freeandfreezize wrote: “Not really. Your suggestion is that unhinged people rebelling against some aspects of the behavior of the government will be deterred in the same way that a foreign government would be deterred. Unfortunately it doesn’t work that way.”
I didn’t mean to imply that ‘unhinged people’ could be deterred. My point was that these ‘unhinged people’ will not forgo using explosives because the police do not.
Your original argument is also based upon the premise that the police are responsible for the actions of these ‘unhinged people’ and that if the police would just refrain from certain actions, these ‘unhinged people’ would not react in an ‘unhinged’ manner.
The "unhinged" people certainly do react to what the government does. Had the ATF simply arrested David Koresh while he was shopping, and had the ATF and FBI skipped sending in a covert surveillance team that ended up in a firefight with Randy Weaver and his son followed by a sniper who shot Mrs. Weaver then it is very unlikely that 168 people would have lost their lives in Oklahoma City at the hands of a few "unhinged" people.
I'm not suggesting that the actions of the police, or other law enforcement groups are directly responsible for the actions of the "unhinged" people, but it is smart strategically to consider what the effects of one's actions are.
Using a mobile bomb, a new type of weapon in this kind of situation, may have unintended side effects. Let's hope not.