Sacramento County CA Sheriff's Dept. Dropping Sigs in 9 and 40 going to Glock 9mm's.

[steve]

SAC County S.O. is dropping the SIG P226 in 9mm and .40 along with the P239 in 9mm and going with the Glock 17 and 19 platforms. The Department Rangemaster is a very forward thinking and squared away guy, who makes training and officer safety a top priority.

[ToddG]

The Rangemaster at Sacramento SO is, indeed, a VERY squared away dude and this decision was made after about two years or research & evaluation. I personally handled some of the guns they tested last time I was there. For what it's worth, most of the FIs I met and dealt with were carrying 9mm by choice anyway. Lots of smart guys (and gal) in that group.

[Chuck Haggard]

Sounds like they will be saving money on both guns and ammo.

[GardoneVT]

Out of curiosity, how much of a role does money play in these kinds of decisions?

Having worked military finance, the regulations in the .mil I worked with basically said if a product was one cent cheaper the alternative and was functional ,it won. Is that how it works with LE Agencies ,or do they rigorously test the options to ensure the best gear goes with the troops?

[Chuck Haggard]

Out of curiosity, how much of a role does money play in these kinds of decisions?

Having worked military finance, the regulations in the .mil I worked with basically said if a product was one cent cheaper the alternative and was functional ,it won. Is that how it works with LE Agencies ,or do they rigorously test the options to ensure the best gear goes with the troops?

That is highly agency dependent.

[jlw]

Out of curiosity, how much of a role does money play in these kinds of decisions?

Having worked military finance, the regulations in the .mil I worked with basically said if a product was one cent cheaper the alternative and was functional ,it won. Is that how it works with LE Agencies ,or do they rigorously test the options to ensure the best gear goes with the troops?

There are over 17,000 LE agencies in the US, and you are likely to get close to that many answers.

As for my particular agency, Sheriff's Offices in GA are constitutional offices. The county government has no say in such matters other than to pay the bill.

[steve]

In California the 58 County Sheriffs are also elected constitutional offices. Sacramento County Sheriff Scott Jones is a pro-gun/2nd Amendment Sheriff and the county is one of a few in California that issue CCW's for the reason of self defense only.

[WDW]

Gen 3 or 4?

[steve]

Gen 3 or 4?

From what I know Gen4.

[ToddG]

This thread is not about California CCW politics. That discussion has been moved to this thread (http://pistol-forum.com/showthread.php?9968-Sacramento-CA-CCW-Discussion).

[ToddG]

Having worked military finance, the regulations in the .mil I worked with basically said if a product was one cent cheaper the alternative and was functional ,it won.

Can you cite a federal or military regulation to that effect? Because I've never been involved in any fed/mil procurement that worked that way. In fact, in just about every fed/mil procurement I've seen related to weapons, cost was the least important factor -- spelled out in black and white -- when selecting a winner.

Now, between two identically performing products, sure, it comes down to cost. But if one product was superior to another in a way that the procurement team felt was more important than the price difference the superior product, not the cheaper product, was selected.

It certainly never came down to figuring out what was functional and then going with the cheapest product that met the minimum standards. Paper clips and desk chairs, sure, maybe, but that's not the way weapons are procured.

[jlw]

Suppose an agency wants Sig 226s in 9mm:

-Pistol should be traditional double action with frame mounted de-cocking lever and chambered in 9mm.

[Kevin B.]

Having worked military finance, the regulations in the .mil I worked with basically said if a product was one cent cheaper the alternative and was functional ,it won. Is that how it works with LE Agencies ,or do they rigorously test the options to ensure the best gear goes with the troops?

That has not been my experience, either.

[GardoneVT]

Can you cite a federal or military regulation to that effect? Because I've never been involved in any fed/mil procurement that worked that way. In fact, in just about every fed/mil procurement I've seen related to weapons, cost was the least important factor -- spelled out in black and white -- when selecting a winner.

Now, between two identically performing products, sure, it comes down to cost. But if one product was superior to another in a way that the procurement team felt was more important than the price difference the superior product, not the cheaper product, was selected.

It certainly never came down to figuring out what was functional and then going with the cheapest product that met the minimum standards. Paper clips and desk chairs, sure, maybe, but that's not the way weapons are procured.

It's somewhere in the DoDFMR ,which isn't a fun document to peruse .

That being stated, the 'rule' only applies to purchases above a certain amount, IIRC on orders over 100,000 items.Below that ,it's unit discretion as long as the order is consistent with mission needs.

Note also that how the .mil buys stuff may be entirely different then how the FBI or other Federal agencies procure items.The DoDFMR applies to military regs only.

[ToddG]

That being stated, the 'rule' only applies to purchases above a certain amount, IIRC on orders over 100,000 items.Below that ,it's unit discretion as long as the order is consistent with mission needs.

Note also that how the .mil buys stuff may be entirely different then how the FBI or other Federal agencies procure items.The DoDFMR applies to military regs only.

Having been involved in .mil procurements for over 100,000 per (e.g., proposed JSP aka SOCOM pistol), my experience is that price still wasn't evaluated with the emphasis you suggest.

As best I can determine, FMR doesn't control procurements but merely disbursal of funds afterwards. If you can cite something to the contrary, I'll happily admit my error. But in all the years I worked at Beretta & SIG with an emphasis on military procurements, I never even heard of FMR. DOD procurements are still run in accordance with FAR under DFARS.

[Dave Williams]

The Rangemaster at Sacramento SO is, indeed, a VERY squared away dude and this decision was made after about two years or research & evaluation. I personally handled some of the guns they tested last time I was there. For what it's worth, most of the FIs I met and dealt with were carrying 9mm by choice anyway. Lots of smart guys (and gal) in that group.

Can you share any details of their test and evaluation? Also, any details of their range program?

[ToddG]

I'm not privy to all the details (for many aspects I'm not privy to any of the details) and wouldn't talk about their internal operations publicly regardless. Sorry...

[Dave Williams]

10-4. Thanks anyway.