User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 5/5/2024 9:04:47 PM EDT
Call me stupid, but why would a bad guy with a “glock switch” force departments to re-evaluate what their patrol officers carry? Do LEO’s now all of a sudden need a selectfire option to counter an illegal glock switch? If so, why? I’ve been an urban LEO for over 20 years now and see no reason to re-evaluate what we carry just because of a glock switch. I’ve heard the old “well if the shitheads have ‘em, we should to” argument and when I ask how that would change anything, crickets. As LEO’s, we need to be 100% responsible for every round we fire, suppressing fire is not something civilian LEO’s should have to concern themselves with.
I believe if we train officers to actually shoot accurately, you won’t get those news stories that say something to the effect of “officers fire 98 shots at the suspect and strike him twice”. I realize the adrenaline factor (I’ve been directly underfire myself both here as an LEO stateside and in Iraq as an Infantryman), but c’mon! The story |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/5/2024 9:08:35 PM EDT
[#1]
If I could get taxpayer money to buy new guns I'd come up with a new reason everyday
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/5/2024 9:11:03 PM EDT
[Last Edit: NCPatrolAR]
[#2]
Originally Posted By mpdphil: Call me stupid, but why would a bad guy with a “glock switch” force departments to re-evaluate what their patrol officers carry? Do LEO’s now all of a sudden need a selectfire option to counter an illegal glock switch? If so, why? I’ve been an urban LEO for over 20 years now and see no reason to re-evaluate what we carry just because of a glock switch. I’ve heard the old “well if the shitheads have ‘em, we should to” argument and when I ask how that would change anything, crickets. As LEO’s, we need to be 100% responsible for every round we fire, suppressing fire is not something civilian LEO’s should have to concern themselves with. I believe if we train officers to actually shoot accurately, you won’t get those news stories that say something to the effect of “officers fire 98 shots at the suspect and strike him twice”. I realize the adrenaline factor (I’ve been directly underfire myself both here as an LEO stateside and in Iraq as an Infantryman), but c’mon! The story The bold part......yes; officers actually do need to know what suppressive fire is and how to make use of it. Reading the article it just looks like they are going to increase the number of patrol rifles within the agency....nothing wrong with that. |
|
|
|
NH, USA
|
Posted: 5/5/2024 9:11:51 PM EDT
[#3]
From the article, it reads more like they're trying to get more (all) officers and deputies to have patrol rifles. Only 100 for the county with 300 on their wishlist and it seems like there's minimal rifles on the streets with the city too. Could be the agencies are also looking to update their training so most LEO don't shoot only at their annual quals.
|
|
|
CA, USA
|
Posted: 5/5/2024 9:13:37 PM EDT
[#4]
Sounds like they are talking about deploying more AR's to more officers. Which in some areas seems to make sense. Although, it also seems that deploying those AR's on most stops would be a bit tricky. If I was doing a stop and it was a pretty good bet that I was going to encounter some possible bad guys with a switch, I'd want an AR in my hands. Maybe I'm reading the story wrong though.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/5/2024 9:16:10 PM EDT
[#5]
And yet they won't address the issue that glock switches are not that important to the AFT.
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/5/2024 9:17:18 PM EDT
[#6]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By d16man: And yet they won't address the issue that glock switches are not that important to the AFT. There are so many the only realistic way to address it would be to hire more ATF agents. Let's not go that route. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/5/2024 9:18:58 PM EDT
[#7]
It says right in the news article that their rifle deployment ratio is quite low- they only have 100 rifles, and want 300 more.
Since every cop should have a rifle in case they need to do actual serious stuff, it makes complete sense to me. Agencies that intentionally handcuff their people are foolish… <—— LE patrol rifle instructor. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/5/2024 9:20:10 PM EDT
[#8]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By NCPatrolAR: The bold part......yes; officers actually do need to know what suppressive fire is and how to make use of it. Reading the article it just looks like they are going to increase the number of patrol rifles within the agency....nothing wrong with that. Agreed. The most important thing is where to aim it… |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/5/2024 9:22:15 PM EDT
[#9]
They're asking for more patrol rifles. I'd want an AR if I were a police officer.
