“PolitiFact is America’s Pulitzer Prize-winning fact-checking website and the home of the Truth-O-Meter,” their Facebook page proclaims. And just like the rest of the left-leaning mainstream media, Politifact went nuts over the ultimately fatal Charlottesville “rally.” Not surprisingly, PF tackled Virginia Governor Terry McAuliffe’s patently false assertion that the armed militia in attendance were “better equipped” than the State Police. And wimped out . . .
While state officials say police were prepared, PolitiFact cannot independently verify the specific types of equipment officers had access to on Aug. 12, so we won’t put this claim on the Truth-O-Meter. It seems likely that police had access to greater firepower than the militia members but didn’t use that level of force when dealing with public protesters.
Interesting that Politifact interpreted “better equipped” to mean “more firepower.” Just another example of the org twisting words to achieve their desired result.
Anyway, wikipedia.org reports that the Virginia State Police Troopers are issued the SIG Sauer P229 .357 SIG DAK pistol, the Remington Model 870 12-gauge Police Magnum shotgun and a Colt M4 Carbine patrol rifle. What else did they need?
An MRAP? Why there’s one at the top of this post! On the streets of Charlottesville on the day in question. Airplanes? The VSP has four. Helicopters? The VSP has seven. Manpower? The VSP fields seven divisions with 1,932 troopers, all equipped with the aforementioned guns, ballistic vests, communications gear, command structure, training, etc. As you might expect for a police agency with a $300+ million annual budget.
So if we’re talking about “better equipped” in the proper, general sense of the term — as in “better equipped to handle a violent conflict” — there’s no comparison between the armed militia at the Charlottesville demo and the VSP.
If we’re talking individual militia man gun vs. individual VSP officer, what difference does that make? Oh right. I forgot. It’s all about the guns for Politifact and their ilk. Which is why they can’t manage to dismiss an absurd statement from an assiduously anti-gun pol like Terry McAuliffe, even when they can. Or I should say, could. Should? That too.