(MO) Police Ditch Shotguns for Rifles


PDA






Drizzt
August 27, 2005, 05:21 AM
Police Ditch Shotguns for Rifles
created: 8/26/2005 6:12:37 PM
updated: 8/26/2005 9:44:18 PM

By Mike Owens
Investigative Reporter

KSDK-The St. Louis Police Department is upping the ante on criminals, getting rid of its shotguns, replacing them with 9 millimeter semi automatic rifles.

The rifles come with a scope, making them more accurate at long distances, unlike the shotguns, which only have an effective combat range of 25 yards.

The 400 rifles and laser scopes cost more than a half million dollars, but, in a form of poetic justice, the money was seized from drug dealers!

Officers are now fully trained on the new rifles, which are smaller, lighter and more easily handled than the shotguns. Some shotguns remain in patrol cars, but they are quickly being replaced.

The old guns will not be sent in on trade, they will be melted down as scrap. The police chief, Joe Mokwa, says that would prevent the guns from ever falling into the wrong hands.

Several years ago, a police officer in Jefferson City was killed by a man who had purchased his weapon in an auction at the Missouri Highway Patrol. The weapon still had the highway patrol emblem etched in its side when it was used to kill the officer.

http://www.ksdk.com/news/news_article.aspx?storyid=83905

http://www.ksdk.com/assetpool/images/05826191740_slpdrifle.jpg
What kind of rifle is this? At $1250 per rifle, it doesn't look like that good of a deal.

If you enjoyed reading about "(MO) Police Ditch Shotguns for Rifles" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
Plumber576
August 27, 2005, 05:37 AM
The old guns will not be sent in on trade, they will be melted down as scrap. The police chief, Joe Mokwa, says that would prevent the guns from ever falling into the wrong hands


What a liar. Whatever.

What I don't get is why they don't invest in some AR's? I see that they are Baretta carbines...and the only logical explination I can think of os that their duty side arms must be Barettas.

I know that in my hometown officers have to carry a patrol rifle in their trunk...an ar.

The Viking
August 27, 2005, 05:38 AM
Looks very much like Beretta CX4 Storm.

c_yeager
August 27, 2005, 05:57 AM
I dont really see how a change from 12 guage shotguns to 9mm carbines is a big improvement. Methinks that this has more to do with accomodating shooters of "smaller stature" and greater recoil sensitivity than anything else.

Firethorn
August 27, 2005, 06:01 AM
Agreed. That's awfully expensive. I hope that it included training.

BTW: Why 9mm? Isn't one of the main reasons for getting rifles in the first place to penetrate body armor if needed? Will 9mm, even from a carbine, cut it?

fistful
August 27, 2005, 06:04 AM
The old guns will not be sent in on trade, they will be melted down as scrap. The police chief, Joe Mokwa, says that would prevent the guns from ever falling into the wrong hands.
Several years ago, a police officer in Jefferson City was killed by a man who had purchased his weapon in an auction at the Missouri Highway Patrol. The weapon still had the highway patrol emblem etched in its side when it was used to kill the officer. Chief Mokwa continues the War on Irony. "If you kill my officers," said Mokwa, "the gun better come from Wal-Mart, or we are coming after you."

With tongue out of cheek, doesn't it follow that if one can buy a weapon from a law enforcement organization, one could buy a weapon anywhere? Wouldn't you think the Highway Patrol has easier access to background checks than Joe Retailer? What would have stopped that guy from buying a gun anywhere else? I guess the gubmint just needs more ways to waste to waste our money.

Reporting from Saint Louis County,

I'm fistful.

Back to you, Dan.

Zach S
August 27, 2005, 06:52 AM
I'd be mad if I was a STL LEO. But OTOH a scattergun requires more skill to use proficiently, and since most LEOs arent shooters, I'm sure they're happy with it.

I'd rather have a 9mm AR than a CX4. How much are the CX4s anyway?

Remington788
August 27, 2005, 06:56 AM
At $1250 per rifle, it doesn't look like that good of a deal

No kiding. The rifles look like Beretta CX4 Storms, which wholesale for about $550 and the optics look like EOTECH 552s which wholesale for about $350 for a total of $900. Even if you add 10% for resale, that is still less than $1000. So they over paid by $250 per rifle, mulitply that by 400 and someone made an easy $100,000. :scrutiny:

Zach S
August 27, 2005, 07:02 AM
They may have also got pelican cases. Figure that in, with the custom-cut closed cell foam, and the price seems realistic.

Matthew748
August 27, 2005, 07:24 AM
It seems like a case of one step forward and two steps backwards. I would rather have a 12 gauge shotgun than a Beretta Storm in 9mm.

cracked butt
August 27, 2005, 07:38 AM
Wow! a 9mm is a better combat weapon than a 12 guage loaded with 9 or 10 ~9mm diameter balls fired at 1300 fps. I gotsta sign me up for one of them new age math classes.

If they can't hit a target with 00 buck beyond 25 yards, they need more training, not an expensive pop rifle.

shermacman
August 27, 2005, 07:55 AM
Every day I learn something new. A 12 gauge shot gun is only effective within 25 yards. Hmmm....
I suppose at a hundred yards you could practically play catch with the slugs if you got a buddy to shoot at you.

NastyNate
August 27, 2005, 08:00 AM
The local PD here in Cleveland, TN is slowing moving from shotguns to AR-15's. I talked to the guy that is building them for the PD. He said he has build 30 so far, with another 70 coming soon.

P0832177
August 27, 2005, 08:00 AM
I think it is a logistics thing, too. Commonality of magazines comes to mind.
Securing the weapon in the squad car? Training Time costs $ in both range time and ammo for familiarization. So, that figure could easily be met with some gouging going on.

