Simple Solution

This is being reported as a thing:

Protests descended into violent chaos yet again in Portland over the weekend, as protesters targeted the federal courthouse and reportedly hurled Molotov cocktails toward federal officers.

There’s no “reportedly” about it:  the Pantifas are trying to set the cops on fire.  The question is:  what should we do about it?  Here’s my humble suggestion:

(That’s a Swiss police sniper, but you get the idea.  If all the cool kids — and especially the ever-neutral Swiss — are doing it…)

There’s probably no need to go Full Mosul on the thing, but whatever.

And the rules of engagement (ROE) should be quite simple:  the second the bomb leaves the thrower’s hand — establishing a prima facie  offensive action — open fire.  Ditto the little shits letting off commercial fireworks (rockets) aimed at the cops.

I’m done being all patient and indulgent.  Let’s see how the rioters’ nail-studded plywood shields stand up to a .308 bullet.

28 comments

    1. I think it needs to become a certain expectation that if you laze someone that rounds will be coming your way.

      There are enough laser accessories available for firearms that a reasonable person could easily conclude that a laser pointed in their direction is the equivalent of a firearm being sighted on them, which in addition to the high potential for catastrophic eye injury, is reason enough to engage the source of the laser.

      As for the interest in using precision shooting to deter an individual set on harming LEOs, I think that sounds like too much time consuming effort and corresponding risk incurred for the police. I don’t want anyone looking through a scope for an emitter that will damage their eyes and in the interest of time, I think suppressive fire in the vicinity of the laser’s source is justifiable. Even a shotgun blast would be preferable to giving someone a few more seconds to damage the eyesight of one or more cops.

      We could talk about the best cartridges for this job or crowd crowd control in general but my experience is limited to dealing with dismounts with a M240C, so I have no special expertise to offer but I’d like to think I’m flexible enough to consider flamethrowers.

  1. Well, yer close there Kim.
    IMnvHO the .308 round should arrive just as the terrorist is partway through his throwing.
    He’ll drop the molotov cocktail, it breaks and immolates him. Thus saving the cost of a trial and subsequent incarceration. Not to mention the beautiful irony of his demise in the flames of anarchy.
    AND, if we’re lucky, the splash of gasoline and fireball might just sear a couple of his buddies.
    No need to call the fire department, it’ll burn out in a few minutes. (that is unless he’s a fatso)

    1. This. Watching one or more of their number burst into flames will hopefully deter the rest.

      IMO, once the turds light the Molotov, they have established an imminent threat of deadly violence, and should be dealt with accordingly.

      I’m a cop, and if I see someone light a Molotov, I’m going to shoot them if there are any potential human targets within range of the thrower.

  2. That’s not a .308 in the second pic.

    It’s an M107, better known as the Barrett M82A1. Probably .50 Browning, but Ronnie Barrett sells them in .416 Barrett caliber also.

  3. Do American citizens have the right to shoot rioters only if they are personally threatened?

    Or can they shoot people in defence of others?

    I’m thinking 2 man sniper-spotter teams with the spotter using a video camera with a very good lens so that the team can prove they were shooting violent felons attacking others, such as people in MAGA hats, conservative journalists and police officers. The team would of course just stand there laughing if the rioters were attacking other leftists.

  4. I’ll only approve of snipers if they switch from FMJ to soft point expanding bullets and head shots. Splattering what little brains these “protesters” have all over the sidewalk pour encourager les autres.

    1. Police do not have the same restrictions as the military. LEOs have been using JHP pistol ammo, and various kinds of expanding rifle rounds, for a long time.

  5. If commercial fireworks and 500mw lasers are non-violent protest, then I say we lay in a company’s worth of illegal chinese lasers and commercial fireworks, and start firing them back at the protesters.

    After all, if it’s nonviolent, what’s the problem?

    1. Except the way it’s worked for a couple of decades or more, violence from the Left is non-violent, and therefore protected speech, and speech from the Conservatives is violence and therefore not protected.

  6. I’d be all for it, except for … Lon Horiuchi.

    There’s a better than even chance that any govt snipers employed will shoot MAGA hats first and ignore antifa party fouls. Anyone who’s still a cop after all this mess probably isn’t on our side at all.

    Sorry for spoiling the fantasy. I’d like to see the “peaceful” terrorists get what they deserve, but I fear that ain’t gonna happen until them spoiled little bastards come out to the suburbs.

