The Myth of Fully Automatic Firearms for Law Enforcement
The question often posed, What would happen if the government allowed police officers to carry fully automatic firearms? often sparks heated debates. However, it is important to contextualize and understand the real implications and realities surrounding this topic.
Current Practices
It is important to note that, in many cases, police officers already have access to fully automatic firearms. In smaller agencies or Special Weapons and Tactics (SWAT) units, particularly those on patrol, fully automatic weapons are often stored in secured locations and ready for use. This practice is not limited to civilian law enforcement but also includes specialized units operating under government jurisdiction.
Training and Ammunition Costs
Full automatic firearms, like the Daniel Defense AR platform mentioned, require extensive training and significant ammunition consumption. While specialized units such as SWAT often carry these weapons for specific situations, the limitations and costs associated with their use make them far from a standard issue for every police officer.
For example, one officer mentioned carrying a Steyr Aug .223 capable of full auto, indicating the specialized nature of fully automatic firearms in law enforcement. Access to other full auto firearms is similarly limited, primarily to specific units and training scenarios. This rarity is further emphasized by the observation that even qualified officers may not regularly employ these weapons in general duties.
No Significant Change in Routine Operations
The presence or lack of fully automatic firearms in the hands of police officers does not significantly alter most daily operations. As mentioned by one official, Hundreds of thousands of police officers would report to work and do their job as professional as possible. The end. This illustrates that the insertion of fully automatic firearms into routine policing would likely have minimal impact on the day-to-day operations of most police forces.
Legal and Policy Considerations
From a legal perspective, the ability of federal agencies to carry automatic firearms already presents a precedent. Similar permissions would likely extend to state law enforcement personnel as well, with federal law not prohibiting such practices. Intrinsic to this is the question of how such practices would fit within existing policies and regulations.
Right to Bear Arms
The discourse around fully automatic firearms in law enforcement is also intertwined with the broader debate on the right to bear arms. Advocates of the Second Amendment might argue for expanded access to these firearms, while critics might express concerns over safety and responsible use. Regardless of perspective, the realities of limited training and costs suggest that the impact would be minimal, supporting the notion that Free For Me But Not For Thee is not the hallmark of a free people.
Ultimately, the argument around fully automatic firearms in law enforcement relies more on inflated expectations and less on practical outcomes. While the policy itself could change, the ramifications in terms of routine operations and day-to-day patrol activities might be surprisingly small.
By understanding the practical realities and current practices, one can better frame the debate on the role of fully automatic firearms in law enforcement and their alignment with broader civil rights discussions.