Ft.Lauderdale,FL Police to Receive 'Assault Weapons'

[George C Morrison]

There are more lies and distortions is this piece than I can count.
Note the bill to prevent felons from carrying concealed weapons!
A little bit of sanity at the end of the piece.I think.

FORT LAUDERDALE
Ft. Lauderdale police beef up arsenal with new rifles
By the end of the summer, Fort Lauderdale police will be issued high-powered weapons.
Posted on Thu, Jun. 05, 2008
BY AMY SHERMAN AND ERIKA BERAS
[email protected]

Joining a growing number of law enforcement agencies nationwide and in South Florida, the Fort Lauderdale Police Department plans to arm its patrol officers with high-powered rifles to match the firepower of the weapons toted by criminals.

City commissioners gave the green light on Tuesday to purchase the semiautomatic weapons, approving an initial purchase of 100 Colt AR6520 rifles for about $150,000, including ammunition. Officers may be issued the weapons by summer's end.

In making the decision, commissioners cited the mass shootings at Columbine and, more recently, Virginia Tech. They also noted last year's shooting of a Miami-Dade police officer at the hands of a gunman who used a modified Mak-90.

SPECIAL TEAMS

Fort Lauderdale officers who serve on specialized teams, have had access to rifles since the late 1990s, according to Lt. Mike DiMaggio.

Since 2001, other officers have had the right to buy their own at about $850 apiece and carry them if they participated in training. About 130 of more than 400 officers have completed that training.

The weapons will be made available to all officers.

''The goal is to have every patrol officer who is on the road every day to have one in their car,'' said Fort Lauderdale Sgt. Frank Sousa.

Officers will be trained on using the rifles, which have more range than handguns.

Then-Police Chief Bruce Roberts, who abruptly quit last week after tense union negotiations, had requested the more powerful weapons.

Fort Lauderdale officers have seized an increasing number of weapons since 2004, the year Congress lifted the ban on assault weapons. Police confiscated 291 in 2007, up from just 95 in 2004.

Other South Florida police departments have long allowed its officers to carry bigger weapons.

Last year, Miami Police Chief John Timoney authorized similar weapons for his police officers. About one-third of Broward Sheriff's Office deputies carry rifles -- something they got the right to do in 2006. BSO deputies and Miami-Dade police officers generally have to buy their own rifles.

''It's done a lot in terms of confidence and general morale where our people for a long time felt as if they were underpowered and now they have another weapon that they can utilize when coming up against people with assault rifles,'' BSO spokesman Jim Leljedal said.

Many blame the 2004 expiration of the federal ban on assault weapons for the escalation of firepower on the streets of South Florida.

But others say escalating the power of officers' firearms isn't the solution. They believe federal lawmakers need to reinstate the ban on assault weapons.

''It's a fact that [officers] are facing more risk out there,'' said State Rep. Yolly Roberson, a Democrat from Miami. ``Yet I don't believe we can really stop violence with violence. What is important is for us to ban assault weapons period.''

CONCEALED WEAPONS

Roberson fought unsuccessfully in Tallahassee to pass a bill to prevent felons from carrying concealed weapons. The bill was opposed by the National Rifle Association.

Dorothy Schulz, a professor in police studies at John Jay College of Criminal Justice in New York, questions whether having police carrying such powerful weapons creates the wrong image.

''It's just an escalation of firearms power. Police are not military personnel. I think it sends a very negative message to the average person and probably a challenge to the criminals,'' she said.

http://www.miamiherald.com/548/story/558639.html

 

[RichardInFlorida]

Wow. I've seen poorly written/researched stories, but that one is pretty awful.

 

[wideym]

It seems to me that an officer who buys his own rifle would take care of it better and be more likely to pratice with it than an officer who just carries an issued one in a squad car.

Is $850 really too much for an officer to afford? I know plenty of working people who can afford ARs and they won't be able to carry them at work.

 

[.cheese.]

Many blame the 2004 expiration of the federal ban on assault weapons for the escalation of firepower on the streets of South Florida.

