Baton Rouge Police Respond With M16A1s

zoQavNw

While sifting through the news this last weekend I came across the terrible shooting of police officers in Baton Rouge but noticed something interesting about some of the responding officers. Several of the officers that responded to the shooting and those guarding the ER at the local hospital were carrying some old M16A1 rifles. It struck me as a strange choice for a patrol rifle, I was left wondering why they wouldn’t be riding with something that hasn’t been updated a bit. Heck, there is no reason there hasn’t been a Aimpoint slapped on those rifles.

1468781266-Police-Shot-Baton-Rouge

The only answer I could think of was that perhaps Baton Rouge participated in the 1033 program heavily. If you aren’t familiar with the program it was designed to donate unwanted military surplus equipment to eligible police departments. The 1033 program makes all kinds of equipment like aircraft, small arms, sandbags, medical supplies, flashlights and even clothing available to cash strapped agencies who are in need of those things.

Even though the rifles are rather outdated by today’s standards I am sure that they are perfectly serviceable and it is a bit heartwarming to see those old warhorses still ready for duty today.

Without dipping into any polarizing or political topics, I think I speak for my fellow writers when I say that our hearts are with the fallen Baton Rouge officers and their families.

UPDATE: A reader with the BRPD and is familiar with their rifle program was kind enough to send us a quick note. Thank you Lucas for the insight.

“Just want to give you a little info on our rifle program. We are heavily involved with the 1033 program, a majority of rifles that are in service in the field are the m16a1. We have several of Bushmaster 16″ rifles, but a majority of rifles on the street are 1033 program M16A1’s. On the M16A1’s we are not allowed to modify the weapon in any shape other than a sling and a light attachment.”

1468781279-Police-Shot-Baton-Rouge Police-Shot-Baton-Rou_Krau-4 q4FZsAm

Phil Note: In fact many police departments participated in the federal program Patrick mentioned and acquired M16A1 rifles. Most are out of service now but I suspect after watching the news coverage and the number of M4 types being carried these M16A1 rifles were probably brought out of the armory to equip officers without a long gun.



Patrick R

Patrick is a Senior Writer for The Firearm Blog and works in the shooting sports industry. He is an avid recreational shooter and a verified gun nerd. With a lifelong passion for shooting, he has a love for all types of firearms, especially handguns and the AR-15 platform. Patrick may be contacted at tfbpatrick@gmail.com.

The above post is my opinion and does not reflect the views of any company or organization.


Advertisement

  • ekimp252

    If it ain’t broke don’t fix it. Put ten rounds center mass at 500 yards with one of those.

    • randomswede

      Do you take the same approach to your paycheck?
      As long as you are getting paid there’s no need for a raise?

      • Anonymoose

        A semi-auto M16A1 is still pretty adequate for a typical police patrol rifle, as long as you’re not using it as a SWAT entry weapon- and even then it’s not really that unwieldy compared to an M4 (especially after you’ve loaded down that M4 with 10 lbs of useless crap on a quad-rail).

        • Anon

          Also, let’s not forget the fact that it’s about the same length as a shotgun with an 18 inch barrel.

        • randomswede

          Certainly I’d take a M16A1 over a sharp stick and stern language, in the 50 some years since it was developed less has happened to firearms than in the 50 years that preceded it.
          I just can’t let the notion that there are things that can or should not be improved stand unchallenged. There’s nothing so good that it can’t be made better.

          Also I’d say the era of the quad-rail is coming to an end and with it the full on pimp-my-gun approach. 50 years from now some will say that, that was a mistake and that keymod and m-lok where attempts at fixing what wasn’t broken.

        • Holdfast_II

          Who said semi? If they aren’t modified, then these are full auto.

          Which is why I don’t like this program. Cops, especially regular patrol cops, have no need for full auto weapons. I get why they might need the range and accuracy of a long arm, especially now the bad guys are using them, but full-auto fire and policing are not compatible.

          • claymore

            Why Not?

      • OJS

        The “need” for a “raise” is created entirely by the fiat currency system in the USA, EU, etc for spending money they don’t have, then blowing up the currency supply printing money so they only pay back “cheaper, newer, inflated” money instead of the valuable cash they promised.
        END THE FED.

        • Joseph Goins

          That is a cost of living increase which is not a raise.

          • OJS

            The cost of living should go DOWN as our efficiency goes up, but the opposite is artificially created, except in limited tech-driven industries.

          • mbrd

            AND (never start a sentence with “and”) population growth.

            sorry for yelling.

          • OJS

            BUT sometimes they make sense to begin sentences with.

        • randomswede

          So if there was no inflation you see no need to pay a worker with more experience, skill and knowledge more money? How about rewarding loyalty?

          • OJS

            If their actions produce more or better whatever then certainly they can be compensated or make the decision to move on, but most people equate “cost of living increase” to “raise” as both have the same effect on the paycheck.

    • Joseph Goins

      Who in the LE community needs to take a 500 yard shot? It doesn’t happen.

