[2dogs]

http://www.boston.com/dailynews/121/region/Troopers_training_to_carry_sub%3A.shtml

Troopers training to carry submachine guns at Logan

By Associated Press, 5/1/2003 10:04
BOSTON (AP) A specially trained state police unit will begin patrolling Logan International Airport with submachine guns next month, making the airport the first in the country to use such heavy weaponry.

The Massachusetts Port Authority, which oversees Logan, has purchased 30 of the guns for $2,500 each. The MP-5's have 30-round clips and a two-round burst capacity, which allows two shots to be fired automatically with one push of the trigger.

Massport Chief Executive Officer Craig Coy said the new weaponry, which will be deployed in June, will act as a deterrent to terrorism.

''It's part of an overall system, an overall approach, to make sure that we have the resources in place, that we have the training in place, that we have the right people in place, and that we have the right equipment in place,'' Coy said.

Since the Sept. 11 attacks, which were carried out with the help of two planes hijacked from Logan, the airport has prided itself on its aggressive pursuit of security improvements. It was the first in the country to have an in-line baggage screen plan approved by the Transportation Security Administration and the first to use several forms of high-tech security technology.

National Guard officers deployed to American airports after the attacks were armed with submachine guns, but this will be the first time they are used as a permanent part of an airport's security force.

Coy predicted that the presence of the guns, which have long been used at European airports, would bring peace of mind to the traveling public.

''I think there's going to be the sense of comfort knowing that we have well-trained people there with the right equipment,'' Coy said.

Members of the special Anti-Terrorism Unit, which is made up of members of the state police troop stationed at Logan, will receive intensive training to become certified on use of the MP-5's. Training includes live-fire drills, night firing and special tactics.

The MP-5's are outfitted with a noise suppressor units so they'll create less alarm among travelers if they're used. The guns are also designed for accuracy in indoor environments.

[Hkmp5sd]

The MP-5's have 30-round clips and a two-round burst capacity, which allows two shots to be fired automatically with one push of the trigger.

Sounds like a waste of money to me. Must have a lot of shootouts at Logan.

[Tamara]

Coy predicted that the presence of the guns, which have long been used at European airports, would bring peace of mind to the traveling public.

Will they get other European features to bring peace of mind to the travelling public? Fedoras? Alsatians? Leather trenchcoats? Searchlights? Snappy, colorful "TSA" armbands?

[Augustwest]

MA stripping people of their rights - "It's for the children."

MA militarizing its police force - "It's for the terrorists."


:banghead:

[M1911]

Unlike some of you, I support this. The terminals at Logan (like many airport terminals) have pretty large sight lines. There's a chance that they might have to take a pretty long shot. They're much more likely to hit their target if they are using a carbine or rifle than if they're using a pistol. Personally, I'd have chosen an M4 over an MP5, but either will work.
Sounds like a waste of money to me. Must have a lot of shootouts at Logan.The MA state police don't have many shootouts anywhere. So does that mean that their pistols are a waste of money? Give me a break.

I think there's always a chance of an incident like the one that happened at the El Al counter in LAX. If that sort of thing happens at Logan, I'd much rather the staties were carrying an MP5 than just their pistol.

[Hkmp5sd]

The MA state police don't have many shootouts anywhere. So does that mean that their pistols are a waste of money? Give me a break.

Not what I said. I think spending 30 x $2,500 on select fire MP5s w/suppressors for airport patrol duty is a waste of money. A semi-automatic shorty AR-15 would be more realistic and a whole lot cheaper.

[Phantom Warrior]

...a two-round burst capacity, which allows two shots to be fired automatically with one push of the trigger.

That's why I have trouble shooting. I'm supposed to be pushing the trigger, not pulling it. :D Apparently written by someone who doesn't have a very good grasp of firearms.

National Guard officers deployed to American airports after the attacks were armed with submachine guns, but this will be the first time they are used as a permanent part of an airport's security force.

Weren't the Guardsmen armed with M-16s? Which, I think it's safe to say, are not submachine guns. I reiterate my earlier comment...

