How To Prevent Police Shooting Persuasive Essay

Since 2013 there have been 268 school shootings in the United States alone (Everytown for Gun Safety, 2017). School gun violence is becoming increasingly probable. It is imperative that our government and our citizens come together to create a solution and implement a plan to prevent and stop the occurrence of school gun violence. The solution, for some, is to bring more guns into the picture by arming teachers, principals, and other school officials, or place armed police officers at school sites (LaPierre, 2015). For others, the solution is to make even stricter laws regarding gun use or to get rid of these weapons altogether. These certainly are drastic options; I must say that I do believe the true solution is to increase the focus on mental health services and by extension, mental health awareness. There is simply not enough focus on the mental health of our youth and of our students. Mental health services are the most important step to making schools safer, because this solution touches the entire problem of violence at its root level.

A very controversial topic throughout the United States and the world is guns. As American citizens, we have a constitutional right to own a fire arm. But why is a gun so important and why is it such a huge part of the United States division of its people? The division starts with people using this Second Amendment to harm people. In recent years, mass shootings have become the norm for the United States and that outcome is not the purpose of the Second Amendment. These mass shooting happen everywhere from movie theatres to concert halls. But the majority of these mass shootings seem to happen at schools with innocent children aging from kindergarten to high school students. With the deaths of children in school rising, the urge to find a solution and develop prevention tactics have become top priority. Not only limiting the access to guns but finding out the reason behind the shootings will help aid in the fight to stop gun violence in schools.

Have you ever been pulled over by a police officer? It is a nerve-wracking incident where you question what you were doing. Why were you pulled over? Was it due to speeding, or failing to obey basic laws of the road? Or, is it something else, like your race, appearance, or other reasons that should not result in a traffic stop? On average, an individual of color is thirty-one percent more likely to be pulled over by a police officer compared to a white individual. Black individuals are also about twenty-three percent more likely to pulled over than a Hispanic individual (Ingraham). By these statistics from 2011, it is reasonable not only to conclude but also infer that police specifically target black individuals. Think about it, many police-related incidents broadcasted on a news channel involves a police officer pulling over a black individual for a traffic violation, and the incident escalating from there. Even though different people drive differently, police target black individuals when it comes to traffic violations. Police are more likely to pull over a black individual and search their vehicle than any other race. Racial profiling being performed by police is an easy subject to have a viewpoint on but is not discussed enough.

Police shooting has become a huge issue across The United States. Community will usually become outraged if the shooting was committed by a white or black cop who shoots and kills a black subject. Protests seem to follow in areas where the police force is predominantly white and the suspect is black. Regardless of rather or not the officer is right or wrong. This started a huge conflict of rather or not the shooting was done due to racism. These conflicts affect the communities the shootings happen in and can draw national attention like in the police shoot death of Sylville Smith. One resolution that will help to eliminate racism within the police force and stop the misconception that most police shooting happen due to racism, is

Gun control can be such a sensitive subject for many gun activists in United States. For years the government has tried to enforce strict gun laws but time and time again they are overturned by the people who fear that their status as a republic would be in jeopardy. If the government were to go forward with the idea, the country would benefit and suffer in various areas. What the government would need to institute is something similar just as the United Kingdom has done. A gun ban is essential in preventing poachers from hunting endangered animals, dismantling organized crime, and preventing corruption from police officers.

Here underlines the major problem in America; guns. Fundamentally without guns, the percentage of police shootings would be next to nothing, furthermore the percentage of officers killed/ attacked would also be next to nothing. 58% of police shootings were as a result of the victim having a gun, if that person didn’t have gun then they possible would still be alive today. The NRA belief that the best way to stop a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun, however if guns were just taken out of the equation then the amount of police shootings and even public shootings would severely decrease. Not to say that police officers shouldn’t have guns, in the most extreme cases such as a SWAT raid, the use of guns should be permitted, like it is in the UK. But police officers that walk the streets of America, should not have a gun, as long as members of the public don’t have a gun. However, unfortunately this will never be the case because in America it is their second amendment right to have a gun, meaning the only way to get rid of that amendment is through 2/3rds of the senate and ¾ of

When the shootings were questioned as “…civil rights violations…” the investigation known as the “DOJ Resolution” was put into motion (Mckay and Proctor A1). Supporters that are against the shootings voice their own ways of fixing this problem. One supporter suggests that APD should change their use of deadly ballistics and commit to the use of “bean bag” guns because they are less than lethal and that they have great stopping power. Another supporter thinks all APD officers should be trained in “CIT” (crisis intervention training), which would support a passive and non-deadly approach to de-escalating a problem before it gets out of hand (Heinz C2). I personally think these suggestions may be the best way to come to a mutual agreement between those against police shootings and the police department.

