Police getting more firepower

reply to post by semperfortis


The casing is bigger, but the projectile is pretty much the same size. I agree with dooper. The 5.56 isn't made for killing. Its more of a wounding round.

You kill the enemy and you only take out 1 guy. You wound the enemy and it takes up to 4 people to get him off the field. So one round can take out up to 5 from the battle.

If I remember correctly from my introduction to the M16. That was the purpose of going to a weapon that doesn't have a very high stopping power. Plus the ammo is light weight

reply to post by jd140


Again,

My personal experiences have been somewhat more positive...

Not bragging but I am accurate well past the 800 meter line with the M-16a2...

In reply to dooper..

The 308 is, in my opinion again, as close to the perfect round as we are ever likely to get. Perhaps only the venerable old 30-06 is better...

What everyone has to remember for practical police carry is..

1. Portability
2. Reliablity

2 very important factors.... The AR-15 fills both nicely.. Especially the CAR-15

Semper

reply to post by semperfortis


Semper, ain't nobody - and I mean nobody - that will even suggest in my presence that Marines can't shoot. Whether blunderbuss, M-16 variant, or M-40. Deadly.

I just had a problem knocking down folks with them. Now before anyone suggests that I can't shoot, I made a running shot on a man at 625 meters - with another man's rifle - and it took three shots as I relied on "Kentucky" windage and elevations since he was running away, and I had to see the impact before I shot again. Dropped him with my third shot, and finished him with my fourth.

And this wasn't the only time they required multiple hits.

I too, always place my shots, and usually shoot right about one MOA. Unless they're running which makes it a bit of a "leading" proposition.

But too many times, it took more than one well-placed round to bring a man down with the .223. Whether mine were high on coke, whether they were dead and just didn't want to admit it, I have no clue.

And that's the problem with the .223. I think you'll agree that there have been mixed results. Especially at enemy targets beyond 200 meters.

In fact, if you're an enemy of the US, you want to engage Americans between 200 meters and 800 meters. You'll usually outgun them.

Unless they have a couple m-14 variants per squad to take up this optimal engagement zone.

Probably just me. I rather have 20 rounds of .308 than 40 rounds of .223. I know the .308 will work. Just not as sure about the .223.

reply to post by dooper


That's quite a 'cold' description of take-down, if you don't mind me saying.

I hope that doesn't upset you dooper, but may i ask if there's mandatory counselling after such an encounter? It sounds harrowing and i am from the UK, so officers use feathers and sticks to suppress criminals.

It's an interesting gun mentality, you guys in US of A have. I thought that red tipped bullet posted by semperfortis was so you know which end to put in the gun first; shows how much i know.

Tell me to bugger off if I'm being too intrusive.

reply to post by Mudman21


What the hell is a "semi-automatic assault rifle?" I suppose they'll also be arming police with water-shooting flame throwers? Maybe they could stock up on some non-incendiary explosives while they're at it. And hey, I hear you can get some pretty good deals on non-electric tasers now.

If the law enforcement people are given M-14s, Then we have some major reason to be afraid..... If they were to get M-1 Garands, I'm moving under ground.

reply to post by PrisonerOfSociety

How can I object to your inquiry?

I'm not sure I understand what exactly you are asking. If you mean did I feel any remorse, then my answer would be not once.

Those days we had lethal fire fights, I was never hungry that night. While killing never sat well on my "supper," I didn't spend a lot of time dwelling on it.

I believe you mentioned our gun culture. I grew up in a very rural area, and was carrying a rifle around once I was big enough to keep both ends off the ground at the same time.

I picked up extra money killing pigeons which got into machinery at the local gin, and they gave me $0.25 per pigeon, which for a boy at that time was very good money.

In the fall, I'd get to practice long range shooting with a .22 in a field of late ripening watermelons in a 200-acre field.

My sons had their own rifles at age eight, I taught all my kids how to be safe and how to shoot at a very young age. My kids now are all old enough to concealed carry - and do.

There are large areas here in the States where you may be the only person for miles and miles. We have a great tradition, great opportunities, and a great love of the outdoors and of shooting.

Since a parent never knows for certain what paths their children will take, I think one of the greatest skills a parent can teach their children is a proficiency with firearms. That very familiarity may some day be the difference between life or death.

I own weapons that have been in my family for almost 150 years, I have my grandfathers shotgun, my fathers, and my sons will in turn possess, and hopefully pass them down to my grandsons.

Methinks that others would really enjoy what we enjoy if they just had an opportunity to do so.

Totally off topic, and I apologize.

Originally posted by hypervigilant
If the law enforcement people are given M-14s, Then we have some major reason to be afraid..... If they were to get M-1 Garands, I'm moving under ground.

Completely agree 100%. The M1 Garand is an absolutely outstanding weapon that you can drag thru the mud, beat on and so forth and the damned thing is still accurate as hell and will easily put down your target.
The only bad thing is that original service grade ones are well over $2500 when you can find one willing to be sold.
Well worth every dollar!

reply to post by dooper


Thanks for explanation dooper, much appreciated.

I always thought of guns as malicious pieces of metal designed for one purpose, but you seem to go beyond the inanimate nature of that cold steel and even give it some kind of warmth, a comfort, a protection.

To be honest, if i was to use a gun, it would be a sniper gun. I'd like to work out the nuances to hit a target from distance; wind, air density, movement, etc, as i have an analytical mind. If there was someone's head on the other end though, that would be a different story. The last image through the scope would haunt me for eternity.

I think it is a cultural thing from what you say; those who are rural and treats guns as a necessity and those city folk who would carry a gun with just one thing in mind.

