Some of the world does it that way. How goddamn hard is it to put in a tiny little spring loaded tab anyway?!
Incompetent Buffalo PD Boss Forces Underpowered Carbines On Officers
- Thread starter Catskillkid
- Start date
gun_slinger_boy
.338 Win Mag
So the AK isn't a commonly used weapon all around the world? Anyway. A 40 carbine is better than nothing. I'm sure everyone would be ok with mp5s being issued. So is this about having a long gun or the caliber?
holdover
.475 A&M Magnum
Im jumping in this late, but I think the police should be armed with anything a civilian can be armed with,
As far as arming Buffalo Police with AR's I really don't see the practical nor tactical value of it. I cannot ever recount a single incidence where Police needed to engage targets out to 300 yards ever. The density of the city makes it absolutely stupid choice for a police round unless they only Issued frangible rounds . The risks of over penetration at close range are documented .
As far as arming Buffalo Police with AR's I really don't see the practical nor tactical value of it. I cannot ever recount a single incidence where Police needed to engage targets out to 300 yards ever. The density of the city makes it absolutely stupid choice for a police round unless they only Issued frangible rounds . The risks of over penetration at close range are documented .
Marine Cpl
.577 Tyrannosaur.
It's the caliber that has people's panties in a twist. Other than the JRC Platform because you need screwdrivers to break it down, I for one think it's a great idea for the average lone patrol officer to have a PCC in his trunk. (Not Swat)
It shares his pistol magazines allowing him to carry more ammo. It has an effective range of up to 150 yards or so. Maybe more if he's good. It has minimal recoil, flash, and concussion. At 100 yards, it's velocity is about the same as the velocity of his pistol at point blank range.
The only thing lacking is armor penetration which statistically is not needed or else the average cop would have to carry a different caliber in their sidearms entirely all the time. The fact that the average criminal is wearing body armor is a false statement.
Now I'm not saying that he shouldn't have a rifle. I'm just saying that a PCC is a fine choice given the advantages you gain from it compared to the high recoiling, low capacity, low rate of fire, not very accurate Remington 870 loaded with slugs that is normally carried in the trunks of police cruisers everyday.
It shares his pistol magazines allowing him to carry more ammo. It has an effective range of up to 150 yards or so. Maybe more if he's good. It has minimal recoil, flash, and concussion. At 100 yards, it's velocity is about the same as the velocity of his pistol at point blank range.
The only thing lacking is armor penetration which statistically is not needed or else the average cop would have to carry a different caliber in their sidearms entirely all the time. The fact that the average criminal is wearing body armor is a false statement.
Now I'm not saying that he shouldn't have a rifle. I'm just saying that a PCC is a fine choice given the advantages you gain from it compared to the high recoiling, low capacity, low rate of fire, not very accurate Remington 870 loaded with slugs that is normally carried in the trunks of police cruisers everyday.
Last edited:
Shotguns are pointless in police work in my opinion. I believe those that remain are holdovers from past tactics and beliefs.
Call me nuts, but other than bird hunting, I don't see much use for shotguns at all in the modern world with the options we have. I only have one and I rarely take it out of the safe.
Call me nuts, but other than bird hunting, I don't see much use for shotguns at all in the modern world with the options we have. I only have one and I rarely take it out of the safe.
Marine Cpl
.577 Tyrannosaur.
A shotgun is an antique gun in my opinion.
Phazer
.450/400 Nitro Ex
At least they have rifles now.
But he did agree to purchase semiautomatic Glock Magazine Quadrail rifles that use the same 40-caliber ammunition as the Glock handguns officers now use. The rifles provide greater long-range accuracy than the handguns, police officials said.
Ummm....more like pistols with extended barrels.
That's how I look at my pistol caliber carbine.
holdover
.475 A&M Magnum
What about a full auto MP-5 for city work? I think that has everything you really need except for distance. light weight, small ,concealable ,combat tested. High rate of fire , with much less chance of over penetration.
holdover
.475 A&M Magnum
Over a shotgun? Of course!
holdover
.475 A&M Magnum
No I meant over a long gun. Not what you would necessarily prefer, but lieu of a AR .
Marine Cpl
.577 Tyrannosaur.
It is. You disagree because you were told it is an excellent weapon by an old timer and you'll more than likely repeat it to a youngster. The fact of the matter is that a shotgun is just a crude smoothbore musket that takes fixed shells.
