We gettin' rifles...

yea i see that. its very much like that in iraq nowadays. theres guys not wanting to shoot, because they might get 15-6'ed (investigation proceedings) because, even though they were given a roe briefing before movin out, stuff still changes.. its like our higher ups actually care for these scumbags ya know? theres many men getting fried over there, for shooting when they werent supposed to. or for hitting non combatants by mistake, because they got in the way. even though they couldnt help it, their leaders will fry em, to save their own oer's. (officer eval reports) its pathetic actually. and i can see this hesitation in cops too. when i watch cops ( i know, this show must get made fun of incessantly in the departments) i see em draw down on people that are/were/about to shoot, and never pull the trigger. its cuz people sue soo often, and the corrupt judges let em win. i know in my heart, that most of the time, the cop wants soo bad to shoot the perpetrator, so that he can go home in one piece that night, but hesitates a little. and its bullshit too. if a person is using a car as a battering ram, i take that as him using that as deadly force. id immediately throw mine in park, get out, and shoot that guy 10 times thru his windshield if he tried ramming my car. but its obvious you guys are forced to do as little as humanly possible, to end the threat, so that he doesnt get hurt, instead of using deadly force, and ending the threat quicker. (which would be a safer route in my opinion) its these crooked judges that are at fault. oh well, i could go on but, im sure you know why things are the way they are. it sucks. id get in too much trouble too quickly if i were on the job. not only that, i sware a little too much lol. id offend WAYYY too many people.
 
much of what you say is definitely true where i work.

that local agency i mentioned, had an incident where they were pursuing a stolen vehicle driven by a 14 year old. long story short, after the suspect stopped, officers exited their vehicle to engage. the suspect drove directly at the officers, who fired their pistols, killing the suspect.

a memorandum was immediately issued, as well as a lawsuit filed, that required officers to get out of the way if a vehicle is being used as a weapon. prior case law and the penal code allowed officers to stand and defend their ground.

cops is fun to watch, but a bit watered down. the calls and situations are real, but knowing a television camera is watching dictates much of what is said and done. agencies are careful when they choose who will be filmed and who will not.
 
you gotta get out of the way now, when someone tries to run you down?? ARE YOU KIDDING ME??? wow. if i could buy you a drink, i would. i thought i had patience lol. you guys are crazier than we were in iraq!.
And yea, i totally know that the CO would only have certain guys televised lol. i can see that there would be some 'less than stellar' guys he wouldnt want representing his precinct. I supposed Id behave on camera too.
 
Buddiiee said:
you gotta get out of the way now, when someone tries to run you down?? ARE YOU KIDDING ME??? wow. if i could buy you a drink, i would. i thought i had patience lol. you guys are crazier than we were in iraq!.
And yea, i totally know that the CO would only have certain guys televised lol. i can see that there would be some 'less than stellar' guys he wouldnt want representing his precinct. I supposed Id behave on camera too.
Click to expand...

I agree. I was fine in the army but I'm sure I would be put in jail as a police officer. I couldn't handle some of the bullshit. I'm an EMT and work on the same scenes with the State Police pretty often. I also hear on the scanner when they make traffic stops and call in the info which is often very mundane. One that I'll never forget though was this one bonehead that gave like 5 separate and distinct pieces of ID information which the trooper dutifully called in each and every one. Over 15 minutes he is spending with this idiot just trying to find out who he is. I swear if it was me I'd be thumping the crap out this moron after the second made up identification. I appreciate the fact that they have that much self restraint. I might even appreciate the fact that the constitution requires that but; I don't believe I could do it.