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/5/2024 9:26:37 PM EDT
[Last Edit: NCPatrolAR]
[#10]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By tac556: It says right in the news article that their rifle deployment ratio is quite low- they only have 100 rifles, and want 300 more. Since every cop should have a rifle in case they need to do actual serious stuff, it makes complete sense to me. Agencies that intentionally handcuff their people are foolish… <—— LE patrol rifle instructor. I'm a plank holder in our patrol rifle program and was actually black balled for a number of years because of my push to get rifles into the hands of patrol guys. While our program is far from great it is coming along and we are about to double the number of carbines at the patrol level. Right now if all of the patrol district rifles are on the street at once we would be fielding just under 80......and thats in an agency with over 2k employees. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/5/2024 9:26:57 PM EDT
[#11]
A police officer in 2024 not having an AR seems like either an extremely cheap ass department or I'd be asking where the funds went.
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/5/2024 9:30:24 PM EDT
[#12]
If you read the article, they’re talking about issuing patrol rifles to their cops, something I assumed was just standard practice these days.
They’re using the “Glock switch” thing as an excuse to try to shake loose funding from somewhere. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/5/2024 9:31:10 PM EDT
[#13]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Aimless: They're asking for more patrol rifles. I'd want an AR if I were a police officer.  Attached File |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/5/2024 9:32:11 PM EDT
[#14]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Rebel31: A police officer in 2024 not having an AR seems like either an extremely cheap ass department or I'd be asking where the funds went. You might be surprised. One of the biggest hurdles I had to overcome was the SWAT chain of command that felt the rifles made them less special and the fact several high profile shootings we had were resolved with shotguns. However, once we got rifles out on the street, they had earned their place within two months. Intuitional inertia is a very real thing and can be a beast to overcome. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/5/2024 9:34:23 PM EDT
[#15]
AR15 is a weapon of war. Designed to kill as many people as possible. Who are the cops at war with?
If they “need” an AR15 then I “need” an AR15. For the exact same reasons. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/5/2024 9:38:20 PM EDT
[#16]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Aimless: They're asking for more patrol rifles. I'd want an AR if I were a police officer. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/5/2024 9:41:44 PM EDT
[#17]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By fadedsun: There are so many the only realistic way to address it would be to hire more ATF agents. Let's not go that route. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By fadedsun: Originally Posted By d16man: And yet they won't address the issue that glock switches are not that important to the AFT. There are so many the only realistic way to address it would be to hire more ATF agents. Let's not go that route. They seem to have resources to track down anyone who orders a "fuel filter" or the wrong kind of thread adapter, if they wanted to track these down I'm sure they could do it with existing manpower. They're making a choice to not conduct enforcement against that demographic. |
|
|
|
NC, USA
|
Posted: 5/5/2024 9:42:15 PM EDT
[#18]
The article also mentions wanting larger caliber handguns as well, which seems like a 180 flip from the recent trend of forces going to 9mm from larger caliber’s. Seems an odd choice when your justification is Glock switches cause they spray all those bullets, but want handguns with lower capacity. Seemed odd. And personally I prefer 40/10mm/45 myself but 9mm does the job just fine currently but also gives you added capacity.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/5/2024 9:44:47 PM EDT
[#19]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By NCPatrolAR: You might be surprised. One of the biggest hurdles I had to overcome was the SWAT chain of command that felt the rifles made them less special and the fact several high profile shootings we had were resolved with shotguns. However, once we got rifles out on the street, they had earned their place within two months. Intuitional inertia is a very real thing and can be a beast to overcome. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By NCPatrolAR: Originally Posted By Rebel31: A police officer in 2024 not having an AR seems like either an extremely cheap ass department or I'd be asking where the funds went. You might be surprised. One of the biggest hurdles I had to overcome was the SWAT chain of command that felt the rifles made them less special and the fact several high profile shootings we had were resolved with shotguns. However, once we got rifles out on the street, they had earned their place within two months. Intuitional inertia is a very real thing and can be a beast to overcome. Yep, SWAT guys are always prima Donna's when it comes to being "special". They'd rather their fellow officers be hurt than to properly equip and train them. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/5/2024 9:46:13 PM EDT
