PDA

View Full Version : Okay for off-duty cops going fully auto at a range?


otteray
04-06-2011, 6:47 PM
If off duty PD go to a public shooting range, are they subject to the same restrictions as the public when it comes to fully auto fire, e.g., semi-auto only?
I am sure it's been brought up before but my Google-fu is weak with this subject.
I thought I saw here somewhere that they could unknowingly get in big trouble.

Please, no cop bashing posts. Not my intent.

Cokebottle
04-06-2011, 6:54 PM
They can legally possess and use FA equipment only if it is owned by the department and checked out to them.

Very good question on whether they can legally "play" with NFA items when off duty... I suspect not.

BigDogatPlay
04-06-2011, 7:04 PM
Specialty weapons, like FA, are most often issued "for official use only". Sanctioned training and on duty work only. No personal or recreational use.

But if the department's policy on the FA allows for it, I'm not aware of any law that would preclude recreational use.

dustoff31
04-06-2011, 7:04 PM
If off duty PD go to a public shooting range, are they subject to the same restrictions as the public when it comes to fully auto fire, e.g., semi-auto only?
I am sure it's been brought up before but my Google-fu is weak with this subject.
I thought I saw here somewhere that they could unknowingly get in big trouble.

Please, no cop bashing posts. Not my intent.


If the operators of the range want to let them shoot FA, and deny everyone else, they can do that. It's private property, the owner can make whatever rules he wants to.

Gryff
04-06-2011, 7:07 PM
They can legally possess and use FA equipment only if it is owned by the department and checked out to them.

Very good question on whether they can legally "play" with NFA items when off duty... I suspect not.

I only know of laws pertaining to the ownership/possession of Class 3 weapons, not using them. But even if legal, privately owned ranges have no requirement to let a LEO shoot their gun in full-auto.

jtmkinsd
04-06-2011, 7:14 PM
Usually, ranges that allow, and contract with military/LEO for training have set rules for FA fire. I've never seen anyone out at the range shooting FA that wasn't with a group, in uniform. What the regs are...I've no clue...but I'm sure you have to take into account Fed/State/local laws.

Ford8N
04-06-2011, 7:21 PM
Specialty weapons, like FA, are most often issued "for official use only". Sanctioned training and on duty work only. No personal or recreational use.

But if the department's policy on the FA allows for it, I'm not aware of any law that would preclude recreational use.

They "play" with them. ;)

Ron-Solo
04-06-2011, 7:34 PM
If he/she is authorized by the department to possess one, it would be legal, but there may be department policy restricting it, as well as policies set by the range.

My department encouraged me to shoot my duty weapon as much as possible, but alas, I was never issued a F/A weapon. :( I did, however, get to shoot some on many occasions. :D

All shooting is training.

One of my associates used to take his issued MP5K, MP5, and HK416 to the desert on occasion. :party:

mastadonn
04-06-2011, 7:38 PM
I have seen off duty LEO's teaching/letting their wife/gf use full auto's at more than one range.

USMC VET
04-06-2011, 7:39 PM
I thought most dept's have their own ranges so id think they just go there to avoid the questions. Not for sure but our dept. does.

Cokebottle
04-06-2011, 7:43 PM
I thought most dept's have their own ranges so id think they just go there to avoid the questions. Not for sure but our dept. does.
You would be surprised how many don't.

Brea and LaHabra (both not-small departments) use OC Indoor.

crazy
04-06-2011, 8:25 PM
I saw a cop get his panties in bunch at the range once. The range has a no holstered gun policy. "But I'm a cop" the guy said. "Don't matter. This is private property and no holstered weapons" he was told. He left mad.

Another time, I was range master and one guy kept doing double taps. I ask the guy to not do that. Single fire only. He told me that he was a Fed and that was how he was trained. I told him he was welcome to go use his range if he didn't want to abide by club rules.

selecw
04-06-2011, 8:29 PM
I saw a cop get his panties in bunch at the range once. The range has a no holstered gun policy. "But I'm a cop" the guy said. "Don't matter. This is private property and no holstered weapons" he was told. He left mad.

Another time, I was range master and one guy kept doing double taps. I ask the guy to not do that. Single fire only. He told me that he was a Fed and that was how he was trained. I told him he was welcome to go use his range if he didn't want to abide by club rules.


