Submitted by Hoosac_Love t3_124jttn in massachusetts
yourboibigsmoi808 t1_je00ey1 wrote
Remind me why it’s “safe” for Police to have Ar’s and Glocks but as soon as a normal person gets one it’s considered a “dangerous “ weapon
Hoosac_Love OP t1_je00ozy wrote
It appears the police actually had a M4 Carbine , actually much more dangerous than a AR or Glock
It's beyond that
yourboibigsmoi808 t1_je00sbl wrote
How the hell did he get an M4?!?!?!
Hoosac_Love OP t1_je014ua wrote
Another poster on this thread made that claim not me,ask them!I had thought it was am AR too.
djsmith89 t1_je0akx8 wrote
Because police departments can purchase newly manufactured machine guns
peteypaaaablo t1_je8pap9 wrote
MA staties have become way over militarized…they have more warfighting equipment and non-explosive weaponry than some smaller countries. The pentagon provided the state with bearcats and a bunch of other shit like 10 years ago…literally got equipment meant to fight a war against foreign adversaries lol even according to Boston magazine some literal Tanks
yourboibigsmoi808 t1_je9xvip wrote
Legalize anti tank weapons I guess 🤷♂️
SheeEttin t1_je0fugu wrote
The department goes to a supplier and orders it?
A real true M4 isn't really obtainable outside the military, but a generic AR in the exact same configuration is relatively easy to get. (Though for private non-LEO citizens, you can't have full auto without shelling out several thousand for the transferable machinegun lower receiver.)
dante662 t1_je08l5k wrote
Because police are "trained".
​
Actually, no they are not. Most barely pass their annual qualifiers and after X years of service they no longer even have to do that.
Drix22 t1_je1uj5v wrote
I have a friend who's a police officer in Worcester, I spend more time at the range and do more official trainings than he does annualy, and he states himself as being the average officer.
If we're going to moan about "police are trained" then we should be able to agree that anyone can obtain this kind of training and be on the same foot if not better when it comes to marksmanship and use of force. But instead this is always used as a hard stop- "Police are trained, but you aren't".
Uhh, ok, I did 200 hours of live fire training last year, plus 40 hours of in class time as a non-leo, does that not matter for anything?
DillonD t1_je1nd44 wrote
Because we live in an authoritarian police state that wants to take the means of community defense away from the individual and entrust it into an oppressive institution that has a monopoly on violence.
brufleth t1_je0ugaq wrote
Who is saying it is safe for police to have them? Seriously. Who?
yourboibigsmoi808 t1_je0vv1u wrote
State politicians who make gun laws
medforddad t1_je0zctz wrote
> Remind me why it’s “safe” for Police to have Ar’s and Glocks but as soon as a normal person gets one it’s considered a “dangerous “ weapon
Does any person actually hold that view? The type of people who are for more restrictive gun laws on individuals are also the type to not be big fans of the police having more deadly, militaristic weaponry.
yourboibigsmoi808 t1_je3r959 wrote
Yes literally the politicians who draft gun laws with loopholes for LEO’s to get guns that these same politicians are harping off that are a hazard and too dangerous for people to have hence Ma approved gun roasters but they don’t apply for law enforcement. “Laws for thee , but not for me”
medforddad t1_je4mll3 wrote
Which politicians exactly? Can you point to someone in the MA legislature who has advocated for stricter gun laws and has advocated for more police access to deadly weapons?
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments