I've heard this excuse before and I don't put much into it. Most of the videos I've seen are bad cops terrorizing people who aren't armed. George Floyd was unarmed, as were countless victims. Karen Garner couldn't hurt anyone. There are many more examples. Also, we're currently a much less armed society than we were before we had this policing issue.
It's because these cops are bad people and there is no accountability. I'm sure in some departments this sort of thing is encouraged, many it's excused. We can agree that bad police should be fired and charged right?
I don't get the gun angle, people have always had guns in the US. There are fewer households with guns now than there were since the 1990s.
Someone did a survey of 15K police officers and gun restrictions in 2013 here:
https://www.police1.com/gun-legislation-law-enforcement/arti...
And when it comes to finding ways to reduce gun violence and large scale shootings, most cops say a federal ban on so-called “assault weapons” isn’t the answer.
More than 91 percent of respondents say it would either have no effect or a negative effect in reducing violent crime. This is an overwhelming response by those whose job it is to actually deal with this issue on the front lines.
More than 91 percent of respondents support the concealed carry of firearms by civilians who have not been convicted of a felony and/or not been deemed psychologically/medically incapable.
A full 86 percent feel that casualties would have been reduced or avoided in recent tragedies like Newtown and Aurora if a legally-armed citizen was present (casualties reduced: 80 percent; avoided altogether: 60 percent).
Most gun deaths are by handguns, not "assault rifles". They also know that a federal ban can be negated by 2 minutes of work with a drill bit.
Similarly, police aren't afraid of people pulling assault rifles out of their glove boxes and pockets.
What videos did this person see, that you are referring to? Are you saying there isn't evidence of a problem of police brutality? I recall a survey of Black NY city police; most of them had been harassed when off-duty.
Could you give an example of who has this idea?
> minorities are more likely to be in the receiving end of a crime
So therefore innocent people should be harrassed and abused, beaten up and jailed?
> prosecute crime wherever it manifests
That's not what happens.
I still think we need more cops. We lag behind Europe in cops per capita, and have higher crime rates.
The idea that we should stop prosecuting crimes because it affects one type of citizen or another is ridiculous for a ton of reasons, but specially because of this: minorities are more likely to be in the receiving end of a crime.
We can do both invest in the social aspect to level the playing field and prosecute crime wherever it manifests.