Is it time to take guns away from the police?

[Trigger69]

my property line(s) have been respected all my life. when i venture into public space i recognize i am taking a chance.

as the rcmp/police have demonstrated for us and the courts have affirmed, if you fear for your/a life then it is acceptable to take the life of the offender. it has worked for me and mine so far.

i keep a safe yard, the rcmp/police should keep the public spaces safe.

as i put forth originally, if the rcmp/police were to be removed of sidearms, i believe public tolerance/acceptance of armed criminals would be diminished. there has to be a first step in the right direction.

the assertion that criminals may wield weapons of convenience is invalid as police would have superior non-lethal weapons and defensive armour, and of course, a shotgun in the trunk, and the ert on call.

surveillance is critical to accountability with respect to all.

If you think this is realistic so be it....IMO you are completely WRONG. Criminals are opportunists and to suggest they would cater to public tolerance is absolutely crazy IMO. If this were the case there wouldn't be any criminals in the 1st place, no violent acts. This is simply not the case.

[A_Britishcolumbian]

not sure what you mean by 'cater to public tolerance'.

if we as the public do not accept guns in our communities, that is report offenders, and then the police and judiciary back us up, guns will go away. when they arise, smite the offender with extreme prejudice.

[Donald G]

To A_Britishcolumbian ...

That disappearing gun thing reminds me of a third generation genetically modified rheostat variable I once raised in captivity; when I let it outside I found that one of its legs was both the same.

Sorry, but I could not resist my evil inclination.

[Trigger69]

not sure what you mean by 'cater to public tolerance'.

if we as the public do not accept guns in our communities, that is report offenders, and then the police and judiciary back us up, guns will go away. when they arise, smite the offender with extreme prejudice.

Can you say the words "pipe dream"? Come on say it because you should understand that if all of this were the case there would be no need for a lot of things, least of all taking guns away from cops. BTW I don't like the way you assume that because cops carry guns this causes the gen pub to be more scared or whatever you call it about guns in general. I do however feel that it is a sad state of affairs that guns are needed at all by cops...but the true fact of the matter is they are and the world is what it is...period. Living in a fairy tail world would be great but most of us realize this is not the case..as should you. What should be always isn't for a number of reasons....you need to 1st understand what should be and it seems like you have that figured out...now you need to understand it always isn't that way for a variety of reasons.

[TMixer]

Is there seriously a five page thread about this?

Taking away their guns would be absolutely ridiculous. It's your police force, folks. Demand better training for officers and that a "clean house" takes place at the top. The problem is the attitude of being above the law. They aren't. They are the law. They should respect themselves.

I feel really sorry for the many officers who do overcome the problems at the top. Their names get dragged down by the few who fall victim to the system in place, and everyone suffers.

[Trigger69]

Is there seriously a five page thread about this?

Taking away their guns would be absolutely ridiculous. It's your police force, folks. Demand better training for officers and that a "clean house" takes place at the top. The problem is the attitude of being above the law. They aren't. They are the law. They should respect themselves.

I feel really sorry for the many officers who do overcome the problems at the top. Their names get dragged down by the few who fall victim to the system in place, and everyone suffers.

I couldn't agree more....well said.

[Treblehook]

To ask such a ludicrous question speaks volumes about the OP's lack of understanding of law enforcement and the process of keeping the peace and providing for safety and security in our communities. Toi suggest such an approach is nothing short of absurd. The OP ought to try doing a few ride alongs with his local police so as to acquire an appreciation of what is really going on in the community and with police work.

[Trigger69]

To ask such a ludicrous question speaks volumes about the OP's lack of understanding of law enforcement and the process of keeping the peace and providing for safety and security in our communities. Toi suggest such an approach is nothing short of absurd. The OP ought to try doing a few ride alongs with his local police so as to acquire an appreciation of what is really going on in the community and with police work.

Yes I agree. I think the OP feels that in a "perfect world" his/her suggestion would work but as many have learned the hard way....the world isn't perfect...not by a long shot.

[mexi cali]

Donald G wrote;

Perhaps you wouldn't mind running on ahead of the police so you could come back and let them know whether weapons of any kind, including guns, were required or not. If they were required,the police could drive on over to wherever you think they should be safely stored, retrieve their guns, and hurry on back to where you are keeping an eye on things pending their return. Lard jay'sus save us.

Ummmm, what am I missing here? Actually, what are you missing here?

[A_Britishcolumbian]

it would seem other people are asking this same question.

Toronto police shooting
by The Canadian Press - Story: 104789
Dec 16, 2013 / 7:46 am

All of the facts have yet to emerge in a police shooting at a Toronto subway station, but it has renewed debate over how officers in Canada's largest city use force.

A few dozen of protesters turned out Sunday night for a rally outside the downtown subway station where an 18-year-old was shot Friday night and sent to hospital.

One of the protesters, Sakura Saunders, says frontline officers are too quick to shoot in confrontations and that only senior officers should have guns.

Ontario's police watchdog, the Special Investigation Unit, believes four of the nine officers at the scene fired their weapons.

Media reports say witnesses saw a man on a subway train holding what appeared to be a gun before police arrived.

The SIU confirms it has recovered a weapon, but hasn't confirmed what type.

One transit rider, Jessica Wong, says she was on the train when police approached a man and told him to put his hands where they could see them, with the man yelling back "I don't have anything to live for any ways."

