Military/Police Special forces who use revolvers?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Joined
Jul 3, 2008
Messages
1,706
Location
Ohio, USA
I just watched a French Police Special Forces movie called "The Assault". It's a true story about the 1994 Air France 8969 hijacking that was suppose to crash in the Eiffel Tower.
Many of the them used French revolver called the Manurhin MR-73 and as a backup they used semi-automatic pistols. The French Military and Police special forces still use revolvers as their main weapon/service weapon. In Vietnam, a Smith and Wesson revolver were used by the Navy, Air Force and Army. I wonder why the pistol took over?

These are the weapons that they used in the movie which was the actual models used in the actual raid:

Weapons used in the movie

Here's actual footage of the raid that was based on the movie:

Actual News footage

Check out 1:56 of the clip. A terrorist shot the muzzle of a police officer's gun and the gun exploded in his face.
 
Last edited:
I was issued a S&W model 15 in Vietnam, match grade, slick weapon but got a 1911 as soon as I could lay my hands on one.
For semi close work it's hard to beat a M79.
 
Id imagine that the number of rounds stored, especially with 9mm in an M9, is a compelling reason...

Perhaps for something like AF duty, the needs of reliability and to put one in your head when stranded are more important than using it as a fighting tool? No idea, just speculating... For Navy, all the watch Ive seen and encountered has had a long gun of some type. Id imagine the need for a lot of rounds in a sidearm is less there than on ground duty.
 
Originally Posted By: JHZR2
Id imagine that the number of rounds stored, especially with 9mm in an M9, is a compelling reason...


That would be my guess too. Pistols can generally hold more rounds, and having multiple pre-loaded magazines makes for quick reloading. As reliable as revolvers are, in a shootout you may be able to get more rounds out with a pistol.
 
Originally Posted By: 01rangerxl
Originally Posted By: JHZR2
Id imagine that the number of rounds stored, especially with 9mm in an M9, is a compelling reason...


That would be my guess too. Pistols can generally hold more rounds, and having multiple pre-loaded magazines makes for quick reloading. As reliable as revolvers are, in a shootout you may be able to get more rounds out with a pistol.


It seems that if people could shoot better, they wouldnt need multiple pre-loaded magazines. I watched a special on the FBI tracking a gang of bank robbers. They cornered one of them, and between 12 FBI agents, 52 shots were fired in less than a minute. The bank robber was hit ONE time, and it was a graze to his cheek. If they knew how to shoot, they may have actually hit the guy instead of everything around him. I think if they didn't have tons of ammo, they may place their shots better.
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: Jason8691

That would be my guess too. Pistols can generally hold more rounds, and having multiple pre-loaded magazines makes for quick reloading. As reliable as revolvers are, in a shootout you may be able to get more rounds out with a pistol.


It seems that if people could shoot better, they wouldnt need multiple pre-loaded magazines. I watched a special on the FBI tracking a gang of bank robbers. They cornered one of them, and between 12 FBI agents, 52 shots were fired in less than a minute. The bank robber was hit ONE time, and it was a graze to his cheek. If they knew how to shoot, they may have actually hit the guy instead of everything around him. I think if they didn't have tons of ammo, they may place their shots better. [/quote]
Requires lots of training = expensive = not popular by the people that fund them.
 
Originally Posted By: Jason8691

It seems that if people could shoot better, they wouldnt need multiple pre-loaded magazines. I watched a special on the FBI tracking a gang of bank robbers. They cornered one of them, and between 12 FBI agents, 52 shots were fired in less than a minute. The bank robber was hit ONE time, and it was a graze to his cheek. If they knew how to shoot, they may have actually hit the guy instead of everything around him. I think if they didn't have tons of ammo, they may place their shots better.


Spoken like a true internet expert.

It's just that easy, right? Shoot better and you won't need more rounds. Nevermind the bad guys with nothing to lose shooting back at you. You just need to place your shots better.
 
Originally Posted By: MrHorspwer
Originally Posted By: Jason8691

It seems that if people could shoot better, they wouldnt need multiple pre-loaded magazines. I watched a special on the FBI tracking a gang of bank robbers. They cornered one of them, and between 12 FBI agents, 52 shots were fired in less than a minute. The bank robber was hit ONE time, and it was a graze to his cheek. If they knew how to shoot, they may have actually hit the guy instead of everything around him. I think if they didn't have tons of ammo, they may place their shots better.


Spoken like a true internet expert.

It's just that easy, right? Shoot better and you won't need more rounds. Nevermind the bad guys with nothing to lose shooting back at you. You just need to place your shots better.


