Militarization of our Police Force

[molonlabe]

http://www.zwire.com/site/news.cfm?newsid=13779528&BRD=1409&PAG=461&dept_id=33071&rfi=6

I find this trend troubling for many reasons. First the Shoot out in LA, which was played over and over again on TV, was an aberration not the norm.

For the life of me I see no reason for police issuing M16-A1 weapons to the rank and file. A semi AR15 would suffice and I would say had they been available during the LA shootout instead of raiding a local gun store to obtain them the shoot out would have ended sooner.

It take discipline to effectively fire full auto and in most instances it is a last resort measure. Under stress most untrained people will spray and pray. I think this puts the citizens at risk along with fellow officers.

I also believe this leads us down the path to a Police State.

Am I alone here??

 

[LawDog]

Hmm. Tweak this a bit...

I find this trend troubling for many reasons. First the Shoot out in LA, which was played over and over again on TV, was an aberration not the norm.

For the life of me I see no reason for anyone to allow M16-A1 weapons to civilians. A semi AR15 would suffice and I would say had they been available during the LA shootout instead of raiding a local gun store to obtain them the shoot out would have ended sooner.

It take discipline to effectively fire full auto and in most instances it is a last resort measure. Under stress most untrained people will spray and pray. I think this puts the citizens at risk along with fellow officers.

I also believe this leads us down the path to a Police State.

Am I alone here??

LawDog

 

[molonlabe]

No, I don’t think this needs tweaking. I believe the defense is that the police are less armed than the criminals therefore they need more firepower. This simply is not so. The uses of fully auto weapons are rare by criminals. It does happen but it is not the norm.

 

[Tamara]

molonlabe,

So, you think you should be able to own full-auto weapons, but your employees shouldn't? I'd hate working for a boss like that.

On the other hand, if transferrable NFA devices are illegal for the citizenry of a jurisdiction, then they should be illegal for the constabulary, too.

 

[molonlabe]

So, you think you should be able to own full-auto weapons, but your employees shouldn't? I'd hate working for a boss like that.

???????? Did I miss something?

 

[Old Fuff]

I think a lot of this boils down to a training issue. Molonlabe has a valid point in saying SOME (not all) officers might panic and go to the spray & pray mode right off. Law enforcement organizations tend to spend a lot more money on toys then they do on training. It was also make a big difference if the officers in question were manning a rural roadblock or patrolling a crowded urban airport. There is a lot more to this then a simple “yes they should,†or “no they shouldn’t.â€

 

[12-34hom]

The horse that just won't die.

Yea, Yea, we all know how all police officers are piss poor shots, their training leaves something to be desired, it's the Us vs.Them thing, Were all JBT's, America going to hell in a handbasket....

I'm sure I've missed some other witty euphemisms, so jump right in.

12-34hom.

 

[DMF]

It take discipline to effectively fire full auto and in most instances it is a last resort measure. Under stress most untrained people will spray and pray.

Deputies will have to train and qualify with the M-16s before they will be able to carry them, he explained.

:banghead:

I also believe this leads us down the path to a Police State.

Oh yeah, because the equipment carried by cops is what causes that to happen.

Am I alone here??

No there are a couple of others with you.
I think some folks here look way too hard for stuff to cry about.

 

[ID_shooting]

"Yea, Yea, we all know how all police officers are piss poor shots, their training leaves something to be desired,"

I know this was sarcasm, but I feel there is quite a bit of truth here. Can't speak for the rest of the country, but the few shooouts our police have been involved in, the cops went into "spray & pray" mode. They play the footage on TV and it sounds like the opening sceens of Saving Private Ryan. Not too mention the sea of brass laying amongst all the cop cars. One incedent comes to mind, we had a guy get into a shootout, he had an SKS and the cops all had thier side arms. Of over 500 rounds fired by the police, only like 20 hit the guys truck that he was hiding behind. Now, pistol shooting is tough and requires training, but methinks more is certainly needed.

Now, I am not bashing LEOs here, I support them every inch of the way, they do a tough job with tough restrictions. But if you can train the military trigger diciplin and fire controll, you can teach the cops as well.

That said, there is nothing wrong with LEO sniper teams or SWAT type units being available to most LEO agencies, I can even see a need for an armored rig with an M2 BMG for certian circumstances. I just don't feel the average squad car need the "heavy" fire power, only highly trained officers.

