zlacker

>>danso+(OP)
As someone of mixed ethnicity who, if I was there could easily be victimized by a senseless mob to whom I owe nothing and have committed no crime against.. yea I am not happy with how the mainstream media promotes and covers this story, downplaying the victims of the chaos and sympathizing with outpourings of anger even if illegal. To clarify, looters should not be shot, law should prevail, and the policeman involved in the original incident should be investigated.. but the mainstream media is to my mind basically behind the looters, and I know if by chance I or someone like me were to be caught in the crossfire and killed, the mainstream media, posturing as champions of justice, would just implicitly shrug. So yea I can't help but feel disaffected by this coverage, no matter how vile the originating incident.

>>darepu+3q1
This entire event is effectively self-defense from a community that has felt terrorized by the police for decades.

It could've been easily prevented by actually arresting someone that committed abject murder, but the city and the police chose to instead defend a man who has killed multiple people in the past and got away with it scott-free. So when people feel like justice no longer exists, there should be no surprise that they get angry.

It doesn't help that the police also employ agent provocateurs whom help incite riots and looting so that they can use more violent tactics with glee.

>>fzeror+9u1
Looting private businesses and setting fires isn’t “self-defense”.

>>philwe+cy1
An organism that is attacked can self defend in impredictible ways, there will be collaterals.

>>baby+2z1
That still doesn't make looting self-defense.

>>efraim+ZC1
If you see the community, or the people, as a single organism. Then yes it is reacting in harmful way to an attack. And it is hard to control where the harm is directed.

>>baby+uE2
You’re talking about human beings who are responsible for their own actions.

>>philwe+Ef3
And yet people generalize the action of a few to the whole protest.

>>baby+qV3
Yes, especially when they say things like, "If you see the community, or the people, as a single organism..."

>>philwe+NJ4
it's like you're actively trying not to understand my comment?

>>baby+2l5
Not at all. If looting and vandalism is “the action of a few”, then it doesn’t make sense to characterize it as “self-defense” on behalf of some collective “organism”. It’s like you switched sides and started arguing my point in the middle of the argument.

>>philwe+Oo5
> If looting and vandalism is “the action of a few”, then it doesn’t make sense to characterize it as “self-defense” on behalf of some collective “organism”.

Then we'll have to agree to disagree, opportunists don't exist without a crowd.