MSNBC anchor Richard Lui asked a law enforcement analyst on Saturday if there could be a risk of "overreaction" by authorities responding to terrorist attacks. He was speaking as coverage was being shown of the London Islamic terrorist attack was being shown.
Seven people were killed in the attack and about 48 were injured, some with life-threatening injuries.
The question sounded a lot like questions you've heard about Israel's "disproportionate" responses to Hamasshole attacks.
You see, the left believes if someone hits you, it's okay to hit back, but only as hard as they hit you, in case you might hurt them. This is because the left is self-loathing and more considerate of jihadis and those who protect and shelter them, than they are for the well-being of the innocent people of the West.
So, as images of police response to the attack played out, Lui asked his guest Jim Cavanaugh if, in his experience, there could be an excessive amount of force used by law enforcement for such incidents.
"When you have analyzed these incidents post facto, as well as during . . . there's certainly a risk of under-reaction; but is there any risk of overreaction, of deploying too much?" the idiot asked.
He continued, "You know, as we've been watching all of this live coming into our satellite center here in New York City and then beaming it out from London, is there ever a point where you go, 'Well, that's too much,' or 'You shouldn't be applying that amount of force there.'"
Cavanaugh seemed reluctant to give this stupid question an answer, but he did, saying the police response couldn't be "too large" in such cases.
What is Lui thinking? Wing them? Shoot them in the leg as they cut somebody's throat, or try to kill the cops?
I'd like to see Lui in the same position as a cop facing off with a jihadist. I bet he'd empty his gun in the terrorist and reload.