I have much respect for LEOs and the job they do but as prior military, I find it insulting that you equate (or make greater) LE with the military in terms of risk.  Anyone who has served as soldier in war would agree...their shifts don't end....they don't have the option of quiting after a particularly bad event...when was the last time LAPD encountered an armor division?  Again we saw in example of LAPD's vigilance during the LA riots....I don't seem to recall them in the war zone during the riots.  For that matter, when was the last time anyone has heard of a reasonable weight/fitness program in a PD?  Like most officers say, 90% boredom....10% full-on adrenaline.  As a veteran of our country's armed forces, please don't insult our brotherhood by making the comparison.  A general observation that I've noticed:  security guard=wannabe cop, LEO=wannabe military.

As for protecting the public by risking their lives....my question is this...Do LEOs spend more time responding to a crime after the fact or actually preventing them?  If a crime is being committed to a citizen, is the citizen confident that LE will be there to stop the crime?  I'm pretty sure the general public can answer that one.

now those remarks were made to inflame...the general public's image of the LE is at an all-time low and until LE is forced to accept the fact that they are NOT an authority figure but a citizen whose job it is to enforce the law against lawbreakers.  I think we've all seen the ridiculous car chases that go that result in several innocent lives lost because of a pursuit of a person with a warrant for an unpaid parkign ticket.  I tend to think the priority of public safety and service is getting lost in the ego-pumping movie cop bravado that many officers embrace.

You are right that an AR15 is the absolute wrong weapon for home defense.

END

Except for political reasons its a very good home defense weapon. With softpoints it poses less over penetration risk than handgun rounds. Its easy to shoot well and has lots of rounds on board. Not much of a better weapon.

SNIP
I find it insulting that you equate (or make greater) LE with the military in terms of risk. Anyone who has served as soldier in war would agree...their shifts don't end....
END

I find it insulting that you don't see being a cop in a bad area as being as dangerious as a solder in the military. Yes you can quit as a police officer. You can also quit the military easily now. When your a soldier you had tools and equipment that is not available to cops. We can't call in artilery or air strikes when we start getting our buts kicked. We can't clear rooms with hand grenades. We have to identify threats before we open fire. Its a very different job with different but equal risks. I respect our service men and women and the job they do. All I am asking is you show the same respect for the men and the women who protect you so you can sleep safe at night.

SNIP
As a veteran of our country's armed forces, please don't insult our brotherhood by making the comparison.

The only thing insulting here is your attitude and ignorance on this subject.
Pat

I am by no means anti-gun. I am the farthest thing from it. And you guys are still confusing the issue. My point is that IF a restriction HAS to be in place that is BEYOND the control of the average law abiding citizen, that restriction should not force law enforcement to have to be subject to those same restrictions on features of weapons.

As it has already been clearly pointed out by more than one person in this thread...the cop is going to use his "evil features" weapon against the CRIMINAL WHO ALSO HAS THE SAME OR BETTER WEAPON, not Joe the target shooting enthusiast.

The point here is that if LEGISLATORS see fit to take what we all believe to be a constitutional right away...then for god's sake at least let the 200,000 cops who protect the 200 million people in this country maintain some kind of edge over the criminals who have no regard for the life of the cop that is about to come through the door after them.

Also, do not overlook that the LEO weapons we buy are not really that far off of what you guys can own. We still cant have a 14.5 inch barrel, still cant own anything more than a semi-auto, and dont get to just keep the rifle if we leave the department, even if we baught it with our own money. If I quit my department tomorrow, I can't be out at my local range the next day with my LEO rifle in its current configuration. That was a price I was willing to pay in order to have a weapon with features that might just be enough to keep me alive when it really matters.

And GLOCKFAN...so far...I have had to get that rifle out of its case and aim it in at people more times in one year than I ever did in 10 years as a sniper in the Marine Corps...and I have a Purple Heart if that tells you anything. I have BEEN on the military side AND the LE side. I have every right to make the statements I made comparing military to LE.Remember man, soldiers dont deal with the criminals out on the streets. They dont have to leave home every single day not knowing if they will come home. They dont have to be the ones to deal with the criminals who have better weapons than they do. THAT is my point in comparison.

So yea, even though it is not fair to the rest of the law abiding citizenry...we do NEED those features. If I were just a civilian again, I would LIKE TO HAVE those features, but I could still get by with a post-ban with some pre-ban magazines and a permanently attached flash suppressor.

I have seen pics of a LOT of post-ban weapons on this site and BELIEVE me, a hell of a lot of them are FAR more tricked out than my basic LEO Colt LE Carbine with iron sights and a standard sling.

And what's up with you saying that if cops dont like the odds...they should just quit? Do you realize how much of a moronic statement that was? I won't even address that statement with further rhetoric.