I agree that AR15s probably would be cheaper and more practical for an airport where you might have to take long shots.
<tongue in cheek>
On the other hand, if you were part of this new, super-duper-elite police unit that will get all the funding it wants because it's protecting the airport would you settle for an AR15? If I was in charge I'd tell my boss "There is NO WAY we can adequately defend this airport with AR15s. We absolutely need MP5s. Those are the bare minimum for safely protecting our patrons. In fact, we need suppressed MP5 because those are so much cool...I mean quieter."
</tongue in cheek>

[cslinger]

"I agree that AR15s probably would be cheaper and more practical for an airport where you might have to take long shots.
<tongue in cheek>
On the other hand, if you were part of this new, super-duper-elite police unit that will get all the funding it wants because it's protecting the airport would you settle for an AR15? If I was in charge I'd tell my boss "There is NO WAY we can adequately defend this airport with AR15s. We absolutely need MP5s. Those are the bare minimum for safely protecting our patrons. In fact, we need suppressed MP5 because those are so much cool...I mean quieter."
</tongue in cheek>"


AMEN to that. I was recently talking to a member of the Meto PD ballistics team and I was asking why bothing paying all this money for patrol care AR-15 etc. when a nice lever action would both do the job nicely and be very friendly and PC to boot. He agreed and went so far as to say a rifled shotgun would be fine 99% of the time and having somebody trained on a bolt action would probably fill in the other 1%of the time.

Then I got to thinking if I was the local PD armory dude chances are I am a gun nut and if I had the capability of acquiring some uber cool uber tactical toys I probably would too. So that being the case I don't think the MP5s were necessary by any stretch of the imagination but boy I can understand the dude in charge of coming up with this procurement was probably like a kid in a candy store and I can't blame him.

As long as they are proficient and well trained more power to them.

Chris

[Skunkabilly]

2 30-round clips in a 2rd-burst MP5? Cool!
BA-BAP! BA-BAP! BA-BAP! BA-BAP! BA-BAP! BA-BAP! BA-BAP! BA-BAP! BA-BAP! BA-BAP! BA-BAP! BA-BAP! BA-BAP! BA-BAP! BA-BAP! **PING!!!***

''I think there's going to be the sense of comfort knowing that we have well-trained people there with the right equipment,'' Coy said.


Yep. That's why my friends all love me.

[Intune]

"The MP-5's are outfitted with a noise suppressor units so they'll create less alarm among travelers if they're used. The guns are also designed for accuracy in indoor environments."


I have ALWAYS preferred gunfights that don't alarm people. I hate it when they scurry around seeking cover! Having a family of five wander through crossfire will result in a timeout being called. Rules, don'tyaknow! Don't ever try to fire an MP-5 outdoors. Can't hit anything.
:rolleyes:

[Oleg Volk]

I don't think that MP5s are that bad of a tool for police work (though they don't punch body armor well). What is pathetic is the gap between other civilians in MA, especially at the airport itself, and the police officers. Makes me wonder if I time-warped back to the USSR...

[Intune]

"...time warped back to the USSR."

That statement should grab the attention of everyone on these boards. VERY sobering. This is from a man who has lived it.

[answerguy]

That's not really much of a burst, is it?

[Boats]

Nope, not the USSR, they have warped into a different reality altogether in that latter day degenerate utopia that used to be the nation's armory:

With apologies to the musical Oklahoma!

Fascistchusetts, where the tyranny comes sweepin' down as pain

And the stompin' feet can sure sound sweet
When the jackboots come marchin' to your plane.
Fascistchusetts, Ev'ry night my honey lamb and I
Sit in the dark and watch like hawks
As our freedoms are circlin' down the drain.

We know we belong to the land
And the land we belong to is grand!
We know because the politicians make us say,
"Yes masters, we'd love another tax to pay!"
We're only sayin'
You're doin' fine, Fascistchusetts!
Fascistchusetts, formerly of the USA!
(Maybe we'll escape to New Hampshire someday)

[bogie]

Bet #1: The things get dirty, stay dirty, heck, they gather dust and spider webs. Airports are no longer terrorist targets. Loony targets maybe, but not terrorist targets. The terrorists ain't stupid.

