08-14-2017, 05:26 PM
(08-14-2017, 05:23 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: I definitely agree, here. I don't know how much you have been following the events in the city, but the police were harshly criticized at the 08 July rally for being too aggressive. This weekend, they are being criticized by the left for not doing enough, and the right for being authoritarian jackboots. McAuliffe has come out and said that there was hesitation on the law enforcement end because they had been notified by DHS and FBI ahead of time that the racist groups coming in would be heavily armed based on their intelligence, and were looking for trouble. As a result, law enforcement handled them with kid gloves to avoid a bloodbath that could have happened because the racists were, according to McAuliffe, better armed and armored than the police.
FWIW, the city tried to move the protest to a more rural park, so not in the downtown area, that was larger and could accommodate the expected crowds, as well as ban weapons and items commonly used as such (poles and the like). The court denied both of those requests and ruled in favor of the plaintiff, who was backed by the ACLU and the Rutherford Institute.
I think you'll find that those types who are armed to deal with the other side will be intensely reluctant to use those weapons against law enforcement. It's one of the reasons I've pointed out in the past that a person who is willing to attack law enforcement is a much more dangerous person than your average criminal. You hit the nail squarely, it's a catch 22 for local law enforcement, which is why we, as a nation, need to give them more of the benefit of the doubt in these situations.
