Seems like a good org. To paint a clear picture, what's the membership numbers of LEAA compared to the membership numbers of an anti-gun police org? That would give us an idea of the numbers of LEOs that feel one way or the other.
Should LEOs have Full Auto?
- Thread starter TechBrute
- Start date
- Status
Not sure on the membership numbers of LEAA, but the problem with the other organizations such as FOP or PBA is that most are not voluntary memberships. They are the police unions such as AFL-CIO or Teamsters are for construction workers and such. Most depts. every officer is forced to be a member of the union and really has no say in how the top officials endorse stupid legislation like gun control. :banghead:
Cortland
Member
Here in Virginia, for the purposes of reciprocity a police officer's commission is a concealed carry permit (we have a law to this effect). This puts police officers and "ordinary" citizens on the same playing field when negotiating for recognition in other states. A CCW law for police officers only would further serve to create that class of "super-citizens." If LEOs had national CCW, do you really think the Virginia State Police would give two hoots about expanding Virginia's reciprocity agreements? It'd be a dead issue.
Snaps
Member
Well, I've got a video on my computer where a cop covering a suspect while her partner is ontop of him discharges her gun and damn near kills them both. I'm sure y'all have all seen it though.
CannibalCrowley
Member
DMF
I'd attribute a lot of anti-gun victories to the police. Whenever anti-gun legislation is proposed the vocal majority of police are out there supporting it. How would making LEOs into elite citizens change this?
Cortland
Member
In case you haven't, here it is.
To truly control a FA weapon takes practice and most of all training. Police don't get the training and can't or won't practice. Most I shoot with really are not very good with handguns that they have shot for years, and would truly be fish out of water with full auto rock and roll guns. Budgets would need to increase drastically for the everyday cop to have FA weapons and use them safely and effectively. Train a few SWAT officers and give them the FA, much more cost effective for the taxpayer and safer for all of us.
Thanks for proving my point. While you're out tilting at windmills fighting, "all or nothing" the anti-gun people are winning one little battle at a time. With each little victory of theirs the big victory of the pro-2A side becomes more of an impossibility.
Quit being Don Quixote, and realize that that screaming about cops within the pro-2A crowd, gives the anti-gun crowd more strength. The politicians see a divided pro-2A crowd, and a united anti-gun crowd, and know it's better to keep the united block of voters happy, than risk only getting support from part of a divided group. As long as the pro-2A crowd opposes any pro-gun move, unless it's an all or nothing victory the anti-gun groups will continue to win.
Again, they win because of silly narrow minded us v. them divisions in the pro-2A crowd.
Steve in PA
Member
Don't foget the Mason or whatever he was who shot the other guy in the head during a ceremony. I'm sure that non-LEO had lots of training too 
This is surreal. They do not hand us a free MP5 when we graduate the Academy. I'll say it again - I as a cop cannot get a restricted FA weapon any easier than any other person. I dont know what y'all are sprinkling on the pizza, but I would wager if you actually looked at individual class three permits you'd find more full-autos in the collections of rich citizens than held by individual cops. If you see FA in the hands of cops they are invariably agency guns. Go to Knob Creek or the Hiram Maxim shoot, you wont find a lot of cops. It's all that money they do not pay us, do we get ammo, or something like food.
Plus I guess I dont get the point. Police officers should not be allowed full auto and everybody else should? So you support restrictive gun control?
And the average gun owner is SAFER than the average cop? In my state minimum basic firearms training for a peace officer is 60 hours, for a "civilian" CCW it is 12, of which only 2 need be on the range. Granted, cops have horrific hit rates in gun fights, but I doubt the "civilians" do much better. For every stupid cop trick (anecdotal) you have on video, I can trot out plenty of civilian examples. Glass houses and all that.....
I suppose it isnt OK either that we "get" police package cars either. The privilege of heavy duty alternators and bench seats made out of concrete. Us snotty elitist super-citizens with our gas guzzling V8s and AM radios......
