Some people believe that if a police officer carries guns, it can encourage a higher level of violence. To what extent do you agree or disagree?

Some people believe that if a police officer carries guns, it can encourage a higher level of violence. To what extent do you agree or disagree?

Give reasons for your answer and include any relevant examples from your own knowledge or experience. You should write at least 250 words.

Sample Answer 1: Band 8

Many people believe that a police force armed with guns encourages the level of violence in society. Other people maintain that an armed police force deters the level of violence. I think it really depends on how the guns are used by the police.

The obvious argument for having armed police centers around the idea that the show of guns by police is in itself a deterrent to violence. Citizens who may be contemplating an act of violence will be reminded that their own safety and welfare may be jeopardized if they are caught committing a violent crime by police. Thus, having an armed police force can in fact discourage the committing of crimes and violence within a society.

On the other hand, armed police officers’ use of guns may escalate violence instead of deterring it. If a police officer shoots at a suspected criminal, that violence may breed more violence, as the criminal might shoot back, and then the police officers, the criminals, and even innocent bystanders could be injured or killed with the gunfire. ieltsselfstudy.com

To sum up, most citizens expect the police to protect them by any means necessary, including guns. If citizens are not confident that the police are protecting them, those citizens might then decide to obtain guns to protect themselves against other citizens and the police. So, in those instances guns will lead to more guns and violence will breed more violence. However, if police officers are properly trained as to how and when to use guns, the guns they carry should provide a deterrent to the level of violence in society.

---

Model Essay 2

In some countries, the police force carries guns to fight against lawbreakers and protect the innocent. However, some people hold the view that it would give rise to a higher level of violence. As far as I am concerned, only when guns are used properly under certain supervision, can they serve to protect citizens?

Undoubtedly, guns are one of the most powerful weapons that the police can use to maintain social security and stability as it is the best deterrent to potential lawbreakers and scare off the would-be criminals. If the police force carries guns in the public, there is a possibility that the potential criminals may give up their plans, thus reducing the crime rate. In addition, the police can use guns to protect themselves as police officers are one of the most dangerous jobs in the world. They need to protect themselves when they face criminals who are using weapons.

However, the application of guns can pose potential risks. First of all, it may lead to the abuse of weapons, especially in some western countries where ordinary people have the right to buy guns. Secondly, there is a possibility that the police may hurt innocent citizens accidentally when they pick the wrong targets, which also leads to social chaos. Thirdly, if every police officer carries a gun and walks in the street, people will lack a sense of security and society will have a horrifying atmosphere. ieltsselfstudy.com

To conclude, the police can hold guns, but they should be very careful to avoid the abuse of guns. At the same time, the police must be trained strictly before being allowed to Carry Weapons.

---

Model Essay 3

Police officers carry guns and that is part of their job. They are entrusted with the job of enforcing law and order in society. When criminals carry guns, can we expect our police force to carry out their duty without the help of guns? Police officers do inspire society. Children, especially, have a fascination for the police uniform and the gun. Does this cause an increase in violence in society? Well, that is debatable.

Because police officers carry guns and use them as and when necessary, it might give the impression that carrying guns is fashionable. It might also give the impression that guns are necessary for the maintenance of peace. In that case, it can be said that gun-toting police officers inspire violence.

Now let’s take a look at the other side of the argument. The duty of a police officer is to enforce law and order in society. During the execution of their job, they face a lot of challenges. They have to deal with people of different kinds. How can we expect an unarmed police officer to effectively deal with a situation that might itself be violent? The gun, though it may be a sign of violence, is a necessity in situations like these. It also provides some security to the lives of our police force. When criminals are armed, police officers too need to be armed. That is essential for the effective execution of their job. ieltsselfstudy.com

Looking at both sides of the argument, it is safe to assume that the gun is a necessary evil that the police force can’t do away with. What we need to do to reduce the incidences of violence is to create awareness about their ill effects.

