When you look at the history of policing, the function of the patrol rifle in patrol vehicles is a relatively new concept. This practice was widely adopted nationwide after the internationally reported North Hollywood shoot-out on February 28, 1997. On that day suspects Larry Phillips and Emil Matasareanu entered the Bank of America branch in North Hollywood, California to rob it after months of preparations and surveillance for this particular heist. Wearing full body armor and carrying several weapons—a Norinco Type 56 S-1, Bushmaster XM15 Dissipator that had been modified to fire in full automatic, and several other weapons with a total of over 3,600 rounds between them—the duo were more than prepared for what would later be referred to as “an event that changed the way modern policing is conducted”.
Attracted to the scene by the sounds of gunfire, officers surrounded the Bank of America at 6600 Laurel Canyon Boulevard. As the two suspects fled the scene LAPD officers were not prepared for the firepower they encountered; they quickly found themselves outgunned with their standard issue Beretta model 92F 9mm and Smith and Wesson model 15 .38 revolvers during the ensuing shoot-out.
This situation called for drastic action. Though not used, officers commandeered several AR-15s from a local gun store to attempt to match firepower. The shoot-out spanned almost six blocks, and an after-action report revealed the suspects were found to have fired almost 1,100 rounds between them for the duration of the shoot-out. Ten officers and six civilians were injured. It ultimately ended in the suicide of Phillips and the death of Matasareanu from blood loss relating to multiple gunshot wounds received in the exchange of gunfire.
In the aftermath the U.S. Department of Defense supplied LAPD with 600 surplus M-16 rifles. This was done to give patrol sergeants and officers opportunity to respond with appropriate firepower, should something like this ever happen again. Other agencies followed suit. Omaha, Nebraska trained their officers to carry patrol rifles and invented training that was used as the basis for patrol rifle schools today. Larger agencies like Miami Dade Police also followed suit shortly thereafter and the slow progression began. Almost all agencies now having access to patrol rifles—if not by a supervisor—then directly accessible to street officers in their patrol vehicles.
The issue has now moved on from the question of “How do we train/equip/supervise the use of patrol rifles?” to “How do we keep them secure in the ever-changing world of law enforcement vehicles?”—a world which scrambles to provide effective solutions for patrol cars, as the focus moves away from the traditional Ford Crown Victoria to a plethora of vehicles, including SUVs and trucks that are used regularly in law enforcement.
Many agencies grapple with accessibility issues concerning the patrol rifle. The ease-of-use requirement for officers must balance with security concerns as regards prisoners within the vehicle. Rifles should be inaccessible should the prisoner gain access to the front compartment of the vehicle.
From an officer/public safety perspective, there are two schools of thought. Some agencies believe in using the ‘out of sight, out of mind’ approach, where patrol rifles and shotguns are considered safer by the agency if they are out of the view of the public, and do not offer criminals being transported an opportunity to obtain a weapon should they somehow free themselves from restraints in custody. Therefore they condone placing weapons in the trunk of the patrol vehicle, believing it alleviates the thought process.
While that approach has some merit in certain circumstances, from an accessibility perspective such an approach can have potentially fatal consequences for law enforcement. In the case of an officer-involved shooting that happened to a California sheriff’s deputy several years ago, the accessibility of having a rifle in a secured mount in the front of the car may well have saved his life as the deputy pulled into a neighborhood on an incomplete 911 call and was immediately confronted by the sight of a man walking down the middle of the street with a rifle. The man began firing at the deputy’s patrol car as soon as he rounded the corner, forcing the deputy to return fire through his front windshield. The deputy fired four shots. One grazed the subject, giving him pause enough that afforded the deputy critical seconds in which he was able to reverse his patrol car around the corner for cover and call for backup. Once backup arrived, a plan was quickly formulated to engage the shooter as he continued to fire at the deputies for a short time, before being taken down when the deputies returned fire, killing the subject.
The second school of thought may carry the most inherent risk to everyone involved. This is the storage of patrol rifles unsecured in nothing more than a soft zipper case in the trunk of a patrol vehicle. Despite the availability of secure storage solutions in trunks that have existed for over a decade, it can still be witnessed on any scene that has warranted a more tactical response in many agencies, where officers open their trunk to retrieve an AR-15 or similar rifle from a padded, unlocked soft case with no other form of securing mechanism. For anyone who has been on the job a long time this may appear commonplace. But to the rookie with the new car with dual front mounted shotgun/rifle rack that knows no different, it would appear abhorrent.
Factor in this method where a prisoner is able to free themselves from their restraints either fully or partially and an officer is somehow incapacitated. The only thing between that criminal and a fully loaded AR-15 with 90 rounds of ammunition minimum (one mag in the rifle and two additional is standard carry for most patrol rifle carrying officers) is the ability to operate a trunk release and a zipper.
With the technological advances made in even the last ten years in everything from body armor to weapons in the police equipment market, the thought that there are still agencies that do not correctly secure their weapons either in front or in the trunk is unacceptable.
An agency that I worked for still to this day houses a shotgun and rifle in an invisible compartment in the sub floor of an SUV rear compartment. The “no one knows it’s there but me, so it can’t happen to us” mentality is a potentially dangerous thought process. The days of ‘It can’t happen to me’ seem like a distant memory in light of the past few months of unrest that have seen officers murdered in their own homes, in gas stations while filling up cruisers, and sitting in their patrol cars, guilty of nothing more than going to work that day.
Look at the plethora of available security devices available in the market today that can save the lives of officers in a crisis situation that were not available ten years ago—look at the improvements made since then. Ask yourself if securing your rifle is worth it. The choice should be easy.