For home/personal defense, I should practice with a revolver then. I've heard people use semi-autos as personal protection and they spray bullets everywhere instead of aiming.

That's probably why the the French SWAT police were successful with the Air France hijacking. Six shots, .357, double-action, was all they needed.

Manurhin MR-73
Manurhin.jpg
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: MrHorspwer
Originally Posted By: Jason8691

It seems that if people could shoot better, they wouldnt need multiple pre-loaded magazines. I watched a special on the FBI tracking a gang of bank robbers. They cornered one of them, and between 12 FBI agents, 52 shots were fired in less than a minute. The bank robber was hit ONE time, and it was a graze to his cheek. If they knew how to shoot, they may have actually hit the guy instead of everything around him. I think if they didn't have tons of ammo, they may place their shots better.


Spoken like a true internet expert.

It's just that easy, right? Shoot better and you won't need more rounds. Nevermind the bad guys with nothing to lose shooting back at you. You just need to place your shots better.


Quote:
You ever see tape of the Kehoe brothers from Ohio, those two guys that get out of that white Suburban, it’s been on COPS a few times? Those guys, folks, have a shootout with the police, at point, blank, range…nobody gets hurt. I would love to have been at that office the next day when that guy’s being interviewed by the police…(imitates the chief)And then what happened? (imitating officer) Well, at that point I unloaded my semi-automatic 9 millimeter weapon at point blank range. (imitating chief) And then what happened? (imitating officer) They left… (as himself) Nice shooting, Elmer Fudd. There was a kid in Detroit a few years ago, shot 8 bullets, hit 9 people. These cops fired 22 shots, didn’t even hit the [freakin'] Suburban! Ron White


Point.....Blank....Range.
crackmeup2.gif
 
Originally Posted By: MrHorspwer
Originally Posted By: Jason8691

It seems that if people could shoot better, they wouldnt need multiple pre-loaded magazines. I watched a special on the FBI tracking a gang of bank robbers. They cornered one of them, and between 12 FBI agents, 52 shots were fired in less than a minute. The bank robber was hit ONE time, and it was a graze to his cheek. If they knew how to shoot, they may have actually hit the guy instead of everything around him. I think if they didn't have tons of ammo, they may place their shots better.


Spoken like a true internet expert.

It's just that easy, right? Shoot better and you won't need more rounds. Nevermind the bad guys with nothing to lose shooting back at you. You just need to place your shots better.


Have you ever been shot at? No not an Internet expert, 22 years in the military and about 35 'years of shooting. We're taught to not waste ammo, so yes-it is that easy. Don't panic and just spray and pray, aim center mass and squeeze the trigger. If l know l only have 6 shots, lm not going to waste them.
 
Last edited:
Went on vacation to southern France last year. One of my most vivid memories is seeing a female uniformed cop in Cannes. They have a chain on the gun to the belt. This woman was a left-handed shot; and she had a BIG HONKIN' REVOLVER, stainless or chrome I could only tell it was bright metal not blued. Not knowing if it's a good idea to be a foreigner and walk up talking guns to the local PD, I just walked away with my wife. But from my experience, I'd bet it was a .357 mag.
 
Originally Posted By: Jason8691
Originally Posted By: MrHorspwer
Originally Posted By: Jason8691

It seems that if people could shoot better, they wouldnt need multiple pre-loaded magazines. I watched a special on the FBI tracking a gang of bank robbers. They cornered one of them, and between 12 FBI agents, 52 shots were fired in less than a minute. The bank robber was hit ONE time, and it was a graze to his cheek. If they knew how to shoot, they may have actually hit the guy instead of everything around him. I think if they didn't have tons of ammo, they may place their shots better.


Spoken like a true internet expert.

It's just that easy, right? Shoot better and you won't need more rounds. Nevermind the bad guys with nothing to lose shooting back at you. You just need to place your shots better.


Have you ever been shot at? No not an Internet expert, 22 years in the military and about 35 'years of shooting. We're taught to not waste ammo, so yes-it is that easy. Don't panic and just spray and pray, aim center mass and squeeze the trigger. If l know l only have 6 shots, lm not going to waste them.


No, like most people, I have never been shot at. So, like most people, I have no idea how I will react to an extreme stress situation where I need to draw a pistol in defense.

Have I tried to prepare myself as best I can, by taking defensive pistol courses and actively practicing defensive pistol exercises? Yeah, sure... but cardboard doesn't shoot back.

Do I feel prepared should the unfortunate occur? Yes, I am confident that I will respond appropriatly. That doesn't mean I'm going to puff out my chest and critique an unknown gunfight involving law enforcement agents, boiling it down to the very simple sentiment, "They need to shoot better." That is akin to saying that if Dale Earnhardt Jr. wants to win a Sprint Cup, he needs to, "Drive better." Maybe if you gave him a car with 50 less HP or three gallons less fuel, he'd be more likely to make it count.