  • Mike

    THEY WERE UPDATED…WITH 30 ROUND MAGPUL P-MAGS.

    • Patrick R. – Staff Writer

      THANK YOU …. BUT WHY ARE WE YELLING?

      • Jeff Smith
      • CAUSE I AM DEAF FROM ALL THAT SHOOTING I DID IN MY YOUTH WITHOUT EARPRO

      • glenn cheney

        HE’S NOT YELLIN’….THAT’S HOW WE OLD GEEZERS HAVE TO TYPE SO WE CAN READ…..WE HAVE BAD EYES……HUH? WHAT’D HE SAY?

        • Zebra Dun

          THAT WAS MY FIRST THOUGHT! I SAID TO MYSELF, DANG I SURE CAN READ THIS NOW AND WITHOUT MY BI-FOCALS TOO!

    • Jon

      The department can modify them. I suspect what Lucas meant was that the officers assigned the rifle was not allowed to modify them. You just can not get rid of the original parts. The inspector from the state 1033 coordinator’s office will want to see the parts when they do their inspection. We modified our to be semi-auto only.

      • Jason Bourne

        Yes! This is correct. My local sheriff’s office has several M16A1 weapons obtained through the 1033 program. They are allowed to modify but it is slightly similar to building class 3 NFA items, in that the 1033 paper work must match the firearm rebuilt configuration and be approved (I.e. new barrel length, trigger, bcg, etc)

    • David Sharpe

      The rifles themselves aren’t modified other than a sling and a light.

      They should be able to put a scope/sight on them though.

      • 1. There’s an argument to be made that a carrying handle mounted Aimpoint, or similar optic, isn’t as useful, because you can’t get a good cheek weld.

        2. For rifles that are only going to be dragged out of the armory once in a blue moon, there could be worries about battery life, battery corrosion in storage, and sight settings are all failure points, whereas iron sights are viewed as less susceptible to these (and are less susceptible, so long as you don’t have a stupid armorer resettinging all the sights to mechanical zero to look uniform… Which has been found in military units on IG inspections.)

        3. A lot of departments are too cheap to spend several hundred dollars per “free” rifle, upgrading them. In some cases it is a real budget crunch (and that may well be the case in Baton Rouge), in others it’s the same short-sighted thinking as, “Why would I pay more for glass on my rifle than I paid for the rifle?”

        • Patrick R. – Staff Writer

          ..

          • Yeah, but rigging the rifles for that adds to the price. I mean, it’s not huge, but bean counters look at it as “$400-500 for sights, plus support, plus $100 for a rail system?!? Per ‘free’ rifle?!?”

        • David Sharpe

          2) If battery life mattered, they wouldn’t have lights on them. I’m betting these rifles are issued to patrol officers who leave them in their trunks, based on the wording that’s what I am thinking.

          3) Again based on the wording i’m thinking they are issued to officers plain jane and officers put light/slings on them using their own money.

          • It’s a wee bit harder to rack your rifle without noticing the 200 lumen light is still turned on. 😉

            If the officers are personally responsible for upgrading them, that just makes the financial argument more solid.

  • Mr Mxyzptlk

    That isn’t an A1, it has a BD as well as having what looks like an A2 lower. That is an A1E1 upper used on a number of Colt commercial models, such as the Model 715 which this appears to be. This is the same pattern that Diemaca (now Colt Canada) used for the C7. Some people think that the A2 rear sight is overkill and the simpler A1 sight is perfectly acceptable for practical use.

    This rifle was never used by the US Military so I assume it has nothing to do with the 1033 program, more likely they procured this rifle from Colt, or possibly another manufacturer that makes a rifle of this pattern.

    • Patrick R. – Staff Writer

      I totally overlooked the A1E1 upper. Good spot!

    • milesfortis

      That type of upper receiver was introduced into the military smallarms parts supply pipeline right at the end of A1 production. I know. I rebuilt my issue A1 in Germany when I saw that upper in the parts drawer and decided to use it as I’m left handed.
      The lower could simply be a Balimoy which were made with the early style of reinforcements, even for M16A1s. Just saying

  • Pete – TFB Writer

    In the second pic, does it look like the sear pin hole is empty? Did they remove the auto sear on all of these rifles prior to issue?

    • Chris Cosby

      Pretty common from my understanding. A bunch of agencies pulled the auto sear to give the officers semi auto only.

    • go4it

      Looks like it. If the auto sear is missing, then it’s an “M16” in name only – based on the pre-neutering condition.

      I say put the auto sear back in and give some of these rioting thugs a real serious “moment of pause”!

      • Holdfast_II

        And how many civilians do you want shot by mistake?

        • Billy Jack

          That’s not fair considering all the recent events and apparently no LE on civilian shots.

          • mbrd

            what? how is that not fair?

            jerkoffs shooting le does not make le likely spraying the public okay.

