Terrs hit America: LE or Military Response?

[Skinny Shooter]

I've heard it said that during the Clinton administration, terrorism was considered a law enforcement issue.
Bush considered it a military issue.

What do you think about either one being used here in the States against terrorism?

My first thought is, it should be a LE response, but, the bad guys are receiving the types of training that LE may not trained for.
So that leaves the military.
How do you get trained military shooters to a school within 15mins? I don't think you can.
Looking forward to your thoughts.

Allen

[GoodOlBoy]

First problem is use of the military within the US for ANY sort of combat operation is more than a little no-no when considered against the constitution. Second of all even if it wasn't if you allowed it to start, then it would be easier and easier to just call in the military and declare martial law as people would get use to it (kinda like TV violence eventually desensitizes kids to real violence)

AND it should be the PEOPLE of the US defending it within the borders along with LE and FBI.

That being said working with LE in a state that has some pretty hefty requirements for training I am still staggered at how many LE here don't go to the range except twice a year to qualify, AND how many of them don't own any firearm except their sidearm.

IE if it happens it is gonna be bad no matter what happens. We were once a nation of riflemen. Now we are a nation of passive let somebody else protect me while I hide behind the "safety" of plaster walls at home.

GoodOlBoy

[bulletpusher]

Inside the confines of the Continental United States the U.S. Military is not allowed by Law to function as an active attack force. That is the job of the National Guard (which is under the control of the Governors of each state to keep the Federal Government from trying to take control of the country by Martial Law, etc.,etc.)

The Constitution strictly forbids it, even though it looks like President Bush and soon to be Obama are making plans to move 20,000 U.S. Troups into an active force inside the borders of this country by 2010 or 2011.

I think the people in will have to do the defending along side of the Law Enforcement personnel. That way the Law Enforcement personnel will have someone beside them, that knows how to do the job.

We shall See

Bulletpusher

[Skinny Shooter]

Originally posted by bulletpusher
The Constitution strictly forbids it, even though it looks like President Bush and soon to be Obama are making plans to move 20,000 U.S. Troups into an active force inside the borders of this country by 2010 or 2011.
Bulletpusher

And that is what prompted this thread.
I don't see Bush using troops to take away rights, but, future presidents who we don't know are what scare me.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/11/30/AR2008113002217_pf.html
Passé Comitatus Act... (test) Passé Comitatus Act... (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/27989275/)

[Rapier]

The real problem you have of course is that the LE orginizations are not trained or equipped to handle a full blown terrorist attack. Best example is the two that robbed the bank in CA, they were just well armed bank robbers. Just imagine a dozen well trained and well armed folks doing the same thing, with ambush tactics, grenades, claymores, etc. The death toll cold be staggering and mostly LE.

I voted LE due to the Constitution, but like the Constitution itself, there is a reason for doing a lot of things, including changing old rules or habits. I am most framiliar with what Franklin said and think he was dead on, but things do change.

I remember the "good old days," when we had but two deputies covering the entire county at night and they came to my home and asked if I would ride with them on Friday and Saturday night, as a backup in an emergency. I rode with them for three years. The LE job is scary at times and that is just handling the normal local stuff. I can not imagine getting a call to go to a terrorist shoot out or firefight in progress.
Best,
Ed

[GoodOlBoy]

Yes but what it boils down to is that LE departments need to get off of their arses and train better swat teams, and force better training on officers. There is absolutely no reason for them to not be practicing on a range once a week and doing live fire (simunitions etc) training at least once a month. PERIOD. Local LE departments require them to hit the range twice a year and burn at least two magazines for qualification purposes. BTW most LE Swat Sniper/countersnipers rarely practice beyond 200 yards. Thats nice. So what do you do when the sniper is in the top of a 30 story building and you can't get to him? You throw a shoe at him or what?

As for the kalifornistan shootout the problem was that you had body armored targets and NOBODY willing or capable of taking a head shot, or a groin shot. Had they had a swat sniper who could have taken a shot from say 400 yards out then they could have shot the head (madula oblongata casserola) or a groin shot (femoral artery salsaria) then it would have been over in minutes, AND the officer would have been out of the line of fire. Also let us not forget that the real issue in that fight was underpowered weaponry as much as lack of a jerk on a trigger. Try shooting the armored bad guy with a 308, 30-06, or any mule deer capable caliber and see if it don't work a wittle better than 9mm, and buckshot from 30+ yards.

