16556137-large

“Grand Rapids police expect to move to a 9mm handgun next year and trade in the department’s .40 caliber guns,” mlive.com. “Police say the decision was made, in part, because many of the existing guns were approaching a service milestone, typically involving replacement of springs and possibly barrels. Grand Rapids police officers now use a SIG Sauer P229 DAK that takes .40 caliber bullets.” Yes, but that’s not the real reason they opted for nines over fo-tays: “The 9mm weapons are expected to have less recoil than the current handguns.” And there you have it. Hey! Let’s crunch some numbers . . .

The city actually is expected to make money off the deal, with an expected trade-in value of $167,549, exactly $10,000 more than the purchase cost of $157,549.

The city, however, will have to spend $65,394 on various duty belts, holsters and magazine pouches for the new weapons.

So when the city said that they were going to make money on the deal, what they meant was they’re going to lose money on the deal. Still, anything that increases police marksmanship is a good thing – as long as it doesn’t decrease lethality. Oh dear. I just stepped in it didn’t I?

RELATED ARTICLESMORE FROM AUTHOR

114 COMMENTS

  1. I have a theory on why they are switching back. FBI shootout 1986, the chosen standard rounds in 9mm and .38 special failed to drop the bad guy and (potentially, among other circumstances) got two agents killed.

    FBI requests 10mm auto round (which had higher muzzle energy than .357 magnum out of a semi automatic), finds the recoil is too great, starts loading less powder. Someone at S&W decided they could make the same round in a shorter case to fit a 9mm frame handgun, and made .40 S&W, which many police agencies adopted as the newest and greatest round.

    With the advances in defensive 9mm ammo in higher pressures and with greater expanding hollow point rounds, I think it’s to the point where you don’t need a larger bullet to get great defensive results.

    • The Miami shootout was an outlier. It was more about failed tactics than it was equipment failure. Somebody in the fbi just wanted an excuse to spend taxpayers money on new gear. The fbi learned the wrong lesson from Miami.

      The North Hollywood bank robbery was also an outlier. But at least LAPD learned part of the lesson and began equipping more of their uniform units with rifles.

      Both North Hollywood and Miami were classic cases of when SWAT should have been deployed. I can’t think of too many examples since these when SWAT should have actually been used.

      • I read somewhere that the FBI basically wanted to blame something besides their agents and tactics for the Miami disaster, hence the desire to find a “more effective” handgun cartridge. After interviewing with them for a position years and years ago, I wouldn’t be surprised. The agents who interviewed me were pretty up-front about the high level of concern the Bureau had for its public image.

      • The Miami shootout may have been more about failed tactics than failed equipment, but it’s undeniable that the .38 and 9 mm rounds that the agents landed hits with did not perform.

        Both of the perps absorbed enormous numbers of hits and kept dishing it out.

        • Actually, one of the perps was put out of action almost immediately when their car was wrecked and did little or no damage. The other was fatally wounded early on, (part of his lungs was taken out) but just kept on going. I’m thinking he was just one of those guys that wouldn’t stop, I don’t think any handgun caliber would have made any difference.

      • I was going to say Miami was an accidental encounter between Platt and Matix and the agents, then I remembered they actually set it up as a trap.

        • My understanding has always been that the agents knew enough about the pair to know that they were very heavily armed and had been getting more violent with each robbery.

          Very poor judgement to tackle them with standard cars and soft clothed field agents. In spite of their mistakes the agents involved stayed in the fight long enough to end the bad guys. Unfortunately 2 agents died and just about all the rest were injured to one degree or another. A very rough day.

      • @jwm. The same thing is probably going on here. David Rahinsky was named chief of police 6/27/2014. Not even 6 months later there is a call to bring in new gear. We ran into the same thing a couple years ago. The new chief wanted a mustang as an intercept car. He stated that the Mustangs ran the same price as the regular squad cars when outfitted with everything. After it was purchased they added new wheels and $6000 in led lights (brand new at that time) bring the cost much higher, but he got his new gear.