[#20]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By NCPatrolAR: I'm a plank holder in our patrol rifle program and was actually black balled for a number of years because of my push to get rifles into the hands of patrol guys. While our program is far from great it is coming along and we are about to double the number of carbines at the patrol level. Right now if all of the patrol district rifles are on the street at once we would be fielding just under 80......and thats in an agency with over 2k employees. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/5/2024 9:47:00 PM EDT
[#21]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Aimless: They're asking for more patrol rifles. I'd want an AR if I were a police officer. Yep |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/5/2024 9:47:51 PM EDT
[#22]
Doesn't seem too controversial if you
Don't have a Soros' DA Aren't a sanctuary city Care even a whit about "officer safety" .let's be realistic.. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/5/2024 9:48:27 PM EDT
[#23]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By crusaderf8u: The article also mentions wanting larger caliber handguns as well, which seems like a 180 flip from the recent trend of forces going to 9mm from larger caliber’s. Seems an odd choice when your justification is Glock switches cause they spray all those bullets, but want handguns with lower capacity. Seemed odd. And personally I prefer 40/10mm/45 myself but 9mm does the job just fine currently but also gives you added capacity. I initially read the caliber thing as a handgun caliber thing, but that could also mean going with more rifles if you think about it. Theres nothing else talking about changing handguns in the article. |
|
|
|
MI, USA
|
Posted: 5/5/2024 9:49:25 PM EDT
[#24]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By d16man: And yet they won't address the issue that glock switches are not that important to the AFT. And they damn sure aren’t going to keep the repeat offenders in jail… |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/5/2024 9:49:35 PM EDT
[#25]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By d16man: And yet they won't address the issue that glock switches are not that important to the AFT. Correct. A good patrol rifle in 2024 is cheap. Get more. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/5/2024 9:49:56 PM EDT
[#26]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By NCPatrolAR: The bold part......yes; officers actually do need to know what suppressive fire is and how to make use of it. Reading the article it just looks like they are going to increase the number of patrol rifles within the agency....nothing wrong with that. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By NCPatrolAR: Originally Posted By mpdphil: Call me stupid, but why would a bad guy with a “glock switch” force departments to re-evaluate what their patrol officers carry? Do LEO’s now all of a sudden need a selectfire option to counter an illegal glock switch? If so, why? I’ve been an urban LEO for over 20 years now and see no reason to re-evaluate what we carry just because of a glock switch. I’ve heard the old “well if the shitheads have ‘em, we should to” argument and when I ask how that would change anything, crickets. As LEO’s, we need to be 100% responsible for every round we fire, suppressing fire is not something civilian LEO’s should have to concern themselves with. I believe if we train officers to actually shoot accurately, you won’t get those news stories that say something to the effect of “officers fire 98 shots at the suspect and strike him twice”. I realize the adrenaline factor (I’ve been directly underfire myself both here as an LEO stateside and in Iraq as an Infantryman), but c’mon! The story The bold part......yes; officers actually do need to know what suppressive fire is and how to make use of it. Reading the article it just looks like they are going to increase the number of patrol rifles within the agency....nothing wrong with that. Every cop on patrol should have a patrol rifle already. That’s the agency not letting their officers or not giving them adequate equipment/training if they haven’t by now. Talk about a shit agency, |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/5/2024 9:50:06 PM EDT
[#27]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By TheDuck: Can an officer buy/provide their own as long as it meets "x" requirements? Depends on the agency. Here and in a lot of large agencies.......no way in hell. Usually smaller agencies will allow privately owned weapons since it eases the cost off the agency. IIRC LAPD was also authorizing slugs in their shotguns as a supplement to patrol rifles. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/5/2024 9:52:08 PM EDT
[#28]
If ATF could require that every handgun be select fire a lot of lives would be saved.
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/5/2024 9:53:02 PM EDT
[#29]
As a former LE range instructor, it gives me chills to think about how the hell we would have taught cops to shoot effectively with submachine pistols. It was tough enough to get them up to speed on AR-15s, and full auto M16s.
|
|
|
|
VA, USA
|
Posted: 5/5/2024 9:56:19 PM EDT
[#30]
Fluff piece to get more money to buy more rifles. That’s all it is.
Full auto glock is not much of a step up over any other handgun, save for engagements at point blank, where mag dumping 15-30 rounds into someone’s chest is viable. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/5/2024 10:00:12 PM EDT
[#31]
All officers get Glock 18s and 3 33 round magazines in addition to standard load out. Select fire M4s. Problem pretty much solved. Maybe belt fed as well?
