Personally Owned Weapons

[TC215]

We went through accreditation review about five years ago and our off duty policy caused a stink because we allowed firearms that our armorers were not certified to check and service. We went a couple of years with no off duty guns being allowed until our policy caught up and met standards. As far as making individual officers responsible then why check any weapons, issued or otherwise. I don't agree with everything but there is a point to it. The reason for having an armorer is sticking to manufacturer standards is so we don't have bubba with a hammer and punch making his own decisions about how a gun should operate. Come on, if your LEO then you know what the "guys" can and will do to a firearm because they read about it or watched someone on U Tube. A Sig pistol was returned to Sig Sauer from a West Coast Agency because it wouldn't group. The barrel had no rifling left. The Officer used a power drill jerry rigged with a cleaning brush to clean his barrel.

We've been accreditted through CALEA for 20+ years and have had no such issues. Our policy is similar to what jnc36rcpd described.

[Erick Gelhaus]

Come on, if your LEO then you know what the "guys" can and will do to a firearm because ...

My apologies. Was just passing on how my office's policy addresses your concern - based a 25 years of experience in an agency with a "few" personally owned weapons.

[breakingtime91]

You police officers are worst then the army and marine infantry arguing... god help u

[BehindBlueI's]

You police officers are worst then the army and marine infantry arguing... god help u

You don't argue with Marines. You just pretend to throw the ball and then leave when they go to look for it.

[LSP972]

You don't argue with Marines. You just pretend to throw the ball and then leave when they go to look for it.

ROTFLMAO!

.

[Lon]

We just had our on site for our re-accreditation with CALEA (we do the extra special Gold Standard accred). No issues with our POW policy which allows a variety of BUG/OD and does not require armorers for them. They must be approved by the range staff (as the Chief's "designee"), but that's it. Policy says the officer is required to handle any maintenance issues that arise.

I know at least some of the assessors read the stuff, because I ended up in a huge debate over our UoF policy with one of them during our last on site.

[SCSU74]

My department allows investigators to carry approved personal weapons. We are issued .40 cal Glocks (surprise!) in all flavors. At this point I carry a G19 with Wilson Combat sights and a Crimson trace laser grip. These are the only modifications made to the weapon. The captain of crime scene carries a VP9, which I also carried until one of my kids liberated it.

Our Chief Deputy is making some noise about standardizing on the Glocks, especially considering the current media driven climate. Anyone have any real arguments or examples where different weapons caused problems, tactical or legal, for an agency?

My first department had approx 2,000 sworn and we were allowed to carry personal pistol, shotgun and rifle. 0 issues. Could mod them basically any way we wanted as long as we didn't mess with trigger and range staff looked it over before carrying. The approved list for each was pretty extensive, I really liked the options we had.

Current department is around 850 and are allowed personal pistols, but shotgun and rifle are issued by agency. We can change sights and stipple frame, but that's about it pistol wise. We're limited to Glock or Sig.

[breakingtime91]

You don't argue with Marines. You just pretend to throw the ball and then leave when they go to look for it.

That gave me a really could laugh

[K.O.A.M.]

We allow personally owned weapons with some limited exceptions. Our gatekeeping function is that they must be approved by the armorer. Anything other than stock out of the box gets his go-over treatment. He will check all triggers for factory specifications. Outside of factory specifications on pull weight, no approval. All personally owned rifles must be AR's or have been on the books before 2010.

It works out pretty well. We are a Sig agency, and it allows those who would carry something else while not in uniform to do so. The flaw in the policy is eventually we will get an armorer who is an idiot and will either approve nothing or everything. I don't plan on switching anything out anytime soon.

[Chuck Whitlock]

Our policy is that the issued G23 can be carried on duty only. No personal firearms on the clock at all. The current authorized personal off duty handgun is anything Glock makes.

With the advent of the G42 and G43, that is actually pretty workable. It could be a lot worse.

I hate the thought of an issue pistol where it's that or nothing. Reasonable restrictions on modifications need to be in place, but adding sights, grip tape or factory parts shouldn't be an issue. As Chuck said earlier, one size, and one gun type, doesn't necessarily fit everyone.

US BIA policy was G22 or G23 in uniform. G27 was authorized BUG. Issued G22/23 was carried on duty, POW G23 off duty, and POW G27 as BUG either way.

If the modifications, other than the one in question, are appropriate, practical, and well thought out claims against them should be easily quashed. Examples ... grip reductions; it is well known that the stock plastic Glock sights are poor performers so replacing them is easy to explain. Triggers were mentioned, it appears the skimmer would be an easy one to argue against; yet a NP3 coated OEM trigger group from Robar is little different from a cleaned up trigger on a 1911A1. (Some years back I was given a set of grip panels with the Paladin logo to commemorate an assignment, they went on a pistol in the safe not the one I carried at work.)

As a certified Glock armorer at that agency, and with the Chief's knowledge, MY issued sidearm had a "-" connector and NY-1 trigger spring, to match my POW's. This is a factory authorized configuration, using OEM parts. Funny enough, I couldn't get the "-" connectors from Glock, but paid the inflated price at Glockmeister or Glockparts.

I'm very much in the "keep it stock" camp, but I'm curious about the following regarding court, especially in LEO situations:

Glock OEM "-" connector in:
1) Otherwise stock G17, both Gen3 and Gen4 separately (different pull weight I think) (or G22)
2) As already present in stock G34 (or G35)

Anyone have any data to share on that? This also assumes stock trigger spring, not NY1.

T

In their Factory Armorer class glock recommends against the minus connector for LE use. Blue label G34/35 come with the standard connector unless it is an agency purchase and the agency specifically requests the minus connector in writing on agency letterhead.

There was an accidental shooting at the end of a pursuit in Tomball Texas a few years back. The officer had replaced the stock connector in his Glock 21 with a minus connector. He didn't make any crazy modifications and was not criminally charged. However, during the civil suit the fact that he had swapped the connector and that Glock does not recommend the minus connector for law-enforcement duty use was an issue. If you do a Google search, Mas Ayoob did a write up on this case for American handgun or magazine.

Glock regards the "-" connector with standard spring as "competition only".