This is already the case; police are trained to only use military equipment in extreme situations. That doesn't prevent any deaths.
Police shouldn't have access to military equipment at all. And the perspective on what counts as an extreme situation is one sided apparently given how many times it's been used in non extreme situations.
Police should not use military equipment, who gets to decide what an emergency is, and how can you possibly say this one prevent deaths every single person who has ever died from police intervention could’ve been prevented
The police need to conduct themselves and behave as peace keepers first. They are not an occupying force, nor are they an offensive force. If a situation is grave enough to require that level of interaction then we need to rethink who handles what. States have the national guard, let us rethink how they are used or determine some other more logical course of action. Police already wear too many hats and missions get jumbled as a result. Let's demilitarize the community police and work on solutions that make sense.
What defines extreme to everyone is different, as an armed bank robbery can be deemed extreme, but it's not a hostage situation, which is also extreme. The lines feel too blurry to use as a way to prevent something bad from happening.
no, maybe some police if they use there job just as an excuse for things, or if they are doing the job wrong, or other things, but if a police is actually doing there job right then why remove them.
Even if the police force is put in those extremes situations once in that situation they'll feel more more scared and will feel like they're in huge danger causing them to panic even with training because they wouldn't be used to that type of situation.
The historical activity of users engaging with this answer.
Loading the political themes of users that engaged with this discussion