Bet #2: They'll be either walking around with no magazines, or with empty magazines.

Anyone wanna put up a Shiner?

[444]

As has been mentioned by many posts, they chose the wrong weapon; they should have went with the M16. The MP5 is inferior in every way to the M16. I was on the tarmac of an international airport yesterday. You could easily have someone well out of effective rifle range, let alone submachine gun range. The 5.56 caliber is a more effective stopper. The 5.56 has less risk of overpenetration while at the same time being much more effective against body armor.

I find it interesting that most of us believe that as American citizens, we have the right to be armed, and armed as effectively as possible. We believe that we have the right to own, carry, and use any small arm available. But if the police do the same, they are nazis.

[M1911]

Bogie:

I'll take that bet. They'll be carrying them and the magazines will be full.

Hkmp5sd:

Ah, guess I misunderstood what you were saying. The $2500 sounds high. I'm guessing that includes the gun, surpressor, magazines, leather, etc. An M4 would likely still be cheaper though.

[Boats]

I find it interesting that most of us believe that as American citizens, we have the right to be armed, and armed as effectively as possible. We believe that we have the right to own, carry, and use any small arm available. But if the police do the same, they are nazis.

If the police would merely submit to placing themselves under the same firearms restrictions as they enforce upon the rest of society, I'd have no problem with whatever the police wished to carry. However, the status quo is that some paramilitarized civilians are somehow "supercitizens" and the rest of us, no matter our backgrounds or training, do not make the cut to carry/own whatever it is the police can carry/own.

"But it is the politicians that pass the laws!" I have yet to ever hear of a law enforcement official arguing that their "supercitizens" should be submitting to the same onerous regulations as those they enforce upon the law-abiding citizens they allegedly protect.

[444]

Actually I can own an MP5 or an M16 and it would be easier for me than it would be for those cops. For me, all I need is the money. For them, they have to go through the selection process, graduate from the academy, and I am sure the members of the " specially trained state police unit" were not rookies; they put in their time on the streets.

[Soap]

Oleg and Intune,

Have you ever been to Logan? The cops there literally wear jackboots and a baldric. Now they have SMGs.

[Tamara]

I find it interesting that most of us believe that as American citizens, we have the right to be armed, and armed as effectively as possible. We believe that we have the right to own, carry, and use any small arm available. But if the police do the same, they are nazis.

No, it is (to paraphrase Orwell) that some citizens are more equal than others.

...and your other post is in error: unless you have an SOT, you can't own one of the guns these guys are toting, as they are surely Post-'86. (Neither can any citizen of MA, even if they were all HK94 sear guns...)

[Boats]

Thanks Tam, you saved me the trouble.

[org]

I may be wrong, but to me it seems the most repressive states and cities have the most militarized police forces in terms of equipment and attitude, while denying citizens their 2nd amendment rights.

I'd hate to be anywhere in the terminal with those "2 round bursts" ricocheting around. Maybe a semiauto that is accurate would be better than a MP5 that gets shot twice a year.

[Skunkabilly]

Flory, what's a baldric? Rufen Sie die Polizei an wenn Sie Skunky sehen!!

[DJJ]

Well, Boats and Tamara already said it, but that won't stop me.

I find it interesting that most of us believe that as American citizens, we have the right to be armed, and armed as effectively as possible. We believe that we have the right to own, carry, and use any small arm available. But if the police do the same, they are nazis.

The Same would be fine. The Same is all we're asking for. Calling it The Same means I get to walk into the secure area at Logan with my brand-new, unregistered, supressed MP-5. The situation is, in fact, far from The Same.

[444]

I think you are missing my point. It sounds to me, and I very well may be wrong, but it sounds like you are using the same arguments to bash the police that the antis use against us. That article doesn't mention any actual deads done by these police officers, it only mentions that they are getting new guns. So right away a number of you pipe up that they are jackbooted thugs etc. based on nothing other than the fact that they are now carrying submachine guns. Just the fact that they have machineguns makes them bad guys. Put another way, the MP5s don't make them bad guys. Of course they may be bad guys, or they may be bad guys because you don't agree with the laws that they are enforcing, whatevever; but it isn't the guns' fault.

