"Some of" LE angency's internal policy's seem to be irrational

[thrasherfox]

I went over to a LEO friend of mine tonight. I was issued a military survival knife and wanted to ask him the legality of carying it. Sad to say I received the answer I had thought, no.

Anyway, during our conversation we got to talking about AR-15's, I had asked him if he heard of the bullet button ban being fought and he hadnt. He told me his department authorizes the use of personal AR-15's while on duty, but they must be equiped with bullet buttons.

I am like "WHAT!! are you kidding me!!" I said while you are on duty you should be able to have a fully auto with a 100 round drum if you want.

I guess the department does issue some AR-15's in differant configurations, some are only issues Semi automatic. some are issued 3 round burst models and a select few are issued full auto.

I found this entire concept to be crazy. While I think I should have the right to posses high capacity magazines, and full auto weapons, I also have no problems with LEO's having an advantage when it comes to fire power over the regular publc.


Anyone else have department policy's like this? Just wondering how far this insanity (in my opinion) is spread. just does not seem like a reasonable scenario. Why should a LEO have to deal with a bullet button in a fire fight. I mean why should any of us law aviding citizens have to deal with it, but especially LEO's

Thoughts?

[Bert Gamble]

I am not a big bullet button hater since I have never shot one without it, but to think that the police have to have them on their duty weapons is pretty stupid in my opinion.

Hopefully the vast majority of officers would go an entire career without having to use the AR, but if they had to use it, it should be fully operational. To think that an encounter where the AR is needed could be settled with 10 rounds is folly at best. I am pretty sure that the bad guys won't be following this rule.

[Big D]

What department does he work for? I think its ridiculous to consider a rifle with a bullet button to be a serious weapon for patrol.

[thrasherfox]

I dont want to mention his department, but I feel sorry for the LEO's that work there. Local policy and I personally think it is a bad one.

[Ron-Solo]

I wouldn't say one Deaprtment's misguided policy means the entire LEO System is broken like the thread title indicates.....

[TRICKSTER]

The entire original post doesn't sound right.

[Ron-Solo]

Yep

[NOTARPilot]

I'm willing to bet you got some bad info or misunderstood.

[solanoshooter]

I've never heard of any agency that allows for personal ARs on duty with a bullet button. I hope you're mistaken. Not saying there isn't one out there, but it's not a place I'd want to work as that department's admin clearly has no clue.

Originally Posted by Bert Gamble

Hopefully the vast majority of officers would go an entire career without having to use the AR, but if they had to use it, it should be fully operational. To think that an encounter where the AR is needed could be settled with 10 rounds is folly at best. I am pretty sure that the bad guys won't be following this rule.

I've never been involved in one but I've been on the scene of several. I can't think of one OIS in our county where one officer has shot more than 10 rounds with an AR. Sure there have been firefights across the county where officers fire quite a bit more, but in officer involved shootings that is not the norm. That's not to say that you shouldn't be prepared. When I worked patrol I always had two spare rifle mags in my bag.

As for full auto, my opinion is that there is little place for it on patrol. The average patrol officer won't train enough to use it effectively. As police officers we are accountable for every round we fire. It doesn't matter what the crooks do. We don't get to spray and pray.

[phdo]

I think that's ridiculous. LEOs should be able to use ARs the way it was intended.

[Bobby Ricigliano]

Originally Posted by TRICKSTER

The entire original post doesn't sound right.

I agree with Trickster.

Sorry OP, but I'm not buying this. Personally owned bullet buttoned AR-15 as a duty weapon? Nope. This is FUD.

[Linh]

Yeah I'm a little slow but I don't see how the "LEO entire system" is broke. On another note what is broke is the legal/justice system.

I think all it takes is for their chief to sign a memo.

When I read the original post I was like WHAT? the average police officer does not need a full auto AR-15 with a 100 round magazine. Hell when I was deployed I could have been fine with a handgun instead of my M-16.

[stkcode]

It sounds like of what may have already been said. Probably bad or mis-informed info. I really don't see why LEO would need to use a personal AR-15. Nor as mentioned, have a need for full auto. I don't see any common situations for an LEO were they would need to lay down that kind of suppressing fire. If the situation is that bad, it's time to call in the National Guard or Military.

But then again, LE has several hummers here and I still haven't figured out what they need them for either. Needless to say, they have been sitting and rotting for years.

[pepsi2451]

Question for the LEO on here, would you even want to use a bullet button equipped rifle on duty?

