You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
LEO and AR 15s
- Thread starter mayosligo
- Start date
. Not sure what else he had in there or if it was his, or been recently confiscated. Oh well, i'm boredConn. Trooper
New member
I have asked the question:
So a LEO exemption of the proposed Fienstein AWB is saying that a the life of a police officer confronting a suspect is more important than my life was5 minutes before when that same suspect kicked in my door and shot me?
And I get the same answer every time:
No, but police officers are highly trained!
I proceed to laugh out loud!
They don't have an argument that Cops for some reason deserve semi-auto weapons and civilians don't! Simple.
Because police are sent to, and expected to respond to, and address, situations that require they have access to long guns. I have been on several calls where I was faced by bad guys with rifles, probably a half a dozen over the years, doesn't happen every day. I needed a rifle to protect myself, but also to prevent the "bad guy" from getting away and killing someone else. Like your family, or my family. I'm not saying my life is more important than yours (except that police represent a civilizied society, and an attack on police should be seen as an attack on your community). Just that I have to go to these calls, and place myself in harms way.
I have never been faced with a situation that required a rifle in my personal life. Not once. Not that I think you shouldn't own them, just my own experience of never needing any type of firearm in my personal life, only professionally.
So a LEO exemption of the proposed Fienstein AWB is saying that a the life of a police officer confronting a suspect is more important than my life was5 minutes before when that same suspect kicked in my door and shot me?
And I get the same answer every time:
No, but police officers are highly trained!
I proceed to laugh out loud!
They don't have an argument that Cops for some reason deserve semi-auto weapons and civilians don't! Simple.
Because police are sent to, and expected to respond to, and address, situations that require they have access to long guns. I have been on several calls where I was faced by bad guys with rifles, probably a half a dozen over the years, doesn't happen every day. I needed a rifle to protect myself, but also to prevent the "bad guy" from getting away and killing someone else. Like your family, or my family. I'm not saying my life is more important than yours (except that police represent a civilizied society, and an attack on police should be seen as an attack on your community). Just that I have to go to these calls, and place myself in harms way.
I have never been faced with a situation that required a rifle in my personal life. Not once. Not that I think you shouldn't own them, just my own experience of never needing any type of firearm in my personal life, only professionally.
Trooper,
Thanks for your service to your community. We all appriciate the dangers and unknowns associated with your job. Thanks again.
Because you have never needed a rifle in your personal life in no way insures that you may never need one in the future. The last call you responded to that required a rifle, that victim probably wished they had had one before you arrived. See, victims don't have a choice about being in those situations. You, ultimately, do have a choice (and I am glad you choose to go, put your life in danger for others).
Nurses, doctors, drinking water plant operators, artists, bus drivers, firemen, teachers, etc. ... along with police - all represent civilized society. An attack on any of them is an attack on civilization and community. Police seek out the bad guys, where as the rest of us, for the most part, don't go looking for trouble. That is the distinction we need to remember.
The point I was making, is that many who would outlaw my rifle use the "training" cops get as an argument that they are more responsible with, and therefore deserve their rifles.
I tell anyone that cares to listen, that police "training" in long guns is no better than the "training" I have received since the age of 6. So that argument makes me laugh.
Sure, your tactical training on building entry and hostage situations may be stronger, but I would bet the ranch that my gun handeling and marksmanship (and safety) would compare to most police forces in this country. And I suspect many others in the "gun community" have the same skills.
Again, thanks for your service to your community. We need more people like you who CHOOSE to put themselves in harms way for the good of the community!
Thanks for your service to your community. We all appriciate the dangers and unknowns associated with your job. Thanks again.
Because you have never needed a rifle in your personal life in no way insures that you may never need one in the future. The last call you responded to that required a rifle, that victim probably wished they had had one before you arrived. See, victims don't have a choice about being in those situations. You, ultimately, do have a choice (and I am glad you choose to go, put your life in danger for others).
Nurses, doctors, drinking water plant operators, artists, bus drivers, firemen, teachers, etc. ... along with police - all represent civilized society. An attack on any of them is an attack on civilization and community. Police seek out the bad guys, where as the rest of us, for the most part, don't go looking for trouble. That is the distinction we need to remember.
The point I was making, is that many who would outlaw my rifle use the "training" cops get as an argument that they are more responsible with, and therefore deserve their rifles.
I tell anyone that cares to listen, that police "training" in long guns is no better than the "training" I have received since the age of 6. So that argument makes me laugh.
Sure, your tactical training on building entry and hostage situations may be stronger, but I would bet the ranch that my gun handeling and marksmanship (and safety) would compare to most police forces in this country. And I suspect many others in the "gun community" have the same skills.
Again, thanks for your service to your community. We need more people like you who CHOOSE to put themselves in harms way for the good of the community!
I have never been faced with a situation that required a rifle in my personal life. Not once.
I hope you never do.
Your only a tiny drop in the bucket. There are 100 million others out there that at some time may have needed one.
