Tactical Tailor

B&T USA Awarded Contract to Supply the Lake County, Indiana Sheriff’s Dept with MP9 SMGs

Tampa, FL – The Lake County Indiana Sheriff’s Department has chosen B&T USA to provide a compact concealable submachine gun platform to equip a group of its officers. The Department selected the B&T MP9 9mm SMG due to its flexibility to fulfill all mission requirements from uniformed warrant service to plain clothes undercover operations. 

“The MP9 met Lake County’s requirements through a combination of its compact size, accurate high rate of fire, reliability, and configurability. The MP9 can be deployed from a variety of drop leg, belt, and shoulder holsters and has the ability to accept a suppressor.,” stated Jon Scott, Vice President of Sales, B&T USA.

For more information on these products and other B&T products please visit our website www.bt-ag.ch/eng.

For information on becoming a B&T USA dealer please contact Jon Scott at B&T USA, +1 (813) 653-1200. Or email sales@bt-arms.com.

26 Responses to “B&T USA Awarded Contract to Supply the Lake County, Indiana Sheriff’s Dept with MP9 SMGs”

  1. Oh Billy says:

    Classic case of “do as I say, not as I do”. There is absolutely no reason for any law enforcement to have what is not available to the civilian population. Sub machine gun with suppressor. Really? Wouldn’t want you guys to blow an eardrum while in full auto.

  2. Jeff S says:

    Self: What the hell is Lake County, Indiana that requires an SMG?

    Google Maps: Gary… the city of Gary, Indiana.

    Self: Oh…

    • Jim says:

      What is 13% but also 50%?

      • Whiskey Bravo says:

        White Domestic Terrorist?

        • Ed says:

          Only if you get your “news” from the MSM (Fake news, including Fox!)

          • SamHill says:

            Since the united stated house judiciary committee, just yesterday, held a hearing on criminalizing white people from having national pride, these weapons may end up being used against regular folks sooner than you may think.

            While all these sheriff departments probably think it is super-cool to get all the toys they might have used if they had deployed to a hostile foreign country MRAPs, machine guns etc, this does not seem in line with our founding father’s intent. If the average guy can’t go buy an MP9, the local cops don’t need it either and certainly not while being purchased with that average guy’s money!

            Additionally, our country is in the most massive debt ever, federally and privately so, by all measures (except for the rigged numbers in the stock market propped up only by quantitative easing (money printing)) we really don’t have the cash to buy machine guns for all the cops. The taxpayer’s credit card is almost maxed out.

            • TominVA says:

              “criminalizing white people from having national pride”

              Is that what they really said, or just what you want to believe?

              • SamHill says:

                You can go and listen for yourself, the clips are all over youtube. There is zero reason that I would want to believe that so I don’t think I’ll be continuing this conversation with the biggest lib-tard in the room tonight, Tom.

                • Ed says:

                  100% agree with your above comment. (I didn’t want to reply to the same string and have Tom think I was agreeing with him)

                  I guess I didn’t see Whiskey Bravo’s sarc, I was only focused on the above comment he replied to since I know what 50 of 13 means – total destruction of a city from the inside out!

                  Out

  3. Todd says:

    Billy,
    A citizen of the State of Indiana can purchase a submachine gun with a suppressor if he isn’ a prohibited person. Meaning if they aren’t
    1. Under indictment for any crime punishable by more than a year in prison
    2. A fugitive
    3. An unlawful user of any controlled substance
    4. Been adjudicated as a mental defective
    5. Has been committed to a mental institution
    6. An illegal alien
    7. Has a dishonorable discharge from the military
    8. Has renounced their U.S. citizenship
    9. Is the subject of a restraining order restraining the person from harassing, talking, or threatening an intimate partner or the child of an intimate partner, or
    who has been convicted of a misdemeanor crime of domestic violence

    I am not even going to address your comment on the needs for suppressors as you obviously have an axe to grind.