One thing I don't think non police and military should be able to own is armor piercing handgun ammo. But this is very seldom an issue.
Pat

Several things to say, first let me say that I have a friend who's a Deputy Sheriff so I'm far from "anti'LEO", second, anything that armor percing handgun ammo can do FMJ rifle ammo can do better so I don't see what the big deal is over it.  Also, most of the points that the LEO's have made for their weapons/equiptment hold even more weight for a job working for an Armored Car Co.  How much money does the average LEO have one them at any one time during the day?   When I worked Wells&Fargo I oftened carried over $150,000 into banks with nothing more then a S&W M-67, .38spl standing between me and anyone with criminal intent on taking the money.  I could have used body armor and an MP-5 to protect that money but that's not what I was issued.  Because of this I had to use my head, think my route thru and be very careful.  Brains not force is the best weapon that anyone, LEO or civillian can have in a situtation.  I'm not trying to stop LEO's from having/using equiptment that can save their lives but it's ashamed that laws have been passed keeping citizens from the same "luxury" of owning that equiptment.  We've got to ban together and stop the division between "US" and "THEM" if we all are going to win in the Gun Control issue.  

Frank,
You cant pull a rifle out of your back pocket like you can a pistol. A 9mm sub-compact pistol with teflon ammo should not be compared to a rifle with FMJ ammo. When a cop is talking to you on a traffic stop, he is going to see you going for a rifle. He may  not see that pistol fast enough to get out of the way before that teflon round penetrates his vest.
You need to do some more reading.

How many times did you have to draw your weapon while you worked for Wells Fargo? Did you ever have to go into a dark, abandoned bank to collect cash bags from crack heads? Please....dont compare apples to oranges.

Patriot,
You are an idiot. Are you actually trying to make some vague comparison about D-day to this issue? Do you actually think that conducting an amphibious operation has any sort of miniscule comparison to carrying out a high risk search warrant or anwering an armed domestic? I have done all of the above and trust me, they dont compare.
And your attempt at sarchasm towards Marines was noted but it just makes you look more ignorant. I will address your ignorance once then Im done with you. Just so you can add this to the annals of your brain. The Marine Corps also used the M-1 Garand and you might want to remember that more Marines stormed more beaches and lost more men doing it in the island hopping campaign in the Pacific than the Army did in the entire European campaign. And D-day was not faught by just rangers. Do some more reading besides just watching Private Ryan.

So, it is OK for LEO to have AP ammo but not for all? AP ammo in the hands of LEO would be asinine considering how many rounds ACTUALLY get put in the victims compared to walls, doors, etc. I would think that overpenetration would be a BIG issue.

And, one thing, Marine Sniper, AP ammo isnt teflon coated. It has a steel, or other metal component in it to not allow full expansion. Guess youv'e been watching to many movies.

So, it is OK for LEO to have AP ammo but not for all? AP ammo in the hands of LEO would be asinine considering how many rounds ACTUALLY get put in the victims compared to walls, doors, etc. I would think that overpenetration would be a BIG issue.
END

Yes it would be ok for LEO's to have it for special circumstances. It would not be a general issue load for the reasons you cited involving over penetration. And there is no valid reason for a non leo to own handgun rounds designed to defeat bullet resistant vests. And your right its not a big issue. I was just pointing out some gun legislation I agree with. Its already a law so its not much of a discussion. Kind of like I like the laws forbidding felons from owning guns. I would also like to see people more accountable for how they store their firearms. Over 90% of weapons used in crimes are stolen from homes where the guns were legally possessed. The majority of those guns that were stolen were not secured in any manner other than keeping them inside a home. A gun should either be in you hand, on your person, with in reach or locked up. A gun locked away when you need it is no help true. But a gun left unlocked when you leave the house is also no help. I know of one person who's wife arrive home to have her husbands 357 mag revolver being pointed at her. The burglar found it easily and was surprised. My point is that gun should have been on his or her person so they could have stopped the crime or locked up and secured if they chose not to carry.
Pat

I must admit I have been faviorably impressed by most of the Marines I have met. All have been brave individuals, most have been intelligent, tough and men of honor. I have great respect fall all Marines except one that has rubbed me the wrong way. I have also been impressed with their shooting. I have had to correct many former Airforce and Army shooters on the range to help them shoot better. Marines normally shoot very well with their longguns.
Pat

what ever!

here's 25 cents... go buy yourself a clue!

what ever!

here's 25 cents... go buy yourself a clue!

END

Ok when is the last time you had to respond to a gun call at 0200 hours. When is the last time you had to hold someone at gun point with your AR15. When is the last time your life was threatened. When was the last time you risked your life with your AR15. Those of us who are sworn to serve and protect do it on a daily basis. I respect your right to own your AR15 for protection. But the chances you you needing it are far less than my chances of needing it. Got a clue thanks sounds like you need one.
Pat

LOL, yah, thank god for laws stoping felons from owning guns, we know that they really work. It's not like a "criminal" would break a law stoping him from owning a firearm.  Let's get real, laws forbiding felons form owning guns are just about as worthless as tits on a boar hog.   Criminals are criminals because they don't follow the law.  I think everyone should be able to own firearms, if they mis-use them then the law biding around them would soon make it a imposible for them to own or use firearms improperly ever again.  READ DOA.

