Does anyone else agree with me that we limit the power of cops waaaaaaaay too much? They have all the ridiculous, time-wasting procedures they have to go through, they're not allowed to shoot to wound, and if there's a fight between a cop and a suspect, people tend to worry about the suspect much more than the people who work every day to keep us safe. I'm not saying that we should give them unlimited strength to do what they please, but it's truly to the point where vigilante's could do a better job than police, just because cops have their hands tied.
the laws are layed out in our best interest, really cops would kill more people and say it was an "accident" when they were aiming for a non lethal spot, plus lead can cause lead poisoning. maybe if they were a bit more forceful it would be for the best, and if they were all armed with rubbers bullets as well as real ones, serious injury could be avoided in "small" and easily controlled situations. for crime like bank robbing, and other serious scenarios, shooting to KILL would be best in my opinion. im just not that... passionate?
I agree, there is a chance of corruption in the police force, but is that any reason to sacrifice the life of an honest police officer just because a suspect is so high on drugs he doesn't even notice the can of pepper spray being emptied in his face. That happens all the time in todays system. If police were allowed to shoot to wound, I guarantee police fatalities would drop.
1) Because criminals might just think twice if they know they can actually get shot for what they're doing, and
2) I don't care how drugged up you are, if you get kneecapped with a nine millimeter, you're not getting up any time soon.
Are you freaking daft? Get. Out. Of. My. House. Now.
Cops have far too much power. And people invest too much reliance in them. People so not want to take care of their own problems, so they call the cops. Anytime you trust anyone with that much power things are going to go wrong. Give a man total control over a nation, and expect bad things to happen. Give a group of people the power over a small area and expect bad things to happen. Give a group of people guns, other weapons, cars, control of the law AND the power over a small area...that's &$#^ crazy.
So you support vigilanteism? The police are there to set in order. If people just enforce the law themselves, then I would have gotten shot last week when this kid told his mom I pushed him off his bike, when I did no such thing. This lady's F'in crazy, and she threatened a law suit. Thankfully, we have the police force, who not only replace the very gory end for me, they also are a good deterrent from her getting her shotgun and blowing my brains out. And you say that we can expect bad things to happen when we give a group of people control over the of an area. What alternatives are there, besides anarchy?
Yes, and that is a problem. However, when you consider the amount of corruption in the police force of America after all the screening programs, versus the amount of corruption you would get from a system where the law is enforced by anyone who can get a board with a nail in it, I think I would pick police.
Also, Dacer, to what you said earlier, Lead Poisoning only occurs when you ingest lead or have it inside of your for a long time. Bullets would be removed within a few hours, not nerely enough time to get lead poisoning.
If there is the constant threat of being killed for screwing around, you would not be screwing around.
Also, if that was the normal way of taking care of problems, it would not be that severe. If you pushed someone, expected to maybe get a beating. You try to kill someone, expect to see oblivion. In other words, the punishment would go along with the crime.
Think back to the middle ages. If someone wronged you, or you thought they did, go duel. The one still breathing ends up being correct.
If anyone tried truly abusing this system, they would in turn be taken care of. People wouldn't be able to go around killing people and trying to falsely justify it. They would be found out and killed(or killed by the relative of a victim.)
People these days are too soft, too coddled by the thought of being safe thanks to the boys in blue. They do not know how to handle their own problems, their own lives. They value being 'safe' over bring free. They are the sheep, and the police are both the shepard and wolf.
Yes, someone who abused the system would soon be killed Problem? That doesn't make me feel a whole lot better, since I'm lying dead in a ditch somewhere.
People are too stupid to let everyone take care of themselves. If that was the way it was, I would have been killed long ago, and yet strangely, I've never been arrested. This i because human beings are naturally incredibly violent creatures.
Also, you say that people are too soft. I've met people who grew up in areas where no one in their right mind goes unless they had to. One of them is a man I respect very much; my Kung Fu teacher. But he is almost absolutely merciless to anyone who screws with him. He's killed 3 people, and broken so many peoples' bones he lost count years ago. Maybe it's just my preference, but I don't think people should have to live in a world like that.
Your problem is that you think in the now, with everything the way it is now but with new rules.
That is not the case. You must think as if my criteria were the only regulations for...let's say a thousand years. People would not kill without a good reason, and society would accept that. If you live in fear of death should you wrong someone, you would think twice before wronging someone.
And if someone thinks you wronged them badly enough to want you dead and can't be disuaded, make sure you don't die. Quick wits and a quicker hand would be the judge, jury and executioner. If your tounge is not plated in silver, you better know how to hold your own. The weak and stupid die, the strong and intelligent live.
@Devoidless, I totally agree that that's how the world should be. The thing is, yes, I'm thinking in the now. Uless you've developed a time machine, we can't change history to make our entire society that way. Also, no one would stand for it. We have become so removed from nature, we have forgotten what the world truly is. Also, you say that people would think twice before commiting a crime. I'd be willing to bet that a large portion of the people who commit crimes never think about the retribution.
@Yakooza99k, A local news station near me did a story a while ago, and they found that the number of police reports about officers injured by violent suspects and fugitives almost doubled the number of reports of police brutality. The thing is, people care more about the rights of some drug runner or bank robber than a gov't employee. ALso, if they had more power, they could more easily incapacitate some with stronger force, rather than being forced to beat someone who is fighting back senseless with a knightstick.
I agree that the police are restricted quite a bit, and that they should receive more power. But with more power means that some police chiefs and deputies could become corrupt and look the other way with bribes.
Does anyone else agree with me that we limit the power of cops waaaaaaaay too much?
Your question is too broad. In what areas are you refering to? Like physically? Coming from the equipment they're given? Or do you mean legally? Like searching houses when they deem fit and such.
In Australia police can't legally have taser guns. Recently a 15 year old boy commit suicide through police action. They got a call that it turns out was from the kid saying that there was a disterbance at a park. The police showed up and this kid had two knives and was trying to attack people. They police fired a warning shot into the ground first because he was a child (which is illegal mind you) and then they pepper sprayed him 3 times and he still didn't go down. In the end one of them shot him in the leg and when he still kept coming at them they ended up shooting him dead. Think about how much cleaner and less depressing the end of that story would have been if it went something along the lines of "They tasered him and he collapsed."
So to answer your question better equipment should be issued depending on the country but they are fine with the legal power they have as it is. Even that may be too much.
I believe that police power is slightly restricted but if more power was given, then there would be corruption and other undesirable effects. Why can't all police officers use non lethal weapons such as tasers?