 

[Logan5]

On the other hand, a department can pay for a lot of things with the money it's not spending on 25 new AR15s. Free, new M16A1s probably aren't going to lead to officers ripping off mags full auto at the drop of a hat. How many times have you seen comments about the wastefulness of the government torching M16s and M14s? Finally we're seeing some return on those 76-79 taxpayer dollars spent to buy M16A1's and keep them unfired in a warehouse somewhere for thirty years.

 

[justice4all]

I think that cops and other citizens should be allowed to keep and bear automatic weapons. But most of the time, most people would be better off firing in semi-auto mode. As an infantryman in the USMC, I was trained to only use the three round burst feature on the M16A2 when clearing rooms and when being overrun. Otherwise, you're better off taking well-aimed shots. And we were much better trained with our rifles than the average police officer.

 

[DMF]

I know this was sarcasm, but I feel there is quite a bit of truth here. Can't speak for the rest of the country, but the few shooouts our police have been involved in, the cops went into "spray & pray" mode. They play the footage on TV and it sounds like the opening sceens of Saving Private Ryan. Not too mention the sea of brass laying amongst all the cop cars. One incedent comes to mind, we had a guy get into a shootout, he had an SKS and the cops all had thier side arms. Of over 500 rounds fired by the police, only like 20 hit the guys truck that he was hiding behind. Now, pistol shooting is tough and requires training, but methinks more is certainly needed.

I'll bet you're a good shot at the range too. However, if we take away that paper target, and replace it with a live person who is moving and shooting a rifle at you, I doubt you would do any better than those cops. People that criticize the accuracy of shots fired in a lethal force situation have invariable never been IN a lethal force shooting.

No matter how much folks want to pretend it's otherwise, banging away on the lane at the range, or shooting cardboard swingers at an IDPA or IPSC match is NOT anything like shooting at someone who is trying to kill you, is moving, and utilizing cover and concealment.

 

[bnolsen]

One thing that REALLY upsets me is that people who are or were Police Officers are given special rights above and beyond what normal citizens have. In places of heavy gun control or even not, current or former Police Officers are allowed the privilege of conceal carry and use of fully automatic weapons even when not on duty.

This makes me sick. What about those who have prior military service? When was it a good thing to give special privileges to select groups in the US? Hasn't that always been against what the US has always stood for?

 

[mattf7184]

Kappeler, V. E. & Kraska, P. B. (1997, February). Militarizing american police: The rise
and normalization of paramilitary units. Social Problems, 44 (1), 1-18.


Good reading.

 

[2t2 crash]

why would they give them the M15-A1 configuration?
we all use the A2 model because we found the 3 round burst sufficient.
I sure as hell wouldnt want to trust a cop with a full auto weapon... why not just give them a SAW or 240-G? .223 is a POS round anyhow....
give them a few M1As or such in .308, i would think that would be a bit better.

of course i am just a zoomie, so pay no heed.

Crash



m16-a1.... WHOOPS

 

[Pilgrim]

I'm not sure I understand the heartburn here over surplus M-16s and M-14s to law enforcement. I would rather see law enforcement get them than have them cut up into scrap as the liberal gun grabbers in Congress want to see happen.

My department had Ruger AC-556s long before this surplus distribution program went into effect. We did not train the deputies to fire full auto. We let them try it to see that it had very limited applications in law enforcement, plus the two magazines issued with the rifle would not last long in full auto.

The M-14s, and I am pretty sure the M-16s, can be converted to semi-auto fire only. I am sure most law enforcement chiefs have asked if this is possible and have made the decision to make those modifications. The chiefs fear uncontrolled and indiscriminate fire just as much as you do.

The North Hollywood incident may have been an aberration or isolated incident, but it did happen and it caught the LAPD with their pants down around their ankles. If those two robbers had had a better plan, and perhaps some outside help, the L.A. County Coroner would have been a busy fellow and the LAPD would have had some serious work for the piper at the officers' funerals. Would you wish that on any department because you don't like the idea of officers having modern rifles in their patrol cars?

It is foolish to make decisions on equipment, training, and tactics based on what you think the crooks might do. Better you make those decisions based on what they are capable of. We know for a certainty that there are more and more crooks capable of, and having the will to oppose the police like the two robbers did at North Hollywood.

