(LA) Opelousas PD Buys Machine Gun


PDA

Drizzt
March 31, 2003, 11:55 PM
Opelousas PD Buys Machine Gun


March 31, 2003
Reported by Erica Young

Opelousas police don't want to be out-gunned, so they've bought a machine gun which can be mounted on the department's armored personnel carrier. The department is the first in the state to buy the weapon, recently made legal for police by the Homeland Security Act.

Opelousas was prompted by incidents in other cities, like the gunfight last month in which five Alexandria police officers were shot, two of them fatally.

The department's new machine gun, an M-2-4-9 squad automatic weapon, can put out 850 rounds a minute. The department bought a 200-round belt, a 100-round magazine and a replacement barrel to go with the gun.

Captain Mark LeBlanc hopes the weapon will never be used in anger. He believes just the knowledge that his department has it will act as a deterrent.

http://www.kplctv.com/Global/story.asp?S=1208293&nav=0nqxEwlf

If you enjoyed reading about "(LA) Opelousas PD Buys Machine Gun" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
MN_Strelok
April 1, 2003, 12:26 AM
Wow. I'm not even going to question the perceived need for city cops to have a LMG. Instead I'll focus on this minor oversight:

The department's new machine gun, an M-2-4-9 squad automatic weapon, can put out 850 rounds a minute. The department bought a 200-round belt, a 100-round magazine and a replacement barrel to go with the gun.

Someone needs to work on his basic math skills. And with less than 30 seconds of sustained fire, why do they need a second barrel?

BTW, what's a 100 round SAW mag? Is that a C-Mag or something?

QuarterBoreGunner
April 1, 2003, 01:03 AM
"Do you know why I pulled you over Sir?"

"uhm..no officer, was I speeding?"

"Sir, you have a tail light out?"

"A tail light? You pulled me over for a tail light?"

"Sir...STOP RESISTING!"

"What? ...resisting? I just can't believe you pulled..."

"That's it LIGHT HIM UP BOYS!"

BupBupBupBupBupBupBupBupBupBupBupBupBupBupBupBupBupBupBupBupBupBupBupBupBupBupbup!!!!

(30 seconds later) Srgt? He's still movin'? Uhm can we get another belt?

Kristofer
April 1, 2003, 01:45 AM
The department is the first in the state to buy the weapon, recently made legal for police by the Homeland Security Act.
I'm scared.

Tommy Gunn
April 1, 2003, 03:09 AM
The Dept would do better to issue out AR15 rifles and then spend money on ammunition and range time. Maybe some HK MP5's or even Thompsen SMG's from Auto-Ordinace for dealing with any Dillinger wannabe's.

Perhaps the armored car and LMG would be good to have on hand in case of another Hurricane Hugo where mobs of looters descended on the damaged suburbs in trucks and vans.

Wildalaska
April 1, 2003, 03:19 AM
Hey the Chief and the boys wanted to play..so what...your tax dollars pay for his toys!!!

You should see the toys the Police Agencies in Alaska get to play with that dealers pay for....tons of post samples floating around...

Including one that should be arriving shortly and will be the subject of a test report for you, the eager audience!

WildcanyousayfactorycoltAlaska

SDC
April 1, 2003, 10:09 AM
This is the FN MAG GPMG, so the "100 round magazine" is actually going to be a belt carrier box, not an actual magazine. If this wasn't so scary, it'd be funny.:(

shermacman
April 1, 2003, 10:25 AM
This is so ridiculous it simply boggles the mind. I am not an international terrorism expert, nor do I play one on TV, but what possible scenario justifies a squad gun? The amount of money involved, the wasted time training, the amount of time and resources that are being diverted from real problems. This is just feel good self-fondling.
Not that I wouldn't mind running a few rounds through it on community awareness day...!

Jmurman
April 1, 2003, 10:37 AM
hmmmm.police depts with LMG's

What is the "percieved need?"

