Every police officer should carry a gun whenever he or she is working; police officers need to be armed to protect themselves and the public from violent criminals. The benefits of having an armed police force far outweigh the disadvantages. To what extent do you agree or disagree with this opinion?

Since year 2014 till present, the relationship between the police and public has deteriorated, and conflicts are becoming increasingly serious. The police is facing new challenges, higher risks and unprecedented situations, on the contrary there are also cases of abuse of force. In my opinion, the police should be equipped with the pistol for self-protection and not more. First, prior to the 90s, we did hear about bank robberies and kidnappings, consequently there was a demand for greater arm force to handle these hazardous criminals. In recent years these kinds of crimes are rarely occurred due to the improvement of the public security. The police is almost lost the reason in using of firearm. Secondly, there are records showing that the police used unauthorized force against unarmed persons. The public granted permission in gatherings and organized large-scale protests, due to the fact they disagreed with the new law announced by the government. The police did not notify the people and dispersed them with guns pointing to their head. Thirdly, the Police General Rules listed clearly conditions for usage of force, on the contrary there are still polices abused usage of guns and caused injury to public. There was a young protester was unarmed and no aggressive actions, a traffic police fired a shot at him without warning. In addition, a police shoot a female protester using an anti-riot gun, and caused her left eye be blind. In conclusion, the police is authorized with more force on the contrary inappropriately usage will cause extremely serious losses to the public. I believe the degree of weapon usage for the police should strictly maintain for protection purposes.