I feel for the officers, I really do. When time came for a local department to long gun up what did they buy? AR-15s in 223. Why? In case a maniac with a deer rifle opened fire. Well uhmmm how about an AR-10 in 308 instead you putzes? You are worried about a drunk with a deer rifle and you buy a overzealous squirrel gun? For the love of all that is good and holy buy a freakin caliber that can do the job FROM FURTHER OUT so that you don't get officers killed. I mean after all you aren't going to train them properly to shoot the gun anyway (the same local agency trains from no more than 50 yards out with long guns because thats as big as the range is. . . . . ) why not give them a caliber that an idiot can graze meat with and still do damage?

I gotta stop now before I lose my mind and my blood preassure reptures, but I will say this last thing. Until we stop letting bean counters make the choices LEOs are NEVER going to be up to par for a heavy situation. PERIOD.

GoodOlBoy

[GoodOlBoy]

Ed I just thought about I missed a critical point. You are DEAD ON when you mention riding along and LEOs depending on your aid. The very fact that LEOs cannot, or will not depend on civillians anymore that they KNOW can back them up is insane. I know half a dozen good men that I have shot with MANY times who can outshoot your standard LEO any day of the week. I would count on them. And I know alot of HCers would too.

GoodOlBoy

[Adam Helmer]

Rapier,

I have watched endless videos of those two North LA bank robbers. The responding cops could not shoot nor could they hit what they shot at! IF any cop had a .308 or .30-06 deer rifle and shot either, or both, of those bank robbers in the HEAD or legs, they would have bled out quick, fast and right away.

GOB is right on about the "Posse Committas" which says the PEOPLE help the LEOs restore order. ALSO, GOB, I concur about "Enough Gun." I was issued a MATEL 16 in 1965 and that .223 did not impress me then or now about a RIFLE gun. Nuff said.

Adam

[Rapier]

GOB,
You understand exactly. I stopped riding when the head shed told the deputies that civilians could no longer ride with them. I felt real bad leaving my deputies without anyone to cover their backsides in drug busts and late night bar brawl visits, real bad.

I did not mention the Hollywood, Florida FBI fiasco because I really did not want to go there but..... That was two US Airborne trained bank robbers, just two, with semi auto guns who shot up the FBI guys. I used the CA bank robbers, which was just as bad if not worse. Just think what a dozen bad guys could do intent on a real killing ambush, with military training and equipment, including explosives. It would not be real difficult to pull an entire police force into a big buzz saw.

The military with recent deployment would be better equiped mentaly, training and actual equipment to handle the problem, but you run square into the Constitution.

Best solution would probably be for the military vetran NCOs to train LE in antiterrorist tactics and LE departments to secure equipment to work the problem, not pea shooters. If nothing else we could offer our LE folks captured or surplus weapons.
Best,
Ed

[GoodOlBoy]

Not to mention there should be a MUCH heftier bonus for trained vets who go to work for police departments. The bonus on them around here is LESS than the bonus a newbie out of the academy gets if he speaks spanish. (Not that spanish isn't important but sheesh)

The sadest part of our society and history is the underapreciation and villanization of ex-military. A close second would be the villanization of "rough men" who are capable and willing to do what is needed to keep family, friends, and community safe, but are turned away, and looked down upon because it is not politically correct for them to do so.

God Bless and keep us all. I fear we need that blessing in the comming days more than ever.

GoodOlBoy

[BILLY D.]

Originally posted by Adam Helmer
Rapier,

I have watched endless videos of those two North LA bank robbers. The responding cops could not shoot nor could they hit what they shot at! IF any cop had a .308 or .30-06 deer rifle and shot either, or both, of those bank robbers in the HEAD or legs, they would have bled out quick, fast and right away.

GOB is right on about the "Posse Committas" which says the PEOPLE help the LEOs restore order. ALSO, GOB, I concur about "Enough Gun." I was issued a MATEL 16 in 1965 and that .223 did not impress me then or now about a RIFLE gun. Nuff said.

Adam

Adam

Did any of the guys you served with refuse to carry an M-16 and use a captured VC weapon?

