Good points! But the British police might be better off and saved a lot of bucks by issuing P2000 .40S&W pistol loaded with Winchester RA40T (also used by the RCMP, if I am not mistaken).
It is supposed to be a joke, but taken seriously, it may be a good idea considering the 4.6mm's limitation. At least, a pointed thing is useful if the bullet failed to stop an attacking suspect loaded with narcotics, specially if that suspect is big and muscular.Very true . . . however, why bring a knife to a gun fight? :62: :71:
Its technically illegal for british police to have automatic weapons, hence why all the MP5s you see in the Pics from London thread are Semi-Auto only. Not sure as to the reason of it, probably political correctness, although I think in some early cases the police had automatics (ie: MP5Ks) they all got converted to semi only. Hope that helps.
Easier said than done with the one who said it doesn't put his/her life on the line.10% could and should.
For the other 90%, lack of full auto helps reduce the needless dumping of rounds under pressure and increases the probability of the officer/soldier taking aimed shots. Bullets are a finite commodity for the individual officer/soldier on patrol and sometimes the decision makers feel that it is better to issue weapons that "encourage" people to spend ammo judiciously as opposed to just trusting them to use good judgement with all options.
It is not an issue of political correctness when departments/units go semi only. It is an issue of practicality.
So, forcing officers/soldiers to use semi only in their individual weapons actually gives them a tactical advantage over opponents that use full auto and an advantage over what would likely happen if they themselves used full auto.