Why does law enforcement favor the forty?

[kcub]

and why should/should not civilians also favor the forty?

What are good 40 bugs for leo and civie alike?

[allaroundhunter]

Not all law enforcement does? Many departments are going back to the 9mm and many use the .45 as well.

Departments are finding that officers shoot better overall with the 9mm and it doesn't compromise anything to the .40.

[BigJimP]

They thought they wanted something to hit harder than a 9mm...10mm proved to be way too difficult to shoot for many / and the .40S&W was born as a shortened version of the 10mm.... 180gr bullets were kind of the established standard for the .40S&W...

Over time, some dept's have gone back to 9mm's realizing shot placement is a bigger issue than bullet weight ....and 124gr or maybe 147gr in 9mm.../ now some dept's went to .357 Sig ...and even some went to the .45 acp....

Weight of the bullet makes a difference if you can put it on target - quickly and effectively for tactical accuracy ( center mass and all that discussion)...
--------
Is the .40S&W right for you - in some platform ...maybe, maybe not. I have a 1911 in .40S&W ...and as it turns out, I rarely shoot it ...and I'd rather carry a 5" 1911 in .45 acp ...and I practice often with a 1911 in 9mm...

I have Sig 239's in 9mm and .40S&W...and I like that gun in .40S&W ..../ same thing on the Sig 226 ...I have them in 9mm and .40S&W and I like them in both 9mm and .40S&W....( so I took a bite out of the .40S&W caliber fascination...or 4 or 5 ...and I still have them...but I don't shoot them too much...) ...and I rarely carry a gun in .40S&W...unless its in the summer and its the Sig 239. I will occasionally carry a small and light 4", alloy frame, 1911 in 9mm ....and I often just feel better carrying a full sized, 5", 1911 in .45 acp ( because its the gun I shoot the best).

So caliber ???
and capacity ????
Pick what you want ....and put the shots on target quickly out of a holster ( double taps in under 3 sec, triple taps in under 4 sec ) ...and tactically accurate ( draw a line between nipples ...and then make a triangle down to belly button...) hit that triangle at 15', 18', 21', and 24' 100 % of the time, in under 3 sec out of a holster with a double tap / or 4 sec for a triple tap ...and mix in some reload drills....and it won't matter if you shoot a 9mm, .40S&W, .357 Sig, .38 spl, .357 mag...or .45 acp ....( maybe even stretch the drill to 27' and 30' ( just in case ) although I think LE Agencies are recognizing officers need to be quicker and on target close in ..and out to 21' or maybe 24' ...for what they'll encounter 90% of the time or more...

and if you can't run that drill almost 100% most days at the range....then maybe drop down a caliber - or find a different weapon that fits you better...or maybe some instruction.../ but using that drill to evaluate your "tactical shooting capability" I think is a decent test of your skills...

In my opinion....

[Kreyzhorse]

I'm not law enforcement, but I know a few and it seems as if many departments in my area are going to the .45.

The .40 recoil, especially in a small gun, can be pretty harsh. It isn't universal that the .40 is a one size fits all best cartridge.

[Theohazard]

When using good hollow points, 9mm and .40 are virtually indistinguishable in terms of terminal edfectiveness on the human body.

With some loadings, .40 is marginally more effective at barrier penetration such as car windows and such.

But, in my opinion, the main reason for police using larger rounds like the .40 or the .45 is a perceived lack of "stopping power" of smaller calibers like the 9mm; every time a police shooting occurs where the suspect required an abnormal number of rounds to go down, they tend to blame the lack of "stopping power" of the round. But the problem is shot placement; most handgun rounds are pea-shooters in comparison to shotguns and rifles, so the officers need the training to enable them to put several rounds in the right place as quickly as possible.

When a police shooting occurs where the suspect takes many shots to go down, the problem is that handguns are relatively underpowered and too many of those shots weren't put in the right spot. Those departments would be far better off if they just put more resources into training instead of using those resources to move to a larger caliber.

And like BigJimP said, many departments are realizing this and going back to 9mm.

[PawPaw]

If I'm recalling my law enforcement recent history, the .40SW came about during the FBI tests following the Miami Shootout, where the effectiveness of the 9mm was called into question. The .40 was a compromise cartridge, following the 10mm. It's a high-pressure cartridge that will fit in handguns normally designed for the 9mm.

I work for an agency (the local Sheriff's Office) and we're issued the M&P 45 as a duty handgun. I've been a cop for over 30 years and I don't think I've ever pulled the trigger on a .40SW.

What are good 40 bugs for leo and civie alike?

