Armed Police: Does It Work?
In the state of California the local police are armed to an extent with their standard issued hand guns. From the 1900’s to 2000, more than 14,000 federal, state and local law enforcement officers were killed in the line of duty. Just about 50% of those deaths were because of firearms, even though crime is at its low point over the past half a century. Police should be armed because it can reduce crime, can handle more dangerous threats, and can save lives.
Law enforcement should be armed, because when police are not armed, with at least some kind of weaponry, the criminal will probably get their way if they are superior firepower. Almost 50% of the fatalities of law enforcement on the line of duty. It is not right to give them something to protect themselves and other people with. It is their job. They should be allowed to carry the necessary tools to combat potential threats.
With police being armed to a large extent, criminals will know what might happen when and if one opens fire on an officer. Law enforcement having weapons would be intimidating. While if somewhere that the Law enforcement are not armed, the criminals would have an advantage. Riots that may end up happening, and the mobs would easily disperse faster if the law enforcements discharge weapons into the air will stun the crowd. On the side not seeing armed law enforcement, the citizens would feel safer and secure when they see an officer knowing they can tackle threats that might happen. As armed violence has increased sharply in parts of the developed world, the police need to redefine their role so that it is a more appropriate response to a contemporary problem. If they are not armed and something that comes their way that t...
... middle of paper ...
...eing the victims of crime. Police officers should have a right to protect themselves. Fewer officers may die on duty if they were better protected. Arming the police is a matter of self-defense rather than being actively involved in regular shootouts. This is shown by the fact that most routinely armed police never fire their weapon on active duty in their career. John Mizon says “How much longer can this go on? Would criminals not think twice when faced by a police officer holding a firearm? Arm them now, give them the protection they deserve” and film director Michael Winner, founder of the Police Memorial Trust, is among the most vocal advocates of guns for all officers. "The criminals are armed with guns and knives, with weapons that kill the police and I think they should have a better chance of retaliation," arming the police will be a good way to save lives.
One of the most disturbing trends in American policing in recent years has been the militarization of police weaponry and tactics. In his new book, “The Rise of the Warrior Cop”, author Radley Balko traces the roots of American law enforcement from the constables of colonial times to present day SWAT teams and special response units. With the high controversy surrounding the “war on drugs” and the “war on terrorism,” policymakers have signed off on a dangerously aggressive style of policing that too often leads to unnecessary deaths and injuries. Some people say that modern law enforcement is on a collision course with our Bill of Rights and is unconstitutional. In the book “ Rise of the Warrior Cop” the author talks about how modern day policing are adapting mostly all military tactic. These wars are more than just metaphors designed to rally public support and secure all the money they can to support these programs. They change the way we think about what the police do. Wars mean shooting first and asking questions later. Wars require military tactics and weaponry. Wars mean civilian casualties. Are we at war with our own people?
...is novel with an outstanding salute to those who serve in law enforcement saying, “And so I tip my hat to all the good cops throughout our nation who risk their lives and strive to do the right thing when facing split-second decisions about life and death every day in the kill zone” (Klinger, 2004, page 274). Pulling the trigger of a gun can cause a variety of issues both within and outside of a police officer’s life, but it could also potentially save another human being from harm and keep the safety of our society intact.
Law abiding citizens should have the right to protect themselves against criminals. You are less likely to suffer an injury when attacked if you are carrying a handgun, as opposed to other methods of self-protection. The right to carry a concealed handgun is protected by the Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. The U.S. Constitution states “the right of the people to bear arms shall not be infringed” (ProCon.org 1).Carrying a handgun could keep a lot of people from being killed during a public shooting incident. Concealed handguns protect citizens from violent crimes such as burglary and robbery. Most criminals are armed and you don’t have much of a chance of survival if you are not carrying a
By teaching police officers alternatives to shooting to kill, they experience higher risks with their lives. Police Commissioner, Ray Kelly, said, “It would be "very difficult" to train officers to shoot to wound” (Jacobo, 2016). Police officers are viewed as “predators” and “an occupying army” rather than allies (Valey, 2016). This is a perception that needs to change because it counteracts the mission of police officers
If people want to defend themselves, why waste the money and time on having police? In this day and age why have weapons, why not cut out all firearms and just be one happy country, it’s that simple, but is it really that simple? Assault Weapons Must Be Banned in America.