115grfmj
August 27, 2005, 08:18 AM
than a good shotgun at the close combat ranges the average LEO is
likely to engage targets. Nothing wrong with arming a few qualified
inidivuals with rifles, per shift, to deal with poss. threats, but replacing
shotguns as a whole is likely to bit them in the #ss. :uhoh:

Jim Watson
August 27, 2005, 08:30 AM
These days you have to plan for the lowest common denominator. The copchick in the foreground probably had trouble handling the pump stroke length and effort of a shotgun and the and recoil of a 12 gauge.

ChairborneRanger
August 27, 2005, 08:34 AM
A good friend of mine retired as a Lieutenant from the Michigan State Police a few years back. He has always told me that whenever he got into a situation where he thought he might really have to use a firearm----he brought his 12 GA pump. That says it all for me.

CARRY'IN
August 27, 2005, 08:43 AM
They mentioned "laser scopes", maybe it has a laser on it.

enfield
August 27, 2005, 08:49 AM
Oh, Lord. The politicians are spending our money again (still) and telling us what's best for us, even when it flies in the face of common sense. I bet the cops on the beat would rather have a shotgun than another 7 lb pistol.

bosshoff
August 27, 2005, 09:02 AM
Do you remember the time you brought out your friend to shoot for the first time? You wanted him (a novice) to be able to hit something his first time out, and you wanted him to leave with a positive experience. You had him shoot a shotgun, didn't you. Why, because it is easier to point a shotgun, than it is is to aim a rifle. (Obviously, you left the #4 lead shot at home, and brought some light dove loads. ;) )

psyopspec
August 27, 2005, 09:57 AM
Oh, Lord. The politicians are spending our money again

Says in the article the rifles were purchased with siezed drug money.

I agree with others it's a bad deal and that SLPD got took in a big way. Does it look to anyone else like the "hump" on the grip of the service auto in the male officer's holster looks too big to be a Beretta? Wihout mag commonality (very very unlikely to be an advantage over a 12 ga. in the first place) this is one of the worst deals of the century.

Old Fuff
August 27, 2005, 10:10 AM
But ya' got to admit that they look "badder." Looks are everything. The sheeple will be impressed. Evil black rifles are O.K. so long as the police have them. On the other hand I suppose they'll demand that they be outlawed for everyone else. :uhoh:

armoredman
August 27, 2005, 10:18 AM
A 9mm is not a rifle. A 9mm is not a carbine. A 9mm in this configuration is a semi-auto subgun look-a-like. If these were in 10mm, I might say they could be carbines, but not quite. If they simply equipped them with actual M-1 carbines, they'd be far ahead. 9mm is a handgun or subgun round, not a rifle round. If they wanted rifles, they should have bought rifles.

Matt G
August 27, 2005, 10:29 AM
I've always said I'd rather see rifles than shotguns on patrol. More accuracy and power means fewer shots fired, means you have better control of your downrange rounds. Those who argue the "overpenetration" side need to study the issue of where 12 pellets of 00 buck go each time a shotgun is fired.

My only issue is that they didn't use a rifle round. But for making hits at under 100 yards, especially in "active shooter" scenarios, it should do far better than pistols. Lord knows that pistol cal carbines have no felt recoil to speak of, so accuracy should go up.

Hope they have the good sense to put slings on those rifles. They'll increase the utility about 100%. But then, I think every patrol shotgun should have a sling as well, and I pretty much NEVER see that.

Preacherman
August 27, 2005, 10:31 AM
Hey, this is St. Louis... one wonders how much palm grease was applied by the vendor, in the first place!

El Tejon
August 27, 2005, 10:31 AM
BTW, for those that care, the shotguns will not be "melted down". They are sold to dealers in other states with resale covenants of 250 miles. The money is used for "equipment" and "training".

GRB
August 27, 2005, 10:37 AM
I'll agree with most of the statements in this thread that it was a mistake to rid the department of all shotguns in favor of a 9mm Carbine; however, I cannot agree with the sentiment in the following:If they can't hit a target with 00 buck beyond 25 yards, they need more training, not an expensive pop rifle.Does anyone else see anything wrong with the quoted statement regarding the typical combat situation that would require a shotgun with double aught buck? If not, I am quite surprised. If you don't see something wrong with the picture painted by said statement, try a little test. Take a 12 gauge, with slug barrel as used by PDs, load it with 00 buckshot, fire it at a paper combat target (with life sized depiction of bad guy) at 5 yards. Then up goes a new paper target and you move back and fire again at 10 yards. Then up goes a new paper target and you move back and fire from 15 yards. Now count the pellet holes in the bad guy, and see if any made it outside the bad guy, onto other areas of the paper or even on the very outer edges of the BG (such would likely be passing through clothing only). All hit the bad guy, good for you, there is a good chance such would be the case from 15 yards. Now up goes a new target and you move to 20 yards and fire from there. Now count those pellet holes on this target. You may have started to see the picture at 15 but, you will almost definitely see it at 20 yards using the run of the mill police shotgun, lets say a remington 870 with 18 or 20 inch slug barrel and, with departmental type ammo 2 3/4 inch 00 buckshot. Now move to 25 yards after first having put up a new paper bad guy target. See how many pellets fired from 25 yards actually hit the bad guy on that paper, how many hit elsewhere on the paper and how many missed paper all together. Then tell yourself what is wrong with the statement in the above quote.

I will not argue this point, I am not trying to start an argument either, nor am I trying to belittle anyone's post. I am just giving you all a good 'try it yourself test'. Go have some fun and maybe learn something from it about using 00 buckshot in combat relative especially to any urban or suburban or home defense situation. Then remember about being sure of your target and what is beyond it, and about being responsible for any lead you fire out of your gun.

