Why do I hear this term so much "outgunned"?

[johnny blaze]

The term outgunned has been mentioned many times pertaining to law enforcement.
I recently read an article about the military giving away weapons to law enforcement.
The last article that I read stated that the one department received M-16's and M-14's, fully automatic. The chief was quoted as saying that "We have been out gunned for a long time, now we are catching up", or something simular to that statement.
I think this statement has been used way too much. I do not beleive that the average weapon taken from criminals is close to the caliber that any police department carries. So what does this outgunned statement come from? I would imagine that it is just political or media hype.
I recently talked to the local sheriff, and he told me that the favorite weapon of criminals is a 9mm, and alot of junk 32's and 25's.
The last gun show that I was at, I had to look twice to see if the people guarding the show were police or military, with all the equipment they had. Turned out they were police in full military dress (like black special opts outfits). Made me feel a little strange.

 

[I LIKE IT!]

Oh it's just the liberal media trying to convey that civillians/sheep shouldn't have firearms/teeth in todays society, either that or they just feel "outgunned" will keep people glued on tube longer/ratings.

Most street cops(not SWAT) are "out classed" when compared to law-abiding citizens in my opinion, not only in weaponry but in skill-level as well.

My .02

 

[hotpig]

Around here many of the PD's changed to BDU style uniforms because they are cheaper and hold up better.

The department buys us three sets per year. We buy our own after they look ratty or get torn or stained.

The other night I ruined a brand new shirt. I was too cheap to spend big bucks out of my own pocket so it was not a high dollar shirt. I only lost 46.00 on the shirt plus the cost of paying a old lady down the street to sew the patches on.


I would gladly change the tradition dress uniform that we wear today for a more rugged uniform that meets are real needs.

 

[B.D. Turner]

I have this one figured out. The term "out gunned" means that our department cannot afford to buy what we need due to budget problems. It sounds good and means much of nothing. People who get elected to county and city positions are not always real smart.
One lady on city of Greenville NC board while discussing the information super highway thought it was a new bypass and only voted for it to save people time getting around town. ( I am not making this up)
The mayor of one small town thought that if you saw someone selling drugs through night vision equipment that you couldn't arrest them because what they were doing was in the dark. Yes we are out gunned.
Beam us up Scotty!

 

[johnny blaze]

I guess that it is media hype. they have to do something to get the masses to watch.

On the uniforms, that makes sense. I guess that I never realized that the standard uniforms cost so much. The non standard uniforms look much more confortable than the standard units.

B. D. Turner - That is a real good point. I never thought about it in that perspective.

 

[Soybomb]

I'm eager to see how the leo's weigh in but I'm certainly under the impression that the training many are getting is improving alot and they're transitioning well from shotguns to rifles and the like. I'm not sure how well that holds true in smaller departments though.

 

[Neo-Luddite]

It's political 'newspeak' that has trickled down.

As far as I have ever understood, the average number of aimed shots fired in an armed confrontation with a trained LEO is still 2 or 3 (on the officer's part)
There are obvious exceptions to this. Most police are well armed and decently trained. The argument can be made that new toys passed along by the military create their own 'need'. To make a tired point, I assume that an officer carrying a .357 these days can hit what he/she is shooting at--NOT that they are 'outgunned' by anyone.

It's funny, the opposite just happened near where we live. A new CLEO for the next town up the road announced that he was selling off the department's stock of M-14's as he saw no potential need for that kind of firepower. He saw it as a liability. OK--if he had an APC or a Huey to clothe and feed, they MIGHT be a liability. I think it's great that police departments can get free or cheap hardware and gear. I wish that I could too!

 

[Hardtarget]

I had a friend working as a deputy in one of the "surrounding counties" of a large city. They were warned of the apparent problem of "ciity thugs" going to the small town areas to do their robberies. So he got a shorty M-16. It was a cool piece...barrel was barely past the front sight and a 6 position stock. Very compact weapon. Yes, it was full auto. I only got to shoot it once. So far, there has not been the feared invasion of city thugs so he has had this for a long time and never needed it...just as it should be. He just didn't want to be "outgunned". Watching him shoot, its not likely he would ever be "out-classed", either. That guy could rock...rifle, pistol, or shotgun.
Mark.

 

[loumarch]

As a former LEO I have to weigh in on this issue. I trained with many officers from many different departments(I was County). In all of my years I don't think there was more than 1 or 2, out of a few hundred, that would be able to use an automatic weapon effectively.

Most, but not all, of the departments with full auto capability will never deploy these weapons. They'll sit in an armory forever or until they decide to upgrade them. It's very doubtful that anyone will even be trained on these weapons.

The decision to procure automatic weapons is usually based on a SHTF scenario.
If there is a true SHTF scenario, an automatic weapon won't mean a hill of beans. These are basically just "comfort food" for the troops.

