Leavers stated, 'I'm aware of many circumstances involving mental health and other offenders where had police not have had the use of a Taser they would have used a fire arm and there very well may have been a death...They are a very positive thing.' In September 2009, the United States Police Executive Research Forum (PERF) reported on its survey comparing fatality and injury rates showed by police jurisdictions using conducted energy devices and police jurisdictions where these devices are not deployed. The study found '...the odds of a suspect being injured are reduced by more than 40 per cent in CED agencies
Here are a few examples of the illnesses caused by obesity: type 2 diabetes, cancer, cardiovascular (heart) disease, and asthma. Singling out cancer just for the sake of example, 14-20 percent of all cancer deaths were blamed on obesity. If this statement holds true, if every adult would hold their BMI under 25 (50th percentile), about 90,000 deaths a year could be prevented. (Biographies Of Disease:
Gun Control For Gun control has always been a national spotlight in American history. “About 80 million Americans own guns,” says Deborah White from About.com. She also Says, “A fire arm is made for one reason, and that is to kill people.” If less people have guns, then there would be a smaller chance of a murder or a shootout happening. There would be a reduction in the crime rate and a reduction of fire arms falling into the hands of children. There are many misguided individuals in our society and it would be safer if they had less access to guns.
If yes, what if it was a last resort instead of using the gun in a non life-threatening situation? A: No, to my understanding, tasers are meant to initially stun or shock an individual to assist with arrest. If it comes down to the point of having to taser someone who is resisting arrest I believe it is a good alternative to the use of a more serious weapon such as guns
While AWR Hawkins explains that there’s no relation between gun control and crime, and that gun control might possibly be directly related to more violent crimes resulting in death. * Each author takes a strong stance on both of their views. Boseley takes a strong stance that more guns in the US is actually the cause of more gun related deaths, while Hawkins writes that more gun control leads to higher death rates. * The intended audience for both authors would be readers that take their side. Boseley’s audience would tend to be people who agree that heightened gun control in the US would lead to less deaths in major cities like Detroit or New York.
If California would have gotten rid of the death penalty long ago such money would not have been spent, saving the state millions of dollars. Also in some states one trial can be a setback, financially speaking. For example, according to The Spokesman-Review officials in Washington are concerned that the costs for a single death penalty trial will approach $1 million. To pay for the trial, the county has had to let one government position go unfilled, delay employee raises, had to use its $300,000 contingency fund, and eliminated all capital improvements. According to fnsa.org Georgia is laying off 900 correction personnel due to the high costs of the death penalty.
Shaffer claims that not only will crime not decrease, but will grow resulting in more violence than ever. Publication of the poll, September, 4, showed that 59 percent of the individuals expressing an opinion favored restricting possession of hand guns, such as pistols and revolvers, to the police; only 35 percent of the respondents were opposed fifty-three percent favored making it unlawful to have a loaded gun in one’s home, and 85 percent approved rigid restraints on use of guns by teenagers. The author Shaffer then gets information from a recent Gallup poll found substantial majorities “definitely of a mind to place some kind of restriction on the use of guns” (13). As Shaffer claims, I as well agree on the statistics and her opinion that it would only make matters worst while others tend to think the opposite. In addition, Shaffer effectively defends her idea that banning handguns will have no effect on reduction of violent crime, but may actually increase instances of gun crimes.
Out of these 32,000, suicide accounts for 60% of all gun related deaths in the U.S. About 3% of gun related deaths are accidental. The remaining 34% accounts for homicide related deaths caused by firearms. That comes to about 11,000 gun related deaths per year, but out of these,
Law Enforcements use of Less than Lethal Weapons Law enforcements use of less than lethal weapons is controversial. My research was conducted to see if less than lethal weapons are a good alternative to traditional police methods, and specifically if they resulted in fewer injuries and deaths. Law enforcements proper use of less than lethal weapons results in fewer deaths and injuries. Until the development of less than lethal weapons, police officers had few options for riot control. Common tactics were, a slowly advancing wall of officers with batons, officers on horseback, shotguns with salt shells.
In the United States death by homicide ranks at number 15 in comparison to health conditions such as heart disease, hypertension, cancer, blood poisoning, etc. (LeDuc, 2013)This is a high rating when put in perspective that in most cases one cannot control contracting most illnesses however man can control murdering people. In 2011 8,583 deaths occurred due to the use of firearms. (Simon, 2013) This is the type of statistical data that our officials use to form opinions on how weapons impact our society. The focus seems to be on the mechanism (the firearms) rather than who uses the mechanism.