All the best,
Glenn B

The Real Hawkeye
August 27, 2005, 11:35 AM
At least the reflex sighted 9mm carbines will make a head shot easier in the case of heavily armored bank robbers shooting it out with them in the streets. That is assuming they are required to train and qualify with them regularly.

fistful
August 27, 2005, 12:31 PM
The preacher was talking, there’s a sermon he gave
He said "Everyman's conscience is vile and depraved,
You cannot depend on it to be your guide
When it is you who must keep it satisfied”. (Joan Osborne) Actually, that one was written by Dylan. Good song.

OH25shooter
August 27, 2005, 12:43 PM
A female street officer holding a rifle is scary to me. :eek:

teCh0010
August 27, 2005, 01:15 PM
I don't know what I would want officers carrying in the car for an urban enviroment. For a rural Sherrif's office I think 50% 12GA and 50% CMP M1 Garands would do the trick. Or put both in each car for less than the price that STL spent.

carebear
August 27, 2005, 02:57 PM
The price per weapon usually includes all the accessories and accoutrement.

Spare mags, "special" cleaning gear, parts for the armory, training support, all that kind of stuff. Heck, the rep probably talked them into using the high-speed battery Eotech rather than the AA compatible. :rolleyes:

CARRY'IN
August 27, 2005, 05:20 PM
Evil black rifles are O.K. so long as the police have them.

I hear ya. Nothing like someone with a gun telling you that you cant have one (I always say). Police using military weapons, swat teams with nazi helmets, snipers blasting women and children; it all makes me nervous.

And the only reason I could see them using 9mm would be for magazine commonality. Just using the same ammo cant save them that much money. If it cant accept their service pistol mag it is a poor choice.

Chrontius
August 27, 2005, 06:59 PM
It's not that the ammo will save them money, the savings will be in logistics -- fewer cops doing paperwork on supplies, more cops on patrol.

That said, I like the idea of a scattergun and a CX4 in 10mm in each squad car, though slug barrels seems like a bad call.

ZeroX
August 27, 2005, 07:21 PM
That doesn't make a whole lot of sense. I'd much rather have a 12 gauge pumpgun than a 9mm carbine. And if I had to have a rifle, I'd actually want a *gasp* rifle caliber. :rolleyes:

CARRY'IN
August 27, 2005, 07:33 PM
the savings will be in logistics -- fewer cops doing paperwork on supplies

Have to throw the BS flag on that one.

R.H. Lee
August 27, 2005, 07:37 PM
Both my local PD and the state CHP now carry BOTH 870's and AR's in their cruisers.

fgr39
August 27, 2005, 08:12 PM
realisticly when are LEO's gonna engage a threat more than 25 yards away? I'm sure there will be that rare time but thats what slugs are for.

Texian Pistolero
August 27, 2005, 08:19 PM
There was a time when I believed that there was a place for 9mm or .45 ACP

carbines,

but my current opinion is that if you are not upgrading all the wat to 5.56 mm or 7.62 mm,

then you are just short stroking the mule.

cracked butt
August 27, 2005, 08:53 PM
Does anyone else see anything wrong with the quoted statement regarding the typical combat situation that would require a shotgun with double aught buck? If not, I am quite surprised. If you don't see something wrong with the picture painted by said statement, try a little test. Take a 12 gauge, with slug barrel as used by PDs, load it with 00 buckshot, fire it at a paper combat target (with life sized depiction of bad guy) at 5 yards. Then up goes a new paper target and you move back and fire again at 10 yards. Then up goes a new paper target and you move back and fire from 15 yards. Now count the pellet holes in the bad guy, and see if any made it outside the bad guy, onto other areas of the paper or even on the very outer edges of the BG (such would likely be passing through clothing only). All hit the bad guy, good for you, there is a good chance such would be the case from 15 yards. Now up goes a new target and you move to 20 yards and fire from there. Now count those pellet holes on this target. You may have started to see the picture at 15 but, you will almost definitely see it at 20 yards using the run of the mill police shotgun, lets say a remington 870 with 18 or 20 inch slug barrel and, with departmental type ammo 2 3/4 inch 00 buckshot. Now move to 25 yards after first having put up a new paper bad guy target. See how many pellets fired from 25 yards actually hit the bad guy on that paper, how many hit elsewhere on the paper and how many missed paper all together. Then tell yourself what is wrong with the statement in the above quote.

Glen- I've rolled Turkeys at 15 yards further out with a whole lot less. A real live living breathing moving target, not a hypothetical paper target.

I've never shot anything with buckshot other than leftover jack-o-lanterns and pumpkins from halloween. No problems whatsoever hitting them at that range, and that is with a regular old non-ninjafied scattergun. With cheapo foster slugs, I can easily hit a pumpkin at twice that distance.

With your example even if only one piece of buckshot hits at 25+ yards, its still a far cry better than real life police shooting at such ranges with a handgun.

newfalguy101
August 27, 2005, 09:23 PM
Seems to me that it would have made a whole lot more sence to buy .223's or something along those lines, than to get pistol caliber carbines, especially if they are talking about threats beyond 25 yards.

BTW, for those that care, the shotguns will not be "melted down". They are sold to dealers in other states with resale covenants of 250 miles. The money is used for "equipment" and "training".

I hope you are right, but, the article quoted in the first post says otherwise:

The old guns will not be sent in on trade, they will be melted down as scrap. The police chief, Joe Mokwa, says that would prevent the guns from ever falling into the wrong hands.

fastbolt
August 27, 2005, 10:00 PM
I was sort of hoping that what with the Rifle OR Shotgun debate occurring in most places, the pistol-caliber shoulder weapon would be fading into well deserved obscurity in L/E work ...

