Does law Enforcement really need select fire?

[KABA556]

Didn't you just write this a few posts back?

I guess you found this reference AFTER you wrote this post?



Talk about "cherry picking." Citing an incident where someone was ambushed does not support an argument against arming LEO's with select−fire guns. And unless you were there, you have no idea if such weaponry might have helped him. Were you there?

The fact remains that in some situations such weaponry may be useful.

You weren't there but it didn't stop you from assuming that a fully automatic rifle would have helped him, even when the article clearly states he was shot from an ambush immediately after he exited his vehicle.

[KABA556]

Seriously though there is no reason whatsoever for any normal LE agency to have an M2

OFFICER SAFETY!


I am going to try to dig up an old video where about 20-40 SWAT guys unloaded several hundred rounds from automatic rifles and sub-machine guns into an SUV that had tried to run over one officer while fleeing the scene of a house where a warrant was being served.

SWAT guys were on both sides of the road as they fired at this vehicle passing in-between them in a residential suburban development. I cannot help but wonder how many of the several hundred rounds fired went into other homes. They put themselves at risk and put all of their fellow officers at risk.




There was an incident in Cleveland about a year ago where 13 police fired about 137 rounds into a car occupied by two unarmed individuals. The police were on both sides of the road and some police wound up striking police cruisers on the other side of the road, causing the officers whose vehicles were getting hit to assume they were taking return fire from the occupants of the vehicle, resulting in even more firing into the vehicle.

The officers were repeatedly told to end the pursuit since the vehicle was wanted for speed only. They continued the pursuit until they brought the vehicle to a stop and then they unloaded 137 rounds into it.

http://www.cleveland.com/metro/index.ssf/2012/12/13_cleveland_police_officers_w.html

http://www.thenation.com/blog/171645/anger-rises-cleveland-after-police-fire-137-shots-unarmed-couple#

These are the people we want to give automatic rifles and belt-fed machine guns to?

[bigger hammer]

Actually, the public does have the right to restrict tools. The SF Police Commission is directly responsible for three deaths that might have been prevented if they had allowed SFPD to issue tasers.

A few cities have set up such commissions. As you mention, they're a horrible idea, usually forced on the PD by judgments from federal lawsuits. Almost always they cause serious problems. In LA they took away the "Upper Body Control Hold" (commonly called a choke−out or in MMA a 'rear naked choke') and the Rodney King incident resulted. The officers used all the appropriate weapons that were left, and still had a failure. Had this incident occurred before the police commission took away the UBCH, Mr. King would have been rendered unconscious before Mr. Holiday would have had time to set up his camera and no one would even know his name.

[KABA556]

http://www.finalcall.com/artman/publish/National_News_2/article_9680.shtml

[Corsair415]

OFFICER SAFETY!


I am going to try to dig up an old video where about 20-40 SWAT guys unloaded several hundred rounds from automatic rifles and sub-machine guns into an SUV that had tried to run over one officer while fleeing the scene of a house where a warrant was being served.

SWAT guys were on both sides of the road as they fired at this vehicle passing in-between them in a residential suburban development. I cannot help but wonder how many of the several hundred rounds fired went into other homes. They put themselves at risk and put all of their fellow officers at risk.




There was an incident in Cleveland about a year ago where 13 police fired about 137 rounds into a car occupied by two unarmed individuals. The police were on both sides of the road and some police wound up striking police cruisers on the other side of the road, causing the officers whose vehicles were getting hit to assume they were taking return fire from the occupants of the vehicle, resulting in even more firing into the vehicle.

The officers were repeatedly told to end the pursuit since the vehicle was wanted for speed only. They continued the pursuit until they brought the vehicle to a stop and then they unloaded 137 rounds into it.

http://www.cleveland.com/metro/index.ssf/2012/12/13_cleveland_police_officers_w.html

http://www.thenation.com/blog/171645/anger-rises-cleveland-after-police-fire-137-shots-unarmed-couple#

These are the people we want to give automatic rifles and belt-fed machine guns to?

Hopefully they had circus music playing as they unloaded on the vehicle.

[bigger hammer]

Who am I to say? The information on his death stated that he was shot from an ambush as soon as he exited his vehicle.

He was killed by individuals he didn't even realize were there, from the way the article was written anyway... He was shot by a group of five men who were hiding and lying in wait. All the firepower in the world won't help you if somebody shoots you before you even know they are there.

As I said, "begging the question." I made thousands of T−stops in my career. A select fire rifle would have not been of assistance in any of them. OTOH, there were several situations that I was involved in, where such a weapon would have been quite helpful.

