Does law Enforcement really need select fire?

[rexblaine]

What an amazing troll thread.

LEO are Citizens

They should be able to have whatever they want. Same rules should apply.

Training should also be available.

Too many regulations.

[Ronin2]

What an amazing troll thread.

LEO are Citizens

They should be able to have whatever they want. Same rules should apply.

Training should also be available.

Too many regulations.

How obtuse of you. They are not "just citizens" when they are "on the job/duty". They are an instrument of power for the government. The become citizens when they are off duty and not acting on behalf of society.

[WyattandDoc]

How obtuse of you. They are not "just citizens" when they are "on the job/duty". They are an instrument of power for the government. The become citizens when they are off duty and not acting on behalf of society.

Sir,

I agree with a lot of what you say. Especially your views on freedom of press, accountability of LE and 2nd Amendment freedoms for ALL law abiding citizens, LE/Military or not.

But what I'm not getting, is why is this a LE question or issue? Shouldn't your anger be with the Law Makers? A select fire weapon would be a great tool in about .001% of LE operations, but if you and your family were in a situation where it would help the LEO with mitigating that situation, wouldn't you want them to have it?

Any tool in a cops toolbox could be misused including a bean bag SG. That's where oversight, training and accountability come in.

But to say they shouldn't have them because a non-LEO can't seems juvenile. Our anger should be with the ones making all these ridiculous laws.

I say this with all due respect.

Stay well.

[DrjonesUSA]

Lets see you guys work with them and then say the same thing.

Work with who? Cops?
Sure....

Whatever you guys do, lets take away your computer/tools because you can still get the job done with a typewriter and no tools....right?

You forget that the constitution very specifically and explicitly grants only certain rights and abilities to the govt - it does not start out by saying "the govt. can do everything except for these few things..."

It is the exact opposite; the govt. does not in fact have any rights or abilities not specifically delegated to it by the constitution.

Therefore, cops actually do not have any right to own guns (in their official capacity as LEOs) nor computers unless specifically allowed by the constitution.

As a citizen, on the other hand, there are far fewer limits as to what I can do and own, and many of my rights are expressly protected by the BOR & Constitution.

Your understanding is backwards.

[DrjonesUSA]

While there have been cases were LEOs have effectively used handguns to take out threats at ranges of over 50 yards, that is not what handguns are designed for.

If you're dealing with "threats" at 50+ yards, it's time to call SWAT...

[SVT-40]

If you're dealing with "threats" at 50+ yards, it's time to call SWAT...

Meanwhile the officer is pinned down because he doesn't have a rifle...

[barrage]

Meanwhile the officer is pinned down because he doesn't have a rifle...

You're right. We should probably start issuing 240B's and AT-4's to all our local law enforcement agents so that kind of thing doesn't happen since their ability to peacefully do their jobs without killing anybody somehow became impossible during the mid 90's. Whatever gets them home safe at night, right?

[CK_32]

Now that we have 9 year old's with F/A assault weapons I think yes!

Too soon?

[morfeeis]

You're right. We should probably start issuing 240B's and AT-4's to all our local law enforcement agents so that kind of thing doesn't happen since their ability to peacefully do their jobs without killing anybody somehow became impossible during the mid 90's. Whatever gets them home safe at night, right?

They need to get home safe, just issue a10 warthogs.

[SVT-40]

You're right. We should probably start issuing 240B's and AT-4's to all our local law enforcement agents so that kind of thing doesn't happen since their ability to peacefully do their jobs without killing anybody somehow became impossible during the mid 90's. Whatever gets them home safe at night, right?

So to you, a rifle is equal to a 240B and AT-4's...

Do you get your ideas from Dianne Feinstein???

[barrage]

So to you, a rifle is equal to a 240B and AT-4's...

Do you get your ideas from Dianne Feinstein???

Hey, I'm just trying to look out for the heroes out there who keep me safe from non-government approved activities. Whatever gets them home safe at the end of the day is the only thing that matters and if that means the local police need to start flying around in Apaches and firing hellfire missiles at old ladies delivering newspapers, then they should get them.

[mafbloggerdanny]

First off lets just get one thing out of the way...I understand policing is a really tough job and sometimes bad **** just happens. I have never experienced what these cops go though and I cannot judge them and their actions as if I know better... but just wanted to offer my own perspective on where I think the real problems lie.

From a cost point of view I would say that all these fun gadgets and operator equipment costs way too much to the taxpayer. Police force should not be a black hole where money just goes into and never seen again -- we already have the Pentagon for that

However philosophically, I see no problem whatsoever with the local police having fully auto guns, body armor, apache helos or nuclear bombs ....whatever they want - - the critical component though is that equipment should only come if there is also training, oversight and accountability.

I had this argument yesterday with some folks in my office talking about police militarization and the phenomena of police over-reacting or escalating a situation to the point where they use an inordinate amount of force...and whether there is a correlation in the two phenomenons.

I am of the opinion that even if cops were only allowed to use .22 revolvers there is still a potential for abuse of power and authority.

Conversely you could have your entire police force kitted out like Navy SEALs but they could be officer friendly if they have the right training, attitude.

I think we need to blame the equipment less and assign more blame to the mindset, the mentality that creates these situations where the police overreact and we start wondering if we should take their guns away. It's the police officers unions and the inherent corruption in them, the lack of oversight and accountability. We have seen what teachers unions have done to undermine public education in this country and people rightly criticize them for it. Same with SEIU and gov workers unions, people HATE those unions. But nobody wants to attack the police unions, they are apparently above reproach.

When the police are allowed to utilize force and coercion backed by the authority of the government with impunity and without having to answer to the citizens who pay the taxes and elect them to office, then we have problems.

[bonusweb]

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.

Seeing as how they miss 90% of the time full auto will only mean more bystanders shot. It would only be useful in cover fire anyways. Unless you are are talking a dedicated 50 cal not an M16. Dumping M16 mags, full auto means officer will likely miss target, run out of ammo, overheat the rifle, and/or hit bystanders. Tri burst may be better option.

http://www.nbclosangeles.com/news/local/Torrance-LAPD-Manhunt-Mistaken-Identity-Shooting-Newspaper-Delivery-191200561.html

Officers fired more than 100 rounds at two newspaper delivery women -- leaving bullet holes in their pickup, clothing and other personal items in the vehicle -- in a case of mistaken identity during the search for fugitive Christopher Dorner, according to their attorney.
The women, Margie Carranza and her 71-year-old mother, Emma Hernandez, are "grappling with a lot of issues" in the wake of the incident, attorney Glen Jonas told NBC4.

[audiophil2]

Seeing as how they miss 90% of the time full auto will only mean more bystanders shot. It would only be useful in cover fire anyways. Unless you are are talking a dedicated 50 cal not an M16. Dumping M16 mags, full auto means officer will likely miss target, run out of ammo, overheat the rifle, and/or hit bystanders. Tri burst may be better option.

Tri burst on an M16 is horrible. It is not a consistent 3 round burst system.

[bonusweb]

Tri burst on an M16 is horrible. It is not a consistent 3 round burst system.

Well ok then they better yearly qualify on full auto. You can't just hand them out to the average ape on the force.

Perhaps they can stress them while qualifying to see if their default setting is spray and pray. If so then the don't get or need full auto rifle.