In 2015, the Washington Post reported 987 fatal shootings by on-duty officers in their database (Lowery, 2016). These high numbers along with the role of media, have caused officers to be scrutinized more than ever. Many of the largest police departments were asked to implement new training and implement new policies that would decrease the number of fatal shootings (Lowery, 2016). The reform goals were to decrease the number of shootings that were not a crime, but sparked an outrage in communities (Lowery, 2016). If you look at these goals of reform, it does make sense to try to find ways to decrease deadly shootings that are not necessary. It just does not make sense to me to limit officers so much that they are not effective in stopping crime and we are ultimately ruled by

Guns should be used as a last resort, and officers would be required to provide the offender with a verbal warning before pulling out their gun or shooting. Giving this warning might give the officer time to calm the person down and actually determine if the situation is threatening enough. Patrolling in pairs would also help to ease any fear, and it would allow officers to get a second opinion on whether they should be considering using lethal force. Finally, my policy would advocate for a more diverse police force. Not only does this refer to race, but it also refers to gender. Multiple studies have been performed showing that women police officers are less likely to use deadly force on African-Americans. Additionally, offenders are less likely to act in a way towards women police officers that would cause them to consider pulling out their gun. I plan to provide evidence from these studies in my

With US being among the top when it comes police involved shootings per capita. Its is imperative to curb the use of deadly and follow the model of countries like

Sometimes in order to protect the people, they may have to put force on another. Shooting is a common last resort, and many people are affected by the gun. In order for a situation to get terrible enough for the use of guns, there are a variety of different options that the suspect could be doing: wielding a weapon, suicidal, mentally troubled, running when told to halt (Chappell). If one is opposing a large threat to the community or an officer, and that officer knows someone could possibly get killed by that person, the officer has the authority of self-defense

And before I get bombarded with a wave of ambiguous questions and angry protests saying “How many times do we hear of policemen being killed, surely guns could stop all this?” No. They couldn’t. Even more people would have needlessly died if the policemen were to have pulled out a gun as youths get even more scared at this and it can lead to reckless actions from both the policemen and the guilty party. There would also be mistakes, and with armed policemen, this could lead to innocent people being shot. This can happen either by mistake because the armed officers are acting on inaccurate information, or because they are bystanders caught in the cross-fire of a shoot-out. If we arm everybody, it would also mean that there would be less training in gun control, so mistakes would rise there. The world saw this in cases such as the Amadou Diallo shooting in New York in 1999, or the shooting of Jean Charles De Menezes at Stockwell underground station in 2005. Would we like more of these to happen? All those that would vote for

Nowadays more and more crimes are being committed and police officers protect us from criminal behaviour. I will discuss whether police officers should be allowed to carry guns in this essay. I strongly insist that they should not be allowed to carry guns. There are some reasons to support my opinion. First of all, police officers actually are carrying a gun to protect the people. However, I have never been

Police brutality is one of the United States main problems. Police officers he been abusing of their power and they discriminate people mostly because either there black or Hispanic. They discriminate our people because we are "dangerous, murders,rapist, and drug addicts”. Police shouldn't be allowed to have so much power they abuse of it hurting people killing them just because they assume they are armed or dangerous. They shouldn't be allowed to carry weapons only their batons and tasers because they don't need to carry a gun it's unnecessary. Britain police do not carry guns because they're trained to protect themselves with their batons our police should be trained the same way. Just cause u have a gun or badge doesn't make any difference

I agree that less-lethal weapons have the potential to prevent serious injuries caused by firearms. However, it increases the risk of a suspect to be noncompliant and less threatened by an authority figure. In many instances, non-lethal weapons such as, pepper spray or Taser do not work correctly and end up risking the officers’ lives. If a suspect has the intent to harm general public with a gun, pepper spray or Taser will not be able to stop them from the distance. School shootings for example, the suspects in those situations are seen with multiple guns. The only way to stop them was to use an equal defense.