          • Billy Jack

            Exactly what I said. You see any innocents killed by officers with rifles in any of the high profile events? They weren’t using bean bag rounds or rubber bullets. It’s called training and discipline.
            The only thing close to “spraying” I’ve seen is in NY in a crowd with semi-auto pistols. You don’t need burst or full auto to put a lot of rounds in the air yet that isn’t happening. Police aren’t inbred homicidal maniacs out to put notches on their belts.

        • Cory C

          Agreed.

      • David Sharpe

        Well, not really, the receiver is still an M16, it’s still a FA receiver.

  • Lee Attiny

    They said the shooter was taken out with a 100 yard head shot. That would be a pretty impressive shot with iron sights with all that adrenaline pumping. That being said, i wonder if the BRPD accepts donations in the form of high end AR’s.

    • Mr Mxyzptlk

      Assuming that one shot was fired and they were aiming for his head, sure. However, if they dumped a whole mag and one just happened to hit his head, not so much.

      • Xavier Ramos Santoni

        A SWAT officer took the shot, i really doubt it was an spray and pray situation. It was one hell of a shot!

        • Cory C

          Nice shooting! Godspeed, you scumbag.

  • Fleet

    Good eye Pete. I was thinking the same thing. Also interesting, it appears both receivers have been replaced from the XM grey originals. It has a C7/A1 with shell deflector/A2 with field sights (however you choose to describe it) and on the lower, the radius cut below the front takedown pin is an indicator it’s an A2 lower. With the original furniture and tear-drop forward assist retained, it’s a pretty cool combo of A1 and A2 parts.

    • Mr Mxyzptlk

      That upper is called an A1E1, and I believe that it was actually invented by Colt for commercial rifles for countries/agencies that felt the A2 rear sight was needlessly complex. It is also the receiver that they used on some of their earlier carbines like the Model 723 and 733, along with a few sporter models. It is most notable for its use on the Colt Model 715/Diemaco C7.

      • Fleet

        I general don’t refer to those uppers as A1E1 because a lot of the A1E1 rifles were built using A2 uppers. While colt did commonly use up old parts for commercial/export builds, I think this particular combo would be pretty unlikely. If this was a factory built rifle, the receivers should still be some shade of grey. Also, the A2 lower was one of the last upgrades that came throughout the A2 program. IMO it has way too many A1 parts that would have been gone by the time colt started building rifles on A2 lowers.

  • Harry’s Holsters

    For the average officer’s level of training these are probably more than sufficient. A red dot would be nice but everyone has a budget.

    • Sianmink

      For the average officer’s level of training, select-fire assault rifles are a freaking liability.

      Hopefully these are modified with a lockout or something.

      • Always been an advocate of issuing lever action .30-30s or .44 magnums as patrol rifles; they hit hard enough to defeat barriers and ruin the day of suspects in body armor, and if anyone needs to take the time to stop and aim before firing, it’s someone in a uniform deploying a long arm in a public place.

        • Patrick R. – Staff Writer

          That is literally one of the worst ideas I have heard in the last week.

          • What percentage of LEO shots taken with rifles miss, and what are the ricochet characteristics of .223 compared to a bigger, heavier, rounder bullet? Which is more likely to send witnesses running to social media to yell about the militarization of police, even after a 100% justified shooting– a lever action that looks like it came from Dad’s hunting equipment, or a scaaaaary black rifle that looks like it came from Grand Theft Call Of Battlefield? Which is more compact in a squad car, and more likely to remain functional after a crash or a if a suspect tackles an officer?

            It’s not a perfect solution– nothing is– but it’s hardly a Worst Possible Thing EVER.

          • Patrick R. – Staff Writer

            No, not ever. Just this week.

          • Jwedel1231

            @TexasUberAlles:disqus I bet an AR is more likely to be functioning after a car wreck, but other than that I’m kind of thinking you’re on to something. I haven’t given it enough thought to be certain, and the cops going after a guy with a Tavor doesn’t help, but overall I think it’s not a bad idea.

          • mbrd

            i dunno… crack a levergun stock and you can still shoot. dent or bend a receiver extension/buffer tube and you’re out of action. a lot of leverguns are pretty robust.

            i thought texuber was nuts at first, but he’s got a couple of pretty good points.

            i’m no leo, but maybe i’d want both (?). i figure i’d be paying for one or the other myself, if my department would allow it.

          • Jwedel1231

            I will agree that the buffer tube is a definite weak point on the AR. I also was imagining that in a car wreck, would all the small levers and toggles inside a lever action survive? As long as you didn’t bend the AR’s stock, it would still function.

          • greasyjohn

            You’re so close and miles off. Bring back the great Model 8!

        • David Sharpe

          I don’t agree with that at all, if you want to issue cops with carbines, go with a carbine that is A) in the same calibre as their pistol, and B) using the same mags.

          • Cross-platform compatibility is a valid argument– and pistol caliber carbines are certainly much more accurate and have longer range than handguns– but I think it’s a concern that’s superseded by the need to have something available that punches harder than an issue sidearm.

