or Connect
Mothering › Mothering Forums › Archives › Miscellaneous › Dads › Why do Police have guns?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Why do Police have guns? - Page 5

post #81 of 144
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ambrose View Post
I think cops learning that guns are not to incapacitate but to kill is absolutely not cool. If someone holds a gun towards a cop the cop should shoot at the knee, thigh, arm. Anything but the chest or head. I have no faith in the American Police force and see no reason at all for them to carry guns or tasers.
As a former police officer, I can say that this is absolutely ridiculous. Any time a LEO is in a situation where they feel the necessity to use deadly force it is unimaginably stressful. Fine motors skills are one of the first things to go in stressful situations, and the ability to aim and pull the trigger are fine motor skills. To expect a LEO to take the time to choose a non-lethal target, while hoping that whomever is trying to kill the LEO will suddenly decide that the pain of being shot in the leg is sufficient motivation to stop attempting to kill the LEO, is ridiculous.

When I was working there was a situation in which an intoxicated driver was pulled over by a LEO. The driver decided that he did not wanted to be arrested for what would have been a felony DUI and came out of his car shooting as soon as the vehicle stopped. He was shot in the body several times by the LEO (who was also shot in the thigh) and even as he was on the ground dying he continued to pull the trigger. In fact, the only reason he even fell to the ground was because one of the LEO's bullets struck him in the thigh and broke his leg. Somehow I don't think simply shooting him in the leg or arm would have stopped him.

Yes, there are "bad" or poor cops out there. Yes, sometimes cops use too much force. (Although very often the amount of force used is reasonable, it is just mis-portraited through the media, or the public simply doesn't understand what is reasonable and why it is reasonable.) That's wrong and it makes all cops look bad, unfortunately. But take a look from the perspective of a LEO--how would you like to go to your job every single day knowing that there are people out there who want to kill you just because of the uniform you are wearing? A LEO really can't ever truly relax--even off-duty you're still likely to see people whom you've arrested or otherwise had dealings with who would be perfectly happy to hurt you if they get a chance.
post #82 of 144
Quote:
Originally Posted by PareMesAlt View Post
Police have a somewhat different purpose. Generally speaking they agree to uphold the law in a place where government control is taken for granted. One of the tools that our society has granted them is lethal weaponry.
I will have to disagree. Lethal weapons are not one of the "tools" police have at their disposal for ensuring compliance with the law. Lethal weapons are a way for them to protect themselves when, in the course of protecting other people or ensuring compliance with the law, someone decides to get violent.

Saying that lethal weaponry is one of the tools our society has granted them for this purpose is the same as saying that if you are shooting off fireworks, and you are not supposed to be, then the police have the right to come out and shoot you if you won't stop. That is really not the case.
post #83 of 144
Quote:
Originally Posted by anarchamama View Post
Solidiers and police have guns for the same reason, to enforce the will of the state, and those in control of the state. The question is really just weather a) you agree with the state's right to enforce anything or b) you agree with the existance of the state. Now for those of you who have loved ones who are cops/soldiers there is a whole complicated set of mechanism at play that we could debate. But I am cerytainly NOT going to tell my kids that cops have guns cause they are the good guys and to protect themsleves agaginst bad guys. First becasue it would be a lie, not even an oversiplification. When I was a kids I saw the cops put my dad over the hood of a car and club him for walking a picket line. As an activist trade unionist I see (and my kids see) cops routinely rough people up on picket lines. As an activist I have been ter gassed pepper sprayed and shot and hit at close range with a tear gas cannister (which I might add it is illegal to shoot at people) as a cyclist participating in critical mass I and my kids have seen cops run people of the road, use totally unnessasary pain compliance and pepper spray and arrest to intimidate cyclists. As a person with lots of poor but beligerant friends and family mambers I see the cops intimidate people, look for fights, and abuse their power every day.

Sooooo while this thread is not about the merits or demerits of cops and soldiers it is most certainly not true that the only reasons cops have guns is becuase they are protecting the good guys. They are most certainly protecting somebody, its a matter for debate how "good" those somebodies always are.

