Just out from the Washington Post: D.C. to Arm Patrol Officers With Assault Rifles
Yup, here it comes, the now-classic justification:
The D.C. police department plans to give patrol officers assault rifles to protect them against criminals with high-powered weapons.
But, but, but, how can this be?!? Such so-called high powered weapons are already illegal in the District! More to the point, the District classifies any gun with a magazine capacity of 12 rounds or greater to be a "machine gun" and does not permit anyone save the police to possess one.
So how are these criminals getting their hands on such rifles?
In fact, I do believe there has been one shooting involving an AK-47 look-alike. So one shooting announces the presence of a deadly criminal army waiting to wage war on the city police?
Save the hyperbole for someone who believes it. People seriously fall for this crap?
D.C. Council member Jim Graham says he is inclined to support the use of assault rifles, noting that it's a problem when criminals are better armed than police.
Prove it, Mr. Graham. Really. I think someone is going to get a request for further information. A drug dealer carrying a couple of Glocks in his jockeys could be considered "better armed than the police" (only if the cop in question isn't carrying a holdout gun) but I think that's a stretch. One incident does not a trend make.
And lastly...
Police in Prince George's and Montgomery counties say they have seen criminals use more powerful weapons in recent years, and have given officers the option to carry assault rifles.
Really? I hadn't heard anything about shooting rampages involving rifles in either county and I live in Montgomery County. Somehow, one gets the impression the truth is being stretched rather tightly here.
And what does activity in Maryland have anything to do with crime rates in the District? Notice the conspicuous absence of reporting of any similar trends in Fairfax and Arlington counties across the river in Virginia.
Has anyone noticed that this trend seems to be making the rounds with various cities under the justification of trying to reach parity with the very criminals they are supposed to be arresting? Also, have you noticed that this seems to be announced and done in places that have strong gun bans in place on the very weapons they are supposedly trying to counter?
I expect to see this massive spike in the Uniform Crime Report data on firearms next year to account for this militant arming of police in these gun-free paradises.
Yup, here it comes, the now-classic justification:
The D.C. police department plans to give patrol officers assault rifles to protect them against criminals with high-powered weapons.
But, but, but, how can this be?!? Such so-called high powered weapons are already illegal in the District! More to the point, the District classifies any gun with a magazine capacity of 12 rounds or greater to be a "machine gun" and does not permit anyone save the police to possess one.
So how are these criminals getting their hands on such rifles?
In fact, I do believe there has been one shooting involving an AK-47 look-alike. So one shooting announces the presence of a deadly criminal army waiting to wage war on the city police?
Save the hyperbole for someone who believes it. People seriously fall for this crap?
D.C. Council member Jim Graham says he is inclined to support the use of assault rifles, noting that it's a problem when criminals are better armed than police.
Prove it, Mr. Graham. Really. I think someone is going to get a request for further information. A drug dealer carrying a couple of Glocks in his jockeys could be considered "better armed than the police" (only if the cop in question isn't carrying a holdout gun) but I think that's a stretch. One incident does not a trend make.
And lastly...
Police in Prince George's and Montgomery counties say they have seen criminals use more powerful weapons in recent years, and have given officers the option to carry assault rifles.
Really? I hadn't heard anything about shooting rampages involving rifles in either county and I live in Montgomery County. Somehow, one gets the impression the truth is being stretched rather tightly here.
And what does activity in Maryland have anything to do with crime rates in the District? Notice the conspicuous absence of reporting of any similar trends in Fairfax and Arlington counties across the river in Virginia.
Has anyone noticed that this trend seems to be making the rounds with various cities under the justification of trying to reach parity with the very criminals they are supposed to be arresting? Also, have you noticed that this seems to be announced and done in places that have strong gun bans in place on the very weapons they are supposedly trying to counter?
I expect to see this massive spike in the Uniform Crime Report data on firearms next year to account for this militant arming of police in these gun-free paradises.
4 comments:
I think the opposite will happen. When the criminals see police wandering around with tacti-cool rifles, they will feel the need to trade in their glocks.
DC is trying to justify them without upsetting the masses. I don't see a big deal with them having a rifle in their car, because if I were a cop responding to a shooter of any sort, than I would want to have a rifle.
My question is: if militant looking rifles are such a hazard becuase they are only designed to kill on a large scale, then why the hell are we giving them to the cops?
BTW, I have read on cop forums that DC police are not authorized to carry a BUG.
I agree with Steve. Criminals have historically sought out the same weapons as cops.
Hells bells, if I were a cop (Thank you, God and a BIG collective sigh of relief that I'm not), I'd want a rifle too. A pistol against a rifle in a standoff/shootout is a pretty serious limitation. And for that purpose, I think the AR-15 would be a good choice. Any officer that has been in the military already has a basic familiarity with it, it's easy to operate, low recoil,good accuracy, etc. (NOTE: I say AR-15 because it's semi-auto only. Being ex- military myself, I'm not a big fan of full-auto anyway, especially not in an urban environment with innocents all around.)
The problem I have is that DC wants to arm police with the very EBRs that it seeks to deny me and thee. And as far as I can see, there's no more or less reason to trust the average cop than the average joe-on-the-street: cops aren't some sort of super-citizen (or at least they shouldn't be), and if I'm ever confronted with violent crime, I want the means to resist/prevent, same as they have. A cop on a cell phone is a piss-poor substitute for a firearm in my hand, in those situations.
Post a Comment