Rioting in the U.S.

Tools    





There's been plenty of protests that I agreed with in principle but couldn't support due to method.

Of course I don't agree with BLM for multiple reasons.

What people should have done with George Floyd is not make it a race issue and say all lives matter, meaning despite the fact that he was a career criminal, the police officer had no right to do what he did. If you do this then everyone can stand side by side in agreement and actually accomplish something. A protest or a movement is useless if over half the country disagrees with what you are doing. Instead we have black police officers pulling black college kids out of their cars and tazing them, black people looting black businesses, and white people chanting black lives mater while they burn down black businesses. This movement is not doing anybody any good and it's hurting the black community. None of it was hard to predict.



That elusive hide-and-seek cow is at it again
He threatened the crowd in revving his engine. Do you really believe that was not a threat? In what context is revving your engine's RPM at a group of people reasonable? I don't think anyone needs to be a mind reader to recognize that for what it is when we have all revved out engines in anger and annoyance at a redlight. And red lights can't retaliate!


I may not see aiming a loaded weapon at someone as wrong. Why, it's an absolute right in my mind to do so! If an altercation results of a perceived threat to the safety of others by me, it's not my fault in the slightest or in part. Gosh. I dont know why society doesn't work the way I think it should instead of how it does.


Two wrongs do not make a right, I guess, is what I'm saying here.


If blocking traffic is illegal then have them arrested. Threatening a second illegal action by intentional assault is not a correct response. It's vigilante. And I could be mistaken but I don't think that was the Batmobile. Defending a second illegal action doesn't make it right or dismiss the fact people were hit illegally, either. Like with any accident, there is a point where judgments are drawn with at fault when the accident was absolutely avoidable. That has nothing do with how "principled" the justification may be (quoted for obvious reasons). Avoidable is avoidable. Choosing to escalate is no longer an accident and crosses a very serious line of morality, legality, and responsibility.


No one threatened him till he threatened them. Circles and stuff. I feel this will repeat too.


I don't believe it was intentional.



I don't see how rightfully driving down a street and then stopping before hitting someone is a threat. It sounds like a right to me. On the other hand they don't have the right to block him.



I get it but they have no right to block his right of way, it is illegal, and they should be arrested for it. This guy had guts because I'm sure he's aware of what's been going on. We also don't know where he needed to be. What did the bikers do wrong? So I'd say bad analogy. The driver never broke the law. He didn't hit anybody until he was threatened. Maybe he could have gone around but why should he?



You ready? You look ready.
I’ll admit it’s different for me because I’m in a rural area and the number of people you’d need to clog things up is a whole lot bigger. And you’d know things were clogged before getting there because there’s 8 different ways to get to and from places. Flow of traffic usually goes to the path of least resistance. So having one street inaccessible to me doesn’t seem like the line in the sand to make me start favoring such a binary view of things.

Where I’m from if you’re not in the crosswalk you are going to get ****ed up. (But there are a few exceptions where pedestrians own the streets. Thriving business markets type deal. And you best believe those streets are packed.) But to each their own. I know with cities it’s a totally different ball game when a street gets shut down. And that’s why I will never live in a city.

That goes back to my stupid place/people/time/things.

I believe that anytime is a stupid time to be in a city with city people doing city things. Yes, I am a stick in the mud. hahaha 🤣



He threatened the crowd in revving his engine. Do you really believe that was not a threat? In what context is revving your engine's RPM at a group of people reasonable? I don't think anyone needs to be a mind reader to recognize that for what it is when we have all revved out engines in anger and annoyance at a redlight. And red lights can't retaliate!


I may not see aiming a loaded weapon at someone as wrong. Why, it's an absolute right in my mind to do so! If an altercation results of a perceived threat to the safety of others by me, it's not my fault in the slightest or in part. Gosh. I dont know why society doesn't work the way I think it should instead of how it does.


Two wrongs do not make a right, I guess, is what I'm saying here.


If blocking traffic is illegal then have them arrested. Threatening a second illegal action by intentional assault is not a correct response. It's vigilante. And I could be mistaken but I don't think that was the Batmobile. Defending a second illegal action doesn't make it right or dismiss the fact people were hit illegally, either. Like with any accident, there is a point where judgments are drawn with at fault when the accident was absolutely avoidable. That has nothing do with how "principled" the justification may be (quoted for obvious reasons). Avoidable is avoidable. Choosing to escalate is no longer an accident and crosses a very serious line of morality, legality, and responsibility.


No one threatened him till he threatened them. Circles and stuff. I feel this will repeat too.
We can look at him revving the engine as threatening but it's not a threat in legal terms, yet they are certainly doing something illegal. So what should he have done? Put his tail between his legs and back up? I know you don't believe that. I'll ask you the same thing I asked JM; if you were walking down the sidewalk and I stepped in front of you and said you could go no further, what would you do? Would you push me out of the way, threaten to push me out of the way, or cower and go home?



You ready? You look ready.
Re street blockage: I’d go back the way I came and take another route, but I also would have been aware of my surroundings a few blocks down the street. At which point there are a many number of options. Continuing onward at a faster pace oblivious to the other options is just a bad operator.



Re street blockage: I’d go back the way I came and take another route, but I also would have been aware of my surroundings a few blocks down the street. At which point there are a many number of options. Continuing onward at a faster pace oblivious to the other options is just a bad operator.
Me too. I was paying attention to where the protests were and completely avoiding them.



Alright, I'm just gonna call it here.

I'm a little disappointed how often people chose to escalate disagreements rather than actually try to be understood or reach some form of agreement. Occasionally it's obvious people wanted this to escalate so that the thread would get closed, which definitely isn't cool. But I guess it has to be done now, anyway, so like the protests, flaunting the rules does indeed get the desired attention, albeit with a cost. I guess everyone can decide for themselves if the circumstances require/justify that, or if it's crossing an important line. That seems to be the disagreement, even though we went 2-3 pages without anyone highlighting it or addressing it specifically.