How sad - a range not allowing double taps....

crazy
04-06-2011, 8:31 PM
How sad - a range not allowing double taps....


Not my rules. Just putting in my club hours as range master.

SteveH
04-06-2011, 8:32 PM
How sad - a range not allowing double taps....

Or holstered guns.

five.five-six
04-06-2011, 8:36 PM
Or holstered guns.

I don't blame them for that, it's really easy for the untrained to shoot themselves drawing, add to that all the n00bs with glocks, so why compound the risk?


n00bs + drawing + glocks = glockleg

B Strong
04-06-2011, 8:42 PM
The guys I know with "take home" NFA issue pieces are expected to stay proficent - that would include range days as possible off or on duty.

I doubt a department would take kindly to an officer doing betamag dumps till the piece melted down, but running a couple of hundred rounds down the pipe off duty isn't going to be a problem.

crazy
04-06-2011, 8:47 PM
Or holstered guns.

I promise you, if you saw how many stupid idiots come to the range and break just about every safety rule there is, you wouldn't think it's sad.

SVT-40
04-06-2011, 9:15 PM
I had a MP5 issued to me when I worked a narcotics team. I trained with it at a few public ranges. I was sure to check in with the staff before I shot. Never had a problem.

Interfan
04-06-2011, 9:29 PM
A police officer who care about his job and goes to the range while off duty is commendable. If they go "full auto" when they are just training in their spare time with a duty weapon is just practice. For NFA weapons, each department has their own policy, but officers should be encouraged to train as much as they can. If you carry a gun for a living, range time isn't "play"

For the condescending few out there, the cops aren't the problem -- Our stupid laws made by the legislature are. While you may see a certain police chief of a large city come out and say how "private citizens shouldn't be armed", that is the politician talking, not the law enforcement professional; as the law enforcement officer is sworn to uphold the law. The last time I checked, the CA legislature hasn't been able to go full hillbilly preacher and burn the whole US Constitution like a bacon wrapped Q'uran yet.

Baconator
04-06-2011, 9:31 PM
A police officer who care about his job and goes to the range while off duty is commendable. If they go "full auto" when they are just training in their spare time with a duty weapon is just practice. For NFA weapons, each department has their own policy, but officers should be encouraged to train as much as they can. If you carry a gun for a living, range time isn't "play"

For the condescending few out there, the cops aren't the problem -- Our stupid laws made by the legislature are. While you may see a certain police chief of a large city come out and say how "private citizens shouldn't be armed", that is the politician talking, not the law enforcement professional; as the law enforcement officer is sworn to uphold the law. The last time I checked, the CA legislature hasn't gone hillbilly preacher and burned the US Constitution like a bacon wrapped Q'uran yet.

Don't try using reason or logic to help convince the cop haters.

Interfan
04-06-2011, 9:36 PM
Don't try using reason or logic to help convince the cop haters.

I guess it would be better to say "Cops hate zombies". That may make sense to them.

Baconator
04-06-2011, 9:38 PM
I guess it would be better to say "Cops hate zombies". That may make sense to them.

Oh noes. Kasos and open carring abound.

vsy05
04-06-2011, 9:55 PM
n00bs + drawing + glocks = glockleg

n00bs + drawing + glocks = Plaxico Burress :D

G1500
04-06-2011, 10:32 PM
I had a MP5 issued to me when I worked a narcotics team. I trained with it at a few public ranges. I was sure to check in with the staff before I shot. Never had a problem.

My uncle was in the NTF for a while also. He had an MP5 and a bunch of other cool stuff. When he had to retire, he told me "Hey, I have to turn in my gun next week so I need to get rid of the ammo, wanna go to the range?" Me being about 15-16 at the time said HELL YEA, so my uncle and grandfather loaded up magazines while I made the ammo cache lighter. :D

It was a ton of fun, probably shot a good 750-1000 rounds. FA is WAY fun when someone else is loading for you, and its on their dime. ;)

Falconis
04-06-2011, 11:12 PM
My uncle was in the NTF for a while also. He had an MP5 and a bunch of other cool stuff. When he had to retire, he told me "Hey, I have to turn in my gun next week so I need to get rid of the ammo, wanna go to the range?" Me being about 15-16 at the time said HELL YEA, so my uncle and grandfather loaded up magazines while I made the ammo cache lighter. :D

It was a ton of fun, probably shot a good 750-1000 rounds. FA is WAY fun when someone else is loading for you, and its on their dime. ;)

That part being the most important :D

luckystrike
04-07-2011, 1:31 AM
just what cokebottle said. NFA and FA stuff dont personally belong to them, the firearm belongs to the dept. it is for "official use" and practice/range time is considered official.

Mr. Wannabe High Profile Banger
04-07-2011, 2:17 AM
Long beach town center they have a range they bring their FA toys to play with.

If a Off Duty officer ever had the audacity to go FA while im at a public range...

Id probably become one of those Uppity Looky Loos complaining how thats "illegal"
But only cuz im jealous

Andy Taylor
04-07-2011, 7:02 AM
How sad - a range not allowing double taps....

Hence the reason I no longer go to The Gun Room in Elk Grove.

I worked at a range back in the mid 90's. While not an every day occurance, we did occasionally have LE come in with FA weapons. Our policy was as long as they were legal, and handled them safely, it wasn't a problem.

KaLiFORNIA
04-07-2011, 7:10 AM
If LEO needs FA, to deal with the public. I also deal with the public... I need FA as much as any LEO. We all face the same criminals.

mdimeo
04-07-2011, 7:22 AM
If off duty PD go to a public shooting range, are they subject to the same restrictions as the public when it comes to fully auto fire, e.g., semi-auto only?


FWIW, I used to occasionally see a guy shooting a full-auto AR-pattern rifle at Iron Sights in Oceanside. I heard he was FBI.

Californio
04-07-2011, 8:45 AM
My private range has weekdays where LE and NG use a specific range for training, FA/Burst fire but the range is closed to only them. Never seen it on a weekend when open to the public.

gobler
04-07-2011, 11:57 AM
If we the public are not allowed then that should go for LEOs. Once FA guns are made OK for "Joe Average" to own then we'll talk.

hawk1
04-07-2011, 1:10 PM
Don't try using reason or logic to help convince the cop haters.

QFT...

Flopper
04-07-2011, 2:23 PM
n00bs + drawing + glocks = Plaxico Burress :D

No, not properly carrying/holstering a Glock, having it fall out of his sweatpants, and then attempting to catch it was the problem.

Advice: you drop a Glock, let it fall; do NOT try to catch it.

CSACANNONEER
04-07-2011, 2:35 PM
When I worked at a range in California, we let LEOs and non-LEOs shoot FA guns if they legally possessed them. Yes, there are non LEOs who legally possess FAs in CA! But, to answer the OP's question better, it would be up to the range to allow or not allow FA fire. There is NO LAW IN CALIFORNIA against shooting FA oe select fire guns if you legally possess them.

Viagrow
04-07-2011, 3:07 PM
We do it, it's officialy called training. Who said training can't be fun?

HowardW56
04-07-2011, 6:55 PM
I have seen off duty FBI, and other Feds at an indoor range, shooting MP-40's. Usually in burst mode (2 or 3 rounds, depending on the configuration).

Ron-Solo
04-07-2011, 7:07 PM
If we the public are not allowed then that should go for LEOs. Once FA guns are made OK for "Joe Average" to own then we'll talk.

Start talking. Although very rare, there are non-LE in CA who own F/A weapons.

Please direct your disgust at the legislature who make these laws, not the LEOs who have to deal with this junk every day.

SVT-40
04-07-2011, 7:08 PM
If we the public are not allowed then that should go for LEOs. Once FA guns are made OK for "Joe Average" to own then we'll talk.

Does that mean you are going to stop talking until then?....:eek:

I doubt it.

But I can dream.....

In all seriousness. Why the "us Vs them" thing. It's not personal. Some LEO do need the option to use full auto weapons in the performance of their duties.

Not all LEO's get to use or train with full auto weapons. In fact only a very small percentage do. Besides if you really want to obtain or use full auto weapons in California it is possible. It's just a matter of what steps you are willing to take to achieve your desire.

otteray
04-07-2011, 8:16 PM
If we the public are not allowed then that should go for LEOs. Once FA guns are made OK for "Joe Average" to own then we'll talk.

Reminder: my first post clearly requested NO LEO bashing.
Start your own thread if you must.

1911_sfca
04-07-2011, 9:37 PM
No, the officers must be on duty and the use must be in the course and scope of their duties [12201(b) PC]. That is what I've always heard -- however that section is poorly written and you could argue that the on-duty provision only applies to the DoC clause. I'm not sure whether this has been interpreted by the courts. Any cites?

