View Full Version : Opinions for law enforcement to have three round burst option????
jeeper2269
12-03-15, 23:21
Active shooter situations have obviously increased I the last year. I would like some advise from you guys to determine whether or not we should switch up to select fire/three round burst. This is for patrol only. Small department, 11 sworn(not that it should matter)
Thanks
What advantages do you forsee in a burst fire weapon?
I've trained with 3-round burst. It's cool on the range but looking for armed bad guys and doing building clearing with my personal or issued AR I never felt like I would need one more click on my selector. Just my opinion.
Burst and full auto is fun though.
Nah. There's a dinky department in my county that has some burst/FA stuff, but we don't and I don't see a time when it would ever benefit us. I think that burst/FA is useful in military applications, but not as much for LEO's.
Adding burst or full auto fire isn't going to do anything to increase your effectiveness. What will increase the effectiveness is getting more than the average 1-2 range sessions in a year by getting a trainer out there to provide more training.
I am in a situation not unlike yours; I currently am issued a select-fire M4. I have found that I needed to make modifications to the weapon (buffer, muzzle device, etc) to make it manageable under select fire - things that most patrol officers would not undertake on their own. Furthermore, when allowing others to shoot my M4, they are not nearly as proficient or comfortable with it. My personal experience indicates that most patrol officers will not dedicate the time or effort to be completely comfortable with their patrol rifle, let alone the extra time needed for a select fire weapon. Note, my M4 is FA, not burst, so i'm aSSuming their would be a similar learning curve
If your agency has the dedicated, training oriented officers, and the budget to support the extra training and duty ammunition; i'd say go for it. However, my experience indicates smaller agencies like that are few and far between.
What exactly does a burst trigger accomplish in an active shooter situation, that you don't accomplish with semi-auto fire? Personally I can't think of anything remotely significant. As stated above, that money and effort is better spent on bringing in folks that actually teach you to run the gun well, and effective tactics. If I could spend our entire annual budget just to get cops to stop clumping together like penguins at the South Pole in a high risk situation, that would be the best investment in the history of law enforcement. You'll be way ahead of the game focusing on tactics, not gimmicky triggers.
In the units I was a member of in Israel we were issued Colt Commandos that are with full auto capability.
But after running many test, the SOP for training and for missions is we used the rifles on semi auto only. We did the same with our closed bolt mini or micro Uzi's.
If it is shoulder fired, magazine fed, semi only is the way to go.
If it is belt fed then it is a different animal.
Im in Central Jersey and I know my countys sheriff department just got a few M4's. I know this because I hang around with a few of them. Great guys and all but it concerns me that a bathroom remodeler like myself could out shoot any one of them any day of the week. I train with my firearms and all they do is "qualify" every 6 months. It makes absolutely no sense.
For rank and file semi-automatic should do everything a non-SWAT officer needs to do. If there is a significant cost difference between semi-automatic and three round burst during the bid process, I would try to convince the Chief of Police the money would be better spent on ammunition and training.
I know my local department has FA M-16s, and none of the guys use the auto feature. Many are former Military and they say there is very little use for it.
Sent from my LG-LS995 using Tapatalk
The most important part of "select fire" is installed in the shooter, not the mechanics of the gun. That being said, I prefer both semi-only and auto over burst. Both provide the burst function with trigger discipline.
I find a narrow use for either auto or burst guns in LE, and few agencies will do it right. Far better to take troops to the range and work on quality NSRs and cadences.
With regard to budget, the price difference between a semi and select gun is usually only $25-$75, depending on the vendor.
USMC_Anglico
12-04-15, 09:51
Another reason why the 3 round burst is a bad idea...trigger pull weights. You get three different pull weights, which effects semi fire as well. I've heard anything between 3lbs difference in pull weight, but have never verified. My FA M4A1 has a good consistent trigger. Once the Geissele triggers make their way into the guns, it will be even better. Even big Army finally woke up and is converting all of it's M4's and A4's to FA config over time, mainly for this reason.
joshua_capitolarmory
12-04-15, 16:04
There's a few things to keep in mind. One being round accountability, and along those lines controlling the rifle. A good shooter can hammer out two or three rounds VERY quickly and really know the trigger on a semi auto. Having a "3 rounds fast" switch doesn't equate to "3 rounds fast and automatically on target."
Heck of a fun thing to play with... but as almost everyone has stated- there's not a whole lot of use for it with most LE guys.
My agency we use full auto but then again our backup can be as close as 30min in some areas and as far out as 2 hours in most. I work in a remote area
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
The burst have more parts to control the fire. The regular full auto is simpler
I as a regulqr civiluan understand auto for Leo, now that the gangs and cartel have them too. Hell give them silencers too.
