"And for a regular dude I’m maybe okay...but what I learned is if there’s a door, I’m going out it not in it"-Duke
"Just because a girl sleeps with her brother doesn't mean she's easy..."-Blues
As I often am prone to do, I did not clearly make my point.
I did not mean that I believed a 1911 is hard to shoot, or even that other people were claiming a 1911 is hard to shoot.
I did not even disagree with the OP that the 1911 was probably not the appropriate pistol of choice for today's shooters. We do disagree on why that may be the case.
I was trying to make the point that every time I hear someone demean the 1911 they seldom, if ever, fail to mention the fact that the pistol has a thumb safety and a grip safety as the leading causes of the pistol's shortcomings. It is almost a certainty that those two features will be mentioned as primary reasons the 1911 is unsuitable for Poet Warriors or any other shooters.
I did not even direct my comments towards a specific demographic or a specific age group. (Well maybe I did . . . . I can't recall seeing any reports of any older folks eating Tide pods or snorting condoms).
It is my opinion that learning the correct manual of arms for a 1911 is not rocket science, and any inherent problems in the design are relatively easy to overcome. It takes some effort. And generally speaking, our society is chock full of folks who can't be bothered with that effort. So they demean anything and anyone older that 30 while they giggle and record it for world-wide viewing.
I'm not entirely convinced that approach is going to work for either them or society. And as they age, they might find that life has a way of wiping smirks off one's face.
DISCLAIMER: The last sentence of this post has absolutely, positively NOTHING to do with 1911 pistols, or who does or does not like them. It's just an opinion.
Problem?
Seems like you are determined to make this personal.
Is your problem with me, or just people over the age of 50?
I guess it depends a lot on where you’re working and how often you practiced.* My agency gave each officer 100 practice rounds per month. It was optional to shoot it. There were probably 100 guys who religiously fired their practice rounds. Because there were a lot of people not shooting theirs you could draw a lot of extra practice rounds if you wanted. If I went to the range I was generally firing 200+ rounds. If you went every week the range guys didn’t care. Then there was mandatory quarterly range training. Depending on what the training was say you fired 100-200 rounds.
So our average patrol cop probably shot 800-1000 rounds a year. If you were a meat eater and shot a lot of practice rounds minimum of 2500 rounds a year. When I was on full time SWAT we usually shot 300-500 pistol rounds a week and a like amount of rifle rounds.
If your looking at OIS a patrol Officer has a 1 in a 100 chance of being in an OIS. A K9 handler is 1 in 15. I’d like to know the stats for any unit involved in arresting violent, armed career criminals. Some of our guys had been in 6 while assigned to the Marshall TF.
*Note this is based on no ammunition shortage. It was different when they did have a lot of practice ammo. IIRC it was 100 rounds every three months unless you were on tactical.
Last edited by Coyotesfan97; 05-01-2022 at 12:27 AM.
Just a dog chauffeur that used to hold the dumb end of the leash.
That varies an enormous amount from state to state and agency to agency.
Some places fire a qualification course of 30-60 rounds once a year and that’s it. Some agencies shoot once a month. In my area, in-service training (including firearms) was quarterly.
The best we ever did was 600 rnds of handgun and 150 rnds with the AR-15 annually (shooting quarterly). I think our average was probably 400 rnds of handgun and 120 rnds with the rifle. When we had shotguns, it was often 5 or 10 buckshot (00 or #4) and 5 slugs and 10 birdshot on steel. Sometimes we shot at clay pigeons.
When I started in 1981 I worked for a small town that had a wide open firearms policy, the Chief carried a P-35 Browning (in condition two), three of us carried 1911 pattern pistols, and the rest had revolvers. My Combat Commander (which I still have) was reliable with 185 grn Silvertips.
1948. I began shooting handguns and studying in the area at an early age. I seldom heard WW2 veterans say anything good about 1911's. They usually deemed them heavy and inaccurate. Bullseye shooters used them extensively. I never saw a pistol in a cop's holster. When Cooper was criticizing the 9mm, his reference was ball ammo. Available hollow point ammo was not effective. Cooper assumed that 45 hardball was effective. At the same time, he described the .38 Special as a poor self defense round.
The 1911 as a general issue weapon would be a nightmare for training officers and those who had to maintain them. I have not been without a 1911 for over 50 years. I love mine but do not recommend them to new shooters or even the casual shooter. Enthusiasts buy what they like. Good. I still don't understand why people argue about 1911's. I know a great deal about the platform and have observed that many blowing their horn on this subject are full of shit regardless of the side they choose.
Years ago I owned a 38 Super Colt lightweight Commander fitted with a Bar Sto barrel. The pistol had S&W K-38 sights, a 4lb trigger, lowered ejection port, and properly tensioned extractor. Like a dummy I carried it with hardball ammo. I thought I had cut a big hog in the ass. The fact that I could hit gallon jugs at a 100 yards made me think I was I was capable. Really I wasn't.