In reality it's going to depend on the nature of how/why the weapon was issued to the officer, the departmental policies, and the range policies. Most departments do not let officers take home full auto duty weapons, except if they are needed for special purposes e.g. for SWAT duty.

There is NO exception for wife/girlfriend to use full auto weapon... though have I seen this happen before? Maybe.

Interfan
04-07-2011, 10:27 PM
In all seriousness. Why the "us Vs them" thing. It's not personal.

It is "us" versus "them". The "them" are the idiots in the legislature. The "us" are all of us subjected to following or enforcing their laws. Contrary to what "them" (they) claim, their agenda and regime are not the will of the people and they are not public servants. Also, unlike the legislators with campaign finance law, ethics law, etc.; police can't choose which laws to follow or enforce.

If you think that police are the problem, your don't understand the problem.

gobler
04-08-2011, 2:18 AM
Not bashing. I just hoped that if it is this difficult for "us" to obtain and shoot it should go for ALL who are not on duty. Then perhaps more LEOs might help protect the 2nd A for all.

CSACANNONEER
04-08-2011, 7:23 AM
No, the officers must be on duty and the use must be in the course and scope of their duties [12201(b) PC]. That is what I've always heard -- however that section is poorly written and you could argue that the on-duty provision only applies to the DoC clause. I'm not sure whether this has been interpreted by the courts. Any cites?

In reality it's going to depend on the nature of how/why the weapon was issued to the officer, the departmental policies, and the range policies. Most departments do not let officers take home full auto duty weapons, except if they are needed for special purposes e.g. for SWAT duty.

There is NO exception for wife/girlfriend to use full auto weapon... though have I seen this happen before? Maybe.

I think every single bit of your post is pure FUD. First of all, I know LEOs from many different LEAs who take FA and select fire weapons home with them every day. Yes, they can practice with their duty weapons while they are not officially on the clock. There doesn't need to be an exception for anyone to shoot FA in CA. If the firearm is legal and you are in a place where it is legal and allowed by the facility, a LEO or anyone else in possession of a legal FA gun can let you fire it. In California, this happens a lot more than most of you think. Personally, I know of 6 or 7 ranges within an hour of me where I have seen non LEOs legally firing FA weapons.

Ron-Solo
04-08-2011, 9:42 AM
I think every single bit of your post is pure FUD. First of all, I know LEOs from many different LEAs who take FA and select fire weapons home with them every day. Yes, they can practice with their duty weapons while they are not officially on the clock. There doesn't need to be an exception for anyone to shoot FA in CA. If the firearm is legal and you are in a place where it is legal and allowed by the facility, a LEO or anyone else in possession of a legal FA gun can let you fire it. In California, this happens a lot more than most of you think. Personally, I know of 6 or 7 ranges within an hour of me where I have seen non LEOs legally firing FA weapons.

I agree with CSA 100%

JDW67
04-08-2011, 11:22 AM
Seen off duty cops at Burro. It was amazing how fast certain weapons disappeared off the firing line...

POLICESTATE
04-08-2011, 11:24 AM
No matter what the legal ramifications of FA while off-duty, the rules of the shooting range would still apply. If they don't allow rapid fire then it's just not allowed.

SVT-40
04-08-2011, 10:21 PM
As far as the "on" or "off" duty issue. LEO's are LEO's 24-7 so that does not really fly.

I was issued my MP-5, and had it with me in my UC vehicle for three years. I brought it inside my home each night. If you are issued a full auto weapon it's yours to use and train with just like the pistol you are issued.

Zero difference.

Don't get hung up on the weapon being select fire. It's just another firearm which an LEO could be issued.

Falconis
04-09-2011, 12:33 AM
If we the public are not allowed then that should go for LEOs. Once FA guns are made OK for "Joe Average" to own then we'll talk.

Seriously? I am figuring out which part of this to discuss first. Do you want no cops to have FA because you can't or do you want no cops to be able to practice at public ranges because you can't? I don't know if you believe if there is a need for LEO's to utilize select fire weapons, but there is. To deny someone a necessary tool for their job and to further deny the ability to train on their own time and dime with said tool boggles my mind beyond belief. I know a cop's life may mean very little to you, but to turn the tables a little, if you were the one who had to crash through that door, I would like to see if your tune would change a little. It's good to see legilatures have to do very little to drive that proverbial wedge between gun owners to divide focus.