Other than for birds where an extreme spread is needed to take them down, I for the life of me do not see why anyone would want a high recoiling, low capacity long gun whose ammo is huge and cumbersome. It has a very limited range and the path of the projectiles are a crap shoot.
You cannot make surgical shots when needed. IE. A headshot or a leg shot.
It's outdated technology. If you look at the history of the rifle, the smoothbore was replaced with a rifled bore for accuracy and range.
Last edited:
I'd take an MP-5 over almost anything except maybe a MK19 or an M2.
Blimey
.450/400 Nitro Ex
I know the decision was wrong simply because it's 2017 and look at his 1991 trans am haircut. No excuse for that.
holdover
.475 A&M Magnum
"Willjr75, post: 130960, member: 10"]It is. You disagree because you were told it is an excellent weapon by an old timer and you'll more than likely repeat it to a youngster.
Well, no not really I was trained on it Federal Law enforcement. and in tight close quarters I would prefer it to an M4 for several reasons.
The fact of the matter is that a shotgun is just a crude smoothbore musket that tskes fixed shells.
Its more that that , its a hand held cannon
Other than for birds where an extreme spread is needed to take them down, I for the life of me do not see why anyone would want a high recoiling, low capacity long gun whose ammo is huge and cumbersome. It has a very limited range and the path of the projectiiles are a crap shoot.
Some of top shot guns have very reduced recoil, Its true ammo is heavy and cumbersome and limited range , but used the way it was intended its an excellent close in weapon.
You cannot make surgical shots when needed. IE. A headshot or a leg shot.
Surgical no? head shot? the easiest most effective head shot possible. try hitting a fleeting target down a stairway with a carbine, or try hitting a quail with your AR. Picture yourself covering a hospital hallway now bad guy sprints across the hall 25 to 40 yards away , good luck with your surgical headshot, That's where the shot gun is going to shine.
It's outdated technology. If you look at the history of the rifle, the smoothbore was replaced with a rifled bore for accuracy and range.
with a shotgun your not dealing with either
Were not talking about a general purpose weapon of war , where ammo loads and weight play a part or distances are going to be a factor , Were talking bout a specific context ,close quarter fighting , where stopping power is extremely important.when you hit the guy with a shotgun blast at close range , You can almost guarantee he cannot return fire . not always so with a carbine.
For police purposes , it can be used as a breeching round to blow locks off doors , it gives officers a little bit of leeway for accuracy under stress , its much more like to hit the bad guy , not likely to require a follow up shot ,or miss reduces the need for more ammo, it will STOP the threat .and stray pellets and misses are not as dangerous and if your well trained on it, it can be pretty dam quick shooting too. in the event that the bad guy has a real vest, a head shot is going to be necessary , I would rather have a shotty in short range duel behind cover.
the need for less accuracy under stress and stopping power are two extremely important advantages of the shotgun that out weigh the disadvantages of load weight , or ammo capacity, the most important thing to me is survivability , and I think the shot gun wins that , but that's just my opinion I certainly wouldn't arm a platoon with with them
Well, no not really I was trained on it Federal Law enforcement. and in tight close quarters I would prefer it to an M4 for several reasons.
The fact of the matter is that a shotgun is just a crude smoothbore musket that tskes fixed shells.
Its more that that , its a hand held cannon
Other than for birds where an extreme spread is needed to take them down, I for the life of me do not see why anyone would want a high recoiling, low capacity long gun whose ammo is huge and cumbersome. It has a very limited range and the path of the projectiiles are a crap shoot.
Some of top shot guns have very reduced recoil, Its true ammo is heavy and cumbersome and limited range , but used the way it was intended its an excellent close in weapon.
You cannot make surgical shots when needed. IE. A headshot or a leg shot.
Surgical no? head shot? the easiest most effective head shot possible. try hitting a fleeting target down a stairway with a carbine, or try hitting a quail with your AR. Picture yourself covering a hospital hallway now bad guy sprints across the hall 25 to 40 yards away , good luck with your surgical headshot, That's where the shot gun is going to shine.
It's outdated technology. If you look at the history of the rifle, the smoothbore was replaced with a rifled bore for accuracy and range.
with a shotgun your not dealing with either
Were not talking about a general purpose weapon of war , where ammo loads and weight play a part or distances are going to be a factor , Were talking bout a specific context ,close quarter fighting , where stopping power is extremely important.when you hit the guy with a shotgun blast at close range , You can almost guarantee he cannot return fire . not always so with a carbine.
For police purposes , it can be used as a breeching round to blow locks off doors , it gives officers a little bit of leeway for accuracy under stress , its much more like to hit the bad guy , not likely to require a follow up shot ,or miss reduces the need for more ammo, it will STOP the threat .and stray pellets and misses are not as dangerous and if your well trained on it, it can be pretty dam quick shooting too. in the event that the bad guy has a real vest, a head shot is going to be necessary , I would rather have a shotty in short range duel behind cover.
the need for less accuracy under stress and stopping power are two extremely important advantages of the shotgun that out weigh the disadvantages of load weight , or ammo capacity, the most important thing to me is survivability , and I think the shot gun wins that , but that's just my opinion I certainly wouldn't arm a platoon with with them
Last edited:
AR is not needed, AR is not necessary. Some of y'all sound like democrats! Just kidding (but not really).
Thing is The AR 15 is very useful and effective from point blank range on out. There are many ammunition types that allow departments and agencies to tailor performance to their needs. And while I would agree that modern carbines have supplanted shotguns in many areas I do not think they are irrelevant. The shitguns ready adaptability to a wide variety of less lethal munitons still allows it to be a useful tool.
Thing is The AR 15 is very useful and effective from point blank range on out. There are many ammunition types that allow departments and agencies to tailor performance to their needs. And while I would agree that modern carbines have supplanted shotguns in many areas I do not think they are irrelevant. The shitguns ready adaptability to a wide variety of less lethal munitons still allows it to be a useful tool.
holdover
.475 A&M Magnum
Don't get me wrong, Im not anti AR at all, Im only looking at it as a safety issue for civilians Nobody wants to see innocent people get hurt when a shot gun could have done the same job. Were talking about projects and parking lots city streets were stray rounds do bad thing things.
Marine Cpl
.577 Tyrannosaur.
Just because you were trained with it and prefer it, it doesn't make it better for close quarters. It actually handicapps you.
How will you take a head shot if a perp is holding a hostage as a shield? How can you insure a non vital shot doesn't hit an artery or organ if you are trying to get an armed perp down without killing him?
As far as the hallway scenario goes, you more than likely have better chances of surviving getting hit with a few pellets at 25 yards then you will with accurate burst fire from a weapon who's bullets expand to double it's size.
If the shotgun was so good, all operators would use it for CQB.
Marine Cpl
.577 Tyrannosaur.
Correct!
The fragmenting characteristics of most 5.56/223 ammo is precisely why I think it very suitable for LE use. In a human target its not very likely to overpenetrate and most loads have a hard time getting thorugh exterior wall, cars etc. Conversely if barrier penetration is desired there are loads that accomplish that admirably. Not to mention that the wondeful handling characteristics of the AR makes it easier to hit targets with in the first place.
Me too except I can consistently hit a 100 yd Target more often with my ar9 than I can with a pistol. And I'm not that bad with a pistol.
Marine Cpl
.577 Tyrannosaur.
Not so past fragmentation range.
holdover
.475 A&M Magnum
well I disagree with you, number 4 buck around 18 pellets the size of .22 one in the neck or head or ear would be enough to stop him
But by selecting from the various loads this can be tweaked any which way to suit the circumstances. I would use 69 or 77gr OTM ammo for general purpose use as it is effective over a wide range and readily fragments limiting overpenetration issues. The various "barrier blind" ammo such as the Gold Dots can be swaped in if shooting through light cover or vehicles is required. This expanding ammo also seems to be effective over a wide range. Good ol' 55gr M193 would get the job done on the cheap as well, provided one minds its surprisingly high penetration through mild steel plate. I'd stay away from M855 though, too inconsistent, it'll pencil right through soft targets and shatter on hardend ones.
holdover
.475 A&M Magnum
With the proper bullets I would feel that its safe enough for LE . You know when some drunk guy gos to the door with ahandgun or knife and his wife is right behind him trying to stop the guy, your going to take her out with regular loads , but with frangible she wont get hurt . I could accept that
Marine Cpl
.577 Tyrannosaur.
Well Swat and Special Forces teams from around the world disagree with that logic.
Marine Cpl
.577 Tyrannosaur.
If it was me, I'd want the AR. I'm just saying that the PCC is not bad at all given the advantages one gains and the article is bullshit.