    So Billy, if you aren’t any of the above and live in a state with NFA restrictions preventing you from owning a submachine gun with suppressor then move to Indiana or any other state that allows legal ownership of your desired NFA weapon. If it is that important to you then you can make it happen, just don’t forget your wallet.

    Todd

    • Kaos-1 says:

      I think he means “newly manufactured”. As any of the “transferable” machine guns on the NFA registry are all pre-1986.

      • Oh Billy says:

        Yep. My point exactly. None of us could buy this. Why should police? Double and dangerous standard.

    • SamHill says:

      Federal law requires machine guns to be registered with the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms & Explosives (ATF), and generally prohibits the transfer or possession of machine guns manufactured after May 19, 1986.3 In December 2018, ATF finalized a rule to include bump stocks within the definition of a machine gun subject to this federal law, meaning that bump stocks will be generally banned as of March 26, 2019.

      It looks like, to me, that the average guy can not go and buy an MP9, Todd.

    • Oh Billy says:

      Know how to read: Pass
      Know how to comprehend: fail

      I award you no points! May God have mercy on your soul.

  4. TominVA says:

    If they need them, they should have them – along with the training, that is. Good on’em.

    Here, this is interesting:
    https://www.popularmechanics.com/military/a25703571/world-war-i-uniforms/

    • Stash says:

      Here’s Tom with his favorite word again: need. How have they been doing their jobs without this, up until this point? Is it really a “need”?

      And for everyone else, remember that Tom wants a full-turn AWB with financially ruinous fines for people who don’t comply. But somehow, no possibility of jail time or felony convictions. Unlike every other state or federal AWB written and enforced to this point.

      • TominVA says:

        Sooo…I guess you didn’t like the video.

        Did I say financially ruinous?

        Why should there be felony convictions?

        • Stash says:

          No, I didn’t watch your WWI uniform video.

          Use whatever term you did then “huge ass,” or something like that. With the implication that they would be large enough to force people to comply as opposed to ignoring them, without the threat of jail time or conviction.

          There shouldn’t be felony convictions for firearm ownership. That’s part of the point. But you seem to think that despite the fact the last AWB had felony convictions, and all the state AWBs have jail time and/or felony convictions for violation, that somehow the next one that gets written wouldn’t be written and enforced the same wall as all the others.

          I’m not debating the issue. I’m highlighting your stance on it so everyone else reading your comments knows where you’re coming from.

  5. Alpha2 says:

    In LE I cannot nor have ever seen a scenario where full auto would be useful or needed. Than again working in the Bay Area I could never imagine a city council allowing funds to be spent on full auto weapons. They cannot even stand the APC’s that are used and shit themselves when officers wear BDU’s.

    • Sasquatch says:

      To be fair, it would be extremely difficult to shoot two/reassess, shoot two/reassess on full auto while trying to comply with San Francisco police policies.

  6. Mark says:

    Except for the suppressor, these make more sense than an AR for most police, as long as burst control is emphasized during training.

  7. Ed says:

    The only purpose for a full-auto anything is suppressive fire, i.e. machine-guns in modern land warfare combat. IMHO, if it isn’t belt-fed than it doesn’t necessarily need to be full-auto. I have been trained by the best and we never would use auto on our MK18’s/M4’s unless it was a FAM fire on the range or in the likely event we are breaking contact. The only caveat with breaking contact is, do you have enough rounds after the fact you break, then 20-30 min later you’re re-engaging with the same or different enemy that maneuvered around your direction of travel. The only time in modern PD/LE history (last 80yrs) I can think of a scenario where PD NEEDED some full-auto’s was the Northridge bank robbery in 97. A runner up was the 1986 Maimi-Dade shoot-out where the FBI was outgunned. Please don’t even mention Waco since the ATF was WAY outgunned. Whoever thought that by serving a warrant to the front door of numerically superior force was a good tactical decision should of been convicted of homicidal negligence if they were not part of the failed “raid”.

    Out

  8. J says:

    My rule about indiana: from south bend to the illinois state line and from crown point to the lake michigan shoreline = shithole. Best to avoid it completely or stay on the major roads and haul ass.