Firepower

[Doc]

It's been one year here in SC, since we had that terrible bank robbery. Folks might remember out in CA, where the bank robbers wore body armor, and the whole thing was caught on film, cops utterly helpless for the most part. Happened here too, in March last year.

Three officers lost their lives that day. The suspect has never been caught. He had full body armor, and officers were completely helpless to stop him. He was armed with an auto-shotgun and an AK47. Three officers killed, 11 injured.

Popular public sentiment is, the officers were out gunned. Here, and in many other places, law enforcement is required to use 9mm ammo. They are also required to purchase their own gun, which has caused many problems, as poorer officers start out with cheap Glock imitations, which often jam or misfire, and many have failed miserably in firefights.

It has happened again. Another bank robbery. Another man well armed, and well armored. Two officers died. But, the suspect payed for his crimes. A civilian, armed with a .357 Magnum entered the firefight and came to the officers' aid. Suspect died to internal complications. His armor prevented the .357 slugs from penetration, but, not from the massive shockwave they caused on impact. Almost all of his ribs were broken and his lungs collapsed, and his heart suffered massive trauma.

I dunno about other folks, but I am SICK to death about hearing about stuff like this on the news. I am SICK and tired of hearing about officers bringing capguns to a shoot out. I am bloody well fed up with people crying about victims rights and the cruelty of large calibre weapons used to stop crimes. Screw the victims. What about the cruelty of officers being gunned down by freaking hand held cannons? It's not safe out there. Most of the crime reports I hear about, read about, or see on TV, the crooks have better firepower and body armor then the police do. And that strikes me as being WRONG.

SC is even considering a move which has a lot of folks up in arms. Beat cops may no longer be carrying firearms soon. There is a proposal to have beat cops, usually the first responders to many situations, carry naught but a tazor. Can you say "Disaster waiting to happen?"

Is it just me, or, does this strike one as being somehow flawed... Wrong even. While I understand the need for public safetly, on the other side of the coin, is, well, public safety. Keeping the public safe. And shooting dangerous criminals is a good way of keeping the public safe.

When the average private citizen can bring more firepower into a situation then a police officer can, there is something very wrong. And it needs to be fixed somehow.

Would love to hear some Lurker opinions.

[WarLocke]

If you plan on robbing banks, expect to get shot at.

I'm all for arming police with something better than 9mm. :angry:

[Occhidiangela]

I don't like to see cops get shot when they are in the line of duty.

Draconian responses to "big media" data points is bad decision making, and always has been.

[gekko]

I dunno about other folks, but I am SICK to death about hearing about stuff like this on the news. I am SICK and tired of hearing about officers bringing capguns to a shoot out. I am bloody well fed up with people crying about victims rights and the cruelty of large calibre weapons used to stop crimes. Screw the victims. What about the cruelty of officers being gunned down by freaking hand held cannons? It's not safe out there. Most of the crime reports I hear about, read about, or see on TV, the crooks have better firepower and body armor then the police do. And that strikes me as being WRONG.

Here's what I see as the real problem: we supply officers with high powered weapons and ody armor, and the next bank robbery we see on the news features rocket launchers, depleted uranium shells, and nerve gas.

I do agree that sending police officers out on the job when they are so baddly out-gunned is wrong. However, if this turns into a shootout between who can find the biggest guns, then I'm worried, and I feel sorry not only for the cops or the "victims," but mostly for those bystanders caught in the crossfire.

The only solution that will truly solve this problem is to make these guns more difficult to obtain. The fact is that people don't need assault rifles. People don't need armor piercing bullets. Americans need to wake up and take a good long look at their gun control laws. I would suggest anyone who hasn't yet seen it go out and view the documentary "Bowling for Columbine" by Michael Moore.

Oh, but after all, if we didn't have guns, the king of england could march right in here and start pushing you around. Do you want that, do you?!?

gekko

[Doc]

Erm.

I am one of those folks who stockpile very powerful weapons of mass casual disembowelment. I have everything from 50 cal machine guns to various small arms. I collect ammo too. Lots of Ammo. Sadly, I am a bit like Bert from Tremors.

It's not about keeping the King or Queen of England out of our faces. Look at the good and kindly civilian that stepped in and assisted the officers. He is going to get a good citizens award and a nice shiny plaque from the mayor. He has been proclaimed a hero, and, no doubt, saved lives, in both blue uniform and civilian.

Invading America would be, at best, a dicey proposition, just because of nuts like me. Our right to militia and to stockpile our own weapons is one of the things that makes America a good place. However, it also means that our criminals are well armed. And armored now, on many occasions. You can go down to most sporting goods stores and buy "safety vests" being sold to hunters. Damn good body armor. Infact, most of these safety vests actually have better protection ratings then the POS body armor that most law enforcement officials are supplied. Most of our boys in blue are wearing vests with technology that is 3 or 4 years behind, at best. Each time a vest takes a hit, it was meant to be replaced. But many poor outfits are forced to "recycle" damaged vests, putting the officers at risk.

