Cops wouldn't need to be over-armed if the probability didn't exist that the people they confront are over-armed as well.

If you want both cops and citizens to be less of a threat to each other, go after the NRA and the politicians who support them.

But is it realistic to expect either the cops or the NRA to give up their guns? Perhaps it might be best to go after the politicians that support them? That might be the least difficult path to take?

I am not advocating that cops give up their guns, nor should all citizens. I said "overly-armed".

Given the arsenals some citizens purchase, plus the ease with which one can obtain weapons that go far beyond use for simple self-defense, hunting, sport, etc., we can't expect cops to walk around like Barney Fife patrolling Mayberry's hot beds of crime.

And it's been an escalating problem - deadlier weapons on the street leads to cops on duty outfitted as though they're about to do battle in a war zone. Because in some places, that's exactly what they might be up against when they respond to a call.

Who goes first, the law abiding citizens or the crooks?

If no one else had them??

When told to "stop"....???

Like some other countries who now have hardly and deaths...

And force police then to not use guns like England.

could support!

I don't think he comes even close to the overall danger of an organized police force if they are against the people.

Last edited Sun Dec 7, 2014, 02:18 AM - Edit history (1)