Since 2001, the American Cops have Killed More Than 5000 Civilians

Why are the police killing so many people now-a-days? Is it truly racist behavior as some contend? Is it a conspiracy to create more resistance which then can result in even more deaths at the hands of cops? Is it a group effort to stir up the public into believing some obscure ideal of police protection?
Or is it something simpler like they fear for their lives?
THAT may very well be the end answer, because hand gun statistics will not coo berate a racist point.
The Gallup Poll reveals a truly strange finding, and defies logic in several ways.
For example, their contention is that women are more likely to use guns for protection than men. In fact, it is their subtitle in a 2005 report. Yet, only 13% of women answering the poll (versus 47% of men) own handguns. Strangely, 57% of households do not own a household gun while only 42% do own a household gun. One in three whites own a gun compared to one in six non-whites owning a gun.
41 % of the gun owners are Republicans, 27% of Independents, and 23% of Democrats.
Several differing reports are made concerning the actual shooting of innocent victims of police, however this is because of states' rights. Racism doesn't wash because the reality is that more whites own guns than ALL other minorities combined.
And yet, at least once a week, we hear from the media that blacks are shot and killed. But of some 400 reported killings a year by police (averaged out over several years) only 96 were blacks. Less than one fourth.
Of course, at least one agency uses this to fan even more flames and fires in an attempt to point out that blacks are unduly whining at their death toll. Need I mention that the agency is FOX? I'm in agreement with the idea that they are not even a news agency...more of a gasoline burning agency, their expressed purpose not being fair and balanced news, but rather ways to fan flames to hotter and higher to substantiate their stand on what's wrong with America.
I care about the fact that near a quarter were blacks. I also care that 3/4 were whites.
This is entirely too many people killed by police on a consistent basis, and the only truly remarkable point is, it must be their own fear that is driving them on.

My mind goes to the incident where the cop loses his mind chasing a teenager in a swimsuit, and he draws his weapon. Why does he fear? Or the naked man? or in Indiana, a drunk passed out in his own bed, naked, after taking a cab home from a bar because he was too drunk to drive. If I furthered that information, I would suggest that, if you drove to a bar and got too drunk, then you SHOULD drive home, because at least you will live. So the fear? Perhaps it is losing their weapons altogether and they think they will be too vulnerable in public.
True, there will be a transformation, but, a well executed transition would be good. Many cops without weapons, and a contingent of men to back them up if need calls for it. If they lose control, which is not only easy to do, but actually called for at times. Less obnoxious cops and more humanity is what is called for.
But, let's move along.
Let's look at something else only whispered by real news agencies...
In the United Kingdom, there were zero killings by police in 2013. Zero. Not white nor black, nor even a sizable assortment of indigent immigrants. None. This allows a more civilized and less lethal confrontation from either police or criminals.
In Germany, over a two year period, there were eight police shootings. The fact that there are very few German citizens "packing heat" is one reason, but a more compelling reason is that the police in that country are TRAINED to deal with high stress situations, and that doesn't mean with the game US cops play, known as good cop/bad cop. It means extensive training in looking at the entire situation, making sure that there are  trained leaders among the police monitoring the situation, and it is they... not hot headed individual officers with little or no training ...that establish maneuvers and determine appropriate action. The UK has a no gun ruling for the general population that has even police being unarmed.
Not that there are NO killings by police in Germany, however, and here's how that plays out.
It turns out that of the deaths inflicted by the police, most were found to be mentally ill, such as a naked man standing near a fountain with a knife. And the biggest difference in American cops and German police? While American cops attempt to throw up a "blue curtain" to hide any hint of wrongdoing, the police in Germany demand more training in such situations.
That's right...you read that correctly. The police themselves DEMAND more training in these special situations. And the reason is simple. These civilians are not the enemy. They are the friends and families and neighbors of the police. Just as here, friends, families, and neighbors.

The most convincing point is that guns are not needed in the abundance that they are available.
Handguns are made for one purpose... to kill other humans. While some state it is for protection, that falls far from the reality of how they are used.
Canada, our Northern neighbor, also having a gun control system that makes it very hard to own a weapon save for in deep forests and wild lands, has only twelve deaths by police a year. So, to be sure, one of the positive aspects of getting rid of handguns is that the police must also relinquish their own firearms.

Now the other shoe lands firmly on the ground. Hand gun removal or modifications is what is called for. This brings up more than a few points. Arms dealers selling to the public have spent a ton of money to breed more and more fear into American society. That being said, even if someone were willing to try the experiment,a person would be hard pressed to regain monies spent on handguns purchased. The fear mongers have already bought their big houses, fine teevees and fancy cars. They will not be willing to give that up so easily, but then, it was their fear mongering that gained them that fortune to begin with. So basically, there are only a few options. Accepting a way lower refund than was spent for the weapon in the first place (and trust me, those Glocks and their cop killer bullets are going to be some of the most incredible losses for both the gun owner getting a puny refund as well as for the gun seller who has a different motto than the one he sells on his empty minded bumper sticker. "You can have my money when you pry my cold dead fingers from around it". However, simply freezing all accounts in stateside and foreign banks will go a long way in getting at least some semblance of fair refund.
Now for those who live farther out from the city, where at least ten wild, dangerous animals are seen a month (and that would have to be quantifiable) then there is still a need for protection. So, an even more fair refund may be presented in the form of rifle for handgun... although that, too, should fall within a multi-purpose control system. Rifles and shotguns cannot be allowed within city limits for any reason unless for special situations. Yes, talk about flight from the city, then, eh? But there are so many that try to use the second amendment to justify owning a lethal weapon, even though there is absolutely no sense in assuming that a rifle can stop an MX Missile. C'mon, folks. If you want to pretend like you need to guard against the US government, then you need to somehow vote in enough people to give the OK to owning a nuclear warhead. Maybe set it up in your basement, eh? Just in case they ever attack your home. Or maybe you can get permission to own some surface to air missiles (SAMs) only please...unlike Hamas... buy a scientist's model that can be aimed. Ask Westinghouse or GE to help in that aspect. They're good on giving aid to hostile countries, like China's modern nuclear reactors... all top of the line models that reburn fuel thereby having less waste which is extremely toxic for thousands of years. Of course, you would have thought that someone would have considered moving them farther away from the Pacific Continent fault line, but, well, their thoughts are that by the time the big one hits, they'll be long gone. (Unless there's reincarnation, that is)
Meanwhile, back to the end of hand guns and most rifles in the city. Modifications are also permissible, I suppose, so that Grand Dad's side arm that he carried up San Juan Hill (or in some cases your great grand Dad..or even your great great Grand Dad... but don't make me go further back than that because for me it was my Grand Dad, and I already feel old enough, eh?) anyway, modifications like filling the barrel with molten hard steel to render it unusable would do nicely. You keep your lethal souvenir and mankind gets a bit safer.
Maybe I'm just a dreamer that sees a day when mankind can live together in peace...but the dream is not just mine. 57% of households have no guns.

How does that compare to 100%? More than half?
Good. The dream will come true one day.
Better sooner than later, I think.
Too late for Warrant Officer Jackson... my pilot.
but he had a sense of humor similar to mine, so, better late than never.


http://www.dw.com/en/why-german-police-officers-rarely-reach-for-their-guns/a-17884779

http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/eugene-robinson-its-a-crime-that-we-dont-know-how-many-people-police-shoot-to-death/2014/12/01/adedcb00-7998-11e4-b821-503cc7efed9e_story.html

http://www.gallup.com/poll/20098/gun-ownership-use-america.aspx