DOD, service weapons missing from local departments

[Subdeacon Joe]

http://www.kcra.com/news/investigates/dod-service-weapons-missing-from-local-departments/29641424?utm_campaign=kcra%2B3&utm_medium=Facebook&utm_source=Hootsuite#comments

 

 

SACRAMENTO, Calif. (KCRA) —Dozens of weapons -- ranging from handguns to rifles and even military surplus rifles on loan from the U.S. Department of Defense -- have disappeared, a KCRA 3 investigation has found.

The weapons belong to local and statewide police departments and sheriff's offices.

Watch report: Weapons go missing from local law enforcement agencies

The Stockton Police Department is one of those agencies. It had to make changes to its protocol after an audit found two M-16 rifles were missing.

The rifles are part of the Department of Defense's 1033 program, which loans weapons and military surplus equipment to law enforcement.

As a result of losing the two M-16 rifles, Stockton’s access to the program was suspended.

The department also made some major changes to how Stockton police handle their weapons.

The former military weapons now have individual gun locks, and they are kept in one armory and assigned to specific officers who have to check into the department's armory before taking off to patrol the streets.

But Stockton isn’t alone when it comes to getting its Department of Defense program suspended.

The Stanislaus County Sheriff’s Department was also suspended when the agency was unable to locate two M-16 rifles.

"It should never have happened," Stanislaus County Sheriff Adam Christianson said. "It’s embarrassing and it’s disappointing, but nevertheless, we’re all human beings. We make mistakes."

Christianson said he thinks the weapons are missing due to a paperwork error -- or that they were kept by retirees, and therefore, did not end up on the streets.

"These are not weapons that were stolen from a vehicle or stolen from a residence," Christianson said. "We believe that they’re still in the hands of, of peace officers."

The Napa Police Department also had its program suspended after an officer took an M-16 home to clean it, left the rifle in his pickup truck and later realized the weapon was missing after he was called out to assist a SWAT team.

The California Highway Patrol was suspended because an officer in the Los Angeles division had an M-16 and five other weapons stolen when he took the guns home for the night.

Read more: http://www.kcra.com/news/investigates/dod-service-weapons-missing-from-local-departments/29641424#ixzz3IvgvmJZO

[Cat Brules]

"These are not weapons that were stolen from a vehicle or stolen from a residence," Christianson said. "We believe that they’re still in the hands of, of peace officers."

 

The weapons weren't stolen because they believe they're still in the hands of a police officers? Oh! Okay, then!! No problemo! What's the big deal? Never mind.......

[Cat Brules]

C'mon guys! Quit horse'n around! The DOD got no sens'a humor!! The Chief is gettin' po'd here!

[Alpo]

"...were kept by retirees..."

"...weapons were not stolen..."

 

Kinda sounds like they were stolen by ex-cops, to me. I know if I was assigned a company car, and tried to keep it wahen I retired, they'd call it stealing.

[Subdeacon Joe]

"...were kept by retirees..."

"...weapons were not stolen..."

 

Kinda sounds like they were stolen by ex-cops, to me. I know if I was assigned a company car, and tried to keep it wahen I retired, they'd call it stealing.

 

It wasn't that long ago in CA that a department would, or could, "gift" a firearm to someone who was retiring.

[Muleshoe Bill SASS #67022]

This is occurring all over the USA, not just Ca.

[Henry T Harrison]

It wasn't that long ago in CA that a department would, or could, "gift" a firearm to someone who was retiring.

It wasn't that long ago in CA that a department would, or could, "gift" a firearm to someone who was retiring.

We have always been allowed to keep our side arm when we retired, of course they were not M-16's and they were legaly transfered to us.

[Sedalia Dave]

"These are not weapons that were stolen from a vehicle or stolen from a residence," Christianson said. "We believe that they’re still in the hands of, of peace officers."

 

The weapons weren't stolen because they believe they're still in the hands of a police officers? Oh! Okay, then!! No problemo! What's the big deal? Never mind.......

They say that and then they say.....

 

The Napa Police Department also had its program suspended after an officer took an M-16 home to clean it, left the rifle in his pickup truck and later realized the weapon was missing after he was called out to assist a SWAT team.

 

The California Highway Patrol was suspended because an officer in the Los Angeles division had an M-16 and five other weapons stolen when he took the guns home for the night.

 

How can they be sure they are not in the hands of criminals when they already know that 6 are. Never mind I forgot to apply government logic.

[Badger Mountain Charlie SASS #43172]

I thunk that the M 16 has a full auto function on it, don't it?

[Utah Bob #35998]

I thunk that the M 16 has a full auto function on it, don't it?

Yes. It is not an AR15.

