Soccer Mom Cop Cars - Reacting to The Norden Pt. 2
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 6 сен 2024
- This episode of the Norden continues with an LAPD police officer visiting Nordic countries to see how their cops compare versus the United States police. It's a big difference, but the gap can be closed and I think both sides can win. Less police violence, and less violence against police.
Twitter: @maxhaddad
/ maxhaddad
Peter said he couldn’t imagine being deployed in the field without a weapon. “Deployed in the field” is more of a military term. Peter sounds like he believes he’s heading out to face an enemy. Looks like Remi views his job as a service to the public including those who break the law. Huge difference in police mentality.
Oh wow, really good insight. Impressed at your ability to look at the specific words they used. This is really good, I totally agree with you. It sounds like they're coming from two different places.
As the wife of a wounded warrior and the sister of a retired California chief of police, I noticed this as well.❤
There is a video about US Police training, and many teaches new cops that there is a war against the community... If that's true everywhere - it can explain a bit about the differences in attitude. A quick googling also tells that LAPD have quite a good and long education of six months. Many smaller police forces (there are about 18 000 different ones in the US) won't have the resorces to train their officers that long.
One sentence that stayed with me was "De-escalating tactics will get you killed." That is horrible if it's true.
Violence provokes violence. In America it seems you see the criminal as the enemy in a war. Instead of a fellow citizen doing a criminal act.
That's the thing that strikes me every time whittingham talks about the suspects and the recruits etc - he's talking about them as though they're being deployed into a war zone where their prime objective is to survive and defeat their foes.
I’m Norwegian, and I think that armed police make criminals be even more armed.
Police is trained to calm situations down without force, and I feel safe when approached by police (like traffic stops etc).
I respect the police, and they respect people back.
Not so sure I would feel the same if stopped by a cop in the US...
Helt enig!
I remember a teacher comparing criminality in the big cities of London and New York.
In New York when the police shows up with guns drawn it triggers a kill or be killed response.
While the crock in London is more likely to make a run for freedom because worst case scenario would be a wack with the stick.
In Norway the police is trained in phycology in order to resason with a suspect.
Watching the American I felt like going mummy on him
"Use your words"😂
Americans love their second amendement. It's quite easy to buy a gun in the US even if "theorically" uo can't have one ( for legal reasons... ), just go to a gun market/fair ( you know one of those where you can have a gun just if you have the money in cash ).
arms-race
In Nordics you don't have to be scared if police stop you on the road. They are very polite and just doing their job.
Yeah, and also if you actually have done something. If you act normal and are cooperative they will be polite. When I was a stupid teenager I once shoplifted and got caught, I had to go to the police station in the back of their car and then they fined me, but they were very polite and professional the whole time, no one once touched me or anything (but of course if I tried to run away or something they would have). They were very respectful towards me and I also respected them because of that.
Yeah usually people that hate cops here are people who are criminals anyway. Cops are usually very chill and dont even give a shit if you have some weed on you even tho its technically criminal.
I think that in Finland the police can handle difficult situations if neccessary. They don't think that "it never happens", but they don't have to be so hysterical and paranoid about it every time they interact with the people.
Also, I think it is important to note, that almost every police officer in Finland also has a minimum of 6 months of service in the army even before the police academy, and many of them have one year of service in the military police
I was going to say pretty much this same thing - at least in case of Finland, I believe that (the way editing makes it sound) he is wrong. Tho personally I agree if that is more directed at the Norwegian Police, what with let's lock our handgun in the car and all, it is well targeted criticism..
Can't say for others, but since in FInland near every police officer has a handgun on their person (and rifle/body armor in the locker in the car) - in addition to ~6 months min. conscript service in the FDF like +Santtu mentioned, they are quite ready to respond to and at least contain the crisis situation. If the situation deteriorates, the further officers are ordered to "heavy-up" until the "professional heavies" of Karhu (our SWAT-equilevant) gets there. It's like a lightweight-Military working on the scene if needed - BEFORE the Big Boys get there.
I have to think that in our case, the school shootings of 2007&2008, in addition to shooting incidents in 2009 Leppävaara/Sello Mall & 2012 Hyvinkää, were kind of a wake-up call for us. We could not rely on simple goodwill no longer. We - as a Nation and the Police - had to be ready to deal with "Big World Problems" (school/mass shootings, terrorism etc.) much more readily. It was NOT as much an "we need to completely revamp our Police Forces!" situation tho - more like a "focus shift" towards more global risks.
...which in turn weirds me out: this documentary is 2014 production? Knowing norwegians had "recently" (2011 Oslo bombing/Utøya shooting) had their own "Big World Problems" too, it'd kinda make sense why Officer Anbakk was so conflicted when asked about the need of carrying a weapon.
@Santtu Kähkönen That is also good point. Compare usa cop training which is at best only six months and even less depending state and department. Only small amount of those officers have military background and i believe that officer in usa with military background are far more capable of handling sitsuation when you compare them to officers who haven't had military training. Like you said many of our officer's have been in military 6-12 months. We cant ignore the fact that our officers have trained marksmanship, leadership, teamwork, guns/gun control, tactics and combat in some level depending of their task in army. Army doesn't make you a police officer and they still need that 3 year university college training. But those skills that you learn in army can be the extra spice and make all the difference why we have the most professional and best police in the world. Also when we watch usa body cam footage about shootings, there is almost every time a reckless mag dumping that takes a place. Officer shoots suspected multiple and multiple times only hitting few. How can cops at crowded street justify shootings where officer(s) shoot multiple rounds that are missing the target? There are many videos where officers shoot with numbers, towards armed or unarmed suspect. Lets say there is knife wielding man that 4 officers start to shoot at the same time. Each officer fires 6 times and everybody misses 4 of those bullets. It is total of 16 bullets that are missing suspect and could end up hitting civilian. So who is the real danger? Cops who are trigger happy and have poor skills at marksmanship or knife wielding man? And you can replace that knife with gun but point is that officer with poor gun training can be far more dangerous to the civilians that the so called criminal. Usa cops dont have same kind of situational awareness, gun skills that finnish officers have.
Even when shootings occur there is no need to shoot more than 1-3 bullets depending situation. I bet my life on it that finnish officer can handle almost every difficult situation better than US cops even though dangerous situations happens much often in US. When you put untrained officers handling difficult scenarios they just make bad mistakes and dont necessary learn from them and how could they? You didnt train them properly in first place so how could they even know how to do it better? You dont put surgeon perform operation before you taught them how to do so.
@@kawasakininjailija87 those that planning to become Police in Finland usually go the route of MP in the military. There they learn very quickly not to let their position of authority go to their head. That and an extensive period of training and education makes sure that no Police hit the streets on a power trip.
De-escalating over escalating the situation. If you pull a gun you cause things to escalate. The suspect is now in fear for their life. If you threaten to mace them or use a tazer it's a lot less final for the suspect and they can think about if it's worth it to commit a way higher crime than what you are doing now
Finnish person here. In my experience the police in here are mostly calm, collected and prepared. They always try to solve conflicts by talking. If that doesn't help, then use more force. In general feels like they are here to help you & work with you. They don't have that paranoid "i'm in a war zone & everyone is a suspect"-attitude that we see in some american cops.
I think the American mentality is partially due to the very high rate of gun ownership here, so the cops are more on edge and defensive since there is always the possibility that someone will pull a gun out on them.
I recommend checking out clips from the finnish reality tv "Poliisit", there should be bunch of clips subtitled. It follows police pairs around the country in real situations and it's really interesting to see how they de-escalate and help the citizens.
Yes
Yes, I would love to see a foreigner's reaction to this since it gives a quite an accurate representation of finnish police.
Yes, and those aren't some fake scripted situations either, but actual real patrol mission keeping up peace and order. The approach they have to policing is so different compared to the US
@@Songfugel Yeah I love how they take an amused approach to some of the things. Like in one episode a really drunk person had taken a bike and tried to ride it, but it was locked. They were laughing about it, and stopped the guy with "Hey, do you need help with the bike? Is it actually yours?" and "Let's just leave the bike there, if it's yours you can get it tomorrow. Do you need a lift home or perhaps a visit to the drunk tank?"
