HISTORY

by Dr. Tim Urell

Prior to 1905, US military forces requiring handguns were equipped with revolvers chambered for 38 caliber. These weapon systems proved to be notoriously poor performers, failing to stop enemies even when good center of mass hits were obtained. The problem apparently became acute during the Morro rebellion in the Phillipines where US Marines encountered fanatical opponents who were frequently high on drugs. These "failures to stop" lead the US military to look for a more effective handgun/cartridge.

It was then that the design genius of John Moses Browning was brought to bear on the problem. Working for the Colt Patent Firearms Company, Browning designed a semiautomatic pistol which, with a few modifications, became the 45 Automatic Colt Pistol (ACP). It was tested by the military, found very superior to the then-current issue revolvers, and was adopted as the standard US sidearm in 1911 - over three quarters of a century ago.

Essentially unmodified from its 1911 design, this pistol saw distinguished service in WWI, WWII, Korea, Vietnam, and all other US engagements until the early 1990s. To this day the 45 ACP remains the largest caliber handgun ever routinely issued to military troops. It is interesting to note, however, that no 45's were purchased by the US military at any time after WWII, because such huge numbers of these guns were in military stores.

This little appreciated fact is responsible for the 45's undeserved reputation as a malfunction-prone, inaccurate weapon. The 45s produced in wartime were rushed into service, and often produced under contract by companies with no weapons experience (for example, the Remington Rand typewriter company). Castings were rough, machining imprecise, and the guns were intentionally fit up very loosely so that they would continue to function even if poorly maintained and coated in mud. Accuracy was often only barely acceptable, and malfunctions or even accidental discharges (AD's) because of poor machining, assembly, or maintenance were common.

Such guns were completely satisfactory for military use, however. A handgun is a very short range weapon, and is thus inherently defensive. It is only used when the enemy is nearly in touching distance - at any greater distance a rifle is the weapon of choice. Under such conditions a hard-hitting but inaccurate handgun was acceptable.

Nearly 50 years of sitting in government warehouses, armories, and other less than ideal places did not make these weapons any more accurate or reliable. Further compounding the problem were military armorers. Most of these well meaning and hard working grunts were given only basic instruction in the repair of weapons to original condition, and none whatsoever in improving them. Of course, they were only given the minimal tools needed and not the expensive and sophisticated machine tools needed to make the average GI 45 the equivalent of today's excellent civilian models.

After the Vietnam War, it was decided to begin procurement of new handguns to replace the old and worn out 45s in military stores. Thus began the Joint Services Small Arms Procurement (JSSAP) program. Because the majority of our NATO allies were standardized on the smaller 9mm Parabellum round, it was decided from the beginning that the new gun would be a 9mm - not because it was better than the 45, because it clearly was not, but for standardization with our allies.

It was also decided initially that the new weapon would be of double action design, because it was thought (probably erroneously as will be seen later) that this design was less likely to discharge accidentally than the single action 45. The weapon eventually adopted was the Beretta Model 92F, a weapon felt by many to be inferior to the Colt 45 in virtually all ways.

However, the "official line" was that the Beretta was superior, most specifically in that the double action design was inherently less likely to discharge accidentally than the single action design. It is this issue which we must examine in depth.

DOUBLE ACTION vs SINGLE ACTION

In a double action weapon a long, hard trigger pull is used to cock the hammer, which then falls and fires the round. By contrast, the single action weapon must have the hammer cocked before the trigger is pulled. It is this long, hard pull which is both the assumed advantage of the double action weapon - and its main disadvantage. Advantage: a long, hard pull makes it harder to accidentally discharge the weapon. Disadvantage: a long hard pull makes it much more difficult to keep the intentional shot on target.

A double action pistol typically has a trigger pull requiring about 12 pounds of pressure exerted over a travel of about an inch. By comparison, the typical police single action pistol has a trigger pull of about 5 pounds exerted over half an inch. The supposed safety advantage of the double action gun, then, amounts to 6 or 7 pounds of force and a half inch of travel. Is this really able to prevent AD's?

The type of accidental discharge which is most worried about in this regard is that which might occur when an officer is holding a suspect at gunpoint, searching a building, or effecting an arrest and is suddenly surprised, injured, or attacked. It has been assumed that the harder trigger pull of the double action gun will prevent accidental discharges.

Most people are capable of exerting more than 50 pounds of force with the trigger finger alone. Two adult males struggling over a gun have been estimated to exert over 1,000 pounds of force. Indeed, there have been instances reported in which triggers have been bent or broken in the heat of such struggles. Under these conditions does it seem at all likely that a mere 6 or 7 pounds of additional resistance will prevent an accidental discharge?

Statistics support the finding that accidental discharges are no more likely with modern, civilian, single action autos than with double action autos or even with double action revolvers. For example, within the Yuma County Sheriff's Department there have been only three accidental discharges recorded in the past ten years: one with a double action revolver, one with a single action auto, and one with an MP5 sub gun. This was despite a far greater number of rounds fired with single action weapons during this period of time. Similar statistics have been reported by numerous other agencies. In the ten years prior to adopting the auto pistol, the LAPD reported 50 accidental discharges with revolvers modified to be double action ONLY! Single action and double action weapons are about equally likely to discharge accidentally, and the antidote is the same in both cases - proper training.

Analysis shows that the main theoretical advantage of the double action auto - its supposed resistance to accidental discharges - is an illusion. What, then, of it's main disadvantage - it's poorer accuracy?

Unfortunately, this disadvantage is all too real. Almost any firearms instructor will agree that the most difficult part of his job is teaching officers to hold a three pound gun rock steady while at the same time exerting 12 pounds of force on its trigger. It can be done, but it takes a far greater amount of training to do it.

According to Lt. Massad Ayoob in his excellent book The Semiautomatic Pistol in Police Service and Self Defense, only about 25% of rounds fired double action in street gunfights hit the target, while 75% "...go screaming on through the community" possibly to become a source of tragedy and huge liability exposure for the department and the officer.

In contrast, the first shot hit potential with the single action Colt is about 70 % - nearly three times the double action hit rate! This is the overwhelming superiority of the single action auto -improved accuracy, especially under stress.

This huge advantage in accuracy also makes itself clear on the qualification range. When this department adopted the double action 4506, there was a significant drop in qualification scores from those achieved earlier by the same officers with single action Colts. A single action weapon is a great advantage to the officer who has difficulty qualifying with a double action gun.

Again from Lt Ayoob's book, "The poor shot with a [double action] can usually be helped dramatically simply by switching him to a single action auto". Small statured officers seem to benefit the very most from the single action auto.

The greater accuracy of the single action auto has also made it the choice of many (if not most) officers assigned to special teams where the likelihood of gunplay is great: for example, SWAT. The FBI Hostage Rescue Team spent nearly a decade researching and searching for the best gun with which to equip itself. Cost was no object. The gun finally chosen was the Para Ordnance - a Colt style single action pistol with a double stack magazine.

Finally, there is another testimony to the superiority of the single action - competitions designed to stress accuracy and speed, such as The Steel Challenge, NRA Action Shooting, or IPSC matches. With one exception known to the author, every major event in all of these sports has been won with a single action auto. That should say something in this day of multi-million dollar contracts awarded for winning these events.

It has been said that the single action Colt 45 is the finest fighting pistol ever designed. The above evidence would seem to bear this out.