HorrorMovieFans.com

Maybe the question to ask is why citizens feel they need to take to the streets and disrupt people’s lives with criminal activity in order to bring about change. How do you get to the point where that is the natural response?

Headhunter wrote:

Tiggnutz wrote:A month from now everyone will have moved on even sooner probably and I'm sure that the people left in the burned out rubble will be happy to know MLK said it was justified. When people move,businesses and jobs leave and their already miserable hard lives get worse they should just remember that quote. Ridiculous

You’ve completely missed the point here.

I didn't miss anything. With that video 90 plus percent of the country would of shared in the disgust of a man being murdered by police. Now the story changed to something else a riot and people who had nothing to do with that situation have to suffer for it

zombie wrote:

Headhunter wrote:

zombie wrote:

Headhunter wrote:

zombie wrote:

Headhunter wrote:Riots were the only thing that forced systemic change in the LAPD.

so riot against the police. don't damage people's cars. don't loot stores. focus your riot or your protest. or else you're part of the problem.

What would rioting against the police entail?

would it entail looting wal mart or breaking windows out of civilian's cars?

I don’t know. I’m asking you.

to me, it should entail fighting against the police. and more often, just being loud, protesting and chanting. etc. it should never entail attacking civilians and damaging businesses.

It shouldn’t, but why does it?

When you say fighting against police, what does that mean specifically? Throw objects at them? Engage them in fist fights until the tasers take you down? A gun fight?

The people who wanted free shit and the people who get off on destroying things just silenced the people who really care about a man being murdered on video by a police officer.

Tiggnutz wrote:

Headhunter wrote:

Tiggnutz wrote:A month from now everyone will have moved on even sooner probably and I'm sure that the people left in the burned out rubble will be happy to know MLK said it was justified. When people move,businesses and jobs leave and their already miserable hard lives get worse they should just remember that quote. Ridiculous

You’ve completely missed the point here.

I didn't miss anything. With that video 90 plus percent of the country would of shared in the disgust of a man being murdered by police. Now the story changed to something else a riot and people who had nothing to do with that situation have to suffer for it

So people now have an “out” to stop pretending they care about the murder, is what you’re saying.

Headhunter wrote:Maybe the question to ask is why citizens feel they need to take to the streets and disrupt people’s lives with criminal activity in order to bring about change. How do you get to the point where that is the natural response?

people shoot up theaters or dance clubs. people fly planes into buildings. that's to try to cause a change or fight against a grievance. look into it, as how do you prevent that kind of action. not to justify it and capitulate to those that choose that kind of action.

again, focus your riot or your protest, or else you're just fuel to the problem.

Tiggnutz wrote:The people who wanted free shit and the people who get off on destroying things just silenced the people who really care about a man being murdered on video by a police officer.

If that’s true, most of the people whose perception changed never actually cared in the first place. Humans are capable of thinking with more complexity than “I can only care about one thing at a time”.

I do get extra salty about rioting I've seen the effects first hand I absolutely hate it.

Headhunter wrote:

Tiggnutz wrote:The people who wanted free shit and the people who get off on destroying things just silenced the people who really care about a man being murdered on video by a police officer.

If that’s true, most of the people whose perception changed never actually cared in the first place. Humans are capable of thinking with more complexity than “I can only care about one thing at a time”.

Why justify hurting innocent people who didn't do anything? I never understand this argument at all it's like you dont see that all that stuff burning belong to real people not cops or politicians but citizens.

Headhunter wrote: It shouldn’t, but why does it?

When you say fighting against police, what does that mean specifically? Throw objects at them? Engage them in fist fights until the tasers take you down? A gun fight?

it does, cause they are unfocused or are just capitalizing on a riot/protest, or they get sloppy. or else someone tries to get in their way. but that's another thing.

i'm not gonna make rules, so long as it doesn't spill over and cause damage or harm to non-police.

Headhunter wrote:

Tiggnutz wrote:The people who wanted free shit and the people who get off on destroying things just silenced the people who really care about a man being murdered on video by a police officer.

If that’s true, most of the people whose perception changed never actually cared in the first place. Humans are capable of thinking with more complexity than “I can only care about one thing at a time”.

When did stealing become therapeutic?

zombie wrote:

Headhunter wrote:Maybe the question to ask is why citizens feel they need to take to the streets and disrupt people’s lives with criminal activity in order to bring about change. How do you get to the point where that is the natural response?

people shoot up theaters or dance clubs. people fly planes into buildings. that's to try to cause a change or fight against a grievance. look into it, as how do you prevent that kind of action. not to justify it and capitulate to those that choose that kind of action.

again, focus your riot or your protest, or else you're just fuel to the problem.

Not sure “rioters are like terrorists” was the thing to go with here.

You guys are hyperfocused on the actions being wrong, which very few people would argue with. It is wrong. But you’re ignoring the context that leads to such an irrational response. If there were easy alternatives, they’d have been taken. Don’t you think it’s worth understanding why those alternatives don’t exist, or at least why people feel they don’t?

Headhunter wrote:

zombie wrote:

Headhunter wrote:Maybe the question to ask is why citizens feel they need to take to the streets and disrupt people’s lives with criminal activity in order to bring about change. How do you get to the point where that is the natural response?

people shoot up theaters or dance clubs. people fly planes into buildings. that's to try to cause a change or fight against a grievance. look into it, as how do you prevent that kind of action. not to justify it and capitulate to those that choose that kind of action.

again, focus your riot or your protest, or else you're just fuel to the problem.

Not sure “rioters are like terrorists” was the thing to go with here.

You guys are hyperfocused on the actions being wrong, which very few people would argue with. It is wrong. But you’re ignoring the context that leads to such an irrational response. If there were easy alternatives, they’d have been taken. Don’t you think it’s worth understanding why those alternatives don’t exist, or at least why people feel they don’t?

unfocused riots that involve causing harm to people or property unrelated to what you're rioting against or what you're trying to cause to change does feel like a form of terrorism to me.

Headhunter wrote:

zombie wrote:

Headhunter wrote:Maybe the question to ask is why citizens feel they need to take to the streets and disrupt people’s lives with criminal activity in order to bring about change. How do you get to the point where that is the natural response?

people shoot up theaters or dance clubs. people fly planes into buildings. that's to try to cause a change or fight against a grievance. look into it, as how do you prevent that kind of action. not to justify it and capitulate to those that choose that kind of action.

again, focus your riot or your protest, or else you're just fuel to the problem.

Not sure “rioters are like terrorists” was the thing to go with here.

You guys are hyperfocused on the actions being wrong, which very few people would argue with. It is wrong. But you’re ignoring the context that leads to such an irrational response. If there were easy alternatives, they’d have been taken. Don’t you think it’s worth understanding why those alternatives don’t exist, or at least why people feel they don’t?

That cop is going to prison for sure the one who watched will probably get some time there was no need to riot. The riot was opportunity nothing else.

zombie wrote:

Headhunter wrote: It shouldn’t, but why does it?

When you say fighting against police, what does that mean specifically? Throw objects at them? Engage them in fist fights until the tasers take you down? A gun fight?

it does, cause they are unfocused or are just capitalizing on a riot/protest, or they get sloppy. or else someone tries to get in their way. but that's another thing.

i'm not gonna make rules, so long as it doesn't spill over and cause damage or harm to non-police.

So what are they not doing that is proven to lead to desired results?

It would certainly cause harm to non-police when the fighting gets too intense and police start mowing people down.

Tiggnutz wrote:

Headhunter wrote:

zombie wrote:

Headhunter wrote:Maybe the question to ask is why citizens feel they need to take to the streets and disrupt people’s lives with criminal activity in order to bring about change. How do you get to the point where that is the natural response?

people shoot up theaters or dance clubs. people fly planes into buildings. that's to try to cause a change or fight against a grievance. look into it, as how do you prevent that kind of action. not to justify it and capitulate to those that choose that kind of action.

again, focus your riot or your protest, or else you're just fuel to the problem.

