The Instigator
Sgraf
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
socialpinko
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points

Should law enfocement (poice officers) be armed with deadly weapons

Do you like this debate?NoYes-1
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 3/6/2011 Category: Politics
Updated: 6 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,923 times Debate No: 15094
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (0)
Votes (0)

 

Sgraf

Con

I plan to argue that the law enforcement officials such as police officers should not be routinely armed with lethal weapons. By lethal weapons i mean weapons such as handguns, shotgun, and rifles that are used with the intention of killing a suspect. While in today's society violent crimes committed with these weapons are a very real concern, I feel it is the responsibility of our police force to use advances in modern technology to their advantage and use non lethal weapons to disable suspects. One advantage of this strategy is that there will be a lowered amount of occurrences in which police officers are able to use these weapons to abuse their power and intimidate ordinary everyday citizens. This strategy may also help to keep the police officers themselves safer when involved in a conflict with a suspect. By this i mean that if a suspect knows that the police attempting to arrest him do not have deadly weapons that can be used to kill him the suspect will not feel as threatened and may not feel the need to defend themselves by any means necessary. This may also protect police officers to some degree because when they know that the weapon they are firing is non lethal they will not feel as much hesitation to fire that weapon in order to defend themselves against a suspect. I am not a police officer, nor have i ever been in a conflict where i might need to use a deadly weapon but it is easy to understand how someone may have second thoughts about using a firearm that will kill someone. The use of non lethal weapons by police officers in the United States will also prevent accidental and tragic deaths that could have been avoided. Probably one of the most memorable examples of this is the death of Amadou Diallo. Mr. Diallo was shot 19 times by police officers on the steps outside of his apartment after reaching into his jacket and pulling out his wallet. The lighting outside the apartment building was dim and the officers panicked when Mr. Diallo pulled an object out of his coat. While the officers did act in a way that they were trained too, protecting themselves from the threat of possibly being shot themselves, had they used non lethal weapons such as a high voltage Taser or guns that fire rubber bullets this situation could have easily been diffused and Mr. Diallo likely would still be alive. Some other examples of weapons that could be potentially be used by police officers are firearms that shoot out pepper balls, which are similar to paint balls except that they contain the active irritant that is present in pepper spray, stun grenades, tear gas, scent based weapons known as maldorants, Which create a stench that is extremely unbearable and hard to wash off. While these weapons are currently in use by law enforcement around the globe i feel that they should be used instead of the lethal weapons that police officers use today and increased research and development for these types of weapons will make the world a safer place for people on both sides of the law.
socialpinko

Pro

I'm sorry I misunderstood the resolution and thought that I would be con. My apologies.
Debate Round No. 1
Sgraf

Con

Sgraf forfeited this round.
socialpinko

Pro

this debate is pointless
Debate Round No. 2
Sgraf

Con

Sgraf forfeited this round.
socialpinko

Pro

blah blah blah
Debate Round No. 3
No comments have been posted on this debate.
No votes have been placed for this debate.