[Utah Bob #35998]

We have always been allowed to keep our side arm when we retired, of course they were not M-16's and they were legaly transfered to us.

Yup. I kept my Glock. The department kept the Bushmaster and shotgun.

[Cat Brules]

We have always been allowed to keep our side arm when we retired, of course they were not M-16's and they were legaly transfered to us.

Well, yeah. M16s are full-auto. AR's are semi-auto. These guys stole machine guns.

 

I wouldn't have an issue with police employees who retire after X number of years (on the same police agency) being formally gifted with their badge and buying (for a token sum) their carry sidearm.

[Rusty Chains]

Ya know, I don't see a problem with a cop having a department issued or personally owned modern carbine or rifle locked in a patrol car, but I see no place for these guys being furnished select fire rifles. There is already too much temptation to use simi-auto firearms for suppressive fire (spray and pray) anyway. Every round that does not hit the bad guy goes somewhere, and in a city there is always someone downrange.

[Hardpan Curmudgeon SASS #8967]

It happens... and not just to local or state agencies. Wonder if these guys will be cut off...

 

Rifles Stolen from FBI SWAT Vehicle in Andover

 

Guns, Body Armor Taken from FBI Agent's Car in Union County

 

7 Weapons Stolen from FBI Vehicle

 

Justice Department officials are investigating the disappearance of 449 firearms and 184 laptop computers — at least one containing classified information — from the FBI

[Free Bird 61147]

Mpls officers had to buy their own sidearms/off duty guns. Everything else belonged to the department. Recently the liberal city council returned all the automatic weapons that were given them by the military back to the military. They didn't want to look bad in the eyes of certain minorities. Glad I'm long gone and moved out of state.

[Ramblin Gambler]

Yup. I kept my Glock. The department kept the Bushmaster and shotgun.

I didn't realize departments actually supplied officer's weapons. I know it was a big deal in TV and movies of the 70's that a rogue cop was told to turn in his badge and gun when suspended. But I thought that was just hollywierd doing what hollywierd does. I figured that, at most, departments had some available for newbies.

 

Can't imagine if I was a cop that I'd want to be using borrowed guns. That would be worse than going to a match and having to use borrowed guns.

[The Shoer 27979]

Can't imagine if I was a cop that I'd want to be using borrowed guns. That would be worse than going to a match and having to use borrowed guns.

What do you think the military does, ain't none of those guns belong to the troops

[Utah Bob #35998]

I didn't realize departments actually supplied officer's weapons. I know it was a big deal in TV and movies of the 70's that a rogue cop was told to turn in his badge and gun when suspended. But I thought that was just hollywierd doing what hollywierd does. I figured that, at most, departments had some available for newbies.

Can't imagine if I was a cop that I'd want to be using borrowed guns. That would be worse than going to a match and having to use borrowed guns.

If you're a department armorer or firearms instructor you don't want to have to deal witha plethora of different weapons and ammunition. Officers tend to "tune up" personal weapons, sometimes with disastrous results. For liability and training, it's best to have consistency. The military doesn't let people use personal weapons either. Some departments who can't afford to supply firearms still allow personal carry but if they're smart they limit thr acceptable guns to a few approved models and have at least semi-annual armorer's inspections.

[Hardpan Curmudgeon SASS #8967]

And there are other ways Law Enforcement Agencies can "lose" weapons...

 

Border Patrol Gun Recall

 

"Border Patrol officials have pulled thousands of rifles from field agents in a large-scale effort to refurbish the weaponry, prompting the rank-and-file to complain that they've been left with the dangerous options of sharing guns or being disarmed altogether.

 

"Nearly one-third of the U.S. Customs and Border Protection's 16,300 M4 carbine rifles were tested by the agency's office of training and development, which determined that more than 2,000 had the potential for malfunction. The rate of nearly 40 percent was "more than we are comfortable with,” said CBP Deputy Chief Ron Vitiello...

 

"...But in the meantime, Border Patrol agents are dubious about the department's claims, given that the guns' manufacturer, Colt, has not issued a recall. And they are vehemently opposed to 'pool guns' -- weapons shared by two or more agents."

[The Original Lumpy Gritz]

The small dept I work'd for had 3 real 'tommy' guns and 2 BAR's.

OH-GOD I was sorely tempted--BUT, I liked the view from OUTSIDE the grey bars.

OLG

[Trailrider #896]

And they didn't fill out a Form 4473, or undergo a background check! If the weapon was taken from a vehicle, was the vehicle locked? And in Colorado, you can't legally buy a magazine with a capacity of more than 15 rds. Why buy full auto weapons? Just check out your local cop's vehicle, and take whatever he has in it.