Actually laws prohibiting felons from owning guns are great. They make it easier to arrest them. If the crap bag is stupid enough to carry when you catch him or even contact him he is going down again. Besides if they are a felon they have done something that is deserving of losing their constitutional rights.
PAT

I MAY have to use mine too, but one never knows...

Just like having insurance.  You don't Want to use it, but better to have it than not.  WTF makes you more important than anyone else.. Just because you may or may not be more than likely to "NEED" it ????

I don't have firearms for protection because I WANT to use them, I have them so I CAN use them when needed.  We all know that no leo is everywhere they're needed, and more than likely never are.  IS your life more valuable than mine?  I have family I'd like to go home to or protect too.

SO, because I DON'T need one "right now" it's ok for me to use something less?

It all boils down to this:

"...The right of the PEOPLE to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed"

SAYS NOTHING about "need" or "hunting" or "sport" so don't try and feed me this "I need it more than you do" crap.  

If you're a leo, you're no better/important or special than ME or anyone else who is or is  not a leo.  YOU chose your profession, I have no problem with supporting leo's and wish you no harm in performing your job, just as I would hope you'd do for me. If you're not properly equipt for your job I feel for you, but taking away peoples rights just so you can feel more safe does nothing of the sort for either of us.

We're all  "THE PEOPLE", lets try and make it that way again.  Lets go after the real enemy and punish the criminals, not [u]make[/u] criminals out of everyday people.

Well here we are again, since LEO was in the title the bashing starts.

I'll ask you all to think, esp. those that complain "them vs us", who is starting that in this thread?

Next a few people have started with the "cops are kids that got picked on in high school, are overweight..........." Gee that's really similar to what the "anti's" say about gun owners. How intelligent does it sound coming from them? It sounds just as inteligent here.

As far as "special" laws, I'm a LEO, I don't agree with the AW ban, the 86 MG ban etc. etc. I do agree with NFA rules, but I also think that every state should allow NFA weapons that are properly registered with the feds, w/o further restrictions.

Felons shouldn't have guns. As some have pointed out that won't keep them from getting them, but it will send them back to prison or on parole/probation.

Perhaps instead of playing the them vs us card, we should say that all citizens should live under same gun laws.

Oh and the "the military is SO dangerous", I was in the military for 3 years. I never felt my life was in danger. I realized being in law enforcement or corrections is dangerous very quickly. Even in times of war most of the soldiers are not "at the front". Yes it is very dangerous for those that are actually there, but they are relatively few in number.

It's more dangerous to drive to work than being in the USN or USAF during a war, unless you are in one of those "special" occupations.

Just a quick question. If being an LEO is as/more dangerous then being in the milltary then answer me this.  How many LEO's have died in the last 3 months? Now, how many U.S. Service men have died in the last 3 months? I think you see my point.  

and count yourself lucky you weren't in danger.  tell the airmen at Kopar towers that got bombed in Saudi how safe they are.  Tell that to the soldiers who ended up being victims in terror attacks who weren't "at the front".  or how about the navy men who were on ths ship that was bombed my members of Bin Laden's network.  Why not mention the thousand of officers who have never gotten in an armed confrontation?  I would say that on a person to person count, that military experiences much more levels of danger than your average LEO.

I have read most of these posts and I find myself compelled to chime in with my two cents. First off, I cant believe anyone is trying to compare military service with being a uniform cop. I respect most cops, they do have a tough job, but some are true assholes. Some think they are above the law. Some think they are entitled to special benefits. All that protect and serve crap is a bunch of BS. I don't sleep at night because I believe the police are out there protecting me. I sleep at night because I have a Glock 30 on my night stand and an AR in the closet. The cops are just there to write out a report when the dust has setteled.
Now, whay can I say about the miliaty? Oh yeah, Thanks!

Just like having insurance. You don't Want to use it, but better to have it than not. WTF makes you more important than anyone else.. Just because you may or may not be more than likely to "NEED" it ????
END

Never said I was more important. I just said your gun is more of a toy. One I am glad your allowed to own. Mine is more of a tool. I enjoy it as well but my life also depends on it at times. I don't like the laws with the AWB. But I am also glad cops don't have to live with this stupid law as well. Our lives are not more important. In fact if you lived in my area I would gladly risk my life for you like I do others.

