Thread: Why frontline cops should be armed

Originally Posted by jim160

Depends on the air rifle. Don Wilkinson was killed with an air rifle. So not so low powered.

Dead is dead for sure, there are no degrees of dead.

Originally Posted by Jexla

Interesting. What's a low powered firearm?

Originally Posted by northdude

An air rifle

By labelling it a "high-powered firearm", you are categorising it as a firearm (correct), and quantifying it WITHIN THAT CATEGORY as high-powered (incorrect).

You can't justify the "high-powered" label by comparing it to an air rifle, because air rifles aren't firearms. The "high-powered" label needs to be relative to other things in the same category.

It's like calling a Corolla a "high-performance car" by comparing it to a pushbike.

Originally Posted by Jexla

Yeah, that's pretty much it right there, it's no longer just a restricted weapon, but now considered a firearm. Still in my opinion a low powered one.

When did that change?

Originally Posted by stretch

When did that change?

Originally Posted by jim160

No. The compressed air rifles like that one used to kill him, fires at the same speed or similar to a 22. Hence why you now need a firearms licence to own one.

Guns account for bugger all deaths in nz. More people are killed with knives, cars and other blunt weapons.

Pretty much after that cop got shot they made it so if an airgun is over x fps it is a firearm.

Originally Posted by Jexla

Pretty much after that cop got shot they made it so if an airgun is over x fps it is a firearm.

Yep, found it: Firearm definition includes:

(iv) any specially dangerous airgun.

Originally Posted by Jexla

Pretty much after that cop got shot they made it so if an airgun is over x fps it is a firearm.

I think it only applies to precharge air rifles

I like your attitude Bully saves money as well!

@Savage1 I agree with you and respect you guys for wanting to be armed 24/7, it seems as of lately there is a lot about this in the media about arming the police because of the supposable increase in firearm threats & criminals arming themselves more.

But this is also where you lose a little of my support...

You say you need to be armed for moments like this? ^^^ That's fine but why can't we (civilians) defend ourselves? This is where I agree with @MassiveAttack for concealed carry, under strict reasoning & perhaps extensive training with B endorsement that is.

Because right now if there was ever a 'bump in the night' I have to fumble around with my baseball bat and deal to the threat. The perpetrator could be armed with nothing, the same as me, a knife or a "high-powered" firearm to which then my life & my families lives could come to an end. I wouldn't be able to get to my guns and the police would not be able to get to my house in time sadly.

I can see these discussions painting obscure & doubtful opinions on others but in short, if you believe in being armed for legitimate threats in today's society then so do I.

In my younger days when I had a call out for the alarm at work I went armed, mainly because it was in the middle of nowhere pitch black and the cops left me to it. Entering an empty building by yourself, you need comfort in your hand

My understanding was firearms, glocks etc where carried in the cars already? Is this not enough?

One of the things I like about NZ is that cops aren't tooled up everywhere like overseas.
Think if they openly carry it will escalate to more crims arming up and having a go USA style from watching too many movies shoot-outs etc...

I'm not doing their job though, maybe in some areas could be carried at their discretion maybe if felt necessary?

@Savage1

How much time does your average policeman spend training with the Glock or Bushmaster? Can all police use them, or is there a 'ticket' or something they have to have to be able to open the boot and get the gear out? (Obviously not meaning AOS/STG etc)

Its an interesting point.

from the media and police spokesmen it definitely sounds like firearms are getting more common when it comes to crime and criminals.
It doesn't seem to have increased shooting a lot tho, It makes me ponder the point that if the criminals know the police aren't carrying on there hip
and thus it dose decrease the tension as opposed to them both holding each other at gunpoint.

I can see the police wanting the upperhand but i am a firm believer that it will increase shootings for both partys.
If its a free for all then i am with massiveattack and think there should be a concealed carry permit like you see in USA.

When I was bouncing in town it was scary to watch how the young police responded to a small fight say 3 or 4 people on the street, More often then not it escalated the fight and ended in a brawl.
It was generally better to hope the police didn't arrive and it was much easier to get on top of.
examples would see them running into the crowd spraying 20 - 30 people with pepperspray or tackling the wrong people.

Cant imagine it being any better with a glock on there hip.

How many Police men and women are actually prepared mentally to shoot to kill someone dead when required at close range is another question?
I would hazard a thought that not many people in general are and you would not know until situation arises.
This has been proven psychologically and is why often firearms can be taken off people by the nutcase who is prepared and used against them.
This also needs to be taken into consideration

Originally Posted by Tommy

How much time does your average policeman spend training with the Glock or Bushmaster? Can all police use them, or is there a 'ticket' or something they have to have to be able to open the boot and get the gear out? (Obviously not meaning AOS/STG etc)

AFAIK they need a ticket, which involves doing a course (which they may have to pay for themselves). I have a cop mate who told me that despite being previously firearms qualified, because he hasn't done the latest update if another cop is getting shot he "isn't allowed" to pick up a firearm to defend them. I get the impression he finds the police bureacracy a tad frustrating at times.

Originally Posted by 199p

from the media and police spokesmen it definitely sounds like firearms are getting more common when it comes to crime and criminals.
It doesn't seem to have increased shooting a lot tho, It makes me ponder the point that if the criminals know the police aren't carrying on there hip
and thus it dose decrease the tension as opposed to them both holding each other at gunpoint.

I can see the police wanting the upperhand but i am a firm believer that it will increase shootings for both partys.

From the media and some police spokesmen yes, from actual crime statistics? I'm not so sure.

I agree about the potential for escalation, its a change that would really need to be justified by solid evidence rather than emotionally-loaded rhetoric.