jerkface11
Member
Except that they got the Thompsons for free. So yeah they had no cost.
We could argue cost of opportunity all day, but the fact is that they traded something that had little or no practical value to the police department for something that had real tangible value to the police department. And it wasn't a few guns, that's 44 guns for 1 gun, seems that they got a good deal, just as good a deal as they would have gotten if they had sold for cash and purchased stuff they needed with that cash.Dave gets it
if you found grandpa's pristine pre-war Model 70 tucked away in the attic and traded it for a few Bushmasters, would you go around bragging to your buddies about your free Bushmasters?
We could argue cost of opportunity all day, but the fact is that they traded something that had little or no practical value to the police department for something that had real tangible value to the police department. And it wasn't a few guns, that's 44 guns for 1 gun, seems that they got a good deal, just as good a deal as they would have gotten if they had sold for cash and purchased stuff they needed with that cash.
What do you think the worth of these 2 rifle would be if the general populace could freely create, buy and sell real thompsons? 2-3 grand?
it is technically not correct to say that it was at no cost to the department or taxpayers.
Can you give any examples of a .223 going through a person, then through a wall, and killing someone on the other side? Preferably something where the round was a hollow point or other appropriate anti personnel round.The fact is, .45 is a great policeing round in an urban environment, hitting perps , but not over penatrateing and endangering other citizens on the other side of wall.
Its not a war and over penatration is a huge risk in a police situation, as cpollateral damage is totally unacceptable.
Now every shot can kill multipull folks and the perp.
.45 can shoot through men and stop in a wall, .223 and ss109's can shoot through schools.....