SNIP
and count yourself lucky you weren't in danger. tell the airmen at Kopar towers that got bombed in Saudi how safe they are. Tell that to the soldiers who ended up being victims in terror attacks who weren't "at the front". or how about the navy men who were on ths ship that was bombed my members of Bin Laden's network
END

What about all the officers that died on Sept 11. About 60 soldiers have been killed since the war in Iraq ended. I am sure the number of officers that have been killed since then is simular.  We lose a couple hundered a year. And unlike service in the military there is no peace time for cops. Yes a lot of cops are in relativly low risk areas. But the same can be said of 99% of the military.

SNIP"...The right of the PEOPLE to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed"

SAYS NOTHING about "need" or "hunting" or "sport" so don't try and feed me this "I need it more than you do" crap.
END

I agree your preaching to the choir. But if they do make stupid laws I would rather they not disarm those at the greatest risk who are responsible for the protection of others not just themselves.

The point is we both agree that the AWB sucks and all should be allowed to own preaty much whatever they want in small arms.

The point of contention comes in because we do have some stupid laws and some immature people are jelious that cops don't have to follow the same rules they do. You know what when I retire I can't keep my LEO M4. I am only allowed to have it so I can save your arse. So lighten up. I own a preban for myself when I retire.

Pat

Wow, we DESERVE LESS. Thanks for clarifying your position.

You just drove home the point that all too many LEO's seem to agree with. They aren't part of "us". They have special rights. They are above us.

You claim you are anti any gun laws, but make that statement which pretty much shows your true colors.

The second doesn't apply only based on NEED. The second doesn't say anything about DESERVING anything... It is a RIGHT.

Screw you, and anyone else who thinks "we" (law abiding citizens) don't DESERVE all of our rights.

For that matter, screw anyone else who thinks "them" (law enforcement officers) shouldn't have the same rights and priveladges "we" (law abiding citizens) do. That goes both ways... we shouldn't be trying to restrict officers, and they shouldn't be trying to restrict us.



Oh, you're just laughable. The estimates are around 290 million people in America today. You think only 15 living people (non LEO's of course) have ever needed to defend themselves with a gun?

Hell, over 15 dead people (that would still be alive today) have had need to defend themselves from LEO's.

You think LEO's would love to have 1:20mil odds? Well I bet we all would.

The odds are currently that less than half of police officers ever even fire their weapon in the line of duty. Some of you gung-ho twits make it sound like you routinely hold someone at gunpoint daily, and storm at least 2 houses a week... Get real.


All the above was directed at one particular person's attitude (but does encompass all the others with the same attitude... you know who you are).

As far as my opinion: The only plus I see to restricting LEO's as much as we've been restricted is that we'd have an easier time fighting these BS laws. And most likely have less BS laws introduced/passed in the future, too. (IMHO, that fact alone outweighs all the bad... because eventually it'd repeal restrictions/laws on both LEO's and "citizens")

No, I don't think LEO's should be restricted any more than they currently are.

BUT...

Given the chioce between a double standard (Non LEO's are restricted while LEO's are not), or having us both restricted equally... I'd pick the second choice. Regardless of whether it's both LEO and NON's are restricted or both are not... they should be on the same level, only for my reason listed above.


I've got a few friends in law enforcement, and most of them aren't like the type I'm ripping on. Too bad it's oftentimes the few jerks who have to give the whole group a bad rep.

For example, one of my LEO friends was pissed off that the "citizens" of FL and 9 other states (if I remember right) were allowed to use the same concealed weapoin permit thruought the entire group of states...

...But yet he, "A police officer" (yes, he made the distinction) wasn't allowed to use his CCW out of state.

Nevermind that not one single non-LEO in our state is allowed to have a CCW permit, period.

I told him he should be happy he's even allowed to carry concealed in our state... that didn't seem to cheer him up any.

I would think that most here own guns as tools....to protect the lives of themselves and their families.  as for the soldiers...we're speaking about the amount of deaths in that region alone....not mentioning the hotspots in other parts of the world.  Again, the comparison between military and LE is laughable at best.  As for protecting our ass....well let's just say 90% of police involvement lies around responding to write a report after the fact rather than preventing the crime in the first place.  the weapons of the LE do the victims of crime no good when the LEOs aren't even present to prevent the crime.

Your going to save my "arse"?  Are you going to be there every second of every day.  Oh yeah, i'll just call you and wait 20 minutes while i get shot and my wife gets raped.  

Why don't you just STFU.

And only VIOLENT felons should be banned from owning firearms.    


That right there is where the whole problem starts.  Cops should have to follow the same rules that everyone else does.  I guess i'm immature because i know that cops are still civilians and should have to follow the same laws.

Given the chioce between a double standard (Non LEO's are restricted while LEO's are not), or having us both restricted equally... I'd pick the second choice. Regardless of whether it's both LEO and NON's are restricted or both are not... they should be on the same level, only for my reason listed above.

END

Thats becasue its not your life on the line.

SNIP
Again, the comparison between military and LE is laughable at best. As for protecting our ass....well let's just say 90% of police involvement lies around responding to write a report after the fact rather than preventing the crime in the first place
END

You obviously are ignorant on the types of risks leo's take. Its laughable to think a soldier in time of peace is more at risk than a leo.

