Patrol Rifle Other than AR.

[KenW.]

We have M-16s in Patrol, but none of our Detectives or Civil guys have locking racks, so we're not allowed them... yet.

I'd just as soon have a Winchester 94 as anything else. I'm more concerned about an drunken angry cowboy with a deer rifle than I am with some gang banger with an "assualt weapon".

[Blackdog F4i]

I do question the need for most officers to carry 5-6 or more mags.

In reality the majority of police engagements end before the first mag change in a hi-cap handgun.

HOWEVER, I don't ever want to die for lack of shooting back. So on the vest that carries my rifle armor (because we always wear armor that stops the round our weapon fires RIGHT!!) I keep 4x30 round magazines. The likelyhood that I will ever expend 150 rounds in slim to none, but we have had engagements here in Indiana with determined suspects who were not dissuaded from their activities after being hit 30 times in non-critical areas. (if a target presents a part of it's body YOU SHOOT IT no matter if it will be a critical hit or not).

There have been police engagements where officers have expended all ammo they had available. I DO NOT want to end a gunfight with a .380 backup in my hand.

If I go to a shots fired call, or I am serving a high risk warrant, then on goes the rifle plates and spare ammo when I grab the rifle.

[JTShooter]

Like my father used to tell me, it's better to have it and not need it then to need it and not have it...

[pulicords]

LASD Winchesters

In the 1970's there was a gun shop here in Southern California selling Winchester Model 94s in .30-30 which were marked "Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department." I've been kicking myself for years, for not having bought one! They were 100+ year old technology, but they worked well.

[Sleuth]

Blackdog, it reads as if you have evaluated your situation, and reached a reasonable conclusion. What may be missing from your analysis is research into the training and abilities of the officers who ran out of ammo. We had 'gun buffs' and officers who had to be ordered to carry their guns every day (we were all investigators).
When I was still on the job, I carried a Steyr AUG, 42 round mag in the gun, 3-30's in the gun bag. But I worked in a VERY remote area, where backup, IF they could find you, were at least 45 min. away. A lot could happen in that time.

All I suggest is that each of us realistically evaluate our real, rather than our fantasy, needs.

[Blackdog F4i]

What may be missing from your analysis is research into the training and abilities of the officers who ran out of ammo. We had 'gun buffs' and officers who had to be ordered to carry their guns every day (we were all investigators).

No, I tend to ignore those. If THEY don't value their life and take steps to ensure it's continued existence then there is no reason for me to consider it. We called them "machinegun fodder" in the Corps. They do help to consume the enemy's supply of ammunition so the professionals have an easier go of it.

[AMT8951]

Never thought this thread would go this far when I started it . Anyhow, some of the deputies at an neighboring counties road patrol have started carrying lever action Marlins, 45-70 Govt's with red dot sights or ghost ring sights. Don't know why they choose that combination, but I guess they could do a lot worse.

[Blackdog F4i]

It would be interesting to hear the justification behind that. Most of the justification for our patrol rifles was the ability to defeat soft body armor. I wonder how .45-70 would perform in that regard.

[jwise]

Maybe they wanted to defeat engine blocks?

Seriously-- Sleuth, in this day and age of Active Shooter, each officer needs to be able to take the fight to the enemy. Fighting INTO the building under fire would deplete most officers ammo supply, leaving them nothing left when they get TO the threat.

I carry an Eagle chest rig with six thirty round mags and a "blow-out" med kit.

[pulicords]

It would be interesting to hear the justification behind that. Most of the justification for our patrol rifles was the ability to defeat soft body armor. I wonder how .45-70 would perform in that regard.

If they're using Marlin "Guide Guns" and shooting Garrett heavy hard cast bullets, they'll probably out-penetrate .308 loads. Even if they didn't penetrate body armor, they'd knock down people real easily with blunt force trauma. Those things are good for use on Cape Buffalo, Elephants, etc... If I was carrying a lever gun as a patrol rifle, I'd be just as happy with a good 30-30! (equal to 7.62x39mm within 100 yards)

[Sleuth]

1. Blackdog, I am suggesting that adding situations where the partially trained officer missed a lot and ran out of ammo alters any evaluation of real need. I would expect you to have a higher hit percentage than most.
2. Jwise, I'm sure you don't intend to use 'covering fire' to enter a building filled with innocents. Only aimed fire is acceptable (we don't want ""collateral damage"" in our schools!). Thus, ammo demand should still be considerably less than your 6 mags. (Just the though of all those rounds, bouncing down the school corridors, scares me. See, my wife substitute teaches.)
3. Pulicords, in my area we average car vs. elk 3 times a week. They may want the 45/70's to put down elk or bear. Work good on people too, with a somewhat limited downrange danger area.

All just my opinion, worth what you paid for it.

[Blackdog F4i]

1. Blackdog, I am suggesting that adding situations where the partially trained officer missed a lot and ran out of ammo alters any evaluation of real need. I would expect you to have a higher hit percentage than most.

I understand what you are getting at now. Although I still would rather end a gunfight with 4 full magazines remaining, than with none.

2. Jwise, I'm sure you don't intend to use 'covering fire' to enter a building filled with innocents. Only aimed fire is acceptable (we don't want ""collateral damage"" in our schools!). Thus, ammo demand should still be considerably less than your 6 mags. (Just the though of all those rounds, bouncing down the school corridors, scares me. See, my wife substitute teaches.)

Please do not confuse "suppresive" or "covering fire" with unaimed spraying. Suppressive fire is aimed fire specifically intended to force a target to seek cover and to stop his action while adjacent units maneuver. It is a key element to "fire and maneuver". While this technique has been used on the battlefield for centuries it is VITAL than anyone responding to multiple active shooters know how to employ it. Since "Covering Fire" frequently has you placing rounds into the targets "cover" you are NOT getting effects on target. The goal is to keep the shooter from popping up and shooting your buddy while he moves to a more advantageous position. The ONLY way to do this is to fire while your partner moves. Firing at a "sustained rate" is going to burn through a magazine fairly quickly if you have any distance at all to cover.

There are times when the "gunfight" has turned into a "firefight" the quicker you can adapt and overcome the better for all involved.

ALWAYS better to have and not need, than need and not have. This goes for ammo, weapons, AND tactics.

[jwise]

Blackdog is spot-on.

[JTShooter]

^ +1

[Sleuth]

If I fully understand you, Blackdog, if th shooter is covering behind a brick wall, you will continue to fire at that wall, accepting that some innocents may be hit by either bullet or wall fragments or even ricochets.

That is a different ethos than I applied.