What is a gang? According to National Institute of Justice at nij.org, gangs are: "Whose members collectively identify themselves by adopting a group identity, which they use to create an atmosphere of fear or intimidation," as well as "Whose purpose in part is to engage in criminal activity and which uses violence or intimidation." While it is true, that the police are actually instruments of the state and thereby are not criminals, by definition, it is also true, that there are police that in their actions and in their behavior, most definitely, are criminals, using both the color of their guard to shield themselves effectively from prosecution, as well as because police are an instrument of the criminal justice system, are in almost all instances, no matter how egregious, no matter how outrageous, protected by that same justice system from retribution or prosecution. This means, in effect, that police know that whatever that they do, they will in virtually all circumstances, not have to suffer from prosecution for their actions, making them in most cases not legally liable for their behavior, so that, in effect, they are above the law, even though the onus is most definitely on police, at all times, as representatives of the state, to abide by the law, both in spirit, and in fact.
The fact that police officers have virtual immunity from prosecution, signifies that in the streets of this country, safe or not, low income or not, minority or not, that police can go about their business in whatever manner that they so see fit, knowing that the unwritten code, will protect them at all times, no matter the circumstances of what actually occurs. It would be one thing, if all of this freedom for the police, produced effectively safer communities, with less crime, with less divisiveness, and so on and so forth, but, in fact, when the arm of justice, is allowed to do what it so desires, it breeds contempt by the common man, especially those of lower socio-economic levels, for police, for justice, and for this country that thereby belies the liberty and freedom that America professes so proudly.
Not too surprisingly, when you arm police to the teeth, as well as recruit police from military backgrounds and ranks, you have gotten yourself, an armed militia, extremely well trained in the usage of firepower, in which, in virtually all circumstances, the police will have the highest ground, and their targets, will not. Further to the point, when the usage of deadly force, or the instigation by police so that their "reasonable" response to such is deadly force, is in actuality, whatever the police deem it to be, than the firing by police upon civilians, armed or not, dangerous or not, necessary or not, has already been written by their active trigger fingers.
Those that declaim about how much we need the police, because it is the police that keeps us safe, that they are the true blue line separating us from outright anarchy, and so on and so forth, usually do so, because they come from a place in which police do not target them, nor their families, nor their friends, nor their socio-economic level, but come the day, when the police roam their neighborhoods and their schools, with guns-a-blazing at them, they will live to rue their narrow-minded bigotry.
In point of fact, country upon country, that are similar to America in GDP and its justice system, have police forces that do not shoot, that do not kill, and that do not target their own citizens with lethal force. For instance, as reported by theguardian.com, the combination of England and Wales had a total of 55 fatal police shootings in the last 24 years, which equates to just over two per year. Additionally, Finland had six bullets fired by their police in total for the entire year of 2013. The difference between these countries and America demonstrates an incredibly deep divide and is proof positive that America police are insanely aggressive and violent in their behavior toward those that they have sworn "to protect and to serve".
Finally, as reported by mappingpoliceviolence.com, "Police killed at least 102 unarmed black people in 2015", in which, "Only 10 of the 102 cases in 2015 where an unarmed black person was killed by police resulted in officer(s) being charged with a crime, and only 2 of these deaths …resulted in convictions of officers involve." This signifies that over 90% of the time, police are "justified" in killing unarmed black civilians, this, in an era, when it has never been easier for police through cameras, through hi-technology assistance, through contacts, and through surveillance, to already know or presume who the likely unarmed civilian is before he is fired upon, meaning that there isn't any real exigent need to take final "justice" into their own hands, yet they do it, again and again.