A few people I know tried it but their rifles sounded different than ours and some guys almost shot their buddies, thinking they were VC.

It was one of those damned if you do, damned if you don't type things.

Best wishes, Bill

[Skinny Shooter]

Not meaning to start an argument here because this thread is starting to go off topic already but...
This stuff about the AR being a piece of crap is just that, crap.
The AR platform has come a long way since Vietnam and with the correct ammo it can do the job.

Is there anyone here willing to stand up at 300 yards and take a hit from my AR? Probably not.
LE actually has a better deal going for it than the military. They are not limited to specific rounds like the FMJ and can select what they want.

I do like the AR10-series rifles but that is a hefty gun for the average guy not to mention a female that may have to schlep it around.

The 6.8spc may be the better caliber because its available now and just means swapping out the upper.

I've been reading stories coming back from Iraq and Afghanistan about ammo performance.
Bad guys are being killed by 5.56 and 7.62. And then there are instances where some are taking multiple hits from either till they are stopped.
Each situation seems to be different.

Check out these articles:
http://ammo.ar15.com/project/Self_Defense_Ammo_FAQ/index.htm
http://www.ar15.com/content/page.html?id=185
http://www.m4carbine.net/showthread.php?t=19881

[GoodOlBoy]

Ain't sayin its a bad gun sayin its underpowered. And it is. Period. Yes in the right hands it is deadly. But it requires MORE percission than a 308 (or even a 7.62x39) in order to get the job done. I don't want to take a shot from a 22lr at 300 yards much less a 223. But a 223 is underpowered. I have read plenty of reports from iraq and afganastan in which the tango was shot six, eight, ten, or more times before he went down. It is ALWAYS related to the 223 or the 9mm. With a 308, or 30-06 you are talking about a layered cloth/body armour penetrating round that does the damage and keeps on trucking.

GoodOlBoy

[Skinny Shooter]

Originally posted by GoodOlBoy
Ain't sayin its a bad gun sayin its underpowered. And it is. Period. Yes in the right hands it is deadly. But it requires MORE percission than a 308 (or even a 7.62x39) in order to get the job done. I don't want to take a shot from a 22lr at 300 yards much less a 223. But a 223 is underpowered. I have read plenty of reports from iraq and afganastan in which the tango was shot six, eight, ten, or more times before he went down. It is ALWAYS related to the 223 or the 9mm. With a 308, or 30-06 you are talking about a layered cloth/body armour penetrating round that does the damage and keeps on trucking.

GoodOlBoy

GOB, you need to read those links when you get a chance. I added one after you posted.
I'm sure they won't change your mind and thats ok for you.
I'll never say that the 5.56 is as powerful as the weapon system it replaced but I've read that 5.56 ammo does work.
And I've also read of bad guys needing multiple hits from 7.62 caliber weapons to be put down. So which one wins?

I'd be comfortable with a fast twist AR using 5.56 ammo (not 223) if I had to patrol the streets.
I would not want to wield a heavy AR10 (unless its a carbine version) or M1A1 for patrol. Its not needed.

[GoodOlBoy]

Skiiny I am not saying that the 5.56 (or 223 +10000 CUP pressure) does not work a good portion of the time. I am saying that it is underpowered for the job it was purchased for here, AND that it is underpowered for the job overseas. You have pretty well hit the nail on the head when you said of hearing the 7.62 failing to stop in all cases. THAT is EXACTLLY my point. If a 7.62 which is more powerful won't always do the job then why would I want the 223 in that situation? Short answer is I wouldn't. The military made a GRAVE mistake when they picked the 5.56 over the 222mag after the M16 trials. It was a MUCH better round. So where half a dozen others that were tested. Worried about weight? Why? I have the same opinion on it as I do the 9mm. Sure you can put 1 in the head and 2 in the chest to do the job. OR you can use the right caliber and put them down with 1. The standard 9mm holds 15 + 1 rounds and it can take 5 oponents with that mag on average. The 45 holds 8 + 1 and can take down 9 opponents with that mag at single shot each on average. Yes the 9mm is lighter, but the trade off is that you are getting so much less knockdown that the extra ammo you are packing to do the job (or get left with a dry well) offsets the lighter weight. And yes I understand that on paper numbers don't really translate to a battlefield.