All Finish patrol police carry firearms, there might be a long gun in the car if authorized to carry. The minivan is used because there is more space, and its a mobile office : The back is for holding. The middle for writing of tickets, checking up information from the national registry on icomes, car info insurance etc, or in high risk situations room for 2 more officers. And they have duty bags with plate carriers , shields gas mask forensics and so on
Police are well trained, so no need to worry that they shoot without a reason.
Half the population has military training, and hunting is a popular hobby. In general regular people know how to deal with firearms even though nobody carries a gun in the street.
Police are no threat to regular citicens and they have a lot of common sense of what is their main task. You might get a speeding ticket once in a while, but it is chilled to talk with the police even if you broke the law...you just get a ticket for driving to fast, no gun or handcuffs
There is also special forces "karhu-ryhmä" that has high class equipment like armed military vehicles, sniper rifles, assault rifles etc, and personell that have extensive military type training on top of police training.
They are seldom needed, but if a person is armed and fortified in a building, they have the skills to deal with it and mostly nobody gets killed even in a situation like that.
The military forces work in co-operation with the police, so if there are people with machine guns etc, the special forces from the defence might be asked to help out. The "green men" are a military threat, even if the group doesn't carry any ID. The video "Taistelukenttä 2020" on youtube gives a viev on the military aspect.
With a concription army, most police officers wotking in the field have also basic military training from their time in the army and know how to work with the military command.
National registry for income for writing proportional tickets, right?
@@PaulKEgellJohnsen yes
So, I'm in Sweden... And cops here are definitely prepared for anything coming at them. The biggest difference (at least that's how I feel) is that our cops don't go around trying to intimidate every single person they come across, but they actually want to help people, and they want to keep people safe. But if something happens, they're definitely ready.
🤔 once when E6 was closed somewhere south of the border I got lost during the alternate route. So I asked two policemen for help.
They had a good laugh and told me I should stay because everything is cheaper in Sweden 😂
I can't imagine the American police would be joking around like that
@@lilletrille1892
I guess it could happen, but the likelihood is very small... 😜
Yeah. It's not Officer Korhonen for us, it's Tomi from the P.D. and he's calm and predictable. He's going to arrest you for murder, but you don't have to be terrified of 20 years in an american prison, at most 12 in a finnish prison where you'll be rehabilitated. He's not going to freak out if you move and empty his clip in your back, he's just going to calmly have you get in the police car, possibly cuffed if needed.
It’s complicated. In the Nordics social security, takes care of people falling outside of society. Prison sentences aren’t putting people in jail for the rest of their lives. (We do have a way to keep extremely dangerous criminals inside, which technically has no limits). So we don’t have desperate people that have nothing to lose. On top of that, police here are taught to de-escalate rather than escalate. Escalation is the American way. Also, we don’t have the right to bear arms. The only armed people here are hunters and people doing competitive shooting. (Apart from military and police).
So these things are connected, social system, sentencing (duration) and 2nd amendment. Also the view of what punishment should be.
We believe in rehabilitation, US is more an eye for an eye.
In Norway.
From 1945 to 2010, 12 police officers have been killed on duty. (I don't find more recent stats)
From 2000 to 2019, 1106 people have died in work-related accidents.
The police are not put in excessive danger as I see it, and while it is of course tragic that people die, it's not an excuse to put the rest of society in much higher danger to get that number down.
One funny thing is that giving cops guns can actually reduce safety. In the period 2014-2019 in Norwegian police there was 62 accidental firearms discharges with 7 injuries. This period includes several years where the police were armed due to the threat of terror.
Arming police might increase the risk of getting shot by a coworker more than it reduces the risk of showing up to a gunfight unarmed...
@@espenha 👍🇸🇪
👍🇸🇪
Nobody forcing them to be police. They can work in the library too. They choose to be spit and pissed on and thats why they are payed for. Should pay more so they didnt need to rob ppl but i guess thats too much to ask to have emergency personel that have good heart and salary...
Guess most of those work related deaths is in the building industry. ?
I think it makes a big difference that guns are not as easily obtained in Nordic countries compared to US, might be one of the reasons why Peter for example has to be more scared? I'm a Finn so this is just from this angle.
Norway, Sweden and Finland has some of the highest gun ownerships in Europe. Hunting weapons (shotguns and rifles) are considered as a basic need.
@@siljedahl3861 yes, I can see that, but what about in comparison to US?
@@hennasalokangas There is a list at Wikipedia and US ranks highest of course, en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Estimated_number_of_civilian_guns_per_capita_by_country
@@siljedahl3861 That's true but I think the key difference is the attitude towards guns. In my eyes the American gun culture is heavily supported by the idea of "American freedom" and therefore "everyone should be able to get a gun". It's seems like quite a sensitive topic in the US. But like @Henna Salokangas said, obtaining guns and gun equipment is more strictly regulated in Finland than the US. Guns in Finland are for hunting or other professional or hobby reasons, in contrast to the US, I would argue that most guns have been bought for personal safety reasons and people carry their with them on a daily basis. I feel like these are the major differences.
A lot of people in nordic countries own guns, but it is very rare, and usually forbidden by law (at least in Finland), to carry one. In USA, a person is more likely to have a handgun in their car than in the nordics. The public is also more afraid of the police in the USA than we are here, so maybe they pull out their guns to "protect themselves" from the police more often, because they are afraid that they get shot.
In the US police have guns in case the criminal has a gun, the criminal has a gun because he knows the police and others will have guns. It goes both ways
Did you watch the video? Do you think it's that simple?
In Finland police don't have guns even if the criminal might have a gun. The criminal has a gun perhaps because he is in a bad place and probably needs help.
What did you think of the bit where the guy on the street literally said: "If you don't bring a gun then the criminal with the gun is NOT forced to act."
A period of de-escalation can begin.
I think the whole point of this series is that the solution to guns isn't always guns, it's ultimately about de-esclation.
(I might have misread your sentiment too)
@@hrford Yeah, just the feeling is very different in the nordics. The police is not constant paranoid about being shot. Its fine to have guns as a last resort but it doesnt have to be the first thing police goes to. De-esclation should always be the priority. Also I dont think the average police officer is a good enough shot and it should be handle by special police departments or such. I have trained with police at the range, and they are worse than me, and Im real bad at it :)
The reason you have bullet proof glass but still not arm your forces is because bullet proof glass it a 100% *defensive* feature.
Like what the guy said before, showing up with a gun might escalate the situation, the perp may feel forced to act/respond.
This couldn't possibly happen by having bullet proof glass, hence there is no reason to *not* have it.
It's an extra layers of security at absolutly no cost.
It's a bit like saying that if you send in a negotiator in a hostage situation he shouldn't be wearing a vest.
"he doesn't have a gun so why would he need the vest"
Which ofc is an absolutly asinine suggestion.
How did this Remi guy not know this?
It is also to secure classified information. If the police station isn't secured. Then gangs or whatever can try and get that information. And that is a danger for the whole country.
That soccer mom car is a Volvo V90 Diesel with 315hp plus an additional 100hp electric motor. So 400+hp. That will run circles around anything American cops have.
You tell em.
About pepper spray, in Norway, Everyone who is getting a police education have to experience how it is to be pepper sprayed.
Hi there, I'm Sara. I live in Sweden. Have lived in Stockholm, capital, for half my life. I have never been afraid for my safety while living there. Yes, I've been in uncomfortable situations but I always know I can call the cops and trust that they won't make the situation worse. If they fight fire with fire the world is just going to burn...
Swedish person here and just a few days ago I witnessed a couple of police officers arrest a man with a knife and I was incrediblyimpressed with how they handled it (I live in a quite "dangerous" area for sweden with a lot of gan violence). I think the police are definetly doing a good job and I don't think they are thinking that things won't happen here, because it definitely does. But they seem incredibly competent in dealing with people without reaching for a gun. An ideal world would of course be one where police officers won't have to resort to using a gun to handle the situation but in my opinion the possibility should be there if it comes to using the gun as a protective measure... how to make that work while also thinking of the lives of the offenders is probably a very difficult line to walk. But i think it comes down to believing that the majority of people aren't hurting others or comitting crimes because they want to but rather because they are backed into a corner. Pointing a gun at them in that situation doesn't feel like the right way to go....
