
Every city and suburban police officer I've seen around the Twin Cities in the
last two years has carried a semi-auto of some type (different brands though
I haven't seen any Glock's). 

With regard to this discussion:  We are getting dangerously far from the usual
rantings of t.p.g, and close to the realm of r.g, but I'd like to put my two
cents worth in.  While there's nothing wrong with a revolver (especially a 
large frame S&W in .357 magnum - my favorite) there are valid advantages to
semi-autos.  I suggest reading Massad Ayoob's (I know, some people can't stand
him and think he's full of bull, but I think that in general his material is
very valid and useful) book _The Semi Auto Pistol in Police Work_ (or something 
like that).  He defines a number of ways that semi-auto's are different, and that
"different is good".  The main advantage is not in increased firepower, but in 
more accurate followup shots when you go to single action mode.  There is also a
certain "propriatory nature" of each gun that takes some familiarity to 
learn.  This may have diminished with time as more criminals become familiar
with different models of semi-autos, but it was cited as stopping or at least
slowing down criminals who had grabbed a police officers gun.


Yes, but this is best done with a two hand hold.  With a single hand you either
pull the gun far off target to cock, or must fire double action.  The DA semi
auto has the same advantages plus is always SA after the first shot.



I'm not sure if this is meant to be different from your first point.  In a DA
semi-auto you can pull the trigger again to try dropping the hammer on the same
round - an advantage you don't have in a revolver where the next trigger pull will
always go to the next round (discussing this point now).  This is fine with a dud
but what about a hangfire situation?  Granted it's very rare, but your round will
now go off confined in the cylinder with no place to go.  Slingshotting the slide
on a misfire takes very little time.



Actually with modern revolver designs incorporating hammer blocks this is not
necessary or usually recommended.  A revolver would have to fall hard enough and
at the right angle to actually break the hammer and driver the firing pin into the
round to set it off.


The best speedloader users, especially those using the spring loaded speed
loaders are very fast.  A problem is that ejecting the spent cases is a two
handed job where dropping the expended magazine is one handed.  This means that
while you can be inserting a fresh magazine as soon as the old one clears the
gun, with a speed loader you have to go through more motions that will always 
take more time.  You also don't have the advantage of tactical reloads (replacing
a partial magazine to bring you back to full capacity - the partial magazine can
still be used if needed later).  


Yes, the time to recognize the problem is just as important as the time to clear
it.  Really though, in either a revolver or semi-auto the odds of an actual misfire
with factory ammo are awfully small.  You are more likely to get a jam in a semi-auto
but even these are exceptionally rare with modern quality guns (Sigs, Glocks, et.al.).




All common semi-auto's can be carried with a round in their chamber without any
safety problems.  While I put that out as a statement that I believe, I should
say that this applies to all of the ones I've looked at.  For the DA semi's it's
no different from the revolver situation:  The guns all have hammer or firing
pin blocks.  They also have a safety.  Because there's no real advantage
carrying one of these cocked and locked you have the same safety and speed
of employment as a revolver, plus the advantage of SA followup shots.  I'm
not familiar with SA semi-autos except for the 1911-A1.  I admit that I was
initially skeptical about carrying this cocked and locked, but after examining
the design, trying to defeat the safeties (gun unloaded of course), and 
shooting it a lot, I see no inherent safety problems with it, especially in
a thumbreak holster with the strap under the hammer.  This design also gets
you more speed for an accurate first shot than a revolver.


Yeah, the infamous Glock.  I still can't figure out how it's worse than a revolver
for safety.  If you don't pull the trigger it doesn't go off.  I imagine that if all
your revolver shooting was done double action then you could pull the Glock trigger
far enough to fire before you realized it.  In addition, if you had developed that
nasty habit of keeping your finger on the trigger when holstering your gun and
relying on your thumb on the hammer to remind you to take it off before you blew
off your foot then you'd have problems when the hammer wasn't there.


I think this is even okay for a riot (as long as it's a small one B^)).


I have the poor man's Beretta (Taurus 99) and consider it inferior as a carry
weapon to the Springfield .45 (oops, 9mm vs. 45 arguments are relegated to
r.g).  You are right, though.  If you don't hit what you aim at then the
shooter/gun combination has failed.  I don't ascribe failures in the the
fire real fast with a wonder-nine scenario you mention to the gun.  This is
a shooter failure, whether through lack of discipline or lack of training.



9mm's are becoming more popular with crooks too, though the .38 does still
lead the list.  And like I said, around here semi-auto's seem the rule for the
street cop.  Don't know about the State Patrol however, they may still carry
the "Highway Patrolman".


Vincent, please don't take any of this as a flame.  Just my $0.02 (whoops, looks more
like $2.00) worth.  And much of it is IMHO, but do check Ayoob's book.