The right tool is to catch them spoofing a cell phone tower, documenting it, and only then asking if law enforcement has done it. When they deny, file a criminal complaint and a national security complaint because if law enforcement didn't do it, it was either criminals or spies.
Then when these complaints pile up without action, use them to defeat the DA that is ignoring them. It's only when people start losing their job that this sort of thing will be handled properly and the weakest point is in the parts of the criminal justice system directly subject to the voter.
If the police reasonably expect to be overwhelmed by a criminal conspiracy to violate the laws, they should be mobilizing the state militia. That's the proper response. Having the police violate the law is not the proper response.
When the police are just another criminal gang, it's time for a higher unit of government to occupy and start arresting officials. That's not hyperbole. That's actually historical policy up to today.
The police need to be professional, attempt to size up the likely problem, and if it exceeds the size of what they're supposed to be dealing with, they're supposed to call out the militia and step back until the military restores order.
Yes, this is likely to result in more violence against protestors. The Arkansas state guard is not a police force. They aren't built for nuance. Half the problems we have with the police is that they're not bowing out when they're supposed to. They're covering for the politicians who hire them when the civilian administration loses control of the streets and start acting as paramilitaries instead of police.
Some pharmacies, perfectly legitimate ones, operate online because they run everything out of a warehouse in Nebraska or Oklahoma instead of incurring the higher costs of buying real estate and paying all those extra costs. Mailing 3 months of meds at a time is SOP for them.
Any victim, witness or private detective licensed under the act of August 21, 1953 (P.L.1273, No.361), known as The Private Detective Act of 1953, to intercept the contents of any wire, electronic or oral communication, if that person is under a reasonable suspicion that the intercepted party is committing, about to commit or has committed a crime of violence and there is reason to believe that evidence of the crime of violence may be obtained from the interception.
A lot of NGOs do legislation scorecards like this all the time. It's a pretty well accepted tactic. The only problem is that the lists themselves get to be partisan. You might consider single issue lists across all jurisdiction and you pick out from a menu what votes you consider corrupt for your own personalized corruption map.