    • There was far more to the Miami Shootout than just the bullets “failing”. The FBI used that to cover the fact their tactics failed…all across the board. Many studies have been done and the agents while valiant screwed the pooch. They didn’t wear armor, didn’t use long guns, hell one of the agents lost his handgun because he took it out of the holster and stuck it under his leg.

      The 40 has caused issued that many do not want to discuss because it is so hugely popular. The biggest is wrist issues in agencies that shoot a lot and because of group purchase the handguns don’t fit the agents/officers properly.

      Bullet design has also made the 9mm much more effective and gives the troops more rounds–not that more is better when many of them just “spray”

      • Say What? I know teachers can’t pray in schools, but this separation of church and state thing is getting a little out of hand if cops can’t even spray AND pray.

  2. I’m puzzled by the big fuss that .40 has a significantly higher recoil than 9mm. I really can’t tell a difference, especially not in a full size duty weapon.

      • Which is probably why I *shouldn’t* have introduced myself to .40S&W by shooting a G27. “Snappy” is exactly how I’d describe that experience. I’m sticking with 9mm. If I feel the need to get something else, I’ll get a .45. Or, ironically enough, a 10mm G20 for outdoor duty.

        • Because you can’t find practice ammo for it anywhere?

          Everything I’ve seen online is super hot ammo that I am afraid will eventually break even the G-20. Or it’s 40 S&W practice rounds in a longer case. I’d love to see someone offer something hotter than a 40 S&W practice round but not pushing the freaking envelope. There’s a huge amount of difference between the two, someone, surely, can drop a factory load in the middle of that range?

        • @John & Steve. This brings up my favorite subject, reloading. Unpopular off the shelf ammo can easily be reloaded MUCH cheaper for practice, and SD rounds are cheaper and more effective when you work up a golden load for your particular weapon.

        • I’ve had trouble finding good 10mm reloading data too, leastwise in the powders I have. To say nothing of finding powder on the shelf, either.

          In any case even if you and I reload, the lack of off the shelf ammo will still dissuade many from trying the round out. You have to buy the gun, buy the dies, buy the reloading supplies, THEN find out if you really like shooting the round.

    • Its not huge but noticeable say from a Glock 22 (40) to a Glock 17.

      Ammo is cheaper, gun wears down slower etc. Stopping power from a pistol round is 1000% myth. 9mm is as good as a 40 or 45. There is simply NO NEED for a 40.

  3. I am a 9 mm fan, but is there much of a recoil difference between a relatively heavy, alloy-framed handgun in .40 and a polymer-framed 9 mm?

    • While I don’t have the expertise to back it up with numbers, I actually find .45ACP more pleasant to shoot (in terms of recoil…) from a Glock 21 than from a steel 1911, even though one is much lighter than the other. I’ve been told the polymer frames flex a bit, accounting for the difference. I think it is true. The difference is even more marked between my G30S .45ACP and the Colt Officer’s. I agree with those who think that a heavier slower slide decreases felt recoil. I don’t think a heavier frame helps much.

    • JeffR, I think the difference here is generated by a combination of the guns and ammo. They are going from a high-bore-axis .40 to a lower-bore-axis 9mm. The fact that the slide/barrel of the .40 (the majority of the pistol’s mass/weight) sits notably higher over the hand/arm, which gives the already-more-snappy .40 a longer lever to work with. Because of this, the muzzle jump/bounce is significantly more noticeable than the lower-sitting, less-snappy 9mm, even though the nine weighs about 22% less (in this case). It’s not so much the slap-in-the-palm recoil that is the problem;neither caliber will bloody a person in that fashion. It’s how it reacts during firing, and how fast an average shooter can get it back on target. With proper training, the Glock 9mm will ALWAYS be better than a SIG .40 in this area.

      Glock = lighter, thinner, more shots, less flip AND recoil, and no quantifiable loss in effectiveness. Win/win/win/win/win.