Also while I am sure being a cop is a highly unpleasant job at times, it is in fact not an especially dangerous one as jobs go. Dramatic sure, but cops don't have a particularily high workplace mortality rate. At least in canada the most dangerous industries are fishing and trapping, mining, quarrying and oil rigs, logging and forestry, and construction. So make sure that when you use products produced by these industries you tell your kids that workers die becasue the BAD capitalist don't care enough about workers to follow proper safety standards. : : But of course we don't prosecute in those cases, because well those bad guys are ummmm......different. They don't have guns........

Flame away!
I wholeheartedly agree.

Perspective is such a funny thing. Growing up where I grew up (a "rough) neighborhood, I never grew up with the idea that cops were there to protect me. I still don't have that idea. I knew that hanging on the corner with a bunch of friends was enough provocation to get bullied and harassed by cops. I lived just blocks from where cops shot a man 41 times in cold blood. I can't tell you how many times kids (teens) were shot for "pulling out a suspected weapon". Calling the cops is an absolute last resort when I am all out of options. I'm not saying all cops are terrible but it's a little warped to try to act like cops are the "good guys" all the time.

How to explain it to my child? There's violence in the world, like it or not. Cops have families too and in their line of work, they might come across someone who (whether in reality or not) is a threat. In order for that cop to come home to his daughter or son and wife, he has to protect himself which sometimes involves shooting his gun and sometimes involves somebody dying. I don't see what's wrong with telling children the truth without making it seem like cops are "always good" and whoever they may shoot is "always bad" because in my own personal experience, that's not accurate. In every profession, there's good ones and terrible ones. Let's pray that we only ever have to encounter the good ones.
post #84 of 144
I live just 5 houses away from a notoriously dangerous street. The police definitely have a bad rep in my city. Just thought I stumbled upon this thread at a convenient time...last night we went out for pizza and a large group of officers came in for dinner. My 3 yo DD grew rigid and asked quite loudly, "Mommy, are they here to kill us?" :
post #85 of 144
Quote:
Originally Posted by anarchamama View Post
Also while I am sure being a cop is a highly unpleasant job at times, it is in fact not an especially dangerous one as jobs go. Dramatic sure, but cops don't have a particularily high workplace mortality rate.
Actually, it is a pretty dangerous job. They have a LOT of injuries - broken legs, black eyes, etc. Policemen are also at very high risk of suicide, presumably because of the things they see in their jobs.

I think it's really astonishing that someone would say that a person who has to walk up to people who are violent, and frequently armed, and want only to do them harm, and deal with them on a regular basis, that someone would say it is not a "dangerous" job. Perhaps it is not as dangerous as other occupations but that doesn't make it "not dangerous" by, really, any definition of the phrase.
post #86 of 144
Looks like you have had a lot of replies, but since DH is a LE officer, thought I would reply.

Just like others have said, police have guns to protect themselves and others from people who would harm them. The police have very specific rules about when they can use the gun (i.e. only if someone is trying to kill them or someone else), and if a policeman breaks those rules he could get in trouble and lose his job. Most police officers would not want to ever have to fire their gun in the line of duty (they do have to practice with them to make sure they would be able to use them when necessary).
post #87 of 144
Quote:
Originally Posted by MonieMama View Post
I live just 5 houses away from a notoriously dangerous street. The police definitely have a bad rep in my city. Just thought I stumbled upon this thread at a convenient time...last night we went out for pizza and a large group of officers came in for dinner. My 3 yo DD grew rigid and asked quite loudly, "Mommy, are they here to kill us?" :
And, pray tell, where would your impressionable three year old get such a warped view of the police? Television?:
post #88 of 144
Quote:
Originally Posted by somasoul View Post
Why do police have guns?

Why, to threaten people who don't obey the law of course!!!!

That person could be a violent criminal or someone who chooses not to pay their taxes.
Ridiculous assertion, that a police officer carries a gun to threaten people. And then to mention taxes? When did someone get shot for non-payment of taxes?

As a trained officer, I can tell you that I do not pull my gun to wave it around in an intimidating manner, as if to encourage someone to obey the law.

If I have my gun out, it means that the situation warrants it -- I am in danger, my partner is in danger, the suspect is in danger or a member of the public is in danger -- and my job is to protect those lives.

Anti-police attitudes are so pervasive in this thread -- but few people seem willing to step up and explain why they feel that way, why their husband was tasered etc. They're just content to sit back and bash away at the police...