Both the shotgun and the rifle have advantages and potential dedicated uses in L/E work, with some overlap possible depending on training and specific circumstances.

Personally? For most circumstances I anticipate, based on personal experience over the last 24 years, I'm perfectly comfortable continuing to carry a standard Remington 870 in my unmarked car. For those instances where a rifle (AR) would be more appropriate, though, I'd be comfortable using a rifle. It's just another tool, and I seldom like discarding one type of tool, best suited for some tasks, just to make room for another tool which might be better suited for other tasks.

Training considerations, including ammunition and training/qualification time, may be too much for some agencies that want to streamline their costs & training, and not simply add to the existing ones ...

Equipping vehicles with both weapons systems seem to maximize the tools available for a potentially more diversified number of anticipated needs, though.

AL-GUNNER
August 27, 2005, 10:32 PM
This is not ment as a flame, but regards to the statement that someone has made about if only one piece of Buck shoot hits the target they would be happy. The problem with that in relation to Law Enforcement work is, that an LEO is responsible for every round fired and every pellet out of that round. If it hits a non hostile or damages someones property they have to answer for that injury or damage.
This is something that those of us that use a weapon for self defense or home protection might want to think about when making a selection of a defensive weapon. Because you too could be held to this when and if that time to use you weapon comes.
Just my .02 from what I have heard and read.

cracked butt
August 27, 2005, 11:01 PM
AL-Gunner I gree with you.

If an officer can't hit someone with a shotgun at 25 yards, they probably shouldn't be carrying a gun at all.

Nimitz
August 27, 2005, 11:48 PM
gimmie an AR or 12ga before those....ewww :scrutiny:

Chad

fistful
August 28, 2005, 12:29 AM
I don't know what I would want officers carrying in the car for an urban enviroment. For a rural Sherrif's office I think 50% 12GA and 50% CMP M1 Garands would do the trick. Garands? Those long, heavy things, firing .30-06 rounds out of 8-round en-bloc chargers? Among other things, what about lights, scopes, lasers, etc?

Yeah, I know, Wyatt Earp and Chesty Puller didn't need no fancy stuff like that, so the cops don't either. But for those of us living in the real world, these are considerations.

c_yeager
August 28, 2005, 03:09 AM
Glen- I've rolled Turkeys at 15 yards further out with a whole lot less. A real live living breathing moving target, not a hypothetical paper target.

And how much choke did you have on that gun? Could it be that turkey guns have among the tightest chokes available? These guys are shooting cylinder/modified.

As far as the use of rifles is concerned, its hard to imagine many urban police encounters in which officers would be takin 100 yard shots. And seriously, considering the average LEOs performance with a pistol i dont want them even ATTEMPTING such feats. Really, the shotgun is nice in officer hands simply because they are less likely to kill innocent people when they miss.

coonan357
August 28, 2005, 03:18 AM
the countie mounties in my local carry 12's (870's or mossy590's ) and an Ar in the trunk , and the specialists ( anti terrorist team) carry 308 rems in the trunk also with an assortment of ammo's . in an urban area I think a 9 mm would be better as the range/penetration factors isn't as far as a .308 as one of the officers even said is a little overkill at times, and the logistics of ammo is a major consideration as if the rifle person doesn't have to carry seperate ammo and mags to handle a firefight , if it gets too out of hand thats what the boys in Bdus are for . when I was talking to one of they specialists his trunk had about 50 pounds of different types of ammo . talk about a logistics mess . I got him a crate made so its all now orginized and doesn't flop around back there .

AL-GUNNER
August 28, 2005, 10:39 AM
Guys sorry for the bad spelling in my last post. It was late and I was not wide awake. My statement has nothing to do with if an officer can not hit at 25 yards or not. It had to do with they are responsible for every projectile out the barrel no matter were or what they hit.
Now the new LE rounds have a new wad cup that is great and does extend the capable distance of the buckshot round. For applicatioins that arre too far for buckshot slugs work great for the longer distance. The key thing is training and pratice with your weapon.
I will say I am for the AR platform weapon in patrol cars in all settings. The 5.56 round has less over penatration issuses that the 12 gauge and the handgun rounds.
Again this is my .02 and some testing on this topic.

Gary

Primersinmyshoe
August 28, 2005, 11:04 AM
I live in St. Louis and am not suprised by Mokwa's decision. I call it the "dumbing down" of the PD, and it's embarrasing. Just because the money came from confiscated drug money doesn't mean they couldn't have spent it on - are you ready? - training. But no, they had to go and buy those silly toy carbines.

Just remember, this is coming from a state where we elected a dead guy :banghead:

GRB
August 28, 2005, 11:14 AM
Actually, that one was written by Dylan. Good song.But I quote her singing of it. Oh well...

GRB
August 28, 2005, 11:59 AM
Cracked Butt,

I've rolled Turkeys at 15 yards further out with a whole lot less. A real live living breathing moving target, not a hypothetical paper target.You missed my point almost entirely and your post makes my point even stronger. I am not talking turkey hunting but tactical combat shooting with buckshot. My point was that it would be extremely foolish and possibly negligent (in a police type shooting) to fire buckshot at a man sized target beyond 15 yards because it will most likely wind up that some of the pellets miss the target beyond that range. Remember we are not in the woods turkey hunting but are more likely in an urban or suburban or even rural setting where those fly by pellets may hit someone else. Every time an officer fires his weapon he is responsible for each bullet he has fired, or in the case of 00 buckshot for each pellet.

