AM and thc0655 make good points, as does Bobby Joe. I would suggest that at any stage we are in a security state of some sort, and the one to which Bobby Joe is suggesting a response is up in the higher risk areas.
What is a useful security tool is a way of rapidly identifying the security reality of where we are currently, and where we are heading, and then linking security countermeasures to that reality. Personally I use a system which has 25 gradings from perfection (or as close as we get on earth) to full scale warfare. The threat is scaleable, as is the appropriate and adequate response.
Let's use A, B, C, D and E for argument's sake. Divide each of those into five and you have 25 scales of security level, (A 1-5, B 1-5, C 1-5, D 1-5, E 1-5) ranging from A1 at highest to E5 at lowest.
On that scale Bobby Joe and the drop in specialists appear to be dealing with something in the A4 or A5 levels, and quite appropriately in those circumstances will be considering whether the level of threat is deadly and requires an equal countermeasure. That requires an assessment model which the community is familiar with, and which the community is capable using to respond appropriately.
As thco655 is suggesting, an A4 or A5 response is not appropriate when the neighbours come and annoy you at let's say C3. An alternative scaled response would be better, and it's not hard to think ahead and allocate countermeasures to deal with each security level, as opposed to thinking the only response is to blow all the neighbors away.
So what I am suggesting is not disproportionate response, but that communities are organized to be aware and able to firstly recognize the true situation ahead of any escalation, and then to organically deploy an appropriate response.
An answer to your question Tom, is yes, I do know a resource which can provide exactly a measured and appropriate response at any security level. We can discuss if you are interested in seeing how this system works, it should help.