I don't know what the point of deploying all these cops is, except maybe to frighten and reassure the population simultaneously. It's not like the terrorists are stupid enough to try to plant bombs several hours after London got hit.
====================
Yes.
And, beyond this, even if terrorists were this stupid, or audacious, the fact is there's not a lot heavily armed paramilitaries -- who're meant, really, to engage in hot metal firefights, or prevent firefights through the classic "show of force" -- can do against the sort of attacks available.
No impenetrable shield can be built; this is the hard fact few want to admit, for perfectly understandable reasons.
If someone inconspicuously leaves an explosives filled backpack in a well trafficked space somewhere and remotely detonates it via cell phone call -- or acts as a human weapons delivery system, aka 'suicide bomber' -- there's not a whole lot a group of people with assault weapons can do about it.
At best, it's possible to turn a small, entry-exit controllable area (such as NY's financial district) into a total observation zone but even this becomes difficult to maintain at high quality over time...guards grow less vigilant, camera feeds aren't monitored as closely, the amount of territory under surveillance turns out to be bigger than originally thought, people grow tired of being searched in detail; we're not built to be on relentless alert.
Government managers must, to keep up appearances and show proper due diligence, put boots in the street and increase the number of gun barrels pointed in all directions to demonstrate what's being done. This has obvious propaganda uses -- which are always exploited -- but doesn't come from the populace manipulation impulse alone I think.
Many, perhaps most, people expect this sort of response and report how they 'feel safer' when men in mirrored shades, hovering helicopters and black vans suddenly sprout like unruly plants.
.d.
-- http://monroelab.net/ <<<<<>>>>> groove to my groove