With your example even if only one piece of buckshot hits at 25+ yards, its still a far cry better than real life police shooting at such ranges with a handgun. So if only one piece of buckshot hits the target at 25 yards, there is a large number of pellets (I think 8 if I recall correctly) that have not hit the target and have the potential to hit something or someone else. No at 25 yards, it is not a wise, prudent or good move to use buckshot for police type combat under most circumstances. It would be much wiser at that range to use your pistol, a carbine, a sub-gun, a 12 gauge firing rifled slugs, or a rifle and; of those choices it would be wisest to use a shotgun with slugs, a sub-gun (on single round mode), a carbine of suitable caliber or, a rifle (and the rifle may be too much in some urban/suburban/rural situations). Would you really rather chance 8 pellets going astray than one single round? This is something an officer (and his or her department) MUST consider.

Bear in mind of course, when I am talking police situations and 00 buckshot in shotguns, I am talking commonly utilized police type equipment here such as a Remington 870 and run of the mill slugs as used by the majority of departments as opposed to some super fully choked Turkey Gun shooting super magnum rounds with special wads that cup the pellets (not saying you use this, just keeping it realistic to most potential police combat scenarios).

Just a note: I am not supportive of getting rid of those shotguns at all, I am just talking about using buckshot beyond about 15 yards. I don't think it is a good move in most police type shootouts beyond 15 yards simply because there are much bvetter choices to be used at that range.

All the best,
Glenn B

Rickstir
August 28, 2005, 12:21 PM
SLPD standard issue is a Glock, I am not sure of the caliber. Remember these are the officers that fired 28 shots into a car and only inflicted a flesh wound in the driver. His wife and three kids escaped injury.

In another incident a black female officer emptied her weapon and spage magazine in short order, not even getting close to the target. She demanded another mag from her partner and he refused. She sued him and the department for racial discrimination. She lost in court.

It takes a certain kind of person to be both an affective chief and be political correct at the same time. Too much of a challange for Mokwa.

Flyboy
August 28, 2005, 02:22 PM
Says in the article the rifles were purchased with siezed drug money.
Yeah, that's what it said, and I'm sure that's what the police said. I'd be really interested to see how many of the people from whom the money was seized were actually convicted, though.

Any accountants or such in the St. Louis area want to file a public records request? Get records on the dollar value seized from each individual, then track those individuals through the system? Might be an interesting project.

Mannlicher
August 28, 2005, 02:46 PM
now I wonder what bozo thought that replacing shotties with 9mm carbines was a good idea? .223 maybe, but NOT a pistol caliber carbine. :(

GRB
August 28, 2005, 02:57 PM
I'd be really interested to see how many of the people from whom the money was seized were actually convicted, though.Would you be interested to see just out of curiosity or, is there some point you are trying to make? Administrative forfeiture proceedings do not necessarily require a conviction for the money to legally become forfeit to the G.

Black Majik
August 28, 2005, 03:01 PM
I opened the thread hoping that another county police department received AR-15s, but 9mm Carbines?!

And then as I read thru the thread I kept thinking that it was a CA department in Norcal that made the switch, then had to constantly remind myself that this was a MO department.

Then I thought to myself, "What a shame... shoulda gotten AR-15s, or at least kept both the shotgun and the pansy 9mm rifle. They shoulda stepped up and gotten tommy guns in .45ACP, a REAL caliber" :neener:

R.H. Lee
August 28, 2005, 03:23 PM
Administrative forfeiture proceedings do not necessarily require a conviction for the money to legally become forfeit to the G.
So all that 'due process' nonsense doesn't apply to possessions?

carebear
August 28, 2005, 04:26 PM
Well, what exactly are you doing with large amounts of cash?

Obviously the presumption should be you were buying or selling drugs. :rolleyes:

Beren
August 28, 2005, 04:40 PM
I need to get into the law enforcement firearms supply business. It looks like easy money. Next year, I could try selling a "migration package" to Colt 9mm LE Carbines for "increased compatibility with best-of-breed sighting accessories to maximize effectiveness in urban operations and minimize risk to the civilian population." THEN, the following year, a switchover to 5.56mm for "better effectiveness against the growing use of body armor by violent offenders."

teCh0010
August 28, 2005, 09:50 PM
Garands? Those long, heavy things, firing .30-06 rounds out of 8-round en-bloc chargers? Among other things, what about lights, scopes, lasers, etc?

I can't find the sarccasm smiley either.

What do they need that crap for? They aren't going to the mall.

DanS
August 28, 2005, 11:12 PM
My best friend who was a SLPD officer for many years told me that most of the female officers couldn't handle the shotgun, so they almost failed to qualify with it. They lowered standards for some officers. He carried an issued Glock in 40 S&W.

SLPD had to errect a wall made from RR ties between the range and I-55, because too many cops were shooting cars and/or hitting the hospital and surrounding houses in the neighborHOOD with stray rounds. I still don't understand why the range wasn't turned 180 degrees so the cops would be facing the Mississippi river that is probably 1/2 mile wide or bigger in that area. I guess it's safer to shoot at passing cars on the interstate than an occational barge on the river.

If the Chief of Police says that the guns will be destroyed then that probably is a true statement. St. Louis is a very liberal town and they hate for private law abiding citizens to have a firearm. They still refuse to issue CCW permits even though ordered by the Govenor to do so. But in all fairness that is the SL sheriffs dept., which has/had a problem of hiring felons, those felons were allowed to carry guns.

fistful
August 29, 2005, 12:22 AM
I have lived in the Saint Louis area most of my life and, compared to other major cities, I don't know if you could say it is more liberal.

In any case, Saint Louis is reportedly now issuing permits, now that the funding excuse has been dealt with. Poor schmucks, I bet some of the clerks really hate it.

GunGoBoom
August 29, 2005, 01:31 AM
Wow. Just, wow.

The St. Louis Police Department is upping the ante on criminals, getting rid of its shotguns, replacing them with 9 millimeter semi automatic rifles.

