This has been covered and mentioned way before me, but there are in fact tactics and techniques that can (and should) be used to attempt to de-escalate situations before they get to the point of active rioting.

Specifically, the Army (I believe), and I'm sure other branches of the armed forces, have training manuals on how to interact with people in ways to keep both parties (the would-be combatants/rioters AND other military personnel) from boiling over. This is the sort of this that is incredibly useful, a necessity even, when you're in an active war zone. There's a direct translation over to civilian life, though. At the end of the day, you're trying to keep the peace.

Does it always work? I don't know: I'm not military personnel, nor a LEO, and I haven't looked at all of the available data. As a person who isn't comfortable with the amount of force that local law enforcement in America shows to all people, innocent or guilty, I can tell you 100% that I would personally feel better if I never saw officers show up in armored vehicles.. ever. They're not trained for it, they shouldn't have it.

Perhaps more thought should be given to the idea that showing up in full riot gear before anything violent has occurred is itself viewed by some protesters as incitement. It can become a self-fulfilling prophecy in the wrong situations.

Presumably the police would maintain a minimal, unobtrusive monitoring presence and only gear up/deploy if violence began. This might delay response during a violent protest, but, in theory, would make a peaceful protest safer and might prevent it from turning violent. I don't know what to think about the proposal but it's not completely ridiculous.

Evacuate the civilians and just cordon off the area until the pressure decreases.

If you dress for going to war, a war you should find.

Depends on the riot. I'd say the vast majority of riots are quelled quicker and cheaper with hot chocolate than with tanks though.

If it's not rioting, what's the need to disperse a crowd? Aren't peaceful public gatherings protected by the First Amendment anymore?

> [...] when exactly should the police gear up to disperse a crowd? While it's actively rioting?

I already pay taxes, do I have to give the government solutions to all problems in society in a silver platter too? Why don't they use some of that money to research an answer to that very question? Because guns.

I mean, there could be a foam that slows people down when sprayed. Or a net that makes it confusing to walk. Who knows. So many possibilities. But guns!

Or a magic gas that makes it hard for people to see and breathe and want to run away.

Wouldn't be so bad if it weren't almost always paired with entering said clout of gas with gas masks and beating and arresting protestors.