Shooters, any shooter, Needs much range time in order to develop skills. I helped train both Law Enforcement and non Law Enforcement bring both up to a high standard. I did not do this alone, I tapped many experienced personnel, to include Lawyers and the occasional A.D.A. so that a concealed carry permit holder had as high a standard of training as a LEO.
Not so fast there. Who else would be there to remind you that your inspection sticker is 3 days overdue & extract $50- of E-Z Revenue
I don't think it's possible without removing more liberties from the citizens, which would create an even stronger dependence on governmental help, cost more money, and return no more dividends than we have now. Removing weapons from the police would simply endanger their lives, cause more to quit, allow criminals more latitude, and require a huge additional complement of semi-armed brutality upon citizens whom, in this country, are supposed to be innocent until proven guilty. Police cannot respond any quicker than they do now. They are incredibly brave and in constant danger, simply due to the clothing they wear. I do not want them to be further endangered because someone thinks they might be safer without weapons in the hands of the police. That's simply giving criminals the advantage. If you are a criminal, have an interest in the safety of them or hang out with criminals, you might be very happy to have law enforcement officers at a disadvantage. Otherwise, law abiding citizens love the police and know they are there to do their best to protect them. Any ideas to the contrary are foolish notions of the friends of potential criminals.
And who do you think makes that the priority for police? Where do the enforcement policy priorities come from?
Or do some of the depressing work I did as a LEO, putting horrible pimps in prison, those pimps putting prostitots out on the street, getting them hooked on heroin and responsible for the deaths of many children. There are duties to be performed that you need Police Officers for, mostly thankless tasks most people would rather leave to someone else. And NOT topics to discuss at the Sunday dinner table, unless you want to see people get sick and lose their supper.
Well, we both know the answer to that question. In all fairness, I've been let off for speeding, expired decals etc far more times than I've been written up. It all depends on the cop, your attitude & if you're in the military (or a Veteran) or not. I once got let off after being pulled for speeding aster saying "Hello, now what bulls**t excuse have you not heard today?"
Sorry, I was generalizing. I worked closely with LEOs when I was a Case Worker for a large inner-city Psychiatric Unit. I would either go along to help defuse a "domestic dispute", one of the most volatile situations LEOs have to deal with or help them subdue a raving, 6' 8" 300lb, s**t covered, paranoid schizophrenic on the Unit. One of my best friends is a retired LEO who was also an MP in Viet Nam is coming to Thanksgiving dinner & I'm well aware of both the funny & the tragic tasks involved with the job. There's also not much you don't see when dealing with the criminally insane that private hospitals won't take.
I worked for private ambulance service for a while, and we had to deal with mentally ill patients, I also educated enough Psychiatrists on the value of properly medicated Patients, if they wanted to avoid resulting harm to everyone involved when weighed in the balance of Patient v overall well being, in general of everyone else, staff included.
I'm as pro gun as they come, but yes. Cops in most western nations should be unarmed. Now, I don't think they shouldn't have ACCESS to firearms, in situations where they're deemed necessary, but for average patrolling and so on, they should be unarmed. IF the general population also don't have the right to carry firearms for self defense. Basically, have the gun in the police car, if you get a call, and have to respond to a situation where a gun is necessary, you can take the gun out. But arming of police officers should be specific to the call they're getting. They shouldn't get to carry a firearm for personal protection, if the right to carry a firearm for personal protection doesn't apply to the citizens. There's an exception to countries where firearms for self defense are legal for citizens, like Czechia and the US. If the citizenry can carry firearms for personal protection, the police should too. And if the police can carry firearms for personal protection, the citizenry should too. Basically, if your legal system do not approve of arms for personal protection, this should apply to the police too. The citizenry and the police face the exact same threats, and in just about every country, the police is going all: "the public shouldn't have guns for personal protection", while at the same time going: "but we need those guns for personal protection". For situations where armed police are necessary, they'll still be able to get their guns out, as they have them in their patrol cars.
I agree that getting pulled over for what appears to be no reason is never pleasant, but as you said, much of life is how you act and how you think in response to those events. People should get pulled over for speeding, for traffic violations, and for driving a vehicle not safe on the road, quite frankly. It creates an unsafe situation for everyone else and should be enforced.
I'm sorry, that's just ridiculous on it's face. When you will need a gun is not penciled into the calendar.
It's going to happen eventually. whether we want it or not. Liberalism in this country, if allowed to continue, is going to turn every town and city into a Caracas clone.
And that applies for citizens too. A citizen might need a gun one day for personal protection, as would a cop. But most countries still limit their citizens rights for self defense, while defending the cops' right for self defense. Keep in mind, I'm not saying they shouldn't have access to them. They can still carry them in their patrol cars, so they will still have the same armed response capability whenever there's a need for it. Basically, there are only a few non-hypocritical countries in the world when it comes to this; the US, Czechia, Britain, Iceland and Norway. In the US and Czechia, people have a right to carry arms for self defense, and then it's only natural the police should too. While in Norway, Britain and Iceland, the people do NOT have a right to carry arms for self defense, so it's only natural the police shouldn't have that right either. Note, personal defense, this is the important thing.