We're all civilians, unless we're Military Police. We're subject to civil law just like everybody else.

[CUBAN REDNECK]

Anybody know which jurisdictions returned to 9mm and ditched the .40 caliber?

[BigJimP]

and I don't mean to say you simplified things too much - when you posted your initial question or issue....

but the .40S&W caliber ...regardless of what bullet weight you choose to shoot in it .....135 gr, 155gr, 165gr, 180gr or even the 200gr etc...is a "pretty snappy" caliber to control ...so lighter guns can be a real issue in terms of how long it takes on follow-up shots, etc.../ and while I kind of like the .40S&W in a 180gr and 165 gr....I don't like it at all in 135 gr ( its way snappier to me with that light bullet )....

so whether its LE Depts - or just shooters like us .....what you choose to shoot the .40S&W in ...is a pretty big deal.....like a 29oz Sig 239 ....or a 42 oz all stainless Sig 226 ...and everything in between..../ so its really a very personal decision and what fits your hands the best !

[Wreck-n-Crew]

Anybody know which jurisdictions returned to 9mm and ditched the .40 caliber?

Good Question! Can't wait to see the data on that.

As far as the .40 go's It does have more kick than a 9mm or a 45. If that is their reason, more power to them.

If not, I can't see the reasoning from every thing I know about the differences.

It's been argued that it has no advantages over a 9mm and I know that's not the case. But to carry on the argument with any hope of changing minds is too much energy spent on an immovable object.

[Bluestarlizzard]

I would guess finances has an imput as well.

Specifically, which company is offering what as a deal. When the wave of .40's came out, the manufactures probably did some wheeling and deeling to get there guns out there and "sold it up".

[tjhands]

Ummmm, cops ARE civilians. They can quit their jobs without being court martialed the same as you or I can.

And with good hollowpoint ammo, the 9mm does almost everything as well as the .40SW and allows more rounds in the magazine with less recoil.

[Marko Kloos]

Any .40 S&W pistol you can think of--its 9x19 version will have 125% the ammo capacity, be 25% cheaper to feed, and I very much doubt any coroner can tell the difference between a premium 9mm hollowpoint round and a .40S&W one.

[Wreck-n-Crew]

I would guess finances has an imput as well.

Specifically, which company is offering what as a deal. When the wave of .40's came out, the manufactures probably did some wheeling and deeling to get there guns out there and "sold it up".

Even if they sacrificed price to gain sales and notoriety the money spent on developing a new caliber was not a risk in sales gimmicks.

There was science and purpose in their efforts. It doesn't make business sense to risk money on development as well as sales fully knowing that every competitor could do the same without gaining more in sales on one end and losing in the other with the decline in 9mm or 45 for instance.

There is some increase, but it would have to outweigh the cost. The purpose was greater.

IT was designed for Law enforcement to mimic the reduced velocity 10mm round while fitting in a 9mm frame. The idea being that a bigger bullet had more stop ability with the same penetration through a car door or drywall while maintaining lethality, something that the .45 (though my favorite round) lacked.

Unfortunately the cheaper is not better mentality is not a part of LE budgets and Polymer guns became king, killing the opportunity for the 40S&W and the 10mm to really prove it's full potential.

The lighter frames were thought of as easier to carry even though a metal frame would handle the extra recoil better making the trade off near nil in accuracy under fire situations.

I would like to see LE using the 40S&W or the 10mm in metal frames regardless of the extra cost and weight as more would benefit than not.

[Strafer Gott]

...or the 10 mm as it is presently known really doesn't buck much in that big old Glock 20. I'd like to have a gen 4 grip. Feel the power of the Dark Side, or an earth tone would be okay, too. .40 can be flippant, in compact pieces, but it has it's place.

[Old Stony]

Why are so many people worried that their service pistol might have a little more or less recoil? The 40's are certainly controllable and the heavier bullet will give a definite advantage with windshields or other things a cop might have to shoot through. Cops have to routinely point their service pistols through glass when doing felony stops or dicey situations like that.
Have the female officers influenced the choice of weapons to the point where they need something that has less recoil, or do we just have a wimpier bunch of cops out there?

[allaroundhunter]

Originally Posted by Old Stony

Why are so many people worried that their service pistol might have a little more or less recoil? The 40's are certainly controllable and the heavier bullet will give a definite advantage with windshields or other things a cop might have to shoot through. Cops have to routinely point their service pistols through glass when doing felony stops or dicey situations like that.
Have the female officers influenced the choice of weapons to the point where they need something that has less recoil, or do we just have a wimpier bunch of cops out there?

