Boston PD to get 200 AR's for the street cop

M1911

Moderator
NES Member
Rating - 100%
27   0   0
Joined
Apr 1, 2005
Messages
39,573
Likes
7,791
Location
Near Framingham
Is crime in Boston so bad that the cops can't hold the suspects at bay with there 40 cal high cap hand guns for the 5 minutes it would take to get SWAT out there?
1) a lot of people can die in 5 minutes.

2) SWAT won't be there in 5 minutes. Remember the North Hollywood shootout in LA? That took a heck of a lot longer than 5 minutes before SWAT arrived.
 
Last edited:

MaverickNH

NES Member
Rating - 100%
6   0   0
Joined
Nov 24, 2005
Messages
4,020
Likes
1,970
Location
SoNH
Of course, one of the standard arguements against cisitizens owning/carrying guns is that criminals can steal them, so I don't think I'd want to make the same arguement against police having M16s. Heck - if they can't have "high power, long-range" guns, why should we?

The objections in the article seem typical BS:

1. Citizens would be scared (The Guard carried unloaded M16s in airports to comfort us AFTER a terrorist attack, but police carrying them BEFORE another terrorist attack would be scarey?)

2. The average cop shouldn't have one (OK - train twice yearly, along with their handguns; even if all don't carry M16s all should know how to use them)

After 2 weeks in Jerusalem, I started feeling edgy when there WANS'T an officer/soldier/citizen or two in sight with an M16. Nobody gives it a second thought over there - except wouldbe terrorists...
 
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
Apr 1, 2009
Messages
226
Likes
39
Location
Lexington
If Boston had Open Carry, Police wouldn't need these AR15s...and the concern for hi crime rates would drop...like the mantra "more guns less crime" goes... and the Police/FBI would
be more concerned about the growing need for their own jobs and funding, and the need for a growing military presence in the streets of America.

I get sick and tired of the FEAR Card getting tossed around about Terrorism when we have the answer if we fill our hands.
 
Rating - 100%
15   0   0
Joined
Aug 9, 2006
Messages
16,912
Likes
773
Location
BIOT
The funny thing is that, despite the usual "they can't do what I can't do" stuff, in this case, it's patrol officers who aren't being allowed to carry black rifles, locked up and unloaded, in their cars, while any LTC-B or better holder can.

The whole thing is ridiculous. Every single person in this country, save violent offenders or the batshit insane, should be able to carry whatever loaded rifle they wish. That includes cops.
 

terraformer

NES Member
Rating - 100%
32   0   0
Joined
May 17, 2008
Messages
16,911
Likes
2,599
The funny thing is that, despite the usual "they can't do what I can't do" stuff, in this case, it's patrol officers who aren't being allowed to carry black rifles, locked up and unloaded, in their cars, while any LTC-B or better holder can.

The whole thing is ridiculous. Every single person in this country, save violent offenders or the batshit insane, should be able to carry whatever loaded rifle they wish. That includes cops.

This whole problem could have been prevented had this guy davis articulated a policy for when these came out and when they didn't. The "community leaders" (aka, al sharptons in training) think that these will be pulled on some kid who is hanging on the corner. There has yet to be an articulated policy on when and where in the press. Therefore all the moonbats fears are driving their vision of how these things will be used.
 
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
Nov 6, 2007
Messages
27
Likes
0
Today, I spoke to the licensing officer of Boston. He told me, "Everyone's afraid they'll kill someone, and they will."
 
Last edited:

terraformer

NES Member
Rating - 100%
32   0   0
Joined
May 17, 2008
Messages
16,911
Likes
2,599
Today, I spoke to [an] officer of Boston [PD]. He told me, "Everyone's afraid they'll kill someone, and they will."

That's a ringing endorsement of his colleagues... [rolleyes]

PS: Remove his name, rank, etc. I doubt he expected his words would be pasted on the intertubes....
 
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
Nov 6, 2007
Messages
27
Likes
0
He meant the guns, not the officers. As in, the sheep are afraid the new guns will kill people, and yes they will kill people - the bad guys.
 

cekim

NES Member
Rating - 100%
3   0   0
Joined
Jan 19, 2009
Messages
29,885
Likes
4,684
Location
Clowns->Here<-Jokers
There was a discussion on this earlier on talk radio. All the moonbats were calling in and opposing the rifles.
Indeed... They'd rather die in death camps than give up their illusion of safety...