Tamara, the argument that I can't buy an identical gun because mine might not be MADE the same date as theirs is pretty weak.

Boats, in your first post you make reference to the police simply enforcing the will of the politicians. This is true but you need to take it a step further. The people ELECTED these people. The people VOTED for these people of their own free will. Then when the will of the people is carried out, the people doing the carrying are of course to blame.

[Boats]

Five will get you ten that "the people" never lobbied their "leaders" to exempt the police from almost every firearm law or regulation ever drafted if an exemption for the police had not been drafted in at the start. Time and again it is the leaders of LEO orgs that come to legislators and say, "We'd be happy to support your latest gun control measure, just ensure that we get our customary exemption that you forgot in the initial draft there."

[444]

"the leaders of LEO orgs that come to legislators........."

You mean the legislators that were elected by the public in a free election ?

[Tamara]

Tamara, the argument that I can't buy an identical gun because mine might not be MADE the same date as theirs is pretty weak.

Tell you what; you find a real, transferrable MP5SD (not a clone sear gun), and tote it into Logan Airport, and we'll talk. Otherwise, some animals are still more equal than others. Period.

[Sir Galahad]

Well, actually, they might not find the MP5 you carried in if it was in your carry-on bag. But they will find those nailclippers and G.I. Joe's toy rifle and confiscate those.:D Lesson: Leave G.I. Joe at home. Use MP5 to clip fingernails.:evil:

[M1911]

Tamara:

Is it unjust that we can't own the same Class 3 toys that they use? Sure.

But that's not the pressing issue here. Has there been a demonstrable threat to airports? Yes, there has, as shown at LAX. To respond to such a threat, would it be safer for the general public if they carried just pistols? Or pistols and carbines/rifles? I've argued pistols and carbine/rifles, because they'd be more likely to hit the perps and miss the rest of us.

Btw, while suppressors are illegal in MA, full-auto is legal and I know quite a few folks with Class III toys.

The cops there literally wear jackboots and a baldric.That's the standard MA State Police uniform. They were the same silly breeches throughout MA. It goes back to the days when they road horses. Now it just looks silly and means they can't run as fast.

[444]

Tamara, you are a fountain of knowlege, and I have nothing but respect for you. I have enjoyed your posts for several years now. Most of the time I completely agree with you, but in this case, all I can say is :rolleyes:

[Walk Softly]

I would be happy if I could buy a legal, suppressed MP5 for $2500, even if I couldn't carry it into the airport!

[Tamara]

Tamara, you are a fountain of knowlege, and I have nothing but respect for you. I have enjoyed your posts for several years now. Most of the time I completely agree with you, but in this case, all I can say is :rolleyes:

I don't get it. Are you saying you can legally buy a post-'86 HK MP5SD in MA without an SOT? :confused:

[444]

I have no idea what you can buy in MA. But to answer your question, I guess I lied, I know you can't buy a post-'86 HK MP5SD. But, I can buy a pre-86 MP5SD, but that isn't the point of the thread to me. I agree with their need for the weapons. I believe we need police officers as a society and I believe they need to be well armed. The gun law issue is another story and you know how I feel about that.
I did take an Emerson Commander into a plane yesterday (like I do many days). But I am one of those supercitizens mentioned earlier.

[CZ-75]

Coy predicted that the presence of the guns, which have long been used at European airports, would bring peace of mind to the traveling public.

And this has worked so well.

Frankfurt and Rome come to mind.



And to add to org's thoughts, I've wondered why regimes (like the Eurosocialists and the People's Commune of Massachusetts) that restrict the freedoms of their "citizens," particularly in regard to what, if any, weapons they may own, feel the need to arm their enforcers with automatic weapons.

How much firepower to you need to keep an unarmed populace in line? Or is it that the draconian penalties for owning weapons mean that if criminals are going to violate them, they may as well go all the way?

