DC Police to be armed with Assault weapons

Status
Not open for further replies.
D.C. to arm police with assault rifles
By David C. Lipscomb
May 8, 2008
The Metropolitan Police Department has joined other major U.S. cities in arming patrol officers with assault rifles to protect them against criminals with high-powered weapons, weeks after being released from a federal program that monitors the use of excessive force.
"We want to be as accurate as possible and have more stopping power," Assistant Chief Patrick Burke said yesterday.
The department already has 500 semiautomatic AR-15 rifles, which were converted from fully automatic rifles, and has trained 340 officers to use them.
Chief Burke said the weapons will go in service after the department decides how to rack them in patrol cars, but gave no specific start date.
The Chicago Police Department is making similar plans and the City of Miami Police Department is already using such weapons.
"We need to be equally equipped with the firearms that are being used against the police," said Monique Bond, a Chicago police spokeswoman. "If officers cannot protect themselves, they cannot protect residents."
Last month, Chicago had one of the most violent crime waves in recent history — 36 shootings in which nine people were killed and an AK-47 assault rifle was used to shoot up a plumbing-supply store.
Miami police began giving patrol police assault rifles in September, about a week before a Miami-Dade County officer was killed by a suspect with a high-powered rifle.
Click to expand...
What, your weapon ban isn't working?

I better fix the quote for her though:
said Monique Bond, a Chicago police spokeswoman. "If officers cannot protect themselves, the disarmed residents don't have a flippin chance."
Click to expand...
 
I think it's apparent that in Chicago, where the P.D. is getting class 3 fully automatic M4s and now D.C. is moving the same direction -- that SOME rational thinking politician could see the writing on the wall: That the cities that are disarmed have the most violent crime.

Are we the only ones that can see this simple fact??
 
Last month, Chicago had one of the most violent crime waves in recent history — 36 shootings in which nine people were killed and an AK-47 assault rifle was used to shoot up a plumbing-supply store.
Click to expand...
So are they saying that no one was actually killed by an "assault rifle", but they needed to fit AK-47 into the article to get some media merit badge or something?
 
Let's see, government municipalities moving to keep citizens disarmed, followed by police being armed more and more with the latest and greatest...

I see a pattern alright.
 
Yeah, they had to include the AK to give the story some credibility, even if it wasn't used to kill. Somehow, the police convinced themselves that they were being killed by "assault weapons".

It's all about politics and control. It's way easier to act like you're doing something by giving the cops more guns instead of actually fixing the real problem or by cracking down on people who do commit crimes.
 
I think Roma nailed it. I also see a trend in cities that have no guns for civillians, the have the power to make their people into sheep.
 
Wait, I thought that America wasn't supposed to be classist...

I'm not against allowing officers, as well as citizens, to protect their lives with rifles. As long as we have equal rights, I see no problem.

However, what is the real necessity of five hundred rifles for a standard police unit? A waste of tax money, in my opinion.
How many officers even need to draw weapons in the line of duty?
IMO, handguns are enough for cops, as long as there's back-up on call 24/7.
 
Wow, this story is fictional right? No one is allowed to have gun in our nations capital. So in theory shouldn't the cops be disarming since no one else is armed? What is it going to take to reach these people? It just seems so simple that a 3rd grader could understand. Criminals do not follow the law. States that allow citizens to defend themselves have lower crime rates. Such simple rational lodgic. Our gun ban didn't work, GB gun ban didn't work, nor did Chicago. But look over here at these states that allow CCW have less crime. Why? Maybe we should try what they are doing instead of what Hitler and Stalin did, it didn't work out to well for them. The answer seems so obvious to us but to them all they see are evil guns. :banghead: Did we not drink enough kool-aid when we were growing up to be affected. Maybe its my foil hat that I wear. Are you guys wearing them too? I'm fine with the police having AR-15s but they should allow the citizens a way to defend themselves too. And so they can be more accurate? Don't you have to be allowed to fire your weapon to be accurate. They basically are only allowed to fire if they are shot at first. I know if someone pulls out a gun or a knife on me he isn't trying to get my advice on if its a good brand or not.
 
The department already has 500 semiautomatic AR-15 rifles, which were converted from fully automatic rifles, and has trained 340 officers to use them.
Click to expand...

???????????
Click to expand...

Sounds like old M16s retired from service. In the old days military surplus wound up in the hands of civilians, LEO and non LEO alike. These days it contributes to a police state and is banned for civilian ownership even in a semi auto state (once a machinegun always a machinegun.)

So I would imagine they are old M16s from the government, especialy since D.C. is federaly managed after all and they have a lot of old essentialy free military service weapons no longer needed.

Since the AR-15 and M16 are essentialy the same rifle with minor differences it is not that big of an error. An M16 is an AR-15 variant. When not encumbered by silly civilian laws the distinction is even less pronounced or important. It is a semi auto AR-15 variant. Whether it was once full auto is a minor detail when going to exempt individuals and agencies.
It means all the world of course to mere peasant civilians and whether the semi auto rifle is an illegal machinegun or not.
 