The rest of your post, more of the same "begging the question"

[bigger hammer]

America is well on its way to becoming just another third world failed state with militarized police and internal security units spread across the cities and other areas held by gangs, cartels, militants, etc.

"A piece of it just hit me on my head!" – Henny Penny.

[bigger hammer]

You weren't there but it didn't stop you from assuming that a fully automatic rifle would have helped him, even when the article clearly states he was shot from an ambush immediately after he exited his vehicle.

I made no such assumption. But I have punched holes in your argument big enough to drive an APC through. NO ONE has said that select fire weapons would be used in every deployment as you've insinuated. But they would be useful in some operations. This is simply a fact and to deny that is to deny reality. LEA's have had select fire weapons in their armory for decades.

[bigger hammer]

There was an incident in Cleveland about a year ago where 13 police fired about 137 rounds into a car occupied by two unarmed individuals. The police were on both sides of the road and some police wound up striking police cruisers on the other side of the road, causing the officers whose vehicles were getting hit to assume they were taking return fire from the occupants of the vehicle, resulting in even more firing into the vehicle.

The officers were repeatedly told to end the pursuit since the vehicle was wanted for speed only. They continued the pursuit until they brought the vehicle to a stop and then they unloaded 137 rounds into it.

http://www.cleveland.com/metro/index.ssf/2012/12/13_cleveland_police_officers_w.html

http://www.thenation.com/blog/171645...narmed-couple#

I didn't see any indication in either link that select fire weapons or even semi−auto rifles were used. Can you point us to such a reference? In its absence I'll guess (I'm on a roll here) that they were using their handguns. So I fail to see what this has to do with this discussion. If they had been equipped with select fire weapons, chances are that they'd have fired far less, since the round is more effective and the gun is far easier to shoot and more accurate than handguns. MORE begging of the question.

These are the people we want to give automatic rifles and belt-fed machine guns to?

You're waaaaay to late to decry this. Many, if not most, LEA's already have them in their armories. Nowadays we're just arming the patrol officers with them.

[bigger hammer]

http://www.finalcall.com/artman/publ...cle_9680.shtml

The official report on this incident found this among other issues,

Examples of the failures included “To state the obvious, this chase could have ended without tragic results if Timothy Russell had simply stopped the car in response to the police pursuit. Perhaps the alcohol and the cocaine in his system impaired his judgment.

Play stupid games ...

[Corsair415]

http://www.finalcall.com/artman/publ...cle_9680.shtml

Just a bit of follow up.http://abcnews.go.com/US/63-clevelan...ry?id=20591074

[KABA556]

The official report on this incident found this among other issues,

Play stupid games ...

So the driver had cocaine and alcohol in his system, that explains his stupid behavior.


What explains the behavior on the part of the 13 cops who thought it was a good idea to stand on both sides of the road and fire at a vehicle in the middle of the road?


Some of the police actually hit squad cars on the other side of the road.


At least the driver was under the influence of alcohol and cocaine and that does something to explain his poor judgement. What can the police say to explain their poor judgement?

If that incident is evidence of the best sober judgement of those police I'd hate to see their judgement when they're intoxicated.


If a sober man thinks it is a good idea to have people on both sides of the road fire at a vehicle in the middle of the road in-between both groups, then they're a fool.

[KABA556]

You're waaaaay to late to decry this. Many, if not most, LEA's already have them in their armories. Nowadays we're just arming the patrol officers with them.

There is a mounting backlash in this nation and when the reforms are over you'll be lucky if you are left with a whistle and a wooden stick.

[KABA556]

I vote against anything that has to do with funding for police.

I believe John Lott did a multiple year long study and concluded that we could reduce the rate of rape, murder, carjacking, and armed robbery by about 50% if we armed 20 million American adults with handguns.


Police have almost no impact on the rates of- kidnapping, murder, rape, burglary, armed robbery, domestic abuse, child abuse, etc.

In one city they doubled the number of police on the street over a six month period and it had no impact on murder, rape, kidnapping, or armed robbery, but it did decrease car theft and vandalism by about 40-50%, but at the cost of doubling the number of police on the street. In other words, not the return realized did not justify the expenditure.

[bigger hammer]

So the driver had cocaine and alcohol in his system, that explains his stupid behavior.

What explains the behavior on the part of the 13 cops who thought it was a good idea to stand on both sides of the road and fire at a vehicle in the middle of the road? ...

And down the anti−police rabbit hole we go. Any chance of a return to the topic with some reasonable discussion? I'm doubtin' it.