And that right there has gotten police killed, because they never expected the driver to shoot them over a ******* broken tail light.
I can't deny that! Police work is a RISKY business. You can't eliminate the risk. But you have to look at the OTHER side, look at how many innocent people have been killed for absolutely no reason because the police misinterpreted an action, were over-reactive, or had the wrong person? Are you saying they should eliminate as much risk as possible by treating every person as public enemy #1 and putting their life at risk in even the simplest situations? Maybe when the police come to your door to ask for donations to the policeman's ball they should have a gun pointed at you as you open the door. I mean, there IS the risk that you'll open the door with an AK-47 blasting away.
.. I don't blame the officers one bit and frankly I think /everyone/ should have guns on their dumbasses when pulled over - why the hell should an officer risk their lives for us the way we've been treating and blaming them for everything?
I haven't been treating or blaming them! That has mostly come from first BARACK OBAMA and ERIC HOLDER, which spurred and inflamed the Baltimore riots and trickled down into these radical hate groups like Black Lives Matter. That has all been coming from the previous federal government. If the police start pointing a loaded weapon at you, right at your chest even when you clearly pose no risk, you will see opinion of the police quickly erode even with the general public. If you had a brain you would realize that the best solution to eliminating risk (when you can) is to make intelligent, smart decisions and base your actions on a case by case basis. Let's face it, there are some very good cops, but then there are some bad ones as well. A one size fits all solution, especially when you are dealing with lives is never the best.
If you really want to eliminate risk, would you have the police at every encounter, even a flat tire, have six cops yank all of the passengers out of their car, throw them on the ground, handcuff their arms behind their back, kneel on their neck with a gun pointed at the back of their head? Congratulations, you have just created a brutal fascist police state.
IF you're a normal person you can keep your ******* attitude in check and follow the officers requests without a problem - regardless of the "scary gun" after all. Perhaps it would teach these punk asses some self control and do them some good...
Maybe. But you overlook the real issue, and that is society. You won't find police pointing guns at people for no immediate reason in Bel Air, or other swanky neighborhoods. The key is to base your actions on the needs of the situation, not by some blanket rule. If you approach a car with your hand on your holster, it shouldn't take a well-trained officer more than a second to react to sudden moves, pull his gun, aim and fire. If the person in the car already has his hand on a gun as well, then there is going to be a problem and you can't eliminate that unless you simply shoot the occupant in the back of the head as you approach every car. You can't eliminate risk and you fail to see that polarity creates polar opposites. The role of an officer is SUPPOSED to be as a friendly neighborhood Constable On Patrol, keeping the peace, diffusing situations, and helping people. What you propose is the militarization of the police into virtual S.W.A.T teams treating every person and every situation with the highest suspicion. All that will get you is MORE people killed, police included, by utterly eroding trust in your police and creating widespread fear and mistrust of them as a potential hair-trigger assassination squad.
