Gun Control and North Hollywood Shooting...

[mbt2001]

Thought I would mention and interesting point of the North Hollywood shooting and gun control. Had guns (or certain types of guns) been "banned" the police could not have raided a gun shop and gotten the weapons that started turning the tied in their favor.

At the time the police were not able (read ban) to carry certain weapons beyond their pistol. Of course things changes after the shooting, but it is an interesting way to look at the idea of a ban.

The LAPD were banned from carrying carbines, had the civilians likewise been banned they couldn't have turned the tide by grabbing better arms from a gun shop. The LAPD response was to un-ban...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:N...pe_of_rifle_borrowed_by_police_from_gun_store

Interesting point to remind people of is all I am saying, not a rehash of the shootout.

 

[ApacheCoTodd]

Irony abounds...

The ban was to "keep the guns outa the hands of criminals" but of course, being bank robbers and eventual cop killers - they couldn't care less about a ban.

As stated in the OP, the lawmen had to go to stores to acquire sufficient armament needed to deal with the robbers then they and their various public organizations lent their considerable support in banning the very arms they utilized to save their butts.

But that's all OK now as they got all those M-16s for the trunks... The public on the other hand are left hanging.

 

[Skribs]

While this is true, most police forces nowadays have the rifles they need. The shootout would be different today.

 

[jamesbeat]

Absolutely correct, however the gun grabbers see us folk as untrained, unstable and dangerous, and the police as completely mentally stable and expert marksmen.