Grand Rapids can put a rifle in a squad car for only $5000

[CitizensHaveRights]

Such a bargain...

http://www.mlive.com/news/grand-rapids/index.ssf/2015/12/rifles_may_be_coming_to_grand.html#incart_river_home

[part deux]

Disarm the peasants

"If someone was in Grand Rapids hiding out during a horrific situation such as that in San Bernardino and said, 'I am OK, just waiting for the police to come rescue us,' sadly, many of the police that would be responding are not properly equipped to be optimally effective in dealing with the situation of an active shooter."

Police never did rescue the people in SB.  they murdered and left.

[linux203]

Such a bargain...

Might not be as bad as you think:

Colt LE6940 - $1400
Aimpoint Pro - $450
Overpriced sling - $100
Surefire light - $300
Extra Mags - $60
Rifle bag - $40
Rifle total $2350

$2650 in ammo should be ~7500 rounds per rifle

Assuming they have 2.5x as many officers as cars, that's 3,000 rounds per officer. 

[CitizensHaveRights]

3000 rounds per officer?
Does any PD train their road patrol like that?
Or even their SWAT (run of the mill SWAT, not the snipers)?

Seems like we're lucky if we get them to fire 200 rds a year with their carry weapon.
(but there was a quote in the article that said ammo was expensive and training/practice was needed)

[Scandiacus]

Yeah, that cost doesn't seem too bad assuming it includes the ammunition and training.  A couple months ago the police in my township requested that the board approve a $3200 expenditure for rifles (not including ammunition or training).  They got two similarly equipped AR-15s and a gear loadout for a third they already own, which gives them one rifle per car.  The police argued that the expenditure was necessary because our township has 5 K-12 schools in it, and several of the neighboring townships with their own K-12 schools don't have 24 hour local police, so they would likely be the first responders in case of a school shooting at any of those places.  The board happily approved the expenditure, which I agree with.  I'd say the police argument in favor of the rifles would've also made a pretty good argument for the local schools hiring armed resource personnel, though.

[LD]

I liked the educational value of one of the comments........

On a public safety standpoint, the Carbines make sense, and more so than the shotguns in the cruisers, especially in an Urban/Suburban environment.



The .223 bullets that the carbines fire, are much less likely to over penetrate, and exit a structure, when compared to the shotgun, OR the Handguns they are issued.



The Carbines increase hit probability by a huge margin, when compared to the shotgun and Sidearm.


Increasing hit probability, results in fewer rounds fired in any engagement, and greatly lessens the possibility of unintended harm to those in surrounding structures.

The drastically reduced recoil of the Carbine, compared to the patrol shotgun, increases proficiency, and not just for the Females and slight of build Male Officers. Everybody hates getting beat up by the Shotgun in training, and it translates into a challenge for the trainers, as well as reluctance to maintain proficiency...which increases the risk to public safety.

The Carbines increase effective standoff distance, over the Shotgun and sidearm, increasing officer safety.

With more and more criminals wearing soft body armor, only the Carbine is capable of dealing with the matter. The west Hollywood shootout proved the matter, of Shotguns and sidearms as being a greater hazard to officer safety, AND public safety in such a situation. Cops that don't get results with 3-4 shots, shoot a LOT more.   

Certainly educated me.

[part deux]

kind of blows away the old wives tale of 223 round blowing through multiple walls.

Tom Gresham of GunTalk has talked about this for years, 223 starts tumbling when it hits the first wall.  Just this last weekend, he was harping on the sight radius and how it increases accuracy.

[m.marino]

Interesting comments on the use of a carbine. Having been trained in MOUT as an MP I can tell you that they mean folks are NOT training to deal with the environment and hoping to use increased range for their safety. 5.56 does NOT penetrate cinder block of solid panel walls well at all. It WILL go through drywall without much issue unless you are loading light. Why are the police getting a weapon that is meant to cripple? The 5.56 (.223 cal) round was design as a crippling round. It does that job very very well. So who in their right mind wants police forces to have a round that will go through drywall and will travel along bone structure in the body and tends to tumble in very irregular patterns in soft tissue?

It is a great hunting round and a wonderful combat and defense round. Police having it when the weapons they have will do the job very well with proper training does not make sense to me. For not wanting to penetrate look at some of the SMG's that are used in Europe and designed and tested for that very purpose. Considering the supposed discounts that are given LEO's by manufactures tends to have me asking for a full accounting of where those funds went and not just someones word or a in house counts document.

Michael

[CitizensHaveRights]

A lengthy discussion engaged Grand Rapids Mayor George Heartwell, city commissioners and police Chief David Rahinsky as to the purchase of roughly $69,000 for 65 rifles for 59 vehicles starting as early as summer 2016...

The city is slated to spend an additional $230,000 on rifle ammo and officer training — money already allocated in the police budget.

http://www.wzzm13.com/story/news/local/grand-rapids-central/2015/12/15/when-grand-rapids-police-cruisers-could-carry-rifles/77366254/