PDA

View Full Version : What agency's let you carry your own AR-15??


Sicmaro
07-15-2009, 11:45 AM
I'm trying to get my chief to let me purchase and carry my own rifle in my patrol car. I'm trying to compile a list of agency's that allow this and that are issuing there guys AW letters. Preferable NOR-CAL agency's but all CA would be great.

nobody33
07-15-2009, 2:13 PM
SDPD and LAPD.

fullrearview
07-15-2009, 2:53 PM
SDPD and LAPD.


Good to know!

Ron-Solo
07-15-2009, 4:28 PM
LASD does NOT at this time, but it is possibly going to change soon.

Only Department owned guns at this point.

strangerdude
07-15-2009, 4:35 PM
I have seen LASD (compton) with AR-15, LBPD, Torrance Police has MP5's.

Glock Fan
07-15-2009, 4:38 PM
I've seen AR's in the patrol cars in Irvine....maybe thats why they are voted the safest city ;)

Fjold
07-15-2009, 5:03 PM
The Kern County Sheriff issues letters for their deputies.

emilio
07-15-2009, 5:28 PM
i'm not a LEO by any measure, but this is something that i've wondered about since a buddy applied to the CHP and another is a State Park Ranger. this seems like a thicket of individual and department liability. would an armorer have to inspect the gun? would approved ammunition have to be used? would you have to re-qualify with it?

sweet tax write-off, tho. (ah, the truth is revealed!)
- emilio

Unit74
07-15-2009, 5:41 PM
Escondido.

Guy I know recently bought a Sig 556.

Sicmaro
07-15-2009, 6:05 PM
We have patrol rifle's but they are not assigned to an individual. So the sights and slings are not set for me. Are rifle's don't have night sights or tactical lights either. This is why I would love to be able to have my personal rifle in the car. Sight's and sling are set and I'd have my night sight's and light.

I'm sure the dept. armorer would inspect them and make us qualify but that's no big deal. I'd qualify with my own ammo, and on my own dime if they would allow it.

Jwood562
07-15-2009, 9:50 PM
i'm not a LEO by any measure, but this is something that i've wondered about since a buddy applied to the CHP and another is a State Park Ranger. this seems like a thicket of individual and department liability. would an armorer have to inspect the gun? would approved ammunition have to be used? would you have to re-qualify with it?

sweet tax write-off, tho. (ah, the truth is revealed!)
- emilio


my department allows carrying of personal ARs. They have to fall within department policy which includes:

An approved brand.
Only carry approved ammo
Gun needs to inspected and signed off by SWAT armorer
You have to shoot it quartely without jams or malfunctions (and score well)

Sicmaro
07-15-2009, 11:28 PM
my department allows carrying of personal ARs. They have to fall within department policy which includes:

An approved brand.
Only carry approved ammo
Gun needs to inspected and signed off by SWAT armorer
You have to shoot it quarterly without jams or malfunctions (and score well)

If you could PM me with who you work for that would be great. Just for reference.

Thanks

Triad
07-16-2009, 9:15 AM
The Kern County Sheriff issues letters for their deputies.

For whatever they want to carry. (In the AR realm)

tyrist
07-16-2009, 10:20 PM
We have patrol rifle's but they are not assigned to an individual. So the sights and slings are not set for me. Are rifle's don't have night sights or tactical lights either. This is why I would love to be able to have my personal rifle in the car. Sight's and sling are set and I'd have my night sight's and light.

I'm sure the dept. armorer would inspect them and make us qualify but that's no big deal. I'd qualify with my own ammo, and on my own dime if they would allow it.

That is so unsat and asking for trouble. Each individual has a different zero and the sights need to be custom for each Officer otherwise your shooting all over. I would think your agency would be more concerned about this than they obviously are.

gunrun45
07-16-2009, 10:50 PM
Elk Grove PD, Colusa PD, Coulsa Coputy Sheriff, Mendicino County Sheriff, Eureka PD, Humbolt County Sheriff, Redding PD, Susanville PD, Marysville PD, Sutter County Sheriff might be now as well... Redding PD issues letters but I don't know about carrying on duty.

If you check with your local AW dealers they will be able to give you a good idea of who they see giving out letter. Try River city gun exchange in Sacramento. I know they do a thriving buisness.

Good luck.

locosway
07-17-2009, 12:00 AM
I've seen AR's in the patrol cars in Irvine....maybe thats why they are voted the safest city ;)

The stories I have about station 39...

Sicmaro
07-17-2009, 2:01 AM
Thanks for all the replies guys. Keep them coming. I'm glad some of you are pm'ing me with your policy's and such. really helping me with ideas to try and get this going with my dept.