You try to run over an officer and you get shot. Tough crap. Cars kill more people than guns every year. You tell me which is the deadlier weapon. You die fleeing from police because you don't want to stop. Tough crap. All you needed to do is stop. I could go on but you probably see where I am headed. ;) I agree that police should not be judge, jury and executioner but they have a right to defend themselves and other innocents. Too often I see hostage situation were my first instinct would be to kill the SOB. Fortunately, the police are better trained and for better or worse they were able to keep the hostage taker alive as well as the hostage. My instinct would be to take no chances and just kill the hostage taker. What, you don’t want us to blow up your skull with a snipers bullet? Then don’t aim your gun at innocent unarmed people and hold them hostage. I mean are these rules to hard to obey? :confused:

KR
 
got another one. same agency, hostage situation outside a courthouse. suspect has a female hostage with a gun to her head. an officer fires one round, hitting the suspect in the head killing him, and likely saving the life of the hostage.

the hostage filed suit against the city, the dept, and the officer because she was traumatized as a result of the suspect being killed right next to her.
 
lol. wow. i guess i know what i would do if i was a cop in that city after that. it would be easy. nothing lol. eeeeasy money boys!

Id probably quit the department, and sue the judge, for being crooked, cuz thats some CORRUPT shit there. early retirement :) boy, i cant wait to move out of america....
 
yea.. i know that but, most other people arent as spoiled, and sue happy as americans either. american judges are just plain corrupt, and theyre ruining this country slowly. i know the bobbies dont carry guns. thats fine. american cops can. but they cant use em so whats the difference.
 
Buddiiee said:
yea.. i know that but, most other people arent as spoiled, and sue happy as americans either. american judges are just plain corrupt, and theyre ruining this country slowly. i know the bobbies dont carry guns. thats fine. american cops can. but they cant use em so whats the difference.
Click to expand...

we can use them, we just spend the rest of our lives in court.
 
Hi mwerner. I just realized from your posts that you are at Wash U. I'm a grad student in psychology there.

I don't really have much of a basis for judging how safe this neighborhood is, since the only other US city I've lived in is Baltimore, which seemed worse off to me. At least in St. Louis, I'm not afraid of crackheads crawling through my window in the middle of the night. My neighbor did get his car stolen during his first week here though...

Regarding the university PD getting rifles, I say great. Hope you guys never have to use them, but at least you've got something if the SHTF.
 
Hehe- that's the idea! We've been amazingly lucky in not having had a shooting incident here during my tenure. (25 years!)
But both the neighboring St. Louis 9th district and University City have had plenty.
 
Guntotin_fool said:
...A final comment on the 11 inch shorty M4/CAR-15 vs the MP5/10 or 40. I realize that you use what you can get. However, these comments about getting a rifle caliber vers a hand gun round are for the most part MOOT.

It is very difficult to get a 11 inch 5.56 to chrono over 2000 FPS with most of the ammo available. You might find the odd round that goes 2200 with a 55 grain bullet, but at that speed you are going to not much more performance than using a .22 hornet. It is very rare to get reliable expansion out of a 5.56 at sub 2500 fps velocities. Rifle bullets are meant to function at rifle velocities, If you make a jacket that reliably expands at 2000FPS, at 2600 Fps or 3200 FPS out of a 20 or 24 inch barrel that bullet is going to destruct like a balloon on a pin. at the same time, if you make a jacketed bullet that will hold together and expand at between 2800 and 3200 fps, when it hits 2400 fps, it will act like a FMJ and just drill a little hole. Every MP5 i have shot will shoot sub 4 inch groups at 100 yards, most will shoot about a 3 inch group when handled by a good trigger guy. My eyes are not so good anymore, but last time I shot an SD, I was still able to put every shot in the head of a 1/4 scale silhouette at 25 yards, ( all the range we had available to us that day.) with the switch on fun, I can dump the whole mag into the COM oval with no difficulty at all.

A 10mm with a 170 grain JHP is already 3 times the mass, nearly twice the diameter and AND the velocity out of the 9 inch or so MP5 barrel is in the vicinity of 1700 FPS, and has bullets that will reliably expand up to at least .60 caliber, and maybe 70 caliber.

The 40 S&W makes about 1600 with a 155 grainer out of the MP5 and tests are showing .357 sigs at about 1900 FPS with a 120 Grainer.

Sure these are not eye popping when you read them against 5.56 performance out of a 20 or 24 inch barrel. But against the 11 inch CAR barrel. They look pretty good.