I wonder who they will call when their car is stolen by some meth-head. Or when they are in the 7-11 and a gunman walks in and takes hostages. Or when the next Son of Sam, Green River Killer, Charles Manson, or Jeffrey Dahmer starts stalking their neighbourhoods.
post #89 of 144

I can't take this -- have to say something

Quote:
Originally Posted by anarchamama View Post
Also while I am sure being a cop is a highly unpleasant job at times, it is in fact not an especially dangerous one as jobs go. Dramatic sure, but cops don't have a particularily high workplace mortality rate.
Go to http://odmp.org/browse.php and check out the dead cops. Browse a few of the pages that details how those cops died. Some you will find died by drowning or in a random car accident, but the VAST majority died while helping someone, while doing their job, while serving the public. Your intentional disrespect of their sacrifice speaks volumes as to your character. Andthat you are passing these sentiments on to your children? Great -- job security for me.

I've reread your saga of being tear-gassed at union marches and watching your father get arrested. I suspect that your father's experiences were quite a few years ago and that yours were likely linked to illegal activity, perhaps participating in a riot? Perhaps inciting violence or attempting to create anarchy? Blaming the police for their lawful actions that were in response to your unlawful actions doesn't make a whole lot of sense and isn't going to curry any favour. The vast majority of ordinary North Americans are not rabid unionists, and have no sympathy for them, or their tactics. Do a little research on the Anti Poverty Committee, their antics and public perception.

Quote:
At least in canada the most dangerous industries are fishing and trapping, mining, quarrying and oil rigs, logging and forestry, and construction.
That's only because the worker's compensation schemes either haven't caught up in those industries yet, or the workers are seen as expendable by all levels -- owners, the employees themselves and the consumers. If the employees in those industries used each and every safety mechanism available to them (like most policemen do...), there would be far fewer deaths.

Let's look at your examples of "workers [that] die becasue the BAD capitalist don't care enough about workers to follow proper safety standards." (as if the company owners should be there, holding the employee's hand each and every day...)

Fisherman: Everytime a fisherman dies, ask yourself if he had a lifejacket or exposure suit on like he was supposed to. Was he clipped on like he was supposed to be? No? How is that the fishing company's fault that the fisher cut corners and didn't do his own due-diligence? The company isn't a babysitter, can't FORCE anyone to save their own lives.

Trappers: I can't find ANY statistics to bear out your claim that this is a dangerous occupation. Please quote legitimate sources to prove this out.

Natural resources: Yes, dangerous work, which is why they get paid well for it, including hazard pay, northern living allowance, isolation allowance, all meals and tranportation to/from camps etc. No one is forced into working in this sector, yet they flock to the region year after year, and prove themselves willing to work cheaper, faster and more unsafely than the next guy. Is it any wonder that they die? It's akin to suicide -- they're CHOOSING to not avail themselves of safety measures. Every employee in BC and AB gets any training which MAY be applicable to their job, including first aid, rescue, toxic gas training and equipment etc. These industries also have dedicated first aid attendants and safety officers whose SOLE job it is is to ensure the safety of the employees. The only other job category to get such attention is construction.

Between 1991-1999, 93 miners died and 21,351 were injured (source: http://www.msha.gov/MSHAINFO/FactSheets/MSHAFCT2.HTM)

Contrast that with 148 police officers killed in 1991 alone http://odmp.org/year.php?year=1991
1992: 169
1993: 162
1994: 179
1995: 184
1996: 142
1997: 176
1998: 175
1999: 151

That's 1661 American police officers DEAD in the same time span that MSHA reports 93 miners died.

Construction: Again, if construction workers would use all of the safety mechanisms available to them, not one life would be lost. Each workplace accident can be traced to an employee's failure to obey simple safety rules.

I think these arguments you are throwing out there are just red herrings, meant to divert attention from the real issue.

According to http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/cius_04/summa...ock/index.html this is what happened in America in 2004:

Every 23.1 seconds: One Violent Crime

Every 32.6 minutes: One Murder
Every 5.6 minutes: One Forcible Rape
Every 1.3 minutes: One Robbery
Every 36.9 seconds: One Aggravated Assault


Every 3.1 seconds: One Property Crime

Every 14.7 seconds: One Burglary
Every 4.5 seconds: One Larceny-theft
Every 25.5 seconds: One Motor Vehicle Theft

And who did the victims call for help?