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/5/2024 10:00:53 PM EDT
[Last Edit: i_tell_you_what]
[#32]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Moon-Watcher: As a former LE range instructor, it gives me chills to think about how the hell we would have taught cops to shoot effectively with submachine pistols. It was tough enough to get them up to speed on AR-15s, and full auto M16s. I think mp5sd style guns would be perfect for something like this. MPX if you want better ergos. It would be helpful to know what kind of long gun deployment policies are at play here too. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/5/2024 10:02:20 PM EDT
[#33]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By rb889: Fluff piece to get more money to buy more rifles. That’s all it is. Full auto glock is not much of a step up over any other handgun, save for engagements at point blank, where mag dumping 15-30 rounds into someone’s chest is viable. I wish it had been that easy here. I had to pull the records for every gun turned in over a three year period then pull reports on why anything larger than a pistol was turned in. I then had to pull case studies from various agencies, ballistic reports from various places, etc. I had 6-7 binders full of data and still hit brick walls at times. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/5/2024 10:05:35 PM EDT
[#34]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By crusaderf8u: The article also mentions wanting larger caliber handguns as well, which seems like a 180 flip from the recent trend of forces going to 9mm from larger caliber’s. Seems an odd choice when your justification is Glock switches cause they spray all those bullets, but want handguns with lower capacity. Seemed odd. And personally I prefer 40/10mm/45 myself but 9mm does the job just fine currently but also gives you added capacity. The article just stated “larger caliber of types of weapons”, it said nothing about handguns. Considering almost the entirety of the article is talking about rifles, I think it’s a safe assumption they mean rifles with the “larger caliber” statement. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/5/2024 10:11:00 PM EDT
[Last Edit: Hesperus]
[#35]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By i_tell_you_what: I think mp5sd style guns would be perfect for something like this. MPX if you want better ergos. It would be helpful to know what kind of long gun deployment policies are at play here too. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By i_tell_you_what: Originally Posted By Moon-Watcher: As a former LE range instructor, it gives me chills to think about how the hell we would have taught cops to shoot effectively with submachine pistols. It was tough enough to get them up to speed on AR-15s, and full auto M16s. I think mp5sd style guns would be perfect for something like this. MPX if you want better ergos. It would be helpful to know what kind of long gun deployment policies are at play here too. I went to an Armorers course where I was the only one there who wasn't law enforcement in some context. The chief instructor made a pretty good case for agencies issuing integrally suppressed long guns simply because whatever the price of the guns is. Its going to be less than covering the medical bills of some cop who gets his eardrums blown out. As for the SWAT guys being prima donnas and wanting to feel special. That sounds like one of the most narcissistic things I've ever heard in my life and something that could get people killed. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/5/2024 10:15:21 PM EDT
[#36]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By NCPatrolAR: I'm a plank holder in our patrol rifle program and was actually black balled for a number of years because of my push to get rifles into the hands of patrol guys. While our program is far from great it is coming along and we are about to double the number of carbines at the patrol level. Right now if all of the patrol district rifles are on the street at once we would be fielding just under 80......and thats in an agency with over 2k employees. Damn. I thought the 3 years it took me at my first agency for me to get a rifle program built and pushed thru was rough! Got them adopted less than a year before the Hollywood shootout and had to go for personally owned for those that wanted it, and pooled rifles for those that did not (not ideal but better than nothing). Next agency- rebuilt that program from scratch as well. I was able to gradually expand it at first, then in a couple years got it to where it was near universal for patrol by buying as many rifles and related accessories as I could at the end of each fiscal cycle. Hardest fight going from a small core group to everyone was the training hours. First group trained several days a year (so 16-24 hrs) after initial training. Rolling them out to everyone expanded the initial training hours, but dropped everyone down to about 4 hrs of dedicated rifle training time yearly. Probably worse now. Had similar situations with less lethal programs that I ran at both places as well. I can’t imagine having that few rifles for an agency that size. I make fun of a neighboring agency where they only have enough for about 1 out of 8 or so people. Lots of situations where stuff went down, every rifle on scene would be from our agency, because they just didn’t have them. They will give any idiot a handgun, which requires great skill to be truly proficient with, but some want to make a rifle a specialist tool, when a mediocre shooter with a rifle is a hell of a lot safer than a mediocre shooter with a handgun. Makes no sense… |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/5/2024 10:16:07 PM EDT