We get high intensity dome lights and you dont, suckers!!!!!!!!!
Plus I guess I dont get the point. Police officers should not be allowed full auto and everybody else should? So you support restrictive gun control?
And the average gun owner is SAFER than the average cop? In my state minimum basic firearms training for a peace officer is 60 hours, for a "civilian" CCW it is 12, of which only 2 need be on the range. Granted, cops have horrific hit rates in gun fights, but I doubt the "civilians" do much better. For every stupid cop trick (anecdotal) you have on video, I can trot out plenty of civilian examples. Glass houses and all that.....
I suppose it isnt OK either that we "get" police package cars either. The privilege of heavy duty alternators and bench seats made out of concrete. Us snotty elitist super-citizens with our gas guzzling V8s and AM radios......
We get high intensity dome lights and you dont, suckers!!!!!!!!!
Hkmp5sd
Member
LEO "training" should be considered a non-issue in this debate. Given the liability and negative publicity, is it likely that any agency is going to issue machineguns to their officers without extensive training? Look at the restrictions some agencies put on the type of sidearm and type of ammunition their officers carry.
I know of several small agencies that removed the ARs and Mini-14s from their patrol cars and replaced them with "traditional" looking carbines to prevent intimidating the citizens when they see the police carrying "assault weapons."
Politcal reasons aside, a gun is a tool. One of the tools needed by LEOs turns out to be firearms. Just like us civilians, one firearm does not meet all of our requirements. It is not the local police or sheriff department that passed a law preventing me from buying a machinegun made after 1986. Just because I can't buy my dream gun (P90), it isn't right for me to prevent a police officer, with a legitimate need for a select fire weapon, from getting one.
If you can use the "if I can have one too" argument, then you should argue to remove machineguns from all government agencies, including the military. Why should some private straight out of boot camp get a machinegun if I, an honorably discharged veteran, cannot have one? It is obvious the government already has little faith in his training and ability because they limit his "machinegun" to 3 bullets.
I know of several small agencies that removed the ARs and Mini-14s from their patrol cars and replaced them with "traditional" looking carbines to prevent intimidating the citizens when they see the police carrying "assault weapons."
Politcal reasons aside, a gun is a tool. One of the tools needed by LEOs turns out to be firearms. Just like us civilians, one firearm does not meet all of our requirements. It is not the local police or sheriff department that passed a law preventing me from buying a machinegun made after 1986. Just because I can't buy my dream gun (P90), it isn't right for me to prevent a police officer, with a legitimate need for a select fire weapon, from getting one.
If you can use the "if I can have one too" argument, then you should argue to remove machineguns from all government agencies, including the military. Why should some private straight out of boot camp get a machinegun if I, an honorably discharged veteran, cannot have one? It is obvious the government already has little faith in his training and ability because they limit his "machinegun" to 3 bullets.
If you really want to hear something ridiculous the NJ State Police recently wanted to upgrade their 9mm sidearms to .40 caliber. They were denied because the legal advisor stated that .40 caliber sounded too threatening and would scare the public. :banghead:
gulogulo1970
Member
I know some people will try to make it an us vs them argument. I won't I just think it should be fair, so we're all us's. Civilian police forces and civilians should be treated to the same rights and privledges. I know for private ownership this is true of both groups.
By having a group (police force) that can have weapons that a normal civilian can't it creates an us and them atmosphere. Hey, they have that, we don't. It creates an elite class of gun users.
One thing we do have to understand is that some professions get to use things that the private people don't. Demolishions experts come to mind, they get to use explosives we don't. Sometimes the tools come with the job. I just think in this case it kinda hits a Bill of Rights brick wall. I know the next sentence is a stretch, but...I don't want to see a day when the only people that can exercise their free speech rights are the goverment trained and lisenced press. Scary thought, but it really is pretty much the same kind of logic.