Long ramble here but yeah, those are my thoughts on the subject 🤔
You know, it has happen here but it doesn't happen here as often as it does in USA. I' am from Finland and police here do carry guns as well as pepperspay and tacer and handcuffs. The difference is that here in Finland (and in other nordic countries) you can't buy a gun as easily as in USA, so the police (even when they carry a gun) don't presume the worst every time. And at least here in Finland, police patrol in pairs, so there is always two police officers in police vehicle when they are on duty.
Cop brings a weapon and wonders why client/suspect is acting "suspicious" aka normally anxious or wary when confronted with a weapon.
cop doesn't treat you like a human person and wonders why the client/suspect is not cooperative?
who could have thought that if you respect others they respect you, and are more likely to cooperate with you peacefully.
As a Norwegian I would say that we are prepared. If there is a serious situations that need to be handled, I believe they have a special units that are allowed to carry heavy weaponry that would handle that. That is what happened 22 July. Their response was to slow at that incident but I believe they learned from that.
To be fair, the counter-terrorist unit's response wasn't the only issue. As with everything else, it usually isn't one thing that fails in a scandal, but an array of things. The missing communication between different departments, the police not believing in the public calling them saying there's a shooting, the equipment used, etcetcetc. But yeah, I am convinced those errors are fixed, but let's not hope they ever have to prove that.
The Norwegian police is unarmed. They do have weapons in the car, but not on them as a matter of procedure.
The exception to this rule is Oslo, where I have occationally seen armed policemen in the city center. As I understand they can have their weapon but generally don't.
@@karsh001 It's never a matter of "they can but they don't". It's a matter of "they do" or "they don't" - it's a black and white regulation. If you're on a post where the government has decided they should be armed (currently it's still a trial around high-risk areas) and they're not armed - they're breaking the law by not being armed.
@@karsh001 before threats of terrorism and such, the only armed police in oslo were the ones that patrolled around the embassy areas. They usually carried guns.
As visiting Norway on a regular base, I have to say that (in bigger Cities like Oslo and Bergen) things have changed since 2011. Before that you could often see a single officer walking unarmed arround the streets. After 2011 you see them usually as a couple, one of them carrying a rifle. In the smaller towns you often see them walking arround, talking to people and enjoying ice cream and coffee (like any other person from the nordic countries)
"It doesn't make sense". Well, considering that it apparently keeps people alive, both civilians AND police officers, it makes perfect sense.
When all you have is a hammer, every problem starts to look like a nail. Substitute gun and target...
And Norwegian gun laws are pretty strict, so while there are a lot of guns owned by civilians, they have all got a hunting licence (rifles and shotguns, no handguns) or are active members of a gun club (may own handguns) - or serving members of the police or military.
Some areas, like the capital, do have quite a few illegal weapons in circulation, but if you pull over Average Joe for speeding you are very unlikely to meet a handgun - the illegal gun trade is mostly confined to certain criminal gangs.
I think the middle ground is reached pretty well in Finland - officers carry guns, but frankly I wasn't really sure about that. There when needed, but used with enough reluctance that the average citizen isn't particularly aware of it.
Yeah. They have guns, but even just pulling it out means you are going to need to fill paperwork explaining why that was necessary. It's quite a deterrent unless you really fear for your life at the moment
in most cases i think i comes down to training, where you learn how to deal with different situations and how to disable a potential threat without using lethal force.
it just seems that America depends more on their tools and not their training, of course i could be wrong.
Nordic cops are trained to be diplomatic and to de-escalate situations. American cops are trained to immediately resort to violence at even the slightest perceived threat.
@@DivineFalcon yeah kinda like subimt or be subdued, rather than lets calm down and rational about this.
I find it funny that station in Norway is bulletproof. as "recently" (a couple years ago now). A gun accidentally misfired in the wardrobe. So I automatically went "ofc it is bulletproof - gotta keep the civilians outside safe from the weapons on the inside"
You don't want to make a stressed out person desperate with no escape. He will fight to his death. paraphrasing from the art of war.
I worked a security job in Norway close to the swedish border when i was younger and i learned som fun facts from the company i worked for. The security company was swedish, but they worked in both countries. The instructors who worked both side of the border said that the same criminal gangs they would encounter carried more and deadlier weapons in sweden compared to Norway. The only theory they had was that the swedish police is armed and the norwegian police were not. I was told they literally encountered the same men on both side of the border and they were mostly unarmed when they encountered them on the norwegian side.
Also wanted to say that the police in Norway has three years in school before becoming police and there is very big compition to even get in to the education to become Police. I think that has a lot to say for how Police react and behave in the public and in situations.
Many of us norwegins has also been at least one year in the military too, since in norway we have a conscription to the military in the defence department
It's a complicated thing, about that "do you think it won't happen here" and "20/20 hindsight", because I feel even on personal level, the other option to learning from your mistakes is preparing for the worst. Always preparing for the worst makes you expect the worst and react with that expectation. Now think about how that same thing reflects when talking about how an entire nation's system is built and workers educated. They are basically taught to approach every situation thinking "I might die today" and that is more than most people can rationally handle. I personally see the US police force as a system that prepares for the worst, and that's what makes the conflict situations more tense and all parties more triggerhappy.
Of course the fact that gun ownership is so different in the states as well has a big impact on this. In the Nordic countries, getting a gun license is difficult. If you're going to start a hunting hobby, you first need to join a licenced hunting group. Then you apply for the license, and the application process takes a long time and you need to go to the police for psychological evaluation at least once. If you want a gun for "personal safety" it's almost impossible to get that licence and you need to have very heavy reasoning to be allowed it, and even then, it needs to stay in a locked cabinet, you can't carry it around freely. So considering this, I understand why it's more important for the US police force to carry guns compared to the Nordic countries.
I do think the education given to police officers in the states is scary in how miniscule it is though.
IF Carey a Gun outside and police take you with it You get directly to 2 year in jail so got lock Up directly are Law in Sweden so not many Carey Guns get a Long Time before get oht and not have to use in pocket lock you Up
In Finland men have gone through the army training, and probably many of the women too. And then there is two years of police academy. You don't just end up being a cop, you really train to be one.
Well the problem with comparing the USA vs Europe (or any country in europe for that matter) is the gun laws, normal citizens can buy guns in europe after cetain criterias for example in sweden you can buy a handgun after you have been active in a shooting club for at least 6 months and does not have a criminal record and is trustworthy as a citizen, then you have to had participated actively in the shooting club and by the end of those 6 months you have to take a shooting test that is arranged by the club.
After that the shooting club has to certify that you are a qualified marksman with documents and THEN you can apply for a handgun for target practice.
And the license is only valid for 5 years and then you have to reapply every 5 years as long as you want to keep the license.
So it is kinda hard for a citizen to get a hold of a handgun in europe (and we should not get into the process of getting a carbine/automatic rifle, that is even harder cause you have to justify why you would need that carbine/ automatic rifle and so on), where in the US everyone is allowed to own a gun without even getting the proper training cause it is defended by your amendments to own a gun and that creates a different climate between people.
It does level the playfield between humans and people who normaly would be to afraid of picking a fight with someone who is bigger and strong now instead they might feel more encourage to pick a fight cause they have access to a gun.
And we should not talk about the lack of traing in US police departments, the normal 13-19 weeks is far to little with that kind of responsibility that comes with being able to restrict someones freedom and the people skills of verbally talking to someone and calm them down when they are panicking or are upset and so on.
So there are many factors that comes into play here and these are just a few that i could think off the top of my head.
As you said, you need to have a reason to own a gun, if you own a gun because you like shooting you show it by shooting for six months you can not just get a gun because you want a gun for no reason other than you want a gun.
The host speak swedish with a finnish accent/dialect, also known as Fin-Swedish since some finnish people who live at the border of Sweden are speaking both Finnish and Swedish.
No that is not correct. Swedish is an official language in Finland, as is finnish. It's usually spoken by the coast and in the archipelago, not specifically by the border to Sweden. Actually by the land border over in Lapland it is not common at all. It is the first language to about 6% of the population, and it is part of the heritage from being a part of swedish territory until the area that is now Finland became an autonomous region in Russia in 1809. Back then all the official stuff was in swedish.
