Ruger Forum banner

1 - 11 of 11 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,621 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Would let guards carry semiautomatic weapons at work
By PAM ZUBECK and PERRY SWANSON
THE GAZETTE
December 11, 2007 - 11:39PM


Colorado Springs City Council members will consider allowing security guards to carry semiautomatic weapons next month.

Although the change has been in the works for months, the revision is sure to draw added interest in light of Sunday’s shootings at New Life Church.

City Clerk Kathryn Young said she will submit a proposal to the council in January that would revise the city’s security licensing laws, including the types of weapons allowed.

She said the proposed measure would allow semiautomatic weapons; the current ordinance limits security guards to revolvers.

Konquest Security President Michael Briggs said the New Life shootings underscore why security guards should be more heavily armed.

“It does kind of make a point here,” Briggs said. “Here’s a guy who went into a church with enough ammo to kill half the people in it. If they continue to knock us down to carrying nothing but a sixshooter,” he said, the ability of security guards to diffuse deadly situations is diminished.

“It should be up to the (security) officer’s discretion which one they want to carry.” Briggs and other security companies have pressured the city to ease its restrictions, but the exact provisions of the proposal aren’t known.

Lonnie Hall with Knight Investigation and Security Service said the current ordinance doesn’t specify types of weapons involved, but that clerk’s officials limit guards to .38- or.357-caliber handguns with either 4- or 6-inch barrels.

“If CSPD (Colorado Springs Police Department) needs assistance, and some security officers have been utilized from time to time, with a double-action revolver, you’re limited on the rounds you’re allowed to carry,” he said, to a total of 18.

Semiautomatic firearms, he said, allow officers to carry up to 33 rounds.

In addition, Hall said, “It allows for a greater accuracy, because most semiautomatic weapons have a little bit less kick. A lot of people now coming out of the military that we employ, they’re used to the semiautomatic weapons because they have to carry them in the military.”
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,896 Posts
gee ya mean they are thinking they aren't so bad now?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,156 Posts
Without going into a revolver vs. auto kick, I will never bad-mouth a man who chooses to carry a revolver. The debate can get long and lengthly.

A person should have a choice.
Wheelguns are not for everybody, and i am glad they are seeing the light that some folks out there may be better able to protect the community with a semi-auto..
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,393 Posts
I totally agree. A person should be able to carry the handgun they are most comfortable with. When I did carry, I carried an SP101. When my new license comes in, I will probably change to a semi-auto....it will be a Sig!!! Now, to narrow it down to the P250, P220, P226, or P229....decisions, decisions.....
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
723 Posts
Per my agency's policy I can carry whatever I want off duty, as long as I am "Weapons Qualified". :D

I've carried both types of weapons over the years and really like a revolver for self defensive purposes. Most encounters are over in less than three rounds, even with multiple attackers. The funny thing is, when bullets start flying badguys start running, at least in my expirience.

Since I carry for self defense ONLY and will use one of my weapons as a "last resort" I do not feel hindered by a revolver. My agency's policy is basically, "Do not get involved off duty." This sits fine with me because people should be responsible for their own safety, as the USSC has already ruled.

Many other forums have a "Tactical" section where someone is always asking about "What would you do in a mall, etc, etc." Truth be told, if I have the opportunity I will flee the mall and only use my handguns if the shooter is shooting at me or mine or inhibiting my ability to flee the scene to safety.

Also, since I'm responsible for every bullet fired out of my gun, or as Clint Smith likes to say, "Every bullet has a lawyer attatched to it;" I will not be using my guns to lay down "Cover Fire" or some other such nonsense. "Cover Fire" is a military tactic and we are not in a declared war zone. We, all of us, if we have to shoot, are in a self defese scenario, use appropriate tactics and weapons.

I am not saying that an autoloader is an inappropriate weapons system, far from it. I just think that selecting ammo capacity over tactics is a poor choice. Autoloaders have many advantages, faster reloading is one of them. The ability to clear a "jam" faster is another.

OK, my rant is over, flame me if you will.

Biker
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,156 Posts
As i said, don't want to get into an auto vs revolver debate. Both weapon systems have their advantages/drawbacks--it basicly comes down to the man.

As for off-duty involvment, I have in the past got involved in situtations coming to the assistance of other officers and victims and will continue to do so.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,621 Posts
Discussion Starter #7
Heck, I don't even got a badge and I still get involved in some things when no cops are around...and I'd give my hide to save a cop in a heartbeat...I can't go the other way...ain't in me...glad I don't have any department policy hanging over me...
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
723 Posts
I wasn't try to post regarding an autoloader vs revolver issue, but rather why are the Guards now getting autoloaders?

How many shootouts have they been in where they have run out of ammo? How many times have they come to the assistance of a Police Officer and needed to reload using an Officer's spare magazine? That's sort of what I was referring to in my previous post.

I see the autoloader as the answer given when tactics would be a better issue to deal with. I also wonder if these politicians have thought about the culpable liability of what happens when a bullet misses it's intended target and hits the baby in the baby stroller instead?

As far as intervening off duty, "Any actions taken while off duty will not be considered within the scope of employment and will be considered actions taken as a private citizen." I'm not saying I won't always get involved, but I better dang well know who all the players are first.

Biker
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,393 Posts
With that last statement, Biker, I'm sure we all can agree. If and when any of us feel compelled to protect life (be it ours or another's), we had better be REAL SURE of who is who. Shooting a GG instead of the BG, is a really bad thing - not only legally, but emotionally, too).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,621 Posts
Discussion Starter #10
Youbetcha!!! Spray -n-pray don't work....and neither do snap judgements....you two are right....and there are gonna be few times when a good(read with a 4 in the caliber;)) revolver isn't fast enough to handle it....newer isn't always better....
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,241 Posts
The policy if effected is long overdue.

Many concerns about how to react in mall situations, etc., are colored by a persons standing and responsibilities, a sworn officer has greater responsibilities then does a private citizen. Biker has made some good points as has Deputy. As a private citizen only sworn to protect and defend the Constitution against its enemies both foreign and domestic, I understand my carrying a weapon as a defensive tool only.

I don't have a badge and that must color my judgment in many situations. My interceding into a criminal situation is only permeated upon there being no sworn law enforcement personnel to defer to. My personal code of honor would not allow me to see the weak taken advantage of. That principle is binding regardless of being armed or not. The soul of a man is his primary weapon.

This has been some good food for thought.
 
1 - 11 of 11 Posts
Top