So going to something with a fraction of the power and energy is upping the ante eh? OK, if you say so. $1,200 plastic pistols - hilarious. As mentioned, this has more to do with greased palms and/or recoil sensitivity for the womyn on the force, than actual analysis of need in actual likely scenarios.

As for melting the guns, that's just.... :cuss:

fistful
August 29, 2005, 02:01 AM
upping the ante on criminals Didn't notice that before. That's a good one. Must be the word "semi-automatic" that makes reporters think this new carbine is especially deadly.

Sorry to keep this whole 25-yard shot controversy alive, but what about officers just switching to slugs for longer shots? Too slow and too complicated?

joachim slim
August 29, 2005, 02:07 AM
i carried a shotgun as my issue gun while at ft. campbell. i loved it on live fire range. they also still had the .45 grease guns. my son in law is a deputy in jefferson county mo. they carry gloks in 40s&w. i told him to please grab shotgun if he is in an urban setting. i also told him if he needed a rifle i would buy him a nice one in .223 or .308. i dont want him in a gun fight with a pellet rifle. i think the st. louis dept. got the 9mm rifle only because some P@$$! A$$ was afraid of recoil. :banghead:

joachim slim
August 29, 2005, 02:11 AM
also when jefferson county has a auction all the good guns are never around. they always auction the junk. i watched them hurriedly remove a ruger 10-22 that was in fine shape. said it was considered para military and had to be detroyed. i guess they want to pound that old dumb dirt up everyones A$$. :cuss:

fistful
August 29, 2005, 02:20 AM
What do they need that crap for? They aren't going to the mall. I assume you mean the new-fangled sights I spoke of. The thing is, those are useful for acquiring and aiming at your target, especially if the cop is not as good a shot as Sergeant York. Yes, I know, he used a bolt-action. Anyhoo, one might also ask why patrol cars need "crap" like an unneccesarily-long rifle, with unneccesarily-long cartridges, unneccesary over-penetration (I would guess) and an unneccesarily-limited capacity. All that and at the range a thirty-ought really becomes worthwhile, it's not so easy to see or aim at the target because it's not so easy to mount a scope on the rifle.

BlackCat
August 29, 2005, 02:43 AM
The 400 rifles and laser scopes cost more than a half million dollars, but, in a form of poetic justice, the money was seized from drug dealers!

That's just in case anyone forgot what the war on drugs is all about. $$

coonan357
August 29, 2005, 06:17 AM
if they drive the stratus as squad they might have to get roof racks for those rifles( man those cars are small) :neener:

teCh0010
August 29, 2005, 09:42 AM
I assume you mean the new-fangled sights I spoke of. The thing is, those are useful for acquiring and aiming at your target, especially if the cop is not as good a shot as Sergeant York. .

The 870's that are in use by almost every department in the country don't have optics, and many of departments that are buying AR's with their Homeland Security money aren't buying optics either.

An EOTECH with batteries on a weapon designed to be left in the trunk of a car is just something to fail before you have to use it. Hopefully they installed them co-witnessed with those worthless iron sights that came on the weapon.

Anyhoo, one might also ask why patrol cars need "crap" like an unneccesarily-long rifle, with unneccesarily-long cartridges, unneccesary over-penetration (I would guess) and an unneccesarily-limited capacity.

For a rural Sheriff’s office it's a surplus weapon with a round that just works and has inexpensive surplus available. I'm not sure I would want to try to put down a wounded feral cow in the roadway with a 9mm. I bet that doesn't happen often in St. Louis, but I wasn't recommending Garands for St Louis.

All that and at the range a thirty-ought really becomes worthwhile, it's not so easy to see or aim at the target because it's not so easy to mount a scope on the rifle.

Have you used the irons on a Garand at distance? A torso sized target at 300m was part of the qualification course completed by hundreds of thousands of military personnel through the 50's.

lucky_fool
August 29, 2005, 01:23 PM
If the Cx4 is good enough for the Galactica crew to take out Cylons (http://www.hellinahandbasket.net/archives/002261.html), it ought to be good enough for the SLPD. ;)

mountaindrew
August 29, 2005, 02:49 PM
Just for information SLPD carries DAO berettas but I thought they were in 40S&W, but I might have been wrong on that. I have never seen a CITY officer carry a glock or anything other than the 92/96, whichever it is. Stl county is a seperat department, I I believe they mat carry Glocks

mountaindrew
August 29, 2005, 02:51 PM
And to the earlier poster who talked about what you have a new shooter shoot, I have never found any gun easier to hit with or faster than a 9mm carbine with a red dot scope.

P. Plainsman
August 29, 2005, 04:12 PM
Hmm, what to make of this? Certainly a shot in the arm for Beretta and a validation of their marketing department.

If one takes the average St. Louis cop to be a competent shooter and gun handler, who knows guns and is not scared of them, then exchanging an 870 for a 9mm Storm carbine is plainly a degradation in firepower -- the reaction of most of us on this forum.

If one takes the average St. Louis cop to be a duffer who is still a little uncomfortable with the whole gun thing, then a lightweight 9mm carbine with a good optic is a more reasonable choice. Mild-mannered, low recoil, aids in careful shot placement. For all the partially justified scorn that some of THR's gunnies pour on the various pistol-caliber semi-auto carbines, they seem like a pretty good way to put something in the hands of a mediocre shooter that will enable him or her to make a contribution to a firefight. Better than a handgun.

Where these Storms may get the St. Louis PD in trouble is if patrol officers erroneously conclude that the presence of this carbine in their trunk makes them capable of responding to tough, armored, and/or dangerous threats -- that they can perch behind the squad car and trade fire with a nutjob with a .308. Nope, call in SWAT.