Oh I agree, which is why both my wife and I carry, and we'll only live in a state that allows self defense. No one knows when a gun will be needed as criminals don't send in RSVPs. I'm sure all the cops in the UK that got stabbed to death thought in their last seconds of life "dammit why don't I have a gun".
Thing is, not that many cops are stabbed to death in the UK. I often find these discussions between pro gunners and anti gunners ridiculous, how they're trying to portray the other side as some dystopian hellscape. In my view, Britain is nowhere near as bad as most other European countries, because almost all European countries limit gun ownership for the public, while having armed police everywhere. That's not a free society. Freedom comes in many forms, but if the right of the individuals aren't consistent and equal between the state's actor and the public, it's not really a free society. Britain is somewhat freer than Germany in that regard, as they're more consistent. Neither the US, nor Britain are "wrong", as they're both consistent in the rights of the individual.
Have you ever served as a Police Officer or similar capacity ? From your thoughts on the matter, it would seem not likely. You are correct in this point, regular Citizens need to be Armed just as much as regular Police Officers. However, if the Police Officers gun(s) are secured in a patrol car, although most calls do not require use of said firearm(s), the need can arise so quickly as to resulting in the deaths of both Police and the Citizens they are supposed to protect. Many people fear Armed Police and if they were disarmed, not hesitate to lay a beating on your smaller weaker built Police Officers. That sidearm tends to level the playing field when a Police Officer faces one to several well built full backs. Even Armed Police Officers face dangers, experience has taught me that. Unarmed Police is a poor idea, now statistics do show that many Police Officers never draw their sidearm in 20 years of service, their entire career !! However, there are many times when that sidearm is needed, and there is NO WAY to ever predict in any way when the Police will need Arms. I can tell you there were many times I walked into situations where I needed my sidearm and would have been killed had I been unarmed. There are many times I did not need Arms, there is just no way to know when and where.
Nor are there in the US. 135 police officers died in the line of duty in 2016, and that's for ALL reasons, not just getting murdered. Nor are police killing large numbers of people in the US. Out of about 12 million arrests per year, lethal force is used in a couple thousand incidents.
Again, I'm making the case IF firearms for personal protection is not a right among the citizenry. Not a "should people have the right to carry firearms", that's a whole other debate, and one where I probably would agree with you. I'm not sure how the cops operate where you are from, so true, I have no idea. But here, police are never alone. It's practically unheard of that cops get killed. It probably wouldn't happen if they were armed all the time either, but the principle is still the same. Rights concerning individuals should be equal.
A significant number of the patients I dealt with on this Emergency Psychiatric Hospital for a large city were revolving door, homeless & extremely dangerous to themselves & others. The medications at the time (late 1970s - early 1980s) were unpleasant to take so they would be stabilized, quit their meds & then be hauled back in 2 months later by 4 - 6 LEOs and we'd start the process over again. The only way our clients could be properly medicated was at a State Hospital.
Let us consider this, the Official Police see more of the Hell-scape than the Citizens that would dictate if and when Police should be Armed. When you carefully study true events and do not give way to emotional ways and means, you are better able to see reason in these matters. In England there is a different method of Policing and I am indeed familiarized with it having served as such in various Countries with similar make-up. England has a long standing TRADITION of the Unarmed Bobby, this entrenched position has Legion of adherence and will only change from within as it has become a point of Honour almost as did the Knighthood and Nobility of Spirit. Any changes obviously will not come from America, look at Taxi cabs and busses, change is not well favoured in the U.K. so don't expect change any time soon, and when it does, it will definitely not be on American terms. Lol....
Since it can happen any day then citizens and police need them everyday. Comparing our country to others is ok, but it’s getting very old. We are not other countries. The US has a Constitution unlike any other, and that Constitution provides acknowledgment of the fundamental human right to protect yourself with a firearm. When the people have guns, the police need them to “police.”
Police everywhere operate in similar manner, in the U.S. the habit of sending out one Officer cars as a cost saving method is something I have allways opposed as detrimental, a partner is always important for many reasons that would compose a textbook of 1,000 pages to completely explain. Backup very is important too, as Police do not and should not operate alone. also, Police not getting killed in U.K speaks more of the People than anything else, regular Citizens are not out to harm Police Officers in any case, and here in the U.S. there are more People that see the Police as the Enemy and this is a greater problem than in U.K. where you do not have the history of social injustices, Slavery etc... and historical animosity experienced between the Races harboring ill will betwixt them. This gives way to massive rioting and looting exploding in Los Angeles and other Major Cities.
We need to create a culture where corruption and crime among cops is totally impossible. How to do it? I am open to suggestions but removing guns s certainly one of them. When found to be engaged in corruption, cops (not citizens) pay for the crimes. And extended sentences given to those crooks. Please make more suggestions ....