There is also the times when the need for a rifle is much much more likely to be needed. Anytime when there is a break down of our community's. Natural disaster and rioting come to mind.
You may not live in a area that has ever been effected by any kind of civil unrest but, there are some that have and you really never know where it will hit next.
As for the better trained argument, just point to the recent scandal regarding Ian Birk, and John T Williams. Birk was absolutely screwed over and scapegoated. But the government found that he wasn't trained well enough. It's highly offensive to be told police officers are better trained, until they shoot and kill someone who refuses to respond to a lawful order to put down a knife, and which point they weren't trained well enough. Yeesh.
Conn Trooper- do you personally believe the public does not have a right to the same handgun and rifle you carry around professionally? I'm not looking to jump on you for your answer either way, mostly curious.
My personal view is that the NFA is somewhat tolerable.. the government may have the fully automatic M4 in common use, but the soldiers don't buy their own, or take it home at night. Law Enforcement do with the semi-automatic AR-15 and the semi-automatic Glock/Sig/1911/assorted Side Arms.
Conn Trooper- do you personally believe the public does not have a right to the same handgun and rifle you carry around professionally? I'm not looking to jump on you for your answer either way, mostly curious.
My personal view is that the NFA is somewhat tolerable.. the government may have the fully automatic M4 in common use, but the soldiers don't buy their own, or take it home at night. Law Enforcement do with the semi-automatic AR-15 and the semi-automatic Glock/Sig/1911/assorted Side Arms.
EODK9Trainer424
Inactive
"I think the first real push to do this was the Norco shootout. After that departments started looking for Mini-14's, M16's, and AR-15's. that was about 1980."
This was true on the left coast but not the right coast. I remember that shootout as I was a fairly new LEO at the time. My agency in VA, and many around us, never saw the first patrol rifle until the 2000's. Except for SWAT of course. We were using our handguns and 12 ga's for years. Even now, at least at my former agency, only a few off each squad carries a long rifle. We did go to Slugs (and Buckshot) for the 870's a number of years back which was nice as they are pretty damn accurate up to a certain distance but it's still not a rifle.
This was true on the left coast but not the right coast. I remember that shootout as I was a fairly new LEO at the time. My agency in VA, and many around us, never saw the first patrol rifle until the 2000's. Except for SWAT of course. We were using our handguns and 12 ga's for years. Even now, at least at my former agency, only a few off each squad carries a long rifle. We did go to Slugs (and Buckshot) for the 870's a number of years back which was nice as they are pretty damn accurate up to a certain distance but it's still not a rifle.
EODK9Trainer424
Inactive
This may have been one of the most professional/respectful responses to someone that they disagree with as I have ever seen. Nice job Wyoredman.
Trooper,
Thanks for your service to your community. We all appriciate the dangers and unknowns associated with your job. Thanks again.
Because you have never needed a rifle in your personal life in no way insures that you may never need one in the future. The last call you responded to that required a rifle, that victim probably wished they had had one before you arrived. See, victims don't have a choice about being in those situations. You, ultimately, do have a choice (and I am glad you choose to go, put your life in danger for others).
Nurses, doctors, drinking water plant operators, artists, bus drivers, firemen, teachers, etc. ... along with police - all represent civilized society. An attack on any of them is an attack on civilization and community. Police seek out the bad guys, where as the rest of us, for the most part, don't go looking for trouble. That is the distinction we need to remember.
The point I was making, is that many who would outlaw my rifle use the "training" cops get as an argument that they are more responsible with, and therefore deserve their rifles.
I tell anyone that cares to listen, that police "training" in long guns is no better than the "training" I have received since the age of 6. So that argument makes me laugh.
Sure, your tactical training on building entry and hostage situations may be stronger, but I would bet the ranch that my gun handeling and marksmanship (and safety) would compare to most police forces in this country. And I suspect many others in the "gun community" have the same skills.
Again, thanks for your service to your community. We need more people like you who CHOOSE to put themselves in harms way for the good of the community!
Trooper,
Thanks for your service to your community. We all appriciate the dangers and unknowns associated with your job. Thanks again.
Because you have never needed a rifle in your personal life in no way insures that you may never need one in the future. The last call you responded to that required a rifle, that victim probably wished they had had one before you arrived. See, victims don't have a choice about being in those situations. You, ultimately, do have a choice (and I am glad you choose to go, put your life in danger for others).
Nurses, doctors, drinking water plant operators, artists, bus drivers, firemen, teachers, etc. ... along with police - all represent civilized society. An attack on any of them is an attack on civilization and community. Police seek out the bad guys, where as the rest of us, for the most part, don't go looking for trouble. That is the distinction we need to remember.
The point I was making, is that many who would outlaw my rifle use the "training" cops get as an argument that they are more responsible with, and therefore deserve their rifles.
I tell anyone that cares to listen, that police "training" in long guns is no better than the "training" I have received since the age of 6. So that argument makes me laugh.
Sure, your tactical training on building entry and hostage situations may be stronger, but I would bet the ranch that my gun handeling and marksmanship (and safety) would compare to most police forces in this country. And I suspect many others in the "gun community" have the same skills.
