Campus cops get ARs - in California!


PDA






Teachu2
January 24, 2013, 12:41 PM
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2013/01/24/southern-california-schools-get-high-powered-rifles/

If you enjoyed reading about "Campus cops get ARs - in California!" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
mbt2001
January 24, 2013, 12:42 PM
So....

Arming themselves is a great idea, especially if the tax payers get gored in doing it, but arming anyone else must be outlawed...

Kind of funny that the answer really is more guns.

SoCalNoMore
January 24, 2013, 12:44 PM
I had the unfortunate opportunity to work a stint out of the Fontana Sheriff's station, they need these without a doubt. So odd that Feinstein is wanting to ban them and make the supply dry up when schools are getting them. And with all of the "no we dont need armed guards in our schools" rhetoric.

USAF_Vet
January 24, 2013, 12:45 PM
Cops can use those weapons to protect your kids while at school, but when they get home, they are SOL. They want to stop school shootings, they couldn't care less about home invasion shootings. They don't care if kids die, they just don't want it happening on the states time and dime.

blackrussian
January 24, 2013, 12:45 PM
At least they got pre-craze pricing.

Dr.Zubrato
January 24, 2013, 12:58 PM
I love the last quote.

"In my world, everything should be peaceful, we shouldn't hate each other," said the mother of five. "However, that's not the world we're living in. We're living in a violent world, crazies are out there constantly. ... We need to be prepared."


Word.

Shadow 7D
January 24, 2013, 01:16 PM
Yep, for $25 they are carrying FULL AUTO scary guns...
wonder if they know how to use them.

flyskater
January 24, 2013, 02:36 PM
I hope it comes with a 10 round magazine."The weapons, which cost $1,000 each, are high-powered weapons that are accurate at longer range

"The weapons, which cost $1,000 each, are high-powered weapons that are accurate at longer range" - How are they labeled "high powered" but I can't hunt with a 223?

r1derbike
January 24, 2013, 02:40 PM
Yeah, high-powered is a misnomer. Accurate at longer ranges is a good thing, however.

DMK
January 24, 2013, 02:44 PM
Yep, for $25 they are carrying FULL AUTO scary guns...
wonder if they know how to use them.They aren't full auto. They are your standard semi-auto Colt 6940s.

As far as knowing how to use them, I don't know if they are or not, but there is no reason in the world they shouldn't get training in proper tactics. Tactical training is really is not that expensive (no more than say good enterprise computer training) and AR-15s are not difficult to shoot properly.

r1derbike
January 24, 2013, 02:47 PM
I love the last quote.

"In my world, everything should be peaceful, we shouldn't hate each other," said the mother of five.Denial is the first delusion to becoming a victim.

It never ceases to amaze me, that while I understand the maternal instinct, and the desire to have peace, glitter, and unicorns at every street corner, that utter denial of the brutal world out there is just too scary to acknowledge. A fatal mistake in far too many instances.

Yes, we need to do better...much better, and the proposed fixes have been continually shot-down (except in a few cases I may count on 1 finger), or will increase the violence by disarmament of law-abiding citizens, many, who have already, or will risk their lives to save those who would support to neuter us.

Browning
January 24, 2013, 02:50 PM
Well at least their chief has good taste in guns and he got them Colts and not some crappy brand.

I think they should be regulated to 10 rds like the rest of California's citizens though.

dprice3844444
January 24, 2013, 02:54 PM
bout time the district is getting smart.usually campus cops only carry sidearms,maybe shotguns in the cars.some are just security guards,not even certified cops,usually with revolvers,depending on the attitude of administration.

bdgackle
January 24, 2013, 03:08 PM
Will these have "California compliant" stocks with no pistol grips, and non-collapsing buttstocks? I assume law enforcement has no need to "spray fire from the hip"... so... why else would they need pistol grips? Also, as there is no legitimate law enforcement application of a bayonet lug, I am going to assume those were sheared off as well?

Don't get me wrong... I fully support properly equipped law enforcement. Just seems that any ergonomic feature that makes them better shooters is equally valid for civilians.

Teachu2
January 24, 2013, 03:17 PM
Will these have "California compliant" stocks with no pistol grips, and non-collapsing buttstocks? I assume law enforcement has no need to "spray fire from the hip"... so... why else would they need pistol grips? Also, as there is no legitimate law enforcement application of a bayonet lug, I am going to assume those were sheared off as well?

Don't get me wrong... I fully support properly equipped law enforcement. Just seems that any ergonomic feature that makes them better shooters is equally valid for civilians.
Pistol grips and collapsible stocks are legal in CA with a bullet button. LE agencies are exempt from the bullet button requirement.

Teachu2
January 24, 2013, 03:20 PM
bout time the district is getting smart.usually campus cops only carry sidearms,maybe shotguns in the cars.some are just security guards,not even certified cops,usually with revolvers,depending on the attitude of administration.
Most campus cops in California carry Glock 40s.

bdgackle
January 24, 2013, 03:24 PM
There is no legal requirement for a bullet button - the purpose of the button is to make the rifle non-magazine fed in the eyes of the law, thus removing it from the assault weapon ban's consideration entirely.

