Prior to 1994 our city PD issued Smith 65's loaded with 38+P+ ammo. The Deputies and county PD could carry anything they wanted as long as they could qualify with it. They furnished personal guns. In 1994 the City issued Smith 5906's in 9mm, the County and SO went to G22's in 40 S&W. The GSP has been all over the place. In 1994 they had Smith 686's and carried 357 ammo. They had a brief look at Smith 4506's, then G22's, then Glock basically gave them G37's in 45 GAP but no one liked them and they went to G17's in 9mm.
Since 1994 we've had 13 LE shootings, 7 with 9mm, 6 with 40 S&W. There were never more than 3 shots fired by any officer and all bad guys were DRT. There were no survivors and no difference in how quickly they went down.
Departments upgrade to new guns about every 10-15 years anyway, sometimes they make them last 20 years. The 5906 was discontinued and the M&P 9mm pistols our city tested didn't meet reliability standards so our city replaced their 20 year old Smiths with G17's in 2014. The SO changed to G17's last year and the county will when they buy new guns the next time.
Going from a G22 to a G17 didn't require any more training or even new holsters. Our Sheriff contacted numerous agencies around the country who had made the switch from 40 to 9mm and none of them could offer any evidence that the 9mm pistols were any less effective than what they'd been using. On paper the 40 looks better, but the end results are all that matter.
Good post, so I'll ask you this question; if there is no difference in effectiveness between the two rounds (except for the agreed upon fact of longevity, TWO (2) more rounds and cost although that is debatable using economies of scale (volume), why go through the expense of replacing all your weapons just because of the aforementioned reasons?
A good principle to guide me through life: “This is all I have come to expect, standard lackluster performance. Trust nothing, believe no one and realize it will only get worse…”
