Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!crabapple.srv.cs.cmu.edu!fs7.ece.cmu.edu!europa.eng.gtefsd.com!emory!darwin.sura.net!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!news.acns.nwu.edu!uicvm.uic.edu!u28037
Organization: University of Illinois at Chicago, academic Computer Center
Date: Wed, 14 Apr 1993 23:00:01 CDT
From: Jason Kratz <U28037@uicvm.uic.edu>
Message-ID: <93104.230001U28037@uicvm.uic.edu>
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
Subject: Re: My Gun is like my American Express Card
References: <viking.734512792@ponderous.cc.iastate.edu>
 <93104.173826U28037@uicv <PA146008.711.734832476@utkvm1.utk.edu>
Lines: 79

In article <PA146008.711.734832476@utkvm1.utk.edu>, PA146008@utkvm1.utk.edu
(David Veal) says:
>>
[stuff deleted]

me:
>>What seems to be happening here is the situation getting totally blown out of
>>proportion.  In my post I was referring to your regular patrolman in a car
>>cruising around the city vs. gang members.  Of course the police have access
>>to the things that you mentioned but do they use tanks and such all of the
>>time?  Of course they don't and that's the point I was trying to make.  Every
>>day when I go out to lunch I always see cops coming in.  The majority that I
>>see are still carrying revolvers.  Not that there is anything wrong with a
>>revolver but if you're a cop that is up against some gang member with a
>couple
>>of automatics in his coat (I mean semi-auto handguns) you're going to be at a
>>disadvantage even with training.
>
David:

>      This is the "arms race" fallacy.  That somehow bigger guns make an
>individual safer.  The problem is that for each corresponding level of
>offensive power the is not an automatic level of defense increase.  The
>problem is that there's a sort of lethality threshold that once you get
>past you're only talking about a metter of degree.
>
>      Regardless of what cops are up against there's really no reason
>for the average beat cop to have anything bigger than a pistol on him
>as a personal weapon and maybe a rifle and a shotgun in the cruiser.
>
>      I mean, think about it.  Carrying a monster pistol or sub-machinegun
>doesn't make the cop any less wounded if somebody shoots him.  A lot
>of police departenments have switched to semi-automatics, as better
>more reliable weapons, and more stopping power, but there's a point
>of diminishing returns.
>
This is a very, very good point.  Who cares what kind of gun you've got if
you're lying on the ground dead.

>      And as far as automatics go, any gang member carrying around "a
>couple" of automatics (an incredible rarity) is going to be far more of
>a menace to himself and innocent bystanders than anything he might be
>tryinh to aim at.  One auto is hard enough to control.  Anybody who
>could control two is going to get the police officer regardless of
>what the police officer is armed with.
>
[more stuff deleted.  mostly mine]
>        My question is this:  What would a police officer gain from
>having a sub-machinegun or similar personal weapon that he already
>doesn't have with a 9mm or 10mm semi-automatic pistol?  I don't see
>as how the police should be hosing around full-auto fire, nor has
>my experience with police officers (or the stats regarding how many
>police officers get killed by other cops) made me feel such would be a
>good idea.  Precise fire is far more preferable.  Nor should they using
>"bigger" guns.  Most standard sidearms have more then sufficient
>stopping power when properly applied.  All more powerful weapons would
>do is make the likelihood of death higher without really giving police
>significantly more options.
>
Another very good point that is well taken.  It seems that when lots of lead
is flying (either the cops or the gangs) someone innocent always gets caught
in the crossfire.
>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>David Veal Univ. of Tenn. Div. of Cont. Education Info. Services Group
>PA146008@utkvm1.utk.edu - "I still remember the way you laughed, the day
>your pushed me down the elevator shaft;  I'm beginning to think you don't
>love me anymore." - "Weird Al"

All points made above are well taken.  I guess I am in the mindset of
"having more makes it better" which is obviously not the correct mindset
to take in this discussion.  Now that I think about the situation a
little more carefully I see your point exactly David and I
wholeheartedly (sp?) agree.  Like I said I'm just assuming that "more
bullets and/or bigger bullets is better".  Once again though I want to
state that I am a pro-gun individual and do NOT believe that gun control
is really a viable option here in the United States regardless of the drivel
that I spout here :-)

Jason
