Full auto vs. bolt action. Volume of fire is more effective unless the guy with the Lee-Enfield is a sniper. It would take a highly trained specialist to take on an enemy armed with assault rifles, and probably not a regular police officer.
The Idea that one must cower behind cover while some idiot sprays auto-fire around or else be killed is nonsense, those will be out-flanked, and defeated even while cowering.
Automatic fire is random, indiscrete and actually not very likely to kill/disable a SPECIFIC target (which the police would have been in this case). A man (or woman) only need to commit their lives to fate (faith in my case) and fight. If one believes that their life is in their hands alone, they will cower, rather than trust to providence and courage.
Many certainly will die “charging the guns”, always has been that way, always will be. Many win and survive in the face of “odds” against them, we call them Heroes, living or dead.
For all of those out there that think they will only cower as some lunatic shoots their family or those they are sworn to protect, they will.
For those that know in their hearts, they will risk death to protect those in their charge, they likely will defeat the threat, even though not evenly armed or armored. They may not walk away, or even survive, but they know also that living after failing to act with fatal results to their duty would be a worse fate.
Ideally, proper weapons, proper tactics and training are desired, but in the absence of that “perfect” scenario, one still must be morally motivated to act, as action produces results, inaction produces freedom of action for the other force.
Snipers are effective from distance, behind cover or at least concealment, terribly ineffective in dynamic action environments. Remember, snipers (mil and civ) pick whom to kill at thier will, not in response to violent dynamic action. Many readers will think me odd, but those who have been there and back know the truth.
God Bless and Molon Labe.