To be honest, i don't know what to think about guns. I see them as pawn for political agendas, namely the right to bear arms, the right to self defence & empowerment but on the other hand, there are bastards in the World who carry guns in their belt thinking 'they're the man', epitomised with rappers for example, who see it as a status symbol.

I think cops getting bigger guns, just pushes the wrong message.

What terrorist threats? When's the last time a cop had to shoot at a terrorist in America?

reply to post by jd140


You also have to take into account the ease of operating and maintaining, as well as obtaining parts and accessories, for an AR-15. It is actually a very nice weapon to have when and if the SHTF. Just think about it; lightweight, accurate, interchangable parts, quick to break-down and clean, and no end to available ammunition, as it is the standard caliber used by our military. All in all, I'd have to say that their weapon was a good choice.

The BIG question is why?

reply to post by Mudman21


In a town here in the midwest population 20k aprox , they are just bought 30 ,30 round clips and also have a swat team....for an area where there is hardley no crime at all, mostly teenagers being drunk and stupid. Never been a need for a swat team. There is no reason for this build up in rural America,.....unless they are expecting something....hmmmm

That was really the intent of my original post, to show the militarization of our police forces. I hear on the news everyday that police departments everywhere are laying off officers and cutting budgets b/c of the economy and then at the same time, I see articles where police departments are spending millions on new weapons. Now I realize that some areas are doing better than others economically, but the money spent on some of these weapons could be better spent on payrolls.

And yes, I realize that an AR15 is not the ideal weapon to take out a perp, but when fired 30 times consecutively, than that makes it a very powerful weapon to bring down anyone, even with body armour. I have several semi auto rifles and fire them frequently at my local range, and these weapons can do serious damage especially when put in the hands of someone who has been trained to use said rifle.

Surely if the citizens of the U.S are allowed automatic weapons then it would be sensible to give the Police the same firepower. I for one would like to see the outlawing of all guns in your wonderful country.

[edit on 30-5-2009 by Peruvianmonk]

Citizens aren't allowed to own automatic weapons.






............

reply to post by bigdog36


The Garand is also great rifle for eradicating the wild hog population that is becoming a problem in so many rural areas across the country, and the 30-06 round is capable of taking down the largest of game animals and predators in the American continents and it can be used to break down doors and still shoot very tight groups. Try doing that with any other semi automatic.

Originally posted by WisdomInChains
Citizens aren't allowed to own automatic weapons.

Yes they are. You pay an extra 200 dollars for it.

Originally posted by Peruvianmonk
Surely if the citizens of the U.S are allowed automatic weapons then it would be sensible to give the Police the same firepower. I for one would like to see the outlawing of all guns in your wonderful country.

Well, I would like to see the outlawing of all free speech in your country. Maybe then I wouldn't have to discuss our Second Amendment with a bunch of foreigners who don't understand how important it is to us.

Originally posted by Peruvianmonk
Surely if the citizens of the U.S are allowed automatic weapons then it would be sensible to give the Police the same firepower. I for one would like to see the outlawing of all guns in your wonderful country.

[edit on 30-5-2009 by Peruvianmonk]

Peruvianmonk,

You should think before you speak or type such out. I am sure in the UK the government will lead everyone by getting rid of thier guns FIRST...military as well.

Please try thinking ..not emoting. There are those of us Yanks who are very proud to be Yanks...even bloody Yanks.

There is something very immoral about a government which would arm us and then teach us how to shoot, carry on wars in far away places, and then disarm us when we get home. Such a government is to me, from the outset, morally bankrupt. Trust us to do thier dirty work but then not trust us to be armed. Not smart on the part of a government. Unless of course we are sent to public school to become emotional trainwrecks and believe that stupid, and disarmed is perfectly normal. Stupid is the first step to disarmament.

Government ...has historically shown a remarkable propensity to tolerate criminals and their excesses. This is particularly true in the UK and in Europe. The public becomes hostage to the criminal/political element..even in their own homes. Sound familiar???
The French are only just begining to catch on to what they have done over the years.

Nonetheless Peruvianmonk....after the UK disarms all their police force and military...we will consider it here in America. NOT!!!!

Hey Peruvianmonk...did I tell you that I prepare and install uranium fuel rods to go in nuclear reactors?? Do you think one can do this work and be an emotional train wreck. A drama queen??

And you guys are worried about me with a gun. Get a life dude!!
Only public education can dumb people down that far. And public education is paid for by whom???? Politicians and the body politic of course!! Not all of us here are emotional train wrecks with a television/emotional education here in the USA.


Thanks,
Orangetom

reply to post by PrisonerOfSociety


Prisoner, surely there must be somewhere you can pursue your long-range shooting. Of all the shooting I've done, it's that long-range stuff that I find most rewarding, for the same identical reasons it would appeal to you.

In Los Angeles, two heavily armed bank robbers with considerable body armor shot the hell out of a neighborhood, and some police, and did so for a while.

No one had anything to bring them down.

Had one single officer, or even cooperative civilian with a .308, both men would have been down and out with two shots.

At another location years ago, a guy shot up the McDonalds, and went about his cold business of executing the patrons.

SWAT sat on their asses and watched more and more victims get killed. It didn't matter that they had a .308, they didn't take the shots when they had them. Will must accompany skill.

Columbine. I see all sorts of officers, and no one is going in! It's like, what do we do?

Well, if you're a cop, and folks are getting killed inside, then you earn your pay!

Give them whatever they need, but train them to react quickly and effectively.

The greatest weapon in the world isn't worth a damn, if you're going to sit by and let innocents get killed.

I've certainly never questioned the need of law enforcement to have the best tools at their disposal for any job that may arise. Perhaps someday I'll be in a hostage situation, and the person holding me hostage will be in full body armor. It's unlikely to happen, but if it ever does I sure hope the first cop on the scene has a weapon in their squad car that can take the guy down.