Cops should have access to semiauto rifles. It is truly amazing that we have so many experts in DC that feel like they can know how to police better, than the cops that have to actually do the job. Phil Mendelson is one expert that needs to move out of his cozy little nest in NW to Trinidad or far NE/SE to see the real DC.
I'm pretty pro-gun, but not at all comfortable with this idea. First, this isn't the military and I'm willing to be that even with training most cops aren't going to have anywhere near the skill and accuracy with an AR-15 that your average soldier has. Second, when shots are fired, most of them miss - and a rifle bullet will travel a lot further and do a lot more damage than a Glock 9mm. Third, I'd like to see some statistics on how often cops have been outgunned or failed to capture a criminal because they only had sidearms rather than an assault rifle...I'm willing to be it's pretty low. Given that the average police encounter takes place in very close quarters it seems to me that it would be rare in the first place that it would make more sense to use any kind of rifle versus a pistol.
Overall, I think this is a really bad idea, and I say that as someone that supports private gun ownership and has fired both the current handgun cops use as well as the AR-15.
A rifles are a lot more accurate than a glock. There will be many fewer bullets flying around. It requires much less training for a rifle than a handgun. It's not like the cops will walking the streets with rifles in hand. Most likely they will be stored in the trunk until needed.
A rifle is more accurate and useful over long distances - but how often are cops required to fire at someone more than 25 feet away? Almost never.
The reason cops have 9mm's is because it's just about the easiest handgun to shoot with OK (but not great) stopping power. This is good because a stray shot that travels more than 50 feet with a 9 has lost a significant amount of velocity and while harmful is probably not lethal, whereas an AR-15's bullet velocity is at or near its peak for the first couple of hundred yards it travels.
The 9mm is a pretty low-skill handgun, and contrary to what Anonymous says, it is definitely easier to train someone to use a handgun like that than a rifle. I don't think there is a compelling case for the average DC cop to be anywhere near an AR-15, at any time.
I agree that people should be concerned about this. The militarization of the police forces in America is a VERY BAD THING. Also, it should first be Clearly demonstrated that the police are outgunned.
its not a machine gun. Its semi-automatic. you need to pull the trigger each time you fire a single round. I see no reason well-trained cops can't have access them. And DC should give its non-criminal citizens the ability to own a handgun.
Keep in mind, these are the same sort of rifles that according to the VPC/Brady Campaign are useful only for 'spraying from the hip' and 'killing lots of people'... Now if that's true, ask yourself: why do the police need them?
For the record; the VPC/Brady Campaign are full of cr@p, but the militarization of the police is NOT a good thing, and in an urban environment, the over-penetration of rifle rounds is a real danger to innocent bystanders.
I'm against this. I have lived here 15 years and I NEVER heard of an instance where MPD was 'outgunned'. When did this happen? No one can name ONE instance? i think even though the rifles are being provided for free, the officers would have to spend time (and tax dollars) training to use them, whereas both that time AND money could be better used in fighting crime on the streets. the rifles are unncessary and a waste of time for training and a waste of money to pay for the training.
We live in one of the top terrorist targets in the world. If the police want to train for a worst-case scenario and keep these at the ready, I'm all for it.
Did anyone note that these were requested by Chief Lanier when she was head of the Special Operations Division, which includes Homeland Security/Counter-Terrorism?
While some of the frequent posters on this blog may disagree, I'm optimistic that the Chief is in the best position to know what she needs.
True in a factual sense, but as defined by DC law, any semi-auto capable of holding 12 or more rounds is a 'machine gun'.
Correct me if I am wrong, but it is semi because you have the choice to turn it from manual to auto with a click of a lever. A M-4 is a semi-auto.
For those that don't know a M-4 is has a shorter muzzle length and a collapsible stock.
It is for military use. The police want to be militarized because they want to maintain power. There is NO logical reason for them to have guns that are meant to be used in warfare. What is next? The MPD will be outsourced to Blackwater?
The AR-15 fires in semi-automatic mode only. One trigger pull, one shot. You will not see the MPD using fully automatic weapons and there is no switch on the weapon to allow automatic mode.
Derek, you're thinking of an M-16, which fires in full auto, a 3-round burst or in semi-auto mode. The AR-15 is the civilian equivalent of the M-16.
I'm all for the police "maintaining power." Isn't that the point? I think my previous post represeted a "logical reason" for the MPD to maintain enough fire power to deal with any threat they might face in the nation's capital.
I also doubt the city would outsource to Blackwater. That would require a contract and, as we've seen from the H St. streetscape project, they are apparently unable to issue a contract.
By and large Blackwater guys are far hotter than DC cops, and they make a lot more money so when 'dating' they can afford to take you someplace nice.... maybe even one of our own new H St restaurants, so farming out our police efforts wouldn't be all bad.
I ahve fired a M-16 and I was thinking of a M-5 when I wrote those comments last night drunk. My buddy is a sniper in SF and I listen to the stories. The M-5 is for urban warfare.
I know they won't, it jsut pisses me off that they want to militarized our police.
