AP: California lawmen own thousands of assault guns

[alp227]

Peace officers throughout California have bought more than 7,600 assault weapons that are outlawed for civilians in the decade since state lawmakers allowed the practice, according to data obtained by the Associated Press after it was revealed that federal authorities are investigating illegal gun sales by law enforcement.

Investigators have not said what kinds of weapons were involved, but did say they were ones that officers can buy but civilians cannot. That category also can include certain types of handguns and high-capacity ammunition magazines.

The AP's findings and the federal probe have prompted one state lawmaker to revisit the law to ensure that the guns can be bought only for police purposes.

"I think it's much more questionable whether we should allow peace officers to have access to weapons or firearms that a private citizen wouldn't have access to if the use is strictly personal," said Assemblyman Roger Dickinson, D-Sacramento.

Read more: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2011/12/21/BAOM1MFG7F.DTL&ao=all

[slackmaster]

1. California's gun laws include senseless restrictions that have no demonstrable benefit

To public safety or anything else.

[ileus]

2. But...they make some people feel good.

[slackmaster]

5. Feeling good is good, I suppose

But it doesn't outweigh freedom of choice for others.

[Hoyt]

13. As does the gun or two public carriers stuff down pants before they can venture out.

[SteveW]

3. Wanting to "match the suspects..."

"Some campus officers said they want the firepower to respond to attacks, such as the 2007 killing spree at Virginia Tech, where 33 people died in the deadliest mass shooting in modern U.S. history. This month, a gunman killed a university police officer at the campus.
Matching firepower

"We want to definitely match the suspects," said Los Angeles School Police Department Lt. Chris Stevens, whose officers bought four assault rifles this year. They are supposed to only use them if needed on the job.
________________
But the rest of us don't get to "match the suspects." I can understand the police wanting to have comparable firepower (even though Cho was using pistols), but if "suspects" using semi-auto carbines are a concern to police, why are they not a concern for the everyday person who is most likely to encounter those rather rare "suspects" who use so-called "assault weapons?"

Sfgate needs to clean up its terminology again: The arms in question are NOT "assault rifles," and are not equivalent to "assault weapons."

[one-eyed fat man]

9. One of those all depends questions

If one of the chosen has a semi-automatic carbine in the trunk of their squad car, it's called a "patrol rifle."



If you or I have the exact same semi-auto carbine in the trunk of our car, it's an "assault weapon!"

[PavePusher]

11. Is hoyt posting pictures of his toys on duh inderwybz again? n/t

[Hoyt]

14. Just enjoying listening to you guys whine because you can't have a couple too.

[SteveW]

15. LOL. It would be faster to throw that "Lazamataz" than to figure it out. nt

[Glassunion]

4. An investigation uncovered by the ATF operation "The Dawdling and Somewhat Unhappy"

[DissedByBush]

6. Always going the wrong way

"prompted one state lawmaker to revisit the law to ensure that the guns can be bought only for police purposes. "

First reaction: Always restrict the rights of the people. If a restriction is not working, that's because it's not restrictive enough, not because the restriction is stupid.

How I would love to hear "prompted one state lawmaker to revisit the law to remove the restrictions on civilians."

But that's not in the totalitarian, authoritarian mindset.

California Über Alles!

[ObamaFTW2012]

7. I need to correct some terminology

Police officers ARE civilians, just as anyone else not actively serving in the armed forces is. The people the police officers serve are "citizens". Incorrect usage as demonstrated only serves to promote the idea of militarization of law enforcement.

[JustABozoOnThisBus]

16. Right. But, try telling it to some cops

They don't see themselves as mere "civilians".

[Glassunion]

8. Could someone with more technical knowledge correct me

if I'm wrong...

But isn't an "assault gun" something one would find mounted to the top of a Jeep or tank? An "assault rifle" a select fire rifle with full auto capabilities? And an "assault weapon" an abstract term for something?

[MicaelS]

10. Typical journalistic hyperbole and stupidity

They don't have a clue what they're writing about.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assault_gun

An assault gun is a gun or howitzer mounted on a motor vehicle or armored chassis, designed for use in the direct fire role in support of infantry when attacking other infantry or fortified positions.['/b]

[Glassunion]

12. If that's the case. I don't want the LAPD to have them.

That is gun control I can get behind...