I mean I agree with you on the technicality, but the uniquely American view that someone can take a gun to a protest and not be looking for trouble is a very interesting one.
That's a law enforcement role in most of the rest of the western world.
[0] I have no source, but it seems consistent with the police behavior observable in the videos.
>That's a law enforcement role in most of the rest of the western world.
Might want to take a step back and realize what they were protesting.
The problem is that when the government is derelict in it's duty (or, if critical mass of people believe so), this is the expected outcome. If people lose faith in the government to protect them, they're not going to roll over and die, they'll take whatever measures they deem fit to defend themselves and their property.
Law Enforcement exists for a reason. Maintenance of a degree of order keeps the populace happy while professionalism and codification of enforcement moderates the response (at least in the general case). Ideally, it's the "win-win" scenario where the perpetrators get to be treated well enough, while the populace is confident that violations of their safety and rights will be addressed.
When the destruction starts, it stops being a protest, and there is no between.
It’s fine, you can say out loud that you don’t value the lives of people you disagree with.
That's IMO essentially the same statement. Why shouldn't you have deterrence?