    Side note. Cops gleefully invaded a man’s home and confiscated his gun in California based on nothing more that an anonymous complaint about his “racist” posting on the internet. They are not on our side.

    1. I’d have agreed with you a year ago.

      Now, though? I’m not so sure. The cops are getting hurled under the bus every time an arrest (or even an interaction) goes poorly.

      Remember, a pension’s only good if you get to spend it.

  7. I’d say “scrap the 308 and use 105MM mortars with rounds set for 10 meter air burst” but the hang time is unacceptable. (I do know some people with high skill levels on the four-deuce, not quite “coffee cup at 2 miles” but with 105s a few feet doesn’t matter, and they’re pretty good hands with an 81, too. I suspect it wouldn’t take a whole lot to talk them out of retirement.)

    So, some version of direct fire device is the answer. I doubt there are many surplus bazookas available, much less ammo for them, but if it’s fed dot gov personnel using them, the entire arsenal should be available. (And, IIRC, there was something about homemade Panzerfausts on WRSA recently…).

    Yes, there will be “collateral damage,” as in “everyone within 10 yards will leave some residue lining the crater. I fail to see a problem, however.

    It should be understood this is not my original suggestion; we still have 94 fully functional B-52s, lots of Mark 82s, and – probably – some pilots and bombardiers who still remember how to do Arc Light or Linebacker. “Urban renewal from 20,000 feet;” what’s not to like?

      1. Bingo. Specifically, 9 March 1945. 16 square miles of Tokyo by dawn on the 10th.

        Which is a bit grandiose; that took almost 300 B-29s all night, and we’re down to just a pair (although, the Enola Gay, reportedly, is flyable, and while Boch’s Car is at the Air Force Museum in Dayton, I don’t know what its condition is, and that’s still only four). And while B-52s carry quite a bit more weight, it’s rack space that determines the total payload, and we have only 94 of them certified airworthy.

        In any case, look at it this way: It’s Portland. Who would miss it?

  8. Grapeshot? Civil war? If we have something it will not be like that one. I think big cities will become no-go zones and those of us in fly over country will be buried in refugees.

    That would be interesting as they could be in motor homes.

    As to Portland, if the cops don’t want to save it I doubt I can be interested.

    1. Only briefly, sir. I suspect rural communities will immediately ‘fort up’ and refuse to let anyone in, save for anyone who can demonstrate a useful skill to said community.

  9. why wait until they throw the bombs?
    Those things have only 1 purpose, so simply having them makes them a threat to life and property.

    Take them out with extreme prejudice. Dare I suggest 40mm grenade launchers with HE Frag rounds?

    1. I also heard on the mainslime media that the protesters were policing themselves better. If someone climbed on a fence near the courthouse, others pulled him down. If someone started to throw things, the crowd sent him away.
      This is of course, only the first night, so everyone is on his best behavior until the argument can be made that rioters quieted down because the Federal agents left, which of course proves that violence erupted because the Federals arrived. [/sarc].

  10. I served in the Royal Hong Kong Police Force (when it was considered to be the Best in the East, Hong Kong’s Finest). I joined in 1974 and left in 2003.
    In January 1984 I was on foot with a platoon of the Royal Hong Kong Police Police Tactical Unit. First rank of eight in the platoon were the arrest squad (not used), second rank of eight carried Federal gas guns, firing tear gas, third rank carried the same weapon but firing 9″ long wooden baton shells. Six of the fourth rank carried Remington shotguns, the remaining two carried AR15s. My Orderly also carried an AR15 but I’d impressed upon him that I would be the one to use that weapon, not him because I would take the flak, not him.
    We marched with military-style precision towards the group of rioters we faced. “Platoon halt! Number Two Section UP.” “Number Three Section, reinforce Two Section!” (Some precision marching there.)
    Now there was one tear-gas firer alternated with one baton-round firer in a rank of 16 men.
    “At the crowd in front PRESENT!” Tear gas firers aimed high, baton round shooters aimed low.
    Result? WHOOSH!!
    The crowd dissipated in seconds. Not one round of any munition was fired.
    Objective achieved.
    The lesson learned? MAJOR show of force, disciplined and controlled, with the absolute threat that force WILL be used can achieve the objective, the dissolution of the rioting mob.

Leave a Reply