Duncan PD gets $46 Military M-16's, must be nice!

[Lone Wolf '49]

Yeah, we should go back to unarmed cops just like the Brits....

They shouldn't be denied inexpensive and available long guns just because they are select fire. Getting these rifles through the 1033 program frees up funds for other stuff like body armor AND more training. Like I said, we've already bought them, why shouldn't we get our money's worth out of them.

I'd rather see them go to the Duncan PD than the Palestinian Authority or the shredder.

And thank you too, sir! Seriously. I have know of PD's that received M-14's and others over the years, and rather them to have them. Good night and good luck, young ones.

 

[SMS]

Yes, but also they say these officers are "protecting the citizens", however, since I am sure there are more than 45 citizens in Duncan, protecting citizens is an impossibility. So if LEOs need these weapons to "protect" us, dont you think we need these weapons to protect ourselves?

Then go buy one...or put on a uniform. It's not like these officers are getting them for personal use. It's duty gear.

 

[WhiteyMacD]

Then go buy one...or put on a uniform. It's not like these officers are getting them for personal use. It's duty gear.

Not the point. If you justify having a class 3 weapon for the purposes of defense, then it should be as easily available to your average citizen without having to "put on a uniform" or "pay upwards of $15k for a <$2k firearm."

Any thought contrary is absurd.

 

[SMS]

Not as absurd as suggesting that a police officer should be denied something because you, as a private citizen (who isn't paid to go out and look for trouble) don't have access to it or can't afford it. I get what you're saying...but the remedy is not withholding tools from our law enforcement personnel.

Work to change the law...in the meantime, if you want what they get, then join 'em or pony up for it.

 

[WhiteyMacD]

Not as absurd as suggesting that a police officer should be denied something because you don't have access to it or can't afford it. I get what you're saying...but the remedy is not withholding tools from our law enforcement personnel.

Work to change the law...in the mean time, it's a cop's job to go out and look for trouble. That's not your job. If you want what they get, then join 'em or pony up for it.

One, I would like for it to be shown where I directly said any weapon should be withheld. Two, I can sort of see the point BP was making. Granted, Im not in the know, but I am pretty sure I wouldnt be satisfied with the level of training most LEOs get with an AR and a handgun much less a long gun with a fun switch. This is based off first hand experience and conversation with LEO friends of mine who are not gun people. However, I digress, I wouldnt say I 100% agree with withholding such firearms from LEOs, but I dont 100% disagree with bp either.

 

[dieseltech09]

Wont they have to be converted to Semi only before the patrol cops get to carry them? Dont PDs have to have special training to have FA weapons?

 

[J.P.]

Work to change the law...

Yeah.....
Wouldn't it be nice if the firearms industry itself would actually chip in and help?

 

[Lone Wolf '49]

Yeah, we should go back to unarmed cops just like the Brits....

They shouldn't be denied inexpensive and available long guns just because they are select fire. Getting these rifles through the 1033 program frees up funds for other stuff like body armor AND more training. Like I said, we've already bought them, why shouldn't we get our money's worth out of them.

I'd rather see them go to the Duncan PD than the Palestinian Authority or the shredder.

Thank you again, sir. Sincerely.

 

[Lone Wolf '49]

Then go buy one...or put on a uniform. It's not like these officers are getting them for personal use. It's duty gear.

I got to quit reading this, but thank you again, Sir!

 

[bernardderek]

Well, I think I should have every bit as good of a weapon as any LEO, serviceman, etc.