Ballistically the 10 mm auto is the twin of the 41 magnum, and I have seen several animals hit with 41 mags from a 1895 marlin 16 in barrel that would lead me to believe with good development work, a AR platform shorty with a 10 mm auto might be a really hot tip in CQB, especially if you get to use expanding ammo. a 170 at 2200 or a 200 at 1950 -2000 fps would be a good hammer....
Click to expand...

Sorry to be so late to this party.

I quote Guntotin' because it raises a question in my mind.

My understanding is that the damage caused by a .223 is mainly not due to any expansion of the round. Rather, the primary wound channel (that which is caused by the actual diameter of the round passing through the target) is relatively small when compared to the secondary wound channel (by virtue of its supersonic speed, a shock wave surrounds the bullet, causing a rapid contraction of soft tissue around the bullet). A .22 hole entering and leaving could leave a much larger secondary wound channel that would not be immediately apparent.

Therefore, as long as the bullet in question maintains a velocity of more than sonic speeds (approx. 1130fps) in the target, expansion of the round is of less importance.

Is my understanding of primary and secondary wounds flawed?
 
Rick in KY said:
Sorry to be so late to this party.

I quote Guntotin' because it raises a question in my mind.

My understanding is that the damage caused by a .223 is mainly not due to any expansion of the round. Rather, the primary wound channel (that which is caused by the actual diameter of the round passing through the target) is relatively small when compared to the secondary wound channel (by virtue of its supersonic speed, a shock wave surrounds the bullet, causing a rapid contraction of soft tissue around the bullet). A .22 hole entering and leaving could leave a much larger secondary wound channel that would not be immediately apparent.

Therefore, as long as the bullet in question maintains a velocity of more than sonic speeds (approx. 1130fps) in the target, expansion of the round is of less importance.

Is my understanding of primary and secondary wounds flawed?
Click to expand...


I believe you are referring to cavitation and you are correct that significant damage far out of proportion to the actual diameter of the bullet can be done. Cavitation can damage organs far away from the actual bullet path. Particularly susceptible to cavitation are the hollow organs if I remember correctly though all are susceptible to considerable damage from it. In order to cause significant cavitation you need bullet speed. That is why really significant damage from cavitation usually is from rifle rounds instead of pistol rounds and why rifle wounds are usually much worse in general.

KR
 
I don't care what type of cop you are, if you can't hit your target (I guess that to be 90% of the police) you shouldn't carry a gun. In England (I was told) the cops that DO carry pass a test where they must prove there marksmanship on a moving target, & then only the top 10% are issued a weapon. If you are a 20 year old w/ no military experience (90% of the student body) you shouldn't have a gun on duty anyway both due to federal law, & a general lack of maturity. I once saw our Police chief brag he carries a snubby .357 "because he can handle it", a Marine recruiter asked him if he was a killer, the chief went silent. After a pause the Marine said he was (Viet-Nam) & prays he wasn't. All cops in my opinion suffer from the "look at me I"m macho" sickness.
 
jpvjr said:
I don't care what type of cop you are, if you can't hit your target (I guess that to be 90% of the police) you shouldn't carry a gun. In England (I was told) the cops that DO carry pass a test where they must prove there marksmanship on a moving target, & then only the top 10% are issued a weapon. If you are a 20 year old w/ no military experience (90% of the student body) you shouldn't have a gun on duty anyway both due to federal law, & a general lack of maturity. I once saw our Police chief brag he carries a snubby .357 "because he can handle it", a Marine recruiter asked him if he was a killer, the chief went silent. After a pause the Marine said he was (Viet-Nam) & prays he wasn't. All cops in my opinion suffer from the "look at me I"m macho" sickness.
Click to expand...

new guy troll. nothing related to the thread posted here. go rant in w&c. you're a jackass.
 
maybe its time to bring this back. did ya see what happened at virginia tech? ok, i guess they (campus police) need em. 'Nuff said I guess.
 
Schools are " target rich environments " !!! The lessons of Beslan have not been learned !
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top