They, the Agency mandated the following: No external hammer, No grip safety , only, striker fired semi autos with a Minimum 6 round magazine capacity. Approved cals, 380, 9mm. 40 S&W and 45acp. They never even asked us, firearms instructors for input. After it was approved we asked about us recommending changes and were told our input was not needed. Yes, all the 1911 guys were pissed off as well as the Springfield XD crowd. Later, we found out the Admin folks just cut and pasted bits from other agencies policies and made it into a Frankenstein policy of our own. We were not happy about it, in any way, shape, or form!
In my first agency, after a good bit of training and experience, I ended up being the firearms and tactics instructor. At the time we were using a Level 1 security holster, essentially just a thumb break model. On top of that, they were worn and floppy, and several of us had our handguns pop out of the holster when chasing a suspect or in a nasty fight. I went to the Chief and laid out why the holster we were using wasn't up to modern standards and training and pointed out the very real potential for a bad guy to end up with one of our guns when in a tussle. It had happened to me. He asked me to give him a few recommendations and I set to work on that. A couple of days later I had all the information, prices, ect. pulled together to present to the Chief and when I approached him he said, "Oh I had Lt. XYZ go ahead and order us some new leather." When we got our new leather it was a Level II Don Hume holster and not nearly the quality of the Safariland rigs I wanted. I asked the LT how he came about choosing those Don Hume holsters and he said "They were the best price." Fuggen white shirts!
The downhill slide for law enforcement appeared to have its beginnings in the late ‘70s, as ‘60s Hippies aged and began to infiltrate government, demanding that auto thieves be cited and released, and significantly downgrading narcotics offenses. It only got worse after that, with officers in some nearby jurisdictions ultimately being directed not to refer cases for prosecution from robbery calls unless a firearm was used or great bodily injury resulted. My inability to tolerate such dangerous foolishness motivated me to reposition myself from road patrol officer (also on the state pistol team) to prosecuting attorney, where I could personally see to it that bad guys received the kind of attention they truly deserved. It was most satisfying for me. Judges, on the other hand, became somewhat miffed at the cases which went to trial because of the prosecution’s stubborn refusal to offer a reduced charge. But, arresting officers loved the results, and my DA thereafter got himself re-elected five times, so far (none of his predecessors had served more than two terms). Not satisfied to leave us relying solely on our abilities to make friends easily, that outstanding DA had a couple of us more aggressive (and properly qualified) DDAs carrying concealed firearms, both on and off the job with our ID cards endorsed pursuant to LEOSA. (In California, while DA investigators are specified by statute as peace officers, prosecutors are not. But, California prosecutors can be law enforcement officers under LEOSA, if it’s arranged correctly.)
I apologize for venting, off subject and on your time.