Again, thanks for your service to your community. We need more people like you who CHOOSE to put themselves in harms way for the good of the community!
Conn. Trooper
New member
Wyoredman, I am not disagreeing with you, I'm only relating why I want a rifle for professional use, not that I think you shouldn't have one.
Conn. Trooper
New member
Conn Trooper- do you personally believe the public does not have a right to the same handgun and rifle you carry around professionally? I'm not looking to jump on you for your answer either way, mostly curious.
Not at all. I don't have anything that every other resident of CT. couldn't own. My rifle is a regular old Colt M4 in post ban configuration. There is no exemption for cops in CT. The state and towns can own whatever they want, but I can't.
In my opinion, most people need more training (cops included). I would trade all the registration, permits and BS rules surrounding guns for a training requirement. I know that could lead to an ever increasing amount of training being required until its no longer affordable (which would be its own form of gun control), but some people scare me when I go to a public range.
Not at all. I don't have anything that every other resident of CT. couldn't own. My rifle is a regular old Colt M4 in post ban configuration. There is no exemption for cops in CT. The state and towns can own whatever they want, but I can't.
In my opinion, most people need more training (cops included). I would trade all the registration, permits and BS rules surrounding guns for a training requirement. I know that could lead to an ever increasing amount of training being required until its no longer affordable (which would be its own form of gun control), but some people scare me when I go to a public range.
Aren't you a State guy? Trooper?
And if you want to get terrified, come to the range near me. They rent guns. And they're on the edge of a neighborhood that are either recent immigrants or work visa holders. Yay, go them and all, but it's really terrifying watching them get their first taste of 2nd amendment freedom. Sometimes it seems like the only thing they don't sweep the muzzle over is the target.
And if you want to get terrified, come to the range near me. They rent guns. And they're on the edge of a neighborhood that are either recent immigrants or work visa holders. Yay, go them and all, but it's really terrifying watching them get their first taste of 2nd amendment freedom. Sometimes it seems like the only thing they don't sweep the muzzle over is the target.
Conn. Trooper
New member
I am a State Trooper, but I use my own rifle. No evil features.
That's what I mean about training, there are some people that have no clue what they are doing with firearms. Scary sometimes.
That's what I mean about training, there are some people that have no clue what they are doing with firearms. Scary sometimes.
Trooper,
You are getting close to where "gun control" should be, if there really needs to be such a thing.
The State should decide what types of "control" is needed. The only thing the Fed should do is make sure the State doesn't infringe on the 2nd.
Take training for example. Here in the West (Wyoming, Idaho, Utah, Montana, etc.) we don't really have any problems with learning firearm usage. It is something we learn, just like driving. Most people who are outdoors types learn by doing from an early age. In the more Urban States, I can immagine that the first time rifle owner may be 42 years old and never have touched a gun. The "One Size Fits All" approach to anything the Fed does never makes much sense.
Now, TFLers, don't jump on me for generalizations in the above paragraph. That is how I see it. I understand that there are those people out west that have never shot and I understand that there are urbanites who are pros. (Thats another problem with control, there are always special intrests groups who get their feelings hurt from it, so it is better not to have it sometimes!)
Edit: P.S. My shooting out on the BLM, where there aren't any, zero, people for 15-30 miles is a whole lot different than shooting at a range near a city. The rules for one, don't work at all for the other. Fed control of anything muddies the water even more.
You are getting close to where "gun control" should be, if there really needs to be such a thing.
The State should decide what types of "control" is needed. The only thing the Fed should do is make sure the State doesn't infringe on the 2nd.
Take training for example. Here in the West (Wyoming, Idaho, Utah, Montana, etc.) we don't really have any problems with learning firearm usage. It is something we learn, just like driving. Most people who are outdoors types learn by doing from an early age. In the more Urban States, I can immagine that the first time rifle owner may be 42 years old and never have touched a gun. The "One Size Fits All" approach to anything the Fed does never makes much sense.
Now, TFLers, don't jump on me for generalizations in the above paragraph. That is how I see it. I understand that there are those people out west that have never shot and I understand that there are urbanites who are pros. (Thats another problem with control, there are always special intrests groups who get their feelings hurt from it, so it is better not to have it sometimes!)
Edit: P.S. My shooting out on the BLM, where there aren't any, zero, people for 15-30 miles is a whole lot different than shooting at a range near a city. The rules for one, don't work at all for the other. Fed control of anything muddies the water even more.
Last edited:
Conn. Trooper
New member
Oh, I'm with you, I grew up in rural Pennsylvania and learned to shoot with my grandfather when I was 10. My grandfather was born and raised in coal country and was very familiar with firearms. He taught my brother and I to shoot. But many people don't have that, and never get any sort of formal or informal training. That worries me.
armsmaster270
New member
When I was on the PD I carried a personal Mini 14 in the trunk of my squad car. Unauthorized, but if I had to use it I would gladly take the suspention.