image from newsok.com
After the Dallas police massacre, the Oklahoma City police union asked that officers be allowed to carry their personal rifles with them at work. From newsok.com:
Posted on 07/27/2016 5:35:42 AM PDT by marktwain
image from newsok.com
After the Dallas police massacre, the Oklahoma City police union asked that officers be allowed to carry their personal rifles with them at work. From newsok.com:
Citing the deaths of five officers in Dallas last week, the Fraternal Order of Police has asked that Oklahoma City officers be allowed to carry their personal rifles and ammunition and be issued additional body armor.
OKLAHOMA CITY -Officers will have to qualify with their own rifles, and use department issued ammunition. The department currently has about 285 rifles for 520 officers. The department is going to buy more rifles. The police chief says the policy will be a temporary one. From kfor.com:
Oklahoma City Police Chief Bill Citty now says officers will be able to carry their own rifles until the department can purchase additional weapons.
Chief Citty said in press conference Monday that he had changed his mind on the issue following Sunday's attack in Baton Rouge, La. that left three law enforcement officers dead and three injured."The threats are real," said Citty.
Citty says he wants to have control over those high-powered weapons, so the city will be purchasing rifles for the remaining officers in the field.The idea of officers having their own rifles has merit. Personally owned arms have the advantage of supporting the idea of officers as citizens, instead of merely enforcers of the commands of those above them. People tend to take care of their own equipment better than something that belongs to a impersonal organization. Inspections and qualifications can apply to personally owned arms as well as department owned arms.
Until those guns arrive, officers will be able to carry their personal rifles, if the weapon is approved and they qualify.
Yep - and having a weapon you set up for yourself, vs. one that might get shared around, is also a big advantage.
Sure, an AR is an AR but your AR just feels like your AR. ;-) Seriously, many people add personal touches, grips, grip tape, stocks, rails, fore grips, etc.
While I have no problem with this, a handgun is probably the better defensive weapon for the ambush style attacks which have been conducted against police officers as of late. But every little bit helps. Even then, if you are sitting in a car, belted in, you are like fish in a barrel if an armed assassin wants to take you out.
Mamm, if I was expecting trouble, I would have brought my rifle. Or something like that.
So where does this end? Further militarization of the police is not the answer.
Obama has already bought M16's for the IRS and the EPA.
Of course - they’re the Obamacare and climate change enforcers.
American police have had rifles forever, especially in rural areas.
I do not see the addition of rifles as a big problem.
Had I been a pinned-down Dallas officer, I would have preferred having the .22-250 varmint rifle that I’ve owned since 1967, as opposed to a pistol. Pistols are ineffective when it comes time to “reach out and touch someone.”
Police having their private arms is actually a step away from militarization, IMHO.
It is closer to the idea of a milita.
Yes, if the shooter is sniping from a distance then a rifle is the best way to return fire. But most of these cop killings have been very close quarters ambush style attacks, often while the officer is in his car. In that situation a hand gun is quicker and easier to maneuver. Clearly, it’s best to have both close by.
A man with his personal weapon will be more accurate when shooting it. I’ve shot some of the fancy weapons with long mags. I’ll stay with my old 30-30 that I’ve owned for 50 plus years. Whether it’s dropping a deer at 260 yards on the run or barking a squirrel it always delivered. No fancy gismos or safetys, little to jam and its like a glove in my shoulder. From experience you know where it will hit.
Oh fer cryin’ out loud! An AR is NOT a military rifle. Maybe you’d prefer police officers to go back to Winchester 1873’s? Or perhaps the more modern Winchester 1892 assault rifle?
“So where does this end? Further militarization of the police is not the answer.”
I have to agree. Secondarily, if it is so dangerous out there that they need loaded rifles strapped to their chest, how about letting us common folk do the same? Are we not on the same streets? Are we not under the same danger?
I dont’ mind the State allowing police to have their “personal” rifles.
I just wish the State would stop trying to criminalize mine.
The Dallas shooter was 2-3 stories up in a parking garage. Handgun and standard issue shotgun were kind of useless.
If some citizen wants to open carry a rifle, they can move to AZ, OH etc.
“If some citizen wants to open carry a rifle, they can move to AZ, OH etc.”
And if some cop wants to carry a rifle on duty he can do the same? See how that doesnt work?
Allow all citizens to open carry loaded rifles in all states and you wouldnt need half the police force we have.
We are all equal Americans or we are not.
Actual a 73 or 92 wouldn’t be that bad of an patrol rifle.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.