6 ms·
There's two things that seems to be missing here with regards to routine patrol officers being armed in the US. First, Great Britain is smaller than many US sta
by jmccree 12y ago
There's two things that seems to be missing here with regards to routine patrol officers being armed in the US. First, Great Britain is smaller than many US states. The population density of ~780/sqmi is higher than all but 3 of US states. The majority of US states are under ~200 persons/sqmi. Outside of major cities and suburbs the nearest backup officer can routinely be 15 or more minutes away. As well, many areas have dangerous wild animals to deal with. Bears, coyotes, wolfs, etc. that Britain has mostly eliminated.
Secondly, in the US, we have the right to keep and bear arms, which means every one the routine patrol officer encounters should be assumed to be legally armed as well. It would put officers at a severe disadvantage to be unarmed when regularly dealing with armed suspects. In many states 5-10% of the population has a concealed carry permit, and in the majority (40+) of states open carry of a rifle is legal without any permit. Whether you agree with this or not, it's a fact of life in most of the US that a large percent of the population is legally armed, so there seems no reason to arbitrarily limit police from also being armed as any individual citizen could be.
- pmorici 12y agoAny city of sufficient size probably has it's own animal control department. It isn't like police are in mortal danger from wildlife and need the gun for protection from it.
- bluedino 12y ago>> As well, many areas have dangerous wild animals to deal with. Bears, coyotes, wolfs, etc. that Britain has mostly eliminated. This is only true for a very small handful of remote areas where few of the US Population live.
- waterlesscloud 12y agoI live in the second biggest city in the country and see coyotes almost every morning. And there are reports pretty much every year of bears wandering into town. I'm not sure I buy wild animals as a reason for cops to carry guns, but there's a lot more of wild animals in a lot more places than you seem to think.
- gambiting 12y agoI have no problem with officers having guns safely stowed in the car, but I think carrying them all the time is excessive. This would be completely sufficient for all animal problems,and probably 99% of situations where you actually want to shoot at someone.
- jmccree 12y agoWe have coyotes in the city limits of Atlanta, GA and black bears are regularly spotted in the nearby suburbs. (In counties with population over 500k) I would hesitate to say there's only a handful of areas with bears/coyotes/etc., as over 90% of the US land area is considered rural. To be sure, most wild animals are more afraid of us and run away rather than attack, but it's a legitimate thing that law enforcement has to be prepared for.
- bluedino 12y agoCoyotes are of no threat to humans
- jmccree 12y agoI would hesitate to say "no threat". http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coyote_attacks_on_humans#Others http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coyote_attacks_on_humans#Others list several attacks, including a few where responding officers shot the coyote. To be fair, a much bigger concern is preying on pets and live stock.
- chiph 12y agoI live within the city limits of Austin, and I frequently hear coyotes (and nearby residents lose pets to them). When I lived on the east coast, there would occasionally be a deer encounter. People don't normally think of whitetail deer as aggressive, but during the fall rut, the bucks can be pretty territorial.
- whyenot 12y agoIt has been estimated as many as 100 coyotes live in San Francisco[1]. Mountain lions have been found in Palo Alto[2], Mountain View[3], greater Los Angeles[4] and other very urban areas in California. [1] http://www.sfgate.com/outdoors/article/Coyotes-seemingly-thrive-in-San-Francisco-5045034.php http://www.sfgate.com/outdoors/article/Coyotes-seemingly-thr... [2] http://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/Palo-Alto-visit-fatal-to-cougar-Cop-shoots-cat-2776914.php http://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/Palo-Alto-visit-fatal-... [3] http://www.nbcbayarea.com/news/local/Report-of-Mountain-Lion-Sighting-in-Mountain-View--258222181.html http://www.nbcbayarea.com/news/local/Report-of-Mountain-Lion... [4] http://losangeles.cbslocal.com/tag/mountain-lion/ http://losangeles.cbslocal.com/tag/mountain-lion/
- GFK_of_xmaspast 12y agoThis is an animal control issue, not a law enforcement issue.
- cafard 12y agoLet me chime in and say that there are credible reports of coyote in Washington, DC, and that bears are spotted now and then, mostly in the close-in suburbs, but once in the city itself. But let me also say, that I don't think I'd care to take on a bear with a handgun.
- hga 12y agoI certainly wouldn't want to take on a bear with a handgun and load that's optimized for incapacitating humans! And avoidance is generally the best policy, but it's not an option for the police. So it's better than nothing, and there have been successful stops of bear attacks with these sorts of handguns. Hmmm, a downside of replacing the police shotgun with "patrol carbines" (AR-15 variants, generally), you could always use slugs in the former, which are effective against bears.
- snowwrestler 12y agoI've personally seen coyotes near DC, mostly in the Potomac River corridor northwest of town. The C&O Canal park is a nice long wildlife corridor and is chock full of coyote food like whitetail deer, squirrels, chipmunks, rabbits, etc. That said, the idea that someone would need to carry a gun in that area to protect them from coyotes is laughable.
- philwelch 12y agoOutside of major cities and suburbs there's virtually no crime anyway, and law enforcement is usually handled by the Sheriff's Department. For some reason, sheriff's deputies seem a lot less antagonistic than city cops. And sure, let them carry shotguns in their trunk if you're worried about wildlife.
- fiatmoney 12y agoSheriffs are elected in most places in the US. Depending on the local political dynamics, that can make for a more responsive police force.
- avn2109 12y ago>> "...dangerous wild animals to deal with..." I come from one of the wildest remaining areas in the lower 48, with a correspondingly high density of charismatic megafauna and apex predators. On exactly zero occasions have I ever witnessed the police or sheriff's deputies interacting with wildlife. There are specialized (and very heavily armed) government divisions for that sort of thing, and the vanilla police would spark a turf conflict by stepping in. For example, it is common to see Fish and Wildlife department employees tranquilize and cage a grizzly bear in someone's yard, or to find the Animal Control division running a family of moose out of town, or to see NPS Rangers on horseback herd wild bison. I have even seen crews of municipal snipers deployed to reduce mule deer populations in town. No sane person would deny very heavy weapons to the men who come face to face with grizzly bears in their daily life. Similarly, the deer sharpshooters should undoubtedly have long and powerful rifles with fancy optics. But that is certainly not an argument for supporting the militarization and firepower expansion of the ordinary police.