Bravo11
April 1, 2003, 10:48 AM
Check out their website:
http://www.opelousaspd.com/
Watch the photos of the Chief cycle thru.
Doesn't the photo in desert camo and beret look
familiar.
Check it out

shermacman
April 1, 2003, 10:58 AM
Nice work megcatia!
Oh...
My...
God...!
:what:

buzz_knox
April 1, 2003, 11:18 AM
The M249 is the 5.56mm SAW. The M240 is the FN GPMG. The SAW has been made available to LE agencies by FN, but I don't believe the GFPM has. So, something is still screwy about the article.

Greg L
April 1, 2003, 11:23 AM
With all the gold braid on that uniform he looks like a South American tin pot dictator. Perhaps that is what he is trying to do in OUR south America. :scrutiny:

Greg

MJRW
April 1, 2003, 11:25 AM
What were those 5 officers shot with? If it was anything less than a full auto rifle, they would be better off with more range time. Sending 200 rounds at a person in 15 seconds isn't going to do a damn bit of good if you couldn't even hit the mall they are standing in front of.

Nightfall
April 1, 2003, 11:27 AM
This is beyond ridiculous. They need an M249 for their APC... WHY?! What massive urban conflict do you want to be ready for? What possible police job requires a Squad Automatic Weapon? Laying down cover fire for the troops as they raid a house or something? Area suppression fire? If we don't need assault rifles... why do the police need a belt fed machine gun on an APC? Groups of terrorists? But I thought it was silly to want an assault rifle for such situations? Oh, I forgot, I'm just a serf. Forgive me, my lord. :rolleyes:

I'm all for giving officers an M16A2 or M4 to have in the trunk, it seems prudent. Train them on it well, you've got a much more effective defense then a bunch of half trained persons with 9mms.

Not to be paranoid... but jeez, why is the gov't so intent on arming it's police forces with military combat hardware, while taking away all the effective combat weapons from citizens? Hmm... :fire:

JW2
April 1, 2003, 11:34 AM
http://www.opelousaspd.com/Strike%20Force%20Cont.htm

I like the top right picture of the fellas in the pool...

Especially the one who has the handgun pointed at the back of the other guys head.. :uhoh:

Bravo11
April 1, 2003, 11:37 AM
Same page--scroll down and check out the URBAN ASSAULT VEHICLE next the APC

shermacman
April 1, 2003, 11:44 AM
Ah, the crystal clear waters of Louisiana!...if this is their idea of real life situations! No mud, no gators, no copperheads, just a lovely swim in the chlorinated beauty of a community pool! "Hey, kid, no running! Stay off of the lap lane ropes or I'll blow you out of yer Speedos with my waterproof Glock!" Guess the ATV with the SAW gun will be driving around the school parking lot lookin to take out teenage cigarette smokers: "Smoking kills, punk!"

JW2
April 1, 2003, 11:50 AM
They look like a buncha commando wannabes who are outside "playing"... :scrutiny: They really need a SAW when they can't even properly handle their sidearms.

Boy am I glad I don't live in this town.

dev_null
April 1, 2003, 11:56 AM
Not to mention, do you have any idea how small that town is? Yeah, that's exactly where Al-Qaeda figures to make their next big play... NOT! :rolleyes:

MJRW
April 1, 2003, 12:00 PM
This city of 20,000 people needs that? It seems that with their raw numbers of crime they simply need more cops:

2000 statistics

185 violent crimes: 0 murders, 14 rapes, 42 robberies, and 129 aggravated assaults

1270 property crimes

We are talking 4 crimes a day here. Coincidentally, there are only 4 patrolling officers at most. I wonder what the ratio of sworn officers to citizens is in this town.

JW2
April 1, 2003, 12:01 PM
I was just talking to my boss today about something she witnessed at a large event this weekend. Security at the event apparently posessed some sort of SMG (She's definately not a gun person, so I couldn't figure out exactly what it was). I brought up the point that carrying this kinda firepower really isn't gonna stop some kind of Al-Qaeda type attack, not to mention that this took place in Camden, SC, which probably isn't high on the target list. All this does is reinforce the image that you should be terrified to go out in public. :banghead:

RustyHammer
April 1, 2003, 01:01 PM
Come on guys, LE needs toys too! Just one of the "perks".

Kristofer
April 1, 2003, 01:06 PM
Even the NYPD would never have to engage a force big enough to merit a belt fed machine gun. If thier city has that kind of problem, it's time to call in the National Guard. And the worst part is that it was probably federal money, not city funds that paid for it.

Pilgrim
April 1, 2003, 01:12 PM
Well, they certainly have the toys. The question remains is whether they will ever learn how to use it.

When the 200 round belt runs out, will they be able to fix a bayonet to the gun?

megatronrules
April 1, 2003, 01:34 PM
This is rediculous. They cant hit anything with their pistols most times. We are gun nuts though! ;) Lets not forget :D ;)
I quote the great Jeff Cooper "You're only "outgunned" if you miss."

Im so sick of hearing about outgunned cops, its BS! A pistol is the most used weapon in crimes to my knowledge. The cops have pistols. How are they outgunned? Most criminals use cheap guns as far as I know. A friend of mine is cop on a gang unit in a large city. He has never seen or taken a good gun from a perp. All junk. So if the cop has a Sig,Glock,Beretta or anything else thats good how is he outgunned by some scumbag with a Bryco etc,,?

Rant over.

Matt G
April 1, 2003, 01:45 PM
Through the Homeland Security Act, the local P.D.s are getting surplus weapons cheap. Really cheap.

Am I actually reading this correctly: the Members here are by and large demanding that a specific NEED be put forth to have a belt-fed .223 LMG????

NEED?

The real question is not why THEY have one, but why it's so hard for you and I to have one.

bogie
April 1, 2003, 01:51 PM
Hmm... Time to coin a new term...

County Ninjas?

Greg L
April 1, 2003, 01:55 PM
The real question is not why THEY have one, but why it's so hard for you and I to have one.

I think that is where much of the :scrutiny: is coming from. That and it is our tax dollars that get to pay for these toys that this podunk PD doesn't need to justify in any way (to say nothing of the 5 different styles of uniforms that the chief seems to "need" ).

The problem isn't so much their having it (and the APC), it is the inevitable usage of it against someone to prove their "need" for such equipment.

To be fair though, I was happy to see that a couple of the officers went to Gunsite for training.

Greg

Nightfall
April 1, 2003, 02:39 PM
Matt, considering the ability PD's have to enforce laws on folks in their area, I don't think it unreasonable that they be answerable to the people they will be using a belt fed LMG to enforce laws on. :p

So yes, I expect the PD to be able to explain to me why they NEED a squad machine gun for their duties. The Constitution didn't put trust in the gov't... it put that trust with the people. For a reason, methinks. ;) You're right though, this wouldn't be near as much an issue if the gov't hadn't decided an M249 too dangerous for you and I to use.

Kristofer
April 1, 2003, 02:43 PM
Am I actually reading this correctly: the Members here are by and large demanding that a specific NEED be put forth to have a belt-fed .223 LMG????

Last time I checked the 2nd admendment didn't say "the right of the police to keep and bear machine guns".:rolleyes:

ElToro
April 1, 2003, 05:46 PM
Ah, well. Maybe the swamps are full of muslim guerillas under the UN aegis.
Then again, we're all kids at heart, and every kid needs a power SAW...:-)

Guntalk
April 1, 2003, 06:34 PM
The shootout in Alexandria that the story references will, I believe, be determined to have been tragic result of very poor tactics by the response team.

They knew the guy was in the house.

They knew the guy had a rapid-fire rifle.