Police are one of the few professions that actively seek out trouble and make it go away. Do you call a construction worker when your bike is stolen or when you get mugged? Do you call a fisherman when some druggie has set up shop on your front step or latin-american gangs are taking over your neighbourhood? www.knowgangs.com/gang_resources/profiles/ms13/

Miners don't take on armed and dangerous gang members. Police do. Fisherman don't run towards an active-shooter in a mall, nor do construction workers or coal miners. Who does? The Police. Firemen put out fires, while someone has to catch the arsonist. Who? The police. EMS don't go in if it's even remotely unsafe, they wait for who? The police. Seeing a common thread here?


Quote:
Flame away!
Naw, it's not worth the effort. Flaming only gets people banned by the hypermods on MDC -- I'd sooner meet your disrespectful unionist and veiled-communist rhetoric with fact and figure and then watch it destruct under it's own impossibility.

This thread started out about why police officers have guns and many answers were fielded explaining why police officers are equipped with the tools to do their jobs. Several posters here have hijacked it with their own skewed viewpoints based on their own experiences, as valid as they may be and turned this thread into their own cop-bashing forum. This is regrettable, since these are obviously isolated incidents, and there are hundreds of thousands of police officers in the US, and hundreds of thousands more in Canada -- the vast majority of whom do their jobs with honour, integrity and service to their sworn community.
post #90 of 144
Quote:
Originally Posted by dadinblue View Post
Several posters here have hijacked it with their own skewed viewpoints based on their own experiences, as valid as they may be and turned this thread into their own cop-bashing forum. This is regrettable, since these are obviously isolated incidents . . .
Perspective is everything.

Just because a few people aren't lauding the cops and saying how great and heroic each and every cop is does not mean the forum has turned to cop-bashing. The idea that all cops are great and heroic is also a skewed viewpoint. I think very few people on this thread have condemned all cops. It's very much like teachers (which I am). When teachers are being criticized, I feel very hard-pressed to defend them but I also realize that there are some teachers out there doing much more harm than good and some people have very few experiences with outstanding teachers. What is wrong with acknowledging that?

And a few people have already said that because of their experience calling the cops is an absolute last resort, like in a life and death situation and hope to never have to do so.
post #91 of 144
Quote:
Originally Posted by dadinblue View Post
Go to http://odmp.org/browse.php and check out the dead cops. Browse a few of the pages that details how those cops died. Some you will find died by drowning or in a random car accident, but the VAST majority died while helping someone, while doing their job, while serving the public. Your intentional disrespect of their sacrifice speaks volumes as to your character. Andthat you are passing these sentiments on to your children? Great -- job security for me.

I've reread your saga of being tear-gassed at union marches and watching your father get arrested. I suspect that your father's experiences were quite a few years ago and that yours were likely linked to illegal activity, perhaps participating in a riot? Perhaps inciting violence or attempting to create anarchy? Blaming the police for their lawful actions that were in response to your unlawful actions doesn't make a whole lot of sense and isn't going to curry any favour. The vast majority of ordinary North Americans are not rabid unionists, and have no sympathy for them, or their tactics. Do a little research on the Anti Poverty Committee, their antics and public perception.


That's only because the worker's compensation schemes either haven't caught up in those industries yet, or the workers are seen as expendable by all levels -- owners, the employees themselves and the consumers. If the employees in those industries used each and every safety mechanism available to them (like most policemen do...), there would be far fewer deaths.

Let's look at your examples of "workers [that] die becasue the BAD capitalist don't care enough about workers to follow proper safety standards." (as if the company owners should be there, holding the employee's hand each and every day...)

Fisherman: Everytime a fisherman dies, ask yourself if he had a lifejacket or exposure suit on like he was supposed to. Was he clipped on like he was supposed to be? No? How is that the fishing company's fault that the fisher cut corners and didn't do his own due-diligence? The company isn't a babysitter, can't FORCE anyone to save their own lives.

Trappers: I can't find ANY statistics to bear out your claim that this is a dangerous occupation. Please quote legitimate sources to prove this out.

Natural resources: Yes, dangerous work, which is why they get paid well for it, including hazard pay, northern living allowance, isolation allowance, all meals and tranportation to/from camps etc. No one is forced into working in this sector, yet they flock to the region year after year, and prove themselves willing to work cheaper, faster and more unsafely than the next guy. Is it any wonder that they die? It's akin to suicide -- they're CHOOSING to not avail themselves of safety measures. Every employee in BC and AB gets any training which MAY be applicable to their job, including first aid, rescue, toxic gas training and equipment etc. These industries also have dedicated first aid attendants and safety officers whose SOLE job it is is to ensure the safety of the employees. The only other job category to get such attention is construction.