I would even choose a 30 caliber carbine over a 5.56 any day, but thats just me. Then again I would also choose a HK/UMP 45 over the 5.56 any day. The AR/M16 platform is a good design. The choice of caliber leaves MUCH to be desired in THAT kind of firefight. It is one of the reasons that platform can be obtained in so many variations now.

Is it better than the firearm it replaced? Todays version probably is, yes. The vietnam era one not so much.

Is the caliber better? Not by a long shot.

Does the caliber have a use? Yes it does thats why I own one.


I have a very big problem with saying that any gun/caliber is useless. There is no such thing and often you have to make do. My point is that the boys and girls fighting for us overseas, and at home should never have to make do with a lighter, less expensive caliber simply for the sake of a bean counter.

GoodOlBoy

[GoodOlBoy]

PS I did read the above links. What's your point?

I can post links to every side of the argument on that round and that is the problem. The point is the 5.56 is a mediocre round at best when used in a ar/m16 platform on full tilt. For a precission platform (ie a bolt gun) in the hands of the right person it is a dirty deadly nasty little bugger. But spray and pray is no substitute and far to often LE and military don't have time or don't take time to stand around for slow single shots. In a situation where you are firing multiple rounds on the two way range, hoping to penetrate barrier/armor/camel dung you need a round that will effectively do the job and still have overkill on the other side. And then you get to longer range shots out of the same platform. Again you are not going to shoot 600 yards with a 5.56 and kill the target very danged often with a ar/m16 platform. You can do it with a BAR (30-06) or an M1Garand (30-06 or 308 version). There are even those who can do it with an AR-10 in 308.

The 5.56 has outlived its military assault rifle usefullness. We are not on a peacekeeping mission we are at war. We cannot guarentee that the bad guys are always going to be in the sweet spot of the 5.56s range. Replace it. Use a 6mm, or a 308, or a 30-06, or a 458 socom, or a 50 beowulf, or a heatseaking slaggergag or whatever. But for the love of all that is good and holy don't hold on to it out of stubborness when there are better options for our boys and girls.

GoodOlBoy

[Skinny Shooter]

I'll have to agree to disagree with you on a number of points.
I would invite you to post those opinions on Ar15.com or M4carbine.net.
There are folks there that have been there and done it that can give you much better info than I can on how they feel about the 5.56 in combat.
I don't have the time or inclination to debate this. This debate has been going on for many years now and my input isn't going to make a difference.
:)
Allen

[GoodOlBoy]

Yea that would be the place to debate it a board dedicated to fanatics of the gun type. After that I can go to potheads.com and argue why pot should be illegal.

Anyway.

GoodOlBoy

[GoodOlBoy]

Facts aside everybody wants a link. Growing up in a military family with half a dozen vets apparently counts for nothing so here we go. I will post them as I dig them back up. i don't keep them bookmarked because I don't care to.

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/library/report/1986/MVT.htm
7.62mm vs 5.56mm

After that go spend some time at snipercentral, then at urbansniper, then do a search of each of the calibers independantly and compare. Then go get a few rifles of both and see what you get. There is a reason why 223s (or yes even 5.56) go tink on a free swinging 1" steel plate, and 308 or 30-06 damage the plate with a CLANG when you shoot it. Even the 7.62x39 makes a heck of a dent at 150 yards in the steel. Which is probably why you can get ARs chambered in 7.62x39 now as well.

Everybody can also take up a collection and send me enough money to buy an AR-15 and AR-10 a BAR, and a Garand in 308 and I will do the tests myself, video tape it, and post the results if you want. If so I will show the results on steel at 50, 100, 200, 300, 500, 600, 800, and 1000 yards from the different calibers. In fact for that matter I will do the same shots and tests on plywood, car doors, geletin, whatever you want.

Our boys and girls should never carry a rifle not capable of kills out to 600 yards from a single bullet fired prone without ten grand worth of electronics and gear. The marines used to train at 1000 yards without all the extra BS. Someday some terrorist is going to find a way to throw a EMP blanket over an area and our people are gonna get geeked because they depend on electronics WAY to much.

Anyway.

GoodOlBoy

[GoodOlBoy]

Alrighty first of all let me appologize for my tone yesterday. I realize now that it was more than a bit harsh, chalk it up to the migrain I had all day long (had the lights off in my office because it was so bad).