Wong said in an email officers had their guns pointed at the man when she and others started getting off the train, and that not long after she heard a number of shots.

"That is when everyone started running up the staircase and escalators. People who were coming down were going back up, people were even running up (the) down escalators," she wrote in an email.

The SIU, which is automatically called to investigate cases where someone is killed or suffers serious injury when police are involved, hasn't said whether the teenager is still in hospital and what his condition is.

Saunders said in her view police went for their guns too quickly in the confrontation.

"It seems from the witness accounts that the police did not take time to assess the situation before firing an excessive amount of bullets," she said.

There has already been considerable debate over how Toronto police use lethal force.

In July there were noisy protests after 18-year-old Sammy Yatim was shot on an empty streetcar - an incident that was caught on video.

An officer faces a charge of second degree murder in connection with the case, which is awaiting a hearing to be held next year to determine if there is enough evidence to send the case to trial.

http://www.castanet.net/edition/news-st ... htm#104789

[Donald G]

I think we should do away with antibiotics too. Now and again, in protecting a healthy body, antibiotics are forced to kill off bad germs that are trying to destroy our otherwise healthy bodies.

[A_Britishcolumbian]

this is so sad. police being allowed to kill without being held responsible, and in this case kill for what reason? the thrill of it?

Montreal teen shot by police 'didn't deserve to die': coroner's report

CTVNews.ca Staff
Published Tuesday, December 17, 2013

The Quebec coroner's office has released its report into the death of Montreal teenager Fredy Villanueva, who was shot and killed during a confrontation with police in August 2008.
The coroner's report, released Tuesday, says the unarmed 18-year-old didn't deserve to die for his actions.
"I doubt if Fredy Villanueva even thought about the risk of his actions," wrote Quebec court Judge Andre Perreault. "He probably did not know that Const. Lapointe could perceive his actions, combined with that of his friends, as an act of aggression that could be seen as threatening his life or that of his partner."

Villanueva was shot and killed on Aug. 9, 2008 by Const. Jean-Loup Lapointe after he was found playing an illegal game of dice with his brother and three friends in Montreal's Henri-Bourassa Park.
The death sparked rioting and the acknowledgment of racial tension in Montreal North.
The report found that Villanueva's death was the result of a number of human factors, which, when taken on their own, could not justify the end result.
"Thousands of offences as trivial as playing dice in a park are subject to annual police interventions that all go well, even when the police and citizens do not agree on whether the offence has indeed been committed," Perreault noted.
The French-language report is available on the coroner's website.

Villanueva's mother, Lilian, said Tuesday she has waited for a long time for the report into her son's death.
"My son Fredy died for nothing," she tearfully told reporters during a press conference.
The family's lawyer Peter Georges-Louis said the report makes it clear that the police officers’ response was unjustified. "Fredy wasn't a threat," he said.
A police investigation cleared the officers involved in the shooting of any wrongdoing and no criminal charges were laid.
Following the shooting, Lapointe said the reason he opened fire was because he was afraid that the gang of young men he was confronting would be able to take his firearm.

Perreault was particularly critical of how the post-shooting investigation was handled, which he said was subject to numerous gaffes.
The coroner's report says both Montreal police and officers from the Surete du Quebec tasked with investigating the shooting seemed to go out of their way to avoid talking Lapointe or his partner Const. Stephanie Pilotte.
It was a week later when Lapointe and Pilotte were finally asked to provide written testimony about what occurred.
A 106-day inquest into Villanueva's death began in 2009, but ground to a halt in February 2011 following multiple court challenges from the City of Montreal and the Montreal police union.
The report includes 21 recommendations directed at Montreal's police department, Quebec's police school and the Ministry of Education.
The recommendations include:
The creation of new guidelines on the appropriate use of physical contact by police officers
Police training on how to interact with different ethnic groups
Training in the distinctions between social profiling, racial profiling, and criminal profiling
Teaching high school students how to interact with police officers, how to contest a fine or infraction, and the consequences of refusing to show ID
Montreal police satisfied with report
Montreal Police Chief Marc Parent said that, on the whole, the department is satisfied with the report into Villanueva's death.
Speaking to reporters a few hours after the report was released, Parent said Montreal police had already made a number of changes regarding how they interact with the public since the 2008 shooting.
"I'm not saying there's not work to be done still, but there's been a lot of improvement," he said.
Parent said since the shooting police have taken steps to make sure that all officers involved in an incident involving the death or injury of a civilian are met within 48 hours by an outside force.


Read more: http://www.ctvnews.ca/canada/montreal-t ... z2nlcb6VnQ

[Donald G]

Unfortunately exactly what the situation was at the precise moment that lethal force was used is not given. The reader can thus not decide the issues for themselves and is forced to take the conclusions reached by the hearing for what they are worth. The truth in general would seem to fall somewhere between the total police responsibility and guilt alleged by the deceased's family and the report vindicating the police alleged by the police. Only those who were present at the time will ever likely know the full true story.

For good or bad any police officer being investigated for any offense has the same rights to speak with legal council and to maintain his/her silence as any other Canadian, with only a few duty related exceptions. That could, in itself, negate the Chiefs desire that the officers involved now be spoken to by police from another police force early in the criminal investigation.

Fortunately BC now has independent civilian oversight of all such police investigations from the time the incident happens onward, something the Association of Chiefs of Police in B.C. had been asking for for a number of years.