Or perhaps the majority of officers do not have extensive handgun training, recoil control abilities, and do not have much time or desire to practice with their sidearms and the 9mm is the better choice

Just giving the other side of the argument.

[SgtLumpy]

I worked for a giant department, then later worked for a tiny department. Both departments, after analyzing shooting data, came to the overwhelming conclusion that shot placement was a more important factor than rapidly getting multiple rounds on the target. ie a well placed anything was what was needed a lot more than quick draw, multi-taps. I think it's logical to expand that to "A well placed 45 is better than a well placed 40" or "A well placed 9 is better than a well placed 40". Both in terms of the typical increased difficulty of handling the 40 over the other two.

My guess is that this conclusion was borne out of the shift in copper training that happened sometime after the 70s. In the old days, drawing your weapon was a rare thing. In some departments you had to report to your chain of command every time you took it out of the holster. The political/social climate at the time didn't want cops "pointing guns at people".

Some time after that, gang wars and dopers started getting out of control and it became just really routine to have your gun out of your holster.

Example - in the early 70s we were taught to confront an unknown subject by putting our hand on our holstered weapon (not drawing) and issue verbal commands. Ten years later it became routine to draw if someone approached you in your vehicle, if you entered a crack house, a gang group etc. Traffic stops in gang areas are simply felony stops as routine. Guns aimed, order the occupants out, on the ground, etc. In other words, they didn't need to rapidly get their guns out. It wasn't "quick draw". Instead they were "allowed" to have their guns out, in hand, even aimed, ready for use.

I'm not real sure if my rambling relates directly to the 40 vs something else argument. But I do know there was always discussion of the intimidation factor of seeing a cocked and locked 1911 vs seeing a DA Smith auto. In the really old days, that same intimidation factor came from cops that carried cross draw. There weren't many that I knew. But the bad guys (I think) suspected that those cross draw cops were some kind of pistolero expert so they tended to respect them more.


Sgt Lumpy

[Mystro]

Lets put it this way, I have a 27 handgun collection. Shot 10mm competitive IPSC and am a serious handgun hunter. My bed side gun is a Sig P229 Dark Elite in 40S&W. I adore the 9mm, 10mm and 45acp but I like the power and capacity of the P229 in 40s&w for a bump in the night gun. I have killed deer with 10mm loaded down to a hot 40s&w spec. The 40 is a great round in the right gun. A P229 loaded with Critical Defence at 500 ftlbs per round is a lot of firepower. Recoils is a non issue and accuracy is tack driving. That said, 40 is not a good caliber for a new gun owner. FYI.....I never feel under gunned carrying either 9,40 or 45.

[Theohazard]

When people say they prefer the lower recoil of the 9mm, it's amazing how many other people seem to think that preference is due to those people being recoil sensitive or "wimpy". But for most people, it has nothing to do with being sensitive to the extra recoil of the bigger calibers, it has to do with being faster and more accurate with the 9mm because of its lower recoil.

9mm, .40, and .45 are all basically the same as far as terminal ballistics on the human body. And they all often require mulitple center-mass shots to stop the threat. Which means the shooter should be prepared to make multiple follow-up shots as fast as possible.

Try this drill: Take two guns that are identical except one is a 9mm and the other is a .40 (it's harder to be scientific if you add in a .45; those guns are almost always bigger). Then, at 21 feet, fire 3 rounds as fast and as accurately as you can. Most people will be faster and more accurate with the 9mm when shooting those rapid-fire groups. That's what we mean when we say we prefer the recoil of the 9mm.

[DennRN]

In my opinion this is largely a matter of preference and secondly a matter of physics.

The 40 cal is a compromise in not only bullet weight but also feet per second amongst the calibers already mentioned here. So it's less mass than a 45 but moving faster than 45 by a substantial margin. There being no free lunch, the 40 cal tends to recoil more because force = mass X velocity.
This can be offset by having a larger (higher mass/greater inertia) platform to launch the projectile, but these days more and more handguns are moving to lighter weight alloy and polymer frames, making the 40 cal more "snappy" to the average shooter.

On a side note, a 40 moving faster than a 45 also has a flatter trajectory.
Since all objects fall at the same rate, a 40 and 45 fired simultaneously at the same height and angle will impact the ground at the same time, however a 40 will have covered more distance since it has a higher velocity. Maybe this matters in terms of "accuracy" of rounds fired at distance, maybe not.

A 9 will move at similar velocities as a 40 and have a similar trajectory but have less mass. As a trade off, it will have less recoil from a 40 cal model of the same pistol, making followup shots more easy for the average shooter.

