My department will not allow the carrying of a single action 1911 as a primary duty weapon. They say the whole "locked and ****** method of carry is unsafe, therfore not permitted by most police depts nationwide. With how long the 1911 has been in use by military, police, and civilians, I am surprised some would consider the guns unsafe. Why would so many folks carry the damn things if there were so many accidents with them. My father is a veteran, and swore by his 1911 during the war. My dept has no problem with the glocks and berettas, and I guess I see why, but I love the classic 45 as a duty weapon. Anyone know of a situation where carrying a 1911 locked and ****** was unsafe?
2007-06-04 08:13:36 · 7 answers · asked by Jamie A 1 in Politics & Government ➔ Law Enforcement & Police
That is the way John Browning designed it and it is supposed to be carried.
2007-06-07 18:39:24 · answer #1 · answered by .45 Peacemaker 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
My department was the same way. In my early days I had to carry a revolver whenever I carried any semi auto.
I also believe they were right.
I investigated a lot of officer involved shootings. A large number came from accidental discharges with 1911's. (some of teh conversion were worse) I asked the same question about military carrying them and learned from retired military officers that they only carried ****** and locked when "going into action" otherwise the chamber stayed empty.
Well as police officers we are always "in action" and when we do need to use our sidearm we do not normally have time to feed a round into the chamber.
Nowadays we go with DAO on all semi's.and most revolvers (hammer-less). It has been a lot safer.
2007-06-04 15:27:52 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
There's always the likelihood of messing up your pants if it goes off (whether you happen to shoot yourself or not).
There are good reasons to be fond of Old Slabsides, and good reasons to be aware that it as a century-old design. A modern double-action automatic in .45ACP or .40S&W is fundamentally safer to carry and a tiny bit faster to point and fire, maybe just enough to favorably affect your future.
2007-06-04 15:35:51 · answer #3 · answered by senior citizen 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It is about unsafe as carrying any Glock. No external safeties what so ever
2007-06-04 15:29:39 · answer #4 · answered by Anthony M 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Those policy makes are not throughly familiar with the mechanics of the 1911A1. Anyone who knows it intimately, can carry the gun in great safety, in this manner.
2007-06-04 18:30:58 · answer #5 · answered by WC 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Not really unsafe. But I feel their are better options.
Personally, I'd rather have the extra magazine capacity of my Springfield.
2007-06-04 15:22:43 · answer #6 · answered by Kenneth C 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It's all about training, training, training - and more training.
2007-06-04 15:17:54 · answer #7 · answered by ? 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