      • If you shoot nearly identical guns in the two different calibers you WILL notice a difference. I have CZ-75Bs in both calibers, and the 40 is notably “snappier” even though they didn’t taper the slide on the 40 mm like they do on the .9mm (er, I mean the .40 cal. vs the 9mm).

        • I agree, even though I constantly hear many people say they can’t feel any difference (some of them have posted similar comments right here in this section). I just assume they’ve never fired them side-by-side, have a defective internal “recoil sensor”, or think this is the best way to show the world they’re a true “tough guy” because recoil never bothers them at all.

          In this case, the pistol differences will make the comparison even more pronounced, with the SIG feeling like a bucking bronco next to the mild-mannered Glock.

        • When I bought the 40 I was coming off a fairly lengthy period of time during which I hadn’t done much (if any) shooting of rimfire. I took it to the range, and my tendency to “push” the gun was so pronounced I decided I was just WAAAAY out of practice, and I stopped carrying until I could improve. Switching back to the 9 mm once, my accuracy *markedly* improved and I felt vindicated. Later on I figured out how to work on the “push” problem and can actually control it if I shoot slowly. (Gotta work on speed and stress situations next.) I was even able to make a ragged hole with my 1006 the other day (isntead of stringing shots vertically), which I was never able to do before.

          Unfortunately, I still string shots if I have to do anything suddenly or quickly. It’s tolerable with the 9mm but not with the .40.

        • Gaah. Where I said “rimfire” above, I meant “centerfire.” (And come to think of it, I wasn’t shooting much because it was the Great Ammo Drought of ’13.)

  4. I think it’s a Ford/Chevy/Dodge kinda thing… Ammo envy? And of course you might get another round or two with the 9 mil?

  5. We need to remember something: before we launch the “USS CaliberWarz” , it must be remembered that the typical cop does NOT share our view on firearms use.

    Its crazy, I know, but most folks paid to haul a gun around despise doing so, and loathe the practice required even more. The problem police agencies often face isn’t necessarily picking an effectice round, but motivating their staff to stay practiced.

    Realistically , they can only do so much on that front. Hence why 10mm was a cultural fail for the FBI-it would have worked great if every agent was Jeff Cooper. Tis not so, alas.

    9mm enjoys an advantage in that an uninterested officer will not be confronted with heavy recoil , thus disincentivizing further practice while also maximizing limited training time. I’d rather see officers packing a 9mm they can quasi-hit with then a .40 they detest handling.

    • A lot of ‘gun people’ certainly consider the 9×19 adequate:

      http://www.gunweek.com/2005/feature0910.html

      “Many disparage the 9mm’s stopping power, and knowing that only military “ball” ammunition was available, I asked if this had been a problem. Spook said that it hadn’t. He knows what some of the gun magazine chest-beaters claim in print, and admits that he hasn’t shot any blocks of ballistic gelatin. He has shot eight men with the nine, though, and all went down with center thorax hits. One or two shots sufficed, if well placed. Spook knows that others have complained about the nine, and wonders where they hit their opponents. He has talked with a couple of tank crewmen who shot Iraqis off their huge armored mounts, and they seemed satisfied, too.”

      9×19 is also (in Canada, and I’m assuming your country) about 20% cheaper than .40 S&W, and that money can go to more practice ammunition, or things like dash cams. BTW, except for the RCMP and Toronto Police, most city police services and cash in transit armed guard companies use .40s.

  6. I think an awful lot of cops are not gun people. They use only the gun the department requires and only use it as often as required to keep their jobs. These cops should be restricted to the 9mm.

    Or maybe have them switch back to revolvers in .38. Cops that can show they’re POTG should be able to carry what they want.

    • That might be a little extreme, but I would like to see more firearm training. 40 rounds or whatever is not sufficient to make a mediocre shooter someone that should be entrusted with special privileges in both federal and slave state law…

    • So make them gun people. Training is a form of indoctrination anyway, no reason that can’t be included. Of course it would go against the politically acceptable understanding of guns.

      • “So make them gun people.”

        You can’t make someone a gun person. If they have no real desire to want to master the weapon, they won’t.

        Were I a cop, I’d want my partner to be a gun person. Someone who actively keeps the weapon in good running order, versus the cop who thinks of his gun as just a utensil.

      • Training would be bunches cheaper if they only accepted applications from POTG. Our rights would be safer, too!

    • A S&W Model 10 and two speed loaders. That’s what I think major urban area LEO’s should be carrying.

      Or, if we want to go with the new bling-bling stainless, let’s go for Model 64’s or 67’s.

      • No thanks. I’d much rather have a Sig 226 Tac Ops, FN FNX, XD, M&P, Glock 34/35, or a Dan Wesson 1911. Smith makes great revolvers but it takes me forever to reload a revolver. Plus the barrel / cylinder gap makes the crazy loud.

      • “Or, if we want to go with the new bling-bling stainless, let’s go for Model 64’s or 67’s.”

        What’s the advantage of blue vs stainless?

        Besides color. You can blacken stainless.

  7. A little less muzzle flip and recoil puts you back on target quicker for follow-up shots. Cheaper to practice, availability of better performing defensive rounds and higher cap mags. have all made the 9mm change somewhat popular for LEAs.

    • After looking at gel blocks, most hand gun rounds are anemic compared to rifle and shotgun rounds. I think the difference between 9mm and .40 caliber is sort of academic. Shot placement is going to be more important.

      • It’s kind of like comparing 00 to 000. Sure each 000 makes a little bigger hole but there’s more 00 pellets in each round. Either way you’ll probably need more than one pellet to put down the bad guy.

    • That’s what it comes down to. Lower total cost of ownership. 9mm is less expensive than.40: in ammo, firearm, and spare parts. Mags are basically the same price, but you do get slightly higher capacity with 9mm.

      Stopping power? Who knows? Any given exchange is going to have so many unpredictable variables that that debates over single factors are almost entirely academic from the start.

      There is a noticeable recoil difference, not one that matters to me, but perhaps might to skittish or some female officers. Depending on models, width could be the same, so no gain for smaller hands, but weight may be a couple ounces lighter in 9mm.

      I don’t see a big conspiracy here, just a business decision like any other, with pros and cons to be evaluated in the context of their operation.

  8. Well, we can hope that with less recoil they will hit their targets more often and kill fewer innocent bystanders. Dogs are still hosed though.

  9. Call me cynical, but I’m guessing there’s a kickback/sweetheart kind of deal in there somewhere. Maybe in all that new leather that will have to be purchased for $65k so the city can “make” $10k on the trade-ins. Unless they are planning on using metal-framed pistols, I am another one who doesn’t think the switch will make much difference, recoil-wise.

  10. When I first got into guns I was a die hard 40 fan. Then I started CCing and I realized how much harder it was to stay on target for follow up shots. I believed that the increased stopping power would make up for that, but then I found out that, no, 40 doesn’t actually hit harder than 9. That’s not even taking into account ammo capacity. My primary side arm is still a 40 because I believe that things like barrier penetration is probably better with a 40, but all my other guns are 9mm now.

    • Barrier penetration is an important element, and one that underscores the difficulty in assessing a given cartridge’s utility from an inappropriate perspective. Barrier penetration matters to you, and that’s fine, no argument from me. However, for most privat citizens, that may nit be as great a concern, given the nature of DGUs, as it would be for an officer.

      True, there are scenarios where shooting through a barrier, like your own windshield, could come into play. That and more resistant barriers are more likely in the line of police duty, though.

      I din’t know the relative penetrating power of 9mm vs. .40, but that would definitely be a factor to consider for officers, whereas it may be a secondary or tertiary factor for a private CCer.

      • Dirty Harry said he particularly favors his .44 due to penetration power, since he claims he’s seen a .38 ricochet off a car windshield.

        Just sayin….not meant to be taken serious.

