police euphemism


PDA






proletariat
October 11, 2004, 01:35 AM
I was watching the discovery rescue special on the "north hollywood bank robbery shooting" that had become so imfamous in California. The thing that got me was that the LAPD now carries M4's in their squad cars after that shooting. The funny thing about it was they called the AK-47 "assault rifles" and they called their M4's "urban police rifles" LOL. Last time I checked M4's were labeled 'assault rifles' in California.

If you enjoyed reading about "police euphemism" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
Tharg
October 11, 2004, 02:05 AM
Shhhhhhh yer gonna let everyone KNOW... (rofl)

whiteben
October 11, 2004, 02:27 AM
Yes, this is surely some nice doublespeak. On a more serious note, I have heard it suggested a number of times that regular joes should try to use the same equipment (guns and ammo) as the local police. That way when the dead guy's family's lawyer thunders "You purposely loaded your souped up gun with ultra-lethal ammo" you can calmly reply: "I took my cues from my local police force. I figured that it is their business to know about this sort of thing. And if they use Federal Hydra-Shok 40S&W JHPs in their DA/SA Sigs then gosh darn it I figure it is good enough for me."

Obviously this is a bigger problem in some states than in others.

Comments?

Matt G
October 11, 2004, 02:28 AM
Excellent point, proletariat.

BTW, the preferred term is "Patrol Rifle," or "Patrol Carbine." When I was writing a proposal for a rifle policy for my PD, I used the term over and over again.

Believe it or not, it's a GOOD THING to have the cops carrying the exact same arms that they've been touting were evil. First, they get a bit more educated about them, and don't believe that they're the atomic death ray they've been touted to be, and learn the limitations. Second, they begin to respect them and have some affection for the design. Third, a lot of agencies have to walk on eggs to put "black rifles" into patrol cars, for fear of alarming the public that is afraid of the "militarization" of police. By pointing out the utility of such a rifle in a patrol purpose, they are pretty much answering the same questions they've been asking the citizenry, about why they "need 'assault rifles'". :rolleyes:

Tharg
October 11, 2004, 02:45 AM
Man that sucks....

I would be pissed were i a cop(policeman/woman, law enforcement officer whatever) if someone told me that i wasn't allowed to have "x" gun for use in a situation.

I'm sure that is the case however, since doesn't any armament have to be approved etc etc? (asking cause i think that statement is true - but don't know since i'm not in a law enforcment field)

Course looking back - if the police knew this and that - i heard (online boards i know...) that they went to a local gun shop asking for assault weapons.... i don't know i'd not have gone for a bolt action... in some nice calibre... heheheh Not like those guys in the video were trying to hide - less you count hiding behind the body armour....

heh

IMHO police should be able to use anything that is available... (course - i think that of civilians too- rofl) to arm your enforcement arm w/ anything less is to ask them to try to catchup /w training etc what they don't get in usuable arms... and thats wrong IMO.

but then - there are those people who are prolly against me owning a fully auto weapon that think the police shouldn't either... bleh...

J/Tharg!

RevDisk
October 11, 2004, 03:36 AM
IMHO police should be able to use anything that is available... (course - i think that of civilians too- rofl) to arm your enforcement arm w/ anything less is to ask them to try to catchup /w training etc what they don't get in usuable arms... and thats wrong IMO.

That's pretty much my opinion too. Police should be able to have anything civvies have. Of course, I don't like that they can get weapons banned for civilian application.

Tharg
October 11, 2004, 03:43 AM
heh right... and wrong? <rofl>

Supposedly we "trust them w/ our lives" - and yet they are unable to get anything we can-not get..?

interesting line of thought....

either way - its just sad that anyone can't own whatever they wanna... the legal ramnifications have had little to do on criminal behavior since long before the US came to be a country.

heh
J/Tharg!

benEzra
October 11, 2004, 08:46 AM
The fact that police widely use pistol-gripped, detachable-mag selfloaders as patrol rifles is an excellent counter to the prohibitionist argument that such rifles "have no other purpose than to kill as many people as possible without reloading" by being "spray fired from the hip," ad nauseaum.

Carlos Cabeza
October 11, 2004, 11:12 AM
Right before the AWB expired the T-Town PD (Tulsa, OK.) announced that they were going to equip their officers with EBR's. They said they wanted to have the same equipment that the BG's had.

carpettbaggerr
October 11, 2004, 02:14 PM
We're arguing about rifles when the framers envisioned privately owned battleships .

Sigh.

PATH
October 11, 2004, 05:08 PM
POLICE PERSONNEL ARE "CIVILIANS"!!!!

Cops are not soldiers ergo they are civilians. I am sorry but I just had to say that!

Zundfolge
October 11, 2004, 05:38 PM
So are the M4s carried by LAPD select fire?

