Posted on 12/03/2004 1:54:14 PM PST by 4.1O dana super trac pak
Twenty Indianapolis police officers were training to use M-16 rifles, with the weapons expected to be available to patrol officers by the end of the week, officials said.
"There are specific situations where they are going to be used," Deputy Chief James Reno said. "It gives us other options. This may be something they can have in their arsenal."
Indianapolis police have faced the same types of weapons several times in recent years, The Indianapolis Star reported Wednesday.
In August, a man fired an SKS-style rifle in a southside neighborhood and killed Patrolman Timothy "Jake" Laird from more than 150 yards away.
"I think it's a great weapon," said Marlon Douglas, one of the officers being trained to carry the M-16. "After the Jake Laird incident, we just want to make sure we're ready for anything."
The department is using the Colt M-16, A1, the same rifle used by American troops during the Vietnam War. The department bought the 218 surplus weapons from a federal armory in Illinois, the Star reported.
The rifles were modified to remove the automatic firing capability. The original rifle can keep firing for as long as the shooter holds the trigger, while these rifles fire just one shot for each squeeze, officials said.
Police officials said they will distribute the M-16s to officers who work different shifts and districts so the weapons will always be available.
That's right, same as the 7.62 NATO, 7.62x51mm. The AK/SKS round, at 7.62x39, is a lot less powerful. The M-16's 5.56 mm round does not have the M-14 round's penetrating power and long range effectiveness.
Thanks for the clarification on the cartridge length. I always forget which is which.
And while you are correct about long range effectiveness vs. the 5.56, they still penetrate pretty well, and I would submit that the GI weapons don't need to be effective any further out than the M16/AR15 is. You're talking sniper rounds/weapons, which are more likely to be chambered in the larger rounds you mentioned above (or a completely different round of a similar size). Additionally, I don't know if I like the idea of the larger round being issued to LEOs in an urban setting. Seems you'd want the lighter round for safety's sake.
Sssshhhhh! Those black helicopters have super-sensitive listening devices!
My argument for the heavier round comes from the LA shootout with the two perps wearing body armor and firing AKs. It only ended when one of them shot himself and the other had his legs shot out from under him. Even though the cops borrowed some AR-15s from a local gun store, leaving a couple of M1-As on the rack, they didn't seem to be able to penetrate the perps' body armor at the range they were shooting. An M1-A round (7.62x51mm) would have gone right through that armor and immediately stopped the subject.
I like the Mini 30. :-)
A valid argument, when we're talking body armor.
Maybe we should offer a wide assortment of weapons for the trunk.
If that happens, I might be inclined to sign up!
You could be right, I'm not an expert though.
I believe per BATF interpretation, once a receiver is a full auto, always a full auto regardless of internals. So these will need to be registered with the treasury boys whether they go fast or not.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.