Ron-Solo
07-17-2009, 11:50 AM
i'm not a LEO by any measure, but this is something that i've wondered about since a buddy applied to the CHP and another is a State Park Ranger. this seems like a thicket of individual and department liability. would an armorer have to inspect the gun? would approved ammunition have to be used? would you have to re-qualify with it?

sweet tax write-off, tho. (ah, the truth is revealed!)
- emilio

With LASD, personal owned guns must come from an approved list. If it is factory new it does not require any further inspection. If we purchase a used gun, it must be inspected by a department armorer before we can carry it on or off duty.

BTW, one of the most intelligent questions I've seen posted in the LEO forum lately. Thanks!

Ron-Solo
07-17-2009, 11:52 AM
That is so unsat and asking for trouble. Each individual has a different zero and the sights need to be custom for each Officer otherwise your shooting all over. I would think your agency would be more concerned about this than they obviously are.

This is why LASD is considering allowing personal rifles. They are at least retro fitting all the Dept rifles with EoTech 512's

Reconsnake
07-17-2009, 6:46 PM
My first concern:

Why is a rifle any different than the firearm on your belt? You are required to purchase a pistol, qualify with that weapon, and be competent with it. In some respects, based on bullet energy and velocity, rifle caliber munitions can be more dangerous than their handgun counterparts, in reference to collateral damage. I would imagine that most would consider proficency with a rifle caliber round, more important than with a smaller cartidge with less behind it. You may be able to argue the point, that stray .223 could not only negatively impact the ability of the department to choose that as a weapon system for their officers, as well as the confidence of the officers to deploy that weapon system to protect themselves and the public.

Good luck, as I believe to effectively utilize any weapon, you need to be as familiar with it as possible.

bluestaterebel
07-18-2009, 11:35 AM
My first concern:

Why is a rifle any different than the firearm on your belt? You are required to purchase a pistol, qualify with that weapon, and be competent with it. In some respects, based on bullet energy and velocity, rifle caliber munitions can be more dangerous than their handgun counterparts, in reference to collateral damage. I would imagine that most would consider proficency with a rifle caliber round, more important than with a smaller cartidge with less behind it. You may be able to argue the point, that stray .223 could not only negatively impact the ability of the department to choose that as a weapon system for their officers, as well as the confidence of the officers to deploy that weapon system to protect themselves and the public.

Good luck, as I believe to effectively utilize any weapon, you need to be as familiar with it as possible.

Good point, but you underestimate the auroa of the Evil Black Rifle.

yellowreef
07-18-2009, 1:39 PM
My first concern:

Why is a rifle any different than the firearm on your belt? You are required to purchase a pistol, qualify with that weapon, and be competent with it. In some respects, based on bullet energy and velocity, rifle caliber munitions can be more dangerous than their handgun counterparts, in reference to collateral damage. I would imagine that most would consider proficency with a rifle caliber round, more important than with a smaller cartidge with less behind it. You may be able to argue the point, that stray .223 could not only negatively impact the ability of the department to choose that as a weapon system for their officers, as well as the confidence of the officers to deploy that weapon system to protect themselves and the public.

Good luck, as I believe to effectively utilize any weapon, you need to be as familiar with it as possible.

Are you referencing someone's particular post? I don't get the point you are trying to make. Agencies that allow this do make you train and qualify with the rilfe.

leitung
07-18-2009, 2:15 PM
Check with Roseville PD, I have heard that they issue their own long arms. I dont think thats correct however. I have seen Roseville pd with Mini-14s before.

Cool to se some LEOs from the Sacramento, I am trying to put my Level III post to good use here.

Reconsnake
07-18-2009, 3:47 PM
Are you referencing someone's particular post? I don't get the point you are trying to make. Agencies that allow this do make you train and qualify with the rilfe.

The OP stated:


"We have patrol rifle's but they are not assigned to an individual. So the sights and slings are not set for me. Are rifle's don't have night sights or tactical lights either. This is why I would love to be able to have my personal rifle in the car. Sight's and sling are set and I'd have my night sight's and light.

I'm sure the dept. armorer would inspect them and make us qualify but that's no big deal. I'd qualify with my own ammo, and on my own dime if they would allow it."

I am in favor of LEOs being able to carry their own rifles that they are comfortable/familiar with. Training and qualifying with one AR does not exactly get you 1/2" groups @100 yards with any AR. I am reasonably sure LEOs don't go to the range before each and every shift to sight in the rifle they checked out for that shift.

J_B
07-18-2009, 8:17 PM
This is why LASD is considering allowing personal rifles. They are at least retro fitting all the Dept rifles with EoTech 512's

My agency (Sac Co So) won't even consider allowing use of combat optics...in their eyes, it'll make a, and I quote, "sniper rifle." I argued with our old patrol chief and since he was a Jarhead too, he listened and was in agreement with optics but the upper tier just wasn't having it...same thing with our own patrol rifles. Why give us beat up, aging M16A1s retrofitted w/A2 handguards and just let us buy our own?? I was given only a one word answer, "No." End of story.