Should police have guns?

[Curious George]

In a sense, yes, since pushing the wrong buttons can get you suddenly shot for instance.

But cops are under a different circumstance while approaching a criminal, since the latter wants to get away from his crime and the police poses a very real impediment towards that goal.

So a person should assume that a person is potentially carrying a gun when they pose a very real impediment to a criminal's goal?

 

[Revoltingest]

So people in general should assume others are potentially armed?

I do.
And you know what?
It's OK.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Yes, any LEO approaching anyone has to take precautions that their lives and those around them are protected. This is called training. When an officer approaching anyone will always demand that the persons hands must be visible at all times. You normal law abiding person will comply, it is when a person does not comply for various reasons that the problem exist. In those situations the threat level rises and can escalate. It all comes back to training-training-training-training and more training.

Training to address a risk that need not be there if it weren't for American gun policy.

 

[Revoltingest]

In a sense, yes, since pushing the wrong buttons can get you suddenly shot for instance.

But cops are under a different circumstance while approaching a criminal, since the latter wants to get away from his crime and the police poses a very real impediment towards that goal.

The big problem is cops approaching people who are not criminals,
but with a presumption that we are about to be, or already are.

 

[Koldo]

A gun in every household would do this for the most part.



Only if they got a good shot off first.

It is very very easy to blow some brains when you have the initiative. Generally speaking, the moment the criminal puts himself at risk is when he threatens someone to get what he wants. Had he merely shot the victim in the first place there would be nearly no risk to his life.

Unless your family is pretty wealthy there is no way they would be able to catch the killer.

 

[Curious George]

I do.
And you know what?
It's OK.

I hope I haven't led you to believe that it is not "OK."

 

[esmith]

Training to address a risk that need not be there if it weren't for American gun policy.

Are you saying that if the U.S. changed our firearm policy that there would be no firearms in the hands of people? Do you really think that all the firearms would go away if the policies were changed? If you are, I think you are living in a fictional world.

 

[Koldo]

However, the punishment for homicide is far more severe than robbery.

Exactly ! Which is why the police is necessary. Without the police, the odds of facing the consequences for homicide would be much lower and therefore the criminals wouldn't care as much. My point is: even if an armed population serves as deterrence, you still need the cops.

 

[Revoltingest]

I hope I haven't led you to believe that it is not "OK."

Nope.
Just giving my take on being around potentially armed people.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Are you saying that if the U.S. changed our firearm policy that there would be no firearms in the hands of people?

No, I'm not. I'm saying that your country is reaping what the gun lobby sowed. What you do about it is a separate question.

Do you really think that all the firearms would go away if the policies were changed? If you are, I think you are living in a fictional world.

As I touched on before: if the will was there, you could do it, just as Australia did. The reasons why your country can't do it come down entirely to public sentiment. As long as you and people like you value your precious guns over the safety of your families and neighbours, I agree: nothing will change.

 

[esmith]

It is very very easy to blow some brains when you have the initiative. Generally speaking, the moment the criminal puts himself at risk is when he threatens someone to get what he wants. Had he merely shot the victim in the first place there would be nearly no risk to his life.

Unless your family is pretty wealthy there is no way they would be able to catch the killer.

Well according to statistics about 62% of homicides were cleared in 2017. Kind of nullifies your statement doesn't it.
Clearance rate - crime by type in the U.S. 2017 | Statistic

 

[Koldo]

So a person should assume that a person is potentially carrying a gun when they pose a very real impediment to a criminal's goal?

I am gonna fix it: "a person should assume that a criminal is potentially carrying a gun when they pose a very real impediment to the criminal's goal."

That's more or less accurate. Particularly when that impediment entails being killed or left to die in jail for instance.

 

[Curious George]

I am gonna fix it: "a person should assume that a criminal is potentially carrying a gun when they pose a very real impediment to the criminal's goal."

That's more or less accurate. Particularly when that impediment entails being killed or left to die in jail for instance.

And guns are useful tools to have in such a situation?

 

[esmith]

No, I'm not. I'm saying that your country is reaping what the gun lobby sowed. What you do about it is a separate question.


As I touched on before: if the will was there, you could do it, just as Australia did. The reasons why your country can't do it come down entirely to public sentiment. As long as you and people like you value your precious guns over the safety of your families and neighbours, I agree: nothing will change.

Well at least you realize that we do take our Constitution very seriously.

 

[Koldo]

The big problem is cops approaching people who are not criminals,
but with a presumption that we are about to be, or already are.

There is taking precautions and then there is downright mistreating.

 

[Shad]

It is very very easy to blow some brains when you have the initiative. Generally speaking, the moment the criminal puts himself at risk is when he threatens someone to get what he wants.

Not in my book. The moment they are on my property they are at risk.

 

[Koldo]

Well according to statistics about 62% of homicides were cleared in 2017. Kind of nullifies your statement doesn't it.
Clearance rate - crime by type in the U.S. 2017 | Statistic

In what sense does it nullify what statement of mine ?

 

[Revoltingest]

There is taking precautions and then there is downright mistreating.

This is where training & performance need improvement.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Well at least you realize that we do take our Constitution very seriously.

That's the thing: I don't think you do.

The conservative "gun enthusiast" crowd seems very selective on the parts of the Constitution they'll support and when. They sure don't like the First Amendment when church-state separation is at issue, or the Sixth Amendment when they're talking about GITMO detainees being held without trial, or the Eighth Amendment when they're talking about refugee claimant families being separated.

They've got your back if you want to publish a Holocaust-denying book, though.

 

[Koldo]

And guns are useful tools to have in such a situation?

Depends. Sometimes they will be, sometimes they won't.
As for cops, more specifically, they need them if they want to catch armed criminals.