What CA law enforcement is exempt from is the entire ban, not just a minor requirement of it. This leaves the same question: what legitimate reason to police have to own these weapons that is not equally applicable to civilians?

Not to split hairs - just highlighting what I hope is a useful argument. I have no doubt I am preaching to the converted in your case. And you are of course correct that these will be standard configuration weapons. My question was largely facetious.

Texan Scott
January 24, 2013, 03:36 PM
I can't imagine why police officers would NEED ar15s if they're only good for killing large numbers of people as quickly as possible.

DMK
January 24, 2013, 04:35 PM
I can't imagine why police officers would NEED ar15s if they're only good for killing large numbers of people as quickly as possible. Coming from a fellow gun owner, I really hope that is sarcasm.

Skribs
January 24, 2013, 05:05 PM
I'm pretty sure it was sarcasm, DMK. It's essentially the argument we're all making regarding police exemptions - we fight the same bad guys, and are held to much the same legal standards regarding when lethal force is justified in defense. The only difference is we're not actively seeking out the bad guys.

What I loved was the host who said there is no legal requirement for citizens to use their guns responsibly. Somehow insinuating that cops should have guns because they're required not to shoot innocents, but civilians are not bound by that law, so we should get rid of guns for civilians so that we can't shoot each other. That guy made no sense at all.

Oh I'm sorry that wasn't the host. That was the mayor of some city (I believe in California).

Shadow 7D
January 24, 2013, 11:23 PM
They aren't full auto. They are your standard semi-auto Colt 6940s.

As far as knowing how to use them, I don't know if they are or not, but there is no reason in the world they shouldn't get training in proper tactics. Tactical training is really is not that expensive (no more than say good enterprise computer training) and AR-15s are not difficult to shoot properly.
Ah, too bad, for MUCH less they could have got a DRMO rifle

Texan Scott
January 25, 2013, 03:38 AM
Lol. DMK, let me rephrase: IF ar15s really were good for nothing but mass killing, what valid reason could cops have for keeping them? The rifle either has legitimate legal defensive uses or it doesn't. Which is it, Fsteiners?

gunNoob
January 25, 2013, 03:56 AM
Funny how they didn't refer to them as "assault rifles" in this article.

InkEd
January 25, 2013, 03:56 AM
Not allowed for the people...THEN...Not allowed for the police!!!

tekarra
January 25, 2013, 09:09 PM
What will the children think of seeing police carrying rifles at school!

PedalBiker
January 25, 2013, 09:22 PM
IF what Feinstein says about "assault rifles" is true then police don't need them.


If assault rifles are designed to "kill lots of people", why do police need to "kill lots of people"?

If assault rifles are not useful for self defense why do police need them at all?

If assault rifles are so powerful why would police use them in a school, let alone in the city anywhere?

If 30 round magazines are tools of "war" why do cops need them, it's not like we send them into combat?


In reality this school district realized the obvious:
1. Rifles are more accurate. Less misses means less chance of unintended casualties.
2. High velocity bullets are less ricochet prone and hence safer.
3. Fragmenting bullets are less likely to over penetrate and hence are safer.
4. A removable magazine is quicker, safer and easier to unload than a tubular magazine.
5. A removable magazine makes an unloaded weapon easier to quickly and safely load, eliminating the need to store weapons loaded.
5. A semi auto rifle will serve a wounded officer who may have only use of one arm.
6. A 223 cartridge is easy to manage due to light recoil which makes accurate shooting easier.


All of which proves that Feinstein wants more powerful, more dangerous weapons to be left out of "round one" of her legislation. And make no mistake this is just round one.

If it's small Feinstein hates it.
If it's cheap Feinstein hates it.
If it's powerful Feinstein hates it.
If it's accurate Feinstein hates it.

There are no guns Feinstein likes but the ones SHE has.

CGT80
January 26, 2013, 02:56 AM
Pistols with standard cap mags and AR-15's are good to go for the cops who work the schools I went to, but I have to run a bullet button on my rifle, to defend myself in the same city.......A bunch of BS.

I think it is a great idea that officers be well armed. They should be free to carry an AR-15 on their person, if they want. I read an article that said the AR's would be locked up on campus and used if needed. Once they unlock them from where ever they are stored, it will be too late.

The second high school (A. B. Miller High School) in Fontana is 40 acres, if I recall correctly. It used to take me all of the 5-6 minute passing period to get from the library end of he quad to the gym, and that was at a very fast walk. Someone could pop off a few pistol rounds in a classroom right across the quad from the office and no one in the office would hear it. Science teachers have clocked the wind on the playing fields of that campus at 80 mph gusts. The wind blows very often in the fall and will kick up through the spring. Just walking around on days like that were tough. That campus had 3,000 students in 1999. A few obvious officers with firearms are not enough to guarantee that an attacker could be stopped quickly. The field can have hundreds of kids on them at one time. If staff could carry concealed, at will, it would help even more. An attacker would not know how many people or who was carrying, other than the obvious cops.

It is great that FUSD has stepped up their game, but it sucks that in Komnifornia we are not allowed to defend ourselves with the same equipment that the cops or bad guys will carry.

If you enjoyed reading about "Campus cops get ARs - in California!" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!