Thread: Why frontline cops should be armed

Should all frontline cops be armed fulltime? Fuck no. No, no, nooooo!

Just, no!

For every retarded thing I have ever seen a civilian do, I have multiple examples that I have observed a cop do. In uniform. While on the job.

Originally Posted by Danny

But...God I hope we never see the general public allowed to bare arms in public

Short sleeved shirts are a fashion faux pas anyway, the correct thing is to wear a long sleeved shirt with the sleeves rolled neatly to just below the elbow.

Originally Posted by gimp

Short sleeved shirts are a fashion faux pas anyway, the correct thing is to wear a long sleeved shirt with the sleeves rolled neatly to just below the elbow.

There is always the kiwi classic black singlet.

and the baggy jockeys -designed to let the boys swing free and accomodate a big hairy paw to scratch em if required!

Originally Posted by Danny

I cannot understand this thread although I read and accept most points of views- some are wildly generic and plain nonsense, reminding me of a relative of mine whom has a Dr in front of his name, he is often fucked when building a deck, changing a tyre or nappy or talking any sense at all.

The police ARE armed but unfortunately no one can foresee into a crystal ball. Police routinely 'tool' up when attending a certain address or addressing an individual because of the history that some have so those who have no idea should just mow their lawns or go pull their pud...that you may be actually qualified to do...

No one can pick a David Gray or a Napier situation or a random 3T in a back country road that turns bloody ugly within seconds. So we need to accept shit happens, the PC brigade will always squeak the loudest, police will always be under resourced, under trained-and that's another matter entirely imo but the Police work bloody hard to protect YOUR family and friends and property.

But...God I hope we never see the general public allowed to bare arms in public; (like America), that would be a bad day indeed.
Now, I'm off to pull my pudding.

Had a good laugh at most of this thread since it started, some good posts such as this ^^, some others just make my mind boggle and reinforce that the notion that arming the public is ridiculous...

As stated through this thread Police have access to firearms, taser other appointments for any job where we believe they are necessary - you certainly don't meet a knife head on with a taser,so firearms are not always for firearm related jobs.

I think we should celebrate the lack of Police shootings considering jobs with knives (weapons) and firearms occur almost daily in most of the regions, your just not privy to them - or they are not good story's?

99% of the time decision making is sound and there are good outcomes for all, the 1% is what the armchair experts dwell on and regurgitate.

MY 2C

Originally Posted by Smartie

that arming the public is ridiculous...

Rather then currently being presented with rhetoric & anecdotal evidence that the police "should" be armed, actual data needs to be ascertained. Then there is a fair argument for both the police and everyday citizens for self-defence.

I get that CC for some people may seem 'over-the-top' & unnecessary in this country (and you are probably right...) but we have to consider there are some very run down and potentially dangerous regions in NZ where good honest everyday people with FAL's have to live. I don't think it's unrealistic or ridiculous for those people to have at least an option for home defence. It's more a natural right that goes far beyond the legislation we have now.

Here's my 2 cents worth.

I know many people in my town who will not come into town for a show or a meal after dark on a Sat night, due to the incidents of being accosted by two or three knuckle draggers who's intent is to make life unpleasant for them, if they don't make a compulsory contribution for their next drug purchase!!!!!

IF ( a big "IF" ) properly police approved FAL holders had the lawful ability to carry a concealed short piece???? The knuckle draggers would never know whether their next client was carrying or not. A fairly good disincentive I'd have thought. Even if you weren't carrying a piece you'd be fairly sure that only a completely whacked out knuckle dragger could make life unpleasant for you. But then he may well be so spaced out that the problem could be resolved by a good swift kick in goolies!!!!!

Home invasion protection is a different matter. You just need to do what you have to do in the circumstances that you're faced with, do a "kahui" when the fed's arrive and follow your lawyer's advice on what to say & when to say it!!!

Originally Posted by top gun

Here's my 2 cents worth.
IF ( a big "IF" ) properly police approved FAL holders had the lawful ability to carry a concealed short piece???? The knuckle draggers would never know whether their next client was carrying or not. A fairly good disincentive I'd have thought. Even if you weren't carrying a piece you'd be fairly sure that only a completely whacked out knuckle dragger could make life unpleasant for you. But then he may well be so spaced out that the problem could be resolved by a good swift kick in goolies!!!!!

I'm not sure concealed carry is the solution you think it is.