    • Raymond Allen Davis, a CIA contract ‘agent,’ was able to take out a pair of attackers by shooting through his windshield with a Glock 17. I’m not sure anything distinguishes vitally between 9mm and .40cal.

      • Shh! We don’t want the hoplophobes to know that there actually is a pistol that will make bad guys fly across a room. Besides, I was thinking along the lines of best middle ground for 40v9.

  13. I have been a 1911 .45acp owner for many years and used it in the Army before the switch to 9mm. I’ve carried a 1911 4 inch 45acp version in my 511 bag for “fanny pack carry” (I live in Illinois) but now have my ccw. But because of physical disabilities from the service, I’ve recently had to switched to the Springfield Armory XD Mod 2 in 9mm. It’s a lot lighter and of course higher capacity. Plan to keep a 1911 .45acp in the truck “just in case “. So 9mm here I am.

  14. I carry the Sig P229 in .40 Do I care what other say, think or do? scoffs……not in my best porn filled dreams.

  15. “The 9mm weapons are expected to have less recoil than the current handguns.”

    They should switch to .22LR. There’s less recoil than 9mm or .40 cal. and the dogs will be just as dead.

  16. If someone is really sensitive to recoil, they can shoot lighter bullets (say 135 grain) out of a .40 S&W pistol with about the same recoil as a 9mm shooting 124 grain bullets. I cannot imagine a huge difference between the two.

    • Lighter-weight but still full-power ammunition will have very little difference in recoil; significantly less than the difference between 9mm and .40, which many people claim they can’t feel at all. If you mix full-power light-bullet .40 ammo and full-weight full-power .40 ammo in the same magazine and have the average person shoot it, they will not notice any difference unless you ask them to look for any changes in recoil feel.

      Even then, some folks can’t feel it, and I’d argue that almost no one can take advantage of it, small as it is.

      And if you’re going to reduce the velocity as well as the weight, then you may as well go to the smaller caliber and gain a few more shots per magazine.

  17. A miss with a .40 does nothing for you, a hit with a 9mm is better than a miss with a .40. Less chance of collateral damage as well.

  18. meh. Never noticed a damn bit of difference between 9 and 40. Maybe being strong helps. I just never understood the drama.

  19. My brother and I both shot a quick string of 5 shot groups from our respective full size M&Ps from a draw. The non-shooter loaded and handed the pistols to the other so we did not know which we had. We both shot my .40 cal better than his 9mm. Neither of us noticed recoil in that situation. The only difference, mine is a pro series, his is a standard, so mine has a slightly better, lighter trigger (neither of us noticed that either). So for us, the difference was minimal to none.

    I will admit that I’ve let some smaller statured guys shoot my .40 vs a 9 and they have noticed, so I can see the need when you have varying sized individuals in a department that all have to shoot the same pistol and round. For me, I carry a .40 in both my full size and Shield M&Ps, I figure the heavier bullet is likely better, especially if the hollowpoints fail. I don’t worry about a round or two of capacity difference but I also would have no problem leaving the house every day with a 9mm or .45. Carry what you feel suits you and don’t worry what others say, especially LEOs, their opinions are as varied as everyone else’s.

  20. IMHO…having been in the government procurement process in the past……and as is the goal of any government entity….

    The ONLY thing this is about is SPENDING MONEY!

    EXPANDING government and spending money is all this and most government increases is about!

    Nothing more!

    • No argument here. They are currently fully equipped, and replacement is not likely needed for decades. Somebody has clearly been searching high and low for an excuse to spend other people’s money.

  21. Going to the Glock 17. Well anything even a 9mm is better than a crappy SIG. Glocks a better pistol any way.

    9mm is a good round. But it has to have a heavy 147gr bullet to get good ballistics. PPB has used Glock 17s with Federal HST 147gr 9mm for over 16 years no issue with them at all. I tell any guard cop or CCW if you ho with 9mm do not use European loads in old German 115 or NATO 124gr loads 147 give enough knock down power to do the job.