Bottom line: I'd vastly prefer an AR or an 870 if I were a cop, but given the realities of training (and politics) in most urban PDs, I can sort of see what the St. L. brass were thinking.

Just my two cents.

PS: As a pretty green shotgunner, I have to admit I can't always put a clean pattern on a target at 25 yards with typical cop hardware: 2 3/4" 00 buck loads in a short 870 with cylinder choke. It's only eight or nine pellets. To me, though, this is a reason for the cops to shift to 1 Buck or even 4 Buck loads, rather than a reason to ditch the shotgun for a pistol carbine. Quick shots at 25 with an open choke and 1 or 4 Buck virtually always give me a disabling pattern of hits.

balletto
August 29, 2005, 05:30 PM
As of at least 2000, the SLMPD carried Beretta handguns, I don't know if they still do, so I suppose they could still have a goodly collection of Beretta 92 magazines available.

There were some reports floating around a few years ago that they were going to get rid of the Beretta pistols as they were getting a bit old and worn, but I'm not sure what became of that idea.

Speaking as someone who did some computer consulting at the SLMPD in 1999-2000, and who met Chief Mokwa before he became chief, he always struck me as a real stand-up guy. Don't underestimate the amount of politics that you have to deal with as you move up the ladder, especially in a city police force that's managed like the SLMPD. Compromises to the liberal elements in the city eg) melting down old shotguns, may earn you the clout to do other more important things.

Due to scandals from a long long long time ago, the city police department is actually run by a police board that is appointed by the Governor of Missouri. The St. Louis mayor has a seat on the board, but doesn't necessarily get to dictate what goes on in the police force; 4 or 5 appointed officials do. You can imagine the potential for politics with that many people having a say in what goes on.

DillHarris
August 29, 2005, 06:00 PM
If the Chief of Police says that the guns will be destroyed then that probably is a true statement.

Um, probably so, but the police department has already been busted a couple times this year for under reporting crimes. I think there was a big article in the paper about it this past weekend. A few months ago there was the whole issue of 5000 unreported crimes. "Gee, those just got lost in the new system." was what Mokwa said. I'm sure it didn't have anything to do with the fact that St. Louis was listed as the 4th highest crime city and the extra crimes would have moved us to 3rd. Hell, now that concealed carry's legal I say disarm the police completely. :neener:

scout26
August 29, 2005, 06:03 PM
Hmmmm. Am I'm the only one that noticed that those officers are facing the WRONG way on the range ????

:neener:

fistful
August 31, 2005, 04:33 AM
The 870's that are in use by almost every department in the country don't have optics, and many of departments that are buying AR's with their Homeland Security money aren't buying optics either.
Let's not compare shotguns with rifles in this particular, as a shotgun is used for close ranges where scopes are less useful. What certain units are buying or not buying does not prove the wisdom of their choice. It could mean they don't have the cash for scopes yet. It could mean they should have bought a less expensive weapon that fires a stouter cartridge. Even so, I think a better choice than the Garand could have been found. By the way, I like old-fashioned guns with peep sights, but that doesn't mean I'd outfit a rural police department with the Garand.


An EOTECH with batteries on a weapon designed to be left in the trunk of a car is just something to fail before you have to use it. Seperate issue.



I'm not sure I would want to try to put down a wounded feral cow in the roadway with a 9mm. I bet that doesn't happen often in St. Louis, but I wasn't recommending Garands for St Louis. I saw that you were talking about rural areas, and I don't recommend nine millimeter for much, either.


Have you used the irons on a Garand at distance? A torso sized target at 300m was part of the qualification course completed by hundreds of thousands of military personnel through the 50's.

The rifle qualification course still includes "a torso sized target at 300m" (I last took it this spring) but I doubt I've ever hit it. I have never fired a Garand, but I do have a Czech Mauser with an aperture sight and in the same caliber. Even with its light, single-stage trigger, I would have trouble hitting a 300-yard target with this arrangement. Wanna bet there are a lot of cops as near-sighted and as a bad a shot as I am, who would really benefit from a scope? Then there is the question of lights and lasers. The Garand just happens to be a product of it's time - it's not set up to carry the equipment that LE desires these days.

Nightcrawler
August 31, 2005, 06:17 AM
BTW: Why 9mm? Isn't one of the main reasons for getting rifles in the first place to penetrate body armor if needed?

Not really. Criminals very rarely wear body armor. Everyone points to the famous North Hollywood shootout, but other than that there are few incidents in which body armor was worn by the bad guys.

In any case, one could argue that if the bank robbers are going to wear armor, they're going to anticipate the cops using rifles and will wear rifle plates to protect them from that.

I don't know if I'd completely replace rifles with the carbines. Ideally, your squad car would have two long arms, a rifle and a shotgun. Two or three man rifle/shotgun teams have proved themselves very effective since the Phillippine Insurrection.

ckyllo
August 31, 2005, 09:44 AM
i think a better choice for a cop car rifle would be the Remington Model 7615P pump action patrol rifle. same controls as the 870 pump, same operation as the 870, and will fit in the 870 holder and uses common ar-15 mags. dont know what the price is but it must be cheaper than the storm.

http://www.remingtonle.com/rifles/7615.htm

TheEgg
August 31, 2005, 12:59 PM
It seems silly to me. The obvious arrangement should be shotguns in a locking mount in the car, and an AR-15/M-16 in the trunk, available when/if needed. Specially trained marksmen on the force would substitute precision .308 rifles for the AR-15. You then have a flexible and at-hand battery to reply to the vast majority of police calls.

I know a lot of departments follow this model, and from what I have heard from the rank and file, they feel it works.

