The Weberian notion of states holding the monopoly on violence can be challenged in the light of states dealing with street protests. In established democracies, the police handling of street protests is characterized by the oscillation between confrontational and nonconfrontational approaches. In the United States, the escalated force approach was common up until the 1980s, while in the UK, the government dealt with urban riots heavy-handedly. In the 1990s the negotiated management approach emerged. This research argues that unraveling this oscillation requires understanding of democratic states’ upholding of their legitimacy. Violent crackdown on protests can undermine governments’ legitimacy. However, by associating public order violators with threat, democratic states may resort to force against protesters, deriving its legitimacy from the public’s paranoid mentality.