If not then they are speaking accurately ... the AK-47s used in the North Hollywood Shootout were Assault Rifles by the correct definition ... if the M4s the LAPD are packing are only semi auto then they are not actually Assault Rifles (at least as defined by the military and us gunnies)

WT
October 11, 2004, 06:12 PM
I thought the LAPD got a bunch of surplus M16A1's from the US Army? Free. All LAPD had to do was pay shipping.

Jim K
October 11, 2004, 06:50 PM
A while back a news story in the Washington Post said that a criminal armed with a Beretta semi-automatic assault handgun had been shot by a state police officer using his service pistol. Guess what kind of pistol the state police use. Same gun, only the definitions are loaded.

Jim

tetleyb
October 11, 2004, 07:59 PM
POLICE PERSONNEL ARE "CIVILIANS"!!!!

Dang, don't get your panties in a wad...

Thin The Herd

ceetee
October 11, 2004, 08:34 PM
a Beretta semi-automatic assault handgun




If that's true, then I have in my very own glovebox, a "Smith and Wesson Model 686 Assault Revolver"...

Mannlicher
October 11, 2004, 08:50 PM
You would think with the ineffectiveness of the .223 rifles they finally did scare up, they would smell the reality, and carry M1A or FALs. That .308 is a LOT more effective against guys wearing vests than the .223.

rock jock
October 11, 2004, 10:46 PM
I remember in early Sept, the police chief of Miami was on CNN and he was complaining about how his officers were going to be outgunned if the AWB expired. I wanted to reach through the TV and throttle this guy. Setting aside all the lies contained in that statement, I wanted to ask him why his PD was not trained and equipped with AR's in their patrol cars. If they were outgunned, it was his fault, not mine.

PATH
October 11, 2004, 11:43 PM
tetleyb,

On occasion I get a wedgie. I don't wear "panties" thus couldn't get a pair in a wad.:D Fact is though that all cops are civilians.;)

WEPS
October 12, 2004, 12:08 AM
mannlicher "You would think with the ineffectiveness of the .223 rifles they finally did scare up, they would smell the reality, and carry M1A or FALs. That .308 is a LOT more effective against guys wearing vests than the .223."

with all do respect mannlicher, you are mistaken. a 223 will pierce things a 308 wouldn't. i know this from personal experieces in the field. 5.56 is a very leathal round. that being said i would still prefer 7.62x51

fistful
October 12, 2004, 12:18 AM
Congrats to Mannlicher on his not-so-subtle attempt to swing this thread into a fur-flinging 5.56 vs. 7.62 deathmatch.

Shame on WEPS for encouraging it.


Good call, PATH. Pedantics, unite!

Jeff White
October 12, 2004, 12:30 AM
Patrolman shoots man in standoff, police say

10/11/2004
http://www.stltoday.com/stltoday/news/stories.nsf/stlouiscitycounty/story/71C38952E4373BDA86256F2A0019CF9E?OpenDocument&Headline=Patrolman+shoots+man+in+standoff,+police+say

A Warren County man who briefly had held his 6-year-old son hostage Sunday morning was shot moments after releasing the boy by a Missouri Highway Patrol officer after the suspect had pointed a rifle at the officer, police officers say.

The suspect was airlifted in serious condition to St. John's Mercy Medical Center in Creve Coeur with wounds in his chest and arm, said Cpl. Al Nothum, a spokesman for the Highway Patrol. Authorities declined to identify the man, pending the filing of charges.

Nothum said the suspect, who lived with his mother off Highway M west of Warrenton, had been despondent over an affair. Police responded after they said the suspect had threatened his mother outside her house by firing rifle shots into the ground near her and over her head about 8 a.m. Sunday.

Police officers say they arrived at the home to find the suspect driving an all-terrain vehicle in the driveway and holding a .22-caliber rifle and his son on his lap.

"He was yelling at officers and saying, 'Come on, shoot me!'" Nothum said.

About 10:15 a.m., the suspect released the boy then raised his weapon toward the trooper, who shot the suspect with a .223-caliber assault rifle, Nothum said.

Phantom Warrior
October 12, 2004, 12:48 AM
The funny thing about it was they called the AK-47 "assault rifles" and they called their M4's "urban police rifles" LOL. Last time I checked M4's were labeled 'assault rifles' in California.

Well, see, a "pistol-gripped, detachable-mag selfloader" in the hands of a policeman is a patrol rifle, while a "pistol-gripped, detachable-mag selfloaders" in the hands of a civilian* is an assult rifle. It's so obvious...



*said with all the contempt someone who is ALMOST in the real military (ship out for basic in June) can generate.

(uhhhh, that means I'm disgusted by the police tendency to consider everyone else "civlians" even though they themself are too. NOT saying I hate civilians. I'm one too, and will be again after I'm out of the Army.)

c_yeager
October 12, 2004, 01:52 AM
I recall that the AK47s used in the robbery had been made selectfire (i could be wrong though). If that is the case then they did fit even our technical definition of "assault rifle".

