[Condor51]

Ok , I'm series.

Screw the AR-15.
Get a REAL rifle, an M-14. That'll take out any bad guy with an SKS.

It's that physics thingy, F=ma
In English, .308 beats .223 OR the SKS 7.62x39 (however personally I'd rather have the 7.62x39 than a wimpy .223)

Please no Flaming, I just don't like 'little' bullets or the concept behind the M-16 as a main battle rifle, i.e.; wound one enemy and then you take three people out of the fight. That concept only works when your enemy isn't a member of a death cult.

[DocH]

I agree that the 7.62 is a much better round, but most types of .308 AR-type weapons will outshoot a comparably sized (short-barreled) M1-A/M-14 anyday, AND, since many cops are former military and already trained with an M-16, it just makes sense to equip them with what they already know. The AR weapons are easier to handle (ergonomically speaking) also. The modular nature of the AR family also allows much more customization, and/or fitting-out for different missions. The AR is also much easier for individuals, other than an armorer, to repair. The M1-A/M-14 weapons are good weapons, but an AR in the same caliber is much better, in my opinion.

[cpdiii]

With my FAL (7.62-51) on a good day I can put 20 rounds in a pie plate at 100 yards RAPID FIRE. That is a lot of High Speed Grief. However, my main defense weapon for the house is an AR-15 and 1911 45 ACP and or a shotgun.

[Hardastarboard]

No flames here. The M-16 isn't a bad choice for a battle rifle based on what I know (no direct experience carrying one, so I have to defer to the experts). The issue is a difference of purpose. The military needs a gun that fires a round that allows them to carry lots of ammo. The cops don't have that need. 20 rounds should be enough, especially out of a .308 caliber rifle.

So, your suggestion of the M-14 seems like a good one to me. The possible exception is in heavily populated urban areas, where over-penetration and the longer effective range of the heavier caliber might mitigate against using it.

[libstripper]

About 6 months ago the "American Rifleman" had an article on the M-14 and the M1-A, its civilian counterpart. Turns out a number of the M-14s stayed with units in Vietnam after the M-16 was introduced. The remaining M-14s were used essentially as shoulder held artillery pieces to do things like cut through brush the M-16s couldn't and even, occasionally, to cut down trees.

There are a couple of really neat features to the M-14/M-1A for police work. The first is it doesn't have the alarming, and deceptive, military look of the M-16. Looking a lot more like an ordinary civilian hunting rifle means uninformed people will be less alarmed by its appearance. The other is that, as you have stated, it's vastly more combat effective than a M-16 since its; round carries just about twice as much energy, making it a natural for shooting through walls and body armor.