All people in Finland speak Swedish (at least in theory). You have to study it in school since Finland is bilangual country.
The term finlandssvenska or as you put it Fin-swedish comes from Sweden and as you say it is considered a dialect but only in Sweden.
I’m from Finland.
I think the police here are ready if it gets bad. They get at least 3 years of training. However most people here respect them and what they do and they don`t need to use guns that often. You can go talk to a cop if see one without being afraid of them. If they pull you over for speeding you mostly feel ashamed and pissed of about the ticket you are going to get. Never afraid.
And for drunks in public: mostly cops just send you home or will take you there themselves. Or if you are too drunk for your own safety or safety of others, they’ll take you to their “drunk tank” holding cells until you are sober enough (usually next morning). You don’t get fined for that. They just keep you under observation until you are good to go.
If a cop even unsheathe their gun, they have to write a report about it. Even if they didn’t fire it.
Note: if you shoot or try to overrun police it is always considered as (attempted) murder in Finland. If the situation is hot, i.e. they suspect guns are involved, Finnish police will arm (MP-5 or similar in patrol car).
You are refering to the utöya (sorry for the spelling) massacer. It took place on an island so there were no police present until after the event at which time they arrested the assailant and he is now incarcerated.
That is an awful event which sends chills down the spine still. There was no way anyone could've prepared for that kind of violence. Here in Finland there were two school shootings about 15 years ago and I don't think there is much to do to prepare for those either. I don't think it's even then reasonable to think we should have armed guards in schools all the time. I think there are some anomalies that are impossible to be prepared and the failure occured before that person decided to do something so horrible. It is not fault of the police. And I have no doubt here in Finland, in Sweden and Norway that the police are capable of handling the worst situations imaginable in a best way possible. They are well trained and prepared for bad things.
Nobody saw that massacre coming, but when realizing the scale of the incident, rest assured all polices in perimeters were armed (just my quess, but so I think).
Really interesting to watch your reactions and thoughts! I'm from Finland. Many others have already said most of my thoughts. One thing that I see as quite special here is the attitude towards Poliisi. Finnish people really respect and trust them. Shooting a police officer (to death) is considered a terrible crime and we follow very closely even police dogs who get shot or wounded and hope they survive surgeries etc. Maybe it is like a two way street of respect between "customers" :D and the Police, I don't know. Obviously our police forces are not perfect (there is corruption), but everybody can rely on getting help in bad situations from them.
I also think the police here knows quite well the situation they get in and can prepare in advance if they should have a gun at the ready. They are not blindly walking in and can suspect if they are sent to detain someone who is violent and carries weapons.
Here, shooting a police office is the _one_ crime that criminals do not get away with.
It can happen everywhere, and it has! Haven't you heard of Anders Behring Breivik? But you can choose not to be afraid all the time, you know "keep calm and carry on". Having trigger-happy police running around isn't the cure for anything.
Few years ago the first person ever in history of the country died in Iceland from a shot fired by the police. The whole country and the police force especially was shook.
Officers in the usa often seem so scared and skittish, just like the one on that show. Officers in Finland, at least the ones I've dealt with, seem calm, relaxed and super assertive, and if the situation is deemed non threatening, they usually just talk casually. They command respect with their confidence, not with hypervigilant skittishness.
Seriously, many cops in usa remind me more of scared people ready to explode at any second, than assertive leaders.
I 100% agree. The cops in the US seem to be really scared a lot and therefore shoot first for their own safety. There also seems to be no tools to resolve the situation without guns, excessive use of force, aggressive behavior and shouting orders. There are many examples where you can see that in the USA, the arrival of the police on the scene escalates the situation considerably. And doesn’t calm it down as would be desirable?
13:20 I really agree with this point. A criminal who is holding a weapon is 95% of the time going to be in a nervous, agitated, not so rational state of mind, and pointing a gun at someone is definitely not a good way to calm them down. Being in that kind of situation can trigger a fight-or-flight response, and that's when things get really ugly.
Just to drop in my personal two cents, I have interacted with the police here in Finland on a few occasions (a traffic stop or two, a house party that got a bit too loud, that kind of thing) and from what I've seen they do a good job of being assertive and in control while also being polite, non-threatening and avoiding escalation.
In Finland the police used to resort to guns and violence a lot more often than they do now. Then the hostage crisis of Mikkeli happened. The crisis began when the perpetrator took three hostages in Helsinki in a bank robbery, with whom he traveled by car to Mikkeli. The event ended when he blew up his car, killing himself and one hostage, who had been forced to drive the car if I remember correctly. The two other hostages had escaped the car just moments prior, and then the police started shooting at the car and it blew up. It was quickly noted that the situation would have probably not escalated to the perpetrator blowing up the car if the police hadn't handled it so messily. For example, no one knew what police unit from where was in charge of the situation. To this day no one knows who ordered for the shots to be fired that made the perpetrator blow up the car. The two surviving hostages also thought the situation was de-escalating and shooting was a mistake. After that, the ways our police handle things changed. The dead hostage's family is still angry with the way the situation (and its aftermath) was handled. The hostage was only in his early 20s. No one was put responsible until over 5 years later, and even then only the commanding officer who just got a heavy fine.
en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mikkeli_hostage_crisis
Please react to the finnish series "Poliisit"! You can find clips of it on youtube with english subtitles. 🙂
Will do my friend, added it to the list :)
@@MaxHaddad You asked if we feel safe. I am from Finland, but live in France. I do literally feel both far more safe in Finland than elsewhere and also more protected. But idk, if you realize that Finland is a country where a lot of people actually own guns. Second most personal weapons per population in Europe - only people in Switzerland have more. And we have far less gun related violence than a similar size US state does. I always remind folks who say that USA is huge - about the fact that each state is still about the same size than some European countries, with maybe the exception of Texas and maybe Alaska. And yes we have less population, in fact in France the area of the city and joining towns - near which I live has the population about equal to the entire Finland (5.5 million). So Finland is a country that is about 75% covered with woods. We have around about 188K lakes, and about as many islands in those lakes and around the coastline in the largest archipelago of island in the world. We are a forest nation - our towns are such they blend almost seamlessly into the woods. Town park may be a forest more or less. The reason we have so many guns is firstly the fact that people hunt here. But you do need to in fact have such good reasons for owning one and generally be educated about it's use to have a legal permit. Weapons are controlled - all though there may be some guns people inherited of were maybe left after the wars. And yes there are criminals with illegal weapons. But still - I think a dude with a knife is maybe more common incident than gun violence. Also think about this. Women go out at night, any hour of night, and do not NEED to fear that something would happen to them. Men don't even catcall women - no means NO - to the level of the man not attempting again to get a date if she refuses once. The whole culture is in certain ways different. Also where it comes to our respect and trust towards both police and other officials or authorities. I mean, a man will more likely take the advise of the state given instructions related to Covid-19 - than opinion and related thoughts about how to do from his own wife or girlfriend, if she would not be listening to them - all though her not doing so would also be highly unusual. And then also we do have rather interesting laws uncommon elsewhere in the world. 1. Every Man's Rights. Which means that all men and women can go out to walk, pick wild foods (berries, mushrooms, plants) and such even to camp in anyone's forest. From every Finn, every fifth one owns some bit of forest somewhere. The limitations on every man's rights is that you can not actually go out to pick berries from someones garden or intrude on their actual yard. And making fire, well you cant take trees out of someones forest of course - but campfire is generally ok as long as a state of forest fire danger is not in affect - and generally people would probably ask permission about camping and such things anyways. All though that is bit different on islands, cause people will easily dock to the side of some island (not actually to someones pier lol) for over night while on their vacation sail or such. And no, you cant pick plants that are considered protected. 2. If you are lost in woods and your life is in danger and you happen up on someones house or their cabin - and no-one is at home to help you - it is literally legal to break in to save yourself for example from freezing to death in middle of the winter. 