Now let me approach this from another direction. Within its limitations the 5.56/223 in the AR/M16/M4 platform is a great round. The whole setup however is a MEDIUM range setup compared to cartridges of the past. It doesn't mean the caliber nor the platform is junk thats NOT what I am saying. It means that I think the usefulness of a medium range assault rifle setup is in just that. . . . a MEDIUM range ASSAULT rifle setup. FAR too many organizations are trying to use this platform and setup for a long range solution, and while yes there are people who can make the shots at long range even with this setup this is not what it was designed for and not where it shines. Let me give an example below.

We have a local on campus building that is 16 stories tall with an additional 12 feet over the center columned elevator bank. Should a shooter with a 30-06 manage to take a stand on top of that bank all the buildings within 2000 yards except for two at approximately 900 yards that are side by side are 5 stories or less in height. AND there is NO other buildings withing 150 yards of the base of this tower. East of the building is clear nothing for 240+ yards then there are a few single story buildings. North of it are two dorms at 4 stories tall at approximately 150 yards out. North of those at approx 900 yards from the base of the tower are two 14 story towers that are 45 yards apart along an east west axis. West of the tower there are a few 4 to 5 story buildings approximately 400-500 yards out and further. South of the building there is nothing for maybe 700 yards before you get to parking lots, tennis courts, etc. There are no cover places on top of most of those buildings, AND the roof entrance to the tower is on the north face of the elevator shaft he would be setting on. IF a shooter with a 30-06 deer rifle who knows ANYTHING about shooting gets up there you are in SERIOUS trouble since ALL local law enforcement are equiped with ONLY ARs in 223, and I MEAN 223 they are not using 5.56. I am not saying we should dump ALL AR and M16 platforms. I am saying I have seen these guys shoot and a couple of them could probably drive home, get a deer rifle and make a pretty fair attempt at a shot, but the danged sure can't do it with the ARs they are issued. If there were even a SINGLE shooters armed with a 308 bolt gun or an AR-10 there are a FEW (not alot but a few) places they could take a shot from. Myself I wouldn't want to do it with anything less than a 308 bolt gun. I would be willing to attempt it with a 270, 25-06, or 30-06 bolt gun from any of those places.

Thats the Scenerio that got the local law enforcement the ARs in the first place. As I said. It was a BAD choice in my opinion on the part of BEAN COUNTERS to buy JUST the ARs. The local town PD wanted additional budget for four 308 caliber bolt guns and training for four shooters for the guns. The bean counters decided that money was excessive, and cut the budget.

THATS what has me ticked off. SO please stop sending me arse chewings via phone and email.

Thanks

GoodOlBoy

[Skinny Shooter]

Originally posted by GoodOlBoy
Thats the Scenerio that got the local law enforcement the ARs in the first place. As I said. It was a BAD choice in my opinion on the part of BEAN COUNTERS to buy JUST the ARs. The local town PD wanted additional budget for four 308 caliber bolt guns and training for four shooters for the guns. The bean counters decided that money was excessive, and cut the budget.

THATS what has me ticked off. SO please stop sending me arse chewings via phone and email.

Thanks

GoodOlBoy
Anyone that feels the need to chastise GOB thru email or phone, please reconsider doing that and let it be.

Sorry I didn't get back on here since yesterday.
Yesterday we had an emergency call that went awhile, then we had our monthly meeting and got home at midnight.

GOB, you and I are still Buds :cool: and this discussion is no different than two folks with differing opinions around a campfire. :D I value your input here and I'm sure others do too.

I agree about having access to a bolt rifle in a heavier caliber for that application. Maybe the folks holding the budget strings will see the light eventually.
Allen

[GoodOlBoy]

Yep we are. I am not about to let a little disagreement stop that. I understand about emergencies, I am just now gettting back to my desk, about the time I hit submit eariler we had a vehicle do some acrobatics and land in trees a few blocks away because it is raining and apparently you should drive faster in the rain.

ANYWAY back to the ORIGINAL point of the thread since I hung my behind out there like I did.

I think it will wind up being taken on by a mix of LE, Feds, and military even though it shouldn't be touched by military inside the US.