I am not saying I agree with these asinine California gun laws. But to make a bad situation worse strictly due to personal feelings with no rational thought irritates me. It does us no good in the long run if people just keep saying, well as long as I can't do this, I don't think the next guy should. I do find it interesting that you didn't take the time to either include or think about the private citizens who own FA weapons before they were banned.

As far as private ranges, like everyone else said, their rules. I can respect it if they say no, doesn't make them comfortable. I'll leave it at that.

To the person who said take away guns from cops so they will join our fight or something to that effect (I think that was you too gobler), get serious. Most cops that are pro 2A already belong to the NRA or some other group. Taking away guns in any form from cops or other groups of individuals and having them "join the ranks" will do 1 thing ... jack****. I unfortunately do work with cops that would like to see every "citizen" get stripped of every gun they own. I work with them, not hang out with them (don't flame me for that). I also work with cops who see their gun as nothing more than a tool and want nothing to do with further educating themselves on other weapons aside from their handgun and shotgun. As to the cops that are gun enthusiasts, well like I said, most of them already belong to some 2A group. If you want the ones that don't belong to CGN or a similar group, stop posting thoughtless cop bashing articles every 2nd post. Thoughtfully criticizing actions and policies are another thing. But I can tell you right now that the thoughtless bashing is what drives away most cops I know from groups like CGN. Out of the 5 people I can remember talking to 3 of them flatly said they looked through here but after reading a good number of the posts, this is an organization they do not want to associate themselves with. Anyone care to blame them? Another one said he would check it out and the other one said something to the effect, ehh no thanks, I get enough crap here at work, why would I want to deal with it on my free time. All 5 belong to the NRA and that's it. They see no further reason to expend any of their resources.

If you want to see more cops join the ranks here, mindless bashing and posting personal feelings that have no rational basis will not do it. Especially to people who are on the fence. Some of them are probably thinking, "ehhh I really don't care about owning guns to begin with, why the hell would I want to help empower these jerks who hate me? I've got better things to spend my money on like a cherry slurpee". The powers that be here and I may not agree on everything, or maybe we do, but I will say thank goodness that they have the time and mindpower to track a good course of action around these types of obstacles.

I honestly do think we as a group (gun owners) are our own worst enemy when it comes to gun rights.

As to cops who put on "informative demonstrations", come on, what's the real issue with that? Assuming all things perfect, does it really bother you that much where you want to throw a temper tantrum and scream your bloody head off because a person gets to fire a FA weapon and you don't at that moment? Or are you just jealous? To be honest, only time I want to fire a weapon on FA is if I have to or if it's on someone else's dime. It get's expensive real fast. Then there's the cleaning.

What SVT-40 said pretty much sums it up perfectly. Whether or not you agree or like it, cops are cops 24/7. A lot of cops are literally on call 24/7 for certain reasons. Some cops choose not to take action when off duty for a number of reasons. To whine that one group gets to "posses" and utilize an FA weapon is irrationally pointless in the grand scheme of things.

Anyhow, if anyone wants to take any of my statements to task, I'll be more than happy to entertain them in PM's to abide by the OP's wishes and to stick to his original question.

CSACANNONEER
04-09-2011, 7:07 AM
As far as the "on" or "off" duty issue. LEO's are LEO's 24-7 so that does not really fly.


This is not always the case. I know of at least one Federal agency when it's uniformed officers are Federal LEOs while on the clock but, do not have the same powers when they are off duty. I'm sure there are others. Also, while California state COs are considered "LEOs" on duty, I don't think they can carry off duty without obtaining a CCW, just like any civilian. Please correct me if I am wrong.

chris
04-09-2011, 8:01 AM
It is "us" versus "them". The "them" are the idiots in the legislature. The "us" are all of us subjected to following or enforcing their laws. Contrary to what "them" (they) claim, their agenda and regime are not the will of the people and they are not public servants. Also, unlike the legislators with campaign finance law, ethics law, etc.; police can't choose which laws to follow or enforce.

If you think that police are the problem, your don't understand the problem.

i agree. i think the problem is the police "politicain" chief is the problem more than the rank and file LEO's.

