John Hearne
07-16-2017, 11:55 AM
My agency has carried classic Sig pistols in TDA format (in 9mm, 40, and 45 with DAO and DAK as authorized options) since around 1990. Our agency's previous head armorer did not actually maintain guns and didn't know the difference between reloaded ammunition and a rechambered round. I didn't expect any changes to our allowed pistols and fully expected to carry a metal frame Sig until I retired. Apparently, our new armorer is a miracle worker because they've just authorized the Sig P320 as duty weapon (in 9, 40, or 45).
I'm excited by the progress but now I actually have a serious choice in duty pistols. I already own a P320 in 9mm which I bought for training newbies and like the platform. I'm not going to abandon my DA/SA P220ST Match yet but I'm very curious. Earlier this year, I borrowed a P227 and shot it next to my P220 and P220ST and decided to stick with my current gun based on performance. It looks like I'm going to be scraping up the money to buy a full-sized P320 in 45 to run side by side with my current gun and the P320 in 9mm. I know for some of our shooters, the P320 in 9mm with the small grip frame will be a no-brainer and I'm glad to see it as an option. Right now, the P320's have to be personally purchased but their IOP price point is really appealing.
In an interesting example of agency policy, we have had a very liberal AR policy. This changed as well. We allowed any DI gun from any manfacturer and had a very reasonable list of qualified accessories. This was good in that people could buy higher quality rifles and run them. Of course, it led to cheapskates buying bargain bin guns and we now have a new policy. It looks like all future purchases of 5.56 rifles will be Colt or FN as they are the only ones with the M-4 TDP. Had Colt not released the Colt Combat Carbine and FN the FN 15 Tactical II, I might be concerned but both of those rifles are nice turn key solutions. After seeing and hearing about what some folks had chosen to carry, I'm oddly OK with this policy - says the guy with an ancient Colt lower and a BCM upper.
I'm excited by the progress but now I actually have a serious choice in duty pistols. I already own a P320 in 9mm which I bought for training newbies and like the platform. I'm not going to abandon my DA/SA P220ST Match yet but I'm very curious. Earlier this year, I borrowed a P227 and shot it next to my P220 and P220ST and decided to stick with my current gun based on performance. It looks like I'm going to be scraping up the money to buy a full-sized P320 in 45 to run side by side with my current gun and the P320 in 9mm. I know for some of our shooters, the P320 in 9mm with the small grip frame will be a no-brainer and I'm glad to see it as an option. Right now, the P320's have to be personally purchased but their IOP price point is really appealing.
In an interesting example of agency policy, we have had a very liberal AR policy. This changed as well. We allowed any DI gun from any manfacturer and had a very reasonable list of qualified accessories. This was good in that people could buy higher quality rifles and run them. Of course, it led to cheapskates buying bargain bin guns and we now have a new policy. It looks like all future purchases of 5.56 rifles will be Colt or FN as they are the only ones with the M-4 TDP. Had Colt not released the Colt Combat Carbine and FN the FN 15 Tactical II, I might be concerned but both of those rifles are nice turn key solutions. After seeing and hearing about what some folks had chosen to carry, I'm oddly OK with this policy - says the guy with an ancient Colt lower and a BCM upper.