3. If someone is in danger and you know where, but you do not have driving license - yet you need to go to help them - you are allowed to drive there to do so none the less. In fact - in Finland it is illegal to pass someone and abandon them in danger of life, if they are injured. But also we don't generally get sued to court if we don't know exactly how to help, like to do first aid - but it is more likely that each of us knows at least some level of first aid cause it is taught at school. Well those were the things I remember being different. But also - in Finland it is perfectly normal to leave your door open even over night or when you are not home - all though our doors are in fact made to lock without having to specifically lock it on your way out - but they can be set to not lock on their own. Babies are often left alone outside in their stroller to sleep during the day, even mid winter though it is cold. On balconies or deck of the house in the garden. Of course dressed up warmly, so no they don't freeze. That cold and fresh air is good for people you know - it makes the sleep better. So it is not being careless or uncaring or bored about crying or something like that. We just do not generally have that kind of criminals who would maybe try to hurt those small ones. So that is why also our kids walk or ride bike safely home on their own from early age - same for riding on public buss. The level of security in Finland and all North European countries is a completely different thing in comparison to USA or some other European countries. Here in France I do not think it is possible to be as relaxed about ones security as in Finland. We have had so few crimes like some sex-criminal kidnapping a child that if such a thing was to happen it will instantly become national news and besides all those kids are walking around with a phone of their own. Last time when that happen, the girl had her phone and the independence to act while faced with a dangerous situation to call for help with her phone and keep that phone hidden from the man such that they were instantly able to trace where she was and rescue her. Besides, here people do not think that it is someone else's problem if something bad is happening - they will absolutely call for help if the situation is too dangerous to do anything about. And last but not least - we do not have huge gap between the rich and the poor. Taxes are progressive, so more you make more you pay and opposite. Some folks who really earn nothing and are too ill to work pay literally zero personal taxes, or get it returned. And the state places people in great financial trouble, if they become homeless into a home first, and then start solving other problems with them. The social security net is so nice that people do not need to live on streets - that does not mean there are not few who do not choose to rough it out as though some stone age folks or something or just don't know how to get into the program. But they do generally find help. The point being that crime is not in fact even necessary to survive. But as everywhere there are always those who fall to use drugs or who drink away the help coins they get and such. And in those cases life may really be tough - but even they generally still will have a home. The whole system is geared towards giving people the opportunities on equal basis. Our school system is said to be the best in the world and if you ask - which school is the best - the one in your neighborhood, cause private schools that take tuition are in fact 'illegal'. And if you live really far away and are maybe from a poor family or not - well lets say it's difficult for you to get your kids all the way to the school - the government (meaning its same in all localities, though schools are mostly decided on by towns them selves) will send a taxi to pick them up every day and to take them home. To be more accurate, the top state educational offices settle the program as to what to teach - but towns kinda decide about the school food, buildings and such - and teachers have quite a bit freedom as to how they will do their job to meet what the program for the kids require. And a curios matter here - when you might hear that in Finland teachers are valued as highly as doctors. This does not mean the level of income of an American doctor, Finnish doctor does not get similar pay either. No it meas that they must have university level studies all. And that they are supposed to be able each to provide education service for the children in such manner that all those schools are the best equally. So yes, they are both trusted to do so and valued. Well - I wanted to give you a bit more wide sense as to how different things really are in Finland. There is an old saying - it is to win the lottery to be born a Finn. And even if we consistently worry that we loose benefits - from the eyes of someone living outside of her native country - it still is very much true, if not more so. And yes, I am - we are in a way bit proud to 'not be american' - lol - sry, but I for one would likely be dead by now due my health troubles if I was born in the US. So I kinda value our system a lot. Even here in France it is relatively ok, the health system I mean - all though I don't see this place equally safe or honest. In Finland if you lost your wallet you would more likely get it back nothing stolen. And people would not try to grab your phone if you left it on a restaurant table. Well that short of a thing. No, more likely someone will run after you to tell you you forgot it. I kinda thing that it at times may well be psychological environment that may make the opportunities when some grow up harder for some rather than others. But the point I am trying to make is that we try to make our country such people don't need to feel desperate or like there are no opportunities. So I think it does also changes as to how often people end up taking to criminal ways. That does not mean all those various types of crimes do not exist - but the environment is mostly softer in general sense - so also the crimes are not always on equal levels to what they really could be - or as frequent.
@@lyrigageforge3259 Exactly... in high paying positions you might not get as exceedingly rich as in the USA... but in return you gain safety, good neighbors and you have to worry less about loosing it all.
The higher the wealth gap is in a country it will also have higher criminality, substance abuse, less safety and other societal issues a country.
@@lyrigageforge3259 very true. As a Norwegian with many comparable references, I think Finland has a much higher regard of teachers and authorities than in Norway.
And I must add that Finnish highways and cities are very child friendly with playgrounds at a lot of rest stops, and Helsinki’s parks always had a playground.
If the language wasn’t so difficult…
One thing I've noticed is that fear is used as a manipulation tool in America. Politicians use it to justify their positions, cops seem to be fearful, it permeates the public discussion. If the police officers are trained to be afraid of people and seeing threats everywhere they're going to have more extreme reactions in situations which leads to escalation.
Yes the Norwegian police is now armed. Still only temporary, but my feeling is that its there to stay. Prior to that most units had a glock 18 or something similar locked in a coffer in the car, while the "better trained" also kept MP5 locked away in their cars.
Ah! Thank you. Wasn't certain.
Norway had armed police, but not anymore. It was because of "terrorism" threat.
Most unsafe I've ever felt in my life, and I've been stabbed on two different occasions.
Ps: i was born in Mo i Rana.
So police officers are unarmed because of Anders Behring Breivik?
@@sanyonazyin6063 No, they weren't armed when Utøya happened, and I don't believe they armed themselves after Utøya either. It was a lone nutjob, so it wouldn't impact the general threat level. (Though ABB made it more common to have armed police at events that could be targeted by terrorists and nutjobs.)
The police are sometimes allowed to carry guns on their person because of the general threat of terror. Like a lot of the time while ISIS was at it's height.
I went to Mjølan 03-06 👌🏻🙈
@@sanyonazyin6063 @Espen Hugaas Andersen is right. The issue is that it's never been any real terrorist threats in Norway except Anders Bering Breivik, and he was all alone. No terrorist group.
They use temporary arming of police to ease it in to normality because our sitting government wants armed police. We don't need armed police. Armed police just escalates an arms race between police and criminals.
Sweeden has a little less than twice our citizens, but 4 times as many shootings from police.
In 2011 Norwegian police shoot one time. This was a warning shoot.
Danish police shoot 87 times. (Don't know on how many occasions )
(Denmark has rougly same nr of ppl as Norway. But armed police)
Swedish police shoot at 76 different occasions (don't know how many shoots)
The armed police was a bigger threat than any ISIS threat.
The police had many shots fired by accident including shooting themselves and innocent bystander.
Statistically the crime rates are pretty similar, yes. Athough it is very unusual for civilians to carry firearms, which makes it so much less probable for the police to have to fire a weapon. They might use guns to make a point if the suspect is threatening the officers or someone else with anything more than their fists. But now we are talking about keeping the gun in the hand, ready to fire, but not firing. Firing the weapon being necessary is so unprobable because the counterpart almost never has a gun to answer with.
In Norway I feel its a much higher bar to shoot. The value on human life is always more than any material value. And if anything happens that need guns for sure, it escalates to armed both police and military Delta troops fairly fast.
Know this is an old video but I’ll comment anyways…
I’m Norwegian and live in suburbs near a city only 30min from the capital, there’s normally only police around here late on weekends in specific places and otherwise they’re not really needed, if you’re in the city they will drive around during the day as well, what I find most important to take away from police presence is that no matter where I am or what the situation is, being around police or in an area with police has only ever made me feel more safe, and I would say I feel safe even when they aren’t around.
It has always sounded strange to me that Americans can feel threatened by police at all simply because it’s their job to protect, and if they make you feel unsafe something is clearly wrong
One thing - a lot of Norwegian cops _do_ advocate for having permanent arms - but I think it would lead to more violence on the streets. Like many has said, brining guns into the equation - even when holstered - lead to escalation.
In Finland at august 2019 two brothers falsely called for emergency of burglary to their "garage" in to industrial area in city of Porvoo. Their attention was to rob the guns and gears from the police patrol send to the scene. The brothers ended up shooting and wounding both of the police men but both of the police men were able to escape. That lead to a massive man hunt which ended up high speed chase with Finnish "swat" team and the brothers. During the whole insident police didn' shoot a single shot altough one of the brothers shot multiple times towards police during the chase. Brothers finally surrendered and received 15 years sentence.