 

[Bezoar]

The term outgunned makes many people convinced that the police need to have the same weapons as the marines fighting door to door in iraq and afghanistan in order to survive. And that is why you see all the swat/paramilitary police forces carrying mp5s, full auto m16, into just aobut every situation they want to.

 

[CornCod]

This is mostly a matter of paranoia and the bureaucratic quest for more money and toys. There are a few cities where the coppers should have long guns, but I would bet that the number would be under twenty. Nasty little towns like Camden, NJ and East St. Louis, Illinois come to mind. For most policemen a six shot Model 10 S&W is fine.

 

[hotpig]

Seems that I only get dispatched to East St Louis in the middle of the night. None of the guys travel alone unless they have to.


I live the furthest away so I get there about an hour behind the others. I do not stop at stop signs and my Glock is at my side. We do leave together in a fast moving caravan.

 

[GRIZ22]

Quote:

For most policemen a six shot Model 10 S&W is fine

Agreed but why should dedicated shooters have high capacity mags, 1911s, semi AKs and ARs, etc if this is how you feel.

Many times the display of superior firepower by the police prevents gunfire. Two cops with 9mms and the BG has a 9mm or a shotgun can be a formula for a gunfight, one cop with a shotgun and another with a M4 vs the same BG, the BG wi;; usually reconsider. I can't understand the number of responsible gun owners who feel they should be able to own all the full auto, SBR, or other NFA weapons they want but are critical of police owning the same. If police are going into a situation where there may be a fight I want them outgunning the BGs.

 

[Pilgrim]

I retired from law enforcement in 1999. I was one of the department's firearms instructors for six years. The prevailing mindset was that equipment was more important than training. When I complained about that, I was written off and ignored as that "gun nut".

Pilgrim

 

[geekWithA.45]

Sigh, here we go again.

In the run up to the AWB, the press seeded stories all over the place on how the police couldn't compete with the high tech, fully automatic, mass capacity arsenal of the everyday criminal.

Movies, such as Lethal Weapon (II? III?) reinforced the image, by showing "evidence lockers" overflowing with mil pattern arms, most of which had been "easily converted" to fully automatic, and where capable of spewing out hundreds of "cop killer" bullets, capable of plowing easily through several inches of steel.

Then, as now, long arms were only used in < 1% of crimes, AP handgun bullets were hard to come by, and the most common gun sitting in the evidence room was a .38 spc revolver.

I suspect the ratio of revos to 9mm autoloaders has changed in the last 15 years, but that's about it.

 

[10-Ring]

I take the term "outgunned" with a couple grains of salt...
1st - the weapons most PDs have auth'd for use by their people are top notch & their people are well trained in the use of these weapons. So, I don't think the idea of outgunned is truely accurate
2nd - most chiefs & sheriffs are to the point in their careers where they are more poltician than anything else. They say & do things to gain support & maybe earn a few more greenbacks in their budget.

welcome to the world of double speak

 

[Logan5]

Ultimately, no criminal is in radio contact with every other criminal in his vicinity via centralized dispatch, able to call them in when a problem arises. No criminal can, if it comes to that, call on every other criminal in the nation to hunt down an LEO until he or she is captured or killed. As long as law enforcement is organized and has the support of the people, being a criminal is a loosing proposition, and the police can never be "outgunned".
In the immediacy of an individual encounter, it is possible for a given criminal to have superior firepower, but in the short, medium, and long term it does them more harm than good and they are screwed. It's not a situation that is preventable via legislation, but in general we as a people prefer law and order and support it, so that's what we generally get.

 

[Batmaxwyo]

I think the term out gunned came about years ago after the L.A. bank robbery when the bank robbers had fully automatic AK 47's and body armor. Apparently cop bullets were bouncing off the bad guys.

 

[hotpig]

I think you can find a bunch of cops in North Hollywood that would disagree that cops can not be outgunned.

 

[Logan5]

Not to be rude, but that's not what I said. Sure, there can be a disparity in firepower, in the short term, but there's nowhere to run, and no hope of winning, ever, via that route for a criminal.

 

[Glockfan.45]

Seems that I only get dispatched to East St Louis in the middle of the night. None of the guys travel alone unless they have to.

They dont pay me enough to go there in the daylight. What dept are you hotpig ?

As far as the switch to BDUs goes they are a practical/economy matter. Pay for uniform dry cleaning and replacement sometime and you will see. What gear works well for the military works well for alot of other folks also. I dont see police as being outgunned so much as being matched. 98% of the time the bad guys they encounter are armed with pistols and most of those are crappy pop guns at that. Claiming they are outgunned is a good way to get funding for better toys. I have no trouble with patrol men being equiped with a rifle and cant see why anybody else would for that matter.

