5 countries where police officers do not carry firearms — and it works well

[Starboard Tack]

Does anyone think this might work in the US, and if so, what will it take?
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/worldviews/wp/2015/02/18/5-countries-where-police-officers-do-not-carry-firearms-and-it-works-well/

In the United States, it seems obvious that police officers carry guns and are allowed to use them.

In other places, however, this would be considered a provocation and a violation of law.

In Britain, Ireland, Norway, Iceland and New Zealand, officers are unarmed when they are on patrol. Police are only equipped with firearms in special circumstances. It's a strategy that seems to work surprisingly well for these countries. Police officers there have saved lives -- exactly because they were unable to shoot.

"The practice is rooted in tradition and the belief that arming the police with guns engenders more gun violence than it prevents," Guðmundur Oddsson, an assistant professor of sociology at Northern Michigan University, told The Washington Post.
More at link http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/worldviews/wp/2015/02/18/5-countries-where-police-officers-do-not-carry-firearms-and-it-works-well/

[Dawson Leery]

1. kick

[Gregorian]

2. But through convoluted theory, based on fear, we feel that more might makes us safe.

I was just watching this video where Margaret Thatcher is confronted by a child asking the questions about the atomic bomb. The child is obviously more conscious and sane than the adult. The argument is the same for guns as it is for nukes.

There really is only one answer, and it's being kind. It goes against logic, and it leaves us vulnerable. We're always vulnerable, with or without guns an might. That's life. Why is this so hard for some people to understand.

?t=50

[Starboard Tack]

6. Great clip and very poignant.

Poor Maggie. I think she actually believed she was making the world safer, along with her buddy Ron. Amazing that we are still here, considering the fact that these guys were our "leaders", but then I fast forward to the "Dubya/Cheney/Rummy" years and Maggie/Ron almost sound reasonable. Is it just me, or are we in a downward spiral that gets tempered, momentarily, by the likes of Clinton/Blair/Obama?

[napi21]

7. I agree with those countries, but It would never work in the US. There have been way too many years

of "gun freedom" here to ever make the general public give them up, or even subscribe to mandatory storage at an approved facility where they could be accessed for use as sport weapons.

If there was EVER a chance of disarming the public, Sandy Hook would have been it, but you see how well that worked.

Obviously if the general public has open access to all kind of guns, you really can't disarm the police.

[JonLP24]

19. Ironically, that's pretty much how military bases are

Personally owned weapons if you live in the barracks or on-post housing must be stored in the arms room. To go out hunting or whatever you check it in and out.

[raccoon]

21. +1000. nt

[lumberjack_jeff]

23. Never is a long time.

But I agree that it would never work in my lifetime. n/t

[NYC_SKP]

3. Recommended. (nt)

[daleanime]

4. K&R.....

[Skittles]

5. HELLO, arming people IN GENERAL engenders more gun violence than it prevents

but here in America, we coddle the fears of gun humping paranoid assholes

[romanic]

8. Unrealistic for the U.S.

Our population is much greater and more spread out compared to those countries. Plus we have way too many guns (both in the hands of legal and illegal owners) that would outnumber any police department.

[Starboard Tack]

9. Interesting points you raise. Let's address them.

Why is the population size a factor? Everything is relative.
Why is population density a factor? New Zealand has about half the population density of the US and Norway has less than that, close to one third the density.

How does the number of guns in private hands outnumbering those in police hands have any bearing?

There are many more guns in private hands in all those countries than in police hands.

[dreamnightwind]

10. I agree

We need to deescalate, domestically and overseas. Some industries (many, actually) prefer the culture of control and violence. Good for industries, bad for humans.

It's way past time for us to start examining how things work or don't work in other countries. The comments of "it would never work here" are often little more than misdirection, let's try it and see. What we're doing now is obviously not working. I think guns are the problem, not the solution. Actually, poverty and our warrior culture are the problems, neither of which will be fixed with guns.

[Ironing Man]

11. comparisons...

its not your police, or even your guns, its your culture.

from the statistics i've found (and therefore i could well be wrong..) 47 Police Officers in the US were killed as a consequence of people trying to harm them in 2014 alone.

in the period 1900 to 2014 in the UK, 70 Police Officers were killed in the UK as a consequence of people trying to harm them (excluding NI related terrorism).

the US murder rate per head of population is four times that of the UK, (in 2014, the UK with a population of 60m had a total of 722 murders, while the US with a population of 318m had over 12,000..), while the UK's overall crime rate per head of population is far higher than the US's.

[Spitfire of ATJ]

12. I remember this debate in the 70s....

It was around the same time they were talking about switching to the metric system.

[Donald Ian Rankin]

13. If you introduce UK style gun control, you can have unarmed police officers

But until the 2nd amendment is repealed, it's clearly a non-starter.

[Spider Jerusalem]

14. Six

police in Japan for the most part aren't armed, either.

[MattSh]

15. Ahh, but they are not exceptional countries like the USA.

Exceptional countries need exceptional police with exceptional firepower.

[BrotherIvan]

16. What do these countries have in common?

Wait for it...

[davidpdx]

17. I believe South Korean police do not carry firearms

They also don't stalk the doughnut shops either.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

20. With over 300,000, 000 guns in the hands of private Americans

With over 300,000, 000 guns in the hands of United States civilians no sentient person would join the police if it meant he or she couldn't be similarly protected.

The proliferation of guns is a scourge upon the land that can not be solved by disarming the police.

[Starboard Tack]

22. Gotta start somewhere

I don't advocate disarming anyone. I advocate moving toward a society that does not live in fear, where police officers are not the "enemy", but fully integrated members of the community. So many live in bedroom communities like Simi Valley, California, where they feel both safe and among "their own kind".

Cops should have access to weapons, when needed, but not be routinely armed, especially in urban areas.