2:26 the way the narrator put it like "things are *a bit* intense in LA than Norway" is somehow very hilarious to me
As a Norwegian, I agree with Julie Casson - we are prepared, but having cops armed as in the US would not be a good thing. Having both the cops and people unarmed does make for a safer society with less chance of escalation in any situation. Police here are not here to control, but to assist in keeping the peace.
Norwegian police are generally not armed. They are in a trial of using tasers and in a trial of being armed at points of interest (our main airport etc.) but generally speaking, their guns are locked inside a box in their vehicles, and can only be used after gaining permission from their commanders in case of a high-risk operation.
It is totally true what you say: Not having quick access to a gun forces you to think and act differently. It forces you to de-escalate, as you don't have the immediate measures to escalate the situation. A few years ago we had a trial where every police officer carried a gun on their person. That led to a lot more situations were they employed the guns and threatened suspects with them. It also led to a lot of dangerous situations of inappropriate weapon handling: People shooting their partners accidentally, weapons discharging in the bathroom stalls etc... Sure, some of that probably comes from inexperience of handling a weapon, but a lot of it also comes from the psychological perspective of "Now I have a gun...I am like God, I can decide whether you die or live". But then again, as he said, Norwegian police use their guns everyday - it's just PLANNED beforehand that they're going to arm themselves.
And to the "Why do American law enforcement officers feel more inclined to pull out their weapons" question, I think it's more a cultural problem within law enforcement, and I think a lot goes back to an obviously flawed training where most American police departments don't get any real training in de-escalation techniques. They are basically given a toolbox with a lot of weapons, they're taught how to use them, but they're never taught how to use the big and scary tool called de-escalation.
As for the one police officer being killed for going into a knife fight with bare hands: Had the police been armed from the get-go, yes, that dude might probably have survived, BUT: That would also force a general increase in violent confrontations between police and criminals, which might lead to more deaths on both sides, in the big picture.
For a Norwegian police officer using a gun is always the last, not the first, option. The best weapon an officer use is their heads! Talking and calm down the situation is the first option, then arrest and handcuff - using a gun is always, ALWAYS, the last option and not without getting OK from their leaders first (via radio)...
All these police forces he visited were in the north of the countries with small comunities. It's a bit different in the cities further south. A police friend that worked in both places said about the differences: "More handguns, less axes."
22. July 2011 - tetrorist attack. There was first an attack on the government quarter in the capitol that involved a car being placed there with a 950 kilo fertilizer-bomb. Than the terrorist, Anders Behring Breivik, drove from the capitol to Utøya and tok the ferry over to the island, where it was a summercamp (564 youths) for the young that had a political intresst.
He killed 8, seriously injured 10, and injurd many more in the capitol.
He killed 69, seriously injured 33, and hundreds were in danger and under psycological stress.
There is a movie about it "22 july", and i think it is on netflix. That attack had an really big impact on Norway.
Where I live in czech republic, police shoots 2 blanks as a warning. Real shooting is very very rare.
It would be more realistic if they also compared it to the bigger citys and capitols in the Nordic.
Late to comment, but wanted to add to the comment by ohnofan:
Peter also specified, at the end, another aspect that points to a different mentality overall, and that is his use of "Law Enforcement Officer" (which is, as I understand it, how the US in general describes police ). He is, in a manner, saying he has to force people to follow the law, which points to an attitude were you expect the public in general to not wanting to follow the law. Again pointing to that Peter expects to go out and face the enemy.
Contrasting the attitude displayed by Swedish, Finnish and Norwegian police, were they consider themselves as doing a public service, hence being servants of the public.
An example of this is that during the 60's and 70's, in Norway, police came to be known as "onkel politi" or "uncle police", I'm not sure if this term is used anymore, but I do know that it was in use up until 2000 or there about.
A lot of this is around semantics, but semantics do instil attitude over time.
I’m in England, where police were historically unarmed. There are specialist armed police now routinely deployed at airports and areas considered at a high risk of terrorism but the regular police are unarmed. In 2012, about two miles from my home two police officers, Nicola Hughes and Fiona Bone, were murdered by Dale Cregan. Cregan later handed himself in at the police station, which was the only place he was safe. Outside he’d be considered armed and dangerous and likely to be shot.
There have been reports that heavy hitters in the crime world have put a bounty on Cregan for killing Hughes and Bone. If it’s not motivated by horror at what he did then there’s self-interest in not wanting to see armed police proliferating. Don’t shoot at the police and they won’t need to shoot back. Police use of guns is a complex situation and not one we’ll solve in the comments section but we can discuss it.
The reason pepper spray is preferred over tasers is that long term damage from electric shock weapons are a concern in Norway. That is why electric shock weapons of any kind are illegal to own by the general population.
The norwegian police do not carry guns on their body, and the reason for that is that they are supposed to solve the situation verbally as they said in the video. I dont think they mentioned it, but in Norway it takes you 3 years of school to become a policeman compared to America where it takes from 13 to 19 WEEKS. So Norwegian policemen are not only trained on how to use their weapon, but how to resolve a situation depending on how the perpetrator acts. I feel that sometimes in America cops finds a way to justify discharging their weapons, and that is because they dont have the toolbox to resolve a situation without guns. So the problem is not necessarily the guns, but the lack of case training without using guns.
Great videos btw, as a norwegian love your channel and your good opinions!
In Estonia police cars most Škoda Superb 1,4 Turbo petrol , VW GOLF 1,5 -2,0 diesel , MB Vito diesel 2,3.
19:32
Okey, so in *this* particular police department there's apparently a majority in favor of carrying firearms, but in the Norwegian police force as a whole there's a majority against it, but the split is *extremely* close to a tie.
We're talking 49%-51% most years, going up and down a bit over time.
Also since 2019, Norwegian police are generally armed again now, according to Wikipedia. Not sure why that changed but I can’t find any stats to indicate if that led to an increase of violence towards police officers or shootings by police officers
As a swede, my impression from US movies, series and documentaries is that US police are trained to maintain a state of hypervigilance. They are not only ready for trouble, as their Nordic colleagues, but are prepared to meet that trouble with deadly force. Nordic police, and most police forces in the developed world, are rather trained to de-escalate situations. They enter a situation with dialogue, where a US police officer would do so by issuing orders with either baton in hand or one hand on his gun.
I have seen more than one clip where I would claim a US police officer actively escalated a situation that could possibly have been resolved peacefully. It may be out of genuine fear, but that fear is something that their training ingrains in them, not necessarily something real.
Look for an older clip, "Swedish cops break up subway fight NYC", where four Swedish police on vacation helped out in a situation on their way to Les Miserables. I have no clue why it became such a big deal in NYC, to my (Swedish) eyes they seemed a bit overly forceful, but they were lauded as heroes.
To be fair neither Norway, Sweden or Finland is as diverse and polarized as the US. Socially or economically.
The standard of living is on a higher level overall and i'm sure that plays a big roll in why weapons are used less by the police. Everyone is seen more as equals.
In the cases where guns are used it's usually connected to organized crime, drugs and such (which is on the rise sadly..)
Very old video. in 2020, the police were armed in Norway for some time, but now they are again unarmed. The police today have completely different colors for the cars, yellow and black and they have an agreement with Mercedes Benz and BMW
Oh wow. The video did seem a little grainy. Someone mentioned there may be a better episode of this to watch as well. Appreciate you updating me on their being armed/unarmed as well. Thank you. :)
I'm in New Zealand. Our police aren't normally armed but they seem to use their guns more readily than the officers in Nordic countries. But if I was pulled over at a traffic stop or there were cops just strolling around I wouldn't expect them to have guns. We had a incident recently where a teenager was shot and died (it seems like he was an unlucky stander by) and the cops spend the following couple of days tracking down the people involved. When they located one of them they turned up armed but they set the dogs on him, instead of going in guns blazing. They also spent time trying to talk him out of the house on his own. We have a fair amount of gun control though. Handguns just aren't really a thing here. People do have rifles and shotguns for hunting. They got rid of the more high powered guns after we had a mass shooting a few years ago. They had a trial where they had easier access to their guns but their own statistics showed that their was a disparity over which ethnicities got the guns pulled on them so that got shut down.