[Sir Galahad]

Ho, there, hoss. Calling a police officer an "enforcer"? I've been quiet about the jackboot talk, but really, guys. :rolleyes: Who gets called to look for peoples' missing kids? Think it's Gun Owners of America or the NRA? Who is usually first uniform on scene to give aid in car accidents? Uh, the Libertarian Party? Have some forgotten that a pretty tall number of cops died in the WTC on 9/11 trying to SAVE LIVES? Don't blame the cops. Blame the politicians that make the laws. The police officers I know are honorable, giving people. There was one cop shot to death here a couple years ago just doing his job. He asked some punk high on meth to turn down his radio. For that, he was killed. Just trying to give a citizen who called in with a noise complaint some service. Let's talk about the laws, not the men who are only doing their jobs for what is sometimes an ungrateful community.

[Tamara]

Don't blame the cops. Blame the politicians that make the laws.

Why, that's just what I'm doing. (...at least, if you insert "good" between "the" and "cops", and most of them are.) ;)

[CZ-75]

Calling a police officer an "enforcer"?

When you consider the political make-up of some of these places, what else would you call them?

I suppose the NKVD and the Gestapo were just "police officers"? :rolleyes:

[Mizzoutiger]

Let's quit beating around the bush and talk about what REALLY bothers us. We cannot protect our constitutional rights from tyranny if the "employees" of tyranny outgun us. Your average citizen should be able to procure the very same weapons government agents can in the same ease that they do. Otherwise, when it comes down to acting on our 2nd amendment rights to do what I believe, as many others do, the framers of the constitution intended, it would be an exercise in futility.

"What country can perserve its liberties if their rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance. Let them take arms." Thomas Jefferson

Our rulers are not in the least nervous at the citizenry's arms. They are issued full auto "assault" rifles with magazines that dwarf civilian capacity. I won't even get into more lethal military equipment. I'll just say that should ever the time come in our nation's future that we will have to take back our country by force, we would have an american massacre on our hands.

[444]

I got news for you. Clothes don't make the man. Handing someone an MP5 doesn't make him or her a bad***. Having firearms that can switch to full auto doesn't make someone a bad***. Firepower isn't the issue. When people are too lazy to vote for their freedom, the idea of fighting for it seems pretty silly.

[M1911]

And this has worked so well. And this has worked so well.So, would the Frankfurt and Rome incidents have been better (i.e., there been less loss of innocent lives) if the police there had been more poorly armed?

Folks, I just don't understand your objections to this. I don't get it.
Having firearms that can switch to full auto doesn't make someone a bad***It is always difficult to get accurate details from an article in the popular press, but it sounds to me that these guns aren't full-auto, but are instead semi and burst (2-round).

[Soap]

Skunk- It is a belt with a strap that goes over one shoulder.

[Sir Galahad]

CZ-75, I'm referring to AMERICAN police officers. Hel-lo!:rolleyes:

Those who think they cannot defend themselves without automatic weapons sure don't have much confidence in their marksmanship skills.:evil: Got news for ya, full auto doesn't make up for poor shots, it increases them. In basic, we had M-16A1s. These were the full-auto selectives, not the 3 round burst A2s.If a guy was a poor shot with semi, you should have seen all the misses with full auto! And even the good shots saw their misses increase with full auto. Maybe the first two or three rounds hit the target and the rest flew off. This is why the military went to burst fire instead of full auto. Yeah, yeah, I know, I know. That's not YOU, right? :rolleyes:

A crack shot with a single shot rifle will be more effective than some nabob with a full auto. Even police departments forget that.

[Tamara]

Those who think they cannot defend themselves without automatic weapons sure don't have much confidence in their marksmanship skills.


So this violation of the Second Amendment isn't such a bad one then, right?

Out of curiousity, where do you think the government, as an entity, derives the right to buy an MP5 or a SAW?

[M1911]

COME ON PEOPLE!

Yes, the NFA laws are wrong. Yes, we should be able to buy full-auto and surpressors.

But that has NOTHING to do with how the MA State Police guarding Logan airport should be armed.

ENOUGH of this! Start another thread if you wish to debate that.

[CZ-75]

CZ-75, I'm referring to AMERICAN police officers. Hel-lo!

I don't see much distance between Kalifornia, PRNJ, and MA police (particularly state police) and those from those other regimes and I wasn't making a distinction. Give'em time over here.

