Garry
From my experience, which was a vote in the 90's it was 60% against being armed. However, I also know a lot of of police officers, many of who voted in that poll, who've since changed their minds.
I'd suggest you read Insp Gadgets blog to see how much feeling there is in favour nowadays.
So having dealt with my opinion being out of step, next lets look at facts.
My last station, 70% of officers were armed. Mostly with handguns, glock's to be exact. So 70% of officers at that station were the type to make that decision, just as I was quite willing to make the decision to clout someone with an asp, and if necessary clout them in a way that may well have killed them.
So in short my point is I did the job and know the mindset intimately of those that do it. You're wrong.
Going back to the type of pistol, yes, badly maintained, automatics can be unreliable. Well maintained they are not. Certainly every European Police Force that use them, ie most, don't have an issue. Why would the UK Police be any different? The issue of using revolvers therefore doesn't arise.
Cost of purchase? Bit late to worry about that.
The only other cost is training. Easily solved, stop wasting money on diversity training, and use it for self defence in all it's forms. After all, you can't be nice to Gypsies if your laying dead.
My only concern is the repercussions of using a gun, which is why I refused to carry one. The likes of Duggan, I assume you've now seen the news about him, and seen the error of your previous conjecture about him, shows that even when properly used, people will insist in believing the Guardian's inaccurate tripe rather than waiting until the evidence is made public.
Until a better system than the incompetent "I"PCC is put in place, I wouldn't carry a firearm. Thats not to say that I support "Judge Dread" Policing, it simply means that I do not support trial by media and trial by rumour, I do support quick and proper investigations conducted by those with experience and knowledge.