The police drive solo into many dangerous situations. It's not the best situation, but it saves money.
But....many lone officers have to call for back-up if they find themselves in a scary hornet's nest. More officers must be near enough to assist...and not be scattered so sparsely through their districts that they are virtually unable to get to the scene of a bad situation.
My position is that the state and local sheriffs and captains know how many officers they need for worst-case scenarios.....and if they can make a case to the politicians overlooking them, then they should have the proper funding that they need, no more, no less.
Do you also feel that maybe we all have too many firemen, eh?
Leni
Many of the situations cops find themselves in without back-up is because they are enforcing too many laws.
As for peak load (riot situations), the citizenry/auxillary can augment just fine.
The reason most city cops found themselves overwhelmed recently is because they were protecting “protestors” instead of enforcing the law.
We could probably do a 40% cut across the board and be just fine.
In my entire life I cannot think of a situation where a cop was of benefit to me. All I ever got was tickets.
And the opportunity to fill out a form when I was once burglarized when not home. And I have to do that via a phone interview.
If the cops are not going to enforce the law, the people have no use for them whatsoever.