The 9mm, championed by Mr. Heston, is a sissified piece of crap. And he is a sissified Nancy boy. While I understand the need to keep suspects alive to get information out of them, and keeping the public safe. It's all fine and good. But when some guy in full armor sporting a street sweeper 10 guage full auto shotgun and an AK47, keeping him alive is well, just plain dumb. He just robbed the bank. It's academic. Screw the 9mm capgun and pull out some real firepower. The reliable and punchy and man dropping 45. The hyper velocity .357 magnum round. The brutal punch of the .44 magnum. Hell, the brand spanking new S&W .500 magnum would be perfect for dropping heavily armored foes, who also use somewhat armored vehicals to escape. (People stuff body panels with flak jacket plates) Give officers the fighting edge with simi or full auto-shotguns of their own. Give police more money somehow. Give them moderm armor suits. Give them tazors if you please, but allow them a real gun as well to deal with situations that tazors aint no good for.

Hell, I would be willing to pay for out of my own wallet guns for our local Greer officers if it were allowed. But not some pussy pea shooter. Perhaps, this could be a solution. If people want to sleep better at night and fight crime, perhaps police should get funded from the community more. People in the community should also have the right to decide what sort of fire power their protectors are packing. Seems like a good idea to me.

[Mithrandir]

Here's what I see as the real problem: we supply officers with high powered weapons and ody armor, and the next bank robbery we see on the news features rocket launchers, depleted uranium shells, and nerve gas.

So you're suggesting that if bank robbers could gain access to these things now that they wouldn't use them? Of course they would. If they don't have access to rocket launchers, nerve gas, etc. then there's no problem, now is there?

Oh, but after all, if we didn't have guns, the king of england could march right in here and start pushing you around. Do you want that, do you?!?

Well obviously more officers would have died if that civilian did not have a .357 Magnum in his possession. But honestly, ban guns and you just take them out of the hands of those who are using them for defense and not criminal reasons. Some telling statistics:

* Americans use firearms to defend themselves from criminals about 760,000 times a year. This figure is the lowest among a group of 15 nationwide polls done by organizations including Gallup and the Los Angeles Times. (7)

* Approximately 11% of gun owners and 13% of handgun owners have used their firearms for protection from criminals. (3)

* When citizens use guns for protection from criminals, the criminal is wounded in about 1 out of every 100 instances, and the criminal is killed in about 1 out of every 1000 instances. (3)

* Washington D.C. enacted a virtual ban on handguns in 1976. Between 1976 and 1991, Washington D.C.'s homicide rate rose 200%, while the U.S. rate rose 12%. (1)

* In the early 1990's, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms reported that 7% of armed career criminals obtain firearms from licensed gun shops. (3)
- JustFacts.com

Americans use guns to protect themselves 760,000 times a year? D.C. bans handguns and the homice rate raises 200%? Only 7% of criminals get their guns legally through a gun shop? Yep, let's ban em - sounds good.

[Nystul]

Americans need to wake up and take a good long look at their gun control laws.

You probably should too, if you think gun control laws have any relevance to the situation Doc describes.

Even if the guy could get an AK47 legally, do you think he would do so if he was planning to rob a bank with it?

[Doc]

If I have to shoot somebody (and I have but we wont talk about that) I do not try to kill. I am a good responsible gun owner. I have deadly accurate aim. I have a well developed sense of morals. I am a pacifist who dislikes violence. I am a model gun owning citizen. If I should have to shoot you, I will shoot you in the leg or the arm and make sure you live, performing first aid if need be, and lecturing you sternly the whole time explaining in small simple words on why you shouldn't be acting like a jackass and putting other people at risk and why crime does not pay. Believe me, the lecturing would be far worse then me depositing a chunk of lead in you. If I blew a leg off, being the kind and good citizen I am, I would even offer to buy an artificial replacement. Make no mistake, I am a nice guy. But that will not change the fact, if given the chance, I can and will engage, and have no problem plugging somebody.

America does need some better gun control laws, there is no doubt about that. But taking guns out of the hands of citizens would be a HUGE mistake. If only criminals have guns, then the average citizen becomes nothing more then a target. People will get guns. Bad people will do anything to get guns. Good kindly citizens, like the random passerby with the .357 or eccentric nutcases like my self, are the sort of counter measure that this country needs. Check your local laws, citizens in many cases have rights and abilities that have actually been stripped away from law enforcement, allowing us to be the deciding factor. Don't go running around in a mask and cape though looking for trouble. But if it comes to you, you might have the power to end it.

Mayhap there should be an "adopt an officer" sort of thing, where folks can adopt an officer like they do a section of highway. Help pay for weapons and armor. Sort of like how a group of churches would sponsor a knight way back long ago.

[gekko]

Americans need to wake up and take a good long look at their gun control laws.

You probably should too, if you think gun control laws have any relevance to the situation Doc describes.

Even if the guy could get an AK47 legally, do you think he would do so if he was planning to rob a bank with it?

I agree completely. This is why I've been so vocally against the gun registry my own home province (ON, Canada, btw). Registered, legal guns don't kill people.

However.

I still refuse to accept that the answer is more, bigger guns for the police. The bank robbers in question will find, acquire, and use whatever weapons they can, so long as the gain is greater than the cost. Now, were I a bank robber planning a heist, one of the first things I would consider is "what kind of weapons will I be up against?" The better equiped the police are, the bigger the guns they will face. Consider England, were the local equivalent of "beat police" do NOT carry guns. Consider how rare it is to hear of an armed robbery in England. That's more than just coincidence.

I understand it's not an easy thing to just make it tougher for the criminals to acquire these weapons. However, if the only other solution proposed is to equip police officers with military-level weaponry, thinking they'll be able to outgun whatever opposition comes their way... yikes. So long as the bad guys can steal more than it costs them to fund their strikes, it won't matter what weapons you give law enforcement agents.

As to the well armed citizen and how his high powered handgun saved the day: what would have happened if everyone in the bank and nearby had such a weapon in their hands? The bank robbers would most likely have opened fire into the crowd at whatever opposition they see. So I don't buy that as an argument for why the american need to own guns makes the population safe.

Guns don't make people safe. Not in the hands of bad guys, not in the hands of the cops. Turn this into a contest to see who can have the biggest guns, and sooner or later the headlines won't read about how the police were so baddly outgunned. The headlines will be talking about the dozens who died in a wild gunfight.

gekko

[DeeBye]

I enjoy reading your posts here Doc, but it seems to me that they are mostly news-related without any links to actual news articles. I like the commentary, but it would help a great deal if you could provide an off-site link so that I may put the story into context.

[Doc]

It's just local backwoods South turn on the radio or tv news. You know. Those strange archaic devices that produce sound and occasionally pictures. News Talk Radio doesn't even have a website. Channel 7 does. I think. www.wspa.com I think. :huh: I am not even sure how I could get links for most of this stuff. I know news channel 7 had a big story about the bank robbery and a look back on it one year later. Might have something on their website. As for News Talk Radio... It's on AM. I don't think most folks even know what AM is anymore... And I ain't talking about the morning and breakfast time.

I am not actually sure how I can fulfill that request to be honest.

[DeeBye]

It has happened again. Another bank robbery. Another man well armed, and well armored. Two officers died. But, the suspect payed for his crimes. A civilian, armed with a .357 Magnum entered the firefight and came to the officers' aid. Suspect died to internal complications. His armor prevented the .357 slugs from penetration, but, not from the massive shockwave they caused on impact. Almost all of his ribs were broken and his lungs collapsed, and his heart suffered massive trauma.

Something like this should have a lot of media play. Two cops dead, suspect killed by a good Samaritan packing larger heat than the 5-0? This story should be somewhere on the www.

[AtomicKitKat]

I dunno about you guys, but a 1% hit rate seems well, sucky. I generally support the total abolishment of firearms, but one thing I will insist on, if guns HAVE to be around, are much stricter criteria for a license. Yearly marksmanship tests, for instance. At least a 30-50% hit rate before you pass. Maybe even psych evaluations. If you only hit 1 time out of every 100 shots, you might as well arm folks with frag grenades, improve their accuracy. Hey, it might kill bystanders as well, but at least they'll blow up the perps. Collateral damage is inevitable.

[Sir_Die_alot]

still refuse to accept that the answer is more, bigger guns for the police. The bank robbers in question will find, acquire, and use whatever weapons they can, so long as the gain is greater than the cost. Now, were I a bank robber planning a heist, one of the first things I would consider is "what kind of weapons will I be up against?" The better equiped the police are, the bigger the guns they will face.

You would make a lousy bank robber. A smart bank robber thinks "if small is good, big is better". A bank robber is not out for a gunfight, they are out to intimidate people to load a bag of money, fast. You won't do this as well with a little 9mm pop gun as you will with a large assault rifel that can leave a hole in someone the size of a basketball. Gun size has little to do with police. A bank robber hopes to be gone before they get there.

Consider England, were the local equivalent of "beat police" do NOT carry guns. Consider how rare it is to hear of an armed robbery in England. That's more than just coincidence.

It's always "consider England" the argument against guns. A country surrounded by water smaller than many U.S. states. Get out your globe and look at england. Now swing it around and look at the USA. See a slight difference in size? Consider how many police per square mile is required for "safe" living conditions, what this would cost, and the potential for exploitation. The U.S. is not surrounded by water. We already have a flood of illegal immigrants and drugs we can't stop. The last thing we need are illegal gun shipments only going to people who would use them to break laws. England just doesn't apply.

As to the well armed citizen and how his high powered handgun saved the day: what would have happened if everyone in the bank and nearby had such a weapon in their hands? The bank robbers would most likely have opened fire into the crowd at whatever opposition they see. So I don't buy that as an argument for why the american need to own guns makes the population safe.

No the bank robbers would have been shot dead a lot sooner. You have to be a complete moron or suicidal to rob a bank where everyone is armed. There is a reason the guy who tried to hold up the gun store made it into the Darwin awards. :P

Guns don't make people safe. Not in the hands of bad guys, not in the hands of the cops.

Idealogic drivel. By this logic we should just unarm all police and that will fix all gun problems. Just because you don't like guns don't let that blind you to the fact that the good or evil that comes from a gun depends on who is holding it. <_<

[Doc]

You might think so.

Here in SC, we average 3 to 4 bank robberies a week, most of them in the Greenville Spartanburg area. More specifically, in Greer, where there are about 20 or so police officers to deal with about 10,000 people in the population. Almost every day, every single week, there is another "blockbuster" bank robbery. I don't want to say it's ho-hum, but, it's getting close.

It's just crap nobody cares about. Take Columbine for example. Nobody cared about school shooting till it happened to noticeable rich white kids. And then it was a friggin tragedy. Boo fricken hoo. Go to just about any ghetto or inner city projects. School shootings and stabbings are a daily fact of life, and, nobody gives a rats ass about those. Hell, on a day when 3 or 4 kids die, you would think that would make the news too... But nobody cares. And so it is here. Greer is mostly one big friggin trailer park. It's Jerry Springer land. Stuff happens here, and, nobody really cares. It's the backwards backwood rural South. And America turns a blind eye to what goes on here cause "we don't know no better." Unless it's something that is utterly outrageous like the Goose Creek school raid, it's just small time crap that nobody, and I mean nobody, loses sleep over. Greenville has one of the worst murder rates in the country. We have spectacular killings. Like Charlie Manson blood on the walls dead bodies everywhichweres and bits and chunks of body parts. It's just another death of some nobody that nobody cares about. We have trailer park serial killers. That's what we call them. And they are, at best, local celebrities. Take Hell Night. Halloween. It's a night of rape and murder. It's a night of horror. A bunch of spooks in white hoods use this night to spread their message of hate and fear. And it happens every bloody year. And you can hop right next door to Georgia and nobody has heard about it. Why? Cause nobody gives a crap.

It's not the big cities that are scary. It's the small towns that nobody notices and nobody cares about, and the day to day stuff that the outside world never sees. Especially here in the Deep South. Southern trees still bear strange fruit if you get my drift. And nobody cares.

[Walkiry]

No the bank robbers would have been shot dead a lot sooner. You have to be a complete moron or suicidal to rob a bank where everyone is armed. There is a reason the guy who tried to hold up the gun store made it into the Darwin awards. :P

Shoot dead along with a nice amount of bystanders hit by misfires/ricochet/poor aim. My biggest beef with guns is that they are dangerous devices, and should be treated as such. At least with some better control than just saying "I'm an US citizen".

I have no qualms with responsible gun owners. I just think it'd be a good idea to check if someone is actually minimally responsible first.

[TaMeOlta]

"There are two types of people in this world , friend. Those with loaded weapons , and those who dig . You , dig ."

(sorry if I got the quote wrong ;) )

[Sir_Die_alot]

I have no qualms with responsible gun owners. I just think it'd be a good idea to check if someone is actually minimally responsible first.

The NRA offers free lessons for just that. It's a shame that the people who are so hot on making guns illegal never think to put such reasonable and logical provision into gun control laws. Idiot activism in action. :angry:

[Baajikiil]

Here in SC, we average 3 to 4 bank robberies a week, most of them in the Greenville Spartanburg area.

I did do a few quick google searchs trying to find a link, because I'm interested in reading it as well. Though I didn't see the particular incident you mentioned, I did come up with alot of hits for recent SC bank robberies. There really is alot of them.

One of the most recent had a teller, and 2 customers shot dead, and the robber has escaped cleanly. There certainly was more bank robberies involving deaths than I would have expected.

[Doc]

One of the most recent had a teller, and 2 customers shot dead, and the robber has escaped cleanly. There certainly was more bank robberies involving deaths than I would have expected.

Not only more deaths, but, officials say about 70% of the bank robberies are never solved. Nothing like a crime you can get away with.