“Militarization of police” can you define it and are you against it?

Gaius46 said:

Okay so though I've been around guns my entire life I don't know as much about the subject as many people in this forum but as far as I know, based on what I've seen it do to deer, a round from my 6mm will go in one side of person, go out the other then probably several walls - assuming it doesn't hit a stud - before it finally comes to a stop. If I use soft point ammo less than that but still it's coming out the other side of the person. I don't know that you can say the same for shotgun pellets.

I'm assuming a 5.56 would behave similarly.

Click to expand...

A 5.56 is less likely to over penetrate than some handgun rounds (9mm) included. The 5.56 is an EXCELLENT choice for urban areas for that reason. It will even stop in drywall. And if hollowpoints are used? Less likely to do so as well. Plus it has a range advantage (north hollywood is a good example of that). Then you factor in misses. If you miss with a shotgun...you miss with 9-12 pellets. Or if you don’t get the full pattern into the target. Shotguns aren’t a 1 size fits all solution. They require as much (if not more) training to utilize correctly. And you have to know your ammunition as well.

That being said...sub machine guns wouldn’t be a horrible choice, And they are frequently used in Europe, but they don’t offer that much difference between a short barrel AR and they have less power.

Thoreau72 said:

OK, that is plausible, having worked for the government.

That said, wasn't there one single good man asking the question "do civilian police really need bayonets?" How many civilian police agencies requested or were interested in acquiring bayonets?

If getting rid of inventory was the goal, why not burn the bayonets in an incinerator?

Click to expand...

Harder to explain than selling old “outdated” equipment.

blackjack50 said:

Harder to explain than selling old “outdated” equipment.

Click to expand...

I wonder if that is the default bureaucratic mindset?

They destroy old cars, old airplanes and old office equipment, why not old/unwanted bayonets?

Thoreau72 said:

I wonder if that is the default bureaucratic mindset?

They destroy old cars, old airplanes and old office equipment, why not old/unwanted bayonets?

Click to expand...

Yea. The one thing I’ve learned from the few government jobs I’ve had...they want to spend every penny they have. And they don’t have to answer to profits like a corporation does

blackjack50 said:

Yea. The one thing I’ve learned from the few government jobs I’ve had...they want to spend every penny they have. And they don’t have to answer to profits like a corporation does

Click to expand...

Agreed. That is one of the many things I learned in my time with the USArmy.

Manc Skipper said:

The issue should be obvious. The mindset. The public are not the enemy. Neither are the criminals, for that matter, but the lines get blurred when the police travel in elite paraminlitary squads in armoured vehicles..

Click to expand...

You mean police MRAPs are pulling over 80 year old granny for going 5 over the speed limit?

Gaius46 said:

Weapons designed to be used on the battlefield aren't necessarily the best choice for crowded urban areas where the vast majority of people around are your own innocent citizens.

Click to expand...

For one most agencies and officers use AR15s. A civillain rifke that has never been isdued to a modern army, therefore not making it a weapon designed for the battlefield. Secondly, in the few cases where and agency issues surplus M4s, they actually serve a better purpose than the previously issued MP5S. for one the AR15/M4 platform provides the officer to adequately defend himself in multple environments. Short enough to clear buildings but in a rifle cartridge to engage badguys at relatively long distances. Secondly the 5.56/.223 round actually penetrates less walls than most pistol calibers.