[Chickasaw Bill SASS #70001]

kinda looks like the same rules , do NOT apply

 

the rules are for thee , NOT me

 

CB

[Utah Bob #35998]

And they didn't fill out a Form 4473, or undergo a background check! If the weapon was taken from a vehicle, was the vehicle locked? And in Colorado, you can't legally buy a magazine with a capacity of more than 15 rds. Why buy full auto weapons? Just check out your local cop's vehicle, and take whatever he has in it.

I don't need to buyany....have lots of Legal 30 rd mags. All grandfathered in.

But lets just cut to the chase. Should cops who don't secure weapons be disciplined? Yup.

Should cops who steal department weapons be prosecuted? Duh.

Do most of these departments need M16s? Nope.

And what didI mis. Who bought full auto weapons?

[Utah Bob #35998]

Can't imagine if I was a cop that I'd want to be using borrowed guns. That would be worse than going to a match and having to use borrowed guns.

Not at all. You're not borrowing it. It is issued to you. If anything goes wrong you take it to the armorer who happily fixes it for you at no charge (well, maybe a doughnut) or issues you a new one. His job depends on keeping the firesticks functioning. Perfect system.

[Abilene Slim SASS 81783]

Not at all. You're not borrowing it. It is issued to you. If anything goes wrong you take it to the armorer who happily fixes it for you at no charge (well, maybe a doughnut) or issues you a new one. His job depends on keeping the firesticks functioning. Perfect system.

A related topic. Thoughts? Straight up question -- I'm curious what those who use issued weapons think. Might the agents be making a mountain of a mole hill?

 

Border Patrol Weapons

[Utah Bob #35998]

A related topic. Thoughts? Straight up question -- I'm curious what those who use issued weapons think. Might the agents be making a mountain of a mole hill?

 

Border Patrol Weapons

I don't have any info on that situation so I can't really speculate on what the deal is.

[Alpo]

It seems to me (just off the top of my head) that if I am issued a rifle, and that is MY rifle, and no one else screws with it, then if something goes wrong with it it is my fault. But if there are 21 of us (three shifts daily, seven men each) and only seven guns, so two OTHER people get to screw with MY GUN, and when I come back next shift, I can just HOPE my gun is still working the way it was when I went home. No one has felt the need to adjust the trigger, or screw with the sights, or whatever.

 

I would not be happy.

 

That appears to be the bitch with the Border Patrol.

[Barry Sloe]

Seems to me that besides piss poor paper work, there are X-number of retired law enforcement who are now in violation of federal law. I believe to have possession of a full auto weapon you must have a class 3 license.

BS

[Alpo]

There's no such thing as a class three license.

 

There is a Type 3 Special Occupation Tax addition to an FFL. A Type 3 SOT allows a dealer to sell NFA items. There is also a Type 2, which allows a dealer to make as well as sell them, but I'm pretty sure the Type 3 SOT is the basis for the "Class 3" nonsense.

 

To own an NFA item requires two things. That you pay the Feds a one-time tax (either 200 dollars or 5 dollars - depending on what you are getting) and that you live in a state that allows the private ownership of it. This tax, by the way, is for each item. You buy one machinegun, you pay one 200-dollar tax. You buy twelve machineguns, you pay twelve 200-dollar taxes. You can keep the gun forever, and never pay anything else on it. If you sell it, however, the buyer will have to pay the Feds a 200-dollar tax. When you croak, whoever you leave it to in your will does not have to pay a tax, but if you just decided to give it to your son now (for example, instead of waiting until you're dead), he does have to pay the tax.

 

California does not allow the private ownership of machineguns, and most of the stuff in this thread seems to be in California.
:

[Utah Bob #35998]

Seems to me that besides piss poor paper work, there are X-number of retired law enforcement who are now in violation of federal law. I believe to have possession of a full auto weapon you must have a class 3 license.

BS

I never heard of an agency that allows retired officers to keep a full auto weapon. Just service pistols.

[The Original Lumpy Gritz]

Seems to me that besides piss poor paper work, there are X-number of retired law enforcement who are now in violation of federal law. I believe to have possession of a full auto weapon you must have a class 3 license.

BS

Show us ONE example of an officer allowed to keep a select-fire weapon.

OLG

[Elk Creek LeMieux]

Just to throw it out there, being called a M16/M4 in an article don't make it full auto. M16A2's and 3's were "burst" fire, IIRC.

 

Seems like I've seen some Colt "service" rifles that were semi only.

 

I know the one the game warden carried when I was a kid was semi only.

[Utah Bob #35998]

Burst fire is considered full auto by BATFE.

[Elk Creek LeMieux]

Burst fire is considered full auto by BATFE.

Actually, I suppose it probably is.

 

As I was...

[Utah Bob #35998]

Actually, I suppose it probably is.

 

As I was...