I found your opinion of the vehicles interesting. Our cops use vans when they think they'll be making a lot of arrests. Like at a big protest, on a Friday night in the city, that kind of thing. The station wagons are used by the officers with dogs. There's not really room for them in a sedan!
The beard thing is just sad. Ours can definitely have facial hair. Tattoo's are pretty common too, but then we have members of parliament with facial tattoo's so it's a bit different here.
I'm from Norway. As for Norwegian Police being armed now, they did a temporary armament for some months when the terror-level-alert (or whatever you call that) was raised. The standard rule is stil as described in this documentary (you have weapons locked down in the car and can only take them out on orders from the head-police-officer in charge in your region, based on the threat-assessment for each mission).
British police are mostly unarmed. A lot of police said they would resign their job if carrying a gun was mandatory. There are rapid response units that carry guns IF it becomes known that a gun or knife is present.
Check out the norwegian policemans body language! This is a calm and confident man.
And I feel like that is exactly the right thing to project, it tells the criminals that you can't fuck with this guy and he doesn't fear you, but also that he wont do anything unless you do, so you should totally not do anything and give up^^
@@johnuferbach9166
Works pretty well on all mammals, I suspect. 😄
Seeing that the US has 66 times the population of Norway, there would be only 66 shots fired by all US police forces in a year by comparison.
Part of the reason for this low police shooting rate in Norway is the fact that the police is unarmed, and while they have access to firearms locked up in their cars, using them calls for considerable paperwork afterwards. The main reason, however, is the simple fact that the general population in Norway is NOT armed to the teeth. When a Norwegian cop has to negatively interact with the public, the chances that the suspect might pull a gun is very low - virtually nil.
Finland we have a "Police University College" where all the police are trained and it takes about 3 years to graduate. Standards to get accepted there are quite high. We also have a quite strict gun laws that is making the job of police much safer. Police in Finland are usually quite calm and neutral when you meet them. They don't seem like stressed or in edge so to speak. I feel like they treat you like customer and leave the judging to court if it goes there. It is not really their job to decide. Even these long time trained police officers do mistakes sometimes but because rules to use guns are so strict the errors are not fatal. One thing i would add is that they are not really treated like "heroes" or kept on pedestal which keeps their egos checked. They are just trained people who are doing their jobs. I also have never felt danger living here.
I would imagine that the bullet proof glass in the station was over kill.
Ranking by country for civilian-held firearms per 100 population. Small Arms Survey 2017.
US-120.5
Finland-32.4
Norway-28.8
I think if you go around thinking your life is threathen every second, you will see threaths all around. And of course is good to be cautious, but being afraid all the time really could hinder your decision making.
Of course things can happen in Nordic countries too. But I don't feel unsafe, even if there is some political rhetoric to claim otherwise.
I'm a Finn... And I've been opposite side of the law ,many many times in my past...
Not once I've even though in back of my mind, that Finnish cops carry gun,.
even in cases where I've have had a knife or baton or something in my possession....
Even if you wrestling with them little... They often just overwhelms you... Because they always works in pairs..
Based on personal experiences,sometimes after wrestling with them, you might "accidentally" bounce few extra times to walls/doors in police station ... But even that is pretty rare
In USA,Esclation is the modus operandi. In europe deescalation is the key to success.
"Pepperspray greatly motivates you to stop" LOL
;)
Make no mistake, having any emergency vehicle turn on the emergency lights behind your car in the night will certainly capture your attention even without a siren on. Be it police unmarked sportscar, a soccer mom vehicle, or a van, it's suitably menacing to compel to do the right thing in traffic.
As a Norwegian, my thought is that it is no reason to worry, since no one is carrying guns, and probably 99% of households doesn't even have any guns. There are exceptions, but those are used for hunting. Unlike in the US where it looks like people are so scared they carry their guns to the store... it just seems weird.
11:36
A tazer is more likely to be lethal, a pepper spray needs to be inhaled to be lethal.
It does so by both weakening the heart a little bit, but more importantly by causing inflamation of the throat inhibiting breathing.
It takes a bit longer time to die from breathing problems then from your heart just outright stopping from a electric shock.
In Europe we never had that Wild West approach.
The thing with Norway and other nordic countries are that the population doesn't walk around with guns on them, we don't need guns for home defence, we don't live in a warzone.
Usually Finnish police manages to take a hold of a person (if needed) by talking, giving commands and usually the person complies. But if not then the police may use a taser or just simply tackling the person down. Rarely there's any shooting involved coz Finnish police doesnt carry guns generally. But if there's more bigger incident like the stabbing in Turku's market square in 2017, then of course police arrives with guns although not to fatally shoot the suspect (just stop the person).
To your last question: I think that what Peter does not really grasp, is that empirically, most hardened drug-mafia-criminals, packing illegal guns don't feel for shooting at the police as much in the Nordic countries as in the US. The criminals pack guns to protect themselves from eachother, not to protect themselves from the police. The police are regarded as mediators, as the good big brother, etc. Of course, you have people who don't like the police in the Nordic countries too, and also here, people discuss if people act racist towards certain ethnic minorities, etc. What I'd like to see in this episode is if they brought him out in a patrol-car one busy friday night, then he could see how Nordic police is trained to de-escalate, and to treat people like people and not a nuisance :)
I once was in a pub, and I saw a known drug-addict loading up a colt.45 at his table. I walked over to the pub-owner, and she said "oh, i only took a knife from him earlier this night, I guess I'll have to call the police now" Some time later, the door-man asked if he could leave the pub. One beer later, I talked to the woman at the bar, and she said that the police had asked her to call a taxi for the criminal, to take him home. They would drive over the next morning, when he wasn't drunk, to take his gun then, in a safer environment than in a pub, friday night...
Just recently found your videos, great content!
I live in Switzerland and was in Norway for a semester while studying. What i think, besides the way jails look and are run or wether or not police is armed or not, plays a much bigger roll is the social security system and the gun controls.
Maybe you've seen the piece of the daily show on Swiss gun culture. There are some good points already made. For example, most young man either get their first contact with a gun at a shooting range where they shoot on targets 300m away as a competitive sport, or when they join the army. The gun you get from the army stays at home mostly and you have to go 300m shooting atleast once per year. It's like this until they are ~32 years old. Depending on how often you went shooting you can buy it quite cheap after one has finished his service and can return the rest of the gear to the army. The main thing to know is, that if someone in times of peace has to carry his gun in public (e.g. to go to / go home from the yearly 3 week re-training courses) they don't carry ammunition with them. If you buy it after the service the possibility to shoot 3 or 20 shot series will be disabled mechanically. You can't buy automatic weapons.
When it comes to social security, i think that providing affordable and good education aswell as affordable healthcare is key. I'll bet, that number burglaries within a country can be lowered with social security systems in place if someone e.g. loses their job. If for example i lose my job, i have to report it to the office in charge and provide evidence of how many job applications i did during the month. There is a minimum number that can be discussed, that one needs to do. Depending on the education. If someone is e.g. a carpenter or electrician he will have much more job offerings than someone that is maybe an engineer in fluid dynamics, just because his field is so specific. By providing the evidence i get the right to get a certain amount of money, out of the national insurance. This way i know, that if i lose my job, i have a perspective and don't have to sell all my belongings, just to somehow make it through a maybe longer time while searching for a job. Or just get some money otherwise, e.g. burglary etc.
When it comes to police in Switzerland, they are well trained and only had to deal with friendly police men and women. They carry a gun, mostly something like a P30 or a Glock 17. Their training starts with 1 year of police school, followed by 2.5 years of training on the job.
Also some states in America have death penalty, this might make someone go rogue if he knows its the end of the line might as well go balls to the wall
Not a bad point at all. It does happen. :/
The biggest difference is the amount of weapons in the US, when everyone has a gun no one knows who are going to use them. Here it is really hard to get them, probably on the black market or if you know someone who can get it, but it is very expensive as far as I have heard. We do have hunters but they have to have certificates which isn't that easy to get either. And I do understand the fascination that some people have with guns, but as far as I know we don't feel the need to have guns if other people more than likely doesn't have guns either then we don't need to protect against that. Those criminals who have and use guns is most likely gang related and they most likely use them against other gangs.