The amount of anti LEO sentiment on this forum troubles me at times. I think too many people lump the Police in with the ATF, DEA, FBI and others, they are not the same at all. For the record some of those military guns are easy to convert and some are not. An AR to M16 conversion is rather tricky but dropping a full auto FCG into an AK is a cheap and simple matter so dont fool yourself by claiming its some kind of daunting task. I'm not saying that makes AKs bad I own a few of them myself, but lets be honest with ourselves here. AP bullets are not at all common on the street most rounds the thugs use are in the .25 to .32 range that would have a hard time penetrating a heavy coat let alone body armor.

For most policemen a six shot Model 10 S&W is fine

This sentiment bothers me the most. If you think an LEO only needs a six shooter then how can you justify to others that you need a 15-20-30 round whatever for SD/HD. Better trade that auto loader in for a wheelgun then.

 

[ArfinGreebly]

North Hollywood

As mentioned above, the North Hollywood bank shootout brought a lot of attention to the quality of arms and armor available to both the good guys and bad guys.

Some links (actually, very interesting stuff):
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_Hollywood_shootout

Google up "north hollywood shootout" and you'll find photos, diagrams, audio, video, reports, and analyses.

In the end, the thing that kept this from being over a lot sooner was the fact that LAPD patrolmen had no rifles. They had shotguns and sidearms. They couldn't get penetration. Moreover, all their training had them shooting center-mass. And center-mass was covered with body armor.

A couple of good head shots would have shortened this from 45 minutes to 5 minutes.

Any rifle at all would have made a night-and-day difference. An ordinary .30-30 would have a) been able to penetrate the body armor, and b) allowed for accurate head shots.

The argument is often offered that the only viable weapon to counter a military pattern rifle is another mil-pat rifle.

I would disagree. It wasn't volume of fire that would have made the difference, rather a) hitting power, and b) accuracy of aimed fire.

For various reasons, it's entirely reasonable to equip officers with AR type weapons. They're common, robust, shoot widely available ammo, and the weapons system is familiar to many from their military training.

Really, though, better marksmanship training would have gone a long way. A rifle of any kind -- really, even a Ruger 10/22 -- would have made all the difference with a head shot. Any other full rifle calibre would have been more than adequate.

A single officer with a .30-30 at 150 yards could have put an end to it all. An M1 or M14 would have been just the ticket. Heck, even a Mini-14.

Point is, they didn't have any rifles.

Lesson learned: make sure officers are equipped with rifles.

Now, whether those rifles should be AR15, M16, M1A1, or Mini-14s is a whole different argument.

The essence is have a rifle.

 

[crashresidue]

Cheers,
First off, I'm NOT a LEO - nor would I ever want to be.
"Logan5" - I'm NOT picking on you - but the mind set you verbalized. I'm combat vet - and as such, I don't give a rat's patuti where you stop the bad guy "down the road". If he made it "down the road" - then I'm either dead or FUBR'd. It's MY @ss that's on the line.
You're looking at the "long view". THAT doesnt' mean sh@t to me - in the short view of things. The whole point of having superior firepower is to survive so that I, too can enjoy the "long view.

Gentle winds,
cr

 

[Sunray]

"...or military..." They'll never be military. Most cops at a gun shows are on what's called 'paid duty' up here. Literally, a cop hired for the day as security guards. Not cheap either.
'Outgunned' means the cop or whoever, has a firearm that isn't capable of dealing with whatever situation they get into. The LA shootout is a classic example. Cops with handguns facing criminals with FA battle rifles and body armour. The LA cops won because of superior numbers and a fair bit of ingenuity. They did adapt their shooting to non-body mass shots, eventually.
'Outgunned' can also be the shooting ability of the cop too. The days of cops having shooting skills before they become cops are long gone. Most new cops have never seen a real firearm of any kind when they get hired. Having a degree is more important. Their sole experience is whatever training they get in cop school. Most of them don't shoot for recreation or for work related practice either. Not all of them nor everywhere, of course, but most. Usually good guys, but their firearm training, up here, at least, is inadequate. Eight hours of firearm training in the College, last I heard.
Used to shoot ISU target matches against Toronto cop teams. Usually wiped the floor with em. Mind you, some of the young guys would use their then issue revolver. Target shooters they weren't and not entirely comfortable shooting with us 'civilians', but good guys just the same.

 

[Dr. Dickie]

I think this mind set comes from the original out gunned scenario, that was the nut in the Texas tower. Remember, the police had nothing to shoot back at the guy in the tower, but a bunch of locals had high powered hunting rifles that could
It was then brought home with the North Hollywood bank robbery, and before that the '86 Miami FBI shoot out (bad guy had a mini 14, FBI had revolvers).
Cops can be outgunned, not very often, but good golly aren't we all prepared for what is a small percentage possiblity?
The question is (as former LEO weapons instructors have said) should the normal patrol be armed with autos, or should that be reserved for SWAT?
I can certainly see where a patrol would want an AR 15 in the trunk, just in case (I sure would want one if my butt was out there). Full autos are for suppression to escape, or fix the enemy in position for flanking maneuvers. Something I doubt the patrol officer is prepared to deal with. But a rifle, oh ya.