Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login

Site Notices
11/20/2019 5:07:11 PM
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 6
Posted: 10/25/2006 9:12:54 PM EST
[Last Edit: 10/25/2006 9:13:26 PM EST by DYNAMIC_ENTRY]
Ok, lets crank this on up.
Should Law Enforcement officer be allowed to carry either Departmental or Privately owned Automatic weapon while on duty.
SWAT or Tactical units excepted.
I mean the everyday average street officer having an Automatic Weapon in their vehicle.

Getting the popcorn and a coke.
Link Posted: 10/25/2006 9:13:50 PM EST
Wow.. This'll go downhill fast.
Link Posted: 10/25/2006 9:13:56 PM EST
Are they wearing BDUs at the time?
Link Posted: 10/25/2006 9:14:20 PM EST
[Last Edit: 10/26/2006 11:05:21 AM EST by DYNAMIC_ENTRY]
Link Posted: 10/25/2006 9:15:33 PM EST
Man, Roo's thread and now this.


I need to make more popcorn.
Link Posted: 10/25/2006 9:15:49 PM EST
3 pages tops
Link Posted: 10/25/2006 9:16:47 PM EST
Only if they are professional enough.
Link Posted: 10/25/2006 9:17:35 PM EST

Originally Posted By DYNAMIC_ENTRY:
Ok, lets crank this on up.
Should Law Enforcement officer be allowed to carry either Departmental or Privately owned Automatic weapon while on duty.
SWAT or Tactical units excepted.
I mean the everyday average street officer having an Automatic Weapon in their vehicle.

Getting the popcorn and a coke.


If they are properly trained, Why not?

But in reality, there is very little need for full auto on duty. A semi-auto AR15 is a very formidable weapon.
Link Posted: 10/25/2006 9:19:01 PM EST
in what situations does the average "street cop" see himself needing a fully automatic weapon? traffic stop? burgler call? domestic abuse?, 7-11 robbery?

I can't think of any situation that an "average street cop" would need a fully automatic weapon for duty.

yes they should be armed with the weapon that they can operate best, but lots of bullets going down range ain't one of them.

remember, cops have to be accountable for every round that comes out of their weapon.

pretty tough when you fire full auto.
Link Posted: 10/25/2006 9:19:51 PM EST
No, and I'm going to have to call it quits for the night, the site is just getting too difficult to use.
Link Posted: 10/25/2006 9:21:47 PM EST
Well in a rapidly developing situation such as the LA Riots, or Katrina - It would probably have been nice....buuuut - can't forget the "lootie cops".

I'll bite - No, not for eveyday patrol.
Link Posted: 10/25/2006 9:22:16 PM EST
Does my dog get a vote in this?
Link Posted: 10/25/2006 9:23:24 PM EST

Originally Posted By stormwalker:
in what situations does the average "street cop" see himself needing a fully automatic weapon? traffic stop? burgler call? domestic abuse?, 7-11 robbery?

I can't think of any situation that an "average street cop" would need a fully automatic weapon for duty.


I dunno.. North LA Shootout?


Originally Posted By DYNAMIC_ENTRY:
Yep, it ought to be a good one.


In your own thread? So is this a trolling topic?

Link Posted: 10/25/2006 9:25:20 PM EST
If its good enough for the Iraqi police, its good enough for us.
Link Posted: 10/25/2006 9:26:53 PM EST
If we can't, they shouldnt be allowed to either.

Other than that, and a training requirement, I really don't care.
Link Posted: 10/25/2006 9:27:59 PM EST
[Last Edit: 10/25/2006 9:45:36 PM EST by geerhed]
I am fine with this, as long as they do not exceed the posted speed limit if they are not responding to a call.

Also, they must be civilan cops, not the other kind.
Link Posted: 10/25/2006 9:38:17 PM EST
Nope.
Link Posted: 10/25/2006 9:43:46 PM EST
No!
Link Posted: 10/25/2006 9:56:10 PM EST
only if they were in the data base pre may 19th 1986 like the rest of us and they live in a NFA friendly state like the rest of us.

Link Posted: 10/25/2006 9:59:09 PM EST

Originally Posted By cyrax777:
only if they were in the data base pre may 19th 1986 like the rest of us and they live in a NFA friendly state like the rest of us.



+1
Link Posted: 10/25/2006 10:03:33 PM EST

Originally Posted By cyrax777:
only if they were in the data base pre may 19th 1986 like the rest of us and they live in a NFA friendly state like the rest of us.




Uh huh.............Would you say that about the National Guard troops sent to your area to restore order after some type of disastor? Only semi-auto ARs for them!!!!!!!??????
Link Posted: 10/25/2006 10:05:05 PM EST
[Last Edit: 10/25/2006 10:05:33 PM EST by 4get_No1]
EDIT - reading comprehension
Link Posted: 10/25/2006 10:07:16 PM EST
[Last Edit: 10/25/2006 10:08:01 PM EST by cyrax777]

Originally Posted By RangemasterP226:

Originally Posted By cyrax777:
only if they were in the data base pre may 19th 1986 like the rest of us and they live in a NFA friendly state like the rest of us.




