Would this be an effective way to stop riots?

I've come across news about riots: some occur due to corrupt governments, basic needs, discrimination etc, and it's understandable despite other (nonviolent) options; however, others occur for relatively minor causes, ensuing chaos and anarchy as mobs and vandals stir up the devastation. When riot control police respond, it seems inefficient, and riots continue to occur.

It seems unwise to spend so much to develop some of those riot control agents. The microwave area-denial is good, but what’s with those less-than-lethal rounds?

In order to deter these rioters, we need to be decisive. Rubber rounds don’t do much to hamper the violence; by firing live rounds to subdue the leaders, insanity would soon subside. It’d help if police fired indirectly (from a helicopter) for a better view and to prevent return fire: with such, heavier rounds and grenades can be used. Better yet, we create something that people would fear just at the sight of it. As opposed to causing slight pain with rubber rounds, we do some real damage to those rioters to stop the craze.

A more extreme method would be to systematically mow down everyone involved at the scene whenever a riot breaks out, but there would be repercussions.

Thoughts?
Additional Details
@Nightrider: Thanks for the insight. It might sound absurd, but I don’t watch Stallone movies. I’m saying that if we manage to disable the leaders encouraging the violence, the others would stop. Any successful group requires a leader to facilitate. If we knock out the leader of the mob, the followers would not only become confused as nobody is there to cheer them on; fear escalates because the instant the first round takes the first man down, subsequent ones would follow.

The systematic approach is only taken when extreme cases call for it. About the law, we need to modify it to favor Police action. Join a mob, take out the city, and then whine a lawsuit onto Police? This is ridiculous. Those who try to destroy the city could pay the medical fees themselves. Mass meetings in public don’t give call to machine gun fire. Again, it occurs via escalation: only when they become out of control do we take extreme measures. Response is proportional only to the level of violence present.

Nightrider

You are watching WAY too many Stallone movies. Are you actually advocating killing people as a method to stop rioting? Do you realize the legal implications of mass murder?

Not withstanding the multimillion dollar lawsuits that ambulance chasing lawyers would file within hours, think of the instant anarchy that would result with the public's belief that any mass meeting in public would result in machine gun toting helicopters killing everyone in sight. Law and order would break down instantly.

Nice thought but it won't work. As an example of this type of "justice", look at the regime of Idi Amin and what he did.

I hope this helps and you can find it useful

Enter Your Message or Comment

User Name:
User Email:
Post a comment: