And lasers can be shone right back at Antifa too. I’m surprised that dazzlers have not aready been used. You could set them up like claymores.

The trouble with using less than or non lethal devices on personally menacing trespassers threating imminant bodily harm and thus comitting what has been considered assault under the law traditionally, is that these people have nothing worth anything, including their lives, as they evaluate life, to lose.

You will be sued, and possibly prosecuted. We have all witnessed the prosecutor in St Louis, and Fredo Cuomo on TV, minimizing what has historically been considered assault.

So along with all other boundaries, interpersonal ones also fall under progressive assault.

Which makes perfect sense, since the elimination of personal immunities, boundaries, and conscience, are all essential aims of the collectivist minded organism.

As they see it you exist, insofar as you are conditionally allowed to exist, for them and their gratification, without hinderance or let, body and soul, forever and ever …. amen.

That , is another reason, apart from their irrationality, that you cannot negotiate with a progressive. You have nothing to bargain with that they do not already claim total access to and collective ownership over.

And we fleetingly wonder what the link between Marxian progressivism and Islam could possibly be … hmmm.

I am the first to admit, this is in response to a change in the bad guys’ change in armament: they are also carrying autoloaders with high capacity magazines and ballistic vests. We are also seeing more armored vehicles being used by law enforcement, and cops are able to tap into information data bases from their vehicle and communicate from their person to headquarters.

So the equation has changed on both sides. And legislatures appear more and more ready to handicap the police and allow law-breakers to go Scott-free when they’re apprehended. A recent development in rioters’ armament comes from the demonstrations in Hong Kong: Antifa and BLM appear to be using hand-held lasers to blind law enforcement officers. It’s an insidious development: they don’t appear to be dangerous weapons, but they can disable an LEO at 100 yards.

It’s a strange world out there.

More police chiefs will be able to openly support Trump and Law & Order over Dem disorder & BLM riots.

(Never mind the in-depth coverage: just for happening to be there to at the right time to film this complex but brilliantly executed anti-sexagenarianist operation, CNN deserves a Pulitzer…)

NAPO is an “association of associations” and not all individual associations belong. Most police associations are labor oriented, dealing with compensation and working conditions, and tend to endorse politicians to achieve gains in that area. Hence the Obama-Biden support in 08, 12. Today’s Democrat party is anti-police and pro-criminal to the point that the survival of the officers has eclipsed the more traditional labor-related issues. Times change so the interest groups respond in relation to those changes.

But the show does aspire to at least a veneer of accuracy and I’m using it to visually demonstrate an actual change in police procedure. The use of heavily armed and armored police officers to enter buildings in search of suspects is pretty commonplace today yet was almost unheard of a few decades ago.

I could have instead talked about how police departments in even fairly small communities now have equipment like MRAPs but that doesn’t paint quite as clear a picture.

The point is not the verisimilitude of L&O. The point is the changing nature of policing in the United States.

Mike