Should we rely on police to defend the public?

Asked by: LukeMckeown
  • The police are capable of defending us.

    The police are very capable of keeping the public safe. Of course there is the argument that the police are not able to prevent certain crimes, such as murder, rape, assault, and so on from happening. But its not possible for them to know when its going to happen. Only the person who is planning it can have any idea. What the police are good for is capturing criminals, as well as for the most part protecting the public from harm.

    In addition, the police protect the public in other ways. By trying to stop drunk driving, keeping people from speeding, and so on. Although not as much action, its still important that somebody do this.

    Of course, my uncle was a State Trooper, so I admit my opinion is a bit biased.

  • Isn't it their job?

    I'm positive that it is the Police's job to protect the public surely? Didn't it come in the job description somewhere? If we're not relying on the police to defend the public then who should we be relying on? In my opinion there is no one more fully equip than the Police to defend us, who have appropriate equipment and the appropriate training. Whether they are there when we need them or not, we should rely on them because I don't think anyone else is capable of defending the public.

  • We definitely should

    The whole entire reason why police are implemented is to police and defend the public. Take the Zimmerman case for example. A man was out on a city watch, armed (a clear paradox to the city "watch" aspect) and killed a young black boy. Whether it was murder or self defense is up for debate however more and more occurrences like this will happen if we rely on untrained civilians to roam the streets like armed professionals.

  • They have no obligation to do so.

    Police are supposed to enforce laws, But have no obligation to do it the moment the law is broken. They have no obligation to protect any random citizen (Warren v. District of Columbia) and cannot be held liable for your victimization when they have a legal document/special relationship saying they do have to protect you (Town of Castle Rock v. Gonzales)
    Cops are back up. Save yourself 'til they get there.

  • No we shouldn't because...

    The Police won't always be there when you need help, you should learn how to defend yourself. The police aren't there to baby sit you. I'm not saying I'm anti police or government, I have family and friends who are in the forces; I still have respect our officers. Peace out

  • Should we rely on the police to defend the public?

    In theory, technically they are set up for that specific purpose: to protect the public in general, they are not set up to protect the populace individually. Here in the states, the U. S. Supreme Court has officially proclaim that law enforcement is only responsible for protecting the general public, not to protect individuals. Besides, the police can't be everywhere at once right when a crime is in progress. This is why some people, if they can afford it, private bodyguards. It's also the purpose of the 2nd amendment, and that is very necessary in rural areas where some people live miles away from the nearest breathing thing alive! The only ones it seems that against the right to protect themselves are the ones who are well off enough in a high tax bracket to be able to live in an area where police protection is taken for granted. I guess people like that think that every neighborhood gets that kind of protection!

  • 9 times out of 10 they wont be there

    The cops are not immediately there at the scene.By the time they catch the criminal, you would be (pick one or all or some) raped, murdered, and/or robbed.The cops are not psychic.They cannot immediately know suzie Q is going to get raped or billy bob gets robbed.That is why we have the 2nd ammendment

  • No we should not.

    The police are only minutes away when seconds count.

    The police have an important function but it is a stretch to believe that the police can stop actual crimes in progress other than in a very tiny percentage of crime. The police are important in follow up investigations and apprehending suspects after the fact.

    The area that the police may excel in is crowd control or major incidents where are known ahead of time. To rely on them for personal protection is not reasonable however.

    The fact that many police departments encourage neighborhood watches, citizen patrol groups, give seminars on safety at home and away, etc., should tell you what the police feel their abilities are and that is that they rely on the public to help them and to keep from being victims.

  • Not a good idea.

    The police cannot and will not always be there for you. So at the end of the day, your safety, and that of your loved ones, is your own responsibility. This is why we have stuff like the 2nd Amendment. It's not a RIGHT to bear arms, it's a RESPONSIBILITY to take charge of your own well-being.

  • No, we should not.

    The police are only there after the crime (except a minority of cases). In the majority of instances, police are there AFTER the crime has been committed, for example rape or a burglary. So why should we rely on their defense? Surely we should be allowed to use force to a higher degree than the criminal-to-be may carry? Why can we not be allowed concealed carry permits in the UK, so people can defend themselves to an extent to fend off burglars, or stop a rape from taking place. These laws being introduced could stop criminals in their tracks.

Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
Cowboy0108 says2013-07-27T01:03:54.347
Everyone should just protect themselves by simply carrying a gun and shooting the violent criminals. We cannot rely on the police to prevent a rape or a murder. We can just rely on ourselves to prevent a rape or a murder.