Yes most of our job is reactionary. However when people need help now they call me not to take a report but to stop bad things from happening. LAPD did not show up at the bank robbery a few years ago to take a report. They contained the bad guys saved lots of innocent lives and then SWAT killed the bad guys. Were creating a us vs them thread. I would rather we all agree that the AWB needs to be repealed for everyone.
Pat

Personally, I think LEO attitudes are vastly different nationwide.  I would venture to guess it is even more different between rural and urban officers. In my state, there are areas where you can wind up waiting for an officer for several hours, not minutes.  There have been rulings from courts stating that law enforcement is here for the general safety of society, not individual safety of each human being.  So, if you are one of those that expect the government will protect you, then you better hope you live next to a police station.  As gun owners, if we can be easily divided by whether or not we carry a badge, then we will probably be stripped of our second amendment rights.  

You're funny.

Please do 2 things for me. Learn how to use the quote function, and learn how to read properly.

Here, I'll re-point it out for you:



The odds of your life depending on your "preban/LEO AR15" is about as dismal as the odds of my life depending on it.

My reason isn't because my life does or doesn't depend on it (which it could very well). The reason is WHAT I JUST STATED TWICE. Because it'd help us repeal some of these dumb laws, and prevent future laws from taking effect.

If you're gonna pull the "we need it more" argument, then you probably don't have a problem with giving half your salary to the person who is a few hundred thousand dollars in debt to cancer bills.

Why don't we just let non-felons who live in the ghetto have whatever gun they want, because they "need it more" than those of us who live in the suburbs.

Sadly, too many other examples are already being enacted today... people with your attitude feel it's ok to put down others rights in order to help themselves.

Don't try and act like that's not what you're saying... because you'd never have argued that point if you didn't mean it that way.

how about the LA riots?  From what I recall, there wasn't too much police involvement there....the law-abiding citizens that lived in that area pretty much had to defend themselves.  As for those in need calling LEOs....how many times did bad things happen before you got there.  If I recall the bank robbery...the crime was already commmitted...the conflict occurred on their escape.  You're not fooling anyone into thinking that LEOs are actually preventing the majority of crimes...most people have seen their local LEOs at work (mostly parked at speed traps and not patrolling their neighborhoods....which should tell most people something about police priorites).  Again, most LEOs will confess that 90% of the time it's boredome and 10% full on adrenaline (which often makes the public wonder why crime continues to rise even with the ever-increasing funding of their police department).

DOA,

YOU are the one who does not know what he is talking about. Looks like YOU need to do the research and not watch movies.

We are talking about HANDGUN ammo. Handgun ammo does not have a steel penetrator. I am talking about the teflon handgun ammo that penetrates body armor. If you have never seen any, or read about it...then your ignorance speaks volumes.

Frank,


To answer your question..first remember that there is currently a war going on. So your question would be better placed over say... the last 10 years or so forth.
According to the Officer Down memorial page [url]http://www.odmp.org[/url](which ONLY lists those officers who are reported TO the page) the number is over 16,000. The national official number is in the neighborhood of about 500 per year. Take note that FAR more are SERIOUSLY injured on a regular basis...they just dont die and become a statistic. LE agencies in my county alone last year had 127 officers injured in the line of duty and 7 killed.

Just an FYI since this is the topic of discussion. [url=http://www.odmp.org/officer.php?oid=17003]THIS OFFICER [/url] was killed by two shots from a Colt AR-15A2. The officer started taking fire as soon as he exited his vehicle but according to the other officer present at the scene, they could not determine the exact location of the shooter because of the flash suppressor on the end of his barrel, and the close proximity of other buildings which made it difficult to tell which direction the shots were coming from.

So yea, I would safely assume that it can be said that ON AVERAGE, Law Enforcement is more hazardous than Military. And once again, I have seen action in both fields so I dont hold myself as a non-credible witness.

GLOCKFAN,
I owe you an appology. I just now figured out how you use that SNIP and END thing instead of quotes. I had thought that you were the one making some of those comments I responded to and I addressed some animosities toward you. I now realize that you were simply quoting others. I am sorry.

Interesting.  The Bureau of Justice lists the numbers in 2000 at 50....nationwide.  Not quite in the same ballpark as military.

http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/homicide/leok.htm#leok

That's wrong. Over 250 officers were killed in the year 2000. Hell, odmp.org alone has 161 listed. If you dont believe it you can go to www.odmp.org and read each officer's name and how he died.

Compare that to [url=http://www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/2003/iraq/forces/casualties/]THIS NUMBER[/url] of military casualties during the past 8 months during a time of conflict.

I take nothing away from the military. I am a combat veteran with two gold stars on my combat action ribbon AND I have a Purple Heart. But the only risk of non-accidental death to military personnel is either during a conflict or in a high risk area.

