Seems a bit over the top to me, unless regular firefights are breaking out. There’s a fine line between policing and para-military operations and it seems there is this desire with a lot of police forces to snuggle up as close to that line as possible.
Your criticism seems to be that the rifle looks like a military rifle, and that makes the police look paramilitary.
Does the legitimate need for the weapon, explained in the article, mean anything to you? The shotguns and pistols the police already have are effective weapons, but each one has its limitations. The addition of a rifle would close the gap.
Also, it’s likely that the rifle will be kept in the trunk of the police car. That’s what most forces do. So the addition will be transparant, at most times, to the public.
AR-15s are semi-automatic. Police simply don’t need and, frankly, can’t handle full auto weapons safely. FWIW I doubt the crook had an automatic either.
Tasers are great as long as they arent’ the pistol shaped ones which have led to confusion and had folks shot instead of shocked.
AR-15s will give them a more accurate longarm than the shotgun loaded with a multiple projectile ammunition (buckshot). Missed shots will travel much further however.
The penetration game of .223 (5.56 x 45mm) still debated among tactical firearms types AFAIK. Personally, I can’t fathom .223 penetrating less than buckshot. But I’m not an expert. But the likleyhood of a flyer hitting someone else would definitely be less.
The some sherrif deputies carry a Ruger Mini-14 (semi-automatic .223) and some state cops carry ar-15 here on patrol. No big deal to me. But I’m not anti-gun. I am anti-law and law enforcement on some issues though.
Didn’t a Florida official urge all citizens to carry guns a few years ago? If that’s true, maybe the police don’t want to be outgunned by just any old random citizen.
The simple fact is that a gun is a tool, and the AR-15 serves a specific purpose. It gives an option to the officer when confronted with a nessassary situation, much like the pump shotgun most departments already carry does. The small caliber and low recoil of an AR type rife gives extra firepower to someone who may find difficulty in effectively utilizing a 12ga. shotgun, and the accuracy of the 5.56mm round is often safer to use than a 9mm handgun in urban situations. Especially if the situation finds the officer dealing with criminals using body armor armed with fully automatic weapons.
Can you, or anybody, cite us a single instance of this happening in Florida in the past 10 years? If it ain’t happening, which I rather doubt it is, then the cops justification for carrying these things goes right out the window.
And what a shabbily written article. The author and editor both have confused automatic with semi-sutomatic. It’s no wonder the general populace doesn’t know the difference either and is so easily coerced into fear by the gun-grabbers with their deliberate misuse of the terms. Other mistakes and general stupidity:
We really have no idea if the gunman at that bank robbery used an automatic or a semi-automatic since the writer apparently doesn’t know the difference. And horror-of-horrors, a criminal used a semi-automatic weapon in a mass-murder incident? What the fuck? This is nothing new. Semi-automatic pistols are the firearm of choice for badguys - and have been for at least 20 years.
Lots of comparisons here. But comparisons to what, exactly? The statement about the bullet being less penetrating is very likely incorrect. A .223 is a very high-speed, small cross-section, light-weight projectile. It is specifically chosen for applications where penetration is critical.
That article is really, really pathetic. And if what’s stated there are the true justifications the JSO’s have selected this firearm, then no, they most certainly do not need them, simply because the gun quite simply doesn’t fit the solutions needed for their problems. More generally, I don’t think the average law enforcement organization has a need for too many fully automatic weapons anyway. They certainly do not need to be available to every officer on every call. The cops in the U.S. already have a pretty poor record of inappropriate use of their firearms. Giving them guns with more firepower is only going to amplify the problem.
It’s not Florida, of course, but what about the shootout in North Hollywood? Maybe it’s overblown to point to a single incident, but the single incident at the UT tower in 1966 directly led to the formation of SWAT teams around the country.
What ever happened to “Be prepared”? No, I can’t find a cite for this occurring in FL in the last decade, but it has happened elsewhere and due to the potential of FL police officers becoming engaged in a such heavily prepared firefight is high enough to me to justify the issuance of such armaments.
Bleah. Infuriating is what that article is. I just fired off this e-mail to the News4Jax team.
Eh, seems like pretty poor justification (one event seven years ago and an entire country away) for spending 1.8 million tax dollars. And that thing in North Hollywood had several law enforcement units in place before anything really happened anyway - Sheriff’s Department, Detectives, SWAT, FBI, Harbor Patrol, plus the usual uniformed officers. It’s not clear to me that giving more powerful firearms to a few of the respondents would have made any significant difference. The SWAT guys at least I’m sure were there with their automatic firearms.
Even tho’ the potential approaches zero?
You never know when a movie will break out. Excellent email, by the way. Please, let us know what form of bedbug letter you receive in reply.
I don’t see any reason that every cop needs to have this type of armament available to them. I do see reason that small, elite, trained numbers of police might need them. This just sounds like the police believe they are more of an occupation force rather than a law enforcement agency.
The next town over from where I live is Amesbury, Massachusetts.
This small city has a population of about 16,450. It’s 97% white, real estate is very expensive compared with most places, and has no “bad neighborhoods” to speak of.
For the years I could get info on with my quick search this is the crime info:
…1998…1999
Total crimes:…254…283
Murders:…0…1
Rapes:…0…0
Robberies:…2…1
Aggravated assaults:…17…13
Burglaries:…73…53
Larcenies:…150…198
Motor vehicle thefts:…12… 17
Crime rate:…15.8…17.53…(per 1,000 residents)
Not exactly a tough place to be a police officer. Not even one crime a day is committed there.
On Saturday, Nov 8th, 2003 a man hoping to get back together with his ex showed up at her house where she was with a male companion. The result was a shootout with the police with over 50 shots fired.
He had an AR-15 semi-automatic rifle. The police who responded in the first two cruisers had pistols and shotguns. They were at quite a distance from the suspect, giving him a distinct advantage. Later, a third cop showed up who had an AR-15 rifle in his trunk. This evened out the fight and allowed the police to kill the suspect.
After this happened I talked with my SO, who is an EMT (they work closely with the police). She says it’s common for certain cops in a small town like that to have a rifle in the trunk.
For certain situations it is a tool that they just need. Shotguns only shoot accurately at short ranges. Handguns are even more limited by range. If a suspect has a rifle and is out in the distance, the police need a rifle also.
Confusing the M-16 and the AR-15 is quite easy, as they look nearly identical to even trained eyes without a close look at the fire selector switch or manufacturer’s stamp on the lower receiver. It is also often confused with the CAR-15, a Vietnam-era variant of the original M-16, and was the basis of the modern M-4 Carbine, M-4 CQB, Commando, and Model 635 variants of M-16 family of weapons. They fire the same caliber cartridge except for the Model 635, which is a 9mm submachinegun. But the AR-15 is most definitely a semi-auto only full-sized rifle.
But, like Uncle says, this confusion aside, the article gives some pretty lame justification for this expenditure. And, having seen enough cops on the shooting range firing line, the thought of giving them additional firepower just gives me the willies.
The article doesn’t say they are going to carry them…
I take that to mean they will be available if needed.
Immediately following the famous LA bank robbery one of our local police departments bought a scoped bolt action .30-06 for each car.
Either way, its not like the cops are carrying these things around slung over their shoulder all day. Like the shotguns, they are available on hand if the situation calls for it. Hardly an occupation force.