Why one cop carries 145 rounds of ammo on the job

This is how things can happen in the real world, folks. No drugs or booze, just one criminal's determination to kill a cop. It took 33 shots for an expert sniper and firearms instructor to stop one suspect. He got an incredible amounts of hits in a wild gunfight, but the perp simply did not want to stop.

Now, contrast this with the actions of New York State Democrats. Under the leadership of Gov. Coumo, they limited law abiding gun owners to just seven rounds in their guns and only seven rounds in magazines. The expert police officer in the above article needed 33 rounds, and thank God he had them. If a citizen in New York needed to stop a gunman like this breaking into their house, they are just going to get slaughtered. Thanks Cuomo! Thanks Democrats! Thanks Obama!


This gentlemen tells it like it is.

[video=youtube;eeQiVBvy0m0]http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=eeQiVBvy0m0[/video]

 

So, you agree that the US government isn't buying ammunition to suppress the Amercican public, in a facist takeover, as put forth by the US Right when discussing gun control measures.

Thanks.

 

If they were buying them for the Police you might have a point. However if you cared to research it many police departments are having issues getting enough ammo right now.

 

So then we're agreed, Obama isn't plannign a facist takeover of the US. This was all in the minds and imaginations of the idiotically paranoid US Right.

 

It could be a little of both.

Certainly the Social Security Administration does not need automatic weapons and piles of ammo to do it's job.

Obama has already boasted from his won lips about building a domestic army as potent as the US military.

I don't think he is planning to kill Obama voters with that force, do you?

 

The bottom line is that clearly seven rounds might not be enough. Who are the Democrats to limit how many rounds a law abiding citizen can use before they are murdered?

 

I wonder if Gramins gun was legally purchased or not.

 

Me too. But, I look at it like educating shoeless serfs.


Without a written constitution, they are at the mercy of what ever cabal is ruling them.

I think the NY law is going to be overturned as waaaay unconstitutional.


The gunfight in question:

The average homeowner may need more than seven rounds and Gov. Coumo's answer to them is "then die".

 

145 rounds is an awful lot of fear.

 

At the end of the day, the only folks they'd have equipped to "guard against" the cultural decline begat by their "benevolent" welfare state, their gratuitously violent entertainment media, their "protecting the civil rights" of the insane, their advocacy of free-for-all hedonism, their systemic alleviation of personal responsibility, and their soft, "compassionate" stance on crime and criminality....

is the government union protected, fat benefits and pensioned police state.

Ironic, huh? They speed it along, then emotionally extort more money from taxpayers to protect a would-be disarmed citizenry from it....while crying about the police state

Quite a racket, this "utopia"

 

That's just seven twenty round magazines give or take a few shots.

Even fewer if they are thirty round mags.

 

Then, they will get to star in their own version of "A Clockwork Orange" someday.

 

I'm just confused now.

The US Right told us that Obama was stockpiling bullets to supress the masses who will oppose his dictatorship. Now, one of those people started a thread saying the police "needed" this level of ammunition for criminals.

Which is it? Perhaps you could clarify.

 

Who cares, it's not relevant to the OP topic.

 

LOL!!! How many one on one gunfights have you won, Colonel?

 

Or preparation, as the officer from the article said.

It would sure suck if he were to be pinned down by more than one suspect, with back up far off, and not enough ammo.

 

You must have missed the part where the officer unloaded 3 mags and barely slowed the criminal down after hitting him 14 times.

- - - Updated - - -

Yes, police need this kind of firepower to take care of criminals.
The government needs not make criminals out of law abiding citizens exercising their 2A rights.

 

I'm just glad that where I live, my tax money is spent on education for kids and the growth of the nation, rather than on arming the police for street shoot outs. Much better that my money ultimately goes to companies that produce educational material, rather than weapons of destruction.

Once you find yourself in a circle of violence, it's difficult to break. Money is spent nott on education, but elsewhere, meaning the level of stupid in a country goes up, along with it violence and the circle becomes a spiral.

 

Bet you would drop a load if you saw my stock pile of ammo.
Just inventoried, close to 8000 rounds of various calibers. And going ammo buying this coming weekend.

 

Why do your criminals chose guns? Mexican criminals also do, but lets compare first world nations.

 

So you would just be fine with that cop dying that day and not the criminal scum.

 

Did you feel tough when you wrote that? Like a real man? A big tough real manly man?

 

It is both.

Local cops deal with street criminals.

The federal government is responsible for protection from foreign threats.

Obama does not need a domestic army except to kill other Americans that he deems a threat to his regime.

 

That has no relevence to what I posted.

- - - Updated - - -

Obama has created a domestic army?

Where are they stationed?