Peace Officers should mostly replace police officers, but a police force of some kind is needed. Police would only be called in once a situation has proven, after a sustained non violent effort by peace officers, to require force. Peace officers should be thoroughly civilian, never in the military, or at least out of the military for a long period of time 7-10 years minimum. Police officers should be an armed, trained, militarized last resort. Anyone who thinks that a force of last resort is not required is living in a fantasy. The problem with policing could be summarized as force being the first resort too often.
This would full fill the requirements laid out in the constitutional amendment I am petitioning for. If you like the idea of making protection of citizens lives and rights the number one job of all law enforcers please consider signing it.
Nine Peace Officers For Every One Police Officer.
Peace officers can at the simplest level be thought of as police who do not carry a gun. Think Sheriff Andy on the “Andy Griffith” show or Odo from of “Star Trek: Deep Space 9”, or almost all of the police in real life Britain.
Peace officers would patrol our streets, answer all emergency calls even violent ones, or do the enforcement of ordinances and codes (writing tickets). Even in violent situations they would have a billy club and the training to use it to great effect. They would possibly have a taser to use as well. They would be trained to never call for more backup than needed, never more than a 2 to 1 advantage in any situation.
Peace officers would also have as a strict directive that once someone was subdued that’s it. No more violence. In any situation where any level of resistance was met paramedics would respond. Priority number one is to protect the populace, including offenders. Priority number two is to serve the law, by delivering the accused to their day in court.
They would have to be knowledgeable of all the social services resources available and be a first point of non-punitive contact for people to get help. Criminal penalties would not be a first resort for crimes against property (providing they return it), or for victimless crimes. They would investigate crimes, find evidence and then make the arrest.
Al Capone’s gang was brought down by looking at their books not by doing it the Chicago way.
Yeah that actually didn’t work. Though a moderate ammount of shooting back at criminals was needed. That is inevitable.
What about people who act with violence and will not be talked out of it?
What about known violent armed criminal gangs? What about people who are on an active rampage?
This is when the armed police come in.
A greatly reduced but more targeted and effective police force would be called in for the following extraordinary situations, in order of how common they are likely to be.
- Peace officers have tried to settle this matter and the suspected offender has refused to comply, and is armed.
- A known violent criminal gang, organized crime syndicate/cartel, or terrorist organization is operating and needs to be interdicted.
- A manhunt for a convicted violent offender known to be armed and dangerous.
- Active in progress violent crime confirmed by a first response from Peace officers.
These smaller police forces by nature should be more militarized but also used sparingly. They are only to be used in situations where a bad actor has shown by sustained action that nothing less than lethal force will stop them.
- They won’t be the ones pulling over motorist, that will be unarmed peace officers.
- They won’t be the ones responding to domestic violence, that will be unarmed peace officers.
- They won’t be the ones called about missing children, or drunk drivers, or even in most riots, that would be peace officers.
Think of the police in this scenario as being similar to the SWAT teams. Used only in situations like those SWAT are currently called for. Not to be used for any mundane, ordinary, police work.
Deterrence Is the True Weapon.
Though the peace officers will not be armed they will not be defenseless. It has to be known that within 10 minutes a helicopter full of 10 heavily armed Ex Military SWAT will be on top of a criminal if they dare to shoot at the peace officers. That those men and women will hunt down and stop a proven dangerous criminal (as shooting at a peace officer would do) by any means necessary.
The real power of a weapon is that it deters a potential aggressor and makes him or her think twice. Once the weapon has to be used its greatest power has essentially failed.
The fact that the peace officers would each be able to radio in and have a team of police officers there should stop 99% of criminals. That deterrent effect, of knowing that not complying with the peace officers means that the next step is so terrifying, no sane person will take it.
The job of these police would basically be comprised of waiting at a very small number of stations around a city to be dispatched rapidly if a situation has become lethally violent. Then to dispense violence in proportion to that which is being displayed by an offender.
Calls to disband or defund or abolish the police and not have any manner of law enforcement are frankly naïve. Most people are not criminals. Most police calls aren’t for criminal matters. So lets not have them handle these situations in that manner. Instead armed police will be reserved for those foolish enough to offer armed resistance to the peace. Once someone, of any race, chooses to raise a gun to another citizen, they have chosen to leave our society, and the state must step in, with its monopoly on violence, and cancel out their force.