Amazon.com Widgets

Should law enforcement/police use accurate targeting taser guns instead of guns?

  • Sounds good to me

    To be honest, i don't know how effective tasers would be. In theory, this is a great idea and would really help to control the gun culture in America. On the other hand, tasers are a lot less intimidating and trying to stop a criminal with a taser might not work as well as a gun. But overall, i agree with this and think it would help to make the world more peaceful.

    Posted by: WSB
  • Should the Police or Law Enforcement replace their guns for Accurate Targeting Taser Guns?

    Here's a Gun-Control Idea
    Why doesn't the government replace all guns with Accurate Targeting Taser guns?

    I just saw a video of two cops shooting a dog in the head in NYC (it survived) and it made my blood boil.

    The guns should only be in the hands of those without a criminal background and mental wellness.

    Only for self defense and the tasers should have a limited voltage to only paralyze the target but not killing it.

    I'm not too sure about those in the military but yeah.

  • Both weapons should be available

    Just saw the video of the second person killed by police officer near Ferguson. If the now dead person had a knife did he need to be shot with 5 or 6 bullets? Wouldn't a non fatal weapon be more indicated as the life of the two officers was not at imminent risk?

  • Non violence and using low voltage tasers

    Too many people get killed by guns .. Innocent people and people who could turn their lives around.
    So a limited voltage taser would make sense and teaching law enforcement how to use them safely (as well as the military) would be a huge statement to us all about doing things the most peaceful way possible!

  • We'll go with in theory.

    We'll go with the theory that the taser gun could actually reach a long distance. On that note, I don't know if they should have it in lieu of a firearm but possibly along with. This would give them another less violent line of defense and possibly help alleviate friendly fire (when a victim in a hostage situation is mistakenly slain by the law). It's worth considering. But I don't feel comfortable with unarmed police officers at this point in time.

  • Guns for Life

    Criminals prefer unarmed victims. With that said, if a criminal is armed with a gun and the people, let alone the police are not carrying guns, then it would be easy to rob a store/facility because nobody could fight back and the criminal knows that.
    Example: If you were a criminal and you were trying to rob a store, but everyone inside had a loaded firearm, would you enter?

  • Stupid Idea, Why?

    In a hostage situation the taser does not possess the accuracy of a firearm, the taser is a one shot as well. In a gun fight the Taser is useless and the use of deadly force is the only way out. People die from the firearms of the law because they are breaking the law in the first place.

  • That's a stupid idea

    At least in America where criminals have such easy access to guns. Tazers only shoot about 15 to 25 feet, a gun can shoot a lot farther than that. How do you think a hostage situation would end up under those circumstances? Not good for the police or hostages, that's for certain.

  • Far too dangerous

    If the police can't tell the difference between a white stick and a sword, would you want them carrying tasers? When the Police go back to 'Protecting and Serving' the public and stop talking to us like we are something they trod in, only then can they be trusted not to taser us just for the sheer hell of it!


Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
Ragnar says2013-06-19T22:15:14.367
One day maybe as primary, yet the system still needs improvement.