          • glenn cheney

            I tried to whisper in thein caliber leaving right ear of someone who has the ear, at WILSON COMBAT about producing .45 ACP bbl’s…..Many Bro’s and Browis’es carry the bigger pill, but find their long gun compatibility gapping.
            BTW, Marion Cty. Fl. SWAT just went all P-mags, so some friends got an aluminum Christmas early.
            Speaking of “special” the Brotherhood were very visible a few weeks back in Daytona at the Diet Coke 400….Full deployment, bungied, newest of new, lookin’ good…no mustard stains on the camos.

            Yes, they were visible and plentiful as well, no hard butt attitudes, you could feel the exchange between the “people” and the protectors. It was all thumbs up, everyone knew why they were there, not just “up on the roof.” It was a beautiful thing….

            Of course I was fearless, I was escorted by A.F. veteran, whose relative dropped Fat Man on Nagasaki….That’s Japan for the millenials.

          • David Sharpe

            A lever action is not the answer. Bad guys have AKs and ARs, so should the cops.

            If you want guns that won’t scare sheep, go with a Mini14.

          • That one guy built a Killdozer that one time, does that really justify the Grundle Junction, Oklahoma Police Department having an MRAP and a half dozen M82A1s? Semi-auto rifles only account for around 1% of homicides every year nationwide; I’m not talking about edge cases that are automatically going to lead to a SWAT callout anyway, I’m talking about every squad car, for every day use.

            Freakin’ out the squares aside, cops probably shouldn’t be carrying rifles that have safeties as tractor-clutch clumsy as an AK.

        • datimes

          When I was in college (40years ago) the local Black Panther group got in a shoot out with local police at their barricaded and armored house. To make a long story short one of the cops got in the basement and fired up through the floor using his semi auto .44 mag rifle. Several shooters were immediately wounded and they surrendered.

      • David Sharpe

        I replied to you above but I will again, triggers are replaced with single fire triggers.

        • Stan Darsh

          Does the agency keep the A1 parts on hand just in case, or are they destroyed?

          • David Sharpe

            I’m guessing they keep them in case the govt wants them back. Don’t forget they are only on loan to the police dept.

        • Citizen 47

          When you say trigger you actually mean the sear correct?

          • David Sharpe

            No, I said replace, not remove. The reason I said trigger is because I’ve read that Designated Marksmen overseas replace the standard triggers with COTS triggers to increase accuracy and get a better trigger pull.

            But they may just remove the sear.

          • Core

            Nah, you would have to replace the entire trigger as you said. You can’t mix match FCG components and get good results..

        • Did they replace the FCG, or just install the $2 National Guard riot control lockout (slips under he pistol rip and keeps the selector from rotating to AUTO)?

          • David Sharpe

            To be honest I have no idea if they replace the trigger completely or remove the sear.

            I really doubt they would just slip a guard on to prevent it from rotating. I would bet money they would have to remove the giggle parts.

          • Be willing to bet they either replace the FCG with a semiauto AR15 (probably with Plain Jane parts) group, or they use the NG lockout guard (which, come to think about it, they could probably have for free, if they just asked DoD for them).

            I doubt they’d merely remove the autosear or replace the trigger group with a high end one. (Individual officers may well be willing to put a favored FCG in, out of pocket, but I can’t imagine a department happy with ragged out M16A1s ponying up for, say, a Gieselle SSA group for every “free” rifle…)

  • Will

    Pete,
    As a retired police armorer/firearms instructor I can assure you that, in my department, those officers issued patrol rifles receive modified ones incapable of full auto fire.
    I don’t know BRPD’s policies but I’d bet the rifles pictured are semi-auto also.

  • Bub

    For most applications the a1 sight is all you will ever need. After all most of the aftermarket sights we place on our carbines are a1 based designs.

    • iksnilol

      I dunno, an aimpoint doesn’t remind me that much of an A1 sight. 😛

      • Bub

        The sights I was referring to were more like those from Magpul, Troy, Daniel Defense, etc. I would agree red dots are nice, but there is nothing wrong with iron sights.

        • CommonSense23

          Except how hard they are to actually use when being shot at.

          • Jwedel1231

            And irons suck at low light compared to red dots.

        • AirborneSoldier

          No you are right. Reflex sights are for faster acquisition, not aimed sighting per se. And afaiac, the a1 sights are superior for combat use, as they cant be accidentally moved.

          • carlcasino

            78 years young and never could use a reflex sight. A few years back my Gun guy let me shoot his AR with E-0 Tech and I thought I had just eye replacement surgery.

      • But the irons are *free*, whereas Aimpoint and the like cost actual dollars, have storage requirements (if you only pull them out of the arms room once or twice a year, you have to ensure they get turned off and you can’t store them with cheap alkaline batteries installed), and may not be compatible with the arms racks you have.

        It doesn’t seem like much, but these issues all add up, pure looking at the TCO of these “free” rifles.

        Personally, I think it’s short sighted, but I’m not trying to budget for a 645 officer force, either.

