Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes and thoroughly yes. Because our military's allegiance is to the Constitution not to any single executive administration; because the military have far more resources to purchase bots or counterbots than the police do; and because only an idiot would actually have that tech and yet fail to also have, at minimum, an equally-maneuverable ablative countermeasure drone.
That's like saying only an idiot would have a nuke and not have a counter weapon for a nuke. It's not a given at all. The video implies that people will have to hide behind iron curtains for (partial) security.
The same amount of shaped-explosive that can crack a skull, can neutralize one of these drones. As such, the braindead countermeasure is to retarget these same drones at the stolen drones. At worst, the IFF radios might add a negligible amount of mass ... but that won't matter for long, because once the enemy knows you're deploying counterdrones, they'll need their own IFF radios in order to try to avoid your counterdrones. (Or the enemy could add armor to their drones, but that will make them massive/unmaneuverable enough that you can increase your counterdrones' explosive payload to penetrate their armor, while still being able to intercept them.)
If you're looking for historical analogy, try military aviation in general. During the first World War, bomber planes would have been game-changing ... if not that there were fighters, too. A slaughterbot is a bomber; a slaughterbot that seeks the enemy's slaughterbots is a fighter.