Minneapolis PD Suspect Dies On Video While Handcuffed. FBI Investigating.

[RevolverRob]

Guys, can we stop automatically conflating "protest" and "riot"? They don't mean the same thing.

I was trying to think of a way to explain it the other day.

Something similar to, "Not all homicides are murders, but all murders are homicides."

So I tried, "Not all protesters are rioters, but all rioters are protesters..." - No that's not right.

"Not all rioters are protesters, but all protesters are rioters..." - No that's not right, either.

It then occurred to me, if you cannot make them equivalent to one another in like fashion - then...they probably aren't the same thing?

___

Joe S is right - we have to be careful in conflating protesters and rioters. Rioters are the ones who need to be met with force and stopped, protesters do not.

[Joe S]

What are you doing yourself?

And right to the heart of the matter. I'm going back to that now. Just don't tell my wife that I was influenced by a stranger on the internet (although one I have great respect for), when she had essentially been saying the same to me all morning.

I apologize if anyone thought that they were personally called out. I was hoping in my sincere frustration to help folks examine where they stood on their own practice of their ideals, and hold some of the talking heads to the same principles, regardless of party or some other group affiliation. I honestly believe we are in this together as Americans, and thus my anger at what I see as unnecessary divisiveness that only costs us more liberty as we scramble to disadvantage the "other" team. If mods feel it was out of line, do whatever you got to do.

Anyway, I've got staff to check in on, groceries to get to old folks, and probably a shit ton of garbage and broken glass to pick up once I get downtown. Stay safe everyone.

[Dan_S]

Rioters are the ones who need to be met with force and stopped, protesters do not.

What then, would be determined as a revolutionary act or movement?

[blues]

What then, would be determined as a revolutionary act or movement?

In the eyes of the government confronting it, it would still be treated as a criminal or lawless act, and depending on scale, opposed with force...police or military.

This would be true whether colonists opposed King George or their own subsequently erected government.

Definitions can become matters of nuance and minutiae in numerous circumstances. That becomes more of an issue if the matter is tried as opposed to resolved in the street.

[BehindBlueI's]

And right to the heart of the matter. I'm going back to that now. Just don't tell my wife that I was influenced by a stranger on the internet (although one I have great respect for), when she had essentially been saying the same to me all morning.

I apologize if anyone thought that they were personally called out. I was hoping in my sincere frustration to help folks examine where they stood on their own practice of their ideals, and hold some of the talking heads to the same principles, regardless of party or some other group affiliation. I honestly believe we are in this together as Americans, and thus my anger at what I see as unnecessary divisiveness that only costs us more liberty as we scramble to disadvantage the "other" team. If mods feel it was out of line, do whatever you got to do.

Anyway, I've got staff to check in on, groceries to get to old folks, and probably a shit ton of garbage and broken glass to pick up once I get downtown. Stay safe everyone.

I don't feel personally called out but professionally I am getting tired of being both too little and too much simultaneously. I'm also tired of people complaining "they" are organized and "they" are ruining this country but "we" can't get organized, etc. I note armed protesters showing up to rally against COVID related measures but am not seeing many of those guys showing up to protect infrastructure and businesses. Now the narrative from that group seems to be "I won't protect those who won't protect themselves" and "but if they come for me..."

I'm fine with curfews in the circumstances we are in. None of these "powers" are new. I don't believe we have to let riots continue because we'll all just be declared rioters some day. I've yet to see anyone provide a coherent argument for that. Yes, it's inconvenient. I'm rescheduling my rescheduled vacation. I get it. It sucks. But it's a legitimate response to the death and destruction we're seeing from the riots, IMO. Reasonable people can differ on where exactly the line is to be drawn, but drawn it must be.

[Dan_S]

In the eyes of the government confronting it, it would still be treated as a criminal or lawless act, and depending on scale, opposed with force...police or military.

This would be true whether colonists opposed King George or their own subsequently erected government.

Definitions can become matters of nuance and minutiae in numerous circumstances. That becomes more of an issue if the matter is tried as opposed to resolved in the street.

Are you reading my mind?


It occurs to me, that the Boston Massacre was essentially a group of soldiers obeying lawful orders to disperse a threatening crowd. That raiding a ship in Boston Harbor and pouring tea leaves over the side is destruction of private property, by an armed (they had deadly weapons, in the form of tools, if they weren’t armed outright) gang of law-breakers.

Yet, all this behavior is viewed by many ‘patriotic Americans’ through a very one-sided lens, especially when juxtapositioned against modern events.

[hufnagel]

What then, would be determined as a revolutionary act or movement?

I would say that if your actions resemble Sherman marching through Georgia, especially with no clear objective other than "fuck shit up as much as possible", then you're probably on the wrong side of the argument. You could make an argument that the police, the NG, even the military is the Opposing Force (But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.), but Some Dood's random barber shop or bodega, I don't think so.

[OlongJohnson]

I think the African-American Democrat Mayor of Birmingham made a pretty strong statement about why certain freedoms will be temporarily curtailed after he went easy one night and things went to shit with protests turning to riots and looting.

Because the protests turned ugly, he said, there won’t be any second chances. “That means no more parades, no vigils, no more demonstrations,’’ he said. “Travel on public streets and roadways will be restricted, with exceptions for medical services, food or other essential needs. Exceptions will be made for essential workers.”


He said he wants it clear, especially for those who work downtown and particularly after 7 p.m., to be ready to provide documentation to show to police officers. “We’re not playing,’’ Woodfin said. “We’re going to enforce the law.”

The mayor lashed out at two groups of people – looters and anarchists. “A lot of these looters are local born in the city just like I was, live here in this city just like I do,’’ Woodfin said. “You know who you are. You took advantage of a situation.”


“And there’s the anarchists, the people who come into our city to destroy, not to take anything, simply to destroy, to break things, to set things on fire,’’ he said. “The City of Birmingham the Birmingham Police Department 100 percent support peaceful protesters. We outright reject the looters and the anarchists, and we will happily arrest you.”

@RevolverRob

As I said a couple days ago. At this point, if you're organizing a "protest," you're basically providing an engraved invitation and cover to bad actors, and that makes you part of the problem.

What message is your protest going to deliver that everyone in the country isn't well aware of by now? What more needs to be demonstrated about that's worth inviting the destroyers and thieves into anybody's neighborhood?

[blues]

Are you reading my mind?


It occurs to me, that the Boston Massacre was essentially a group of soldiers obeying lawful orders to disperse a threatening crowd. That raiding a ship in Boston Harbor and pouring tea leaves over the side is destruction of private property, by an armed (they had deadly weapons, in the form of tools, if they weren’t armed outright) gang of law-breakers.

Yet, all this behavior is viewed by many ‘patriotic Americans’ through a very one-sided lens, especially when juxtapositioned against modern events.

I claim no particular mind reading skills...

One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter. That's the way it's always been, and the way it's apt to continue to be. Everything is evaluated via the side of the lens the viewer happens to be looking through.

Patriot or Traitor. Same guy. Same act. Depends who's evaluating.

[shane45]

Was your goal to oppose the tea tax and the oppresion of govt or was it to live the thug life? The body language of the looting crowds I observed on TV in NYC strongly suggest the latter, meaning it was purely opportunistic criminal behaviour that could care less about the "cause".