Looking For Reasons
-
They had to beg to get the CVS they burned and looted also. They had to convince CVS that it would be welcome and was needed not only for prescription drugs, but groceries, etc. Think CVS will rebuild?
They had to beg to get the CVS they burned and looted also. They had to convince CVS that it would be welcome and was needed not only for prescription drugs, but groceries, etc. Think CVS will rebuild?
Reminds me of the Rodney King riots in L.A.
A large, locally owned grocery store was looted and burned to the ground. After the owner said he probably
wouldn't rebuild, he was accused of abandoning the community. But it was out of his hands; to get a loan to
rebuild he would require insurance, and no insurance company was going to give him coverage to rebuild in a
war zone. Same with getting a loan from the bank--no bank was going to loan him money to rebuild in that
neighborhood.
Closer to my home, there are frequent complaints about the lack of any grocery stores in the West End of Charleston, WV.
Seems that a few years ago the local thug population was stealing them blind; when the owners barred them from
entering the store, they hung around on the sidewalk in front and intimidated the customers. Result: the grocery stores
all left and haven't gone back.
-
I said the perception - not necessarily reality. And until we stop seeing all these black people being killed by police, and then that being excused by people saying "but he was a criminal, so I don't care" it'll stay that way.
People protesting the perceived unfair treatment of a sub-group of citizens are 'rioters' while people celebrating a sports team victory are 'revelers' - the difference being cause and skin colour.
While the perception persists, there will always be civil unrest.
I guess until they quit committing the lion's share of violent crime here that perception isn't going to change.
Of the hundreds or thousands of civilians beaten robbed or killed by black thugs every year, how many of them do you suppose are criminals? Or actually innocent?
WSS
-
Brother Steve: you might want to combine this with the ongoing thread RE: Baltimore.
What is the true "Root Cause(s)" of the disaster going on in Baltimore?.
Personally, I don't agree that the death of this individual was the match that set this fuse on fire.
If so, why did a Low Income Housing Complex, with Medical and Health Facilities get torched? I saw the Pastor and he talked about the 6-9 years it took to get this facility near completion (it is faith-based and required donations, , grants, etc.). This was built 'in the community' FOR the 'community'.
Why looting and burning privately owned (most likely, Black owned) businesses if their anger was truly directed at "The Man"?
Why chant, "We want answers", when the city already said their report would be ready THIS Friday?
Here are some possible (true) reasons for this debacle:
- A Mayor who refused to act.
- A Mayor, seemingly, more interested in allowing criminals to run the streets rather than doing her job.
- A Mayor sympathetic to the criminals
- It was a long winter and these criminals were looking to vent pent up energy
- Outside elements infiltrated the community to enrage those just looking for a reason to riot
- A President only too happy to criticize the Police but not at all prone to critique anything these, "people of color" do.
- A (former) Attorney General who did not do his job and, in effect, was a sympathetic listener to certain elements of society
Others?
Brother Steve: you might want to combine this with the ongoing thread RE: Baltimore.
What is the true "Root Cause(s)" of the disaster going on in Baltimore?.
Personally, I don't agree that the death of this individual was the match that set this fuse on fire.
If so, why did a Low Income Housing Complex, with Medical and Health Facilities get torched? I saw the Pastor and he talked about the 6-9 years it took to get this facility near completion (it is faith-based and required donations, , grants, etc.). This was built 'in the community' FOR the 'community'.
Why looting and burning privately owned (most likely, Black owned) businesses if their anger was truly directed at "The Man"?
Why chant, "We want answers", when the city already said their report would be ready THIS Friday?
Here are some possible (true) reasons for this debacle:
- A Mayor who refused to act.
- A Mayor, seemingly, more interested in allowing criminals to run the streets rather than doing her job.
- A Mayor sympathetic to the criminals
- It was a long winter and these criminals were looking to vent pent up energy
- Outside elements infiltrated the community to enrage those just looking for a reason to riot
- A President only too happy to criticize the Police but not at all prone to critique anything these, "people of color" do.
- A (former) Attorney General who did not do his job and, in effect, was a sympathetic listener to certain elements of society
Others?
All of the above
-
-
I enjoyed the video of the angry mom going up the side of her son's head in the middle of the riot.
Looked to me like she left work to go down and drag his ass out of there.
Unfortunately, I fear she is fighting a losing battle. It would have been nice to see a few dad's
kicking asses.
-
If a white mom was doing that to her son, she would be hunted down and arrested.
-
If a white mom was doing that to her son, she would be hunted down and arrested.
If a white mom was doing that to her son, she would be hunted down and arrested.
Not under those circumstances, Die.
-
an answer? at least an INCREDIBLE man
an answer? at least an INCREDIBLE man
This pastor is a man of faith that can look at the ashes and see revival. It still sickens me to think that people would burn a senior center to the ground that only benefits the community. The CVS that was destroyed and looted for example is only going to hurt the people living in that area now with it being gone. I have no sympathy for the criminals but I do have sympathy for those who will have to live there afterwards.
-
an answer? at least an INCREDIBLE man
This pastor is a man of faith that can look at the ashes and see revival. It still sickens me to think that people would burn a senior center to the ground that only benefits the community. The CVS that was destroyed and looted for example is only going to hurt the people living in that area now with it being gone. I have no sympathy for the criminals but I do have sympathy for those who will have to live there afterwards.
This pastor is a man of faith that can look at the ashes and see revival. It still sickens me to think that people would burn a senior center to the ground that only benefits the community. The CVS that was destroyed and looted for example is only going to hurt the people living in that area now with it being gone. I have no sympathy for the criminals but I do have sympathy for those who will have to live there afterwards.
+1
-
I said the perception - not necessarily reality. And until we stop seeing all these black people being killed by police, and then that being excused by people saying "but he was a criminal, so I don't care" it'll stay that way.
People protesting the perceived unfair treatment of a sub-group of citizens are 'rioters' while people celebrating a sports team victory are 'revelers' - the difference being cause and skin colour.
While the perception persists, there will always be civil unrest.
I guess until they quit committing the lion's share of violent crime here that perception isn't going to change.
Of the hundreds or thousands of civilians beaten robbed or killed by black thugs every year, how many of them do you suppose are criminals? Or actually innocent?
WSS
I said the perception - not necessarily reality. And until we stop seeing all these black people being killed by police, and then that being excused by people saying "but he was a criminal, so I don't care" it'll stay that way.
You're missing something pal..."but he was a criminal, so I don't care" only applies after a cop kills a thug without malice or wrongdoing and you crybabies wanna jump all over the cop.
Yeah, I'm glad Micheal Brown is dead.
People protesting the perceived unfair treatment of a sub-group of citizens are 'rioters' while people celebrating a sports team victory are 'revelers' - the difference being cause and skin colour.
Of all the inane liberal hogwash I've heard, that is the latest.
Aside from the fact that Ive never heard sports rioters being called nothing other than rioters, the only difference is that one group riots because they are angry morons, the other group riot because they are happy morons... geesh, you liberal race baiters can manufacture a black/white issue out of anything.
While the perception persists, there will always be civil unrest..
Well duh, when blacks commit the majority of violent crime then the "perception" that they do is valid don't ya think?
-
There is no one reason, why can't you guys understand that? It's been pent up for decades. This argument that well if only they didn't run or resist, well it's been proven that "most" of the time white perps do the same thing they don't get the same treatment. That's a generalization because there's some "glaring" exceptions I've already talked about before. But for the most part cops aren't shooting white guys in the back when they're running away. Fuck, you all remember that family of white people outside that Walmart who literally ganged up like 6 v 3 on some cops and even tried to wrestle the guns away.....if there was ever a time for cops to shoot that would qualify absolutely. White family black family whatever....those people needed to be shot, at least the ones trying to dislodge the officers guns from their holsters. But my my what remarkable constraint when it's white faces you're struggling with. Yes, that's just one incident I get it. BUt it was still stunning to see that kind of restraint in stark contrast to the video's preceding that one by just a few days....where dude's were getting shot while handcuffed on the ground, head stomped while cuffed, old man running away from an officer etc, etc.
In any case, the bottom line is that there has to be an immediate accounting for these incidents. You can't have a man die in your custody, no matter what he did....and think that you can just raise your hands in the air and say totally weird we have no idea how this happened. Somebody is covering for somebody else, of that there is no question. And that's why people are rioting, because of the constant air about police that well we don't really give a fuck go away.
-
Two people were shot in that incident at Walmart and one was killed by law enforcement.
-
Two people were shot in that incident at Walmart and one was killed by law enforcement.
Two people were shot in that incident at Walmart and one was killed by law enforcement.
ah I missed that, the video I saw no one had shot anybody even though the fight had been going on and at least one of the cops was standing up while his buddy was 2 on 1. So they did end up shooting, well good for them that was absolutely warranted.
-
Per that article though, the chief said he was "impressed" that the cops hadn't administered any street justice. Don't get me wrong I agree, I'm just a little miffed that people don't hold other officers in far far far far far less dangerous circumstances to those same standards. What's next? Some chief reviewing a tape saying boy I sure am impressed that officer didn't shoot that unarmed guy in the back as he was running away. Is that the lowered expectations now for cops?
-
There is no one reason, why can't you guys understand that? It's been pent up for decades. This argument that well if only they didn't run or resist, well it's been proven that "most" of the time white perps do the same thing they don't get the same treatment. That's a generalization because there's some "glaring" exceptions I've already talked about before. But for the most part cops aren't shooting white guys in the back when they're running away. Fuck, you all remember that family of white people outside that Walmart who literally ganged up like 6 v 3 on some cops and even tried to wrestle the guns away.....if there was ever a time for cops to shoot that would qualify absolutely. White family black family whatever....those people needed to be shot, at least the ones trying to dislodge the officers guns from their holsters. But my my what remarkable constraint when it's white faces you're struggling with. Yes, that's just one incident I get it. BUt it was still stunning to see that kind of restraint in stark contrast to the video's preceding that one by just a few days....where dude's were getting shot while handcuffed on the ground, head stomped while cuffed, old man running away from an officer etc, etc.