In reality, to be a pacifist, you have to embrace the illusion of safety and thus you have to continually rationalize to preserve this illusion...

If you didn't, you'd be scared poop-less... [wink]
 
Rating - 100%
13   0   0
Joined
Apr 13, 2008
Messages
4,602
Likes
1,421
Location
The PRM
what, with all the money we pay to drive the pike we couldn't get them some M249s as well?

 
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
Nov 2, 2010
Messages
709
Likes
69
Location
Central Connecticut
http://www.boston.com/news/local/ma...irepower_semiautomatic_assault_rifles?mode=PF

Police getting more firepower
200 to be armed with assault rifles
By Donovan Slack and Maria Cramer, Globe Staff | May 29, 2009

The Boston Police Department is preparing a plan to arm as many as 200 patrol officers with semiautomatic assault rifles, a significant boost in firepower that department leaders believe is necessary to counter terrorist threats, according to law enforcement officials briefed on the plan.

The initiative calls for equipping specialized units, such as the bomb squad and harbor patrol, with the high-powered long-range M16 rifles first, the officials said. The department would then distribute the weapons to patrol officers in neighborhood precincts over the next several months, according to the two law enforcement officials, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because they did not have permission to speak publicly.

The officials did not know exactly when the department planned to start handing out the rifles but said police officials already have acquired the guns.

Police department spokeswoman Elaine Driscoll declined to discuss any details of the plan yesterday. She said the plan was still in an "inquiry stage."

"Commissioner [Edward] Davis has not decided if he would like to move forward with this initiative," she said. "At this time, absolutely no determination has been made."

The M16 rifle is a standard, military-issue weapon distributed to US armed forces. It can be used in the field by soldiers with a fully automatic function, operating as a machine-gun, but the Boston proposal is to arm them the weapons for semiautomatic operation.

The law enforcement officials who discussed the proposal said department leaders have described the need for more potent weaponry to confront terrorists like the ones who attacked hotels and other sites in Mumbai, India, last November, killing 166 people and wounding 234 others.

But the plan has sparked a debate within the Police Department about the safety of routinely deploying military-grade weapons on Boston's streets. Currently, the department keeps its stock of high-powered rifles locked in special gun cars that can be driven to crime scenes when they are needed by SWAT teams.

Some police union officials, who are scheduled to discuss the firepower upgrade with department management today, are concerned that the weapons are too powerful for city streets and that they could fall into the wrong hands and be used against police officers and citizens, the officials said.

But other union leaders are not as concerned.

Detective Miller Thomas, president of the Boston Police Detectives Benevolent Society, said he felt comfortable with the safety guidelines department officials have pledged to put in place. Thomas said that in meetings held a few months ago and during the past two weeks, police officials explained to him and other union leaders that the guns would be assigned to specific officers and deposited in special lockers when they went home. When the officers are patrolling, the guns would be secured in cruisers with special lock mechanisms, Thomas said.

"It's not like it's going to be like anyone can go in and take the gun out," he said.

Thomas said department officials told him they plan to provide officers assigned to carry the rifles with up to 40 hours of training and have them shoot some 2,000 practice rounds to become comfortable firing the weapons.

Other officers who are not selected to carry the guns, or choose not to, will be given a less-intensive course so that they will know how to handle one of the guns in an emergency, Thomas said.

He said the plan is to equip patrol officers, detectives, and supervisors with the rifles.

Boston would not be the first city to arm patrol officers with assault rifles. Many other large police departments - including those in Chicago, Miami, Las Vegas, Cincinnati, and Phoenix - are using such rifles already or are planning to.

In Denver, patrol officers have been armed with assault rifles for at least a decade, Denver police spokesman Sonny Jackson said. The rifles are widely distributed, Jackson said, but he declined to say how widely distributed, citing safety reasons. Officers keep them inside hard cases secured in the trunks of police cruisers, in accordance with department policy, which also dictates that the chamber be empty and no magazine loaded in the weapon, he said.