Also, where do you think the Blackwater, Triple Canopy and the otehr merchs come from. SF guys who want to make more money and get away with more than they could in the military.
Soul Searcher. I cannot think of a specific instance where a DC cop was outgunned but there was a period in most major cities where cops had six shot revolvers while criminals had the benefit of clip-fed handguns holding up to 15 rounds. There were huge efforts all over the country to better arm cops. PBA and FOP were all over it. No doubt these cops were outgunned. Maybe its the same case now - maybe not. but if we don't trust our cops to carry a gun that private citizens can legally own in most other states, then it would seem peoples' issues are with the police force and not the gun. -meh
I've enclosed a link to a description of the "North Hollywood Shootout", which took place in 1997. It's probably the most famous example of cops being "outgunned." Essentially, two bank robbers, covered in body armor and armed to the teeth with automatic weapons, decided to fight it out with local cops. The story is almost beyond belief.
I must admit that I’m very surprised at the resistance to the idea of giving cops access to the AR-15. Several surrounding jurisdictions already have this; it's becoming a standard across the country. In a city like Washington with it’s current crime levels and attractiveness as a terrorist target, the police force should have everything it needs to fulfill its duties.
I shudder to think of what would happen if MPD. I shudder even more when I think about the community outcry if a situation broke out where the police where outgunned. People would be saying, “why weren’t they better armed?”
Not every single police officer is perfect, but these men and women put themselves out there every day. They should have access to whatever they need to do their job and to do it right.
A lot of this is also perception. If criminals perceive that the police are better armed and better trained, that is a deterrent. And with the rash of daytime robberies along 14th Street NW in the past couple of months.... just something to consider.
I suppose I can understand the initial apprehension some people would have with this, but I would urge those people to talk to police officers and get their take on the situation. After all, they’re out there and they see the trends on a daily basis.
It's easy to sit back and say "no," but talk to the men and women who are out there. Get the first-hand knowledge.
And yes I know my post is all over the place… hard to concentrate with some of the characters on the Metro.
I realized I left out a key phrase in my earlier post...
I shudder to think of what would happen if MPD **were outgunned**. I shudder even more when I think about the community outcry if a situation broke out where the police where outgunned. People would be saying, “why weren’t they better armed?”
21 comments:
Cops should have access to semiauto rifles. It is truly amazing that we have so many experts in DC that feel like they can know how to police better, than the cops that have to actually do the job. Phil Mendelson is one expert that needs to move out of his cozy little nest in NW to Trinidad or far NE/SE to see the real DC.
I'm pretty pro-gun, but not at all comfortable with this idea. First, this isn't the military and I'm willing to be that even with training most cops aren't going to have anywhere near the skill and accuracy with an AR-15 that your average soldier has. Second, when shots are fired, most of them miss - and a rifle bullet will travel a lot further and do a lot more damage than a Glock 9mm. Third, I'd like to see some statistics on how often cops have been outgunned or failed to capture a criminal because they only had sidearms rather than an assault rifle...I'm willing to be it's pretty low. Given that the average police encounter takes place in very close quarters it seems to me that it would be rare in the first place that it would make more sense to use any kind of rifle versus a pistol.
Overall, I think this is a really bad idea, and I say that as someone that supports private gun ownership and has fired both the current handgun cops use as well as the AR-15.
A rifles are a lot more accurate than a glock. There will be many fewer bullets flying around. It requires much less training for a rifle than a handgun. It's not like the cops will walking the streets with rifles in hand. Most likely they will be stored in the trunk until needed.
i think it's kinda screwy.
i'm an insomniac. as such, sometimes i walk around my block at night when i can't sleep.
not sure i like the idea of cops with machine guns waiting to blast someone who really has no where to go, but home.
A rifle is more accurate and useful over long distances - but how often are cops required to fire at someone more than 25 feet away? Almost never.
The reason cops have 9mm's is because it's just about the easiest handgun to shoot with OK (but not great) stopping power. This is good because a stray shot that travels more than 50 feet with a 9 has lost a significant amount of velocity and while harmful is probably not lethal, whereas an AR-15's bullet velocity is at or near its peak for the first couple of hundred yards it travels.
The 9mm is a pretty low-skill handgun, and contrary to what Anonymous says, it is definitely easier to train someone to use a handgun like that than a rifle. I don't think there is a compelling case for the average DC cop to be anywhere near an AR-15, at any time.
I agree that people should be concerned about this. The militarization of the police forces in America is a VERY BAD THING. Also, it should first be Clearly demonstrated that the police are outgunned.
its not a machine gun. Its semi-automatic. you need to pull the trigger each time you fire a single round. I see no reason well-trained cops can't have access them. And DC should give its non-criminal citizens the ability to own a handgun.
Keep in mind, these are the same sort of rifles that according to the VPC/Brady Campaign are useful only for 'spraying from the hip' and 'killing lots of people'... Now if that's true, ask yourself: why do the police need them?
For the record; the VPC/Brady Campaign are full of cr@p, but the militarization of the police is NOT a good thing, and in an urban environment, the over-penetration of rifle rounds is a real danger to innocent bystanders.
