Social Question

rojo's avatar

Where do we put the armed policemen now?

Asked by rojo (21952points) December 24th, 2012

Today, four firefighters were shot as they responded to a fire.
Thus the question.
Do we put them on each truck or do we send a swat team to every fire along with the truck?
What about the next situation? Do we just keep chasing the killers from incident to incident until there is a cop on every corner and paid mercenaries, excuse me, “security guards” in every business?

Observing members: 0 Composing members: 0

20 Answers

jerv's avatar

How about if we accept that the world is a messed up place and stop being so fucking paranoid? There is no way to absolutely stop stuff like this, and you really reach a point of diminishing returns, and often a point where the cure is worse than the disease.

Shit happens; wipe, and move on!

augustlan's avatar

That was my thought, too, @rojo, when the NRA said armed security should be placed at every school. Shootings can happen anywhere, at any time, and armed security isn’t going to change that, unless they are everywhere. The NRA “solution” seems so shortsighted. Things need to change, but that isn’t the change I want to see.

bolwerk's avatar

The NRA might be right that their silly “good guy with a gun” proposal will stop spectacular blood baths. It’s the rare spectacular blood bath that catches people’s eyes, afterall. Daily urban gun violence gets ignored, even if that’s what will most likely increase due to increased firearm proliferation, killing even more people in the process. It will just happen more quietly.

jerv's avatar

Food for thought; While Columbine may have been mitigated by the presence of an armed guard, it was not outright prevented.

LuckyGuy's avatar

A police officer with a gun was credited for shortening the tragedy.

The perp was a nut jpb who had already been in prison for killing his grandmother 30 years ago. He was a felon and not eligible to own or carry any kind of weapon.

How about locking up or treating nut jobs? That seems to be another common factor.
I think we have a better chance of doing that then outlawing guns.

wundayatta's avatar

We need to work on becoming a more civil society. This will take centuries. We start by reducing guns and improving our ability to help those in need. Both of those tasks will take centuries. What we need is resolve and an understanding we are not fixing this overnight. We are talking about cultural change. That takes a long time.

CWOTUS's avatar

I think everyone can agree, both those for gun rights and those in favor of abolishing all private ownership of firearms, that there are too many guns in the hands of too many criminals and nut cases. Can we agree on that?

As @LuckyGuy has suggested, why is it that so many people think the problems will go away “if only we outlaw the guns”? Aside from creating a whole new class of outlaw (because history has shown that most populations around the world – the USA is not at all special in this regard – will not register, give up or destroy their weapons), you still have the crazies and the outlaws on the streets. And you can bet that they won’t be giving up their weapons.

Let’s do something – something effective – to get the crazies and the dangerous outlaws off the streets. We’d go a long way toward that end if we’d give up our stupid “War on Some Drugs”, which tends to make more people (nominal criminals, because of the laws against drugs) fear and fight the police.

burntbonez's avatar

Most of the dangerous outlaws we know about are off the street. It’s the one we don’t know about that cause the problems. And we usually can’t know about them until they make themselves known, by which time it is too late to prevent the deaths.

jerv's avatar

@wundayatta I agree with the need for cultural change, but I don’t think trying to take guns away will help. I find that it;s far more effective to remove the desire for something than to try to restrict/ban access to it. Forbidden fruit is far more alluring than things that taste far better, as the thrill of getting away with something is more intoxicating than any flavor, if you catch my drift.

wundayatta's avatar

I do agree with you, @jerv. I’d rather people give up guns voluntarily. In order for that to happen, they have to start to trust society. That’s still a long ways away.

woodcutter's avatar

@burntbonez Known dangerous outlaws are pretty well known, the one’s who are out of prison usually return to the same lifestyle they had before prison. Most end up back in prison because they are still dangerous. The legal system lets them out for us to deal with. Because of the rules their presence and intentions can be suspect but legally they can’t be arrested unless they break the conditions of their parole agreements.

There will be a cluster of these crimes until they peter out. Seems that is how they run their course. These wacky acts of violence will never be stopped, unless there can be a way to know the future. Criminals have be dodging gun laws that are meant primarily for them but end up making things harder for law abiding folks who are predictably compliant.

LuckyGuy's avatar

The nut job killed his grandmother with a hammer! Let’s outlaw those.
Only rubber mallets should be permitted. Claw hammers are too dangerous.

He was allowed to plead guilty to a lesser charge of manslaughter the day before the case was going to trial. That’s why he was let out early. Bastard.

jrpowell's avatar

Most people kill out of rage. Stuff in the news makes up a small percentage of gun deaths. Making it harder for the average person to get guns would help prevent “crimes of passion” and other acts that people tend to be less upset about after a nights sleep.

Nobody thinks you can solve the problem overnight but we can certainly make it less bad.

People still die in car accidents so maybe we should get rid of seat-belts~

jerv's avatar

@LuckyGuy I have heard of murders with a wedge of Parmesan cheese as well :/

bucko's avatar

Banks have armed guards and they still get robbed. It’s all about who has more firepower.

woodcutter's avatar

The average cop shoots their service pistol once in a blue moon. They aren’t really that much as proficient with them as the average gun owner. That’s why posting beat cops in malls and schools would only be an appearance of a deterrent. It would be better than nothing at all but let’s not overplay their efficacy.

LuckyGuy's avatar

New update on this case. The nutjob’s mother died recently and she asked that the money go to the local fire department. There is talk that she gave money to that organization and he felt bitter about it. He also killed his sister and left her body in the house he set on fire. 7 homes destroyed. 2 firemen dead. 2 injured.

ucme's avatar

Do unarmed policemen guard paralympians?

woodcutter's avatar

@LuckyGuy His situation should have been monitored by the parole system, like unannounced living inspections. There’s a good chance they would have been discovered and off to prison he would have gone. Again these people who legally should not have had the weapons in the first place go unchecked. So many early indicators ignored and unrecognized..

Bellatrix's avatar

So if I am reading this right, in order to stop guns getting into the wrong hands the US needs to enhance the treatment of mental health, to put armed guards (however they are dressed) in schools and universities and you need more parole officers to search the premises of released criminals.

You might need to sort out your budget, this is all going to cost a shit load of money.

Answer this question




to answer.
Your answer will be saved while you login or join.

Have a question? Ask Fluther!

What do you know more about?
Knowledge Networking @ Fluther