Jackson said the department began using the rifles when Denver police officials saw that officers in other cities were being outgunned by suspects packing high-powered weapons.

"What we were seeing is that the suspects, they're using heavy artillery, they're using assault rifles," Jackson said. "And the officers were only using handguns, and they were at a deficit."

In Boston, the law enforcement officials said the idea of arming patrol officers with assault rifles was first floated about a year ago by Deputy Superintendent Darrin Greeley. But the plan did not gain support from his superiors until after the Mumbai attacks, when Superintendent Daniel Linskey, who is in charge of the Bureau of Field Services and oversees all patrol officers, signed on.

Linskey has since chaired the meetings with union and department officials and outlined plans for the rifles, the law enforcement officials said. Driscoll, the police spokeswoman, characterized the meetings as internal conversations and routine procedure when the department is considering the use of new equipment.

But the department already has received 200 fully automatic rifles from the federal government and plans to modify them to perform like semiautomatic weapons, shooting only one bullet at a time instead of rapidly spraying bullets at targets, the law enforcement officials said.

Thomas said the need for such weapons is clear. He pointed to recent fatal attacks on officers, including the April 4 fatal shooting of three Pittsburgh police officers who were killed by a man lying in wait and armed with an assault rifle.

"If you look around, policemen get pinned down by someone who is firing on them, by virtue that they are being fired at from a greater distance," Thomas said.

Right now, he said, most Boston officers are equipped only with 40-caliber pistols that shoot targets at a maximum of 25 yards away.
"Certainly having our guys with the proper equipment on the street is a benefit to everybody," Thomas said.

Donovan Slack can be reached at [email protected].


I like the .40cal reference! [smile]

They can barely shoot pistols. Not a great idea to put ARs in their hands.
 

noddaduma

NES Member
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
Nov 8, 2009
Messages
4,703
Likes
1,136
Location
Brookline, NH
One more step on the (now short) path to deployment of military against US citizens on US soil.


"But wait a minute, these are POLICE! It says so right on their bullet proof vest!"


Yeah whatever. If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, it's a goddamned duck.

A duck:





 
Last edited:

falcon123

NES Member
Rating - 100%
2   0   0
Joined
Jan 12, 2013
Messages
5,953
Likes
1,729
Location
Central Mass
Thomas said department officials told him they plan to provide officers assigned to carry the rifles with up to 40 hours of training and have them shoot some 2,000 practice rounds to become comfortable firing the weapons.

Other officers who are not selected to carry the guns, or choose not to, will be given a less-intensive course so that they will know how to handle one of the guns in an emergency, Thomas said.

Wow, that's a lot of training. No wonder they don't want us to have them because none of us have that kind of experience firing ARs. It's funny to see how conflicted the higher ups are trying to explain why they need "assault rifles" while putting the gun banners at easy by putting all these silly restrictions on storage on themselves. I feel much safer now.
 

ColdDayInHell

NES Member
Rating - 100%
9   0   0
Joined
Jul 24, 2011
Messages
24,346
Likes
8,355
Location
North Shore
Wow, that's a lot of training. No wonder they don't want us to have them because none of us have that kind of experience firing ARs. It's funny to see how conflicted the higher ups are trying to explain why they need "assault rifles" while putting the gun banners at easy by putting all these silly restrictions on storage on themselves. I feel much safer now.

This what a ****ing joke. 40 hours with a rifle is long enough even for a 6 year old. Wait. Never mind, a child could hit their intended target [hmmm] [rofl]

BPD has about 40MOB (minute of boat)
 

falcon123

NES Member
Rating - 100%
2   0   0
Joined
Jan 12, 2013
Messages
5,953
Likes
1,729
Location
Central Mass
Police union officials are afraid of police officers being armed with effective firepower? I'd like to hear what the policemen they claim to represent think about that.

It is troubling to read that the purpose of the upgrade is to combat terrorism merely two weeks after the Feds have publicly denounced all conservatives, veterans, and patriots as domestic terrorists. Deeply troubling.

Anyone else bothered by that?

