Capitol Riot Control

During counting of the electoral votes for President Biden's first term, thousands of rioters stormed the US Capitol. The rioters claimed they were following the directions of President Trump. Many Republicans argue they were Trump enemies in disguise. The US Senate failed to convict Trump for inciting the riot. Read President Biden's anniversary speech here.

Recent events at the Capitol demonstrate the need for drastic revision of security considerations there and at other government buildings. I wrote a letter to Vice President Kamala Harris, the senior elected official in the Capitol, to solicit her concern, cooperation, support, and action. This is the substance of that letter:

Public discussion among public officials and individuals appearing in the media after the riot indicate that there is little, if any, popular agreement about who should be allowed in or immediately outside, the Capitol, or when, under what circumstances, and what, if any, measures should be employed, as well as by whom, to control entry and access under credible emergency scenarios.

Current measures are demonstrably ineffective and may, in fact, be counterproductive. By making a show of checking bags and creating frustratingly long waiting lines in so many public buildings, deficiencies in current protocols may be revealed to those who may be there deliberately to identify and plan to exploit such weaknesses.

In addition, there seems to be a general belief that established laws and rules of conduct may be safely ignored as long as lawbreakers can claim some allegedly noble purpose. As a result, police and other security personnel appear to be reluctant to use deadly force, or the perception or threat thereof, to control what are commonly referred to as "demonstrations" that are actually life-threatening riots.

Riot control is impossible if the rioters believe that law enforcement will never use lethal force against them, as demonstrated in the attack on the Capitol. All the rioters have to do is create a situation in which the only effective means of resolution is the use of deadly force. In such a case, the rioters are essentially free thereafter to do as they please.

Even peaceful protest has gone far beyond "freedom of speech" or "redress of grievances." Public facilities and spaces are for the use of the "public," not just for "demonstrators." People who have driven hundreds of miles and waited in line for hours to get life-saving vaccinations should not be denied the opportunity to get them because traffic is being blocked by a small group of "peaceful protesters" who don't think it is a good idea. Our entire Nation must formally recognize that any person's right to express his opinion ends at the place where interference with another's right, of whatever nature, begins.

I believe that Congress must enact a national policy to make the differences between rightful protest and unlawful riots and vandalism clear, and, furthermore, the determined intent of the government to prevent, quell or disperse the latter. I would support passage of a law substantially as follows:

"Any gathering of five or more persons, for whatever purpose, that actively advocates, employs, precipitates, encourages, aids or abets violence, intimidation, vandalism, or interference in the lawful activities of others, or involves the threat of deadly force or the perception thereof, shall constitute a riot, for the pacification of which, and arrest of the rioters, the use of deadly force by law enforcement is hereby specifically authorized."

It is a shame and a scandal that our Nation's capital has been turned into a Nazi style prison camp with barricades and barbed tape where children cannot play and tourists cannot visit because they are deterred by barriers, fences and armed guards. Those Washington politicians who claim "we are better than that" have only to look out the window to recognize that such a claim is a undisguised lie! We need to do what it takes to get better than what we have woefully become. It should be made clear to the terrorists and insurrectionists and the bombers and the vandals and the looters and the muggers that we are going to get that way at their expense, by use of lethal force, if necessary. If they want to exercise their constitutional freedoms, they can start by freely choosing to stay home.

What is needed is a graduated system of active and passive protective protocols and restraints designed to enhance normal pedestrian and vehicular traffic while at the same time minimizing disruption potentially caused by obstructionists.

To begin with, a comprehensive study should be made of the January 6th and other riots and violent demonstrations to determine where and what sort of effort is actually needed. The fences and barricades hastily erected in the past month strike me as marginally reasonable knee-jerk reactions to an event safely in the past, a classic case of securely locking the barn after the horse is long gone. Such a study should be conducted by a consortium of security, law enforcement, and military experts. Its purpose would be to determine what measures are required to meet current and potential threats and how effectively to counter them with minimum impact on the safety of the public and the dignity of the seat of government of a great Nation.

The first consideration should be a realization of the fact that fixed barriers are basically a nuisance rather than a deterrent. To be effective, riot control requires armed personnel willing and able to engage the rioters with sufficient firepower to eliminate the riot. In addition to stationing instantly ready and deployable armed and armored personnel at strategic locations in the District, each vulnerable building should have a dedicated instant reaction force with sufficient size and armament to resolve a worst case scenario. This, to my mind, would be an invasion such at the one that took place during the electoral vote counting, conducted, instead of a disorganized rabble, by a paramilitary force each member of which is armed with firearms and grenades and supported by mobile crew-served weapons.

