LAPD adopts FN509 as new duty pistol

[TMB 1]

Yeah, ok. They don't need any oversight and should never be questioned on their decisions, they should be allowed to do what they want with our money and not have to answer any questions on it.

You cops are pretty funny.

LOL. I'm not a cop, but lowest bidder is lowest bidder, so what is your complaint about money?

[sweetfoal]

IIRC, LAPD just had their budget slashed by the pro-BLM, pro-defund the police politicians. So they're hurting financially. It's no surprise they went with the lowest bidder.

Do you know how much a good reddot cost? bidding a reddot ready pistol, highly doubt budget is a concern to LAPD.

[Robert1234]

LOL. I'm not a cop, but lowest bidder is lowest bidder, so what is your complaint about money?

It's the unsaid, but equally important part you're missing.

Lowest bidder that meets or exceeds the specifications set forth by the agency doing the buying.

High Point can't drop their gun into the competition because they don't meet probably most of the requirements.

Likewise, a specification or scope of work can be tailored to whatever the person writing it wants, eliminating other manufacturers from the competition. Want to exclude Glock? Just specify that the gun must have an ambi thumb safety. Want to exclude the Beretta 92? Specify striker fired.

My point is it's not just a nebulous series of requirements, it's a carefully set out set of specifications that is designed to get the purchaser exactly the gun they want.

And my original point was what's wrong with the existing guns they're using? Glock 22 is perfectly serviceable, and very few cops are putting a volume of ammo through the gun to take it to the end of it's service life.

And I'm of the belief that any California law enforcement agency, or any agency operating in California specification for a gun needs to specify that the gun must be on California's Roster of Approved Handguns, and be subject to all legal requirements guns sold to us peasants are subject to, including ten round magazines and no threaded barrels.

[naszero]

It's the unsaid, but equally important part you're missing.



Lowest bidder that meets or exceeds the specifications set forth by the agency doing the buying.



High Point can't drop their gun into the competition because they don't meet probably most of the requirements.



Likewise, a specification or scope of work can be tailored to whatever the person writing it wants, eliminating other manufacturers from the competition. Want to exclude Glock? Just specify that the gun must have an ambi thumb safety. Want to exclude the Beretta 92? Specify striker fired.



My point is it's not just a nebulous series of requirements, it's a carefully set out set of specifications that is designed to get the purchaser exactly the gun they want.



And my original point was what's wrong with the existing guns they're using? Glock 22 is perfectly serviceable, and very few cops are putting a volume of ammo through the gun to take it to the end of it's service life.



And I'm of the belief that any California law enforcement agency, or any agency operating in California specification for a gun needs to specify that the gun must be on California's Roster of Approved Handguns, and be subject to all legal requirements guns sold to us peasants are subject to, including ten round magazines and no threaded barrels.

The FN509 will be issued to new recruits. The LAPD is not replacing all the old issued duty pistols with the FN. I don't know where you're getting the information that they're replacing all the existing Glocks.

Sent from my Pixel 3 XL using Tapatalk

[Mute]

It's the unsaid, but equally important part you're missing.

Lowest bidder that meets or exceeds the specifications set forth by the agency doing the buying.

High Point can't drop their gun into the competition because they don't meet probably most of the requirements.

Likewise, a specification or scope of work can be tailored to whatever the person writing it wants, eliminating other manufacturers from the competition. Want to exclude Glock? Just specify that the gun must have an ambi thumb safety. Want to exclude the Beretta 92? Specify striker fired.

My point is it's not just a nebulous series of requirements, it's a carefully set out set of specifications that is designed to get the purchaser exactly the gun they want.

And my original point was what's wrong with the existing guns they're using? Glock 22 is perfectly serviceable, and very few cops are putting a volume of ammo through the gun to take it to the end of it's service life.

And I'm of the belief that any California law enforcement agency, or any agency operating in California specification for a gun needs to specify that the gun must be on California's Roster of Approved Handguns, and be subject to all legal requirements guns sold to us peasants are subject to, including ten round magazines and no threaded barrels.