LEOs face that risk 365 days a year, regardless of the global political situation. Someone on this thread made reference to the military victims of terrorist attacks. Anyone ever heard of the public servants that died a while back...on...what day was that? Septemer...12th was it? Or was it the 10th?

My point here is not to be condesending. But to point out that BOTH military AND Law Enforcement face an EXPONENTIALLY HIGHER RISK THAN ANY AVERAGE CITIZEN. And due to that fact...even if some idiotic asswad legislator decides to take our constitutional rights away and restrict what we can and can't own, there is NOTHING wrong with allowing the people who lay thier lives on the line, in WHATEVER capacity in the defense of this nation...be it on foreign or domestic soil to have an exception to those laws for thier own safety's sake while performing their duties.

Most cops are anti-gun control unless you are talking about the political types who would do anything to advance their agenda.  The very fact that cops "may need" the restricted type weapons/magizines to face a higher number or better armed criminals justifies them having them.  Don't blame your average cop for National or State policies that they are probably against anyway.
Besides most of you would buy the stuff if you were exempt wouldn't you?

How many of these were as a result of self-inflicted wounds (ND)?  
Are these only 'line of duty' fatalities, or does it include things like traffic accidents while driving to/from work?

Just curious ...

And the funny thing is, only 50 of those were listed as gunfire.

I bet according to you, only they DESERVE to be allowed to wear bulletproof vests, right?

Or since auto accidents were next in line, perhaps they are the only ones who DESERVE to be able to drive... I know it doesn't make sense, but neither do you.

According to that site... 16.8k and counting since 1791... yes that's SEVENTEEN NINETY ONE. Let's just say they've got half, 30k or so.

Average that out with how many US military deaths since WWI.

Lessee... WWI, about 53K KIA
WWII, about 400k
Korea, about 33k
Vietnam about 43k KIA

Now, Let's look at your statistics... say 1/3 of your websites LEO deaths were from gun wounds (since you're arguing you NEED and DESERVE better weapons), that leaves you MISERABLY short of holding a candle to what the men who fought for our country have done for us. Let's be generous and say a meager 15k since the late 1700's. compared to over half a million in the 20th century alone.

You've got a long way to go before you convince those of us who "don't deserve our rights" to believe in you. Stop spouting nonsense.

Teflon will not make a bullet go through a vest or anything else. It is put on some AP handgun bullets the help the barrel last longer. AP bullets are typically made of steel or a similarly hard bullet.

That's not a national registry Stinkybastage. It is a private web site and as I ALREADY stated, only lists the numbers that individuals report to it.

If you honestly think that only 16,000 officers have been killed in over 200 years, you need to get your head examined.

Once again, please remember that whichever database you chose to look at, that it only reflects the ones who DIED. Do not think that just because a cop gets shot, that he dies and ends up on some web site as a statistic. A LOT more cops survive gunshots than die from them.

Why are so many people so quick to snap a fast snyde remark before they think about what they are going to say first? Did you not read the part of that post where I said this:

MarineSniper8541,
On page 2 of this thread you said that you haven't lost anyone in the line of duty. On page 4 that number has risen to 7. Which is it?

MY department has not lost any. Agencies IN my county have. Read more carefully :) Strangely enough, my agency happens to be the largest in the county.

Plain and simple - it is not fair that police (or any other group) be exempt from any laws in this country.  What part of "equal protection under the law" don't you understand?  (For those of you who didn't pass your high school government class, go back and read the U.S. Constitution.)

For "MarineSniper8541", the ONLY thing teflon coated bullets (pistol OR rifle) do better than non-coated is penetrate automobile glass.  The only people who believe otherwise are ignorant politicians and anti-gun movie makers.  

If you read the ammo section of this website, you will find that M193 ball ammo breaks up quicker after hitting sheetrock and stops faster than 9mm, 40S&W, and most shotgun rounds, which makes M193 safer to discharge inside a building than those rounds.

And to all who declare that then "need" something more than I do, based on the hazards of a job YOU voluntarily signed up for, are you saying that the one time I need that "high capacity" magazine or "assault weapon" to save my life, or the life of my wife or my child, I should be prohibited from posessing the ability to defend those precious lives?!  So that a cop who will, statistically speaking, show up minutes after the fact feel safer?

The military has armor, airstrikes, explosives, you name it.  
The police have body armor, tasers, OC spray, batons, cars that can legally go 150+ mph, partners, radios, backup, pistols, shotguns, assault rifles, SWAT teams with snipers and tear gas.
Me, all I've got is myself and the few guns I have had to buy 100% with my own personal funds, no subsidies, no discounts, no sweetheart deals.

If you put your life on the line, I applaud you.  If you decide that your life is worth more than mine and my loved ones, I despise you (stronger words deleted).

