zlacker

>>wolfgk+(OP)
So we're just going to pretend that cities aren't going up in flames, businesses aren't being destroyed and innocent protestors, rioters and police aren't being killed?

There is an extremely blurry line between peaceful and violent protests. Unfortunately all of the chaos of recent days that the WaPo and others (Obama, etc.) seem all too eager to sweep under the rug has ruined things for everyone.

>>hughmu+O5
I hope there is as at least as much of that pretending and sweeping under the rug as there us when phrases like "most cops are good" ,"it's only a few bad apples" are used and when cops are not charged with a crime after being filmed in broad daylight commiting heinous crimes that would cause any civilian to rot in prison, or after being charged they don't even make it to trial because a grand jury preemptively aquitted them. I think all that counts as sweeping under the rug. But it seems you care more about property than human life being swept under the rug?

As someone said, maybe the right perspective is "it's too bad all this property is needlessly destroyed, but how can we let so many innocent people die, protestors get assaulted for no reason, journalists losing their eyes and being beaten and detained on american soil for doing their job?" Priorities my friend, says a lot about you. I am sure a country that can afford multi trillion dollar wars and bailouts can handle a few insured propertied burning down. Heck, some people might even profit with the right insurance.

>>badrab+Du
Democratic mechanisms to address these issues already exist, and they are in the hands of each State's legislature.

If you hold the Federal Government responsible, then you want to put this power in the hands of Federal Legislature. Are you ready to forsake the federal structure of US Government?

>>hexago+9M
That is exactly what these protests are - part of the democratic process. To show the majority, who are not affected by police criminality through a combination of race and chance, the severity of the grievances by the minority who are.

As for the decentralization argument - I really don't want to be on this side of the states' rights debate, but that ship sailed a long time ago with regards to civil rights. It's not terribly unreasonable that individual rights are protected by state governments ior the federal government when an individual state is unwilling. Although we are currently witnessing a direct failure mode of this centralization, with the federal government having gone AWOL with regards to enforcing the law and even inciting lawlessness.