Why do many police forces around the world not carry guns?

I think that if guns are carried, there is much more of a temptation to use them, whereas if you choose not to do so you might be able to solve the issue in another way, for example by talking or by using another form of law enforcement. Lots of people die because they are shot by the police when they might not have been as dangerous as the police thought that they were, and that is such a shame when a life gets wasted. Of course I'm not saying that police are irresponsible at all, it's just that a gun is a weapon, and while they have the opportunity to use it they may take that chance before it is absolutely and completely necessary.
 
Well of course there's greater temptation to use guns if they are being carried, you don't have the choice if you don't carry them. Regardless, I get your point, it's hard to argue that there has not been situations that could have been handled with proper negotiation, that instead turned into open confrontation with firearms. The problem lies perhaps not in the weapons themselves, but in the associated feeling of empowerment, that leads to risk taking one poor decision-making...

Edit: this was a reply to the post above
 
Do you have any sources to back this up? I am in agreement with you. I assumed it would decrease a lot of gun related violence. Police forces should be taught to adequately handle a situation without firearms anyways rather than rely on their gun. This often leads to rushing for their weapon when unnecessary.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top