Organised thugs can/may disperse themselves so as to overwhelm the victim before they could respond by shooting.
It may actually produce a hit first policy from the thugs - not sure if that's what society would want.

From what I have seen on emails I get from friends in the US and on the U.S. Firearm forum that I'm on; the "not knowing" deterrent works quite well. I don't think too many of our knuckle draggers are armed with a firearm,a knife maybe, but being the cowards that most of them are, the sight of a short piece with BIG hole in the muzzle would make them wet their pants & run for it.

I was particularly trying to point out the deterrence factor of the knuckle draggers not knowing if you were carrying or not. That's supposing we ever got a law passed that would allow properly licenced FAL holders to do so IF THEY WISHED. I'm NOT holding my breath waiting for our elected superiors at Fort Fumble to allow us such a right!!!!

Another point of view is police are usually responding to incidents.... as in a crime has already happened or is under way.
A few police are pistol endorsement holders.
Pistol endorsement holders have to shoot a minimum of 12 times a year. Also within that you have to get holster qualified for each holster and type you use.
Arguably pistol holders have 12 times the training as police.

Front line police MAY have to do their test shoot annually. As in it is possible for a police officer to be armed to shoot at a person, yet not have touched a firearm for over a year.
Also police being under funded aren't necessarily armed. all cars are equipped for carriage but only 1/3 of patrol vehicles have firearms at any time. Again you don't know which vehicles are armed.

Bottom line is if police are in danger enough to be armed full time when on the job it's logical to suggest the same risk is present when off duty.
I believe if police were to carry full time then there should be the option for those with pistol endorsements and holster qual to obtain CCW permits.

Give em all full auto 308s I say, big black ones with banana mags...yes I know 308s dont need a banana mag because they dont have much case taper but they should have them anyway and on one of those slings like the army boys use and a glock on one hip and a dirty harry on the other....it wont make a bloody bit of difference because whenever you actually need a cop they are all to busy handing out traffic tickets.

I used to respect my local cop when I was a kid, he sorted out issues caught criminals and yes booted my arse a few times.

I and most other Kiwis have no respect for the police anymore for a multitude of reasons that dont need listing here...we all know them, the last thing I want is a gun on every hip.

Originally Posted by veitnamcam

Give em all full auto 308s I say, big black ones with banana mags...yes I know 308s dont need a banana mag because they dont have much case taper but they should have them anyway and on one of those slings like the army boys use and a glock on one hip and a dirty harry on the other....it wont make a bloody bit of difference because whenever you actually need a cop they are all to busy handing out traffic tickets.

I used to respect my local cop when I was a kid, he sorted out issues caught criminals and yes booted my arse a few times.

I and most other Kiwis have no respect for the police anymore for a multitude of reasons that dont need listing here...we all know them, the last thing I want is a gun on every hip.

Especially given their tendency to miss when it matters, and get away with it unscathed

Originally Posted by veitnamcam

Give em all full auto 308s I say, big black ones with banana mags...yes I know 308s dont need a banana mag because they dont have much case taper but they should have them anyway and on one of those slings like the army boys use and a glock on one hip and a dirty harry on the other....it wont make a bloody bit of difference because whenever you actually need a cop they are all to busy handing out traffic tickets.

I used to respect my local cop when I was a kid, he sorted out issues caught criminals and yes booted my arse a few times.

I and most other Kiwis have no respect for the police anymore for a multitude of reasons that dont need listing here...we all know them, the last thing I want is a gun on every hip.

You went and forgot the flame thrower...that really would sort the men from the boys. Now I'd pay just to see the look on there face just before you light em up it would be like

Concealed carry for 'B' endorsed general public FAL holder's? Anyone who thinks that's ever going to happen in this country is seriously delusional. You've got more chance of winning Wednesday night Lotto three times in a row than that ever happening.

Originally Posted by nseagoon

Pistol endorsement holders have to shoot a minimum of 12 times a year. Also within that you have to get holster qualified for each holster and type you use.

Arguably pistol holders have 12 times the training as police.

There is considerable difference between drawing a loaded pistol from a holster on a range, and carrying a pistol because some deranged P fuelled fuckknuckle wants to smash your face in.

Attending a pistol range doesn't equate to training, it's just attendance. And besides, on a range do something wrong and you just get a DQ. Do something wrong in the real world and you have an endless run of media, court and private prosecutions to deal with.

Police are already sufficiently armed for New Zealand IMO. They have a shit job to do, are constantly criticised and don't have the support/budget from their boss to do the job properly.