Why heavily arm the Police?

Status
Not open for further replies.
M

Mikul

New member
Many police departments are heavily armed with machine guns, bullet-proof vests, and they're trained to use them in a conflict. Unfortunately, I can't think of a single event where they've used them to stop a violent attack on a civilian. I can remember events where they've been fired upon first, but not where the police have used their massive firepower to stop a violent crime in progress. Columbine being the most blaring example of when they could have, but didn't.

Sure, they've used sidearms and probably even the shotguns in their trunk, but I'm thinking of the SWAT-type of equipment.

All I can think of is drug raids and Elian.

Can anyone think of one? I'm sure some of the LEOs out there have some information. I'm just trying to justify their existence. I hear a lot about the drug raids and such, but these are non-violent situations that are made violent by the forced entry. How about hearing the other side of the story.
 
What about that California bank robbery?

------------------
When they try to take away my 2nd Amendment rights, tell them Hell's comin' and I'm comin' with it! Armed and Dangerous
 
Texas Tower - could have used the stuff then.

What's your point?

When the Nazi pig attacked the Jewish Day Care Center - do you want to wait for the Army to arrive?

In fact, after Columbine much thought is being given to appropriate tactics to take on such a killing team.

It's nice to hate police abuse but don't have it blind you to the reality of the dangers out there.
 
From the perspective of a once country cop, I just wish all cops were adequately armed and trained instead of concentrating the ordnance, training dollars, and training assets in a small group of "specialized" tactical teams.

I worked 17.5 years in a rural county where for the most part deputies were only armed with a pistol and a four shot duck hunter's weapon. Only recently have .223 carbines in the form of Ruger Mini-14s and Colt M-16s (Dept. of Defense surplus) have been issued. Issuance of the carbine is not universal throughout the department. The problem that still remains is training time and dollars have not increased to accommodate all around training in the rifle, shotgun, and pistol. The result is deputies still respond to calls where armed resistance is highly possible with only their pistol in their hand. The rifle and shotgun remain in the patrol car.

The North Hollywood bank robbery illustrated that Los Angeles Police Department planning always assumed that cornered bank robbers would hole up, take hostages, and there would be adequate time to call out the SWAT troops. They were fooled when these bank robbers came out fighting and the first responders, uniformed patrol, were only armed with handguns. Shotguns were only available to sergeants and then only buckshot was authorized. Hardly sufficient to deal with suspects wearing heavy body armor.

Columbine showed that patrol has to deal with the problem sometimes. It takes too long for SWAT to form up.

I understand that Clovis PD, California trains all their officers to SWAT standards. That way there is no delay in waiting for the special troops to arrive. All officers are familiar with all the weapons in the arsenal. Likewise, they avoid the image sent to the media when the ninja warriors arrive in black suits, helmets and masks.
 
I don't have the info on the LA bank robbery, but did the police go in bank to stop them, or did the BGs come out and start shooting at the cops?

My point? I don't know that I have one. It just struck me as odd that with the proliferation of firepower (as incomplete as it may be), it should be easier for police to stop a violent crime from happening as long as they get there while the BGs are still in the act, but that doesn't seem to be the case. Mostly, they seem to contain the violence to it's current position and wait until the BGs do something stupid, get bored, or kill themselves.

I see the need for the firepower even if it is only for containment which prevents further violence. My concern (I think) is that it's used more for no-knock type raids and Elain situations instead of the "stop someone from getting killed" situation. The idea being that if it's true that these weapons are used more for "do what I say or else" than to save a life.

The equivalent being that I'm being swindled by some guy, so I point my gun at his head and make him honor the deal. I don't think most of us would support that particular use of a firearm (well, not most of the time).

Thank you for tolerating my 1am ramblings. I'm thinking out loud tonight. I know that something seems wrong with the way these weapons are being used, and I need to find out what it is, or I simply don't know how often they're used for good.
 
In the Los Angeles/North Hollywood robbery, the BGs came out shooting.

Current thinking nowadays is to let the robbery run its course as long as no one starts shooting. Let the BGs leave and follow them by helicopter if available until they are in a position to contain and capture without endangering bystanders.
 
It would be great to know what the rules are for when firearms (rifles and such in particular) are to be pulled on people.

Does anyone know, or does this vary greatly from one department to another?
 
