“Agencies”

[jlw]

Here's a question for those on various approval boards.

What is your approval process? Is it a set list of criteria in an effort to be as unbiased as possible or is it something less formal?

Sent from my SM-S901U using Tapatalk

It’s a sore spot for me as it ended up being a stick used in my very own beating.

When I was appointed as chief deputy, we had 9mm, .40 SW, and .45 ACP firearms in inventory. The SRT guys had Kimber TLE/RL II 1911s (and UMPs in .4 ACP). Everyone else was issued a Glock 22 or 23. We had two G18Cs.

One of the patrol guys posed the legit question of why SFT “needed” special pistols, and if they were good enough for SRT, why couldn’t patrol cops carry them?

So, I convinced the Sheriff to allow personally owned pistols. I was the sole approving authority. I published a list of pistols such as “any Glock but no modifications other than changing sights without specific approval. I approved certain brands of 1911 (don’t remember the list). Sights and grips could be changed, but anything else required specific authorization. To be on the list, we had to have an in-house armorer for the pistol.

We hired a guy who retired with 25 years of service from an H&K agency, and I approved his USP after that agency’s armorer provided a letter stating that he would inspect/service the pistol as needed.

Soon, hurt feelings were abundant if I wouldn’t add stuff to the list.

Several guys bought nice 1911s. They were high round count shooters; so, I went heavy on .45 ACP ammo that year, but then they went to a SWAT school, and after doing all of the reloads, they went out and bought Glock 34s. I didn’t have enough 9mm ammo on hand; so, I had to switch to shooting .45. (We encouraged he guys shoot matches and would help with ammo.)

There was always a batter over the 22s when one became available.

Eventually, I replaced all of the issued pistols with G17s and only bought 9mm ammo. Anyone shooting another caliber had to provide their own.

New Sheriff = new policies.

Instead of being the sole approval, I was part of a committee of three.

The guys that wanted to buy “just as good as” Sightmark optics had finally won.

I have no intention of ever being in charge again. If that does ever happen though, everyone will carry issued firearms.

[fastbolt]

It’s a sore spot for me as it ended up being a stick used in my very own beating.

When I was appointed as chief deputy, we had 9mm, .40 SW, and .45 ACP firearms in inventory. The SRT guys had Kimber TLE/RL II 1911s (and UMPs in .4 ACP). Everyone else was issued a Glock 22 or 23. We had two G18Cs.

One of the patrol guys posed the legit question of why SFT “needed” special pistols, and if they were good enough for SRT, why couldn’t patrol cops carry them?

So, I convinced the Sheriff to allow personally owned pistols. I was the sole approving authority. I published a list of pistols such as “any Glock but no modifications other than changing sights without specific approval. I approved certain brands of 1911 (don’t remember the list). Sights and grips could be changed, but anything else required specific authorization. To be on the list, we had to have an in-house armorer for the pistol.

We hired a guy who retired with 25 years of service from an H&K agency, and I approved his USP after that agency’s armorer provided a letter stating that he would inspect/service the pistol as needed.

Soon, hurt feelings were abundant if I wouldn’t add stuff to the list.

Several guys bought nice 1911s. They were high round count shooters; so, I went heavy on .45 ACP ammo that year, but then they went to a SWAT school, and after doing all of the reloads, they went out and bought Glock 34s. I didn’t have enough 9mm ammo on hand; so, I had to switch to shooting .45. (We encouraged he guys shoot matches and would help with ammo.)

There was always a batter over the 22s when one became available.

Eventually, I replaced all of the issued pistols with G17s and only bought 9mm ammo. Anyone shooting another caliber had to provide their own.

New Sheriff = new policies.

Instead of being the sole approval, I was part of a committee of three.

The guys that wanted to buy “just as good as” Sightmark optics had finally won.

I have no intention of ever being in charge again. If that does ever happen though, everyone will carry issued firearms.

Yep, it's bad enough to be on the level just below the ultimate deciding authority. People seem to think you're going to ask for policy to be changed just because they have hurt feelings. Or they're sad because a gun they personally own won't pass the range quals and inspections. Sometimes Predictable is Preventable, folks. Don't 'customize' or 'improve' something that works, especially if it conflicts with a known, written policy. Sigh.

