StL County Cops Shoot Teen

[K-S-U-Wildcats!]

Would you say that no riots have been caused by angry people, only opportunists?

You've substituted "riot" for "looting" - I'm not sure if there's a reason for that or if you mean the same thing, but I'll take it to mean looting. In answer to your question, I have no idea. Never say never, I suppose.

Actually, it looks like you responded to my post about rioting with talk about looting.  Why should we exclude things like vandalism or assault?

I responded about looting because looting is all I've been talking about.

Do you think that every time there is a disruptive event, there is also a riot?

Of course not. What's your point?

I was wondering about your theory that disruptive events cause people to riot.  Do you think that every riot is caused by a disruptive event?  At what frequency do you think disruptive events cause riots?  What sorts of things account for the difference between situations in which there are both disruptive events and riots and situations in which there are disruptive events but no riots?

it's not my theory that disruptive events cause people to loot. I said that looters take advantage of disruptive events.

Why do you care about correctly classifying the intentions of the rioters?

I think it's important to correctly identify the intentions of the looters because attributing the looting to the Brown shooting (1) is making excuses for lawless behaviour, and (2) unfairly tarnishes the lawful protests.

Why not just say that there is no excuse for lawless behavior?

There is no excuse for lawless behavior.

[michigancat]

http://www.vox.com/2014/8/13/5998591/hands-up-dont-shoot-photos-ferguson-michael-brown?utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter&utm_campaign=voxdotcom&utm_content=wednesday

[Paul Moscow]

I've never heard of a riot that isn't started out of anger. Or of one that was purely the result of a single incident.

Sports Riots

Well, that's interesting!  I guess what I was trying to get at is that plenty of riots happen when lots of people are super angry about something.  That is to say that they wouldn't have happened otherwise.  Why do the thoughts, intentions, or lack thereof of the rioters matter in these cases?  They seem to me to be more side effects than causes.

People don't just decide "Man, I'm really pissed about this and you know what will make me feel better? Stealing a new pair of Air Jordans." Looters take advantage of disruptive events - for example, a hurricane or protest crowds assembling in response to a racially-charged issues - and the diversion of law enforcement resources to manage those events, to start looting. They then hide behind the guise of "I'm just so hurt and angry about police oppression that I gotta steal some stuff!" as an excuse for their lawless thuggery. To be fair to the looters, though, most of them aren't actually saying this - the media paints the narrative for them.

"looters" aren't going into stores to get tv's when the cops aren't looking so they can watch The Bachelor at home on their bunny ears, they loot because they feel powerless. It's no coincidence that looting and riots occur mostly within areas that have been stripped of things that actually give them power - things like a job, decent wage, education. In the 1960's and 1970's the riots in the US occurred almost exclusively in areas of poverty, chronic joblessness, and little educational opportunities.

to look at a looter and judge his situation only by the merchandise in his hand and not the message in his act is idiotic.

[chum1]

I responded about looting because looting is all I've been talking about.

Why are you excluding things like vandalism or assault?  I wasn't.

it's not my theory that disruptive events cause people to loot. I said that looters take advantage of disruptive events.

That's a causal relationship.  And a either an insignificant, weak theory or a significantly flawed one.

There is no excuse for lawless behavior.

See, you don't need to make all of those judgments, after all.

[EMAWmeister]

Arresting journalists out here

[Jabeez]

Police?

[attachment deleted by admin]

[Rage Against the McKee]

You would think they would at least be wearing urban camo.

[steve dave]

lol at this ferguson police chief

[star seed 7]

i cannot hear the name "ferguson" without giggling.

[michigancat]

Arresting journalists out here

Man, their twitter feeds. WTF

[slobber]

It makes me sad to think they would burn down a QT when there isn't one within 200 miles of me. 

Some people don't realize how good they have it.

Yes

(Beep boop, I am Steve Dave's robot beep boop.)


Gonna win 'em all!

[Dugout DickStone]

So was Brown shot in the back?  Was he shot more than once?

Looting a QT is certainly wrong and illegal but so is shooting a man in the back because he is tall and black and won't obey your every command, even if you wear a badge.

Shutting down an entire neighborhood when the residents choose to assemble with a police force that looks like the 101st airborne is illegal. 

Arrest the looters, those that choose to peaceably assemble are guaranteed that right.  Unconditionally

[Dugout DickStone]

If a police officer shot anyone of you in the back, 8-9 times, I'd step up and demand accountability.  If I didn't feel like that were going to happen, I'd engage my peers to force it to happen.

That's all in the constitution.

[Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!)]

I missed the Martial Law discussion.  Sounds dumber than the everybody's (society included) racist discussion.

It's not dumb at all.

I bet it is.

You don't think that a heavily armed police force, with some members that take a use fear/ force first, ask questions later mentality to their job description has anything to do with this? You don't think that a large group of people wrongly or rightly believing that the police are not there to serve and protect them matters? You don't think that it is because of the actions of a small minority of that group, that police and public opinion of said group tends to lean towards the majority of said group falsely being like the majority?  You don't think these things feed each other into a sickening, viscous circular pattern? You don't think any of that matters?

Yeah, it does matter. Because it is a big part of the reason this type of crap continues to happen.

You don't know what Martial Law is.

[Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!)]

The real reason people mob/loot/riot is because their fear of being caught is substantially diminished. That's it. Nothing else. They are criminals. It's a predatory a disposition.

[ednksu]

live cam lukes?
http://fox2now.com/on-air/live-streaming-2/?utm_content=buffer8cff3&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter.com&utm_campaign=buffer

[chum1]

These opportunistic criminals aren't fooling anyone with their phony anger.

https://twitter.com/blackink12/status/499736574355968000

[chum1]

http://new.livestream.com/accounts/9035483/events/3271930

[chum1]

[Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!)]

Blaming society for criminal behavior is such a libtard move.

[Jabeez]

So every elected official in Missouri is just like "eff it".  Seems like a lot of political opportunities are being missed.

[Dugout DickStone]

"Who is too stupid to get into the army now?!  Take that!"

[Dugout DickStone]

Blaming society for criminal behavior is such a libtard move.

You are cool with militarized police action in a US city?

I know you aren't

[Rage Against the McKee]

It seems like the police could do a lot more to stop these riots by putting the murderer in jail than they are going to do by putting on their army costumes and carrying big guns.

[Dugout DickStone]

It seems like the police could do a lot more to stop these riots by putting the murderer in jail than they are going to do by putting on their army costumes and carrying big guns.

Buy those people wrecked a QT.  it's time to mount an assault