If mini 14s are inaccurate why does law inforcement use them?

Status
Not open for further replies.
lee n. field, AFAIK 4 MOA is the standard for military rifles. Most beat it, but 4 MOA is considered good enough for a Marine to carry into battle.

The Mini-14 is certainly "adequate" for a patrol rifle, WRT accuracy. "Sniper" is a SWAT role. As a target shooter, you might not like a gun that's not MOA accurate, but that's got nothing to do with "technically adequate."
 
On LEOs and Mini's:

About two years back I was discussing with a local deputy about his service on the Sheriff's "Rifle Team" These were not competitors but sort of a less than SWAT team. Appearently these guys secure the perimiter for the SWAT Team when it is to be used or back up other officers serving a warrent. At that time the detail was issued Mini-14 carbines. THe deputy was excited about the fact that they were supposed to be going to the AR 15. I discussed the fact that the AR TENDED to be mor accurate under the same conditions, but commented on the need for more and more difficult cleaning.

The Deputy announced that the Mini-14 was terribly hard to clean and, wait for it, The ARs need less cleaning and are easier to clean.

I tried to explain that neither was true but soon gave up for he had taken the party line hook line and sinker. Wonder if he still feels that way.

A couple of the Gun Magazines meantioned some time ago that after Waco and Ruby Ridge the FBI got serieous about reseaching long range police shootings.....and they found after those events, no, nada, zip Law Enforcement shootings from beyond 73 meters from any system from a fixed sighted .38 Special revovler to the most expensive and accurate "sniper rife."

That may have changed in the two or three years since that report, but I think it says something that for five or six years this was te greatest range police shot to serve and protect.

Just as some like to remind us that civilians would have a hard time justifying a shot at a human at such ranges, so will officer friendly. Too much can go wrong when shooting that far in an urban area.

I am more interested in how the LEOs are trained in Carbine use and the availabilty of training ammo and training areas than which carbine they purchase. Take two LEOs with little to no long gun experience and give one and AR15 and put him through some sort of garden variety shooting course shooting 60 to 120 rounds for both training and qualification in the first year and then give him 60 rounds a year for training and retrain himevery five to ten years. Take another and give him a Mini-14 and let him take one of the many gun school type three to five day carbine courses out there with 300 to 500 rounds in training and qaulification and the same lousy continuing education and training ammo.

Would you rather have the Mini or the AR in those conditions?

How many days of training does your state, county or city pay for? Cop is not on street if he is on the range or classroom. Will a more expensive rifle make a difference in how well someone depending on the government for their training and practice ammo performs?

How much time will your local agency pay for the LEOs to perform carbine maintenance?

Guess what? Appearences DO make a difference. If you show 90 percent of the citizenry a guy with a stock wood stocked Mini-14 and another with even a plainjane AR-15 (even yea olde SP-1) which will the citizens feel less threatend by. That is more likely to support council men and state legislatures in giving more money going to their departments. WHich officer will more people think approachable at a later date.

Police agencies choose whatever the folks with the purse strings approve in the long run.

A civilian may buy whatever blows their skirts up. Police are often restricted in what they may provide themselves either by department policy or by their low income.

-Bob Hollingsworth
 
What tools?

Am I doing something wrong?

I guess some random object (can be a can opener) to pop the trigger guard is a tool. I always carry a little Swiss Army Knife. If I can use that, I don't really consider anything to "require a tool."

The AR is a neat system. However, it takes two people to remove my handguards. No tools, though.:)

I wouldn't say either gun is too hard to clean, especially for a semiauto.
 
Back in the day the minis were about 1/2 the price of an AR. Many PDs are changing over to the AR platform since they are more affordable.
 
I don't know about terribly hard, but the disassembly procedure does require tools.

"wdlsguy", I have to ask: have you actually ever personally disassembled a Mini-14 for it's recommended field strip and cleaning? Or are you just going on what it says in Ruger's owner's manual?

I ask becuase, once you have gone through the steps on a Mini-14, you will find the "tools" needed are hardly sophisticated, and certainly do not approach even the level of basic hand tools (screwdrivers, punches, hammers, etc.)

A section of steel cleaning rod would constitute a good "tool" for disassembling a Mini-14 in a pinch. I personally use an old rasty small screwdriver that no longer can drive any screws due to it's chewed up blade.
 
have you actually ever personally disassembled a Mini-14 for it's recommended field strip and cleaning?
Just did it last weekend. How do you remove the bolt lock cover plate without a tool of some sort?
 
Any bit of metal or hard plastic will do, as will spent brass. But that is a "tool", I suppose.
 
How do you remove the bolt lock cover plate without a tool of some sort?
That's not part of the normal field strip, as recommended by Ruger.

If you need to do that, however, the mouth of a spent cartridge case can be used as a punch, and the operating rod can be used as a hammer to tap the plate out of it's grooves in the receiver.
 
I like to give the bolt a thorough cleaning, but that's just me.

The Ruger manual says the bolt can be removed from the receiver with the ejector / bolt stop in place, but the bolt can't be installed with the ejector / bolt stop in place. :scrutiny:

If this is a true statement, I pretty much need to remove the ejector / bolt stop. Sorry for the hijack.
 
If there's a problem with an AR-15 fitting into the cruiser, why not just get an M4
it's not the length, as a full 20" AR is shorter than most of the shotguns, but the height of the action, and the pistol grip, there is a mount for the ARs available, but it won't hold an 870, the minis fit in the 870 racks without a mag, and the rack usually have pockets to hold boxes of 12ga shells, the 20rd mini mags fit in these, 30rd "standard" AR mags don't.
 