Mikul,
I work for a small department in south central Pa. Our department employs 10 officers and provides service to 2 townships and 1 borough. Total population is approx 13,000 to 15,000 people. For the most part, the majority of our jurisdiction is rural area. Being familiar with PA, I'm sure you realize there are alot of hunters in this state and most residences have some type of firearm inside... usually high power rifles, which could punch a bullet through all ten of our officers, wearing balistic vests, if they were all lined up in single file.
Let me give you an example of an incident to help clear your mind about police officers being so well equiped. You're working third shift (11 pm - 7 am), alone, when you are dispatched to a violent domestic dispute. The bad guy has already shot out every window in the house, beat his wife, threatened to kill his wife, kids, himself and any responding police officer. The dirt bag is intoxicated, smoked up on crack/cocaine, and has numerous high power hunting rifles at his disposal. Keep in mind your closest back-up is 10 minutes away. wait.... it gets worse. The PA State Police Special Response Team has a minimum of 4 to 6 hours to deploy and arrive at the incident.
The bad guy has already stepped out on to the porch and fired shots from his rifle in the direction of police, which are approx 100 yds away. I asume you are familiar with the type of handguns we use and understand we need to be much closer, to make our shots count. we have shot guns with slugs and buckshot, but at that distance, I still would not feel right attempting a shot. Especially with a front bead sight, not to mention, not knowing where the victims are in the house and worried about where, or who,
my missed shot may strike.
If you were in this position, you bet your ass you'd be praying for the "gun god" to come down from the heavens and deliver a scoped high power rifle into your trembling hands. Then you could "reach out and touch" the drunken idiot, who's put inocent people through hell. I've been shot at, but never been hit with a piece of 180 grain lead, traveling at 3,000+ f.p.s. ... don't intend to either.
As far as the bullet proof vests, they have saved many police offiers' lives... probably everyday in this country. I hope they develope better vests in the future. Light, concealable vests that will stop high power rounds (if the poop hits the fan and someone is shooting at me with a high power weapon, the vest I wear now, would be lucky to make good toilet paper to wipe my A** with, when the incident is over.
Unfortunately, our police comission, who are made up of local citizens, have your same mentality, when asked to purchase our department high power rifles. They just don't understand why we need them. Hope they never have to find out the hard way!!!
To end this little note, I have to let you know, you can consider me one of those "overly armed police officers." I used my own money to purchase a Bushmaster .223 cal carbine (16" barrel), Ruger Mini-14, Ruger .40 cal carbine, a Mossburg 12 ga shotgun, and a throw on bullet proof vest- threat level III (this is in addition to my concealable vest I wear).
Coming soon.... scoped Remington model 700PSS. I carry all these weapons on duty with me!! I don't want to seem like a "gun crazed idiot" with authority, hoping for the chance to shoot someone. I do this job because I truly enjoy helping people and protecting the safety of others. I hope and pray all my weapons sit there, collect dust and I never have to use them. But, if the need arises, I can trouble god with other prayers, instead of wishing I had better equipment.
You can't wait for a critical incident to occur, to realize you don't have the proper equipment. The whole concept, for an agency that protects other peoples' lives, is to BE PREPARED!!!! I wasn't born a police officer... and nver understood why they did what they did, until I became one. I had to be the one of the most critical people in the world, concerning law enforcement, prior to my training. just one of the things.... you have to do the job, before you can understand the job.

Did I mention, this type of incident has occurred... several times!!! Among many others, where deadly force would have been justified.

[This message has been edited by R PHILLIPS (edited April 27, 2000).]
 
Lest we forget, what of those two NH cops who were killed by a rifle wielding assailant. One didn't even have a chance to exit his patrol car and the other had the fingers of his shooting hand blown back. The latter retreated, was shot in the knee, and then "executed" as he continued to attempt evasion.

Despite the publicity SWAT or Entry Teams enjoy, the average street cop still isn't equipped to take on a rifle armed assailant. Bullet resistent vests may stop handgun bullets, but are worthless when up against a high velocity rifle round. Same thing for those kevlar brain buckets. No, cops are overarmed or overequipped. Rather, that is the perception created thanks to media publicity of a small number of officers.
 
The slaying of 2 officers in the South by 2 thugs armed with an SKS started a great deal of this. 2 days after that happened every gunshop near Richmond VA was sold out on those at the time cheap SKS rifles.
2 days after that my Moss 590 was replaced by an AR-15 that I quickly assembled myself.

Every LEO I know of doesnt even want to THINK of going up against a rifle armed thug. My academy never even TOUCHED that subject.
 
I have zero problem with city to state level LE's being armed to the teeth, but only if honest citizens have the option of being equally well armed. Police never know what kind of trouble they may encounter. Furthermore, they rarely go out looking for trouble to bring on themselves. Local abuses of power are easier to deal with on a local level.

Now, Federal SWAT teams...that's a completely different story. It seems every alphabet agency has a SWAT team. I wonder if the Census bureau is locked and loaded yet (The follow up visits begin today). These agencies should probably not even exist, much less have war-waging capabilities. Almost every Federal agency duplicates and supercedes agencies already in place in all 50 states. Hasn't anyone heard of the tenth amendment?