    • The problem with heavy for caliber bullets is that they need to be seated deeper in the case and the less space for the powder the more chamber pressure a given powder charge will create. The upside is that slower heavier bullets maintain their momentum better than lighter faster ones, be it traveling through atmosphere or ballistics gel or human tissue. But you’ll sacrifice 10-20% in muzzle energy. If you want to hit something or someone hard at close range and you don’t want excessive penetration you want a light bullet, if you want more penetration you want a heavy bullet.

      • Tests show that modern 147gr 9mm rounds are perfectly capable of penetrating deep enough and expanding all the way, whatever the combination of energy/velocity/etc behind this. It’s a significant enough difference from earlier days that most of what was said about caliber wars in 80s and early 90s just doesn’t apply anymore.

        • Expansion can be an issue with heavier slower bullets, but if the bullet is properly designed for the application (caliber, barrel length) it shouldn’t be. But expansion and penetration aren’t the only properties that lead to a disabling wound. Otherwise a 9mm would be just as good as a .357 magnum and even better than a 5.56. The amount of energy a body absorbs is a big factor.

          But yes, the 9mm has come a long way since the 80s. In all bullet weights.

        • Well, both expansion and penetration (all other things being equal) are ultimately the factors of bullet mass and muzzle energy (through velocity), so it’s no surprise that more energetic rounds like .357 would penetrate deeper and expand better. The question is rather how much that matters.

          If what you mean is shockwave effects from the bullet (aka “hydrostatic shock”) as opposed to direct damage to tissue, then those are going to be marginal at handgun energies anyway – you need a rifle round to make a difference. Or a longer barrel to get the full potential of the round, as is the case with .357, which is perfectly capable of rifle velocities and energies out of 16″ barrels.

          That’s assuming that the shockwave is a meaningful factor in the first place, which is very much a contentious topic as I’m sure you know. There are numerous recorded instances of 5.56 actually doing little damage as the round zips through the body without expanding or fragmenting, leaving essentially a .22 caliber hole. In those cases, it would seem that 9mm would indeed do more damage, simply on account of a bigger hole.

          OTOH, when 5.56 does fragment, the damage it deals is extreme, but then we’re not really comparing apples to apples here… it’s the “expansion” of the fragments that deals damage in that case, not the energy by itself.

          Basically, the energy only matters if it’s fully dumped into the body, and even then there needs to be some actual wounding mechanism associated with said dumping that does the damage – and depending on that mechanism results may vary.

      • For the years Ive carried the 147 gr load at work and at training, Ive had no issue with none crimped brass with a 147gr load. PPB and Washington County Sheriffs have had same experience. No issue best results for a 9mm load for LE and Security use.

        Watch utube which one gun blog did test for the best 9mm load. Federal 147gr HST won against all other makes and bullet weights.

    • ShootingTheBull410’s short barrel (3″) 9mm tests are showing that 147 grain loads aren’t consistent expanded when fired from the short barrels. FWIW.

      • 3 inch barrels are awfully short for duty guns. Shorter than that and it’s the semi auto version of a snubbie. (I don’t, personally, see the point in .357 snubbies unless you like having half your powder burn uselessly in a twelve foot fireball once the bullet has exited the barrel, unless of course you just put .38s in it, but Your Mileage May Vary.)

        Though this is good to keep in mind for backup/holdout purposes.

    • Sig Sauers are crappy? Maybe it doesn’t have the features you want, but they are generally a much higher level of fit and finish than a Glock.

      Also, pretty sure HST has only been out for LEO use for about 9 years.

      • Yeah that pronouncement kind of surprised me as well. It’s possible he was thinking of the S&W Sigma series?

  22. Glock must have not been in a giving mode. In the past they’ve given the Glocks, and all the equipment one for one at no cost for Sigs.

    Back during the AWB days they would so the same when trading a 9mm Glock for a .40 S&W. Because they got the two pre-ban magazines that they would sell for $100 each in addition to the gun which they would throw a couple of 10 rounders and sell.