Between 1991-1999, 93 miners died and 21,351 were injured (source: http://www.msha.gov/MSHAINFO/FactSheets/MSHAFCT2.HTM)

Contrast that with 148 police officers killed in 1991 alone http://odmp.org/year.php?year=1991
1992: 169
1993: 162
1994: 179
1995: 184
1996: 142
1997: 176
1998: 175
1999: 151

That's 1661 American police officers DEAD in the same time span that MSHA reports 93 miners died.

Construction: Again, if construction workers would use all of the safety mechanisms available to them, not one life would be lost. Each workplace accident can be traced to an employee's failure to obey simple safety rules.

I think these arguments you are throwing out there are just red herrings, meant to divert attention from the real issue.

According to http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/cius_04/summa...ock/index.html this is what happened in America in 2004:

Every 23.1 seconds: One Violent Crime

Every 32.6 minutes: One Murder
Every 5.6 minutes: One Forcible Rape
Every 1.3 minutes: One Robbery
Every 36.9 seconds: One Aggravated Assault


Every 3.1 seconds: One Property Crime

Every 14.7 seconds: One Burglary
Every 4.5 seconds: One Larceny-theft
Every 25.5 seconds: One Motor Vehicle Theft

And who did the victims call for help?

Police are one of the few professions that actively seek out trouble and make it go away. Do you call a construction worker when your bike is stolen or when you get mugged? Do you call a fisherman when some druggie has set up shop on your front step or latin-american gangs are taking over your neighbourhood? www.knowgangs.com/gang_resources/profiles/ms13/

Miners don't take on armed and dangerous gang members. Police do. Fisherman don't run towards an active-shooter in a mall, nor do construction workers or coal miners. Who does? The Police. Firemen put out fires, while someone has to catch the arsonist. Who? The police. EMS don't go in if it's even remotely unsafe, they wait for who? The police. Seeing a common thread here?




Naw, it's not worth the effort. Flaming only gets people banned by the hypermods on MDC -- I'd sooner meet your disrespectful unionist and veiled-communist rhetoric with fact and figure and then watch it destruct under it's own impossibility.

This thread started out about why police officers have guns and many answers were fielded explaining why police officers are equipped with the tools to do their jobs. Several posters here have hijacked it with their own skewed viewpoints based on their own experiences, as valid as they may be and turned this thread into their own cop-bashing forum. This is regrettable, since these are obviously isolated incidents, and there are hundreds of thousands of police officers in the US, and hundreds of thousands more in Canada -- the vast majority of whom do their jobs with honour, integrity and service to their sworn community.
Assuming that the poster was involved in illegal activities is ridiculous.

And your anti union rhetoric as well.

If you are a police officer in Canada, are you not a member of a union>
post #92 of 144
Quote:
Originally Posted by the_lissa View Post
Assuming that the poster was involved in illegal activities is ridiculous.

And your anti union rhetoric as well.

If you are a police officer in Canada, are you not a member of a union>
I never said I wasn't in a union -- in fact I am very involved in my union, it serves a vital purpose as a buffer between management and those of us out on the street, doing the job. What I commented on was the entire hard-line unionist attitude which is very left-wing and communist in nature. In Canada, that standpoint gets VERY little support, and I suspect less in the US. But if Anarchemama is getting gassed at union 'events', then she is participating in illegal activities -- North America doesn't gas and beat their unionists anymore, and haven't since about the late 1970s. So either her examples are 30 years old or they're coming from overseas, where we don't have Charters and/or Constitutions. I'll edit my comments if it is proven that Anarchemama wasn't doing anything illegal when she was gassed or whatever happened. Until then my objection to her disrespectful and condescending comments stand.

BTW, the RCMP, Canada's largest police force, has no union, and because of that their employees get jerked around left, right and centre. Unions have a function between employees and employers, but they can't be used as a crutch or as an excuse for poor behaviour or a desire to overthrow the government.
post #93 of 144
Quote:
Originally Posted by rootzdawta View Post
Perspective is everything.

