Most Americans are fearful to go beyond their door threshold. If a person turned to their local news channel, they would see chaos. People dying every day around them from the most violent, unnatural causes. Every day people kill one another with no remorse. Frightened, the people of America turn to the security offers hired to protect the people and to keep the people safe, but most security officers don 't keep citizens out of harm 's way at all. Because armed security guards are more harmful than helpful, security guards should not be allowed to carry guns in public places. One reason security officers should not carry guns is because the United States does not regulate armed guards the way they should. Of the fifty states, fifteen states
…show more content…
According to The Center for Investigative Reporting, between 2007 and 2013 Louisiana acquired eight reports of security guard affiliated shootings but none of those reports were investigated, and Georgia claimed to only have collected four reports, but media and law enforcement reports show almost two dozen shootings, which resulted in twenty-three injuries and deaths, none of which were investigated. North Carolina alone received thirty-six reports, but only investigated one guard, who was punished for not being registered to carry a gun. Shockingly, security guards who shoot and even kill people are often not pursued or even punished, they instead are allowed to go back into the line of duty, even though they could be a danger for …show more content…
They also might say that if such events were to happen anyway, that a gun would de-escalate the situation, but rather it is quite the opposite. Guns present more of a problem than a solution in a dangerous circumstance. According to The Center for Investigative Reporting, having an armed guard at a bank presents a much greater risk than having an unarmed guard. Statistics show that sixty-four per 1000 armed bank guards are injured when a robbery occurs, a tremendous rise from only one per 1000 when a robbery occurs where an unarmed bank guard is. The extra gun is more likely to put the robber on edge and escalate the chaos, rather than deescalating
According to The Center for Investigative Reporting, between 2007 and 2013 Louisiana acquired eight reports of security guard affiliated shootings but none of those reports were investigated, and Georgia claimed to only have collected four reports, but media and law enforcement reports show almost two dozen shootings, which resulted in twenty-three injuries and deaths, none of which were investigated. North Carolina alone received thirty-six reports, but only investigated one guard, who was punished for not being registered to carry a gun. Shockingly, security guards who shoot and even kill people are often not pursued or even punished, they instead are allowed to go back into the line of duty, even though they could be a danger for …show more content…
They also might say that if such events were to happen anyway, that a gun would de-escalate the situation, but rather it is quite the opposite. Guns present more of a problem than a solution in a dangerous circumstance. According to The Center for Investigative Reporting, having an armed guard at a bank presents a much greater risk than having an unarmed guard. Statistics show that sixty-four per 1000 armed bank guards are injured when a robbery occurs, a tremendous rise from only one per 1000 when a robbery occurs where an unarmed bank guard is. The extra gun is more likely to put the robber on edge and escalate the chaos, rather than deescalating