Arming them with automatic weapons on a daily basis at the airport is the first step on the slippery slope to para-military enforcers. The next will be when they need them on routine patrol.

So, would the Frankfurt and Rome incidents have been better (i.e., there been less loss of innocent lives) if the police there had been more poorly armed?

I think the idea was that the police were heavily armed, yet the bad guys did it anyway.

[Blain]

"MA: Troopers training to carry submachine guns at Logan airport"

They've already had troops patrolling Logan since 9/11 with M16s. What would be the point of replacing them with MP5s? If anything that's a step down!

[Thumper]

When people are too lazy to vote for their freedom, the idea of fighting for it seems pretty silly.

Wow...well put.

[Yohan]

2 30-round clips in a 2rd-burst MP5? Cool!
BA-BAP! BA-BAP! BA-BAP! BA-BAP! BA-BAP! BA-BAP! BA-BAP! BA-BAP! BA-BAP! BA-BAP! BA-BAP! BA-BAP! BA-BAP! BA-BAP! BA-BAP! **PING!!!***

Ooh- is that a MP5/Garand hybrid? :neener: :neener: :evil:

[Sir Galahad]

Tamara, my point wasn't about who can own what. I'm not in this to say who should own what. My point was about some folks thinking they can't fight a guerilla war without full-auto (in a "for instance" scenario involving rebelling against a tyranny.) There will be plenty of full-auto weapons laying on the ground if a few guys with accurate semi-autos, or even bolt actions, do their part with impeccable marksmanship.:evil: The point was, full-auto is not a "be all" issue. It doesn't define the ability to defend against tyranny. The Viet Minh started mostly with captured bolt action Arisakas, Mosins and SKS. One sniper with a bolt action rifle can hold up thousands of men for hours. It is the will, not the weapon, that makes the warrior.

CZ-75, be sure and copy your comments about police and post them to your dashboard. That way, if you're stuck in a snowdrift without your cell phone in the middle of a blizzard, the police on-scene will know you don't need their help. Blaming cops for bad laws is like blaming gun owners for crime.

[CZ-75]

CZ-75, be sure and copy your comments about police and post them to your dashboard. That way, if you're stuck in a snowdrift without your cell phone in the middle of a blizzard, the police on-scene will know you don't need their help.

That would never happen, b/c I'm not so stupid that I'd go out in a blizzard. Every time I needed the police, they weren't there any time soon or weren't interested in doing much, so I'd doubt it would make a difference anyway. I'd rather rely on AAA.

Blaming cops for bad laws is like blaming gun owners for crime.

Nah, I just blame police unions, since they're at the forefront of the continuing paramilitary trend. Ask Ohioans about how little the police have to do with the legislative process.

[Sir Galahad]

On police unions, we can agree. My take on the paramilitarization of the police, in hindsight, is the same as my take on marksmanship. A lot of police departments try to make up for marksmanship with equipment. There's also the growing trend of saying that ARs are better in police cruisers than shotguns (which a lot of people are running around saying the .223 is better than a shotgun for indoor home defense, so this is not only a police trend.) What I always found odd is that in the case (and I'm going to Tuesday morning quarterback here) of Columbine, where mass shooting was in progress, the SWAT team did not storm in. Ok, here they were with body armor, kevlar helmets, and military weapons and they did not storm in to stop this. So, what was the point of the body armor and helmets? At some point, we're going to be in violation of the Posse Comitatus Act by proxy when we have a de facto army patrolling the streets. In many cases, from what I've seen, the need isn't for more weapons, but more nightstick applied to adjust attitudes on up-and-coming bad guys and more proactive policing. But then the various "communities" go into hysterics about "police brutality" and "profiling". So, in many ways, the police are damned if they do and damned if they don't. Just like here I am second-guessing the SWAT team at Columbine and I wasn't there to know the full scoop. There aren't any easy answers. Well, there are, but today's touchy-feely society doesn't want to implement them.

[surfinUSA]

The unarmed british police have had MP5s at their major airports for years (A lot more british cops are armed than people realize).

More surprizing was that the cops in France carry Mini 14s at Charles De Gaulle airport.