Tony,
Ok that's one. But just one
NM Shooter
True, DMK was originally posting about military uses. The military and LE have different needs IMO. I don't think the same weapons aways serves the needs of each equally well.
444
"It doesn't really give you any more range than a handgun since the cartridge is the same."
Last time I checked longer barrels produce more velocity and that would tend to equal more range, NO? Most people shoot better with shoulder weapons than they do with handguns even if it's a carbine with not-so-great sights. I know personally much past 25 yards with a pistol and I'm out of the running (correction, I better start running). I may be wrong but it seems to me the number of times your average LE officer needs to be able to shoot his or her 223 200-300 yards is rare. Even small departs have a few peps with the skills and tools to do that once in a millenium when it does happen. What this concept is "aimed" at is the stand off situation where the PO would like to be far enough way from the BG to keep the BG from eating him alive with the Saturday Night Special he has while at the same time being close enough (50-100 yards) to do just that to the bad guy with a well designed service/LE carbine. Unless the data has changed recently, BGs still tend to show up armed with handguns (and not rifles) during the commision of their crimes or when "treed."
"The limitation on effective handgun range is the skill of the operator, not the weapon."
So?
That is also not the point of my post. I've seen and shot pistol caliber carbines at regulary hit things at a 100 yards I could not with my handgun shooting the same ammo in both.
"It doesn't give any increased ballistic performance when firing a 9mm or .45 ACP cartridge."
Longer barrel=higher velocity=better performance (assuming the round chosen is not a turkey). Any covers
all the territory. Are you sure you what to go with
no increase.
If you don't agree read up on the countless posts and not a small number of publications regarding the performance decreases being experienced in the ME with short barrelled ARs.
"It doesn't give the officer the ability to defeat body armor."
Are all BG's wearing it these days, even 1%. I think not. BTW, can we always count on 223 being able to defeat body armor? I wonder how some of the newer 233 rounds carrying bullets designed not to over penetrate in building can still defeat high level body armor.
"It is longer and more cumbersome without giving any additional benefit."
Reread my post.
"If it uses magazines that interchange with the duty handgun, it doesn't even give an increase in ammunition capacity."
So if capacity is THE consideration why not belt feds.
Being able to exchange hi-cap mags between sidearms and LE service carbines IS a main part of the whole point. Like I said, many LE pistol mags hold 17 rounds now and it's not a big deal to get slightly longer ones that hold 25. I don't think a 17 to 25 round mag gives up much over a 20 or 30 round AR mag.
I'm not saying this concept should remove the AR platform from the armories list of LE. I think there is a lot of merit of a weapon that falls between the standard LE sidearm and the AR. Some will say the idea of a LE carbine is a comprise to both the pistol and the AR and as such is compromised too much to be justified.
I'm in the camp that sees it as better than either is some ways and worth considering.
A no flame intended 444.
DMK a apologize for theft of this thread.
S-