I love my AR but if I thought I might have to shoot at someone shooting back at me I would rather have a mini-14 or anything else with a detachable mag.

[Ron-Solo]

Some Departments don't have the budget to provide AR rifles to each officer. Sharing rifles brings in the sight adjustment issues on the rifle, hence the need for personally owned rifles. They tend to be better maintained, and the officer more proficient in its use.

The Hummers you see were probably obtained from the military. Last I looked, Lucerne Valley was in the middle of the desert, surrounded by more desert. Kind of looks like a great place to have extra four wheel drive capability to me. SBSO makes great use of the stuff available from the military, especially in their aviation unit.

[ap3572001]

Our department has : Colt AR's, MP5's and M4's. NO BB's

We can own AR's (with BB's like everybody else.) and any other rifles that are not AW's ( Mini 14's, M1A'a, MR1's etc) with any magazines we want.

None of would EVER be allowed to bring a rifle to work with a BB.

[ap3572001]

Originally Posted by pepsi2451

Question for the LEO on here, would you even want to use a bullet button equipped rifle on duty?

I love my AR but if I thought I might have to shoot at someone shooting back at me I would rather have a mini-14 or anything else with a detachable mag.

+1!

I have plenty of range time with AR's and M4's at work.

As far as my personal defense rifles I favor new style MINI-14 with 20/30 round Ruger OEM magazines and my Benelli MR1 with EOTECH and plenty of PMAGS (20's and 30's)

To me AR's with BB's and 10 round mags are just for fun. I have a nice one. Just to have it.

[stkcode]

Originally Posted by Ron-Solo

Some Departments don't have the budget to provide AR rifles to each officer. Sharing rifles brings in the sight adjustment issues on the rifle, hence the need for personally owned rifles. They tend to be better maintained, and the officer more proficient in its use.

The Hummers you see were probably obtained from the military. Last I looked, Lucerne Valley was in the middle of the desert, surrounded by more desert. Kind of looks like a great place to have extra four wheel drive capability to me. SBSO makes great use of the stuff available from the military, especially in their aviation unit.

I agree that they got them from the military. They don't use them because a helicopter can get across the same terrain so much faster then a Hummer ever will.

[Ron-Solo]

Originally Posted by stkcode

I agree that they got them from the military. They don't use them because a helicopter can get across the same terrain so much faster then a Hummer ever will.

Try doing that in the air in bad weather. I'm a huge fan of air operations, but there are limitations. Sometimes there is no substitute for boots on the ground.

Never say Never....especially in LE.

[nickbackouris]

I'm willing to bet you got some bad info or misunderstood.

Yup.

Judging by the fact that he told you you can not legally carry a "military type survival knife", which I assume to be a Ka-bar type, I'm going to assume the other info he gave you might not be accurate, also. You can legally carry a fixed blade knife, sheathed and exposed, on your person in public. It's when you conceal it that it becomes an issue. Ask a Hell's Angel, they're experts on knife laws.

Nothing about your friend, but he needs to brush up on his knife laws, assuming he's an LEO in California.

While I think I should have the right to posses high capacity magazines

See above.

And a few of you should probably read the rules of this forum before you post.

[bodger]

Originally Posted by nickbackouris

Yup.

Judging by the fact that he told you you can not legally carry a "military type survival knife", which I assume to be a Ka-bar type, I'm going to assume the other info he gave you might not be accurate, also. You can legally carry a fixed blade knife, sheathed and exposed, on your person in public. It's when you conceal it that it becomes an issue. Ask a Hell's Angel, they're experts on knife laws.

Nothing about your friend, but he needs to brush up on his knife laws, assuming he's an LEO in California.



See above.

And a few of you should probably read the rules of this forum before you post.

Assuming we're talking about a Ka-Bar, it would not be legal for him to carry that knife openly in Los Angeles where I live.

Many cities have their own laws regarding knives.

Good thread on it here: http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/s...d.php?t=423841

[tbhracing]

Tagged

[Ron-Solo]

Originally Posted by bodger

Assuming we're talking about a Ka-Bar, it would not be legal for him to carry that knife openly in Los Angeles where I live.

Many cities have their own laws regarding knives.

Good thread on it here: http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/s...d.php?t=423841

Very true.....

[nickbackouris]

I stand corrected. I suppose I can only speak for San Diego then. Op, where do you live? Local Leo's might have insight...

[bussda]

A note on Bullet Button personally owned rifles used in patrol: This is a reflection of the recent AG opinion on LEO AW's.

