4 ms·

It's not that simple. Unlike the UK, beat cops in the US carry guns. The moment you put your hand in your pocket you will get shot because the cop is allowed t

It's not that simple. Unlike the UK, beat cops in the US carry guns. The moment you put your hand in your pocket you will get shot because the cop is allowed to suspect you have a gun and shoot in fear of his life. Google "Daniel Shaver" for a real-world example of this.

vinay427 6y ago
There is a third option, because cops in nearly every European country carry guns [1], either in their vehicle or actually on them. Even still, few get shot in this type of situation. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Police_firearm_use_by_country https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Police_firearm_use_by_country
- chrisseaton 6y ago
  I have no idea why so many countries think it's normal for their community police to carry something so extreme as firearms. Really boggles my mind. They should be reserved for extreme emergency situations, used by very specialist officers. There should be absolutely no need for an officer responding to routine tasks to be carrying military-grade weapons.
  - vinay427 6y ago
    My suggestion as to why: police officers carrying guns doesn't need to pose a concern. I currently live in a country with a much lower police shooting and killing rate than the UK despite police routinely carrying firearms here. Granted, the crime rate is also lower, but in any case an end result is that people here are less likely to be shot and/or killed by a cop despite their weaponry. Why should I bother disadvantaging the police in their ability to use a gun at least as a threat, or as a potential weapon, when some years have gone by in which no one here has been killed by a police officer's gun? Furthermore, the distinction you draw between "community police" and "specialist officers" exists through a systematic process in the UK (creating separate training programs, etc.) but why should a country even bother with this process and the potential disadvantages it poses (e.g. delayed armed responses when needed) if it can handle arming ordinary officers without a fatal police shooting problem?
    - chrisseaton 6y ago
      I think it's a principle thing - community police shouldn't have that kind of weaponry, no matter how responsibly they use it or not use it at all. It makes any interaction with them always half-a-second from being lethal. No thanks. > I currently live in a country with a much lower police shooting and killing rate than the UK There are only four countries in the entire world where the police kill less than the UK according to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_killings_by_law_enforcement_officers_by_country https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_killings_by_law_enforc... if that's accurate. It may get lower but can't really get much lower can it! Even countries you think are as-safe or safer have insane rates of killings. For example French police kill almost 8x as much as British police do. What on earth are they doing over there? Maybe take away their guns to stop them slaughtering so many people?
      - vinay427 6y ago
        > It may get lower but can't really get much lower can it! > Even countries you think are as-safe or safer have insane rates of killings. For example French police kill almost 8x as much as British police do. What on earth are they doing over there? Maybe take away their guns to stop them killing so many people? Yep, credit where credit is due: given that the violent crime rate and other similar heuristics in the UK are higher than several of the countries with more fatal police shootings, I think it's very impressive that British police are as non-fatal as they are. I definitely think disarming much of the police force can benefit some of these other countries. That would include France, which you mentioned, as it seems to have a similar violent crime rate. > I think it's a principle thing - community police shouldn't have that kind of weaponry, no matter how responsibly they use it or not use it at all. It makes any interaction with them always half-a-second from being lethal. No thanks. I suppose I can't directly disagree with this, and I see where you're coming from. I recognize that where I am is probably more of an anomaly than the pattern, and this approach likely wouldn't be as successful in many other places.

vinay427 6y ago

There is a third option, because cops in nearly every European country carry guns [1], either in their vehicle or actually on them. Even still, few get shot in this type of situation. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Police_firearm_use_by_country https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Police_firearm_use_by_country

chrisseaton 6y ago
I have no idea why so many countries think it's normal for their community police to carry something so extreme as firearms. Really boggles my mind. They should be reserved for extreme emergency situations, used by very specialist officers. There should be absolutely no need for an officer responding to routine tasks to be carrying military-grade weapons.
- vinay427 6y ago
  My suggestion as to why: police officers carrying guns doesn't need to pose a concern. I currently live in a country with a much lower police shooting and killing rate than the UK despite police routinely carrying firearms here. Granted, the crime rate is also lower, but in any case an end result is that people here are less likely to be shot and/or killed by a cop despite their weaponry. Why should I bother disadvantaging the police in their ability to use a gun at least as a threat, or as a potential weapon, when some years have gone by in which no one here has been killed by a police officer's gun? Furthermore, the distinction you draw between "community police" and "specialist officers" exists through a systematic process in the UK (creating separate training programs, etc.) but why should a country even bother with this process and the potential disadvantages it poses (e.g. delayed armed responses when needed) if it can handle arming ordinary officers without a fatal police shooting problem?
  - chrisseaton 6y ago
    I think it's a principle thing - community police shouldn't have that kind of weaponry, no matter how responsibly they use it or not use it at all. It makes any interaction with them always half-a-second from being lethal. No thanks. > I currently live in a country with a much lower police shooting and killing rate than the UK There are only four countries in the entire world where the police kill less than the UK according to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_killings_by_law_enforcement_officers_by_country https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_killings_by_law_enforc... if that's accurate. It may get lower but can't really get much lower can it! Even countries you think are as-safe or safer have insane rates of killings. For example French police kill almost 8x as much as British police do. What on earth are they doing over there? Maybe take away their guns to stop them slaughtering so many people?
    - vinay427 6y ago
      > It may get lower but can't really get much lower can it! > Even countries you think are as-safe or safer have insane rates of killings. For example French police kill almost 8x as much as British police do. What on earth are they doing over there? Maybe take away their guns to stop them killing so many people? Yep, credit where credit is due: given that the violent crime rate and other similar heuristics in the UK are higher than several of the countries with more fatal police shootings, I think it's very impressive that British police are as non-fatal as they are. I definitely think disarming much of the police force can benefit some of these other countries. That would include France, which you mentioned, as it seems to have a similar violent crime rate. > I think it's a principle thing - community police shouldn't have that kind of weaponry, no matter how responsibly they use it or not use it at all. It makes any interaction with them always half-a-second from being lethal. No thanks. I suppose I can't directly disagree with this, and I see where you're coming from. I recognize that where I am is probably more of an anomaly than the pattern, and this approach likely wouldn't be as successful in many other places.