In the wake of the jury’s decision not to indict Ferguson, MO police officer Darren Wilson, angry protesters took to the streets rioting, pillaging, and damaging many businesses in the area of where Michael Brown was shot. One of the victims included the same liquor store owner that was robbed by Brown. While it doesn’t necessarily come as a shock that this rioting and looting took place after a highly controversial decision made by the grand jury and prosecutor Robert McCulloch, the question everybody wants answered is why couldn’t the innocent business owners who had nothing to do the incident and much less the grand jury’s decision be protected against this?

Despite the arming of police officers and even a call by Governor Jay Nixon to have the national guard at the ready, little to no protection to the business properties was given. A small group of business owners who did have some AR-15 semi-automatic rifles were able to drive off potential looters in one section, but many others were not so fortunate. What needs to change is more protocols need to be put in place for police officers, national guard troops, FBI personnel, and other law enforcement agents to use deadly force when looting and vandalism occur in the city.

Andrew Heiberger reports that these are not peaceful demonstrators that are being spoken of here, there is a clear difference between those who are out there holding up signs, shouting in the megaphones, and those who have nothing but a clear intention to destroy property that’s unprotected. While many store owners certainly did take some extra precautions to board up and surround their store with protective material, those who cannot afford the extra security measures should not have to be subjected to the damage brought about by a lack of action by law enforcement.