As I've stated, they are in fact having some issues with the Glock 22's and parts breakage. Glock is giving them a hard time on supplying those parts and doing something so that they're no longer a repeating problem.

[TMB 1]

It's the unsaid, but equally important part you're missing.

Lowest bidder that meets or exceeds the specifications set forth by the agency doing the buying.

High Point can't drop their gun into the competition because they don't meet probably most of the requirements.

Likewise, a specification or scope of work can be tailored to whatever the person writing it wants, eliminating other manufacturers from the competition. Want to exclude Glock? Just specify that the gun must have an ambi thumb safety. Want to exclude the Beretta 92? Specify striker fired.

My point is it's not just a nebulous series of requirements, it's a carefully set out set of specifications that is designed to get the purchaser exactly the gun they want.

And my original point was what's wrong with the existing guns they're using? Glock 22 is perfectly serviceable, and very few cops are putting a volume of ammo through the gun to take it to the end of it's service life.

And I'm of the belief that any California law enforcement agency, or any agency operating in California specification for a gun needs to specify that the gun must be on California's Roster of Approved Handguns, and be subject to all legal requirements guns sold to us peasants are subject to, including ten round magazines and no threaded barrels.

To your point about Glock they are no longer the lowest bidder and the new pistol can do everything it does.

I do not agree about the roster because the roster should not exist. You are not going to get rid of it by making police follow it.

[Cowboy T]

To your point about Glock they are no longer the lowest bidder and the new pistol can do everything it does.

I do not agree about the roster because the roster should not exist. You are not going to get rid of it by making police follow it.

Actually, it probably will. The police tend to oppose gun control, if it included them. Next thing you know, the legislature writes an exemption carved out for the police; then the police flip-flop like John Kerry and vote for it after they've voted against it. Get rid of the exemption for LE, you'll see so much pressure on Kevin TheLyin to repeal the roster, ol' Kevvie-boy be able to change his drawers fast enough, he'll be so scared.

BTW, I see no problem with FN guns being used by the LAPD, as long as they're good quality, and as long as "regular folks" can also buy them in California.

[TMB 1]

Actually, it probably will. The police tend to oppose gun control, if it included them. Next thing you know, the legislature writes an exemption carved out for the police; then the police flip-flop like John Kerry and vote for it after they've voted against it. Get rid of the exemption for LE, you'll see so much pressure on Kevin TheLyin to repeal the roster, ol' Kevvie-boy be able to change his drawers fast enough, he'll be so scared.

BTW, I see no problem with FN guns being used by the LAPD, as long as they're good quality, and as long as "regular folks" can also buy them in California.

If they had to follow it too, then the politicians would say it should exist, because the police need to be defunded and be more like the British police. If anything it should be State law enforcement and federal LE when in the state that have to follow it.

[Robert1234]

To your point about Glock they are no longer the lowest bidder and the new pistol can do everything it does.

I do not agree about the roster because the roster should not exist. You are not going to get rid of it by making police follow it.

I submit that that's the only way to get rid of it.

Have a ballot initiative pass where police departments can't use public money to purchase any handgun not on the roster and watch how fast the roster goes away.

The fact that they had to have the carve-out exemptions for cops and agencies kind of demonstrates that.

And now there's another piece of equipment to maintain, and if you know anything about municipal public safety agencies, you know that getting people to do more work entails certifications, pay for the classes to get certified, and pay for the people who now have more duties. Armorers won't get certified to maintain the guns unless they get paid for it.

So even if they're only issuing the new guns to new cops, the maintenance costs just went up. There are no free rides when it comes to municipal union contracts.

[Devilock04]

All this talk about Glocks and i just want to know what happened to the M&Ps? I thought LAPD had switched to those pretty recently, were they having issues with those?

[naszero]

I submit that that's the only way to get rid of it.

Have a ballot initiative pass where police departments can't use public money to purchase any handgun, not on the roster and watch how fast the roster goes away.

The fact that they had to have the carve-out exemptions for cops and agencies kind of demonstrates that.

And now there's another piece of equipment to maintain, and if you know anything about municipal public safety agencies, you know that getting people to do more work entails certifications, pay for the classes to get certified, and pay for the people who now have more duties. Armorers won't get certified to maintain the guns unless they get paid for it.