Attachments

  • rack.jpg
    rack.jpg
    13.2 KB · Views: 41
  • rack 2.jpg
    rack 2.jpg
    3.3 KB · Views: 25
The Ruger manual says the bolt can be removed from the receiver with the ejector / bolt stop in place, but the bolt can't be installed with the ejector / bolt stop in place.

If this is a true statement, I pretty much need to remove the ejector / bolt stop. Sorry for the hijack.

AHhhhhhh. You have a Mini-14 "Ranch Rifle', not a plain Mini-14. On the regular Mini-14, you do NOT need to fiddle with the bolt stop/ejector at all as the bolt stop ONLY functions as a stop, and the bolt features a spring-loaded "bump" type ejector.

I have never diassembled a Ranch Rifle, so I cannot advise on your issue, but I am sure that someone else can chime in.
 
The question should be "why don't PD's issue SKS rifles?
Pros:
-Just as accurate as mini-4
-chambered in a much harder hitting caliber
-Chinese and Russian Versions are just as light and handy as a Mini
-The more expensive models of SKS still only cost 1/2 that of a mini
-Much more durable/reliable than a Mini

Cons:
-rifles that have 2 or 3 letters for a name scare the sheeple.
-Not made in America, difficult to import because of goobermint restrictions.
 
Okay according to wiki a mini 14 weighs 6 lbs. 6 oz. I just weighed my AR M4 A2, and it only weighs 6 lbs. 4.1 oz. Close enough in my book to call them the same weight. Lighter versions can be easily had. So where does everyone get that the AR is heavier? Oh, and my Chicom SKS with 16" barrel is a bit over 8 lbs. So there goes that myth too. And someone please tell this AR that it's not supposed to work this dirty, because it's not listening to me.

http://www.freewebs.com/heads_up_racing/dirtyar.htm


Bottom line is money. It usually is with .gov. It doesn't help matters any when too many gun mag writers, write BS stories, because the gun manf. is lining their pockets.

Isn't everyone sick of just parroting the same BS gun myths over and over again? I know I'm getting sick of hearing them.
 
The Mini is a fine rifle. It is extremley reliable and reasonably accurate. the new 580 series can be expected to shoot under 2 inches using decent ammo. one caveat is that you MUST use factory magazines exclusively for reliability.

I dont know how many people I see at training classes that have an otherwise excelleent gun go down becasue of crappy aftermarket magazines
Jack
 
You've missed the primary reason. POLITICS. The Mini-14 hasn't been tagged as an "Assault Weapon" like the AR-15 has. The news media doesn't report the local police are armed with assault weapons and Charles Manson's mother doesn't sue because Charlie got shot by JBTs armed with assault rifles.
 
Everyone has allot of things to say on this topic but are anyone of you guys actually law enforcment officers that have responded to a crime scene that has either just happened or is happening ?

I have and i will tell you that if you are showing up and you need a long gun then the AR is a good backup partner. The scary look that they have is half of what stops the criminal types from making bad choices like shooting at us.

Someone also said that they are a gun for someone that has been trained to use them and that is true they require some practice and training. But they are very, very accurate shot after shot.
 
Also

I also suspect that a politically minded chief might be concerned about the appearance of their officers. The M16 is definitely military, the Mini 14 looks less evil if you will.
 
SWAT wants to look military. Even our team is military in appearance, the black BDUs, the PASGT helmets, the kneepads/elbowpads, facemasks, and dada! M4geries. I guess the Mini-14 is too pastoral looking for them. Now dress a Mini up in some tacticool gear with holosights/etc, and maybe they'll look, but from my personal experiance with tactical responders in law enforcement, the .mil look is the thing to have. And ARs are definately .mil standard. Anybody notice that since the military went to the M4, the M4gery look among SWAT has gone WAAAY up?
 
You've missed the primary reason. POLITICS. The Mini-14 hasn't been tagged as an "Assault Weapon" like the AR-15 has. The news media doesn't report the local police are armed with assault weapons and Charles Manson's mother doesn't sue because Charlie got shot by JBTs armed with assault rifles.
That was true in the 1990's, but is no longer the case, just as for the SKS. S.1431 (2004) and H.R.1022 declare the mini-14 to be an "assault weapon" by name, in any configuration, and the MSM seem to follow the lead of Feinstein et al and the VPC in that regard.

Anybody notice that since the military went to the M4, the M4gery look among SWAT has gone WAAAY up?
Post hoc, ergo prompter hoc is not necessarily the case. That may be a big part of it, but one could also argue that they are merely following the civilian market in adopting M4 style stocks and shorter uppers simply because they are more suitable for civilian/LEO use. For example, an adjustable length stock is very helpful for departments that have people of widely varying stature on the force, issue body armor, have heavy coats in the winter, etc. 16" or shorter barrels also make more sense on an all-purpose patrol carbine than a 20" HBAR. Flattops are desirable if you might ever want to issue optics (which are for function, not for looks). And so on.
 
Yes, but the public recognizes by name and appearance
M16
and
Ak47

That's about it.

The Mini 14 is not really considered an assault rifle.
Considered by whom?

The mini-14 is no more and no less an "assault rifle" than an SKS, a Saiga, an M1 carbine, a Springfield M1A, a FAL, a SAR, or a Rock River LAR-15. None are "assault rifles," but all are called "assault weapons" by every anti that matters.

http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2004-09-12-weapons-ban_x.htm
http://www.vpc.org/studies/officeone.htm
http://www.vpc.org/graphics/awfactsheet.pdf
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/billtext.xpd?bill=h110-1022
http://www.suffredin.org/LegislativeLibrary/Legislation.asp?LegislationID=123&Library=cook
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top