Over 100 community activists and teenagers opposed to the Chicago Police Department’s plan to equip officers with M4 carbine assault rifles protested outside police headquarters Thursday night.
A similar protest was held last month, where picketers demanded that the police department hold a formal hearing before purchasing the semi-automatic rifles. Police stated they were willing to reach out to community organizations but would not hold any public hearings.
Superintendent Jody Weis has already begun purchasing the weapons for S.W.A.T. officers and tactical units. According to Chi-Town Daily News, beat officers are also allowed to buy the guns but must do so with their own money.
Police explain that they need the weapons in order to gain equal footing with armed gangs and criminals. But many worry that police may accidentally hit innocent bystanders during altercations.
“The only people who need these guns are in Iraq,” Arthur McGraw, 19, of Southwest Youth Collaborative told the Chicago Tribune. “It’ll shoot through brick, car doors. Say your family is in the house eating and there’s some gang violence. When they shoot these, [the bullets] can come into your house and shoot your kids.”
Police spokeswoman Monique Bond stated that while some police have ordered and received the weapons, they are not yet using them.
Its people like the kid quoted that has me weeping for the future of our Country, but on the same foot, the soldiers, sailors, airmen and Marines give me greater hope.
Hatt – Are you suggesting criminals do not, and will not, possess long guns simply because it’s against the law to buy “assault” weapons? Please clarify. I believe our police should not be expected to perform their duties with inadequate firepower.
I believe the police should have adequate weapons along with the citizens. If the citizens don’t need it, clearly the police do not need it either. That is my position. It is nothing personal against police.
Mine as well. I think Law Enforcement should have these rifles and need them desperately so. But so do the innocent people who have to live in the crime infested cities.
What, and their pistols cant do this?:rolleyes: At least they can be more accurate with the rifles.
Says the person who knows absolutely nothing about shooting or ballistics , or for that matter even what is needed to be an effective officer:rolleyes: F!%@*%$ douche bag:mad:
I’m really puzzled now. If all firearms were banned in Chicago, are you suggesting police should perform their duties without firearms? My question is sincere.
My answer is sincere, if all guns are banned in Chicago, I feel the police shouldn’t have em either. If the street are too dangerous to police without firearms they are also too dangerous to walk down without firearms. I don’t want to get into an anti police argument here since I have no problem with police having ARs or whatever else they need. I’m just trying to be consistent. The police are not better than the citizens. No need to argue this point any further.
Police enforce the law, not live above it. It’s truly not a bash against the police as they should get their rifles, but if they do, there’s absolutely no logical reason for civilians being restricted from those same rights.
Hatt and Olds – My point is not “Do citizens have the right to own a particular weapon?”, but rather “Police should be equipped to deal with the criminal element.”. The reason to arm a police force with M4’s has nothing to do with the weapons owned by law abiding citizens, but everything to do with the weapons possessed by the criminal population. I’m not trying to persuade you to change your mind or concede my point. I’m merely trying to understand what you were saying and why. Regards, Jeff
Lets look at it another way. Lets use ambulances. What if citizens were prohibited from using ambulances because, by law, every ambulance had to follow police patrol cars and public officials around all day in case of medical emergency. Does that sound sensible? Of course not, because citizens need ambulances to deal with emergencies just like the police.
Actually, we will be needing MORE guns of this type here now, to protect against people like Arthur who think they know better than us what we need, and that they have the right to confiscate what we have despite the provisions of the 2nd Amendment.
You are both right. Police need M4s and such to deal with the criminal element. But of the PTB deem the citizens don’t need them, then they must be saying the police don’t need them either.