Recently, the following question of mine was closed:
- Amongst U.S. police forces, are combat veterans more likely to abuse force than those who lack combat experience?
The reasons for such closure were:
This question does not appear to be about governments, policies and political processes within the scope defined in the help center.
The primary purpose of this question appears to be to promote or discredit a specific political cause, group or politician. It does not appear to be a good-faith effort to learn more about governments, policies and political processes as defined in the help center.
My questions are as follows:
Whether to incorporate combat veterans in police forces — and, if so, to which units to allocate them — is a matter of internal security policy. To use a more European terminology, how exactly are the policies of the Ministry of the Interior, not about "governments, policies and political processes"?
On the accusation that the question was asked in mala fide, how is satisfying one's curiosity an act of bad faith?
If the question were easy to answer, the one answer to it would have been accepted already. However, the answer did not answer my question. Thus, I cannot accept it (yet). Why prevent people who may have access to better data from joining the discussion?