[#37]
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/5/2024 10:20:42 PM EDT
[#38]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By NCPatrolAR: You might be surprised. One of the biggest hurdles I had to overcome was the SWAT chain of command that felt the rifles made them less special and the fact several high profile shootings we had were resolved with shotguns. However, once we got rifles out on the street, they had earned their place within two months. Intuitional inertia is a very real thing and can be a beast to overcome. We never really had the SWAT vs patrol issue to badly… #1- drilled into SWAT to not act like we were better than anyone else. #2- not enough SWAT types to handle everything where a rifle was needed anyhow. Most situations were patrol plus 1-4 SWAT types (if any), at least for the first hour or so. #3- SWAT still got the short barreled full autos, while patrol had 16” semi autos. So SWAT still got to feel “special”…plus all the other fancy gear. So no real feelings hurt for the most part. Once people get to carrying rifles, it is like an external vest- “why the hell weren’t we doing this all along?” |
|
|
|
IL, USA
|
Posted: 5/5/2024 10:21:50 PM EDT
[#39]
Originally Posted By mpdphil: Call me stupid, but why would a bad guy with a “glock switch” force departments to re-evaluate what their patrol officers carry? Do LEO’s now all of a sudden need a selectfire option to counter an illegal glock switch? If so, why? I’ve been an urban LEO for over 20 years now and see no reason to re-evaluate what we carry just because of a glock switch. I’ve heard the old “well if the shitheads have ‘em, we should to” argument and when I ask how that would change anything, crickets. As LEO’s, we need to be 100% responsible for every round we fire, suppressing fire is not something civilian LEO’s should have to concern themselves with. I believe if we train officers to actually shoot accurately, you won’t get those news stories that say something to the effect of “officers fire 98 shots at the suspect and strike him twice”. I realize the adrenaline factor (I’ve been directly underfire myself both here as an LEO stateside and in Iraq as an Infantryman), but c’mon! The story Well said. As an old coyote hunter, I can tell you, speed is fine, but one accurate shot is final. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/5/2024 10:23:32 PM EDT
[#40]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By basp2005: All officers get Glock 18s and 3 33 round magazines in addition to standard load out. Select fire M4s. Problem pretty much solved. Maybe belt fed as well? I was part of a task force for a while and did training a class that brought other task force guys from other areas. I wish I could remember where this one guy was from, but he was with some small size Sheriff’s Office attached to a federal task force. He had an issued Glock 18 as well as a full auto 9mm AR that took Glock mags. He had a chest rig that carried I think 4 33 round mags, plus he had a few more pistol mags. I’ve got a select fire SBR that’s agency issued, but I only shoot it semi. I also have an agency issued 870. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/5/2024 10:24:39 PM EDT
[#41]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Moon-Watcher: As a former LE range instructor, it gives me chills to think about how the hell we would have taught cops to shoot effectively with submachine pistols. It was tough enough to get them up to speed on AR-15s, and full auto M16s. Semi auto AR’s are probably easier and safer for everyone than the pistols…. Less rounds fired per hit, less misses, etc. Only reason to use a pistol is because you didn’t know the gunfight was gonna happen…. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/5/2024 10:26:22 PM EDT
[#42]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Aimless: They're asking for more patrol rifles. I'd want an AR if I were a police officer. Can’t argue that . |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/5/2024 10:31:23 PM EDT
[#43]
|
|
|
|
OK, USA
|
Posted: 5/5/2024 10:38:04 PM EDT
[Last Edit: bigfugly]
[#44]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By tac556: Agreed. The most important thing is where to aim it… just gonna put this here...  Six Oklahoma City Police Officers Fire at and Miss Suspect Pointing Gun |
|
|
IA, USA
|
Posted: 5/5/2024 10:38:56 PM EDT
[#45]
Police don’t use “suppressive fire” they use “aimed controlled fire”. You may wonder what the difference is. Police have a responsibility to aim and control where each shot goes.