As long as the police leave me and other law abiding gun owners alone i dont care.
If you commit crime. The 4 S apply
Sent from my SM-G900P using Tapatalk
My agency we use full auto but then again our backup can be as close as 30min in some areas and as far out as 2 hours in most. I work in a remote area
Sorry you just gave a great argument for aimed semi auto fire. You could burn through all your ammo in short order waiting for a 30 minute backup. I had an off duty incident where semi auto only from a micro Uzi I went through 14 32 round mags.
snowdog650
12-07-15, 13:41
LEOs have to worry much more about where their rounds end up downrange than do soldiers/Marines in theater. As one who works closely with several local and federal SWAT teams, I don't see a use for select fire weapons for civilian agencies.
Yea i know never said i would use it just what we are issued
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Active shooter situations have obviously increased I the last year. I would like some advise from you guys to determine whether or not we should switch up to select fire/three round burst. This is for patrol only. Small department, 11 sworn(not that it should matter)
Thanks
I don't know that the frequency has increased all that much (possible?), but my thoughts are that if an officer feels that a piece of equipment will increase his likelihood of survival in a dangerous situation, he should have every right to use it.
I don't believe that means folks should be patrolling streets in APC's etc in Nomex suits, full rigs, and long guns 24/7 (details to paint a picture) - but I have no problem with an officer having that in their arsenal, just as I have no issue with a civilian owning one. Do whatever you feel will enable you to do your job as effectively as possible. If it's the right tool for the job, then don't not use it because someone may get butt-hurt over it. I trust the discretion of most LEO's.
LEOs have to worry much more about where their rounds end up downrange than do soldiers/Marines in theater. As one who works closely with several local and federal SWAT teams, I don't see a use for select fire weapons for civilian agencies.
I would imagine the number of Soldiers and Marines that have ever used their M4/M16 in full auto during a gunfight is under 1%. I understand its there, but I can't think of a reason I would ever move my selector switch to Auto other than messing around on a range.
Rick
We ran realistic drills that matched some of our prior shootings, multi members took part in the drill they ran it a bunch of times in semi only and a bunch of times with full auto with the shooter striving for 3 round burst with full auto Commando's.
Then we looked at accuracy verse speed of hits. We determined the speed differnce in real life would not effect the out come of a fight. But the accuracy differnce would raise the chance of stray fire hitting good people.
As a result the SOP is semi auto only.
BufordTJustice
12-07-15, 19:51
Being an active LEO, I would MUCH rather have a Geissele SSA or SSA-E than any form of burst.
CanineCombatives
12-07-15, 20:24
Ditto, and if you feel that way about the SSA's, you owe it to yourself to try a CMC flat bow 1/3 two stage or even the single stage 3.5
My issued rifle is full auto and I have a Geissele SSF installed. I have become very proficient in full auto and I am able to get two and three shot bursts out of it quite accurately. I still don't think I would ever feel the need to deploy it in full auto.
Seems like a liability to me. As far as Im concerned f/a out of an M4/M16 is to aid a squad or team in supression. Short of perhaps the middle of the desert cops should never ever be using full auto suppressive fire... I dont see any way that goes well in a populated area.
Mike
Sent from my cell phone with a tiny keyboard and large thumbs...
Parachute Pants
12-15-15, 15:51
With regard to budget, the price difference between a semi and select gun is usually only $25-$75, depending on the vendor.
I LOLed at this. ~$50 for LEO, ~$20,000 for civilians.
If your dept wants Select Fire, Full auto is probably more useful than 3rd bursts. I imagine it wouldn't be used much, but a great option to have.
kaltesherz
12-16-15, 00:36
I'm not LE but have a lot of time on M4's in the military (Infantry) and I can't think of a single good reason to have select-fire on an AR type platform- even in the military. It wastes ammo and accurate aimed fire is more effective at "suppressing". An MP5 is one thing, but 5.56? Nope.
An MP5 is one thing, but 5.56? Nope.
Why the difference?
The justification I've heard second hand for burst/FA fire from someone in the Army was in case a LMG went down; it's a contingency for covering fire. How effective would it be in that role, etc. is up for debate among people more familiar. The USMC adopted the HK M27 with the idea of an automatic rifleman; so I think at least some organizations think there's a usage for it.
Illegitimate or not? I don't know; that's outside of my profession and life experience.
That being said; He hadn't been deployed at the time of that discussion and he has a couple of times since then I'd have to ask if that ever actually happened. Opinions can and do change.
God Bless,
Brandon
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.