I'd say if the soldier is serving during war time or in a hostile war zone its not even a real contest. However, there is a large bit of uncertainty/unpredictability to being a police officer as well. Another special situation would be police officers serving in SWAT team roles.

Both positions have a great deal of danger I would not want to deal with.

Depends on whether it is war time or not.

Depends what kind of cop & Depends what position of war the soldier is in

Well, that is contingent upon the state of affairs.

As far as the homeland is concerned, in the long run, I think I'd have to tilt toward policing being the more dangerous profession.

When you get martial law, police officers will essentially become soldiers with blue uniforms.

So... soldiers go from occasionally patrolling here and there to suddenly being in use, in contrast to that, police officers go from having to deal with shit to having to deal with more shit.

Not many countries experience a civil war, so... in general, soldiers will have it easier.

This all changes when invasions/interventions are in play.

You see, you can't be a police officer in a foreign country, that is where the army is set into motion.

Now, being in a foreign land, combating enemy troops who are using heavy artillery, biological weapons etc. , who also happen to have better knowledge of the terrain and not to mention, probably the support of the locals too.

That makes for a shitstorm, I don't think you could get a more difficult ordeal than this one. So a soldier behind enemy lines is definitely the worst thing to be.

In wartime, soldier. Not in wartime... not that sure.

As an arm-chair expert of something that i have no clue at all,

I would say brazilian cops are at higher risks compare to those colorful soldiers that are guarding the Vatican Pope.

It depends on if we're in war time.

It depends on a lot of things.

• If your in Wartime like Darksith said


• Where you are like if your in a bad or good neighborhood as a cop


• ETC

Depends on where the soldier is and what nation they are fighting for. A soldier of a first world country is going to have a much, much higher rate of survival then a child soldier of some African warlord. Cop also depends on the city they are in and what part of said city they are stationed in.

Soldiers.

Soldiers

These are both wrong.

It is perhaps for dangerous to be a woman than a soldier in an armed conflict

- Maj. Gen. Patrick Cammaert
Ex-Force commander

Soldier obviously. A soldier's duty in war is to kill the enemy and that is also the goal of their enemy.

A cop's duty is to enforce the law and not necessarily kill in comparison.

This is a joke right? A deployed solider acts like police in a lot of capacities. Plus everyday engagement, normal patrols in hostile environments.

Police don't patrol areas where everyone wants them dead.

@richard_wolfe: This isn't a joke

STOP RESISTING!

This^. I've lived in tons of neighborhoods that were no-go zones for the chicken shit police, although a lot of that had to do with the drug dealers paying them to stay the hell out.

Depends a lot

Not everyone in active war zones wants soldiers dead. Soldiers also do a lot of peacekeeping or recovery duties which involves earning civilian trust, training militia etc.

Soldiers are actually FORCED to get into dangerous situations.

Soldiers.

Riskier? Soldier. You're signing up to put your life on the line to against people that are just about, if not more adamant about completing their objective; killing the enemy.

Afghanistan and California have similar population numbers.

2017.

11,000 soldiers in Afghanistan

6 Deaths.

9,000 lapd

0 Deaths in lapd and in California.

So yeah. Statistically police officer is safer.