You don’t get to choose the police officers, where you got that from? They are selected by the government to serve and protect them. Government pays them, gives them power status and protection. The second objective may be to appear helpful to the general population so they can justify their existence as ‘helping the community’. While they may help the community when idle to support their second objective, they will always protect the government first. Just pray you don't end up on the other end.
In democracies it's common to suggest that "we the people" control the Government (via voting) so if there is a problem with the Government then we are able to fix it by voting. Voting for a candidate proposing police reform is a good example, there's just an extra layer of indirection.
You may also “control” the emperor by having your grandfather “vote” him in. And you mentioned democracy? Tell me where that place exists? I don’t see any country where majority of its population can decide laws, restrictions and other decisions?
> And you mentioned democracy? Tell me where that place exists? I don’t see any country where majority of its population can decide laws, restrictions and other decisions?
At least in English, this kind of performative misunderstanding of the term "democracy" as if it's pedantically incorrect in the situation is itself incorrect. It does not make you look smarter. It makes it look like you've had zero exposure whatsoever to the fields of political science or political philosophy, where "democracy" is universally used as an umbrella term unless greater precision is required.