D.C. to arm police with assault rifles
By David C. Lipscomb
May 8, 2008
The Metropolitan Police Department has joined other major U.S. cities in arming patrol officers with assault rifles to protect them against criminals with high-powered weapons, weeks after being released from a federal program that monitors the use of excessive force.
Click to expand...

Let me get this straight, District of Columbia, in the USA, with a big white house up the road, and gun laws that say one cannot have a gun in said district...

1. Either DC Gun Laws don't work or
2. Reporter screwed the pooch royal and meant to report Columbian Drug Dealers had some new toys to play with.

Paging Sarah Brady ...ya need to do some serious re-thinking toots...
 
Are the DC police a federal force? If not then how are the officers, who are civilians, allowed to have full auto rifles without the needed federal permits?

And what will happen when they start disappering, get lost, misplaced, left behind.

Oneshooter
Livin in Texas
 
assault weapons

I may be wrong but this seems to be a pattern. If I'm not mistaken but the new police chief of Philly came from DC. Could that be the same police chief that had come from Chicago? If this is the same man he need to retire. His record of disarming the citizens, watching crime go up then arming the police with fully automatic weapons is just too similar.He has got to be one of the most sadistic immoral,self centered sob's to grace this great country.

The politicians that hire these types should stand trial for conspiracy to commit murder and violating there oath of office and forbidden from ever holding public office again. They disgust me to no end. And their trail of blood is wide and deep. I hope God sees fit to send those scum to the deepest pits of hell.
 
The whole thing is nasty IMO. The are making up the fact that they are being attack by what sounds like roving hoards of assault weapon weildng thugs... And they are not.

If they already have 500 AR15s,what do they need more for?
 
I may be wrong but this seems to be a pattern. If I'm not mistaken but the new police chief of Philly came from DC.
Click to expand...


You're right it is a pattern. To stay in power, big city politicians whether its Philly, Chicago, NYC, DC, SF, etc. need to pander to their liberal, often minority voters whom are sympathetic to criminals as victims. So they are lenient with enforcing gun laws for criminals that commit crimes with guns and strict with proposing and enforcing gun control for law abiding citizens. Its an oxymoron, and purely done to maintain political power.
 
It has to be equal

Or you will have a police state. If cops want to have a semi-auto AR rifle in their car, fine. I would want one if I were a cop because I would rather search for a gunman in a dark warehouse while holding a rifle. But civilians have to have access to the same weapons so there is balance.

Since DC is completely disarmed, I think that this is a dangerous move. It's crazy that this is taking place in the capitol of the free world. Who feels safe knowing that guys like this are responsible for your safety?
<a href="http://s259.photobucket.com/albums/hh284/CTone03/?action=view&current=nycpd.jpg" target="_blank"><img src="http://i259.photobucket.com/albums/hh284/CTone03/nycpd.jpg" border="0" alt="Backwards Aimpoint"></a>

In case you didn't notice, his Aimpoint optic is mounted backwards.
 
Who knows for sure but just maybe these departments are seeing the writing on the wall. The Supreme Court may rule that all Americans have the right to keep and bear arms. Which means DC and Chicago will have to let their citizens go armed.



jj
 
said Monique Bond, a Chicago police spokeswoman. "If officers cannot protect themselves, the disarmed residents don't have a flippin chance."
Click to expand...
The laws get draconian, the police military-up, the citizens die like flies, and the politicians congratulate themselves on a job well done...
 
Which means DC and Chicago will have to let their citizens go armed.
Click to expand...

Good observation just jim. One that points directly at both municipalities (Chicago and Wash DC) not trusting their law abiding citizens that want to protect themselves.

Awful is a word that can only stratch the surface here...
 
Let's see, government municipalities moving to keep citizens disarmed, followed by police being armed more and more with the latest and greatest...

I see a pattern alright.
Click to expand...

Can you say "Police State?". NO LEO "needs" a AR style weapon to do their job. Especially when they are concurrently disarming the people they are supposed to be there protecting.

And let's not forget.....

"LEO have NO LEGAL OBLIGATION to protect any one individual."
-Warren vs. DC
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

T
  • Locked
Detroit Police Destroy Guns
Replies
23
Views
925
Onmilo
Onmilo
S
  • Locked
Must be nice.
Replies
10
Views
705
loki.fish
L
P
  • Locked
Boston Mayor Rejects Idea to Arm Police Officers With Military Assault Weapons
2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Replies
191
Views
6K
ArfinGreebly
ArfinGreebly
G
  • Locked
Reno, NV newspaper printed my letter!
Replies
18
Views
948
alsaqr
alsaqr
K
  • Locked
Arming Bank Tellers
2
Replies
42
Views
2K
2RCO
2
Back
Top