zlacker

Sorta meaningless unless you cross it against the actual count of people in the occupation (estimates in this list https://www.bls.gov/emp/tables/emp-by-detailed-occupation.ht...)

I don't really want to get into the actual meat of the argument, but please use per-capita death stats so the numbers are actually comparable.

>>bpodgu+(OP)
Sure, I combined the two tables in the spreadsheet linked below, and there are many occupations that are more dangerous than police officer if we look at fatalities by per-capita occupation.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1dXtv2wnutujfXWUHB9Bm...

>>Titano+R2
This sounds like one arguing that playing russian roulette isn't dangerous, because one can name more dangerous activities. The fact that deep sea fishing is ultra dangerous doesn't mean that being a cop isn't dangerous.

>>oh_sig+M7
"It's a dangerous job" is given as a reason for why so much policy brutality occurs. Pointing out how dangerous it is relative to other professions is absolutely germane.

>>tricer+pb
That's exactly my point, and no it isn't. Policing isn't less dangerous because deep sea fishing is really dangerous. If someone said "It's the most dangerous job", then it would be germane.

Here's the same logic applied elsewhere:

It's not dangerous to be a black man in America. What's really dangerous is to be a El Salvadoran living in El Salvador(the country with the highest murder rate in the world).

>>oh_sig+rK1
It's not the same logic though. A black man in America didn't choose to be a black man, and has no way to change it. Ditto for an El Salvadoran - most can't legally emigrate.

Police officers are volunteers, not conscripts. They're free at any time to choose a less dangerous profession if they so wish.

Ultimately it doesn't matter if policing was more dangerous than working in an asbestos-uranium mine on a fault line. There's no excuse for law enforcement to be breaking laws without consequence. People who can't tolerate the risks should go do something else.