[Flycatcher]

The local didn't shoot the dog. He didn't need his gun at all. He needed a towel or a smock to protect his dry-cleaning.

That is so idealistically saccharine that I'm tearing up right now. Almost seriously.

But you've got me thinking. I'm an extremely frugal person, and you may have a point about saving the taxpayer money. Local law enforcement probably can go without weaponry. Guns, bullets, they cost money.

But towels and smocks are cheap. We agree! Towels and smocks for the Men in Blue!

Just hope the ones who work in the inner city have a good life insurance policy.

[JRandomFreeper]

The expensive firearms for police don't result in lower crime rates or gang-bangers taking dirt naps.

If they want heavy firepower, they need to clear out the nests of ferals, but that is dangerous. And all the firepower that has been shoved at cops hasn't worked.

If it doesn't work, stop doing it. It's not a difficult concept.

And the up-armored cops are pissing off the voters that pay for that crap. The money will stop flowing as a result.

/johnny