Cokebottle
04-09-2011, 8:50 AM
Seriously? I am figuring out which part of this to discuss first. Do you want no cops to have FA because you can't or do you want no cops to be able to practice at public ranges because you can't?
His point is that we, the general public, come into contact with the same criminals that LEO do. We may go 30 years and never encounter a situation where we have a need to draw a gun, and a LEO may also go 30 years without the need to draw.

But his point is that if LEO are able to have FA as a tool for their job... (and their job is primarily to protect themselves and others around them so they can go home that night)... then civilians should similarly be allowed access to the same tools for the very same reason.
It's about officer safety.... and about civilian safety.

It's back to the fire extinguisher analogy....
It's better to have it and never need it, than it is to need it and not have it.

SVT-40
04-09-2011, 10:05 AM
This is not always the case. I know of at least one Federal agency when it's uniformed officers are Federal LEOs while on the clock but, do not have the same powers when they are off duty. I'm sure there are others. Also, while California state COs are considered "LEOs" on duty, I don't think they can carry off duty without obtaining a CCW, just like any civilian. Please correct me if I am wrong.

When I speak of "LEO's" I'm referring to full time sworn California peace officers. 830.2 types.

Besides I don't think any of the limited power LEO's are issued select fire weapons. Prison guards may have access to some while on duty, but I don't believe they would have any issued only to them. Same with the Fed guards.

gobler
04-09-2011, 10:12 AM
Wow! Cokebottle basically typed my response. And why is it that if you have the belief that LEOs should adhere to the same laws we the public do is automatically bashing? I studied police science in HS and have about four "good" friends who are cops, two of are LAPD. Both formed the "we need to have and do things you can't cause we're cops" Good cops, bad mindset IMHO. Cops are only as good as the person wearing the badge so if you are good and are doing an honest job keeping the peace (the main job for LE) then I have no problem and wish you a safe day and mean it. I do think LE is overly geared up at this point and too many harassing laws are on the books but that is another topic. I also think that unless you are on a SWAT you do not need FA.

SVT-40
04-09-2011, 10:22 AM
His point is that we, the general public, come into contact with the same criminals that LEO do. We may go 30 years and never encounter a situation where we have a need to draw a gun, and a LEO may also go 30 years without the need to draw.

But his point is that if LEO are able to have FA as a tool for their job... (and their job is primarily to protect themselves and others around them so they can go home that night)... then civilians should similarly be allowed access to the same tools for the very same reason.
It's about officer safety.... and about civilian safety.

It's back to the fire extinguisher analogy....
It's better to have it and never need it, than it is to need it and not have it.


Non LEO's do not have the same contact with criminals as LEO's do. Far from reality. LEO's actively search out criminals and are tasked with arresting them.

A LEO's primary job is to enforce laws, and protect the public. Officers safety is important, but if it were the primary function LEO's would not actively confront violent criminals as it would be to dangerous.

If you believe a LEO could go 30 years without needing to draw his sidearm, you watch too much television. Rarely a day goes buy without drawing your sidearm. Building search... gun out. Felony stop... gun out. Alarm call...gun out. Serve arrest or search warrant...gun out. Ect.

As I said before only a very percentage of LEO's use or have access to select fire weapons. Every other LEO is semi auto only, just like you.....and me too since I'm now retired.

Having a full auto firearm would be fun, but I have no need since I'm no longer serving warrants or doing the SWAT thing.

SVT-40
04-09-2011, 10:29 AM
Wow! Cokebottle basically typed my response. And why is it that if you have the belief that LEOs should adhere to the same laws we the public do is automatically bashing? I studied police science in HS and have about four "good" friends who are cops, two of are LAPD. Both formed the "we need to have and do things you can't cause we're cops" Good cops, bad mindset IMHO. Cops are only as good as the person wearing the badge so if you are good and are doing an honest job keeping the peace (the main job for LE) then I have no problem and wish you a safe day and mean it. I do think LE is overly geared up at this point and too many harassing laws are on the books but that is another topic. I also think that unless you are on a SWAT you do not need FA.

Having friends who are cops or studying police science in High School is nice, but just like staying in a Holiday Inn, cannot give you any real insight into what it's like to actually do the job. As far as being "overly geared up" I think you would change your mind the first time you made a entry on a felon just wearing standard body armor.

As far as SWAT being the only LEO's who "need" full auto weapons. Just who do you think uses them other than SWAT and some select special teams?

