The recent rioting in Ferguson, Missouri, over the killing of an unarmed black man by a police officer, has turned both political and racial.
The argument that is now trying to be made by some about the killing and the rioting that ensued, is that the police should not have used “military” tactics.Military tactics?
According to eyewitness and news reports, once the rioting started, St. Louis, Missouri SWAT and riot police arrived on the scene wearing the necessary riot gear to protect them from any physical assault.
Do you think the 2nd Amendment will be destroyed by the Biden Administration?(2)
After a few Molotov cocktails, rocks, and bricks were thrown at themselves, not to mention the looting that followed, the police dispensed tear gas, and used force to disperse the rioters.
The race-baiters were quick to blame the initial police “military” style tactics and appearance used as being a catalyst for the ongoing rioting, later stating that the more subdued approached taken by the Missouri Highway Patrol, which took over the policing, calmed tensions amongst the rioters.
That sense of calm was short-lived, as the rioting started back up again a day later, forcing the Highway Patrol to don their riot gear to confront the violent protesters.Democrat Congressman Alan Grayson is one of those politicians who is up-in-arms over the police presence and use of force, and took to Twitter to gripe about it.
Our police are not soldiers, and our streets are not warzones. Or shouldn’t be. http://t.co/bvLq5roG6z
— Rep. Alan Grayson (@AlanGrayson) August 15, 2014
When police are confronted by an angry mob, who is hurling deadly objects at them, what are police to do, shoot back with water pistols instead of rubber bullets?
Maybe they should use those plastic Captain America shields toy stores sell to children instead of the usual protective head and body gear law enforcement has historically used?I don’t know of any other country around the world, even those socialist ones in the European Union, who do not use riot gear whenever their citizens violently take to the streets.
What Grayson seems to forget about law enforcement’s use of assault rifles and protective combat attire is that criminals have access to black market assault weapons that they themselves use to commit crimes.
Over the past several decades, police have been asking for bigger guns to combat the criminal element, especially against those drug-fueled gangs, who are funded and equipped by murderous drug cartels.
You would only have to look as far as what has happened and still happening along the U.S. southern border with all of the gun violence stemming from the drug wars in Mexico.
Grayson is still fuming about the fact that his amendment, which proposed blocking “military equipment transfers to local law enforcement” was summarily defeated by a vote total of 355 to 62 in the U.S. House of Representatives.
The Grayson amndt: No mil equip for police. Pigs feeding at the mil-industrial trough killed it. #JusticeforFerguson http://t.co/c1nEnFCGIA — Rep. Alan Grayson (@AlanGrayson) August 17, 2014
Yes Alan, this means that even most of your Democrat colleagues in the House voted against your measure.
Oh, I forgot to mention that Missouri’s Governor has just sent the National Guard to Ferguson after two people were shot in latest round of protests.