They knew the guy was willing to shoot police officers (he had hosed down a police car with rifle bullets the day before.)

So, according to reports, they ran to the door and beat on the plywood covering the door, and the guy hosed them through the plywood, killing several officers.

Geez. Surround the place, order pizza, and wait for the guy to come out.

Now, other departments buy more firepower.

Too bad they aren't buying more training.

HABU
April 1, 2003, 07:28 PM
http://www.opelousaspd.com/Chief%20Animated.gif

It seems as though Sodom hauled his butt to La. after his bunkers werre bombed. Check out the guy in desert camo :what:

JPM70535
April 1, 2003, 07:57 PM
I know the Chief personally and he is tactical to the max. Skunkabilly is an amateur compared to him. He is an extreme military buff and definitely supports RKBA.

He was elected at least 8 years ago and in a strange paradox is supported by a majority of both whites and Blacks. He is hated by the criminal class, especially drug dealers and has used such tactics as having his Narcs. pose as garbage men, riding through the drug neighborhoods picking up trash and pouncing on any drug deals they encounter.

Word on the stret was that there was a contract put out on him by the local drug dealers. (Maybe thats why he needed the APC and MG.)

He is really a good guy, just a little strange.

Kristofer
April 1, 2003, 08:23 PM
I dont think its the chief or the PD that is in question. The fact that the police can and are equiping themselves with these knids of weapons is not reassuring to even law abiding citizens. In fact its downright frightening that police percieve a threat big enough to warrant such extreme measures.

"Full-Auto Suppressive Fire - Coming Soon to a PD Near You."

Coronach
April 1, 2003, 10:39 PM
I dunno. Columbine? Platt and Matox? Ever seen an Al Queda training tape?

I'm not so sure that having a belt fed weapon is necessary to address those concerns effectively, but lets put this in perspective. This is a board that advocates private citizens owning such weapons. It should definately advocate the police having them as well.

JMO,
Mike

Kristofer
April 1, 2003, 11:32 PM
Columbine? Platt and Matox? Ever seen an Al Queda training tape?

1940s' Germany, USSR, Cambodia, Rwanda, Serbia

I know these are extreme examples but private citizens having a right to bear, is totally different than those same citizens, being policed by machine gun toting JBTs.

Tamara
April 1, 2003, 11:43 PM
I'm not so sure that having a belt fed weapon is necessary to address those concerns effectively, but lets put this in perspective. This is a board that advocates private citizens owning such weapons. It should definately advocate the police having them as well.

I've got no problem with any police officer going out and buying a SAW. It's when they try to convince the citizens of Mayberry R.F.D. that they need to pay for it that things seem hinky.

Go buy a SAW; just don't tell me that a belt-fed, bipod-equipped weapon is a reasonable investment of taxpayers money. The odds of the Oupelousas PD needing to lay down the kind of covering fire that would necessitate a friggin' quick change barrel are somewhat less than the odds of an asteroid hitting the town. There have got to have been a million better uses for the taxpayer's money.

rock jock
April 1, 2003, 11:52 PM
Tamara got it exactly. A town of 20,000 has NO need for an APC. Those things cost a bundle. How much does that come out to per tax-paying citizen?

bfason
April 2, 2003, 02:56 AM
Kristofer and Tamara are on to something. Don't get me wrong, I am 100% in favor of giving police the tools they need for legitimate law enforcement purposes, but this national trend of handing out "surplus" SAWs and APCs to every Mayberry RFD rubs me the wrong way.

See "Warrior Cops: The Ominous Growth of Paramilitarism in American Police Departments" (http://www.cato.org/pubs/briefs/bp-050es.html) by Diane Cecilia Weber, a Virginia writer on law enforcement and criminal justice.