Does anyone know if the LAPD patrol rifles are select fire or semi?

twency
October 12, 2004, 07:58 AM
POLICE PERSONNEL ARE "CIVILIANS"!!!!

Cops are not soldiers ergo they are civilians. I am sorry but I just had to say that!
The good people at Merriam-Webster.com (http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary?book=Dictionary&va=civilian&x=15&y=15) beg to differ:

Main Entry: ci·vil·ian
Pronunciation: s&-'vil-y&n also -'vi-y&n
Function: noun
1 : a specialist in Roman or modern civil law
2 a : one not on active duty in a military, police, or fire-fighting force b : OUTSIDER

-twency

twency
October 12, 2004, 08:04 AM
On a more serious note, I have heard it suggested a number of times that regular joes should try to use the same equipment (guns and ammo) as the local police. That way when the dead guy's family's lawyer thunders "You purposely loaded your souped up gun with ultra-lethal ammo" you can calmly reply: "I took my cues from my local police force. I figured that it is their business to know about this sort of thing. And if they use Federal Hydra-Shok 40S&W JHPs in their DA/SA Sigs then gosh darn it I figure it is good enough for me.
An effective attorney can argue for or against anything. It's what he or she is paid to do: make a good case, regardless of personal opinion or preference. An assistant DA, or council in a civil matter, could argue, for instance, that by using precisely the same guns 'n' ammo as the local constabulary, the righteous shooter is in fact a wannabe police officer, looking for the opportunity to impart some vigilante justice. "Ladies and Gentlemen of the jury, Joe Johnson knew he didn't measure up to the high mental and phsyical standards of the Possum Creek Police Department, but that didn't stop him from taking the law into his own hands..."

-twency

c_yeager
October 12, 2004, 08:26 AM
Webster is also constantly updating its information to reflect the current common usage of a word. In other words it is more a mirror to how we USE language than a guide in how it is supposed to be used.

For example according to that same dictionary a "Clip" is clearly defined as being both a device for charging magazines AND a magazine.

Main Entry: 2clip
Function: noun
1 : any of various devices that grip, clasp, or hook
2 : a device to hold cartridges for charging the magazines of some rifles; also : a magazine from which ammunition is fed into the chamber of a firearm
3 : a piece of jewelry held in position by a clip

Does this mean that the nature of a "clip" has changed? No, it jus means that people have used the word incorrectly often enough that the incorrect usage is now the COMMON USAGE and thus becomes the dictionary definition.

Model520Fan
October 12, 2004, 08:48 AM
Good call, PATH. Pedantics, unite!

That's "Pedants, unite!"

Phantom Warrior
October 12, 2004, 05:20 PM
What c_yeager said...

fistful
October 12, 2004, 06:09 PM
That's "Pedants, unite!" guess I'm not pedantic enough.

But as a member of John Kerry's band of brothers, I must say that civilians are tasty! Shoot 'em with a fifty in a free fire zone and roast 'em lightly with napalm. That's how John and I did it.

Dave R
October 12, 2004, 06:10 PM
While we're on the subject of nomenclature and verbiage, I think its incorrect to call AR's "Urban Police Rifles" or "Patrol Rifles" or any such thing.

If they want to use correct terminology, the LAPD should say they're equipping their officers with "fine varmit rifles." ;)

PATH
October 12, 2004, 11:43 PM
Methinkst it a tempest in a teapot but to those in the military, civilian police forces are just what they appear to be, civilian. Common usage would have you think our semi-automatic rifles are "assault weapons". When police departments use them they are given a "nice" name. Poice officers represent civil authority, not military, notwithstanding Merriam-Webster.

Winston Smith might give us all a heads up on the changing usages of words.;) :D

He who controls the lexicon controls the culture! Do you own a rifle or do you own an evil "assault weapon"? I guess it all depends on who is doing the writing of the definition.

We own rifles and cops are civilians.:D

Oh, by the way, I have been called many things but never a "pedant".
Thank you for the compliment!:D

fistful
October 13, 2004, 12:32 AM
I heard pedants have to register with the police. Why is that?

PATH
October 13, 2004, 02:26 AM
Ask Winston Smith.:D

jefnvk
October 13, 2004, 11:12 AM
I recall that the AK47s used in the robbery had been made selectfire (i could be wrong though). If that is the case then they did fit even our technical definition of "assault rifle".

Wasn't one of the guns illegally modified to fire full auto? Might have just been modded to slam fire, I don;t remember.

fistful
October 13, 2004, 11:53 AM
Ask Winston Smith.:D About what?

PATH
October 14, 2004, 01:45 AM
I'd answer that but that would make me appear to be a "pedant". A quick search engine query will answer your question!:D

If you enjoyed reading about "police euphemism" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!