Dekalb PD going to 9mm

[BHJ]

Me I like the .40 a lot.
To me after hitting the target, the ability to deliver hydrostatic shock is one of the most important features of a defensive firearm.
Yeah you can take it too far but the .40 does it quite well.

 

[Fatal_Bert]

Me I like the .40 a lot.
To me after hitting the target, the ability to deliver hydrostatic shock is one of the most important features of a defensive firearm.
Yeah you can take it too far but the .40 does it quite well.

Hydrostatic shock from a .40s&w???

 

[Triathloncoach]

Several facts:

1. Anyone that shoots a .40 or .357SIG well can shoot a 9mm faster with equal accuracy, or at the same speed with greater accuracy. 9mm has less recoil to EVERYONE that shoots it, not just the "pansies".

2. 9mm ammo costs less than the other semi-auto calibers. Less cost per round means the agency can purchase more ammo for the same amount, which means that they can train more. Train more, they shoot better. They shoot better, hits on threat have a better likelihood of going where they need to, and shot placement trumps caliber every time.

I'm one of the least recoil sensitive folks you will ever meet. .357SIG has been my duty round for nearly 14 years and I guarantee I've fired at least 1/4 million rounds of it. Before that my duty round was the .40 and I commonly carried a 2.5" or 3" .357 revolver off-duty.

I can run a comparable 9mm faster than I can a .40 or .357. It's a matter of physics and facts and it ain't open to interpretation.

Shot placement trumps caliber every time. Makes sense to give folks the round that they are capable of hitting better with.

All good points, but IMHO, based on absolutely nothing more than what I have read, shot placement in a gunfight comes down to who is less terrified and who is the luckiest.

 

[cmshoot]

All good points, but IMHO, based on absolutely nothing more than what I have read, shot placement in a gunfight comes down to who is less terrified and who is the luckiest.

Skill and training has a lot to do with shot placement. Look at Jim Cirillo, although he was definitely a nervy individual as well.

Jelly Bryce is another excellent example. He got his first job in LE because of his skill in competitive shooting. He became a well-known gunfighter due to his deadly skill in lethal encounters.

 

[Triathloncoach]

Neither.

Neither are guaranteed to be non-fatal.

Back to my question.

If shot placement, price of ammo and low recoil is what makes the choice then why isn't 22 the gold standard?

Maybe because each variable is not weighted equally.

 

[Triathloncoach]

Skill and training has a lot to do with shot placement. Look at Jim Cirillo, although he was definitely a nervy individual as well.

Jelly Bryce is another excellent example. He got his first job in LE because of his skill in competitive shooting. He became a well-known gunfighter due to his deadly skill in lethal encounters.

I miss at 5 yards at the range. But I've read some humbling statistics on LE Hit rates during a gun fight. And I know most LEO are brave people. I can't imagine being shot at. And yes, there are those who remain cool in the line of fire. They sincerely amaze me.

 

[Triathloncoach]

I carry a 22mag (sometimes). My question is valid.

Ha, I will be robbing you on Monday.

 

[6Bones]

Ha, I will be robbing you on Monday.

If you come in close, it will bite you but one thing is for sure, I won't be reaching out and "touching" anyone with a derringer in 22mag.

 

[cmshoot]

Myself and several other LE Firearms Instructors and high-ranked competitive shooters were talking about LE hit ratios. We agreed on a few things:

1. You can't compare them with civilian hit ratios because there is not an organization that keeps accurate stats on civilian shootings. The FBI maintains accurate stats on LE-involved shootings.
So, even if the LE hit ratio is low, we can't prove that the civilian ratio is any better or worse. The data is not there.

