Duncan PD gets $46 Military M-16's, must be nice!

[David2012]

Duncan Police have just bought 45 military surplus M-16's at $46 each. Must be nice! I sure wish the public could get in on deals like this. I'd spring for the class 3 fee if I could get the rifle that cheap.

'According to the chief, the Duncan Police Department currently has 45 officers on staff protecting the citizens. With this purchase, all officers who want to be armed with one of these rifles will be able to. The department holds yearly qualification classes to make sure all officers are proficient with the guns.'






ONLY ON KSWO.COM: Duncan PD purchasing 45 M-16s
Posted: Jul 13, 2012 3:34 PM CDT
Updated: Jul 13, 2012 5:40 PM CDT

By: Jarred Burk - email: jburk@kswo.com
KSWO.com Internet Reporter

http://www.kswo.com/global/story.asp?s=19021509

[jfssms]

At least the Feds aren't destroying them. I'm not sure advertising every Duncan officer will have a M16 in their possession is necessary.

[FireCop203]

At least the Feds aren't destroying them. I'm not sure advertising every Duncan officer will have a M16 in their possession is necessary.

I'd be more afraid of theft now that it's known.

[CAR-AR-M16]

Technically, the $46.00 is just to process and ship the weapons. The DOD still retains "ownership" of the weapons. They are just on "indefinite loan" to the department. The 1033 program is a great way for LE departments to get gear on a budget.

[SMS]

Technically, the $46.00 is just to process and ship the weapons. The DOD still retains "ownership" of the weapons. They are just on "indefinite loan" to the department. The 1033 program is a great way for LE departments to get gear on a budget.

+1. The taxpayers already bought these rifles...might as well get a few more miles out of them and keep our boys in blue well equipped.

[WhiteyMacD]

You know how people will argue that LEOs need these weapons to be able to match what BGs have on the street? Well, I think I should have every bit as good of a weapon as any LEO, serviceman, etc.

[bettingpython]

You know how people will argue that LEOs need these weapons to be able to match what BGs have on the street? Well, I think I should have every bit as good of a weapon as any LEO, serviceman, etc.

+1! The police do not need select fire weapons. Militarization of civilian law enforcement is wrong. Restriction of transfer of post 86 title 2 firearms to individuals is asinine.

What they need is more training time with the firearms that we are "allowed" to own. Select fire is fun but it's pretty much a waste of ammo rapid accurate shots on target will overcome spray and pray.

[Lone Wolf '49]

Technically, the $46.00 is just to process and ship the weapons. The DOD still retains "ownership" of the weapons. They are just on "indefinite loan" to the department. The 1033 program is a great way for LE departments to get gear on a budget.

Thank you. You are so correct.

[SMS]

Yeah, we should go back to unarmed cops just like the Brits....

They shouldn't be denied inexpensive and available long guns just because they are select fire. Getting these rifles through the 1033 program frees up funds for other stuff like body armor AND more training. Like I said, we've already bought them, why shouldn't we get our money's worth out of them.

I'd rather see them go to the Duncan PD than the Palestinian Authority or the shredder.

[WhiteyMacD]

+1! The police do not need select fire weapons. Militarization of civilian law enforcement is wrong. Restriction of transfer of post 86 title 2 firearms to individuals is asinine.

What they need is more training time with the firearms that we are "allowed" to own. Select fire is fun but it's pretty much a waste of ammo rapid accurate shots on target will overcome spray and pray.

Yes, but also they say these officers are "protecting the citizens", however, since I am sure there are more than 45 citizens in Duncan, protecting citizens is an impossibility. So if LEOs need these weapons to "protect" us, dont you think we need these weapons to protect ourselves?

[Lone Wolf '49]

Yeah, we should go back to unarmed cops just like the Brits....

They shouldn't be denied inexpensive and available long guns just because they are select fire. Getting these rifles through the 1033 program frees up funds for other stuff like body armor AND more training. Like I said, we've already bought them, why shouldn't we get our money's worth out of them.

I'd rather see them go to the Duncan PD than the Palestinian Authority or the shredder.

And thank you too, sir! Seriously. I have know of PD's that received M-14's and others over the years, and rather them to have them. Good night and good luck, young ones.

[SMS]

Yes, but also they say these officers are "protecting the citizens", however, since I am sure there are more than 45 citizens in Duncan, protecting citizens is an impossibility. So if LEOs need these weapons to "protect" us, dont you think we need these weapons to protect ourselves?

Then go buy one...or put on a uniform. It's not like these officers are getting them for personal use. It's duty gear.

[WhiteyMacD]

Then go buy one...or put on a uniform. It's not like these officers are getting them for personal use. It's duty gear.

Not the point. If you justify having a class 3 weapon for the purposes of defense, then it should be as easily available to your average citizen without having to "put on a uniform" or "pay upwards of $15k for a <$2k firearm."

Any thought contrary is absurd.

[SMS]

Not as absurd as suggesting that a police officer should be denied something because you, as a private citizen (who isn't paid to go out and look for trouble) don't have access to it or can't afford it. I get what you're saying...but the remedy is not withholding tools from our law enforcement personnel.

Work to change the law...in the meantime, if you want what they get, then join 'em or pony up for it.

[WhiteyMacD]

Not as absurd as suggesting that a police officer should be denied something because you don't have access to it or can't afford it. I get what you're saying...but the remedy is not withholding tools from our law enforcement personnel.

Work to change the law...in the mean time, it's a cop's job to go out and look for trouble. That's not your job. If you want what they get, then join 'em or pony up for it.

One, I would like for it to be shown where I directly said any weapon should be withheld. Two, I can sort of see the point BP was making. Granted, Im not in the know, but I am pretty sure I wouldnt be satisfied with the level of training most LEOs get with an AR and a handgun much less a long gun with a fun switch. This is based off first hand experience and conversation with LEO friends of mine who are not gun people. However, I digress, I wouldnt say I 100% agree with withholding such firearms from LEOs, but I dont 100% disagree with bp either.