Uh huh.............Would you say that about the National Guard troops sent to your area to restore order after some type of disastor? Only semi-auto ARs for them!!!!!!!??????


If the LEO had to follow he same laws as the rest of us We woudlnt have alot of the BS laws we have now.

and yes I know the LEO doesnt own the MG their deparment does. Its still a bullshit law.

Link Posted: 10/25/2006 10:10:04 PM EST
Yes.

So long as it's a NFA registere pre-86 gun.


Honestly I don't care that po-po carry any gun they want, AS LONG AS, the same wepaon is availiable to non-leo's.

and no post-86 or leo only MG don't count they are absoulte double standard B.s.

Link Posted: 10/25/2006 10:34:57 PM EST
Sure, we are the police and we need to have the weapons to deal with problems that come up. I do however believe that only Police and Military should be allowed to have auto weapons and Short barrel rifles and shotguns.
Civilian ownership should be illegal.
Link Posted: 10/25/2006 10:46:52 PM EST
The better question is why do you care?
Link Posted: 10/25/2006 11:13:06 PM EST

Originally Posted By daddyarevalo:
Yes.

So long as it's a NFA registere pre-86 gun.


Honestly I don't care that po-po carry any gun they want, AS LONG AS, the same wepaon is availiable to non-leo's.

and no post-86 or leo only MG don't count they are absoulte double standard B.s.



Actually police officers don't own them either. The agency does. Just like how military guys don't own their guns.

SWAT / SRT guys do NOT own those MP5 and M16s. They are signed out.

And NOBODY ever gets to keep one when they retire, it's a BS story.

If a cop want's to actually OWN a NFA weapon, he has to do the same shit as anyone else.
Link Posted: 10/25/2006 11:16:17 PM EST
How can I repress the common man without a machinegun?
Link Posted: 10/25/2006 11:17:25 PM EST
No! Goodnight.
Link Posted: 10/25/2006 11:18:12 PM EST
[Last Edit: 10/25/2006 11:19:07 PM EST by Zardoz]

Originally Posted By Sukebe:
How can I repress the common man without a machinegun?
The man (no pun intended) has a point...


Link Posted: 10/25/2006 11:41:14 PM EST
[Last Edit: 10/26/2006 12:38:04 AM EST by Gunslinger808]
Hell yes!
Not only select fire, but DDs and tactical nukes as well.
How else you gonna keep the hood safe?
Link Posted: 10/25/2006 11:50:04 PM EST
I have responded to this exact post long ago and stick with it...

I support police officers having anti-tank rifles in their patrol cars if needs be...

So long as the public has access to them as well.

Simply stated, If police "need" a such a tool because criminals have become that advanced and threatening then that means the people have a legitimate reason to have access to it is well. Contraposed, if people have no need for such a tool then the conditions are such that law enforcement agencies don't either.

Some have stated that police are paid to face dangerous criminals and are far more likely to find themselves in that situation and far more frequently as well. I do not dispute this, but I don't see it as justification for one group to have access and the other group is denied. All it takes is ONE time in a person's life for the need-based situation to occur (and Katrina is a friendly reminder of the lessons forgotten in the LA riots).

So, I would in good faith defer to the law enforcement agency's judgment whether it is necessary or not... with my proviso, of course (and this is Second Amendment notwithstanding).
Link Posted: 10/25/2006 11:52:01 PM EST
Lots of agencies here in AZ are getting DRMO M-16's from the mil. MCSO, DPS, Phx PD.

Most are refurbing the fire controls to semi only. They are still machineguns, though.

I know of one deputy who carries an M-16A1, a real M14 with selector, his personal 14" Benelli S90M1 and an MP5 and about 50,000 rds of assorted ammo. He is also the resupply guy for a complete SAU unit. Whenever it hits the fan, I want to be around him. I told him as much and to expect company at his house.

I don't feel that they need to have access to full auto guns most of the time. I also feel that if they can get them, so should I and the pre-86 machinegun bs is a failure of a law. It needs to be recended.

Now, my roommate is going to be getting a post sample M16 soon from the dept he works for. I need to coordinate time off with him so we can go blow some ammo off. Too bad he needs to always be with me. Oh, roomie is in a SWAT unit as well.
Link Posted: 10/26/2006 12:18:51 AM EST
I had a dumbass come into the store and tell me that he owns a FN P90. He says he got it on department letterhead. Said he keeps it at home too... I might have probed the matter further, but it would have probably made the manager bad if I told a customer that he's totally full of shit.
Link Posted: 10/26/2006 12:25:32 AM EST
Nope. In fact they should be limited to Harbor Patrol use in juristictions that patrol international ports of entry.
Link Posted: 10/26/2006 12:27:58 AM EST

Originally Posted By josephpo:
Sure, we are the police and we need to have the weapons to deal with problems that come up. I do however believe that only Police and Military should be allowed to have auto weapons and Short barrel rifles and shotguns.
Civilian ownership should be illegal.


"Spoken like a true asshole!" -Chubbs from "Happy Gilmore"

Good thing you're up there and don't have to worry about mere peasants getting the good shit too. I'll stay here in Oregon where we can shoot our suppressed, short-barreled subguns until we're reduced to eating nothing but ramen until the next paycheck.
Link Posted: 10/26/2006 12:34:57 AM EST
Cops should not have access to weapons that civilians don't. Pure and simple, the American Constitution is set up to prevent the Government from outgunning the People.

So, NO!

Plus, the only reason you ever need full auto is for suppressive fire in heavy firefights. Not even in the LA shoot outs would cops need full auto, as suppressing two guys with semi-autos should be a snap for cops that outnumber them.

So, no again.
Link Posted: 10/26/2006 12:36:07 AM EST

Originally Posted By Barrelburner:
3 pages tops



6
Link Posted: 10/26/2006 12:39:03 AM EST
If they recieve the proper training the sure I dont see the problem with it. Now a brand new rookie with no advanced weapon (fullauto if you will) training. then NO.
Link Posted: 10/26/2006 12:40:05 AM EST
TROLL POST



I think we should because WE can and YOU CANT!




END TROLL POST
Link Posted: 10/26/2006 1:39:31 AM EST
[Last Edit: 10/26/2006 1:41:08 AM EST by rtech]

Originally Posted By josephpo:
Sure, we are the police and we need to have the weapons to deal with problems that come up. I do however believe that only Police and Military should be allowed to have auto weapons and Short barrel rifles and shotguns.
Civilian ownership should be illegal.


I'm curious as to his reasoning on this? Does he think that police are the only ones who need concealable handguns as well? That we only need hunting rifles and a shotgun because that's all you can use for hunting ducks? Maybe he buys into Rosie O'Doughnut and that we don't need firearms at all. The police will come protect us.

Maybe this person is here from DU and trolling the board. That's new and unheard of....

This all comes back to civilian owned businesses that developed full auto small arms and, for that matter, most military utilized arms in US history. We have stifled small arms development forever because now the only places to design them is a big gun company or offshore.

Innovation comes from people thinking outside of the box.

BTW, civilians had full auto arms way before the military even adopted them even prior to the hand-cranked Gatling gun in the mid-1800's. Way before 1934 and 1986. So get over yourself.
Link Posted: 10/26/2006 1:44:14 AM EST
I think we all should be able to use FA. There should be no distinction between a qualified non-police officer and a qualified police officer.

So, to answer the original question: Yes.
Link Posted: 10/26/2006 2:24:05 AM EST
Funny that this came up, a local police dept a few years back always worked the local movie theather Fri/Sat nights.

They were in full uniform wearing FA MP5s

Yeah, that didn't last long.
Link Posted: 10/26/2006 5:48:44 AM EST

Originally Posted By josephpo:
Sure, we are the police and we need to have the weapons to deal with problems that come up. I do however believe that only Police and Military should be allowed to have auto weapons and Short barrel rifles and shotguns.
Civilian ownership should be illegal.
Your kidding,right? I personally don't think that cops should have FA because EVERY round has to be accounted for. I don't think FA should be in their TO@E or whatever THEY call it. And if they do issue FA it should only be to ex-Infantry guys who know how to use 'em(as most cops have nver been in the military I say NO to the question.)
Link Posted: 10/26/2006 5:52:05 AM EST
Yes.
Link Posted: 10/26/2006 5:52:11 AM EST

Originally Posted By Goback:
The better question is why do you care?


exatcly the author knew it would only start shit. his second post "yep. ought to be a good one" just goes to say he is only out to troll.
Link Posted: 10/26/2006 5:52:35 AM EST
Only if I get to borrow some stuff
Link Posted: 10/26/2006 5:54:06 AM EST
NO Police officers accuracy in a shooting with handguns is bad enough when the SHTF they dont need full auto. I have no problem with semi-auto EBRs though

I also dont think agencies need belt-fed weapons either(maybe the border Patrol)
Link Posted: 10/26/2006 5:56:01 AM EST
I think its funny how every arfcom member thinks they should be able to buy a full auto M4 with a can on it at S-mart for 19.95 without doing any paperwork but a cop shouldn't be able to own one...
Link Posted: 10/26/2006 5:56:23 AM EST
Link Posted: 10/26/2006 5:57:22 AM EST

Originally Posted By DYNAMIC_ENTRY:

Should Law Enforcement officer be allowed to carry either Departmental or Privately owned Automatic weapon while on duty.
SWAT or Tactical units excepted.
I mean the everyday average street officer having an Automatic Weapon in their vehicle.

Getting the popcorn and a coke.


Most already do not. So whats the point of trying to stir things up?
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 6
Top Top