A Cygnus Business Media Website            






Sponsored By:








Illinois Police Replace Shotguns with Assault Rifles


Posted: Wednesday, July 16, 2008
Updated: July 16th, 2008 10:10 AM EDT

Most Read Stories TodayMost Read Most E-mailed Stories TodayMost E-mailed E-mail This StoryE-mail Article Print This StoryPrint Article

Chicago Tribune

We're sorry, this article is no longer available! Go to home page

» More Stories From Top News Stories



Share your thoughts, advice, opinions, and expertise @ Officer.com

     
Comments

Posted by Rangemaster Yarbrough
(07/16/08 - 02:51 PM)
Good deal! You might check out www.patrolrifle.com



Posted by ?????????? ??????????? in Portland, OR
(07/16/08 - 08:29 PM)
Assault Rifles
It's not an assault rifle. It's a semi-automatic, magazine-fed rifle. Or is your anti-gun bias showing?



Posted by ////////////
(07/16/08 - 09:22 PM)
Clearly people need to read the articles better. It never mention's the word's assult rifle.



Posted by JE
(07/16/08 - 10:17 PM)
Ha
Clearly, you should read the title of the article.



Posted by Doctor of Democracy in Los Angeles, Kommyfornia
(07/17/08 - 12:05 AM)
EVIL "ASSAULT RIFLES!"
Additionally, officers will receive "assault boots" to match the rifles and better protect themselves.

But seriously, why does it have to be an either/or proposition? Why can't officers be equiped with BOTH rifles and shotguns?!



Posted by Patrol Sgt in Michigan
(07/17/08 - 01:54 AM)
Clearly, lets agree that some copy editor in some dank newsroom penned the ignorant headline. Not an issue, guys. Lets hope the rifle program allows street officers to better protect the citizens they serve.



Posted by Ok Ptrl Cop
(07/17/08 - 07:21 AM)
Rifles
I don't understand why they don't have both. We carry both shotguns and patrol rifles now. At least more departments are realizing the AR-15 platform is a viable and useful tool for leo use no matter what you wanna call 'em!



Posted by Adam 219 in Ok
(07/17/08 - 10:16 AM)
i think we need both types of guns but strictly regulated on when to pull out the ar15 because in a city this could do more harm than good, for example the bullet can pass through several homes...



Posted by Ghuqu in MO
(07/17/08 - 12:37 PM)
I am a full supporter in 2A, and fully believe in full ownership and carry of everything available (OK, short of suitcase nukes), but why on earth would the rank and file LEO need a AR15? Long shots and penetration are not what officers need. Shotguns are great weapons, awesome penetration closeup and much shorter "over travel" potential. If midrange fire is needed a camp carbine or a pistol caliber lever action would be better. I'm sorry, it's not Fallujah, and in my experience, Police (esp. City police) don't have the necessary training and experience to carry a high capacity, long range weapon in such stressful situations. Unfortunately the militarization of the police force by American cities, unable/unwilling to train and pay officers appropriately scares me more and more every day.



Posted by APM TPD in Tulsa, OK
(07/17/08 - 06:31 PM)
Ghuqu are an LEO? Do a little research. The .223 tumbles on impact, thus little over-penetration. .00 or a rifled slug on the other hand. Fortuneatly my department has a patrol rifle progam that is second to none. Sure this isn't Fallujah, but have you seen a gangbanger shoot at you or someone with a AK47. I have and let me tell you THANK GOD for the patrol rifle, because with proper training (including ballistics) it's a great tool to have.









1  |   2  |  



Officer.com E-Mail Alerts
Sign Up for Free e-mail Alerts

Daily News & Features
Officer Down Alerts
Special Offers
Weekly Job Alerts