I think your reasoning is basically sound, but it also sounds like you might be surprised at how few people here carry guns on them. :) I don't know for sure though and don't want to assume I understand exactly how you view the U.S. based of this one comment. Just thought it was worth saying. Definitely a rarity to see anyone other than a police officer carrying a gun. Admittedly, when I was in active drug addiction, I saw more guns more often and not being carried by police officers.
@@MaxHaddad I think my comment was in regards to you noticing that the US cop sounded more afraid and I have remembered a little more that I can ad to my hypothesis. I have seen a lot of US cops say that one of the reasons they fear for their life, are hypervigilant and are quick to draw their guns are because they never know who has a gun and who hasn't. And I have also seen that it is one of the things that is a problem in the US education to become a cop I have seen some cops say that a big part of the education is them getting told that everyone has a gun and everyone wants to hurt/kill them. I of course hasn't been on a US police school, but I can't see any reason why they would say that if it wasn't true.
Where as in the Nordic countries I can mostly talk for Denmark where I live almost no one have guns so it isn't assumed or speculated so the police isn't taught to assume it which does that they don't fear for their life in the same way and that shines through on their behavior and demeanor.
I might not have expressed/explained what I meant in the first comment, maybe not even in this comment.
But their is an extreme amount of civilian weapons in the US. It is the only country that has more weapons than people. And that huge amount might be the reason that the police are in fear and don't know who have weapons and suspect everyone, it is estimated that for every 100 people in the US there is around 120 guns while in Denmark it is estimated that it is 9 out of 100 people so it is assumed that people doesn't have them plus there is a lot of rules for most of those who own guns legally in Denmark.
I hope you get what I mean if not just ask and will try to reply as good as I can.
So a thing is that in Norway at least there is a higher amount of firearms per capita then in USA. (at least i remember seeing statistics on this being the case)
And if you are in the right shooting clubs and so on you can buy quite a lot of the firearms that is legal in USA you need documents and be allowed by the police.
I have heard this neat trick that when driving around with the family you can play a game where you get a point if you see a police car. That way you can easily be alerted to any police cars that are around as your children will spot them for you. Seems like a fun game and all (and if it keeps your children occupied and happy perhaps there is something to it). But to know when there is a police car present seems like a strange thing you'd like to know. It shouldn't matter. Definitely there shouldn't be any reason to be affraid of the presence of the police.
I think there is a good argument for cops not wearing guns, in that everyone else knows that the cop won't pull a gun on them over a misunderstanding. Criminals in Norway have assault weapons too - but they almost never use them except on each other, because they aren't immediately in a life or death situation if they encounter law enforcment. The prison time for having an illegal firearm in your car compared to the prison time for shooting a cop is decades in prison. Why would anyone choose the latter?
Peter has the scarf action down...Love what you have to say about the Men and the size of their "toys"- I am not a man, but I do believe it is true. Very different from us. Thanks max
Hahaha. Peter. What a class act.
i think the peter needs to understand that other countries dont just hand out guns to random people the way americans do... you wont be confronted with a criminal with a gun as a police officer as much if you dont sell guns
Look up Anders Behring Breivik (but don't talk about him on your channel please, he doesn't deserve the attention).
But yeah, basically we've had bad experiences too.
I still think it's wrong arm the police.
In the Netherlands the police bear arms and they use them regularly too. But they will always try to de-escalate situations first. Most shootings, I believe are to stop really long and dangerous high speed pursuits. These are dangerous to other traffic. But even there, the Dutch police will follow for a long time and push off the car outside built up areas first.
I live in Finland and can say that I've never feared for my safety and that I don't feel like the police is not up for the task of protecting me. Also I don't feel like there is much we need protecting from. In the event of something unimaginable the finnish police work in tight relations with the military police and other branches of the armed forces like the Jaeger (Kaupunkijääkäri; a type of special forces) which are very well trained and motivated to actively protect Finalnd from domestic danger if ever need be.
in 2016 there were 1.14 murders per 100000 inhabitants in finland, in the us there were around 5 per 100000... so wouldn't say that there is the same amount of crime in the two countries, at least when it comes to really serious crimes....
I'm glad you're breaking it down into specifics as you are, it's a good way to look at it. I think you and I would agree on how rapists and murderers should be treated. Currently, per 1000 people, Finland has a crime rate twice as high as the United States. Surprising, but it isn't that simple though, because crimes over there may be reported more often simply because of the deserved trust in police. So if crime statistics can't be trusted due to inconsistent rates of reporting, are you comfortable suggesting American prisoners should be treated differently because of something you heard on the news? Mind you, the majority are not imprisoned for murder or sexual crime, but what is labeled in the DSM as a mental illness? You may not have intended it, but that's what it sounds like you're suggesting.
@@MaxHaddad oh, that was absolutely NOT what I was intending to say 😂!! Personally I think American prisons are cruel and inhumane! I also think that sentences in the usa, especially for non-violent crimes, are often insane, especially the system of fixed minimum sentences... In Germany (where I live) you really have to accumulate multiple non-violent crimes to go to the big house (or do something like major fraud or so)... I also think that the American system of bail is majorly unjust anf corrupt since it makes the question of whether someone goes to jail or not a question of wealth... So I was not suggesting that American prisoners should be treated like they are because there are more murders. I think American society as a whole needs major reform to become a more peaceful and relaxed society, cause clearly the US has a problem with people killing each other. I think the current system is a result of the tense atmosphere within the whole society (I mean even the question of wearing masks has become a major fighting-topic)...
@@MaxHaddad it is interesting what you are saying. I am from Sweden and as you say the number of rape is higher here. There are numerous reason why that is I think.
1. The definition of rape is different here. So what might be a small sexual abuse in the US (I am not saying that any sexual abuse are small just the definition in the countries) here it is probably defined as rape. Hence more cases
2. Many that have been raped feel ashamed for it so here we encourage the victims to come forth and help them mentally.
3. We might have a higher trust in the police force and actually do report more because of that.
However we still have problems when it comes to court. Many reported rapes are often without witnesses so it is still words against words.
For example a teenager get caught with shoplifting by security guards and they wait for the police. The kid will be more afraid what the mothers would say about that than the police. So even people doing a crime will trust the police not killing them and they don’t fight back with full force. Check out “Poliisit” reality here in RUclips, it’s about Finnish police in real action and you see how people react in real life situations towards the officers
Okay so my thinking on this is that the environment is very different in US vs Nordics. From what I understand, people in US can carry a gun in public, where as in Nordics that is unheard of. Like if there is a gun sighting in public, it is national news in 5min, 5 police cars are on their way with police dogs and assault rifles and maybe the police special forces are also on their way. Now if you are police for example in Finland, the chance that you face a gun is very rare, but I think this is very different in US. I'd think of the chances of facing a gun in Finland close to the chances of facing an RPG in US. That is something so rare that police don't really expect that, but they still need to have some action plan if it happens.
I think the environment is the largest factor in how the police prepares, but another one is probably training. Like in Finland the police have 3 years of training, where de-escalation is probably a big portion of the training. This leads to more easily trying to de-escalate the situation with every means possible before resorting to a gun. Lastly I think there is also a mentality difference: I think that police job is to serve the society, and that the job comes with some inherent risks. I don't think that we should value police over criminals, both of their lives are as important to the society. This really emphasizes the point that police should try to do everything in their power not to use lethal force. No matter what the situation is, there is probably a chance to de-escalate it. Sure, sometimes there are no good options, but even then an interesting difference is that in US police shoots to kill, while in Finland for example police shoots to disable (e.g. to leg). One last point I wan't to add is that there is also a huge difference in prison times. So in US criminals often face very long prison times which can ruin the rest of their lives, where as in Finland criminals face much more moderate prison times and are helped to get back to society. I think this is important in a crisis situation, as it encourages criminals to not use ultimate force as they might realise that getting caught is not the end of their world. In US it often can be the end of their life (rest of their life in prison, lethal punishment, or just many decades in prison) and imo this encourages people to fight for their lives, as they realise that there is no coming back from this, so they might do whatever possible to try to escape.