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Plain and simple - it is not fair that police (or any other group) be exempt from any laws in this country. What part of "equal protection under the law" don't you understand? (For those of you who didn't pass your high school government class, go back and read the U.S. Constitution.)

END

You would have to go beyond a high school government class and get into some college level political science course to realize that your over simplifing the equal protection under the law clause of the constitution. But if thats.

Now to this whole cop vs military and who dies more for their country thing. Both are honorable professions that deserve our respect. Both are dangerious. Most cops support your right to keep and bear arms. I am going to leave it at that. The rest is just stupid arguing and ego measuring.
Pat

Let me guess: If I live adjacent to an inner city crack neighborhood I suppose I should have a better selection of weaponry than someone in a gated community in the suburbs, because there’s an exponentially higher chance of violence for one in my case. No, better yet: As a white man I should have a better selection of weapons than an Asian, because Asians have a lower incidence (per capita) of violence dealt upon then, whereas a black man should have access to better weaponry than myself since black males have a higher incidence (per capita) of violence dealt upon them!

How about this: If some criminal happens to dump an entire hi-cap magazine on me and my friend (which actually  happened) and all I have 7 rounds to return fire (while being shot at) and to use as exit rounds/escape fire, Do I have your [i]permission[/i] to actually [i]need[/i] a magazine with more than 10 rounds???

[b]Marine Sniper:[/b]
You are an elitist snob, in need of a good dressing down. LEO is a civilian post answerable to civilians. You are not special.

How dare you insinuate that “civilians” (which is what you are) deserve less! What the hell makes a police officer's need to protect himself so much more precious than non-civil servant? For your information, those criminals have it in their own interests to tangle with us "Serfs" rather than the likes of you. [b]We[/b] see the barrel of a gun with armed robberies and attempted rapes. Criminals don't rob on-duty cops. I've been there personally, and I paid my god-damned dues with bullets. Just because I don't ask for a violent scenario doesn't mean I'm not going to get one. Moreover, you need to get over yourself. You are not our all-encompassing shield against crime. If you were, you'd need at least ten times your number. Cops look into crimes that have been committed. Cops try to take down those scumbags who already have committed crimes, before they commit more. Sometimes (and very rarely, due to the amount of crimes) they are in the right place at the right time, but there are too many criminals for police to be useful as a crime stopper. [u]The #1 line of defense against criminals is not a cop, it's the "victim".[/u]

If you are a 5'2 female of 103 pounds a cell phone call to 911 isn't going to save your ass when some burly sonofabitch with a hard on is closing in on you on your way to your car. A pistol and the proper training MIGHT.

If you are strolling to the parking garage and a criminal crosses the street to meet you head-on with a weapon and demands your briefcase, you think a black & white [blue]Crown[/blue] [red]Victoria[/red] is going to come power sliding across the pavement to save the day? Once in a blue moon. They might catch him after his fourth attempt but what good does that do you as victim #2? You can't rely on cops to save you at that one moment. All you have is what God gave you and whatever else you put into preparation for such an event. God gave me quick wits & keen observation, which I supplemented with 230 grain Hydrashoks (something many of you elitist snobs criticize in the hands of the public). Of course only the “gentry in blue” deserve special carry privileges too huh? The public needs to be either at work, out in broad daylight in a very public place, or in the privacy of there own home (where then and only then are they permitted to defend themselves), huh? What Shit! Even if you do concede hollowpoints, CCW, and/or car carry, to the lowly taxpayers, you’re still no better than the elitist snobs that do not. [b]You’re merely a “less-loathsome” hypocrite.[/b]

Frankly, I support the police. I respect the guys that get into a black & white every day to meet what ever uncertainty lies in wait for them. I think it is rough that the patrolman needs to pony up the $ to come up with tools deemed necessary to do his job (just as I do with our military men). [u]But the bottom line is that if our streets are so bad that cops need a vest, a Glock 23 with special LEO ammo housed in LEO magazines, an AR-15, and backup; including K-9 units, and helicopters, you’d think we’d get a little fucking slack from the sources that know how bad the streets are!!![/u]

The way I see it one of two things needs to happen: #1 You (all) need to join us in the fight for ALL of our RIGHTS to arm and protect ourselves from these scumbags. Or #2, If you think the situation is one where your blue shield is the only method that should be employed fighting crime, then you need to do your fucking job a [i]whole lot better[/i]! [i](Lucky for all you LEOs I cut you alot more slack than that & I realize what awesome adversity you are up against)[/i]. [b]Help us  so we can help you. Wake up, Stand up, & fucking Grow up. There's two enemies we have in common: violent offenders and bullshit legislation. The sooner you realize we're all on the same side the sooner we can join together and do what's right.[/b]

I would like to thank all LEOs on this board that do what they can for us vs the scum on the streets, and I would like to [u]especially[/u] thank those LEOs with the guts to do what they can for us against our other enemies: the unconstitutional ones on paper. The former enemy will never be vanquished, but together we might take the latter.

