2 ms·

> Armed law enforcement responding to calls without an evident need for armed law enforcement is itself a problem. It’s fairly obvious that in a country where

by zepto 5y ago

> Armed law enforcement responding to calls without an evident need for armed law enforcement is itself a problem. It’s fairly obvious that in a country where citizens are free to be armed, police must be armed too.

kbenson 5y ago
I think what's being discussed is not that police should be unarmed, but that police should not be the first choice to respond to situations where they currently often are.
- throwawayboise 5y ago
  Yes, police should not be the welfare patrol. However they are, because they are out and about and often would be the nearest public authority to respond to such a need, and governments don't want to fund the social programs that they legislate. It's the same reason teachers are imposed upon to be defacto child-welfare social workers. Police should enforce the law/investigate crimes. Teachers should teach. If we're going to have social welfare programs, we need to provide personnel to do that work, not pile it upon other professions as an unwanted secondary responsibility.
  - zepto 5y ago
    > we need to provide personnel to do that work, not pile it upon other professions as an unwanted secondary responsibility There could be police who want it as a responsibility as long as they are trained and compensated. That is another possibility.
  - rapjr9 5y ago
    We can do what we want with our own money, we don't have wait for politicians to allocate it. Give directly to causes that help people. People have the money (power)! Tax yourself! Fund social programs that replace this function of policing directly. If government does not work we can route around it. Create Kickstarters for good causes.
dragonwriter 5y ago
> It’s fairly obvious that in a country where citizens are free to be armed, police must be armed too Even granting that for the sake of argument, it is less obvious that government-public interactions not for the purposes of arresting criminals or otherwise responding to or preventing apparent actual or imminent crime need to involve police.
- zepto 5y ago
  Totally agreed. That said, there is no also no reason at all not to have specialized police who do actually have mental health and de-escalation training. But again I agree - there should be other options for government/public interaction.

by zepto 5y ago

kbenson 5y ago

I think what's being discussed is not that police should be unarmed, but that police should not be the first choice to respond to situations where they currently often are.

throwawayboise 5y ago
Yes, police should not be the welfare patrol. However they are, because they are out and about and often would be the nearest public authority to respond to such a need, and governments don't want to fund the social programs that they legislate. It's the same reason teachers are imposed upon to be defacto child-welfare social workers. Police should enforce the law/investigate crimes. Teachers should teach. If we're going to have social welfare programs, we need to provide personnel to do that work, not pile it upon other professions as an unwanted secondary responsibility.
- zepto 5y ago
  > we need to provide personnel to do that work, not pile it upon other professions as an unwanted secondary responsibility There could be police who want it as a responsibility as long as they are trained and compensated. That is another possibility.
- rapjr9 5y ago
  We can do what we want with our own money, we don't have wait for politicians to allocate it. Give directly to causes that help people. People have the money (power)! Tax yourself! Fund social programs that replace this function of policing directly. If government does not work we can route around it. Create Kickstarters for good causes.

dragonwriter 5y ago

> It’s fairly obvious that in a country where citizens are free to be armed, police must be armed too Even granting that for the sake of argument, it is less obvious that government-public interactions not for the purposes of arresting criminals or otherwise responding to or preventing apparent actual or imminent crime need to involve police.

zepto 5y ago
Totally agreed. That said, there is no also no reason at all not to have specialized police who do actually have mental health and de-escalation training. But again I agree - there should be other options for government/public interaction.