But others say escalating the power of officers' firearms isn't the solution. They believe federal lawmakers need to reinstate the ban on assault weapons.

Somehow I get the impression that the "some" and "others" are the same people.

 

[Treo]

The term "poorly researched" indicates that the reporter was trying to get the facts right and failed, I don't think that's the case here at all. I think this reporter, like many , has an agenda and is writing to that agenda; I.E. get rid of "Assault Weapons". What I don't know is how we fight the lies in the liberal controlled media.

 

[benEzra]

Sent the following email to the author of the story:

Hi! Just wanted to point out that police departments have been
replacing the traditional patrol shotgun with small-caliber patrol
rifles since the mid-1990's, for reasons that had nothing to do with
the expiration of the 1994 Feinstein law. From _Police Marksman_,
July/August 1998:


Roberts G.K., "Law Enforcement General Purpose Shoulder Fired Weapons:
the Wounding Effects of 5.56mm/.223 Carbines Compared with 12 ga.
Shotguns and Pistol Caliber Weapons Using 10% Ordnance Gelatin as a
Tissue Simulant, Police Marksman, Jul/Aug 1998, pp. 38-45.

"INTRODUCTION

"Until recently, the 12 gauge shotgun has remained the universally
accepted shoulder fired weapon for United States law enforcement use,
despite the shotgun's limitations as a general purpose weapon--short
effective range, imprecise accuracy, downrange hazard to bystanders,
small ammunition capacity, slow reloading, and harsh recoil. While 12
gauge shotguns still have a valid law enforcement role, especially to
deliver specialized munitions and possibly in close quarters combat
(CQB), recent recognition of the shotgun's significant limitations as
a general purpose weapon have prompted many American law enforcement
agencies to begin adopting the more versatile semi-automatic carbine
for general purpose use.(12) Semi-automatic carbines offer more
accuracy, less recoil, greater effective range, faster reloading, and
a larger ammunition capacity than the traditional shotgun.
...
"Less well known is that 5.56mm/.223 rifle ammunition is also ideally
suited for law enforcement general purpose use in semi-automatic
carbines.(5,6). It offers superb accuracy coupled with low recoil, and
is far more effective at incapacitating violent aggressors than the
pistol cartridges utilized in submachineguns and some semi-automatic
carbines.
...

"CONCLUSION

"A 5.56mm/.223 semi-automatic carbine with a minimum of a 14.5" to
16.5" barrel may be the most effective and versatile weapon for use in
law enforcement. When used with effective ammunition, the 5.56mm/.223
carbine simultaneously offers both greater effective range and less
potential downrange hazard to bystanders than a 12 ga. shotgun,
handgun, pistol caliber carbine, or SMG , as well as far greater
potential to incapacitate a violent criminal than any handgun, pistol
caliber carbine, or SMG.
...
The routine issuing of 5.56mm/.223 semi-automatic carbines for general
purpose use to all law enforcement officers would significantly
enhance officer safety, increase police effectiveness, and decrease
dangers to innocent bystanders in all situations requiring the use of
firearms."



That was the law enforcement consensus in 1998. The trend goes back
much further than that; I know the NYPD Stakeout Unit used the M1
carbine (comparable to the AR-15) at least as far back as 1968-1973,
FBI agents used carbines and rifles in the early 20th century, and law
enforcement use of the lever-action Winchester carbine (which in
.30-30 Winchester is a ballistic twin of the AK-47) goes back to the
1800's.

The trend took off in the mid- to late-1990's, not after '04. The
trend was based on the advantages of the carbine compared to the
traditional 12-gauge shotgun (.729 caliber) shotgun, i.e. increased
precision and effective range compared to the shotgun, reduced risk to
bystanders from shot dispersion and richochet, and far less recoil,
which makes carbines much easier for small-statured officers to use
effectively.

FWIW, as far as the 2004 expiration of the Feinstein law (the assault
weapon "ban"), no rifles became legal in 2004 that weren't legal in
2002 or 1997. Civilian AK lookalikes, AR-15 type rifles, etc. were
just as legal to manufacture, sell, and possess during the "ban" as
they are now. And according to the FBI Uniform Crime Reports, rifles
are consistently the least likely class of firearm to be misused.