GoodOlBoy

[DON WALKUP]

i sincerely doubt LE, and i know military, would not allow civilian 'assistance' when it comes to firearms and related operations...they, for the biggest part, look down their noses at our (civilan public) being able to use a firearm.

GW bush summed it up when he said "we do not approve of vigilante activities" without really understanding, or acknowledging, the meaning of "vigilante"...when he was asked about the minutemen along the mexican border.

i once asked an LEO what he thought of having 'assistance' from a "civilian" and he replied, "i shutter at the thought of it..."

i, for one, have little faith in LE/civilan cooperation being sucessfull.

the average civilian shows up at a 'hotspot' armed and ready to assist, would more than likely, be arrested.

i don't know what the answer is...but i suspect you cannot look to LE to allow you to help even if they needed it.

and...yes...i knew many guys that dumped the m16 and picked up VC/NVA weapons.

the 5.56 as a combat cartridge debate continues...talk to a recent vet and he'll more than likley bow to the altar of the 5.56...guys in my era...vietnam...more than likely the .30 cal...we used the 30-06 M1 garand and the M14 in 7.62...walked many patrols with either...now, the M4 laden with all the gadgets, is around the 10 lb level...why not have a cartridge to make it worth carrying?

[Mil Dot]

Just in reading the original question it seems dependent on the scope of the attack and duration. I mean that the 1st responder may be the armed citizen with a CCW at the scene who may be able to take a couple bad guys out prior to LEO's arrival. Your LEO is going to be the initial official response because of 911 calls to any incident and until they know it's an organized terrorist event(s) they'll continue to respond to multiple sites till the light comes on. Unless you, as a American citizen, are ready to have LEOs or Military walking the streets, airports, etc with automatic weapons as you see in countries outside the US you will be the first response to any incident because you're there. I feel the circumstances would play out similar to 9/11. Who were the 1st responders who actually "took it to the terrorists" citizens on flight 93. When faced with certain death or fighting to live they made a decision which undoubtably saved lives at the target that wasn't hit. Unfortunately, in a terrorism scenario, the terrorists have already done all their planning and are executing while LE, FBI and Military will all be starting at zero. By the time these orgs figure out the program the terrorists will be bunkered up and you'll need a JDAM to get them out or the damage will have already been done. 20,000 troops in Texas don't do you a bit of good if they hit 20 different cities across the country on the same day. Sort of like having a pistol in your pants and the bullets in the trunk.

[GoodOlBoy]

Good point MD.

GoodOlBoy

[8X56MS]

So far Bush has kept us safe. The ball is in hussein's court now. I fully expect his foreign and domestic policies to allow another attack.
LE or military response is fine. Just as long as they kill a lot of the ones that would have been responsible. That means both here, and where they came from.

[44mag]

i am no expert, having no
experience with most of the
platforms being argued.

friends that i know ( a little
older than me, as i was too
young for 'nam) who were
in vietnam preferred the
m-14; lacking that, many did
pick up ak's to replace their
m-16's.

i understand that there were
problems originally with the
m-16, many of which i'm sure
have been fixed, as it has
been around awhile now.

the friends i mention all have
ak's, ar-15's, m-1 garands, etc..
they like all of them, but if you
gave them a choice of weapon
for war today, they would
still pick the ak over the m-16.

[Larryjk]

Looking at the different posts I am not sure what to actually respond to! Looks like it has degenerated to an argument over the .223 vs .308.
First, I had an opportunity to spend an hour with a US special operations soldier from Afganistan. The local LE are the ones who are fighting the terrorists. The local military are the ones watching the border and trying to keep terrorists out. The US military is mainly involved with the local LE and receiving great help from Predator strikes. She said there were about 6000 US troops in the southern aea where she is involved. The additional 30,000 troops we hear are going to be moved from Iraq to Afgan duty will really be a great addition. She is involved with the training of the local LE types and trying to stop some of the local crime. (Acid strikes on female students).
.223 vs .308. The marines in Iraq were looking for M14s so they would have a weapon capable of killing a target at 800 yards instead of just wounding. They said the .223 just didn't have the energy at the longer range. Special operations riflemen (Marine snipers) will use just about any bolt action .30 caliber they can get their hands on. The involved marine I know said he used a model 70 Winchester in 30-06 in the "pacification" of Fallugia.