Replacing a 12 g with a pistol caliber popgun just seems like moving down in utility?????? Makes no sense.

akodo
August 31, 2005, 11:10 PM
yes, the 12 guage is going to be a much more effective weapon in a close quarters fight, and switching to slugs, you have something that can reach out and get some work done.

However, i think this change is all about recoil sensitivity. And it isn't just mrs female officer, its the inclusion of a lot of smaller males in attempts to racially diversify the force. (I live in st paul, and let me tell you, the Hmong people are SMALL) as well as fewer people being exposed to shooting in the first place, and most people being even more pantywaste coddled than ever before in history. (a 12 guage recoil isn't so bad if you have to pump your water by hand and then lug it up the hill to the house every day...then go chop some wood)

That being said, a 9mm carbine is going to give a little more whapam and a lot more user accuracy than a handgun. And if 12 guage shotguns are being left beind because the officer is intimidated by the recoil, then while i would choose issuing 20 guages, properly fitting the stocks, and increasing training time, i can understand why the move to 9mm carbines.

Of course, winchester 94s in .357 magnum would be even better.

On a somewhat related side note, i am sure you guys have seen that new remington 7615. For those of you who haven;'t or the brain is slow in retreaving that info, it is the standard pump action rifle (7600) chambered in .223, combined with the ability to accept standard AR-15 magazines, pictured most often with a 30 rounder. The idea is to have a gun that is as similar to the shotgun as possible, for ease of retraining, as well as to make it as no thought as possible when you reach for one or the other if you squadcar is so equipped.

Side benifit, is not an evil black assault rifle, except it looks enough like one that all the people who freak out in ignorance about assault rifles will do the same here.

Medium okay idea IMHO.

Better would have been to simply go with a model 7400, which is almost exactly the same, but is semi-auto. All controlls are located in the same place (read-safty). Just one less thing to worry about, pumping to eject the spent shell, which in a moment of excitement can be forgotten, and the chance of short jacking the pump.

One could argue that the pump action version makes it less likely to inadvertantly fire a 2nd shot due to a stressfull situation, however, the whole idea in using a pump is to fire and have the pump that comes after the firing be second nature. Hence you are right back to bieng a trigger pull away.

Now, as it is again a semi-auto, capable of accepting the evil 'banana clip' you again brush up against the semantic no-no of 'evil assault rifle'. However, i'd address this issue by having the 7400 with the shiny wood furnature and paring it with a 20 round mag, if not a 10 rounder. It would be technically closer to a true assault rifle than the 7615, but would LOOK less like an assualt rifle.

So if you are going to have a semi-auto in .223, why not just get an AR-15? I'd bet remington can make a 7400 pretty cheap, maybe less than an AR-15, you sidestep the evil assault rifle look, and the most important controls are the same as the issued shotgun. Plus, ive found the 7400 to be a very nice pointing gun. the AR-15 never felt that way. The pistol grip of the AR-15 takes a bit to get used to, and is included to help control a weapon in full auto fire, which isn't an issue, so ill stick with the stock that is going to be more familiar to those with no military background and a little to no gun exposure. Finally, the AR-15's sights are set up quite high above the barrel. This is no big deal when shooting at longer distances, but as most police engagements are close, that can be an issue. You are also more likely to get in a scenario where your sights are dead on, but there is some obstruction in front of the barrel you don't see, because the sites are 3 inches above it!

DanS
August 31, 2005, 11:25 PM
When I wrote that if the Chief of Police said the weapons would be destroyed, that I believe him. I believe that they will happily destroy any firearm. Not that City politicians should be trusted.

When I mentioned that St. Louis was/is liberal, I came to that conclusion from living here for over 40 years. And reading some of SL's political history, there hasn't been a republican in office in 70+ years (I think). I don't think a republican would even run for office in the city.

As far as the CCW, do you know anyone in the SL city or county that has a MO CCW permit. They told us 45 days wait, max... After waiting 47 days my brother called and the police said they were going to start mailing them this week for the first in line.

fistful
September 1, 2005, 09:41 AM
As far as the CCW, do you know anyone in the SL city or county that has a MO CCW permit. They told us 45 days wait, max... After waiting 47 days my brother called and the police said they were going to start mailing them this week for the first in line. Let us know when you get them.

Rickstir
September 1, 2005, 01:10 PM
Mountaindrew,
I have a brother-in-law and a nephew that are both STL PD officers. They carry Glocks. I have a 92 FS and can tell the difference.

Treylis
September 1, 2005, 09:14 PM
I am against this not only because I think it's a bad decision from a weapons/tactical perspective, but because I utterly and totally oppose assets forfeiture laws as they are in this country. Too many people have been snowflaked without due process.

fistful
September 1, 2005, 11:35 PM
snowflaked?

What mean that?

Treylis
September 2, 2005, 03:06 AM
Planted drugs on their person in order to seize their possessions.

carebear
September 2, 2005, 03:26 AM
Well, you know they WERE dirty, they just happened to be clean at that moment.... :rolleyes:

clange
September 2, 2005, 03:33 AM
Speaking as someone who did some computer consulting at the SLMPD in 1999-2000, and who met Chief Mokwa before he became chief, he always struck me as a real stand-up guy. Don't underestimate the amount of politics that you have to deal with as you move up the ladder, especially in a city police force that's managed like the SLMPD. Compromises to the liberal elements in the city eg) melting down old shotguns, may earn you the clout to do other more important things.
???? Mokwa. That guy is as anti-gun as they come. He would have those guns melted down, just so there were that many fewer guns in the world.

When MO got its CCW law, and vehicle carry, he instructed his officers to confiscate ANY firearm they found in a vehicle, to later test it to determine if it had been used in a crime. Only after a few well-placed letters and emails, did this official position change.

If you enjoyed reading about "(MO) Police Ditch Shotguns for Rifles" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!