  • micmac80

    At ranges these tings are used by Police ,that is all they need.
    Remember average police sniper shot is taken at 57y

    Best upgrade is some actual training on the weapon

  • William Nelson

    Dates me a bit, but started my time with the Reserves with the A1; nothing beats night-fire qualification putting tracers downrange in full auto (we were told to “get rid of the excess ammo,” and we were more than happy to). Miss the triangle handguards, honestly.

  • Chase

    Its very common. I’m an officer at a small department in Georgia and we issue M16A1’s as well. The auto sears are removed and put into SWAT rifles. The problem is that the A1’s are usually 1970-1971 production, at least ours our, and not in the best of shape. They are kinda picky. The rifles require much more lubrication than other AR style rifles. If they are not completely lubed/greased up they have tons of FTFs and other random jams. Its not just one rifle either its all of them. This is the reason its common for officer’s such as myself to carry personal rifles.

    • Billy Jack

      You should auction them off for the chance to donate a brand new M4 of whatever make your department approves of. I’m guessing that 1033 program won’t allow that though. I know a lot of people would send you guys cash or actual hardware if you put it out there. I’ve wanted to donate some body armor locally but I don’t know if they’d be able to use it or if they’d think I was a nut for donating it.

      • Joseph Goins

        I second that motion.

      • Holdfast_II

        Even if one were permitted to auction 1033 equipment, that open “third hole” is a problem. I assume you’d have to fill and weld it out of existence.

        • Billy Jack

          Wasn’t sure if the sear being gone was enough.

          • Jon

            ATF considers once a full-auto always a full-auto, even if converted to semi-auto.

          • Billy Jack

            So if you bought a barrel or other non-receiver part that could be traced to a once complete nfa full auto rifle could that get you in trouble somehow? Sorry if that’s blatant ignorance.

          • Jwedel1231

            Non serialized parts are not considered to be machine guns and aren’t under the “once FA always FA” rule, but the DOD does crush every part of an old M16 or M4 into dust when they retire the guns.

          • Even though they *lost* that argument in federal court, concerning registered machineguns guns that had been restored by welding to a semiautomatic configuration. (Note, “Once a machinegun, always a machinegun” has no statutory basis – the DEWAT situation ATF relies on for their rationale involves guns that were demilitarized in a way that left them reasonably restorable under current rules. IOW, under the terms of the 68 GCA, DEWATs never *ceased* to be machinegun receivers; they’re just tax free transfers until they get reactivated.)

            The court was explicitly clear that once they were physically indistinguishable from legally semiauto rifles, they weren’t “machineguns” anymore, and couldn’t be considered “readily restored” because otherwise, you have the ridiculous conclusion that *all* of the semiauto guns of that design were actually machineguns as well. And the court’s reasoning wasn’t restricted to the peculiarities of the specific design (HK rifles) in question – they handled it more generally.

            As usual, ATF prefers to pretend the case revolved around something o specific to that individual case that it has no application whatsoever to any but the original parties and the *specific*, individual, firearms, in the original case.

          • mbrd

            and the there is that… how about introducing them into the pool of purchasable “machine guns”?

            hahahahaha! shamefully, that will never happen…

        • mbrd

          and one would probably have to re-anodize the lower to make the third hole completely disappear (never start a sentence with “and”).

      • Jon

        The DOD still legally owns the M16A1. LEAs are prohibited from selling them or trading them into a class 3 dealer.

    • Just say’n

      That was my experience in basic training and it soured me on ARs for many years. However, improvements like M4 feed ramps and Pmags seemed to have solved those issues and brought me back into the fold (not to mention the A1s we were issued in BT in the 80’s were probably worn out).

    • glenn cheney

      We were just glad to see you guys get rid of the coffins on wheels, the interceptor Mustangs….Squirrely they were.
      I got lucky on my Bushmaster armory draw….never fired, A2, full duty stock…She’s tight n’ right! Our Auburn, Al. shooting boxes years ago were the crates for the H&K saws a club member shipped in for county depts. He was Fed. We were an ecclectic collection of do as we sez, not as we duz around a campfire, awaiting bacon wrapped venison tenderloin. But that is another story.

  • DanGoodShot

    They had to be neutered before they went to the police. If you look closely at the picture you can see the pin is missing above the safety. Just a sad open hole. no fun switch

    • Scouse

      When I sold the Steyr AUG to Police Depts. In Canada, they were full auto models, but supplied with semi auto trigger groups.
      How they worked with a full auto trigger in them.
      Press the trigger to first position, single shot, keep drawing the trigger back! BRRRRRP! There was no way I was supplying Full Auto to young men, in a SWAT Team! Especially with the pull through trigger. With the 1.5 power Swarski scope, head shots at 100m, doable after an hour training.
      Still much handier than an M16 in and out of a vehicle!

      • DanGoodShot

        I honestly don’t know why the AUG hasn’t caught on more in the US than it did. I think its a remarkable rifle. Size, weight, accuracy, dependability, maneuverability, easy maintenance… the list of the AUGs benefits goes on. But no, I wouldn’t want your average police officer running around with fa on his duty rifle. Just not necessary.