By having a group (police force) that can have weapons that a normal civilian can't it creates an us and them atmosphere. Hey, they have that, we don't. It creates an elite class of gun users.
One thing we do have to understand is that some professions get to use things that the private people don't. Demolishions experts come to mind, they get to use explosives we don't. Sometimes the tools come with the job. I just think in this case it kinda hits a Bill of Rights brick wall. I know the next sentence is a stretch, but...I don't want to see a day when the only people that can exercise their free speech rights are the goverment trained and lisenced press. Scary thought, but it really is pretty much the same kind of logic.
Greg L
Member
So what's the problem. The public (or anyways the bleating masses running over the cliff) decided that you should use 9mm as opposed to something that might actually work better. Sheesh, next you will be wanting to use hollow points or something
.sharpie613
Member
As far as I'm concerned, there is only one "us vs. them".
Let me paint a picture for you. Let's assume I live in the real United States and am carrying concealed. I trip, fall, and break concealment by accident in full view of an officer. Two possible outcomes will result.
"Here, let me help you up, you okay? If you need it, I have a first aid kit in my cruiser. Say, that's a nice rig you got there, where'd you get the rosewood grips? Have a nice day, okay?"
*Glock pressed into my eardrum* "Just freeze there while we make sure you are *supposed* to have this. What do you need to carry a gun for anyway? Hey, where'd you get these LEO clips?"
If you fall into the former camp, then you are "Us" and you have no greater friend and ally than the average firearm owner. You hate the dumb laws as much as the rest of "Us" do. The other guys...well....
Let me paint a picture for you. Let's assume I live in the real United States and am carrying concealed. I trip, fall, and break concealment by accident in full view of an officer. Two possible outcomes will result.
"Here, let me help you up, you okay? If you need it, I have a first aid kit in my cruiser. Say, that's a nice rig you got there, where'd you get the rosewood grips? Have a nice day, okay?"
*Glock pressed into my eardrum* "Just freeze there while we make sure you are *supposed* to have this. What do you need to carry a gun for anyway? Hey, where'd you get these LEO clips?"
If you fall into the former camp, then you are "Us" and you have no greater friend and ally than the average firearm owner. You hate the dumb laws as much as the rest of "Us" do. The other guys...well....
Fed168
Member
To the mention of police handing out anti gun victories- are they talking about the man on the street or the politico who likes to see their face on TV?
FA is hard to get in law enforcement. It's already been said ad nauseum. We need certain tools that others can't get- and we don't really own them anyway. It's department property.
Sunray- you must have had a bad experience. A very strong majority of tactical officers are quite proficient with FA weapons, among other things. Alot of it comes down to training with them.
FA is hard to get in law enforcement. It's already been said ad nauseum. We need certain tools that others can't get- and we don't really own them anyway. It's department property.
Sunray- you must have had a bad experience. A very strong majority of tactical officers are quite proficient with FA weapons, among other things. Alot of it comes down to training with them.
Tamara
Senior Member
I'm fairly magnanimous; I think my employees should be allowed to own anything I can.
CannibalCrowley
Member
Hkmp5sd
Fed168
The police and military are two different entities with completely different missions. Your argument is that of one who wants the police to operate like the military, thus allowing America to pass its awkward stage.
Fed168
The vocal majority of police support gun control. As to the number of LEOs that don't support it, we have no idea because they usually don't make their views known to the public; because of this the public only sees the supporters which causes them to believe that almost all LEOs support gun control.
Hkmp5sd
Member
I'm one who argues that there are some law enforcement situations where a select fire weapon would be more useful than a semi-auto and the fact the government has deemed it appropriate to restrict my rights as to machinegun ownership, the loss of my rights should not be the reason to hamstring law enforcement's ability to have them.
Art Eatman
Moderator In Memoriam
The topic of the thread is the need for full-auto weaponry for LEOs in the course of their duties.
"Rights" and "civilian" and "us vs. them" and all that woulda/coulda/shoulda stuff is Off Topic for this thread.