My personal opinion is that at least one out of every three rifles issued should be a bolt action with a LPVO scope probably in .308 there is also value in having some access to a rifle that shoots a large heavy bullet ( 45-70, 458 SOCOM, 44 Mag etc) They are less likely to deflect when shooting through brush or glass. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/5/2024 10:39:14 PM EDT
[#46]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By NCPatrolAR: I wish it had been that easy here. I had to pull the records for every gun turned in over a three year period then pull reports on why anything larger than a pistol was turned in. I then had to pull case studies from various agencies, ballistic reports from various places, etc. I had 6-7 binders full of data and still hit brick walls at times. Geez. Talk about organizational inertia….why does your command staff hate their troops? 1995: ME- “hey Chief, why don’t we have rifles?” CHIEF- “we’ve always had shotguns!” Talk about a non-answer. Three years of work followed to overcome that attitude and get it happening. And that was a smaller agency, where I could sometimes get stuff done amazingly fast. So I understand leadership being afraid of anything new… Other agencies had a few rifles in the trunk, with strict rules on deployment. I got them up front, with “if you know you will need a gun, grab the rifle” as the SOP. So much better. Those other agencies eventually did the same. Honestly would not work LE without a rifle after carrying one for so long. Just seems foolish to not have one readily available. The agency that only has about 1 per 8 currently? Yeah I once talked to an old timer there when I was new, he had been on an incident in the 80’s where a hostage was taken, and it went south real quick, the patrol folks opened up and killed the suspect, and also killed the hostage (a kid). Very similar situation happened about 25 years later, this one was resolved easily with a patrol rifle, yet they still don’t have as many as they need. The lesson is right there though…. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/5/2024 10:40:05 PM EDT
[#47]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By tac556: Damn. I thought the 3 years it took me at my first agency for me to get a rifle program built and pushed thru was rough! Got them adopted less than a year before the Hollywood shootout and had to go for personally owned for those that wanted it, and pooled rifles for those that did not (not ideal but better than nothing). Next agency- rebuilt that program from scratch as well. I was able to gradually expand it at first, then in a couple years got it to where it was near universal for patrol by buying as many rifles and related accessories as I could at the end of each fiscal cycle. Hardest fight going from a small core group to everyone was the training hours. First group trained several days a year (so 16-24 hrs) after initial training. Rolling them out to everyone expanded the initial training hours, but dropped everyone down to about 4 hrs of dedicated rifle training time yearly. Probably worse now. Had similar situations with less lethal programs that I ran at both places as well. I can’t imagine having that few rifles for an agency that size. I make fun of a neighboring agency where they only have enough for about 1 out of 8 or so people. Lots of situations where stuff went down, every rifle on scene would be from our agency, because they just didn’t have them. They will give any idiot a handgun, which requires great skill to be truly proficient with, but some want to make a rifle a specialist tool, when a mediocre shooter with a rifle is a hell of a lot safer than a mediocre shooter with a handgun. Makes no sense… It took me about 12-13 years and several different range masters to finally get it approved. While I'm generally left out of any discussion about the origins of the program, the gun we carry is the one I picked out and a lot of the training is stuff I wrote about. Our training program for the rifles has exceeded what I expected and we probably have one of the more comprehensive programs in the state. Our initial school was 3 days but has expended to 5 days and includes things such as shooting from elevated positions, shooting in crowded venues and team movement (basically bounding overwatch). |
|
|
|
OH, USA
|
Posted: 5/5/2024 10:41:51 PM EDT
[#48]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Aimless: They're asking for more patrol rifles. I'd want an AR if I were a police officer. Honestly I'd be requesting hand grenades. I mean, with QI... fuck it... why not? No more "come out with your hands up" pussyfooting around. I'd be more like "This shit is blowing up in five seconds" [tosses grenade in] |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/5/2024 10:43:29 PM EDT
[#49]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By d16man: And yet they won't address the issue that glock switches are not that important to the AFT. They are important if YOU have them but not if THEY have them. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/5/2024 10:43:34 PM EDT
[#50]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By NCPatrolAR: Depends on the agency. Here and in a lot of large agencies.......no way in hell. Usually smaller agencies will allow privately owned weapons since it eases the cost off the agency. IIRC LAPD was also authorizing slugs in their shotguns as a supplement to patrol rifles. We have had an approved weapon list for decades. You can take the issued gun or get one on your own that meets the requirements. They even were giving you $500 to buy a gun. That went away and so did most issued handguns and rifles. Shotguns are still assigned per vehicle or person. Only issued rifles I still have are MGs. |
|
|
|
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
Attached File