Just because a few people aren't lauding the cops and saying how great and heroic each and every cop is does not mean the forum has turned to cop-bashing. The idea that all cops are great and heroic is also a skewed viewpoint. I think very few people on this thread have condemned all cops. It's very much like teachers (which I am). When teachers are being criticized, I feel very hard-pressed to defend them but I also realize that there are some teachers out there doing much more harm than good and some people have very few experiences with outstanding teachers. What is wrong with acknowledging that?
Because the comments made here do tarnish ALL cops. Not one anti-police poster wrote anything about "I dislike Officer #345 because he XYZ to me." OR "I hate the cops in (whatever town) because they used tear gas to..."

The statements made here have been broad and obvioulsy intended to generalize about all police officers, and I object to that.

And to use your example, if I had any reason to bash teachers, I would specify who/where/why, not use massively broad brush strokes to castigate an entire occupation over the actions of a few.
post #94 of 144
On some levels, I think it would be really nice if we could put the whole idea of guns and other ranged lethal weapons- bombs, grenades, nukes, all of it- back into Pandora's Box. Failing that, I don't have a problem with police officers and guns.

One of my current favorite novels is called "Dies the Fire" by SM Stirling. In it, something happens that messes up several major laws of physics, eliminating internal combustion, electricity and gunpowder. One of the characters realizes at one point that she'd far rather have a working gun than have to defend herself from a bigger, stronger opponent without one. And, when I have my paranoid survivalist moments, I sure want a rifle, a pistol and a shotgun in my survival pack. (I need to stop listening to so much Leslie Fish!) Robert Heinlein once said "An armed society is a polite society. Manners are good when one may have to back up his acts with his life." And I see what he means. But I'm glad we have a police force, because I don't want to live in a place where I have to defend my home against armed assailants.

I'm an activist. I've seen some of the situations of misuse of force by law enforcement. I've seen protest support personnel -street medics, legal team, food not bombs- harrassed and intimidated by police. I've heard stories of worse things happening. But if I'm faced with someone who is going to hurt me or someone else, I want there to be someone who can stop him. And vast majority of the stories I hear about abuse of power by police officers do not involve them shooting anyone. Skirting the edge of constitutional rights, yes. Wrongful arrest, yes. Use of excessive force, sometimes. You hear stories of people getting shot when they are mistaken for carrying/reaching for a weapon, but I honestly feel that accidents happen.

You will never hear me say that sailors/airmen/Marines/soldiers are bad people. (Well, maybe Marines, but that's 'cause I'm a Navy brat ) I come from a military family. I'd have joined myself if my health had permitted. I'm married to a Navy veteran. (I'll trash military medicine all day long). However, the primary purpose of the military is to kill people and break things. Depending on how the command decisions are made, this can go horribly wrong (I protested the Iraq war before it began. I still think it was a bad idea. But at this point I'm not sure there's any good solution to what's happening). It also can be a neccessary evil. I feel that warfare is the ultimate failure of human communication.

We have knights and archer toys, and we do have a set of little red firemen that we bought years ago as an alternative to Army men. We love water-shooters around here, some of them (super soakers) are vaguely gun shaped, but we don't have any intention to have toy non-water guns. If dd wants to point her finger or her PB sandwich and say bang bang, I'm not going to stop her, but I don't think kids need realistic weapon props for their battle play. (we do have padded "boffer" swords, because I feel that they are safer than brandishing sticks).

I think, if in the position of the OP, I'd express genuine regret that there is a need for police to have guns. I'd talk about what she should do if she ever found a gun, or if anyone ever pointed a gun at her.
post #95 of 144

I wasn't going to come back.

Quote:
Originally Posted by sithlord_kev View Post
well ambrose,
what did your husband do so a cop had to taser him?
and secondly, before you go saying something about someone pointing a gun at a cop and he should just aim for leg or something you should think twice. a chest is a lot faster to point at in a moment like that. you say you have no faith in the american police force. just because you had a bad accurance with a cop (and we dont know why) doesnt mean they are all bad or dont do their job. i hope you have car trouble someday and no cell phone service, will you flag down a cop? or still be bitter.

good for you karma momma's husband. im glad you stood up
1.) Search my posts I have a thread on it. You can read it for yourself.
2.) I don't care that the chest is 'a lot faster to point at'. You can shoot at a shoulder or thigh or kneecap and have them on the ground and not kill someone.
3.) I don't own a cell phone and HAVE had my car break down. I locked the car and walked the mile and 1/2 to the highway exit to call the tow-truck. Police would be the absolute last people that I would contact. Ever.

