"If any of you would like to explain to this man's family and friends that he and his fellow officers being armed with submachine guns wouldn't have helped or made any difference, I'm sure they would agree with you..."
I would be more amenable to the policy were ordinary civilians' self-defense needs given similar respect. Since they're not, because 'we aren't soldiers,' and since the cops aren't soliders, either...
The tragedy of Officer Crisp's death is far more attributable to his seeking engaging the madman than the weapon he or the madman carried, and is the result of his choice to honorably serve in a capacity that would require he do so if the need arose. That is why officers of the law are held in such high regard; they intentionally risk themselves to uphold the law. Particular or more powerful tools will not change that, and even if they did, would serve only to reduce the distinction officers carry above non-LEO's (the same distinction that justifies their special equipment and treatment under the law).
If an officer's job in the future was somehow made as safe as my own desk job through some technological means, I would resent claims to moral authority and self-sacrifice that would doubtless still be raised to justify anything and everything. I likewise resent moral arguments that the same distinction they've always held above the general populace warrants power they've
never historically held over the same.
Once more, where does it end? Does it end? What would end it? When criminals stop rising to meet force-with-force against police action? Well, now, that can only happen with a disarmed populace...
TCB
That's very dramatic considering sub machine guns have been in use by LE agencies for what, 75 or so years, starting with the Thompson?
My local Podunk city PD just sold a pair of old s&w sub machine guns they never used. Made the papers because they were worth so much as collectors items.
Jim Cirillo mentions using the same guns in the 70's during his stakeouts in NY.
Its absolutely not a new militarization of LE.
As far as police having unrestricted access to weapons the average citizen doesn't...for the most part depending on your state, I don't think that's true.
If you want a submachine gun, go buy one. Seriously. Get a stamp and buy one. Unless your state doesn't allow it, there is nothing preventing you from spending the $5k-$15k to get a submachine gun and stamp.
If you can't get one where you are,....VOTE. If you think the NFA is a burdensome blockage of your rights and makes automatic weapons prohibitively expensive, VOTE.
AFAIK not all LE's are approved to use automatic weapons or issued them, and when they are, they are required to go though the same background checks in the course of their employment before they are able to use sub machine guns as a private citizen in applying for their NFA stamp and afaik LE are not allowed to actually personally own them just because they are LE...they are just issued them as part of their duty gear, the guns belong to the agency, and have to account for them pretty strictly.
You as a private citizen, can actually own a sub machine gun, depending on your state. If you can't,
VOTE.
It is no secret that superior firepower gives an advantage in a firefight.
Who do you want to have the advantage, criminal or LE?
I don't care what your moral objections are. I want LE armed sufficiently that they have a better chance of living through a firefight than the criminal shooting at them. No, more than that. I want them to have the best possible chance of living through the firefight.
You know why?
I don't know about you, but I want the CRIMINAL to lose the firefight. I haven't gotten to the point of preferring criminals to LE.
If you want to be as well armed as LE, spend the money and do it. If you want to be better armed, spend more money and get some legal destructive devices.
If you can't because of your state laws,
VOTE.
Vote for different politicians if you want the focus of LE to change and to get automatic weapons off of the NFA, But don't come onto forums and complain about LE equipping themselves to do the task to which they have been assigned. They aren't stupid and don't want to die while doing their job, and unlike the average citizen who has a perfectly legitimate desire to own an automatic weapon, there have been plenty of situations where LE has shown a demonstrated NEED for that kind of firepower with the increased use of body armor by criminals.
I have trouble following the logic of people protesting the militarization of whatever LE agency, then list as their reason the purchase of items that citizens can and do own. Such as body armor, helmets, tactical gear, black rifles and automatic weapons, and armored vehicles.
You as a citizen can own each and every one of those if you live in or move to the right state and spend the money, and many people do. You want a tank? Mortgage your house and buy a tank. You want a cannon? Raid your child's college fund and buy a cannon. You want an RPG and some HE rounds? I guess with the money and the stamps you can have it.
So yea...what's your point about submachine guns and militarization?
Militarization to me lies in which laws they select to enforce, and how they enforce them, not in the equipment they choose....they will always try and get better equipment to marginalize their risk. Again, they don't want to die doing their job.
I appreciate your sentiments about esteem and sacrifice and all that and I'm sure they do too, but I personally don't think they should have to die either, if it can be prevented with better equipment.
Let me know when LE starts calling in artillery strikes.