Most of the LEO's that have chimed in here are "Pro-2nd. Amend." and feel that the "common citizens" deserve to be armed the same as they are. BUT the whole reason stupid laws like the AWB of '94 get passed in the first place is because the government knows that LEO's will enforce them.  I wonder how many gun control laws would be on the books if LEO's refused to inforce those laws?  If you're an LEO and truly pro-2nd Amend. then wouldn't you be, more or less, oblegated to not inforce any law that would be an infringment on our firearm rights?  I didn't want to turn this into an "US" and "THEM" thread, that was not my intent. But it does seem that the government, by giving LEO's special exemption from the law, has made it an us and them issue.   I personally think WE all should pull together, both LEO and common citizen, to fight any law that would infringe out firearm rights.  
 As for my AR being a "toy", trust me it is not. I feel it is the duty of every abled bodied citizen to keep a rifle that is suitable for militia use.  In the times that we live in one never can tell when it may be necessary to organize the militia to aide in the protection of his or her city/town.   I have full web gear and my AR and if civil unrest broke out in my little town I'd gladly volunteer my services to the local Sheriff's Dept.    

I like the additions Pulpsmack, maybe we should colaborate on are posts,LOL.  Thanks for helping me get my point out.

Anytime...

Yeah how many USN ships were damaged or sunk due to enemy action during the operation for liberate Iraq? How many planes were shot down over Iraq?

The little bump, is that most of the time the military isn't at war. Even when they are at war only a certain percentage of the troops are involved.

Nextly I said DANGER not gunfights. That means assualts, accidents, traffic crashes, environmental hazards.

Most of what the military does comes under the heading of "training". I think more US planes went down over the US since the operation to liberate Iraq, than in Iraq.

My night last night

Hit and Run crash investigation.
Speeder.
Weaving driver.
Juvenile party.
Man threatening suicide with a gun, 5'10" 240, who wants to fight instead of go to the hospital.
Drunk driver that I had to get going 90-100 to catch up to.

The speeder was a convicted felon, including a past battery to LEO.

How's that compare to a day in the military?

There's an awful lot of people that have very similar days as what I just described.

But then again, just being near traffic is like being in the lottery...................

[blue]I've bit my tongue long enough on this thread.  Oly I'll respect you if you're LEO, BUT, your military observation is highly inaccurate.  You obviously haven't been in a trench feeling the heat of MG tracers flying a foot over your head.  You obviously haven't taken cover behind a clay wall in another country while the wall was being disintegrated by RPG and AK rounds.  The majority of our military is infantry.  If you were a clerk or in supply, then perhaps you shouldn't have made your comments.  I think others here will agree.
I was Army for 5 years.  My life was more at risk then than the 13 years I've been an LEO.
For others that think LE does not need some military firepower on-duty hasn't served a high-risk search warrant on a crack house or street level arms dealer.  I was SWAT for 3 years before an injury put an end to it, and I tell you what, the weenie MP5's were just not enough.[/blue]

[blue]
Horse you are correct that LEO's may not get there before the incident is over, and I hope your Glock can protect you, BUT, LEO's are going to go get the bastard when he's holed up in a house, gas station, or shopping mall.  You obviously have had some bad experiences with LE.[/blue]

Teflon Coated Bullets

A Teflon coating can be applied to most bullets. The coating decreases bullet deformation and stabilizes ballistic characteristics. It also increases the armor penetrating ability of the round. In game terms any bullet coated with Teflon will reduce the targets armor by 1. The process of making Teflon bullets is not one that can be accomplished in the basement of your house. There are numerous ammunition manufacturers that currently produce Teflon coated rounds.

Marine Sniper, I do stand corrected on this point, BUT, still believe that AP ammo in the hands of LEO is absurd, especially when you consider overpenetration in an urban environment.

[green]
Glockfan-
We have been round and round before and I have no intention of doing it again.
What's with all of the "SNIPS's" and "END's"?
It would help the other members if you could review the board code for quotes.
Oh, and [u]Firearms[/u] only has 2 "r"s (Your signature quote).  
Thanks-[/green]

Oh please give us some hard facts then. The MOST favorable statistic I can find to help you out says the highest death toll for officers (in the line of duty) was in 1974, with 230 deaths. According to the AP, 158 were killed in '97. The DOJ and other websites aren't even as favorable.

I suppose you think there are no wounded in the military? Over half a million KIA in the 4 conflicts I mentioned, and luckily for the survivors... none of them were wounded. [rolleyes]

I honestly don't care how much danger you do or don't think any profession/civilian is in. You're a [u]scumbag[/u] to say only certain ones DESERVE their rights.

Blowing your huge pile of steaming crap "facts" to pieces is just a little bit of entertainment.

I'm ashamed to know there's one more person who thinks like you residing in our country. Much less allowed to "serve and protect".