Does law Enforcement really need select fire?

[desrt2]

Do law enforcement agents need select fire weapons?

Half observation and half debate here.

I feel that there are way too many select fire weapons possessed by LE - and oddball LE agencies like Social Security Administration, USDA, Department of Education - when there are so few real-world scenarios that call for them.

I used fully automatic main guns and crew-served weapons in combat. There was a need for it on specific missions.

That was war. That was a situation where everything in front of us was was open season.

I still didn't shoot at things I couldn't reach or see. I still placed my shots and hit what I was aiming at.

PS: I'm not hating on select fire weapons. If I lived in a free state and they didn't cost $12k for even an old POS I would probably own one.

[zfields]

For rank and file officers? No.

For specialized units/swat? Possibly. Keep in mind I think the useage of swat teams has gone WAY beyond what they were intended for.

[SanPedroShooter]

I have relatives in the Fed LE, and they get MP5's stuck on semi auto.

The high speed guys get full auto

I would be surprised to find out that street cops get any where near full auto.

If you think about the function and nature of fully automatic fire, it just doesn't make sense. In theory, police self defense is no different than any other citizen. They own every bullet.

At least in theory.

I guess it depends on who and what we're talking about.

Obviously, there is a need and a use for FA equipped rifles. I would imagine a very narrow need.

[audiophil2]

LEO select fires are just as cheap or cheaper than semi-autos. Do they need FA? Not for me to decide.

The nice thing about those guns is they can be semi or full auto. Why remove an option if that was the original design feature?

[ChrisC]

OP, until you have been in their shoes, how can you even make a decision? You question is just as bad as why do people need 30 round magazines.

[SanPedroShooter]

I think you can ask the question based on a 'doctrine of fire' applied to different scenarios.

The OP has combat experience with full auto fire, he seems to be relating that to civilian law enforcement stateside.

If its two different things, you could posit a need for two different weapon systems.

[BKinzey]

It also depends on where they get them. Personally I generally don't think the rank & file should have them and limited availability to SWAT teams and such. I do know that after the North Hollywood Bank Shoot-out the LAPD acquired rifles from the military at the bargain basement price of $100 each. I'm sure many, if not all of them were select-fire. I don't know if the LAPD swapped out parts or not.

In that instance I think it was more important to get 10 rifles into 10 cars rather than, say, 5 rifles converted from select to semi and placed in cars.

[SactoDoug]

If I had my way, LE would only be able to use and own what the average citizen could use and own.

There used to be a time when the only difference between LE and the average citizen was the badge. They had the same access to weapons, vehicles, etc. as everyone else. Today they are a class all their own.

Except in a time of severe crisis, Americans would not tolerate seeing armed soldiers patrolling our streets. I don't see much difference between an Army infantryman and a police officer any more.

[kentactic]

The question is do we need more then they have?

Yes

[SanPedroShooter]

It also depends on where they get them. Personally I generally don't think the rank & file should have them and limited availability to SWAT teams and such. I do know that after the North Hollywood Bank Shoot-out the LAPD acquired rifles from the military at the bargain basement price of $100 each. I'm sure many, if not all of them were select-fire. I don't know if the LAPD swapped out parts or not.

In that instance I think it was more important to get 10 rifles into 10 cars rather than, say, 5 rifles converted from select to semi and placed in cars.

Do the police need NFA forms on all their Title II firearms?

I thought they did.

I live in LA, and I have never seen a rifle in a patrol car. One time I saw an AR15, I know cause I looked through the window at it.

I remember reading that the pussies at city hall or somewhere were offended by the sight of rifles in patrol cars. Maybe they are in the trunk.

I also live across from a military installation, and DOD police have Colt M16A2's exactly like the one I used in the military.

Either way, the PD doesn't seem to need any more help spraying lead at people/cars/objects/dogs or whatever.

Remember those two Asian mail carrier ladies? That was down the street from here.
Look at the damage those knuckleheads did with semi auto...

[IrishJoe3]

If you're talking about crew served automatic weapons? No.

If you're talking about subguns, yes they are an appropriate tool in some circumstances.

I have relatives in the Fed LE, and they get MP5's stuck on semi auto.

The high speed guys get full auto

I would be surprised to find out that street cops get any where near full auto.

If you think about the function and nature of fully automatic fire, it just doesn't make sense. In theory, police self defense is no different than any other citizen. They own every bullet.

At least in theory.

I guess it depends on who and what we're talking about.

Obviously, there is a need and a use for FA equipped rifles. I would imagine a very narrow need.

Pretty much correct.

[IrishJoe3]

I feel that there are way too many select fire weapons possessed by LE - and oddball LE agencies like Social Security Administration, USDA, Department of Education - when there are so few real-world scenarios that call for them.

And that opinion is formed on what factual basis?

[Subotai]

They have to be ready for the inevitable revolution.

[Spyguy]

If I had my way, LE would only be able to use and own what the average citizen in their jurisdiction could use and own.

There used to be a time when the only difference between LE and the average citizen was the badge. They had the same access to weapons, vehicles, etc. as everyone else. Today they are a class all their own.

Except in a time of severe crisis, Americans would not tolerate seeing armed soldiers patrolling our streets. I don't see much difference between an Army infantryman and a police officer any more.

Agree 100% (with a little FIFY added for clarification). In other words, a NYC LEO could only have a mag capacity of 7; while a California LEO could only have a mag capacity of 10. California LEO's must use on-roster handguns, bullet buttons on their semi-auto rifles, etc.

[DrjonesUSA]

NO domestic LEO agency has any need for select fire weaponry.

I don't even believe any officer outside of SWAT should be able to have centerfire rifles in their cruisers. It's completely ridiculous to see every single sheriff, CHP, and podunk agency running around with an AR15 and shotgun.

The police have become way too militarized.