Why revolvers?

[Recusant]

Dump pouches were awful. Pants pockets were worse.

And I hope you didn’t have to convince your department bean counter that your life was worth more than a new-fangled speed loader.

 

[HayesGreener]

And I hope you didn’t have to convince your department bean counter that your life was worth more than a new-fangled speed loader.

The Newhall Incident in 1970 removed argument about speedloaders in most agencies. But it took another 10 years before we saw communities shamed into universal issue of body armor

 

[Shibadog]

What most folks today fail to realize is that back in the day there WERE no “hi cap” pistols or rifles. In ‘68 when the GCA was passed if it had banned ALL new firearms with a capacity of more than 10 literally no one would have cared. The venerable M1 Carbine with 15 rounds and the Browning Hi-Power with 13 were basically the only game in town. Heck when I bought my first AR back in the day it came with two 5 round mags. In a world where 95% or more of firearms held 7 or less a guy with a revolver was certainly not “under armed”. Today a lot of folks think if your not toting 17, 19 or more in your CCW the you’re “unarmed”

 

[Gofer]

A friend of mine was in a department that transitioned from revolvers to Beretta 92s. They were issued 50 rounds of service ammo and were allowed to fire 100 rounds of practice ammo and they hit the street…that was it

 

[Cedric]

Our aviators carried .38s in shoulder holsters through the Gulf War. Never heard any complaints.

 

[TEXASforLIFE]

Not 1 thing wrong with a revolver unless made by hi-point.