Where personnel or vehicular barriers are required, they should be integrated into the general ambiance of the District of Columbia. Permanent barriers can be monuments, public rest facilities or other architectural features, or perhaps stout bushes or trees, or possibly decorative earthworks. Temporary barriers can be massive monuments or other works of art. Fences can be ornate and decorative without being easily moved or dismantled. They might possibly have sharp or barbed features on or near the top to make climbing them impractical. It might be advantageous to make it possible for them to be electrified in an emergency. Perhaps a national contest could be created to decide upon and design these features.

Public buildings, especially the Capitol, should be modified to permit the rapid and efficient movement of normal and emergency traffic, combined with permanent or rapidly deployable features to frustrate, inhibit, confuse, delay, restrict or redirect trespassers. Windows, especially outside windows, should have unbreakable, bullet resistant panes, solidly glazed. All doors, especially those with a light or window, should be substantial enough to prevent even determined attempts at unauthorized entry, and should be capable of being locked from the areas they isolate without a key. Consideration should be given to remote or automatic opening and closing of doors, with local override possible with a key or remote control. Locking devices or mechanisms should be sufficiently robust to prevent damage or defeat. Inconspicuous emergency doors should be installed, the purpose of which would be to close and seal normally open passageways and to compartmentalize and isolate large areas.

The large, ornate architectural features of the Capitol lend themselves to innovative modification to restrict movement of crowds. Virtually any surface, including walls, railings, picture frames, statuary, and other objects of art, can be generously studded with nearly invisible electrodes that would function as unobtrusive tasers or electric fences. Surfaces normally out of reach could be equipped with frangible, sharp and/or barbed projections to make using them as climbing handholds impossible.

Major public buildings like the Capitol should be equipped with devices to deploy active means of riot control. On the outside of these facilities, these could include water cannons, tear gas or other incapacitating agent dispensers, nets, sticky or noxious foams, flash/bang grenades or other means to confuse, disorient and break up an attack.

Within the Capitol itself, equipment should be installed selectively to jam cell phone frequencies and broadcast incapacitating noise to inhibit communication. Law enforcement should be equipped to circumvent these features to accomplish their tasks.

Inside the buildings, it might be feasible additionally to flood large areas with selected incapacitating agents or carbon dioxide to make any form of physical exercise, or even continued occupation, difficult, painful or exhausting for anyone without protective equipment. Painfully bright or strobe lights might be useful, or maybe it would be possible to eliminate visible light and illuminate selected areas only with infra red or ultraviolet light to permit only those (riot control personnel) equipped with vision enhancing equipment. A method of raising the ambient temperature quickly by the use of steam or radiant heaters might be appropriate. It seems to me that judicious use of a suitable combination of all of these measures would reduce even a disciplined paramilitary attack to disorganized chaos.

If it does not, however, "less than lethal" methods should be required formally to escalate to "low lethality" measures. Perhaps shotguns using rock salt or something similar might be effective. More potent or more effective incapacitating agents might be employed. Rioters must be made painfully aware, if necessary, that they will not be allowed to overthrow our government by force or violence, regardless of who they are, where they come from, what they believe, or who incites, leads, or motivates them.

There is, of course, a point at which maximum effort is required to defeat a determined foe. There should be a simple protocol, based on easily recognized circumstances and events, by which riot control personnel must be allowed to use deadly force to deter rioters, and would be protected from reprisal from anyone for doing so. It is much better to win a small insurrection than to allow it to escalate into a full-blown civil war!

Finally, Public information, including school curricula, should make it clear to all residents of the United States that obeying the law is not merely an option. The reason police officers carry deadly weapons is that there are circumstances under which they must be used. People who break the law, for whatever reason, or whoever they are, should not be able to get away with impunity, or be rewarded for placing themselves in physical jeopardy for any reason.

Of course, none of these measures can be effective if our leadership chooses not to consider, install or employ them. In the final analysis, our Nation can have only a level of security and citizen protection as those responsible for them are willing to provide. Given the sacrifices made by so many dedicated Americans who have given their lives, their fortunes and their sacred honor in the defense of our Country in the past, from Lexington and Concord to the present day, it should definitely be higher than it is now.

On the other hand, given the determination of some of the instigators and sympathizers of the rioters to find excuses to weasel out of responsibility and accountability for not doing their jobs, it may be necessary to wait until their gang goes the way of the Bull Moose party!

It can't happen too soon!

John Lindorfer