So even if they're only issuing the new guns to new cops, the maintenance costs just went up. There are no free rides when it comes to municipal union contracts.

I'm pretty sure the parts and training were negotiated into the contract when LAPD went with the M&P's. I would bet money they did the same with FN.

Do you know any LAPD armorers? They're all sworn police officers and probably some of the best-paid "armorers" in the state. Most if not all are gun enthusiasts who wouldn't mind playing with a pistol from another manufacturer. And if they did, there are 5000+ officers more than happy to get out of the field to take their spots.

Edit: I forgot to mention, the roster is BS. I agree it should be revoked.

[naszero]

LAPD was on the same contract with LASD for the M&P's. Current recruits are still issued M&P9's.

[TMB 1]

I submit that that's the only way to get rid of it.

Have a ballot initiative pass where police departments can't use public money to purchase any handgun not on the roster and watch how fast the roster goes away.

The fact that they had to have the carve-out exemptions for cops and agencies kind of demonstrates that.

And now there's another piece of equipment to maintain, and if you know anything about municipal public safety agencies, you know that getting people to do more work entails certifications, pay for the classes to get certified, and pay for the people who now have more duties. Armorers won't get certified to maintain the guns unless they get paid for it.

So even if they're only issuing the new guns to new cops, the maintenance costs just went up. There are no free rides when it comes to municipal union contracts.

You sound like the bean counters that would have them all still carrying revolvers or S&W 59s, or our military still using 03 Springfield, M1 Garand and 1911 and S&W revolvers instead of M4, M16 and M9.

I think our Democrat controlled government would like to have our Police and Sheriff departments follow the roster because their end game is having our LE in a tier system where only State and Federal LE can have the good stuff. They are just as scared of Police and Sheriff departments having guns as they are of the rest of us peons.

[Robert1234]

You sound like the bean counters that would have them all still carrying revolvers or S&W 59s, or our military still using 03 Springfield, M1 Garand and 1911 and S&W revolvers instead of M4, M16 and M9.

I think our Democrat controlled government would like to have our Police and Sheriff departments follow the roster because their end game is having our LE in a tier system where only State and Federal LE can have the good stuff. They are just as scared of Police and Sheriff departments having guns as they are of the rest of us peons.

To your first point, you're either not paying attention to what I'm posting, or not reading it. In your mind I'm a "bean counter" because I see no need for an organization to spend taxpayer money to replace perfectly serviceable tools that are nowhere near the end if their service life? Show me where I said anything other than that.

To your second point, Democrats carved out the exemption, so they know they need the cops armed to protect them from the rest of the populace, so they allow the organizations an exemption. Then they know they need the cop vote, so they get the personal exemption. There's no other reason to allow cops to buy off roster guns or standard capacity magazines for personal use.

It all let's the cops think they're more than just servants to these pedantic jack-holes running the state. And it works. Look how the cops stood by while conservative rallies were assaulted by leftist degenerates during the Orangeman administration.

[TMB 1]

To your first point, you're either not paying attention to what I'm posting, or not reading it. In your mind I'm a "bean counter" because I see no need for an organization to spend taxpayer money to replace perfectly serviceable tools that are nowhere near the end if their service life? Show me where I said anything other than that.

To your second point, Democrats carved out the exemption, so they know they need the cops armed to protect them from the rest of the populace, so they allow the organizations an exemption. Then they know they need the cop vote, so they get the personal exemption. There's no other reason to allow cops to buy off roster guns or standard capacity magazines for personal use.

It all let's the cops think they're more than just servants to these pedantic jack-holes running the state. And it works. Look how the cops stood by while conservative rallies were assaulted by leftist degenerates during the Orangeman administration.

You are saying the same thing the bean counters said of those other firearms I mentioned. "I see no need for an organization to spend taxpayer money to replace perfectly serviceable tools that are nowhere near the end if their service life"


Democrats are also pushing defund the police, they would love to have our police with lesser arms, then send in state or federal police to keep us all in line.