2. In general, the LEO's that get involved in gunfights/shootings are usually not the best officers. Bad guys usually get involved in a deadly force encounters with LEO's that:
a. they think they can easily beat
b. are already at a disadvantage due to poor tactics
If a LEO meets both of these criteria, they usually are not the best operator/tactician/shooter that the agency has to offer. They're in the gunfight because their poor tactics led to the fight.
I cannot count how many times myself and LEO's I knew that were outstanding in their capabilities dealt with perps that turned out to be "armed and dangerous", but we didn't have any problems arresting them. Why? Because the perps knew they were at a disadvantage to begin with and for most folks prison/jail is preferable to death. I even had one tell me he'd have gone for his gun if I hadn't already been pointing a Remington 870 at him.
This doesn't by any means cover every single LEO involved in a gunfight or shooting. There are those rare bad guys that are truly bad and are going to fight no matter the situation or odds. Platt at the "FBI Miami Shootout" is a prime example.

3. Your ability to hit cardboard targets on the range may have very little to do with your ability to put accurate shots on a bad guy. The situations and stressors are very different. If you haven't been in a shooting or a gunfight, it's hard for your to comment accurately on this, unless you're quoting from someone that has.

In the upcoming STRESS Course I'm running March 19, we have a total of 4 Instructors working. Out of those 4, 3 of use have been involved in gunfights/shootings. Out of those 3, 2 of us have been in multiple. It gives a unique perspective, although I don't believe you have to have been in a gunfight to be a good, effective Instructor.

I can say my agency has only been involved in one shooting so far. 9 rounds were fired with 7 hits. That's pretty good, I hope I do as well in my next gunfight. Just so happens, we have the most stringent firearms qualifications of any Federal agency. In addition to the score requirements, we must qualify 4 times a year.

 

[Ken Ford]

Myself and several other LE Firearms Instructors and high-ranked competitive shooters were talking about LE hit ratios. We agreed on a few things:

1. You can't compare them with civilian hit ratios because there is not an organization that keeps accurate stats on civilian shootings. The FBI maintains accurate stats on LE-involved shootings.
So, even if the LE hit ratio is low, we can't prove that the civilian ratio is any better or worse. The data is not there.

2. In general, the LEO's that get involved in gunfights/shootings are usually not the best officers. Bad guys usually get involved in a deadly force encounters with LEO's that:
a. they think they can easily beat
b. are already at a disadvantage due to poor tactics
If a LEO meets both of these criteria, they usually are not the best operator/tactician/shooter that the agency has to offer. They're in the gunfight because their poor tactics led to the fight.
I cannot count how many times myself and LEO's I knew that were outstanding in their capabilities dealt with perps that turned out to be "armed and dangerous", but we didn't have any problems arresting them. Why? Because the perps knew they were at a disadvantage to begin with and for most folks prison/jail is preferable to death. I even had one tell me he'd have gone for his gun if I hadn't already been pointing a Remington 870 at him.
This doesn't by any means cover every single LEO involved in a gunfight or shooting. There are those rare bad guys that are truly bad and are going to fight no matter the situation or odds. Platt at the "FBI Miami Shootout" is a prime example.

3. Your ability to hit cardboard targets on the range may have very little to do with your ability to put accurate shots on a bad guy. The situations and stressors are very different. If you haven't been in a shooting or a gunfight, it's hard for your to comment accurately on this, unless you're quoting from someone that has.

In the upcoming STRESS Course I'm running March 19, we have a total of 4 Instructors working. Out of those 4, 3 of use have been involved in gunfights/shootings. Out of those 3, 2 of us have been in multiple. It gives a unique perspective, although I don't believe you have to have been in a gunfight to be a good, effective Instructor.

I can say my agency has only been involved in one shooting so far. 9 rounds were fired with 7 hits. That's pretty good, I hope I do as well in my next gunfight. Just so happens, we have the most stringent firearms qualifications of any Federal agency. In addition to the score requirements, we must qualify 4 times a year.

I'm not going to win any points from my LEO friends, but I agree totally with point #2

I was FTO for many years and saw many officers that never understood this, the officers that were more likely to be involved in a serious fight encounter were the ones that often disreguarded officer safety tactics.

Those tactics are the same tactics anyone could use to keep them selves safe.