portland independent media center  
images audio video
newswire article commentary united states

police / legal

Police should not carry handguns

OK- maybe a cop in tualitan needs a handgun in case a rabid dog is wandering around.
In a densely packed urban area a policemans handgun is a disaster waiting to happen.

Smart cops can almost always talk people into settling down. Dumb ones can usually tazer or club people into submission. Ultra-violent cops and jail guards sometimes beat people to death, but more often lives lost at the hands of police are due to reckless, instinctual handgun use. If a situation is so bad that the police really think they need deadly force a rifle or shotgun is a much better weapon anyways, and a scared cop is a lot less likely to make a tragic mistake.


Oakland is more dangerous today that it was a week ago. Especially for the cops. It should be. People have a not only a right but a responsibility to be outraged.

The sad thing is that those who are harmed by this are exclusively poor and minority populations in the city. What does this do to 911 response time when the cops are so scared they have to spend time warming up the armored car and rounding up the swat team before they will come to your address?

Don't blame the handguns! 09.Jan.2009 08:04

justme

This issue here is specific to the cop involved, whether his action was intentional or due to lack of proper training and/or equipment. Tens and possibly hundreds of thousands of civilians legally and responsibly carry pistols daily for defensive purposes, including some people in the Bay Area. It is not the guns that are the problem - it is the people behind them!

"people" behind the handguns.. 09.Jan.2009 10:25

exactly.

these cop "people" (i use the term *extremely* lightly) should not be armed. whether a civilian arms themselves is a matter for ourselves to decide.