In any case, the bottom line is that there has to be an immediate accounting for these incidents. You can't have a man die in your custody, no matter what he did....and think that you can just raise your hands in the air and say totally weird we have no idea how this happened. Somebody is covering for somebody else, of that there is no question. And that's why people are rioting, because of the constant air about police that well we don't really give a fuck go away.
There is no one reason, why can't you guys understand that? It's been pent up for decades. This argument that well if only they didn't run or resist, well it's been proven that "most" of the time white perps do the same thing they don't get the same treatment. That's a generalization because there's some "glaring" exceptions I've already talked about before. But for the most part cops aren't shooting white guys in the back when they're running away. Fuck, you all remember that family of white people outside that Walmart who literally ganged up like 6 v 3 on some cops and even tried to wrestle the guns away.....if there was ever a time for cops to shoot that would qualify absolutely. White family black family whatever....those people needed to be shot, at least the ones trying to dislodge the officers guns from their holsters. But my my what remarkable constraint when it's white faces you're struggling with. Yes, that's just one incident I get it. BUt it was still stunning to see that kind of restraint in stark contrast to the video's preceding that one by just a few days....where dude's were getting shot while handcuffed on the ground, head stomped while cuffed, old man running away from an officer etc, etc.
In any case, the bottom line is that there has to be an immediate accounting for these incidents. You can't have a man die in your custody, no matter what he did....and think that you can just raise your hands in the air and say totally weird we have no idea how this happened. Somebody is covering for somebody else, of that there is no question. And that's why people are rioting, because of the constant air about police that well we don't really give a fuck go away.
Your not taking into account that out of the countless black arrests that occur each day, I bet 99% go without incidents of cop misbehaviour.
Use common sense man. I'll go slow.
Blacks commit the majority of violent crime. Agree?
That means more blacks are arrested then are white. With me so far?
That means the chances that police misbehavior occurs during a black arrest are greater than during a white arrest.
Hope that helped.
-
I said the perception - not necessarily reality. And until we stop seeing all these black people being killed by police, and then that being excused by people saying "but he was a criminal, so I don't care" it'll stay that way.
You're missing something pal..."but he was a criminal, so I don't care" only applies after a cop kills a thug without malice or wrongdoing and you crybabies wanna jump all over the cop.
Yeah, I'm glad Micheal Brown is dead.
People protesting the perceived unfair treatment of a sub-group of citizens are 'rioters' while people celebrating a sports team victory are 'revelers' - the difference being cause and skin colour.
Of all the inane liberal hogwash I've heard, that is the latest.
Aside from the fact that Ive never heard sports rioters being called nothing other than rioters, the only difference is that one group riots because they are angry morons, the other group riot because they are happy morons... geesh, you liberal race baiters can manufacture a black/white issue out of anything.
While the perception persists, there will always be civil unrest..
Well duh, when blacks commit the majority of violent crime then the "perception" that they do is valid don't ya think?
Stuart said:
You're missing something pal..."but he was a criminal, so I don't care" only applies after a cop kills a thug without malice or wrongdoing and you crybabies wanna jump all over the cop.
Yeah, I'm glad Micheal Brown is dead.
Standard retort is to call any black guy with any criminal record a thug, and declare that he had it coming. Maybe he's a bad dude, sure. But the punishment for selling cigarettes, or running from police, or resisting arrest is not death. Deadly force has not been necessary in the majority of these cases (I haven't seen one where it was necessary, but I haven't read all of them yet).
Of all the inane liberal hogwash I've heard, that is the latest.
Aside from the fact that Ive never heard sports rioters being called nothing other than rioters, the only difference is that one group riots because they are angry morons, the other group riot because they are happy morons... geesh, you liberal race baiters can manufacture a black/white issue out of anything.
Never heard of people being called revelers, not rioters? Then get your head out of your arse and read.
From OSU's victory - riot police called in to break up people 'celebrating' by setting fire to things and, among other things, tearing down goalposts. For some reason.
http://www.cleveland.com/osu/index.ssf/2015/01/tear_gas_used_on_revelers_at_o.html
http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/2015/01/13/us/ap-us-buckeyes-championship-reaction.html
From SF Giants in October - shootings, stabbings, again in 'celebration' of a sports victory.
http://www.sfgate.com/crime/article/S-F-picks-up-the-pieces-after-raucous-Giants-5858132.php
Lots of talk of 'police in riot gear' but all participants are 'revelers' who are doing nothing but breaking stuff for no cause. Yet, when it's done by people protesting something, they're rioters? I'm not condoning it, by the way, protests should be peaceful.
Well duh, when blacks commit the majority of violent crime then the "perception" that they do is valid don't ya think?
The perception that blacks commit the majority of crimes is valid, and backed up by statistics. The perception that just because you're black you're a thug? That logic doesn't hold so much.
"Nearly half of black males and almost 40 percent of white males in the U.S. are arrested by age 23"
http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2014-01/uosc-sho010314.php
Putting aside any institutional bias towards arresting black people, that's not a huge difference. 4/10 white guys, 5/10 black guys are arrested before age 23. That in itself is quite a shocking statistic, but there's not a huge disparity based on colour.
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better 💗
Register Login