From a medical perspective there are several factors that come into play when looking at what caliber is preferable to you.

Ability to place multiple rounds quickly on target. This increases initial trauma, rapid hypovolemia, and odds of striking a vital organ. In humans, multiple GSWs greatly increase the mortality rate, even though any one of the areas struck may not have been fatal by itself.

Mass and velocity of round. A smaller round can conceivably cause greater trauma than a larger round that moves slower due to hydrostatic shock (a shock wave passing through the tissue causing remote damage, interrupting transmission of nerve impulses, and breaking blood vessels thereby increasing hemorrhage. Related to this phenomenon is the link between velocity and expansion of a projectile designed to impart it's force within a relatively short distance. The shorter the distance between impact and loss of velocity, the higher the pressure pulse imparted into the tissue. Think of suddenly hitting the steering wheel vs hitting the airbag.

Ultimately, none of these factors are greater than shot placement for quickly incapacitating or fatally wounding.

In my opinion it is really a matter of preference whether you want to go with a 40 or another caliber. Over penetration has largely been solved in 9mm with expanding rounds, 40's can be shot rapidly and accurately by a skilled shooter or by reducing the weight of the projectile, a 45 can be pushed to similar velocities as the other calibers with +P loads.

You sound like you want to get a 40 I say go for it if that is your preference. Just know that since you requested recommendations on a BUG to carry, people will generally recommend a lighter weight and smaller size pistol, thereby increasing felt recoil and followup shot times, but this is true of any caliber to an extent. If you plan on using your BUG only at close quarters, than the trade offs don't factor in quite as much.

-Dennis

[Bongo Boy]

I don't know how any law enforcement organizations buy their weapons or get them approved. But, I wouldn't assume that the decision to buy a particular weapon in a particular caliber is driven a lot by law enforcement personnel. I'm not saying it isn't...I don't know. I'm saying don't assume it is.

[DennRN]

Sorry, I didn't mean to imply individual police officers chose their service guns.
I just thought it would be worth addressing part 2 of the OP's question on what back up guns in 40 caliber people would recommend. Not having tons of range time behind a lot of 40s I don't feel qualified to comment on that but I thought I'd share my observations and sentiments on 40's in general.
-Dennis

[BigD_in_FL]

The 40 was developed because most LEOs couldn't handle the 10mm, but it packed more punch than the standard 9mm; the same for the 357 SIG - trying to duplicate the 125 gr 357 mag load in a semi

[Old Stony]

I once took a 3/4" piece of lexan that was cut into a disc about 14" in diamater and ran some penetration tests. If you have even had experience with lexan, you will realize it's a tough plastic type of material. I started out with a .22 short and went through a bunch of calibers up to .454. Unfortunately when I was doing this testing, the .40 hadn't hit the market yet.
Until I got to the .380, there was very little evidence of penetration that you could see, other than a small pucker on the backside of the disc from a .22 mag....which penetrates well. The .380, fired with silvertips, would penetrate less than half of the disc, and part of the base of the bullet was still sticking out of it. The 9mm with a fmj made it to the point where the front of the bullet slightly stuck out the other side, but didn't go through either.
Until I got to to .357 mag, there was nothing that would reliably penetrate the disc.
A lot of discussion goes on about hollowpoints and calibers, but in the real world ideal situations are not always encountered. I occasionally carry a .380 when necessary for concealment, but I load it with fmj's as I would want it to penetrate as deep as possible. A heavy bone under heavy clothing could be a deal breaker for some of these mouse calibers. I would consider the 9mm as only slightly better in that regard, especially loaded with some of the fragile hollowpoints.
Heavy bullets in handguns have proven more effective in hunting situations, simply because of their ability to penetrate. In this regard, I prefer the .40 or .45 for their ability to carry the bullet weight deeper, in a double action pistol that is capable of coming into play fast without without having to fumble with a safety in a fast stressful situation.
If I were on the receiving end of a projectile, I would much rather get hit with a wiffleball than a hardball.....maybe this is an extreme comparison, but I think you can get the picture.
Police dept. armorers come and go, and the dept. issue weapons change as well, depending on someone else's opinion. These changes are not always the best, just what is fashionable at the time. I think we are seeing some of this in the military at this point also.

[kcub]

I agree that less recoil means you can shoot better but in my experience the 9 is just not as accurate as 40 or 45 unless you get a really high end target gun like the Sig P210 or Sig X5/X6.

I think the 40 is probably best against felons in or around cars if you are using non-fmj ammunition as all police will be (which is just the opposite of the military).