  • Spencerhut

    Pretty clear on the second photo the officer has the thumb break on his holstered Glock out of the way. Clearly he was amped up and ready to do his duty.

  • Chad

    Having officers in the field with an M16A1 being used as a Patrol Rifle beats officers with no access to a rifle at all.

    Once upon a time, I was issued an M16A1 and qualified with it out to 500 yards. It still has a warm place in my heart. But I defiantly prefer a 16″ barreled AR with a RDS for Patrol work.

    Unfortunately budgets, funding and the perception of the agency’s senior command staff as to the importance of a Patrol Rifle program plays into the real world. So while the M16A1 would not be my first choice, I’m glad to see these officers armed with one vs. a buckshot loaded Remington 870.

  • Andrew Miller

    Better than pointy sticks.
    I would be more than happy to take custody of one of these rifles, but I’m not a Department.

  • SP mclaughlin

    But you can’t beat the a e s t h e t i c s

  • Sianmink

    Still that means that many of their patrol rifles are full-auto capable, and that capability is questionable at best for police use outside of special teams.

    • claymore

      Why?

      • Sianmink

        Because the main uses for full auto fire are inapplicable to any situation a civilian uniformed police officer is going to be involved in?

        • claymore

          There could be many situations. And why not they are smart enough to know when to move the SELECTOR.

          • David Sharpe

            There are next to no situations full auto would be used by regular police.

          • claymore

            Ad you forget they are SELECT FIRE.

          • David Sharpe

            I’m forgetting nothing, select fire is semi auto and some form of full auto, either regulated or unregulated.

            There is no situation where a police officer would either switch from semi to full, or go directly to full auto.

          • claymore

            You think so from your vast experience in police work? So you don’t think police officers know the difference in selector positions?

        • David Sharpe

          From what I understand the triggers are replaced with single fire triggers.

    • J Garcia Sampedro

      Several non-swat police forces in Europe (I only know for sure Spain, France and Italy) patrol regularly with select-fire rifles (even CETME C “battle rifles”) and SMGs. And that way before the paranoia of terror attacks, with no mass casualties on the streets.
      I think a TRAINED LEO would have no problems with one.

    • H.C.

      Everyones a ceritfied Interneet police instructor now, wtf. All of our Dept rifles are select fire. Train your officers properly for the specific incidents that may require directed fire, and don’t take tools away from officers. The nstance are not questionnable at all, however they are fairly specific.

      • Sianmink

        You know as well as I do that many depts barely train their officers in any sort of marksmanship. Kudos to yours that they do.

        That doesn’t change the fact that the useful applications of automatic fire, and the duties and responsibilities of police work have almost zero overlap.

  • DIR911911 .

    A1 with iron sights , I’ll take that anyday

  • Bob

    If you said there were guys out to shoot me and here’s an M16, I’d be going “Hell yeah.” Ideal for CQB, no, but given the possibility of someone copycatting the sniper style attacks on the police, it has some definite use, with or without iron sights. I’m comfortable with the idea of using irons at a few hundred yards, but I suppose that depends on what kind of trading the police in question have.

  • Joshua Knott

    Nothing wrong with irons ,especially the a1 variant.

  • Ed

    You don’t have to be tavti cool with M-4s every time. A M16A1 is a light accurate and still manageable size. Not every one needs optics to fight and a collapsing stock. Quite shinning Patrick. People can be better off with older AR style rifles. Not every one needs a M-forgery.

  • iowaclass

    So they choose a select-fire rifle, take out the sear, change it into a semi-auto only, but the receiver still has the hole for the sear in it, making it a “machine gun” under ATF regulatory interpretation. Do they register these 1033 rifles as police machine guns in the NFRTR?

    • milesfortis

      No. They are still military owned weapons ‘on loan’ through the program. They are not on entered in the NFRTR as no military weapons are.

      • iowaclass

        So a loan from the military is not a ‘transfer’? Interesting.

        • milesfortis

          You are correct. The weapons are “issued” and remain military property. A transfer implicates not just possession, but also ownership.

          • iowaclass

            This is helpful. Do you know of any source I could cite or quote on this point? It’s for written research I am working on.

          • milesfortis

            Search out the Section 1033 program, is pretty much all the help I can give you.
            Most of the relevant info is there somewhere as it’s a public law.
            That’s the point of “research”; Doing it for yourself .

          • iowaclass

            Now you will not be listed in the acknowledgments section!!!
            😛

          • milesfortis

            No problem.

            I don’t stand out in any way. I’m a rumor. Anonymity is my name. I’m “just one of those guys”. Who? Those guys “down the road there”.

          • Juanito Ibañez

            QUESTION: “IF these 1033 weapons ‘remain military property’, WHY does the receiving agency have to PAY for them?”

  • Joseph Goins

    They don’t seem to have one standard rifle across the board. Either they had M16A1s and are in a multiyear process of upgrading them or they supply the M16A1s to officers who need them and allow individual officers to qualify with personally owned weapons (which is how my local police department does it). Here is a Baton Rouge officer with an M4-variant, a Frank Proctor sling, and a carry handle guarding the hospital where the wounded officer is in the ICU: www . goo . gl/8Y8JlK

  • McThag

    I kind of resent the term “unwanted”. *I* want one. They just won’t let me have one. 🙁

    I’ll just scratch at the screen and whine a bit.

