zlacker

>>oftenw+(OP)
Could we please stop calling “protesters” all the people looting jewelry stores, Target, Nike, etc? These are not protesters, these are looters. Police should use any means at their disposal to protect lives and property from looters and rioters.

>>lsh123+gf
Could we please not waste a second of thought on the relatively minor issue of broken store windows until we sort the issue of cops indiscriminately killing black people?

If you care so much, how about petition your local police force to dump their tear gas at the range and stop firing on peaceful protesters, turning a lot of sitting people into a riot.

>>komali+Pf
I care about both. Two wrongs are two wrongs.

>>bluGil+rg
But hopefully you care about one much, much more than the other. They are not comparable in terms of needing discussion at this moment in history.

(Edit: In the event that you honestly don't know which one is the more important topic, right now or pretty much any other time - police frequently murdering black people or some store windows getting smashed and merch stolen - it's the police murdering black people.)

>>jaas+xh
I can't actually tell which one you're trying to say is more important right now. The case for "riots are the bigger problem right now" being that there is a whole lot more rioting and looting happening right now than there usually is, whereas the amount of police violence is currently significantly below the typical level (as a result of the coronavirus and everyone staying inside, but still).

>>Anthon+Xi
11,000 claims of abuse in the last 3 days just in seattle is low?

>>silver+Ek
You can't retroactively justify a riot based on police conflicts with rioters. It violates causality.

>>Anthon+Tm
I’m not so sure you can pin causality here. Anecdotally, the protests I’ve visited in the past have always been exactly as violent as the police initiates. A peaceful police usually means a peaceful protest in my experience. A violent police—on the other hand—can sometimes cause a violent protest, and even a riot.

Crowd control is a science. And you are sort of ignoring the science by claiming that rioters are the cause of the conflict.

>>runarb+ax
> Anecdotally, the protests I’ve visited in the past have always been exactly as violent as the police initiates.

Things escalate when someone escalates them. Sometimes that's the police. Sometimes it isn't. And even when it is, you still have to be willing to be provoked. Don't.

We have people in this thread justifying riots as "we tried kneeling at football games" as if there is some kind of reasonable progression from there to looting and burning down churches.

>>Anthon+7H
Like I said, crowd control is a science. Even if you have violent actors at the protest, it is still a failure of crowd control if the whole protest turns violent.

Reacting when violated is a natural reaction. With a group this big you cannot think in individual terms. If provoked there and there is a non-zero chance you’ll see a reaction, you will see a reaction. And now you have a positive feedback loop between the police and protestors that may escalate into riots.