Offering simple solutions to an impossibly complex physicaliogical response makes you an Internet expert.
 
Originally Posted By: 2cool
Went on vacation to southern France last year. One of my most vivid memories is seeing a female uniformed cop in Cannes. They have a chain on the gun to the belt. This woman was a left-handed shot; and she had a BIG HONKIN' REVOLVER, stainless or chrome I could only tell it was bright metal not blued. Not knowing if it's a good idea to be a foreigner and walk up talking guns to the local PD, I just walked away with my wife. But from my experience, I'd bet it was a .357 mag.


There is an intimidation factor that goes along with a huge revolver like that. My "home defense" gun is a Ruger Super Redhawk, which is huge if you haven't seen one. Chances are should someone ever break in and Im home, all I have to do is point it in their general direction and they will leave. If they don't leave, they are either high or really brave!
 
I do remember seeing some 38 S&W chambered Ruger wheel guns made for a south east Asian police force at one time. Obviously a hold over from the British rule days.

I have a book kicking around somewhere with an article on the French forces using revolvers. According to this book they picked a revolver for accuracy and the knockdown power of the 357 magnum round. Revolvers in a skilled hand can be quite an effective weapon, however, in the days of the wonder 9mm, the slight edge in power, and the slight edge in accuracy is often not enough for the added speed and capacity of the auto pistol. I will say that shooting a revolver in double action mode does teach you better trigger pulling technique as you have a long and steady pull that is often heavier than many autos. I started shooting autos better when I shot my Ruger Security Six more.
 
Originally Posted By: MrHorspwer
Originally Posted By: Jason8691
Originally Posted By: MrHorspwer
Originally Posted By: Jason8691

It seems that if people could shoot better, they wouldnt need multiple pre-loaded magazines. I watched a special on the FBI tracking a gang of bank robbers. They cornered one of them, and between 12 FBI agents, 52 shots were fired in less than a minute. The bank robber was hit ONE time, and it was a graze to his cheek. If they knew how to shoot, they may have actually hit the guy instead of everything around him. I think if they didn't have tons of ammo, they may place their shots better.


Spoken like a true internet expert.

It's just that easy, right? Shoot better and you won't need more rounds. Nevermind the bad guys with nothing to lose shooting back at you. You just need to place your shots better.


Have you ever been shot at? No not an Internet expert, 22 years in the military and about 35 'years of shooting. We're taught to not waste ammo, so yes-it is that easy. Don't panic and just spray and pray, aim center mass and squeeze the trigger. If l know l only have 6 shots, lm not going to waste them.


No, like most people, I have never been shot at. So, like most people, I have no idea how I will react to an extreme stress situation where I need to draw a pistol in defense.

Have I tried to prepare myself as best I can, by taking defensive pistol courses and actively practicing defensive pistol exercises? Yeah, sure... but cardboard doesn't shoot back.

Do I feel prepared should the unfortunate occur? Yes, I am confident that I will respond appropriatly. That doesn't mean I'm going to puff out my chest and critique an unknown gunfight involving law enforcement agents, boiling it down to the very simple sentiment, "They need to shoot better." That is akin to saying that if Dale Earnhardt Jr. wants to win a Sprint Cup, he needs to, "Drive better." Maybe if you gave him a car with 50 less HP or three gallons less fuel, he'd be more likely to make it count.

Offering simple solutions to an impossibly complex physicaliogical response makes you an Internet expert.



Well, thanks for explaining to me what an internet expert is. And what you are doing is what you should do, be more prepared than the other guy. Next time I will go to ridiculous depths in explaining what I mean-and then get called a know it all. Thanks but I will stick with the simpler method. Most people, when shooting in a high stress situation, will look in the same direction their weapon is pointed and shoot away. Which is ok if you are a manning a machine gun, not ok if you are trying to conserve ammo and actually hit something. My point was that given the supposed professionalism of the FBI, 12 agents shooting at a guy less than 20 feet away with pistols and shotguns should have been able to kill the guy. Instead, 52 shots later, he had a graze under one eye. Had they calmed down, aimed at him-not in his general direction-they would have hit him. I bet if they had revolvers and knew they didn't have two more magazines and 30+ more rounds to spray in his direction, they would have used the skills they were taught and actually hit him. Thats why lasers and lights are good tools for home defense, the shooter doesn't have to line up two sights and aim at something that is moving, they put the laser on him and shoot. But here Im rambling, and I hope I don't sound like an internet expert again.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top