Not sure “rioters are like terrorists” was the thing to go with here.

You guys are hyperfocused on the actions being wrong, which very few people would argue with. It is wrong. But you’re ignoring the context that leads to such an irrational response. If there were easy alternatives, they’d have been taken. Don’t you think it’s worth understanding why those alternatives don’t exist, or at least why people feel they don’t?

That cop is going to prison for sure the one who watched will probably get some time there was no need to riot. The riot was opportunity nothing else.

Why “for sure”? Most cops walk.

Headhunter wrote:

zombie wrote:

Headhunter wrote: It shouldn’t, but why does it?

When you say fighting against police, what does that mean specifically? Throw objects at them? Engage them in fist fights until the tasers take you down? A gun fight?

it does, cause they are unfocused or are just capitalizing on a riot/protest, or they get sloppy. or else someone tries to get in their way. but that's another thing.

i'm not gonna make rules, so long as it doesn't spill over and cause damage or harm to non-police.

So what are they not doing that is proven to lead to desired results?

It would certainly cause harm to non-police when the fighting gets too intense and police start mowing people down.

is this an "the ends justify the means" argument?

at that point, it is on the police. that is not on the rioters.

zombie wrote:

Headhunter wrote:

zombie wrote:

Headhunter wrote: It shouldn’t, but why does it?

When you say fighting against police, what does that mean specifically? Throw objects at them? Engage them in fist fights until the tasers take you down? A gun fight?

it does, cause they are unfocused or are just capitalizing on a riot/protest, or they get sloppy. or else someone tries to get in their way. but that's another thing.

i'm not gonna make rules, so long as it doesn't spill over and cause damage or harm to non-police.

So what are they not doing that is proven to lead to desired results?

It would certainly cause harm to non-police when the fighting gets too intense and police start mowing people down.

is this an "the ends justify the means" argument?

at that point, it is on the police. that is not on the rioters.

This is a “Why are there no ends without bad means” question.

Is that a better result than busting windows of an auto repair shop?

Headhunter wrote:

Tiggnutz wrote:

Headhunter wrote:

zombie wrote:

Headhunter wrote:Maybe the question to ask is why citizens feel they need to take to the streets and disrupt people’s lives with criminal activity in order to bring about change. How do you get to the point where that is the natural response?

people shoot up theaters or dance clubs. people fly planes into buildings. that's to try to cause a change or fight against a grievance. look into it, as how do you prevent that kind of action. not to justify it and capitulate to those that choose that kind of action.

again, focus your riot or your protest, or else you're just fuel to the problem.

Not sure “rioters are like terrorists” was the thing to go with here.

You guys are hyperfocused on the actions being wrong, which very few people would argue with. It is wrong. But you’re ignoring the context that leads to such an irrational response. If there were easy alternatives, they’d have been taken. Don’t you think it’s worth understanding why those alternatives don’t exist, or at least why people feel they don’t?

That cop is going to prison for sure the one who watched will probably get some time there was no need to riot. The riot was opportunity nothing else.

Why “for sure”? Most cops walk.

The guy was in cuffs not struggling and saying he couldn't breath there is absolutely no chance that cop doesn't get convicted. Now if their States Attorney is a worthless sack of self promoting shit like Baltimore's Marilyn Mosby and tries to get something insane like first degree murder that's different but that was the very definition of negligent homicide

Headhunter wrote: This is a “Why are there no ends without bad means” question.

Is that a better result than busting windows of an auto repair shop?

i don't know. i think there absolutely should be change. i'm not going to justify or defend hurting people or property that is unrelated to what you're trying to change.

when the cops come en masse, cause you're rioting and breaking window, you're not gonna also fight them and cause a possible shoot out?