------------------
NRA/GOA/SAF/USMC

"Is your church BATF approved?"

Oregon residents please support the Oregon Firearms Federation, our only "No compromise" gun lobby.
http://www.oregonfirearms.org

[This message has been edited by Longshot (edited April 27, 2000).]
 
I have a little different take on the subject. Does the term "police state" mean anything to you people?
If all LEO's were to use their new equipment only in the cases cited in all the above posts, then O.K. But the picture of the Miami raid comes to mind. I know that that picture showed the Feds. and not local LEO's, but the bridge is so easily crossed it makes me uneasy.
 
Agreed. Just remember, to all those who would claim that the Feds need such "Ninja" units: the Federal gov't has NO police powers except on Federal property. The FBI, the DEA, etc. get their powers from the Commerce Clause and the Fed's authority to regulate interstate commerce. You need a SWAT team to regulate interstate commerce?
 
I too had a problem with Comlombine in that I see no need for the LEOs to show up if all they are gonna do is come secure the parking lot. Their job is dangerous and I respect them all for doing it on the pay that they get. My problem is that the military is asked occasionally to go to another country and defend citizens of other countrys from each other. I've had to do it myself and you wonder why in the world you are there and not home tending to matters that are more important to you. Those cops in CO were from that area and that was their local kids being shot in the school and all they did was sit outside and catch the few that were lucky enough to escape. I hate to send a cop into a very dangerous situation like that but that is what they are paid to do. This is in no way a flame on the cops that were there in CO. They did what they were supposed to do at the time and I'm sure had orders not to go in and do anything. But I do believe we as a Country need to look at our tactics and ROE for these types of situations.
 
I have a different perspective on this as well.

SWAT teams,and well armed and trained LEO's are often the solution to capturing or ultimately stopping BG's. But, they don't usually stop violence against civilians before it occurs. Thus, civilians need to be always prepared to defend themselves until the professionals arrive. Just like first aid and CPR in an emergency medical situation, citizens should not and cannot wait ... they must initially save themselves.

Columbine gave us another lesson, as we've noted from reports this week ... it sounds like the library would not have been such a devasting killing zone if the kids had run instead of hunkering down, as instructed by a 911 operator.

I'm not well-versed in the subject, but it does seem to me that there has been an over-emphasis on SWAT teams, and too little emphasis on properly equipping and training the 'beat' LEO's. I wonder if that has contributed to excessive force by SWAT teams, and too many casualties for 'beat' LEO's?

As always, we appreciate the service of honest LEO's in stopping violence and property crimes.

Regards from AZ
 
Line officers should be trained in and issued: pistols, shotguns, and .223 carbines. They are always the first to respond. The average response time for SWAT teams is in the order of 1.5 hours. Way too long in some instances.

SWAT teams are great tools. The problem is not with the teams themselves, but with the decision making protocals as to when and where to appropriately weild them.
 
Response to "huke"
I don't know where you get your information, but those JeffCo officers did not just secure the parking lot and catch a few evacuees from the building. I was at a seminar last fall where members of the team gave a briefing and walked the attendees through the incident. They were on site and made initial entry into the building within minutes with an ad-hoc team thrown together on-scene. Yes, as the incident wore on, there were a ton of officers in the parking lot; an incident of that magnitude is going to draw officers from miles around. What did you expect all those officers to do? Storm the building en mass? That would have been extremely hazardous, given the situation. Plus, the officers IN the building needed to be rotated out; that armor gets heavy quick.
Please consider all the facts before making inflamatory statements like the one you just made.
 
I'm not worried about LEO's having automatic rifles\carbines. We can't demand the right to have such weapons and then complain if LEO's have the same.

Yes, the Federal Police over step their boundries daily. I don't have many word of support for them. The various Federal Police agencies have become the enforcement arm of the oligarchy. State and Local Police have no need of Federal back up. The Feds mainly exist to do the dirty deeds that the locals and staties refuse to do.
Then there's the ATF...No comment needed.

As for the need of local SWAT, I say it's undeniable. When a SWAT op goes perfectly, it makes little news. When it gets fudged, it's plasterd across the world.
Local SWAT handles hostage sits, takes on barracaded BGs, responds in the event of a terrorist incident, etc.
To say they don't realy do that much good isn't accurate. I know of several incidents where BGs have given up simply becuase SWAT was en route.

Support your local LEOs.
 
I think most cops would be very adequately armed with either a 44 special or 38 special revolver and a 12 gauge pump shotgun. The trend towards more exotic armament is more a fashion statement than a true necessity.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top