"http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/military_law/4203345.html"
sorry, the link didn't paste right, but google:
"SWAT Overkill: The Danger of a Paramilitary Police Force"
I'm against this. I have lived here 15 years and I NEVER heard of an instance where MPD was 'outgunned'. When did this happen? No one can name ONE instance? i think even though the rifles are being provided for free, the officers would have to spend time (and tax dollars) training to use them, whereas both that time AND money could be better used in fighting crime on the streets. the rifles are unncessary and a waste of time for training and a waste of money to pay for the training.
"its not a machine gun. Its semi-automatic"
True in a factual sense, but as defined by DC law, any semi-auto capable of holding 12 or more rounds is a 'machine gun'.
We live in one of the top terrorist targets in the world.
If the police want to train for a worst-case scenario and keep these at the ready, I'm all for it.
Did anyone note that these were requested by Chief Lanier when she was head of the Special Operations Division, which includes Homeland Security/Counter-Terrorism?
While some of the frequent posters on this blog may disagree, I'm optimistic that the Chief is in the best position to know what she needs.
"its not a machine gun. Its semi-automatic"
True in a factual sense, but as defined by DC law, any semi-auto capable of holding 12 or more rounds is a 'machine gun'.
Correct me if I am wrong, but it is semi because you have the choice to turn it from manual to auto with a click of a lever. A M-4 is a semi-auto.
For those that don't know a M-4 is has a shorter muzzle length and a collapsible stock.
It is for military use. The police want to be militarized because they want to maintain power. There is NO logical reason for them to have guns that are meant to be used in warfare. What is next? The MPD will be outsourced to Blackwater?
The AR-15 fires in semi-automatic mode only. One trigger pull, one shot. You will not see the MPD using fully automatic weapons and there is no switch on the weapon to allow automatic mode.
Derek, you're thinking of an M-16, which fires in full auto, a 3-round burst or in semi-auto mode. The AR-15 is the civilian equivalent of the M-16.
I'm all for the police "maintaining power." Isn't that the point? I think my previous post represeted a "logical reason" for the MPD to maintain enough fire power to deal with any threat they might face in the nation's capital.
I also doubt the city would outsource to Blackwater. That would require a contract and, as we've seen from the H St. streetscape project, they are apparently unable to issue a contract.
By and large Blackwater guys are far hotter than DC cops, and they make a lot more money so when 'dating' they can afford to take you someplace nice.... maybe even one of our own new H St restaurants, so farming out our police efforts wouldn't be all bad.
adam smith,
I ahve fired a M-16 and I was thinking of a M-5 when I wrote those comments last night drunk. My buddy is a sniper in SF and I listen to the stories. The M-5 is for urban warfare.
I know they won't, it jsut pisses me off that they want to militarized our police.
Also, where do you think the Blackwater, Triple Canopy and the otehr merchs come from. SF guys who want to make more money and get away with more than they could in the military.
Soul Searcher. I cannot think of a specific instance where a DC cop was outgunned but there was a period in most major cities where cops had six shot revolvers while criminals had the benefit of clip-fed handguns holding up to 15 rounds. There were huge efforts all over the country to better arm cops. PBA and FOP were all over it. No doubt these cops were outgunned.
Maybe its the same case now - maybe not. but if we don't trust our cops to carry a gun that private citizens can legally own in most other states, then it would seem peoples' issues are with the police force and not the gun.
-meh
I've enclosed a link to a description of the "North Hollywood Shootout", which took place in 1997. It's probably the most famous example of cops being "outgunned." Essentially, two bank robbers, covered in body armor and armed to the teeth with automatic weapons, decided to fight it out with local cops. The story is almost beyond belief.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_Hollywood_shootout
I must admit that I’m very surprised at the resistance to the idea of giving cops access to the AR-15. Several surrounding jurisdictions already have this; it's becoming a standard across the country. In a city like Washington with it’s current crime levels and attractiveness as a terrorist target, the police force should have everything it needs to fulfill its duties.
I shudder to think of what would happen if MPD. I shudder even more when I think about the community outcry if a situation broke out where the police where outgunned. People would be saying, “why weren’t they better armed?”
Not every single police officer is perfect, but these men and women put themselves out there every day. They should have access to whatever they need to do their job and to do it right.
A lot of this is also perception. If criminals perceive that the police are better armed and better trained, that is a deterrent. And with the rash of daytime robberies along 14th Street NW in the past couple of months.... just something to consider.
I suppose I can understand the initial apprehension some people would have with this, but I would urge those people to talk to police officers and get their take on the situation. After all, they’re out there and they see the trends on a daily basis.
It's easy to sit back and say "no," but talk to the men and women who are out there. Get the first-hand knowledge.
And yes I know my post is all over the place… hard to concentrate with some of the characters on the Metro.
This isn't something that they would walk around with all day. It's a weapon that is available as a LAST RESORT if needed.
I realized I left out a key phrase in my earlier post...
I shudder to think of what would happen if MPD **were outgunned**. I shudder even more when I think about the community outcry if a situation broke out where the police where outgunned. People would be saying, “why weren’t they better armed?”
Post a Comment