  • datimes

    I’ve been retired for 5 years now but the last 8 I worked I was issued an M-16. The Sheriff got 40 from Homeland Security. Our armors upgraded them and were issued sparingly to those who could qualify a rigorous course. My only regret upon retirement was returning that rifle. The Lt. of training urged us to shoot them on our own as often as possible. They would even occasionally pop for some ammo for pleasure shooting.

  • atmar

    devastating with m193…

  • caleb

    I find it even more interesting that the first picture shows a C7 upper receiver, not an A1.

    • David Sharpe

      How can you possibly know that?

      • caleb

        Upper receiver has field sights and a burton bump.

        • David Sharpe

          You’ll have to tell me the difference between C7 sights and M16 sights.

          And what the fack is a burton bump?

          • caleb

            Its basically an A2 upper receiver that has A1 sights. The burton bump is the shell deflector. A1s did not have them.

  • >’w'<

    “Rambo~Where are you~~? Please come out~~”

  • caleb

    I have two functional eyes that allow me to see a great many obvious things, one of which is that upper receiver with field sights and a burton bump.

  • greasyjohn

    Not allowed to put flashy stuff on their A1s. AS IT SHOULD BE.

  • myndbender

    I could be wrong but it appears as if the auto sear has been removed from the a1 in the first photo. Do agency armorers do that or is it rendered SEMI by EOD 1033 program office? Seems sensible as there are very few times when patrol officers would utilize AUTO afaik.

    • myndbender

      N/M. Question thoroughly answered as I read the other comments

  • L. Roger Rich

    It does have a 30rd mag instead of a 20. So updated a litle.

  • Niguana

    They are not M16A1s, those are C7 upper receivers with triangular handguards.

  • Stomper

    We staved off the Soviet Union for quite a while with A1’s throughout SE Asia, Europe, and CA/SA (America) with pretty good results overall. I know, because I was there. 😉

  • Core

    Good gun. They should upgrade to the M16A1 🙂

    • Juanito Ibañez

      It is an M16A1 — see the Forward Assist thumb piece on the upper receiver.

      The “fence” around the mag release button is a later “Product Improvement” not present on the rifle the officer is carrying.

      • Core

        It’s not an M16A1, like I said. 😉

        • Juanito Ibañez

          UPDATE!

          A much closer inspection of the rifle pictured in the hands of the BRPD officer revealed that the lower receiver DOES have the “mag release button fence” (it also has the Canadian military Thermold 30-round magazine) – so this rifle appears to be a former Canadian C7 assault rifle (converted to semi-auto only: the auto sear pin hole is empty) – which makes it better than an M16A1. 🙂

          Maybe the early French colonial-established town of Baton Rouge (“Red Stick” in French) has worked out their own version of “1033” with the Canadian government to get surplussed C7 rifles.

          • Core

            You can see the grip is A1 style and the flash hider is also closed A1 style. But the shell deflector is the giveaway like you said. The M16A1 has the fence on certain models. Introduced in the XM16E1 model added the cage/fence and eventually the closed A1 flash hider. It’s more likely the XM16E1 than the C7. To prove it’s not a C7 you can see it has the standard length buttstock. C7’s came with A2 buttstocks and a 1/2″ spacer.

          • Juanito Ibañez

            Actually, it cannot be an “A1”, as the ejected case deflector (aka the “Brunton Bump”, U.S. Patent #4,691,615, September 8, 1987) was never available on the M16A1.

            Moreover; an even closer inspection of the photo reveals the reinforcements Rob Roy included in the myriad of changes he and his engineering crew made with the “A2” lower.

            Also, the Canadian military didn’t believe in the general use of telescoping buttstocks, and instead went with their own versions of the “A2” buttstock (“A1” length and shorter), then adjusting the “LoP” (Length of Pull) by selectively utilizing one of two (2) different length stocks – with or without utilizing a buttstock spacer – to come up with the proper fit for the individual soldier.

            They didn’t use the “user adjustable” version buttstock until the advent of the C8.

            In reality, there are massive differences between the U.S. rifles and their Canadian brothers – many not so obvious to the naked eye. 🙂

            One BIG – but not readily observable – difference is the U.S. “cut-rifled” vs. “hammer-forged” barrels of the Canadian rifles.

            IOW; the Canadian’s took Colt’s Technical Data Package (TDP) in their Licensing Agreement, then “Canuck’ed It” to their own liking. 😉

            Anyway; I still believe this may be a Diemaco/Colt Canada C7 instead of a “1033” M16A1. 🙂

          • Core

            I guess my previous post got lost on my cell. But this is a late model XM16E1. The earlier models had the bump side, post slab, with open flash hiders. This would fit the description of a late model XM16E1, closed A1 flash hider, A1 grip, triangle hand-guard. A1 carry handle, with shell deflector on the upper. It was used my the US Air Force. The one thing that disproves the C7 theory is the butt-stock is A1, and fore hand-guard triangle. The C7 had a A2 butt-stock with a 1/2″ spacer, and a reinforced hand-guard, which was round I believe. Good observations.

