Should the Police be emergency response only?

http://www.sacbee.com/news/nation-world/article5542689.html

The summary of this article is that the officer has shot two people dead in his line of duty.

shooting number one By officer Morrison
[YOUTUBE]0VTKyVgjW-c[/YOUTUBE]

shooting two by Officer Morrison
[YOUTUBE]UJ2yNZTbvpg[/YOUTUBE]


I ask this question because it seems that going to look for trouble places the American citizen in danger.

I'm not sure if it is worth the trouble.

 

And you thought judge dredd was a movie.....

 

It's an interesting concept.

I'd love to know how many (major) crimes are prevented/discovered by cops just out on their beat???

If the best police work is done by detectives and emergency police response in general, then HELL YES. They should function like EMT.

But I do agree there should be less focus on law enforcement driving around looking for crimes and instead they should patrol 'on call', hopefully to be in the vicinity of a crime call to respond in time.


This is a big time idea IMO.

 

So how would they be in the vicinity to respond to a call?
How can we afford to pay them to only respond to calls? I don't mind them looking for crime as long as they aren't creating crime

 

You can 'be in the vicinity' by patrolling the city, like a cab driver does so when a call comes in, usually there's a car with 5-10 miles.

But you won't have cops doing random searches and stops on the off chance someone MIGHT be breaking the law.

That way you don't have someone choked to death on a sidewalk for selling single cigarettes.

I haven't thought it out thoroughly, but there's gotta be a way to improve local policing across the United States.

When people feel that law enforcement does more harassing than protecting and serving the community, something needs to change.