I remember when we went through one of the duty weapon selection testings, a few years before I decided to retire. Everyone seemed to think I was 'someone on the inside', just because I was a senior member of the FTU staff. I was being pelted with questions from people about what I thought was 'the best', and did I think their preference was 'the best'. Etc. I dodged giving definitive answers, pointing out that I wasn't part of the actual evaluation & testing committee (selected from all over the office to schedule test-fire and report on observations). Finally, when one of the command staff asked me which I thought was the best choice was (different makes/models in 2 calibers), I responded that they were all fine for the intended role, and I seriously didn't care what was selected. Just send me to any new armorer class needed to service, maintain and repair whatever weapon(s) were selected, and I was happy with whatever was chosen. I flat out didn't care.

In the last selection process before I hung up my firearms instructor/armorer hat (since the previous weapons were being discontinued a few years later), I refrained from getting too deeply involved. Pick something that goes Boom, and is as cop/dummy-proof as humanly possible, fits all of our people (grip inserts) and won't break the bank for training & ammo costs. Call it a wash. They went (understandably) plastic ... in 2, and then 3 calibers.

Naturally, after that one happened, they've since gone to a different brand of plastic, because it was more available equipped with RDS (the new hotness ). This time they - once again - consolidated on 9mm (for overall training and weapon/ammo inventory simplification reasons). That seemed like a good idea, logistically and for 'training needs'.

No doubt it'll change again in coming years.

[TheNewbie]

Are POWs policies becoming more or less prevalent?

Personally, I think they are the way to go in the majority of cases, but I can understand the temptation to have a one size fits all weapon.

[WobblyPossum]

I’m a big fan of how my agency does it. Everyone gets issued the department gun in the academy. It has options to accommodate shooters of different hand sizes in the form of Small, Medium, and Large frames available. There is also a small list of firearms approved for duty use, all chambered in the cartridge the agency gun is chambered in, that can be purchased by individual employees. The personally owned weapons must be inspected and approved by an armorer. The employee must be able to pass the normal qualification course with them and they are responsible for purchasing their own holsters and magazine pouches. The agency will provide you with duty and training ammunition. If there’s a problem with your gun, the armory will inspect it and generally repair it. If you choose to carry a personally owned weapon, you don’t have to have the agency gun in addition to it. If you can’t find a gun you like between the agency gun and the list of authorized personally owned guns, tough.

Most people who go through the process are looking for a backup/off duty/plain clothes gun to supplement the agency gun but some completely replace the agency gun.

[msstate56]

Here's a question for those on various approval boards.

What is your approval process? Is it a set list of criteria in an effort to be as unbiased as possible or is it something less formal?

Sent from my SM-S901U using Tapatalk

I created a set series of tests, that each pistol was put through in the exact same way. Same series of shooters, shot exactly the same and scores/times recorded on a spreadsheet. Then I let the numbers speak for themselves in a final report compiled from all that data.

[Utm]

I’m a big fan of how my agency does it. Everyone gets issued the department gun in the academy. It has options to accommodate shooters of different hand sizes in the form of Small, Medium, and Large frames available. There is also a small list of firearms approved for duty use, all chambered in the cartridge the agency gun is chambered in, that can be purchased by individual employees. The personally owned weapons must be inspected and approved by an armorer. The employee must be able to pass the normal qualification course with them and they are responsible for purchasing their own holsters and magazine pouches. The agency will provide you with duty and training ammunition. If there’s a problem with your gun, the armory will inspect it and generally repair it. If you choose to carry a personally owned weapon, you don’t have to have the agency gun in addition to it. If you can’t find a gun you like between the agency gun and the list of authorized personally owned guns, tough.

Most people who go through the process are looking for a backup/off duty/plain clothes gun to supplement the agency gun but some completely replace the agency gun.

This is the way to do it. Not just mandate 1 gun no exceptions. Allow personal firearms within certain parameters and at the officers cost.

[willie]

Are folks arguing about marketing rhetoric? I started reading from page 1, and had I not been constipated, I would not have completed reading it.

[jlw]

Are folks arguing about marketing rhetoric? I started reading from page 1, and had I not been constipated, I would not have completed reading it.

Good talk. Thanks for your valuable contribution.