"Over the past 20 years Congress has encouraged the U.S. military to supply intelligence, equipment, and training to civilian police. That encouragement has spawned a culture of paramilitarism in American law enforcement. ... The problem is that the mindset of the soldier is simply not appropriate for the civilian police officer. Police officers confront not an 'enemy' but individuals who are protected by the Bill of Rights. Confusing the police function with the military function can lead to dangerous and unintended consequences—such as unnecessary shootings and killings."



Regards,

Bill

wQuay
April 2, 2003, 07:30 AM
I know the Chief personally and he is tactical to the max. Skunkabilly is an amateur compared to him. He is an extreme military buff and definitely supports RKBA.

Someone needs to tell him that the armed forces and law enforcement are two very different things.

slicers63
April 2, 2003, 04:43 PM
This is no worst that Sheriff Joe in Phoenix. He just bought a M2 50 cal for his armored car to fight terrorism.

DeltaElite
April 2, 2003, 04:50 PM
Gee my city is 50 times the size of that Mayberry full of mall ninjas.
The day we actually need a weapon like that, I am retiring.
Reality eludes some, that agency is a prime example.

I bet there next step will to get a Cobra or Apache for air support. :D

Dave R
April 2, 2003, 04:54 PM
I have no problem with the police having a .223 SAW.

As long as there's someone in town with a Class III license and an M1917 or a BAR, the balance of firepower has been restored.





JUST KIDDING!

DeltaElite
April 2, 2003, 05:00 PM
Actually most APC's that agencies get are surplus military, so they don't cost much if anything for the initial purchase.
The two M-113's that we have were gifts from the Army.
Neither have machine guns, missles or rocket launchers.

pax
April 2, 2003, 05:14 PM
Ominous.

pax

The worst evils which mankind has ever had to endure were inflicted by bad governments. The state can be and has often been in the course of history the main source of mischief and disaster. -- Ludwig von Mises

Kristofer
April 2, 2003, 05:21 PM
How long until we see all patrol cars replaced with APCs with turret mounted machine guns? Actually I'm surprised it hasn't happened yet. Or has It?:scrutiny:

Correia
April 2, 2003, 05:27 PM
Now come on guys, you know what you would do in the same situation:

"Hey Sheriff, did you see this fax from the Homeland Security Department?"
"No Deputy, what does it say?"
"It says they will give us an M249 for $100."
"No kidding? Yee Haw! Call up Mearle at the Gun store/bait shop and order us up some cases of .223!"
"What will the news papers say though?"
"Screw it, tell them it is for terrorists or something."
"Yes Sir!"

rock jock
April 2, 2003, 05:55 PM
Neither have machine guns, missles or rocket launchers.
I hope you will rectify that soon. Nothing will slow a speeder down faster than seeing a TOW missile in their rearview mirror.:D

NewShooter78
April 2, 2003, 05:59 PM
It doesn't bother me that they have gotten themselves a SAW up in Op., but come on! The only smg's here in New Orleans are MP5's that the SWAT team uses. And that's not all that often. We also have a LOT more crime, something like 400 murders a year at least, and I can't remember the last time I saw a APC driving around the city. :rolleyes:

Hmm... Time to coin a new term... County Ninjas?

That would be Parish Ninjas, bogie.

Navy joe
April 2, 2003, 06:07 PM
I'd like my peace officers to employ well aimed fire with minimal collateral risk, thank you very much. Anything coming out of a belt-fed machinegun is not well aimed nor should it be, it is an area suppression weapon. I don't mind the PD buying one though if the same was made available to me. Right now I cannot easily own a SAW. Neither should they.

Seriously, if they needed a highpower supression weapon wouldn't a BAR make more sense? I can actually see a use for that if some yahoo is barricaded somewhere taking potshots at people. Superior penetration an a 20 rd mag to keep a lid on Chief Wiggums and his boys doing spray and pray.

natedog
April 2, 2003, 06:35 PM
LAPD SWAT has an M60 in their armory.

If you enjoyed reading about "(LA) Opelousas PD Buys Machine Gun" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!