The negative views of everyday people often make work hard for officers, adding more stress to their careers. The general public regularly criticizes officers for using excessive force and brutality, especially when a police officer ends up killing a suspect or criminal. Oftentimes, especially when a white police officer shoots a citizen of a minority race, the general public is quick to find faults in the officer, blaming the officer for being racist. However, cold, hard statistics show that the majority of police officers are, in fact, white, and the neighborhoods in which these officers are placed in tend to be high-crime areas with many minority citizens living there (Miller “When Cops Kill”). In addition, people might say that a citizen who was shot was not armed; however, almost anything close to the shot individual could have been turned into a deadly weapon that he or she could have used to wound or kill the officer involved. Whenever officers are in this position, the natural reaction is to defend themselves. Everyday, police officers confront the most aggressive, immoral, and sick-minded individuals of society. Officers jeopardize their own lives every time they report for work. Officers witness things that no person should ever have to encounter. They see the most horrific and gruesome scenes that the general public turns away from and
The authors also explain that there are no real statistics to help explain how many times an officer has used a firearm. The text explains that there is no significant data to help explain police shootings and how many occur each year (Kappeler & Potter, 2005). Most of the data that can be found does not clearly state the numbers of times a firearm was used. Majority of data is found through data bases such as Vital Statistics (Kappeler & Potter, 2005). Even data bases such as Vital Statistics do not provide clear information on police
...t is our job, as citizens, to at least be prepared for the criminals’ attack and to be able to defend ourselves in time of need. At the Virginia Tech shooting, the responding police officers took approximately three minutes to reach the school, but about five minutes to break through the chains binding the doors together. Cho fired rounds off for about nine minutes. Out of those nine minutes only four, or less, could have happened, if a professor or other college personnel stopped the aggressive action before the tragedy was completed. Police cannot get there fast enough sometimes to save a life; citizens must be prepared for the worst. One thing is for sure, one would rather have it and doesn’t need it, than need it and doesn’t have it. People often ask themselves, “Why should I have a gun?” Well guns are needed when seconds count, and the police are minutes away.
However, after reading the article the author noted that police are mandated to enforce civilian law and order, investigate crimes, and strictly follow legal procedures even when in pursuit of chronic and dangerous criminals (Kagoro, 2014). Ideally, it has been argued, there should be strict dividing lines between the police and the military; the former for domestic purposes with the latter protecting citizens from external threats (Kagoro, 2014). In his article on the anti-militarization of the police in the United States, Kurt Andrew Schlichter aptly put it that the military is designed, organized, and equipped to execute rapid, violent and efficient obliteration of the “enemy”-whoever the enemy may be ( Kagoro, 2014). However, the law enforcement is usually modeled after the military and in fact there a large number of police officers who are former military personnel. This was a new criticism of police that was unfamiliar to me in the study of criminal justice but, I found it to be a valid point. The idea of changing the focus of policing to be less of a battlefield and more of a community may be a compelling approach to make interaction with citizens less
Police shootings occur all over the world but are a huge problem within the United States. We continue to hear more and more about them. These shootings are making headlines. Front page news it seems almost weekly. All the shootings go one of two ways. Either a Police Officer has been shot or a Police Officer has shot a citizen, but either way the final result is death. Whether an Officer has been shot or an Officer has shot someone these cases seem to be related to one thing, fear. People in today’s society feel as though they can’t trust Police Officers as they are there to hurt and kill them. And Police Officers feel as though they are in danger of doing their everyday duties because people see them as the “bad guys” and want to hurt or kill them. Yes, police brutality and racism still exist, but not all cops are bad. Yes there are still bad citizens in this world that want to kill and harm others, but not all citizens are bad. People seem to react to these shootings by rioting quickly after a police officer has shot and killed someone without
In conclusion, enforcing gun laws would not be the best solution in reducing violence in the United States. Educating people and telling them to always contact police if they cannot handle a situation is always the best option. Guns provide protection and can save a family from a home break in or protect a store owner late at night from robbers who may threaten him or her for money. Not only are guns protected in the constitution, but they are also a part of the American tradition.
...ions where excessive force would be used, because they can be held legally responsible for this. Not only this, but if many different kinds of officers join the force, the community will have a better relationship with the officers that stand to protect it. Lastly, every day people must be educated about how crucial a simple knowledge of the law is, so these people can stand up for themselves in the face of police brutality. "We're not anti-police...we're anti-police brutality".- Al Sharpton. Anytime one hears of brutality, one immediately portrays actions or statements that are unacceptable by any means; something that deserves justice. So why does wearing a uniform give police the right to commit crimes? Ending the excessive use of force by police will permit citizens to live in harmony with law enforcement, allowing for safer, happier and stronger communities.
Many Americans are now applying for a license to carry licensed concealed arms with them. The rate at which licenses are being approved is worrying. This development is concerning law enforcement authorities. Putting so many firearms at the disposal of the public is counterproductive to the gains that are being made on improving security and especially in the cities where incidences of gun crime and violence are on the rise.
Recently in the United States there has been in increase in deaths that have come from police officers using deadly force. The use of force is inevitable as a police officer, many times their own lives or the life’s civilians are at risk when it comes to determine what type of force a officer should use. There are many incidents where police officer have to react in a matter of seconds and has to choose between his own life or that of the individual causing the disturbance. When a Police Officer uses deadly force has caused outraged with the public, stirring up protests and creating a scandal for the police officer and the Police Department. Many do not know when it is right for an officer to use deadly force and what constitutes it, or what happens when the officer does not use the appropriate amount of force that is required to control the situation. There has been many changes in Police Departments around the country to try to reduce the use of deadly force in response to the issues that have occurred because of it.
Why does the government make it harder for average citizens to protect themselves? Police cannot always protect everyone in the community. There are only about 500,000 police officers throughout the country, which means there is around 125,000 police officers on duty at any given time. Other than a bodyguard or a law enforcement officer at everyone’s side twenty-four hours a day, the most effective deterrent to a criminal attack is the criminal’s fear that the potential victim is armed and prepared to defend themselves.