We will almost certainly see some large riots during Trump's first term. We'll see how Trump handles it.
A great opportunity was lost during Comrade Barack's eight years to try and control the staggering amount of violence and lawlessness in the black community. Instead Obama fanned the flames whenever he could.
If Trump doesn't come out strong and crack down harshly on the rioters when these outbursts occur, he's doomed to be a one term president.
The formulas have been known since the early '70s, how to shut down the riots and get the mobs off the streets--and keep them there. This isn't news, but like most history, you have to learn from it or repeat it.
Despite the destruction in most civil unrest events in America, they have commonly been intimately associated with looting.
Someone paying attention during the Watts (Rodney King) riots would have noticed people scouting stores moving ahead of the main mass of looters, breaking shop windows and moving on without doing much looting. That they predominantly broke windows of higher value 'lootable' stores indicates they were scouts, moving ahead of a more organized larcenous group, followed still by the mass of the rioters who looted the leavings and made the general destruction on the block more complete. Some groups were looting for fun
and profit, with an organized approach, likely centered around street gangs.
The mobs are better organized, now, with excellent communications and the ability to send instructions to large groups simultaneously, and expect a high response rate. These comms use cell phones, and shutting down those phones would only place victims of the violence at peril and unable to access emergency or support (transportation, private assistance) services.
It only takes one person monitoring police frequencies to issue warnings or redirect "protesters" to areas where the police are not. To be effective, LEOs have to use their own 'battle board' and track mob movements which should disclose organized groups within that mob.
It is likely in blighted neighborhoods that some percentage, perhaps a large one, of these accounts being used as comms are funded by the taxpayer: "Obamaphones".
Again, flagging those accounts and being able to disable them would only lead to later charges of racial bias in shutting down access to essential emergency services, so short of complete blackouts, communications interdiction may not be feasible except on a keyword screened/identified case by case basis. Because the adversarial forces are civilians, no matter how militant or militarized, any action which would adversely affect the combatants would, of necessity, affect civilians even more, whether they had been sympathetic to 'the cause' or not, providing propaganda opportunities.
But certain force levels (local police, State Police, Special Squads for Riot Control, National Guard, Federal Troops) will get people of the streets. Studies have found that once off the streets, people tended to stay there, but that was before communications were as good as they are today. Imposition of strict curfews and 'you loot, we shoot' policies was an effective means of preventing resurgences in hostilities, although care must be taken to avoid incidents which can be used for propaganda purposes later (
Poor old grandma shot just trying to get some water, dead at 37)
