DC Police to Carry AR-15 semiautomatic rifles
http://www.washingtonpost.com/…
The D.C. police department’s decision to arm patrol officers with semiautomatic rifles is promoted by commanders as a way to stay ahead of criminals. But it is raising concerns among civil rights groups and others, who question whether the weapons are necessary.Hundreds of officers will be issued AR-15 rifles starting this summer, and police say the guns will be a better match for criminals. Although Police Chief Cathy L. Lanier was unable to provide an example of when such firepower would have been needed in the recent past, she said police should not be caught off guard.
Police have about 500 of the weapons, and 352 officers have been trained to use them. Special units have used high-power guns for years, but officials said they wanted more officers to have access to the weapons. This is the first time AR-15s will be available for routine street patrols.
“We want to be prepared,” Lanier said. “I want officers to have what they need to be safe.”
Funny. These officers need bigger guns so as to keep them safer yet DC has what amounts to gun prohibition laws for the general public. There seems to be a bit of a disconnect here. Why is it that Joe Q. Public isn’t allowed “to have what they need to be safe?” And why should the police need to be safer? Wasn’t the point of the gun control legislation to reduce gun crime? If it’s so effective what’s with all the gun crime they need to match? If it’s not working why fight at the Supreme Court to keep it?
Perhaps because what they want is more power? A police state as it were.
The city got the AR-15 rifles from the Department of Defense for free as military surplus items.
Other police departments nationwide equip officers with semiautomatic rifles, including in Dallas, Los Angeles and Miami.
Although the overwhelming majority of D.C. homicides are committed with handguns, criminals have used powerful guns in recent years in some high-profile cases in the Washington area. A team of commando-style robbers carried out a string of bank heists in the District and Maryland in 2004, armed with assault rifles and handguns. At the time, police feared the crimes could be fatal, but the robbers were caught before anyone was seriously hurt.
Lanier referenced a 1997 bank robbery in Los Angeles, in which two men armed with AK-47 assault rifles engaged in a shootout with police. Seventeen officers and civilians were injured in the incident, which was captured on videotape. The case set off a debate about the need to better arm police.
Yes, because that kind of thing happens every day so they need to be carrying these AR-15s on their person during patrol. As for the 1997 robbery I’ve never understood how it is that there was no openings in their body armor. A hunter with a half way decent rifle should have been able to hit them at some junction in the armor. The foot or face/neck.
Assistant Police Chief Patrick Burke, who is in charge of special operations and homeland security, said protocols are being put in place to cover the use of the rifles and promised that officers will be “accountable for every shot.”
Just like they are held accountable now? Tell that to the Bell family, Mark McCullaugh Jr.’s family, Tracy Ingle, and the hundreds of others who are attacked and fail to find justice.
Related posts:
