The first story deals with the full court press by SPD to convince the City Council to approve OUR purchase of suppressors for SPD’s Smith & Wesson M&P15s after some prodding from someone who didn’t think things looked right (guess who) they “asked for more data and deferred for a week”. SPD was able to convince the City Council to buy the suppressors from the SPD Shooting Range Assistant and retired SPD Officer Robert T Bro a name they probably should have recognized right away given the number of times they have approved payments to him for landscape work his company T&B Sprinklers has done for the City.
Of course, to grease the way for Bob to get the bid for the suppressors through his sprinkler company also doing business as T&B Guns it was necessary to give a waiver to him from having to obtain the mandatory City Business License…funny how that stuff works.
I would also be interested in knowing if the City Council was informed that the Glock service weapon 320 or so Officers carry as duty weapons, and from which considerably more rounds have been fired during SPD OIS cases produces a decibel level around 159.8 dB. Since the unsuppressed Smith & Wesson M&P15 produces a decibel level of around 167 dB and the unsuppressed Glock produces a decibel level around 159.8 dB. if hearing damage is the concern wouldn’t it make sense to equip all of the Glocks with suppressors in order to meet OSHA standards? I realize that would be quite expensive, and would likely also need costly modification of the sights as well as new or modified holsters we would have to invest in but if the premise is to prevent hearing damage doing so is a must.
Since T&B Sprinklers can provide suppressors for Glocks via GEMTECH (pictured below) and are providing the suppressors for the S&W M&P15s perhaps they could be named a sole source and we could get a good deal on Glock suppressors to prevent further hearing damage to the Public and Officers?
This second story, really seems to contradict the first… given Chief Craig Meidl’s statements:
Police Chief Craig Meidl, whose agency is set to receive suppressors on their service rifles, said the difference in sound was negligible with the devices and he didn’t have strong feelings about the proposed changes.
“Having heard the difference between a firearm that has a suppressor, and one that does not, I will tell you it is not a great concern of mine if the community decided to allow that,” Meidl said.
My question would be if the “difference in sound was negligible with the devices” or “so small or unimportant as to be not worth considering; insignificant.”, why in the heck did we spend all the money especially when you consider as far as the public is concerned the further the distance from the muzzle of the weapon the less likelihood of hearing damage. Hopefully in the case of SPD weapons the Public will be kept at a safe distance from the muzzle. Given the number of shots fired during SPD OIS cases I would also wonder if there has been hearing loss problems reported by Officers other than Major King, that have been involved SPD OIS cases and especially those who have been in more than one OIS.
I guess since the City Council was informed of concerns regarding the purchase of suppressors for SPD rifles and “asked for more data and deferred for a week” we can assume they did their due diligence, received input from folks other than SPD, reviewed the circumstances surrounding the bid process, and then came up with a decision in the best interest of the Citizens of Spokane…RIGHT?
I REPORT YOU DECIDE!!!