Can neighbourhood 'policing' city angels/guardians be permitted to use physical and/or armed violence to replace policing? Is that what citi angels are designed for?!

the legitimacy of 'neighbourhood'policing is not tested or ensured at all but only by its 'necesity' to complement the scarce budget despite the fact that tax/budget should be used for protection of ppls' lives,property,freedom &safty, in the first place. I have been proposing that neighbourhood 'policing' should not to be easily legally permitted to be armed&given any sorts of power of enforcement with arms or physical violence ...Even in the case of 'self-defence' that seemed to be urgent, it should be the case to be passed to police that is only legitimate in taking responsibility to use physical violence&arms only for certain levl of necessity&rationality of use under strict leagal restriction of its use. This is because of the nature of neibourghood 'policing' in which no one can determine whether it is a simple intentional harm between civilians.  And because of the lackness/insufficiency of regulations for them to avoid physical/varbal/armed violence as possible as they can with their ability . The laws regulate 'neighbourhood''policing'or say 'guardians''city angels' normally lack or are insufficient in the strictness of responsibility to avoid violence. Many may say guardians need arms but actually such cases in which many may deem that guardians should protect themselves with arms/phisical violence are actually those in which the cases  guardians should not start handling in the first place! On the other hand,police is being under strict restrictions as to whether s/he can use physical violence&arms, to which part of the location,for example in the air or to the ground,and etc,which all are stipulated in details in the regulations. Hence,the scope of the cases that neghbourhood 'policing' or guardians are taking responsible for should not include the ones that require the strict regulations of the usage of physical violence/arms that are obliged/imperative for police. Each state/county/city must urgently & exquisitly reveiw the regulations on guardians in terms of the strict ban on the use of physical violence/arms. In patroll&protection of ppl from physical violence/traffickings,etc.,guardians are originally supposed to tackle the situation with non-violent tools such as big horns, or such some other non-violent alternatives along with calling on/ waiting for police arrival for cetain serious cases in which the guardians find cetain level of necessity to protect themselves/civilians. The national/local laws against physical / varbal /armed violence by neighbourhood 'policing' that enforce them to avoid harming others should be urgently and strictly drafted and implemented. And in the first place, the budget&the numbers of police should not be irationalily curtailed too much. Police that protects human rights,lives,properties,freedom,peace&safety should be appropriately & sufficiently emploed&dispatched with a balanced & properily assigned number&quality of police. Related news article: '''Trayvon Martin death: thousands march in town where teenager was shot Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson among the speakers at rally as protesters vow to continue until arrest is made'' Associated Press guardian.co.uk, Saturday 31 March 2012 23.34 BST' http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/mar/31/trayvon-martin-protest-march-sanford?CMP=twt_gu