  24. Flying pigs
    Unicorns
    22LR
    The shot out cop handgun

    Just need to keep downsizing until find a cartridge the copchicks and pixies can handle.

  25. A lot of US police are swapping to 9 lately, and I think you have hit the nail on the head that its a financial move rather than performance. 9 is cheaper and in most cases various PD’s moving to 9’s are also swapping to what at least appears on the surface to be cheaper (not to be read as inferior) weapons.

    I stand buy the 40 as the best all around bullet in a full sized handgun. It falls flat in smaller guns and in any case is not a good “Beginner” round. I would suspect that if the economy ever picks up again, we’ll see a move back to 40.

  26. Good decision. 9mm is cheaper than .40 so hopefully the PD can afford to train their people to suck less. Besides, all pistol calibers suck equally. The minor differences in stopping power are irrelevant.

  28. I don’t think the 65k pricetag is because of the pistol switch. I’ve yet to encounter a gun belt that cares what pistol is hung from it, and pretty much every LEO mag pouch I’m familiar with comes in two flavors: Double stack and single stack. I think they want new duty gear and they’re buying new guns, not they’re buying new guns so they need new duty gear.

    The one obvious piece of kit would be the holsters would likely need a change, but that’s a lot of $200 holsters to get to 65k.

    • Do any of the decision makers, or their families, just happen to have a second line of work? Like leather, or maybe firearms or ammo? Just curious, such coincidences have happened before.

  29. If you want punch, you go .45acp, but if you want capacity then you go 9mm. 40sw was the middle child that can’t seem to find favor in either camp.

    (Granted this argument could be used to justify 10mm and 5×7, but lets not go there for now)

  30. Fact, big bullets make big holes and vice versa, How soon we forget why the Army switched to the .45 Caliber weapon, its like the Democrat’s and the Constitution! the Army changed to the 9mm so a Senator could get a factory in his bailiwick, and make himself look good, and give a retired General a Job at that same Plant! never mind the fact that the nine is a proven failure too stop for the reasons that the army switched to .45 in the first place! the .38 and standard 9mm are so close in Ballistic performance its hard too tell apart!
    most of the Standard weapon change’s from a given caliber are based on biased whims from the upper uppers! most New Recruits could not tell you anything about the ballistics of a given Caliber except by recoil! so lets go to .22 WMR

    • It is not only imprtant to know history, it is important to know all of history. Yes the army switched to the .45acp for more stopping power, however, “… its like the Democrat’s…”, no one remembers that the switch had no effect on stopping power. Soldiers were trained on shot placement and that is what made the difference.
      The .45 is a fine round. But to say it is much better than any other handgun round is to show a total lack of understanding of the subject.

    • The 38 S&W the Army was using in the early 1900’s has very little ballistic similarity to any 9mm. Fudging facts makes for a poor argument.

    • And even if you weren’t slinging bravo sierra, ball ammo isn’t modern hollowpoints, so whatever you’re saying is a non sequitur.

  32. I’d be happy with that switch, but mostly because I prefer metal frames in a duty gun. Then again, I’d be happiest just to choose my own gun. I can shoot 9, .40, and .45 just fine. All work, but 12 gauge and 5.56 are better.

    Have cops shoot a variety of guns, and see what yields the highest qualification score. Or have a standard issue cop issue handgun and allow the gun guys to upgrade to a 9mm – .45 of their choice.

    • Standard issue .38 Spl. revolvers, as much ammo as you want. You’d rather pack something else? Roll your own, including ammo and leather. Sure wouldn’t bother POTG. But continually buying hundreds of different guns for no conceivable reason, trading in and out, is foolish at best, corruption at worst.

    • Really? I love my .40 and my .45 and my 9mm. I love all guns and all calibers. I guess some are just more recoil sensitive than others. I can shoot great groups at 7-10 yards with my .40’s and I’m not the best shot either but I can hold my own.

Comments are closed.