Two topics per thread is bad enough, but this one oughta go to a landfill...
Art
"Rights" and "civilian" and "us vs. them" and all that woulda/coulda/shoulda stuff is Off Topic for this thread.
Two topics per thread is bad enough, but this one oughta go to a landfill...
Art
Heck. The vocal majority of Americans support gun control as well, as defined by this board (read: any rule, reguation or so-called 'infringement' of the individual's right to bear arms). So what is your point? The cops resemble the citizenry they serve. This is not exactly news.
This really needs to stop being us vs them, for exactly the reasons stated by Fed et al. The Antis are winning because of it.
For every anecdotal incident of a cop NDing, there are anecdotal incidents of citizens doing it, too. For every department mouthpiece that gets up and shows his arse by stating how cops should own guns and the good citizens Sheepsville should not, you can go out and find a couple of thousand people who voted for Ted Kennedy and fervently believe he is correct. For each incident of cops shooting someone in a bad shoot, there are hundreds of homicides commited by american gun owners.
As I said- lets stop playing the Us vs. Them game. 'We' are not a monolith, and neither are 'They'.
Mike
This thread is all over the road
quote:
Sadly those groups do not speak for the majority of the rank and file officers and I cringe whenever I see one of their leaders support some stupid gun control law
Get vocal and change the management at FOP and others.
Culimbine videos will not slow anyone down. We have seen 911 and Nick Berg.
Culimbine may be included in some of thos numbers that are not widely distributed in statistics because they would drive the "sucsesses of AWB" through the basement floor on their way to China. If they did include them where they only counted as one instance?
I know of LEOs "reserve deputy" who only wanted the title so they could drive fast without a hastle. Every one in my area knows the cops will blow a red light because they can.
us vs them only grows with time as police have a choice to police their own.
End rant
quote:
Sadly those groups do not speak for the majority of the rank and file officers and I cringe whenever I see one of their leaders support some stupid gun control law
Get vocal and change the management at FOP and others.
Culimbine videos will not slow anyone down. We have seen 911 and Nick Berg.
Culimbine may be included in some of thos numbers that are not widely distributed in statistics because they would drive the "sucsesses of AWB" through the basement floor on their way to China. If they did include them where they only counted as one instance?
I know of LEOs "reserve deputy" who only wanted the title so they could drive fast without a hastle. Every one in my area knows the cops will blow a red light because they can.
us vs them only grows with time as police have a choice to police their own.
End rant
politicaly speaking
I will stop and try to spread the news about that information I can confirm. Sharing with different people why should they educate themselves on what the missrepresentatives and congresscritters actually do while in office.
Some thinkers do not think. They tell me how GWB is not speaking ever when Cheaney is drinking from his water glass. Other thinkers yell me that they watch cnn and abc and nbc and thats what they know outside of VH1 and MTV or the local pop radio.
I can offer alternatives like Internet and history books.
Who is the most visible and aproachable representative of govt. It is not the elected officials. Police Sheriff and local marshals in some localities and constable deputies in others. They are also leaders by proximity and by example. Rules on LEOs barring political opinion in/out of uniform or duty IMHO have no place in govt.
I was holding back Con but to more completely explain my earlier post.
I will stop and try to spread the news about that information I can confirm. Sharing with different people why should they educate themselves on what the missrepresentatives and congresscritters actually do while in office.
Some thinkers do not think. They tell me how GWB is not speaking ever when Cheaney is drinking from his water glass. Other thinkers yell me that they watch cnn and abc and nbc and thats what they know outside of VH1 and MTV or the local pop radio.
I can offer alternatives like Internet and history books.
Who is the most visible and aproachable representative of govt. It is not the elected officials. Police Sheriff and local marshals in some localities and constable deputies in others. They are also leaders by proximity and by example. Rules on LEOs barring political opinion in/out of uniform or duty IMHO have no place in govt.
I was holding back Con but to more completely explain my earlier post.
- Status