Quote:
Originally Posted by dadinblue View Post
Anti-police attitudes are so pervasive in this thread -- but few people seem willing to step up and explain why they feel that way, why their husband was tasered etc. They're just content to sit back and bash away at the police...
I will not explain because quite frankly it would likely lead to a de-railment of thread and that is not the goal here. I'm not content to bash. I want the force to change and improve so I don't HAVE to bash.
post #96 of 144
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ambrose View Post
1.) 2.) I don't care that the chest is 'a lot faster to point at'. You can shoot at a shoulder or thigh or kneecap and have them on the ground and not kill someone.
I guess you just don't get it :
post #97 of 144
Cops have guns for a reason and that reason is to protect themselves from idiots who feel that they are above the law. If someone is firing at them, they have all right to fire back in self-defense. A cop is not going to fire his weapon unless he has no other choice. My father was a cop and I have known a few cop friends and they will tell you that they pray every day that they go out that they wont have to use it. Yes, some cops are corrupt...but not all of them. Movies, tv and radio amplify all of the bad cops but you never really hear of all of the good cops and good stories. These people risk their lives every day to protect good citizens like you and I from crime. And I think we owe them our whole-hearted thanks.

If my child asked me that, and i'm sure he will, I would tell him that Cops are there to protect us and have guns because it helps to keep people safe. There are bad cops out there but they are few and far between amongst the good ones. Honestly, if you also teach your kids about guns and gun safety it wouldn't be as much of an issue and they would gain a greater respect for them and not see them as toys or just lethal weapons.
post #98 of 144
Quote:
Originally Posted by lovethyspirit View Post
Movies, tv and radio amplify all of the bad cops but you never really hear of all of the good cops and good stories.
Nor do we neccessarily remember the good stories. When thinking about personal experiences with the police, the encounters that come to mind first are the one that woke us up in the middle of the night to ask if the car parked across the street belonged to us and some of the scarier, more intimidating officers at the protests I've been to. I don't immediately remember the officer that drove me 15 miles back to my house when my car broke down outside of down and I didn't have tow service. (He did it as his lunch break, too, he wasn't supposed to take me that far.) Nor do I think about the officer that dug into his pocket to cover the last 50 cents of my lunch one day, because I was a little short.
post #99 of 144
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ambrose View Post
2.) I don't care that the chest is 'a lot faster to point at'. You can shoot at a shoulder or thigh or kneecap and have them on the ground and not kill someone.
So. If your child or mother or someone you truly love and care about were in danger of being killed or raped? You would risk the life of your loved one, to save the rapist?

I don't think these people have enough value on this earth to keep alive if it means killing someone I love.

Editing to say, I re-read that and it sounded much nastier than I meant it to. So, I took out the really ugly stuff I said.
post #100 of 144
Quote:
Originally Posted by Laggie View Post
A few years ago I was in line at a grocery store. Ahead of me in line was a mother with a little boy, about four years old. Ahead of them was a police officer.

The little boy asked his mom why the officer had a gun. She said, "Don't worry, it's just a toy gun, it's not real."

I had to try very very hard to keep from bursting out laughing. I think I giggled. The officer turned beet red, but didn't say anything.

Now, I'm not saying that was a great answer... but it sure was funny! Sorry if I'm derailing here but I had to share that one.

Umm, I can't believe noone saw the horrible issue here. The irresponsible parenting that would have a parent tell their child that a gun, ANY gun, was a toy and wouldn't really hurt anyone just blows me away. Just..wow.


The thing about these threads is that posters here tend to forget they are talking about real life people. That police officer you see isn't just some walking uniform, he/she is a person. You don't trade your soul for your badge (although some posters may say they do). A LEO is a father, husband, sister, mother, brother, son...etc. They are following their call to help people in the way they feel is the best to use their talents. 99% of the time, they are good people. Same as any other profession.

And for the record, very few people say they deserved the police treatment they got. To say that a LEO gets off on randomly inflicting pain on inoocent people is just..well...BS.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Dads
Mothering › Mothering Forums › Archives › Miscellaneous › Dads › Why do Police have guns?