  • Sam Pensive

    They’re perfectly serviceable for the majority of encounters local law will ever encounter you know?

  • AirborneSoldier

    Awesome! Blue lives matter!

  • H.C.

    If the Dept is so heavily involved with LESO, they should not be running those uppers. Everything needed to upgrade them to M4A1’s is readily available through the program All of our 1033 rifles have 14.5″ or 10.3″ uppers, as well as officers have a choice of a range of optics. Most choose Eotechs.

  • trapman

    First photo looks like a Viet Nam-era SP1. I know politicians like to spend tax dollars on all things non-law enforcement. Maybe it’s time to lift what restrictions there are, and help these guys match up better against the perps who are getting their stuff illegally, and many times outgunning our police.

  • Jackson Andrew Lewis

    they work heck i compete with an hbar a2….

  • dlh0

    i helped change out 125 m16a1 fire control groups for the alaska state troopers. most rifles were new, or like new. several were hydramatics division/general motors. very rare and valuable rifle, if transferable.

    • Juanito Ibañez

      Being pre-19 May 1986-manufactured they are transferable — though that will never happen! 🙁

      • Patrick R. – Staff Writer

        That is not how that works. If they weren’t dealer samples or registered as a transferable with ATF you are SOL.

        • Juanito Ibañez

          “That is not how that works. If they weren’t dealer samples or registered as a transferable with ATF you are SOL.”

          Sorry, Patrick; but you are wrong on that.

          ALL “arms” classified by the National Firearms Act of 1934, or the Gun Control Act of 1968, as ‘National Firearms Act firearms’ “in the U.S. which are not in the possession or under the control of the United States Government” are – BY LAW – required to be listed in the ATF ‘National Firearms Registration and Transfer Record’ (NFRTR) – and once there, unless they were foreign-manufactured and imported as ‘dealer sales sample’ or ‘for research purposes’ – or U.S. manufactured post-Hughes Amendment (19 May 1986; aka ‘MGB`86’) – they can lawfully be sold in ‘interstate commerce.’

          Seeing as how ‘1033’ weapons are no longer “in the possession or under the control of the United States Government,” these weapons MUST be entered into the NFRTR and shown to be in the possession of whichever non-U.S. Government agency to which they have been “transferred” – and after such entry they become – BY LAW – transferrable.

          The above notwithstanding; as I wrote earlier: “that will never happen!”

          Now, unless the law has changed since I allowed my Title II, Class 2, 07 SOT Manufacturers license to expire after the MGB`86 went into effect, that’s still the way it is.

          If you have newer and/or better information, please ‘enlighten us.’

          BTW: non-lethal sound & light distraction devices (aka “flash-bang grenades”) are also listed in the NFRTR, and many a law enforcement agency has gotten themselves in “hot water” with the ATF over not notifying the NFRTR that the “flash-bang” grenades they have were “destroyed” (used) and have these “NFA arms” stricken from the NFRTR.

          Of course, being another LE agency, their “punishment” consists of a figurative “wrap on the knuckles” for failure to comply with FedGovRegs – kinda like the way the FBI has treated sociopath Hillary Diane Rodham “Did I Wipe the Server – Like With a Cloth or Something?” Clinton.

          • Patrick R. – Staff Writer

            Would you care to cite a source on that? I did some light searching and was unable to locate anything the corroborates that once the Gov no longer possess the firearms that it must be listed in the registry. My understanding is that ANY gov entity can possess Title II firearms with out registration.

            I am not a lawyer so I might not be looking in the right spot though. I have been known to be pretty wrong now and again.

  • buzzman1

    “Heck, there is no reason there hasn’t been a Aimpoint slapped on those rifles.”
    Not a removable carrying handle. Plus the old A1’s have a full auto happy button.

    • Patrick R. – Staff Writer

  • Zebra Dun

    They are using the oldest fool proof method of providing a patrol rifle to Police, K.I.S.S. Keep it simple stupid.
    Adding extraneous crap to a Policeman’s rifle is not good judgement.

  • Core

    I noticed the hole was not preset. Maybe it is filled in or maybe the lower is a commercial lower? It could be a M16E1 commercial clone. Could be made by any number of folks. We need to see the left side for model number.

  • Core

    So we proved that they are not M16A1’s. Through our keen observation and Stoner knowledge base. hehe Juanito you’re el hombre!

  • spike1984

    The Magpul P-MAG is a good start for the surplus legacy AR-15A1 upgrade, but these guys should do something more with these warhorses like put EoTech scopes on their carry handles.

  • spike1984

    The move to use surplus legacy M16A1 rifles instead of new-build M16A4 and M4A1 frames reflects the need to save costs in procurement.