 

[Art Eatman]

I'm less concerned about the particular equipment than I am about the training given for whatever equipment is acquired.

More important than that, though, in my mind, is the overall attitude of the leadership about supervision and inculcated attitudes into the lower ranks.

Seems to me that the real worry is about an "us vs. them" attitude with respect to the citizenry as a whole--and that has little to do with equipment. My own experience is that not much of that attitude exists...

Art

 

[R.H. Lee]

OK. I've got some questions. AFAIK, full auto is really only useful as 'suppressive fire' in a combat situation (war zone). How accurate is full auto from, say, an M16 at 50 yds, or even 3 rd bursts at 25-50 yds? What is the danger to bystanders/other innocents inside buildings behind the target? Considering their use in densely populated urban areas.

And whatever happened to "community policing" (COPS), a strategy that has worked well in high crime areas where it's been employed. Why do police departments think they need to resemble military units more than traditional civilian police? If this trend continues, they'll be riding down city streets in armored vehicles with turrets talking to citizens through loudspeakers.

 

[cordex]

I'm with Tamara on this one. I'm all for cops being able to get good equipment. If they can get surplus rifles from the military cheaper than they could buy them commercially, I'm all for that too. Heck, saves me money and gets them the guns they want. Win-win.

But if it's illegal for me to buy, it oughta be illegal for them.

 

[Art Eatman]

RileyMc, on my second-ever 20-round mag in full-auto with an M16, I was able to put them all into a spanish dagger plant at 100 yards. Within, roughly, a two-foot circle. I'm nothing exceptional; I was 60 at the time; six feet tall and about 175 pounds.

As far as the second part of your question, SFAIK all this military-style stuff is for emergency situations, not for daily waving about. It seems to me that too many folks are expressing themselves in a manner which suggests they think SWAT teams are gonna take over doing routine traffic stops. I don't think so...

, Art

 

[molonlabe]

Dmf

I'll bet you're a good shot at the range too. However, if we take away that paper target, and replace it with a live person who is moving and shooting a rifle at you, I doubt you would do any better than those cops.

My point exactly. It is difficult if not impossible to simulate the adrenalin dump that occurs in a combat situation. Therein lies the danger to the public and officers. I also don’t want this to turn into a LEO bashing thread. LE is just taking advantage of government subsidies.

I am also questioning whether we as citizens (remember to Protect and Serve) want our police (other than the special operations teams) to be armed with fully automatic weapons.

RileyMc comment that full auto is useful in suppressive fire and should be used during advancement toward the objective. Also FYI the three round burst when aimed can easily group within center of mass at 100 yards.

 

[pcf]

Molonlabe,
1. The 600+ M16A1s have all been converted to semi auto, or rendered unable to fire on full auto, whats the difference between that and an AR-15?
2. The rifles were given to the LAPD by the Pentagon, read NO COST. Why buy an AR-15 when the equivalent is free.

Judging a weapon by its name lead to a banned list on the AWB. Names aren't dangerous, people are.

BTW Rifles have numerous police application, not just rare high intensity shoot outs. If your worried about spray and pray, how can you be against rifles? They're more accurate than handguns and easier to shoot under stress.

 

[molonlabe]

pcf

deputies will soon be armed with new M-16 rifles

It doesn’t say in the article that they have been converted to semi auto. An M16 is a machine gun by definition.

 

[fastbolt]

Gee folks, what's the uproar?

If the military was disposing of semiauto AR15's and M16A1's, then I suspect most agencies would be choosing the AR15's, except perhaps for some limited special enforcement units which may require full auto capacbility in limited circumstances, and receive the necessary additional training (and which can already buy new select-fire rifles & carbines, anyway).

Don't you think that some agencies have already considered the high liability issues involved in issuing the line staff M16A1's which are capable of full auto fire, and have instituted policies which either prohibit or restrict the use of full auto fire, or else have easily modified the rifles to limit them to semi auto? Also, some agencies limit the circumstances in which patrol rifles may even be deployed.

And yes, even if converted to semi auto, the M16A1's are still 'machine guns', since they were originally manufactured and sold that way.

 

[duckslayer]

An M16 is a machine gun by definition.

True, but the press has had one or maybe two occasions where they have not presented all the facts of a story correctly.