It's a fairly common occurrence in the US for the highway patrol to pull over a driver for speeding, the driver has a firearm, the police issue a speeding citation and everyone goes on their way.
How does that require the police to be armed? Do you think it likely that typical motorists would be willing to shoot a police officer in order to avoid a traffic citation? Or that the infinitesimal minority crazy enough to do that are going to be deterred if the police are armed as well?
Ordinary police officers don't need firearms because ordinary police officers are not especially likely to have anyone try to shoot at them.
The situation is different if they're executing a warrant on a meth lab, but exceptional situations are exceptional and routine situations are not.
Likewise, I wouldn't issue police equipment based on the extremely common case where a policeman doesn't need a vest nor a gun all day and, in fact, on the majority of days doesn't even need their set of handcuffs.
Or to put it another way, aren't you arguing that all civilians should carry firearms as well? After all, there could be a mugger, or a rapist, or a grizzly bear. Better to have it and not need it, right?
Meanwhile, cops are murdering people with impunity at a rate of about 10x the former.
"Police" is a subculture of anti-society though and behavior and for some reason we keep giving them guns.
I don't like it; but it's not helpful to shout blame. Have to understand where we are, to drive any change.
I don't think this thread demonstrates anti-police thought in general. I think it demonstrates anti-police abuse of power/double standards/hypocrisy and other undesirable issues. It's certainly not littered with people chanting "ACAB!".
I was struck recently, when I saw The Gentlemen (a film about marijuana empires in the UK). Even the crime lords were very averse to carrying guns because it was so illegal. People here always counter with "but the criminals will find ways to get them anyway", but I don't think that's a valid argument.
Anyway, it lines up with the statistics: https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-44053904
> In England and Wales in 2016-17, there were 31 fatal shootings - or one for every 1.9 million people.
> In the US, in contrast, there were 11,000 murders or manslaughters involving a firearm or one death for every 30,000 people.
I think most people don't care whether they are going to be killed by a gun or by some other means.
The current system teaches them to be terrified, criminal psychopaths with no understanding of human beings or deescalation. Giving them a gun is not protection, it's culpable negligence.
The people we are letting become cops in America are the exact people who should a) never be handed a weapon and b) never be given authority.
In the UK, the criminals ~never have a gun (and less crime occurs), so it makes sense that the police wouldn't need guns either.
In the US, normal citizens are often legally armed, and criminals are very often illegally armed.
It would make no sense to tell an officer "you can't carry a gun" when both average citizens and the criminals have guns. While the UK undoubtedly has a fine model for itself, it can't be extrapolated to a country where gun ownership is so common.