Originally posted by Omega Vision
This sounds like an over-generalization. Were you on the ground interviewing rioters to see what they hoped to accomplish?
We know what they hoped to accomplish: looting and burning. They weren't even only targeting non-black stores to burn and loot! That makes NO SENSE to attack your own people if you are trying to say "our race is oppressed".
But it did accomplish change, and I'm not sure that change would have happened if there had only been peaceful protests. I'm not advocating riots as the answer to every social problem, but even Ghandi asserted that there were times when violence was needed, and many academics now agree that without more militant, sometimes violent rights crusaders such as Malcolm X, the more peaceful agents of change like Martin Luther King Jr would never have had the same successes. It's a good cop, bad cop scenario.
So what are you saying? Hold this up as a positive example? Say "hey black people, just burn and steal shit if you want change" ?
You say you aren't advocating a riot, but then you go quoting friggin Ghandi saying sometimes violence is needed. So when you say shit like that it really comes off as an underhanded way of saying "riots are bad...but not always".
It paints the rioters as freedom fighters instead of opportunistic pieces of shit.
The people of this city looted a weave store when they thought the Michael Brown memorial had been burned down. I am not even joking when I say that, I wish I was. It's not about rights or freedom, it's about having an excuse to do whatever they want. The fact that their actions resulted in positive change should not mean this is held up as an example of anything positive.
The people who non-violently protested? Those are the people doing it for any kind of cause. Oh I'm sure some rioters would say they did it for a cause, but actions speak louder then words and if your actions are to loot and burn businesses regardless of who owns them..that shit has zero to do with black rights or black lives mattering.
Originally posted by Surtur
So when you say shit like that it really comes off as an underhanded way of saying "riots are bad...but not always".
Originally posted by Omega Vision
This is exactly what I'm saying. I think you're so dead set on seeing the rioters as inhuman scum that you're not even willing to consider that the riots might have been on some level a legitimate response to a law enforcement system that was utterly failing.
But the thing with Michael Brown is..some people are still calling it a "murder" etc even though the investigations didn't point to that right? The problem for me is before anything had even been determined they rioted over it. When the memorial was set on fire they robbed stores..even though it is possible nobody created the fire because it was windy and they had placed candles near it, so it could of blown one over and started a fire.
I think if a person responded with "I want to loot a store" they don't care about what happened. They don't care about who was killed or the circumstances. Just like the people who say "lets burn stuff because a cop killed a black guy". That type of mentality to me..is not someone who is about ending oppression. That is why I think of them as scum, especially the ones stealing.
I will admit yeah, they got results, but in this day and age this behavior has no place. It makes everyone look bad that this behavior worked IMO. People took advantage of the situation to destroy and steal(which has nothing to do with Michale Brown, doesn't help his case or bring him back or change laws) and then in some ways they were rewarded for it even more. I won't say change wasn't needed, but if this is how they want to get it...well, what if next time it is someone you know whose business is targeted for no reason whatsoever? Do you just say "well they were oppressed" ?
We've already had two cities go through this, and odds are something like this will eventually happen again. I guess it comes down to...some people think the ends justify the means, others do not. I am in the latter category. If people are angry at the cops then go and riot after the cops, don't just steal and burn.
Originally posted by SurturThe problem with this statement is that it goes under the assumption the Micheal Brown case was uncommon in Ferguson.
But the thing with Michael Brown is..some people are still calling it a "murder" etc even though the investigations didn't point to that right? The problem for me is before anything had even been determined they rioted over it. When the memorial was set on fire they robbed stores..even though it is possible nobody created the fire because it was windy and they had placed candles near it, so it could of blown one over and started a fire.I think if a person responded with "I want to loot a store" they don't care about what happened. They don't care about who was killed or the circumstances. Just like the people who say "lets burn stuff because a cop killed a black guy". That type of mentality to me..is not someone who is about ending oppression. That is why I think of them as scum, especially the ones stealing.
I will admit yeah, they got results, but in this day and age this behavior has no place. It makes everyone look bad that this behavior worked IMO. People took advantage of the situation to destroy and steal(which has nothing to do with Michale Brown, doesn't help his case or bring him back or change laws) and then in some ways they were rewarded for it even more. I won't say change wasn't needed, but if this is how they want to get it...well, what if next time it is someone you know whose business is targeted for no reason whatsoever? Do you just say "well they were oppressed" ?
We've already had two cities go through this, and odds are something like this will eventually happen again. I guess it comes down to...some people think the ends justify the means, others do not. I am in the latter category. If people are angry at the cops then go and riot after the cops, don't just steal and burn.
In the report and investigation I thought they mentioned that while Micheal Brown may not have met the criteria that rioters wanted that there was a history of racial prejudice in Ferguson by the police force.
No riots over this? Why? Because it isn't as common?
Originally posted by Newjak
The problem with this statement is that it goes under the assumption the Micheal Brown case was uncommon in Ferguson.In the report and investigation I thought they mentioned that while Micheal Brown may not have met the criteria that rioters wanted that there was a history of racial prejudice in Ferguson by the police force.
I'm not assuming it was or was not uncommon, but blacks commit more crimes against blacks then any other race. So of course in an all black neighborhood encounters with the police would be common.
Originally posted by SurturThere may not be any overt outrage because the case seems like it is actually being handled as a homicide investigation right off the bat.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2015/08/06/an-unarmed-white-teen-was-shot-dead-by-police-his-family-asks-where-is-the-outrage/No riots over this? Why? Because it isn't as common?
I'm not assuming it was or was not uncommon, but blacks commit more crimes against blacks then any other race. So of course in an all black neighborhood encounters with the police would be common.
While for many of the prominent black shootings and police brutality events I people were worried that it would be swept under the rug or not investigated like it should have been due to the race of victims.
I do think police brutality is an issue in this country one that needs to be solved.
But it's hard to look at that stats and not see that racial profiling could be a large issue for many of these police brutality cases when african americans are involved.
Originally posted by Surtur
http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2015/08/06/an-unarmed-white-teen-was-shot-dead-by-police-his-family-asks-where-is-the-outrage/No riots over this? Why? Because it isn't as common?
I'm not assuming it was or was not uncommon, but blacks commit more crimes against blacks then any other race. So of course in an all black neighborhood encounters with the police would be common.
While this case seems to be murky as many of them are, Hammond's death was at least classified as a homicide, which suggests there might be real justice. If justice isn't served though, then it will be time for national outrage as with all the other instances.
More protest for a dude shooting at cop.
Never mind, you said protest. But it seems the protesters where there to mark the anniversary of the initial shooting/death and these gunmen acting independently.
"As we have seen over the recent months and years, not only does violence obscure any message of peaceful protest, it places the community, as well as the officers who seek to protect it, in harm’s way,” Lynch said. “The weekend’s events were peaceful and promoted a message of reconciliation and healing. But incidents of violence, such as we saw last night, are contrary to both that message, along with everything that all of us, including this group, have worked to achieve over the past year."