[Answer]

Originally Posted by UPN Zuch

Do I need to go into detail about how ignorant this is? I don’t even like the police but I can make a list of reasons why they need a gun, even while writing a ticket for someone who is speeding.

You don’t know WHO it is that is actually speeding until you get their license and registration. If you approach, and the person has reason to flee because of a warrant, or maybe they are transporting drugs. Or maybe there’s a kidnapped girl in the trunk. They are going to do what they have to do to escape. And now that you don’t have a gun, they are going to blow your head off and drive away. You don’t take the guns away from police for that exact reason. Also, if they come across a crime involving gunfire, what the help are they going to do? Sit there and call the OTHER cops who have the guns? A very small percentage of police officers have used their guns incorrectly. They need to be punished to the fullest extent of the law.

I think your points are valid, and traffic stops was probably a poor example on my part. That said, I still stand by the idea that there are lower-risk situations where it would make sense to have an unarmed division of police in their preliminary years until they've proven themselves responsible enough to carry. The argument having officers without guns who do their job can't be done is dispelled by the fact that it has been done

In nineteen countries, the police do not carry firearms unless the situation is expected to merit it: Botswana, Cook Islands, Fiji, Iceland, Ireland, Kiribati, Malawi, Marshall Islands, Nauru, New Zealand, Niue, Norway, Samoa, Solomon Islands, Tonga, Tuvalu, the United Kingdom (Northern Ireland excepted), Vanuatu, U.S. Virgin Islands. These countries exhibit gun-homicide rates markedly lower on average than countries with armed police forces. Their police forces commonly adopt a philosophy of policing by consent.[1][2]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Police..._police_forces

But again, I'm not suggesting we take guns away from all police officers. I'm suggesting police with experience who have proven themselves responsible with guns in high-risk situations and police without experience and who haven't proven themselves responsible without guns in low-risk situations. It's not my job to speculate on what is or isn't a high-risk situation, I would leave that to data scientists and statisticians to determine what makes the most sense