They set her up for violence and then refuse to protect her, and then refuse to let her bodyguards protect her.
Unbelievable.
If the authorities refuse to do their job of protecting the public, or worse, sides with criminals, vigilantism results.
So if they are demanding a situation in which a person must be attacked, or their very life threatened before the authorities will even notice the attack, then alternative means should be planned.
In this case, using means to provide “plausible deniability”, the security people should have pre-arranged for “mob breakers”. Essentially brawlers hired to just stand around, unless they receive a signal, then without warning they attack given targets before quickly exiting.
For example, when the mob was converging around the vehicles, the toughs would sort of cluster with them. Then, if a hasty exit was needed, the signal would be given, and the toughs would have a limited number of seconds to punch and kick multiple members of the mob before they took off in different directions.
Observing this at a distance, the police would then converge, but the only people left on the scene would be nursing ringing heads and bloody noses. By the time the police tried to pursue, the attackers would be long gone, and departed the scene by vehicle.
Then, with disabled protesters, and police all over the scene, a quick and safe departure could be made. Since the “good guys” didn’t arrive on the scene until *after* the police had arrived, there would be no “cause and effect” for them to be detained.
Of course there would be much hubbub in the local news, but it would remain an unsolved mystery.
I haven’t been to Canada since I found out they don’t allow me to carry. There isn’t anything there interesting enough to risk going unarmed...
Sure...
I am confused as to why she needed so much security. I am from Calgary, and I attend the UofC where she was scheduled to speak. Things are different in Canada and the threat of violence at these events is almost negligible.
I have to admit that the law enforcement plan sounds like it worked pretty well.
The security guy showed good sense; law enforcement showed good sense; Coulter gave her speech; protesters shouted whatever it was they wanted to shout; good going everybody. What’s the beef?
A provocative speaker doesn’t (or at least shouldn’t) expect to give her speech in a quiet theater. She expects vocal opposition. That’s what she got.
The security guy is used to U.S. lack of trust of every citizen.
If you will think about it, this event sounds a lot like the contentious town meetings that congresscritters held last summer. Contentious and peaceful.
Way to go Canada.