Cokebottle
04-09-2011, 10:30 AM
Non LEO's do not have the same contact with criminals as LEO's do. Far from reality. LEO's actively search out criminals and are tasked with arresting them.
We don't actively search for them and we don't have a brass target on our chest... but until you lock them up, we are all living on the same streets and do come into contact with each other. Some more than others... the door man at The Regency Club is as unlikely to encounter a liquor store robbery suspect as the liquor store owner is to encounter George Bush.

CSACANNONEER
04-09-2011, 10:57 AM
When I speak of "LEO's" I'm referring to full time sworn California peace officers. 830.2 types.

Besides I don't think any of the limited power LEO's are issued select fire weapons. Prison guards may have access to some while on duty, but I don't believe they would have any issued only to them. Same with the Fed guards.

While I was talking about full time California COs, I was not talking about Ferderal COs. My dad retired after 31 years as a sworn, full time, Federal LEO but, he was only "on duty" when he was on the clock. He didn't/couldn't carry off duty. Now that he is retired, he is eligible to get a CCW as a retired, full time LEO. He worked for the Postal Inspection Service.

Quser.619
04-09-2011, 11:45 AM
Non LEO's do not have the same contact with criminals as LEO's do. Far from reality. LEO's actively search out criminals and are tasked with arresting them.


You should try living in some of the neighborhoods I have & make that statement. Try every time you are outside of your house you are surrounded, 24-7, & then you might have a point. Plenty of citizens have a greater amount of contact with criminals than do LEO's, but the difference is they can't get a CCW or carry their protection when out.

Interfan
04-09-2011, 12:53 PM
You should try living in some of the neighborhoods I have & make that statement. Try every time you are outside of your house you are surrounded, 24-7, & then you might have a point. Plenty of citizens have a greater amount of contact with criminals than do LEO's, but the difference is they can't get a CCW or carry their protection when out.

The whole CCW problem is due to the politicians. Since the Sheriff of San Diego County is an elected official, he is the politician responsible. To get elected, you need money. To get money, politicians will pander to the special interest groups that pay them. In the case of SD Sheriff Gore and his predecessors, they are owned by those who oppose CCW.

This isn't a LEO problem, its a political one. I would seriously doubt that you wouldn't find at least 80% of LEOs support gun ownership for responsible citizens. (The key word here is "responsible").

As far as cops having more interaction with criminals, that is fact. LEOs have to deal with all sorts of idiots who are doing something stupid. If police are called into a situation, it is usually for a reason. People get frustrated with the police over firearms laws due to the laws, not the police. The police are just the face of the law as the lawmakers who are the real problem are insulated and will only show their face when they want to get re-elected, or get paid.

This is why it is important to vote for those who serve your needs.

Falconis
04-09-2011, 1:22 PM
I am not saying you guys shouldn't have something while cops get issued the equipment everyone seems to drool over. My argument is why would you take away a necessary tool for law enforcement soley based on your personal feelings and because you can't. REPEAT - I NEVER STATED OR BACKED ANY RESOLUTION TAKING AWAY FIREARMS FROM PEOPLE. I am just merely questioning some people's judgement in taking away a necessary tool.

Also if you do live in a bad neighborhood, you don't have the same interactions as cops do. I'm sorry. You may have MORE interactions, but the interactions aren't the same. When was the last time you told the parolee at large beating on his girlfriend to turn around and put his hands behind his back then ready for a fight?

and to gobler, I took physics in high school and have friends who worked on the gravity probe - B project out of Stanford. Does that make me an expert in physics? Hell that doesn't even make me an amature. Minor knowledge and acquantances in a certain field doesn't mean you know everything.

But no one seems to have answered my original question. How do you justify taking away a necessary tool from someone just because you can't have one?

I'll even agree that more CCW's need to be issued. It would probably cut down on 5 hours worth of report writing on street robberies. I'll even agree that more "fire extinguishers" need to be kept in storage. But I'm probably in the minority here when I say a lot of people that get locked up for most felonies and all violent crimes need to serve atleast 90 percent of their time and mere possesion of a firearm after their release is an automatic ticket back into the slammer.

As far as the FA issue goes, said it before, I'll say it again, take it up with the politicians. They're the ones that instituted that law and like you, I don't own one either. I turned 18 long after the FA ban went into effect.

ohh and gobler, it's easy to think someone is overly geared while in the comfort of your own home and chair.