on_one_wheel wrote:Im going to chime in here with a guess... Because cowboys.
bronco93 wrote:Now I hardly know f all about hand guns. But on the way to work this morning I was sitting at traffic lights and was watching the security guards walk into the bank. And then I started wondering why do they use revolvers and not some sort of modern pistol?
cracker wrote:bronco93 wrote:Now I hardly know f all about hand guns. But on the way to work this morning I was sitting at traffic lights and was watching the security guards walk into the bank. And then I started wondering why do they use revolvers and not some sort of modern pistol?
there not theirs, its what the company would supply.
whats wrong with a revolver?
bronco93 wrote:I should have said too I was mainly thinking of a revolver being used in double action where accuracy is less than a semi auto pistol
CrackThump wrote: Stopping to cock the firearm indicates you had time to think about it and you should have thought of something else.
CrackThump wrote:This is going back a few years, And I mean 'turn of the century' 1999-ish
My lady friend of the season had just qualified as an armed carry guard in nsw and complained about the massively heavy trigger pull on the smith and wesson revolver that she trained with and carried. I remember asking her why she doesnt (a) cock the hammer and fire or (b) opt for semi auto.
The answer took 3 hours and several whiteboard diagrams but it went something like this.
Discharging your firearm should be a last choice or self defence response, Stopping to cock the firearm indicates you had time to think about it and you should have thought of something else.
Revolvers over autos kind of ties into the same subject of heavy trigger pulls, As someone mentioned earlier, the scant training that these minimum wagers receive, using a semi auto increases the possibility of accidental discharges trying to draw from a holster in a high stress situation. There were other reasons, along the lines of a revolver's simplicity of use verus the semi auto's moving parts, jams, various conditions of readiness etc etc... The general idea was that an inexperienced user had less chance of catastrophic f*ckuppery with a revolver
From what I can see, not much has changed with security officers in the last 20 years, so I think its safe to assume that training philosophies havent changed much either.
Annnnnnd... Discuss...
wanneroo wrote:I'd be interested to hear what sort of force on force training these guards receive. Sounds to me they have really no preparation for gun to gun combat.
CrackThump wrote:This is going back a few years, And I mean 'turn of the century' 1999-ish
My lady friend of the season had just qualified as an armed carry guard in nsw and complained about the massively heavy trigger pull on the smith and wesson revolver that she trained with and carried. I remember asking her why she doesnt (a) cock the hammer and fire or (b) opt for semi auto.
The answer took 3 hours and several whiteboard diagrams but it went something like this.
Discharging your firearm should be a last choice or self defence response, Stopping to cock the firearm indicates you had time to think about it and you should have thought of something else.
Revolvers over autos kind of ties into the same subject of heavy trigger pulls, As someone mentioned earlier, the scant training that these minimum wagers receive, using a semi auto increases the possibility of accidental discharges trying to draw from a holster in a high stress situation. There were other reasons, along the lines of a revolver's simplicity of use verus the semi auto's moving parts, jams, various conditions of readiness etc etc... The general idea was that an inexperienced user had less chance of catastrophic f*ckuppery with a revolver
From what I can see, not much has changed with security officers in the last 20 years, so I think its safe to assume that training philosophies havent changed much either.
Annnnnnd... Discuss...
bigrich wrote:wanneroo wrote:I'd be interested to hear what sort of force on force training these guards receive. Sounds to me they have really no preparation for gun to gun combat.
Serious shoot outs just aren’t real common in Australia
wanneroo wrote:bigrich wrote:wanneroo wrote:I'd be interested to hear what sort of force on force training these guards receive. Sounds to me they have really no preparation for gun to gun combat.
Serious shoot outs just aren’t real common in Australia
Understood, but if you are carrying a gun and the potential for using it exists, you better know how to deal with it otherwise it will do more harm than good.
bronco93 wrote:I don't think there is anything wrong with a revolver. I enjoy shooting them. I just thought semi auto pistols are more accurate in the average persons hand?
bronco93 wrote:Now I hardly know f all about hand guns. But on the way to work this morning I was sitting at traffic lights and was watching the security guards walk into the bank. And then I started wondering why do they use revolvers and not some sort of modern pistol?
wanneroo wrote:bigrich wrote:wanneroo wrote:I'd be interested to hear what sort of force on force training these guards receive. Sounds to me they have really no preparation for gun to gun combat.
Serious shoot outs just aren’t real common in Australia
Understood, but if you are carrying a gun and the potential for using it exists, you better know how to deal with it otherwise it will do more harm than good.
bronco93 wrote:cracker wrote:bronco93 wrote:Now I hardly know f all about hand guns. But on the way to work this morning I was sitting at traffic lights and was watching the security guards walk into the bank. And then I started wondering why do they use revolvers and not some sort of modern pistol?
there not theirs, its what the company would supply.
whats wrong with a revolver?
I dont think there is anything wrong with a revolver.
I enjoy shooting them. I just thought semi auto pistols are more accurate in the average persons hand? Saying that, we have all seen the video last year of the aussie copper trying to put down the roo from no more than 3m and was still missing it
Chappo wrote:Like the op I also know sweet fa about handguns but I would assume the biggest reason would be for deterrence and then I’d agree with crackthumps reasoning that they don’t have enough of training or even enough need to warrant a semi auto.
If I could take this off topic slightly, I’ve been watching the Bush Tuckerman series on DVD lately and Les carries a sidearm that looks like it’d do more damage to a croc (or dropbear) if he hit him with it! The thing is huge!!
Like I said I know sweet fa but I’d like to know what it is. Can anyone identify it?
For those of you under 35 and have never heard of Les Hiddins, do yourself a favour.....
Member-Deleted wrote:With the minimal training they receive, if they ever need to draw and use them, 6 missed shots flying off into a crowded CBD is better than a semi fed by a double-stack mag
wanneroo wrote:I'd be interested to hear what sort of force on force training these guards receive. Sounds to me they have really no preparation for gun to gun combat.