(LAPD) Cops use suppressors?

Status
Not open for further replies.

Habeed

member
Joined
Oct 12, 2009
Messages
92
While viewing a story about Jordan Dorner on Commie News Network, I noticed a slide show showing a pair of officers patrolling the street.

It's slide 6 at this page.

http://www.cnn.com/2013/02/08/us/lapd-attacks/index.html?hpt=hp_t1

http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/dam/as...alifornia-manhunt-0207-horizontal-gallery.jpg

Anyways, unless my eyes deceive me...those carbines have cans on them. Is this standard? Why do they use them?

Also, it looks like the officer on the left has the magazine in the weapon (and it appears to be a 30 rounder!) and the officer on the right appears to be holding the mag in his hand. The cop on the right also has what looks like a fairly high magnification scope.
 
Tactical teams get all the niffty toys. Thats not that odd. However, he does need to adjust his armor. Its hanging a little low.
 
The suspect they are after is using some kind of carbine. He might also have a fifty cal. Anyways, that body armor doesn't look like it could be better than level III, which will not stop 5.56 or 7.62, would it. Does body armor like that even help if the opponent is using weapons that go through it? I remember from my military days that those flak jackets we would wear would supposedly make getting shot by a 7.62 round less survivable, not more.
 
It isn't common, yet, but sure! All shooters should use suppressors if they can. So much safer for the hearing of the officers and anyone around them when they discharge their weapons.
 
I can't cite any sources on this, but I've heard in suppressor friendly countries, not using a suppressor is considered rude because it necessitates hearing protection for everyone else. There is way too big of a negative connotation on suppressors in America.
 
I just got a BATFE stamp last week for another suppressor.

Once you use one, there is just no going back to "not" using one.

Less muzzle flip too = better target reacquisition.
 
Last edited:
If IRC LAPD actually approved them and even started issuing them after several law suits over hearing loss occurred in CA (I don't recall if LAPD was one of the agencies sued).

Habeed: If his plate carriers has III or IV rifle plates they WILL stop 5.56 and 7.62 (either x39 or x51). Soft armor is level IIIA and is not rifle rated hard plate III is rifle rated.

-Jenrick
 
But, agreed. With the plate over the guy's stomach, that leaves an awful lot of lung, aorta, and heart exposed to gun fire.
 
There's a lot things to criticize about the LAPD and their recent behavior, but their use of suppressors is not one of them. Yeah, most civilians can't own them and that's wrong. But they're still good for anyone to have. We should be looking for more ways to restore our own right to have suppressors, not strip the right from others.

And that vest does look low. Assuming it's plate carrier, the top of the plate might not be even covering his heart. He needs to bring it up 2 or 3 inches to really use that plate effectively.


\Sadly, most military and police don't know how to use most of the gizmos and gear we're issued, and can't even be bothered to learn.
 
Too bad them suppressors don't need to be removed when the officers go to the can....otherwise we might hear of a few turning up missing:D
 
Reading the article it's only the home owner who says that the residence was considered a meth lab.

To my knowledge I know of no agency that would go with flash bangs, explosive, or ballistic breaching on a suspected active meth lab. Depending on the method of cooking, the atmosphere inside the lab can be anything from low oxygen, to flammable, to down right explosive.

-Jenrick
 
(LAPD) Cops use suppressors?

As a point of clarification, I notice that the CNN caption says they are San Diego Harbor Police.

Interesting that the guy on the left appears to have a suppressor and a nice gun light on a carbine with no optics fitted.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top