Rioting, violence, and hate, is the language of the Left.
Yep. And enabling criminal assault under the pretense of "standing down" (selective enforcement of the law is illegal) is the latest favorite pastime of leftists with badges. There is a lot of evidence that the rank-and-file officers mostly want to do their sworn duty and enforce the law, but the administrators (who report directly to and are subordinate to political officials) order them not to.
The criminals with badges are exploiting the same features of law enforcement that mobs exploit. The imperatives of LEOs change according to the prevailing context of their presence. If a single person breaks the law in front of a LEO, they are duly bound to arrest him and process him through the system. If however, hundreds of people break the law (vandalism or theft for instance) then LEOs are duly bound to focus on CONTAINMENT of the disturbance and may (invariably do) ignore single crimes like vandalism or theft.
The command level LEOs knowing this, exploit their entitlement as administrators to exercise levity and decide that containment becomes their priority as opposed to individual enforcement. More accurately, containment becomes their EXCUSE for allowing destruction and assault of people they don't like. Legislation is needed to clarify this area of the law, since leftists are mercilessly using it to violate the spirit of the 14th amendment.
Since there is no clear cut demarcation in the law regarding how LEOs officials themselves may "interpret" equal enforcement, they can violate the spirit of the 14th amendment all they want without fear of negative consequences from their superiors or from judges, who are often politically aligned with them.
The only exceptions to this were some recent cases where arrests were made of Christian demonstrators with permits who were attacked by anti-Christian protesters who engaged in rioting and assault against the peaceful Christian demonstrators without any action on the part of law enforcement to stop them. Subsequently, because of the violence, the LEOs ordered the Christians to disburse and cancelled the event. When the peaceful Christians refused to disburse because they were not the ones committing crimes, the LEOs arrested them for failure to disburse.
The Christians' lawyer argued successfully that the LEOs had acted illegally first by failing to take action to stop violence, then by acting against the peaceful protesters without due process (effectively enforcing the Hecklers' Veto). All criminal charges were dropped against the Christians who then filed a lawsuit against the city and against the LEOs who arrested them. That lawsuit is still pending.
It makes sense that the far leftists would continue to attempt to use the Heckler's Veto since it almost worked in the previous case. The scum figure they will likely get a sympathetic judge many times (true), so it's worth it from a strategic perspective to continue to use violence as a method of first resort (true again because there is a lot of up side to it and little down side).
Besides, being cacogens leftists prefer to be violent. They enjoy barbarism and sadistic cruelty. Many of them are far more-closely aligned with misanthropic, anti-theistic Satanists who hate humanity, than with peaceful secular types who are agnostic or atheist. They are often largely there to satisfy a deep seated, psychotic hatred for anyone who disagrees with them strongly