---

Model Essay 4

I disagree with the statement that an armed police force would promote a greater degree of violence. A number of arguments surround my opinion.

My first argument to support my viewpoint is that guns would, to a large extent, deter the potential criminals’ Police officers are those who are responsible for taking care of all the citizens, safety and wearing guns could largely make sure of this. For example, if someone has the intention to commit a crime, he would think twice about doing so if there are police carrying guns on patrol. Therefore, the level of violence would decrease rather than go up.

Secondly, criminals usually have guns and so, police officers need them in order to control crime. Instead of taking guns away from the police, it is more important to make laws against the general public having guns. Countries with weak or ineffective gun laws, or countries bordering such countries, like Mexico which has strong 8un laws, but virtually no way to prevent them from being smuggled over the border from the U.S., need a police force that is not only armed but is armed better than the criminals.

Opponents claim that police in the U.K. are able to go without guns and also have crime in control. They have a point but I believe that crime in the UK is under control because they are able to control the flow of guns to the general populace. Therefore, I reiterate my point that the police force should carry guns.

To sum up, because criminals can easily come into possession of guns, therefore the police force needs to be armed. Armed police in itself could never be a cause of increased violence. Nations around the world should hope to someday reach the point where their police force can afford not to carry guns and still be effective.

---

Model Essay 5

On account of a series of commotions happening recently in a wide range of countries, a significant number of people consider those police officers carrying guns on patrol would promote the grade of violence. However, I am opposed to this perspective.

Police officers carrying guns and walking around are less likely to encourage the level of violent crimes. Police officers are responsible for deterring the latent criminals and taking care of all the citizens’ safety, which could be largely guaranteed by gun-carrying action. For example, some people may intend to commit a crime(=break laws/do something illegal), but there is a higher possibility for them to quit taking action if they are aware of the serious consequence of meeting gun-carrying police. In this regard, the level of violent crimes tends to descend, and thus the standpoint that police officers carrying guns will encourage the level of violence will not hold water.

Conversely, some people insist that police officers taking guns on duty would inevitably raise the level of violent crimes. Robbery is a major case in point. If someone intends to rob a bank for money and they are entirely aware of the situation that police officers are equipped with guns, they are likely to make sufficient preparation for having a gun battle. If they were to fire, there would be significant losses in terms of innocent people’s properties or lives, and this will probably jeopardize（ the stability of society. However, if police officers are constantly on alert for any possible emergency and potential threat, there would be slim chances of committing a crime.

In conclusion, I have the inclination to maintain those police officers carrying guns would substantially decrease the level of violence rather than increase it.

---

Model Essay 6

It is often believed by a few sections of society that the violence rate will rise if police authorities carry a weapon. However, some people, including myself, completely disagree with this view. I feel that to reduce the crime rate and protect themselves; Policemen should carry guns or other safety weapons.

The primary reason behind carrying a gun is to deter criminal acts. Thieves or criminals would think twice or be scared before commencing any crime if they know that police officers around them are armed. As a result, violence and crime will be significantly reduced in society. For example, a robber might stop his criminal thought if he is afraid of police officials carrying guns could shoot him from a long distance. Contrary to this, failure to carry a weapon might give offenders a strong advantage in terms of their ability to commit violence without any corresponding risk. Another reason is that police officers can protect themselves and people from dangerous situations.

Certainly, many criminals keep various harmful and life-threatening weapons, which they can use against not only police persons but also citizens. Therefore, if there were no safety precautions for police officials, there, as well as people’s lives, could have come at risk. For instance, in many terror attacks globally, the terrorist killed innocent citizens and police officers. Hence, in such circumstances, to save innocent lives, carrying a gun is a necessary precaution for police officials.

In conclusion, although some people oppose carrying weapons by police officers in fear of violence, I completely disagree. In my view, to control and reduce the crime rate as well as to save people and their own life, Police officials should carry a gun.