Not really. Just waiting for them to finally admit why they want to disarm us.
 

dwarven1

Appleseed Instructor
Rating - 100%
33   0   0
Joined
Mar 13, 2005
Messages
27,699
Likes
1,998
Location
Starksboro, VT
Thomas said department officials told him they plan to provide officers assigned to carry the rifles with up to 40 hours of training and have them shoot some 2,000 practice rounds to become comfortable firing the weapons.

"If you look around, policemen get pinned down by someone who is firing on them, by virtue that they are being fired at from a greater distance," Thomas said.

Right now, he said, most Boston officers are equipped only with 40-caliber pistols that shoot targets at a maximum of 25 yards away.

Wow, that's a lot of training. No wonder they don't want us to have them because none of us have that kind of experience firing ARs.

So... they sent them to an Appleseed? Oh, wait - they said 40 hours. That's TWO Appleseeds!! [laugh]
 
Rating - 100%
4   0   0
Joined
Mar 29, 2011
Messages
681
Likes
102
Location
Milford, ma
Wow. Really old post, but it mentioned in the original article that the need for ebrs was because the police were up against criminals using ebrs. Does anyone know any stats or facts around ebr use in crimes in greater boston?

The 25yard claim is likely a mis-statement by the reporter. Many police standard pistol qualifications are from 25 yards and closer... Not that the weapons themselves are not accurate beyond those distances.
 

mikem317

NES Member
Rating - 100%
23   0   0
Joined
Nov 27, 2007
Messages
14,295
Likes
2,088
Location
New Hampshire
Wow. Really old post, but it mentioned in the original article that the need for ebrs was because the police were up against criminals using ebrs. Does anyone know any stats or facts around ebr use in crimes in greater boston?

The 25yard claim is likely a mis-statement by the reporter. Many police standard pistol qualifications are from 25 yards and closer... Not that the weapons themselves are not accurate beyond those distances.

The official statistic is 0 for 2013 (well, we have one more day left.)

Criminals are using handguns. But a pretty freaking huge margin.
 
Rating - 100%
4   0   0
Joined
Mar 29, 2011
Messages
681
Likes
102
Location
Milford, ma
The official statistic is 0 for 2013 (well, we have one more day left.)

Criminals are using handguns. But a pretty freaking huge margin.

That was my assumption too. Other than the national news stories, of which only some involve ebrs... I just have not seen the information that would lead a reasonable person to believe that ebrs must be outlawed because the children muah...
 

mikem317

NES Member
Rating - 100%
23   0   0
Joined
Nov 27, 2007
Messages
14,295
Likes
2,088
Location
New Hampshire
That was my assumption too. Other than the national news stories, of which only some involve ebrs... I just have not seen the information that would lead a reasonable person to believe that ebrs must be outlawed because the children muah...

The FBI UCR usually records about 300 or so murders by means of a rifle, per annum, in the US. So EBRs, being a small subset of rifles, is probably far fewer. My honest guess is probably two or three dozen, at most, are done with AR, per year.
 
Rating - 100%
4   0   0
Joined
Mar 29, 2011
Messages
681
Likes
102
Location
Milford, ma
Makes you wonder why that's not made mention of more? Seems your chances of death by AR is less than death by falling down stairs on your own or any of a few thousand other Killy things or activities.

It seems and extreme edge case scenario. Is there any other thing where legislation based on a few dozen incidents nationwide has been used to restrict millions?

It seems like a very pointed question for those who seek political office.

The CDC just recently released statistical information linking alcohol to 88,000 deaths per year, and fetal alcohol spectrum disorders in the US affect 40,000 babies per year and cost society more than $5.4 billion.

Now I'm not suggesting we ban alcohol either, I just think it would be interesting to hear a political figure try to publicly rationalize all the attention and effort out against regulating something which arguably has little to no impact now on society at large, while outright ignoring something that has incredible impact on society at large. If it really is about the children muah.... Then what are they really doing about it?
 
Rating - 100%
4   0   0
Joined
Mar 29, 2011
Messages
681
Likes
102
Location
Milford, ma
Doing my research, according to FBI stats... In 2011, all rifles, 323 murders...

That's less than knives (1,694)
Hands, fists, feet (728)
Clubs and hammers (496)
 
Top Bottom