Thanks for your time, and have a great day.

benEzra

 

[RP88]

the media doesnt have an alliance. It just likes to make you think that the world is in chaos. They will always try to find the bad side in everything.

I do like the last comment on how the police arent military personnel; even though that doesnt affect the topic at hand, it's nice to see someone acknowledge that for a change.

also, +1 on the letter. You should have thrown in something about how the weapon is great in the hands of law-abiding citizens for the same reason it is great for law enforcement, but still good nonetheless.

 

[Bill2e]

Here is my email to the herald.

The quote below is from your article in the Thursday June 5 Miami herald. Would you please be so kind as to forward me information to verify the quote? As I am sure you are aware convicted felons are not allowed to legally own or handle firearms. I find it hard to believe the NRA would rally for convicted felons to have the right to carry concealed (since convicted felon are prohibited from owning firearms).

If true I would like to question the NRA on this.

What was the bill number?

Thank you,

Bill

http://www.miamiherald.com/548/story/558639.html

“Roberson fought unsuccessfully in Tallahassee to pass a bill to prevent felons from carrying concealed weapons. The bill was opposed by the National Rifle Association.”

 

[George C Morrison]

Thank you,Bill2e for sending that email to the Herald.That was a good idea and I'm sure most of us will be interested if you get any feedback from the paper.
The disturbing thing about this situation is that the Herald, like every newspaper big and small ,has proofreaders and editors who are responsible for catching everything from simple spelling errors to gross distortions such as we have just read in this article.
It's so ludicrous that it's mind boggling.One of America's major newspaper's stating with a straight face that a bill was introduced to prevent felons from carrying concealed weapons and the devilish NRA opposed it!
And they mention the bills sponsor's name and laments of the defeat are added by the Herald's two writers.
As liberal as the Herald has become, just a few years ago mistakes,distortions and outright lies of this magnitude would never have appeared in its pages.It's sinking to rock bottom levels with hard core socialist editorials and local writers like Fred Grimm and Ana Menendez who beat the anti-gun and pro- Castro drums almost daily.
We need responsibility here and they better come up with an intelligent answer for you and many others.
Look at several of the Herald poster's asking the same questions as you in harsher terms at the end of this preposterous article.
Is it any wonder once great papers such as this are losing all credibility?
I've been reading the Herald since I was a child, and it's appalling, watching it sink to the level of a cheap tabloid.

 

[Eric F]

Is $850 really too much for an officer to afford?

I am no economics specialist, however cops really dont make much in compairison to their cost of living. cops in my city start at 27k/year. So if they are single live at home and drive a beater then sure its afordable. But add a nonworking wife a kid a new house and car its all over. It would take a while to save up. I look at my own situation and I could not afford $850 right now in my life and I make way more than the average cop.

 

[searcher451]

"The liberal controlled media" makes me laugh every time I see it, and I see it a lot. If you think that the media are controlled and owned by so-called liberals, you've been spending too much with Rush and Co. You cannot equate the ignorance of a fresh-out-of-school reporter or a bozo with an agenda (and yes, there are planty of those) with a "liberal media." Most all of the major networks in this country, and most all of the major newspaper and magazine and book chains and groups, are owned and controlled by big business concerns that are as conservative as it gets. Most of these "liberal" bastions, in fact, contribute early and often to the party in power at the moment, which means that Dubya and the GOPers have been the recipients of this largesse for years now. And yet you still hear the "liberal mdeia" call. Do some digging.

http://la.indymedia.org/news/2003/04/47530.php

http://www.takebackthemedia.com/owners.html

And plenty more where those came from.

Rush and the boys would like you to believe that the media are a "liberal" bunch of renegades; it's in Rush's best interest to do so becasue it gives him something to make hay about each day. But it's nonsense. If nothing else, take a tip from Journalism 101: "If your mother says she loves you, check it out."