Because we make a tactical shotgun sight to be used with slugs and buckshot, and a back-up sight for the AR style .223, I try to keep my ear to the ground about what is happening in the tactical world of shoulder mounted tactical weapons for urban law enforcement use. After some time having been deployed by various police departments, it seems that perhaps there may be some grumplings, concerning the appropriateness of the .223 in an inner city or urban environment.
At the same time, a resurgence of the interest in the shotgun could be on the upswing. Though the reasons are numerous, here are a few: The cost of an AR style weapon in the current economic environment; the astronomical numbers of Remington 870’s, as well as other shotguns already deployed throughout the U.S. and elsewhere; the need for one weapon to be capable of double duty — less than lethal and/or standard tactical usages; the possible over penetration danger of the .223 round in an urban environment; and, finally, the stopping power of a 12 gauge slug, even when encountering body armor.
After the North Hollywood incident some years ago by body armored criminals, interest in patrol rifles for law enforcement took off. However, the 223 patrol rifle, though it has many fans, also has some fault-finders. The detractors say it’s too expensive to outfit an agency with patrol rifles; they already have a lot of shotguns, they don’t want to deal with the liability of over-penetration of a .223 round in an urban environment and, though a shotgun slug may not penetrate body armor, it’s impact, even through body armor, would certainly put a bad guy down with possible broken bones and internal injuries. It is true that it is hard to find a body armored volunteer that is willing to take a shotgun slug for research purposes, though volunteers do come forward for less than lethal testing like cs gas and tasers.
Do you think the .223 patrol rifle is appropriate for use in an inner city or urban environment? Share your opinions in the comments below.
{ 2 comments… read them below or add one }
Lots of balistics experts make good arguments for. 223 as a less dangerous penetrator than shotgun slugs and some pistol ammo. A more important argument might be what range should tactical weapons be geared for and select the best weapons for accurate deployment at those ranges.
Dave, your points are well taken. However, one of the reasons for the patrol rifle was that, after the North Hollywood incident, law enforcement needed more penetration when encountering body armor. Depending the ammo, the .223 can be an impressive penetrator and travel a long way, should the shot go awry. A shotgun slug loses energy much quicker than a rifle bullet. As for urban distances necessitating something beyond pistols, I would think that tactical encounters by rank and file police officers beyond 50 yards would be rather rare, regardless of the weapon used. I truly agree with you that tactical weapons, other than sidearms, are a subject needing much more study. I just think that a rifle round in an urban environment creates a greater liability potential than a shotgun slug, though I haven’t definitively made up my mind about this. It would be interesting to see what other feedback we get about this.
Richard