As for the broken AW system, that is more a case of a lack of desire to exercise supervision, starting with elected officials.

[responsiblefreedom69]

Do you know how many codified laws there are in California?! And how many of them contradict one another? What the Penal Code allows, the Vehicle Code might prohibit, and so on. Don't get down on any officer for not knowing them all by heart.

As to knives: What the Cal Penal Code allows and what any local Muni Codes allow might be different.

As to AWs and bullet buttons: The Cal Penal Code allows AWs for City PDs, County SOs, DOJ, CHP, DA Investigators, ETC...not ALL agencies are exempt. At least that's the way it was at the time I retired. I had close contact with at least one state LE agency that was not listed in the PC as exempt and they were using Mini 14s because of it. It's all about the language in the PC.

[theshoer]

you think Goverment is going to have or use common sense ?

[Notorious]

Here's how I can see it happen.

1. Officers need a letter to get a non-BB AW from the dealer, if the chief doesn't sign a letter or allow it in policy or issue one, an officer has no avenue to get one if he doesn't already have one pre-2000

2. Officers, cannot, even with a letter, convert their own BB'ed AW into a department authorized personally owned AW, because LEO's are not exempt from manufacturing an AW by taking off the BB and then registering it with a letter

Therefore, if the department authorizes a personally owned AR type weapon, but does not issue letters to officers to buy a new registerable AW from a dealer, then the officers who wish to have an AR type weapon on duty and brings his own, will have to bring a BB'ed 10 round fixed mag weapon.

Not saying it's right or makes any sense, but that's the scenario I see, and the fact that admin makes no sense in dictating that sort of policy and refusing to issue letters doesn't quite surprise me as much as it would others outside of government, I guess.

[solanoshooter]

Originally Posted by bussda

A note on Bullet Button personally owned rifles used in patrol: This is a reflection of the recent AG opinion on LEO AW's.

Brown's opinion was regarding non-BB AWs owned by retired LEO that were legally purchased and registered prior to the LEO retiring.

[thrasherfox]

Originally Posted by nickbackouris

Yup.

Judging by the fact that he told you you can not legally carry a "military type survival knife", which I assume to be a Ka-bar type, I'm going to assume the other info he gave you might not be accurate, also. You can legally carry a fixed blade knife, sheathed and exposed, on your person in public. It's when you conceal it that it becomes an issue. Ask a Hell's Angel, they're experts on knife laws.

Nothing about your friend, but he needs to brush up on his knife laws, assuming he's an LEO in California.



See above.

And a few of you should probably read the rules of this forum before you post.

Presidio 5000 Auto Axis

http://www.benchmade.com/products/5000

[thrasherfox]

Originally Posted by Notorious

Here's how I can see it happen.

1. Officers need a letter to get a non-BB AW from the dealer, if the chief doesn't sign a letter or allow it in policy or issue one, an officer has no avenue to get one if he doesn't already have one pre-2000

2. Officers, cannot, even with a letter, convert their own BB'ed AW into a department authorized personally owned AW, because LEO's are not exempt from manufacturing an AW by taking off the BB and then registering it with a letter

Therefore, if the department authorizes a personally owned AR type weapon, but does not issue letters to officers to buy a new registerable AW from a dealer, then the officers who wish to have an AR type weapon on duty and brings his own, will have to bring a BB'ed 10 round fixed mag weapon.

Not saying it's right or makes any sense, but that's the scenario I see, and the fact that admin makes no sense in dictating that sort of policy and refusing to issue letters doesn't quite surprise me as much as it would others outside of government, I guess.

Knowing the department this sounds like the more resonable scenario.


And no offense to other departments that dont feel they have any messed up internal rules. But I have heard about differant rules from differant agencies over the years that make no sense, of course I dont work for those departments so in the end it doesnt matter to me personally I guess. Dont have a dog in the fight.

[thrasherfox]

Originally Posted by Ron-Solo

I wouldn't say one Deaprtment's misguided policy means the entire LEO System is broken like the thread title indicates.....

Your right, I over reacted, I changed the title to I hope a more reasonable description.

[Ron-Solo]

Originally Posted by thrasherfox

Your right, I over reacted, I changed the title to I hope a more reasonable description.

Thank you

[code33]

This is a switchblade; a no, no. By letter of the law, you can't even carry it inside your home.

Code prohibiting a switchblade: PC 21510
Definition of a switchblade: PC 17235.

Originally Posted by thrasherfox

Presidio 5000 Auto Axis

http://www.benchmade.com/products/5000