zlacker

>>fortra+(OP)
Maximum sentence is 10 years, she's unlikely to get that, but _minimum_ is 5 years IIRC. That's a _long_ time. And then you're a felon and you can't find a decent job. What was the calculus there, I wonder? Under what circumstances would a person rationally consider torching a police cruiser to be worth the risk of 5 years in the slammer?

>>m0zg+Wc
Perhaps when prioritising their morality and cause, over what's beneficial for them?

>>coldte+Bd
What "morality" or "cause" are you talking about? She burned a police cruiser.

>>m0zg+ce
In America right now there are ongoing protests and riots over the conduct of domestic police departments, specifically their proclivity toward extrajudicial execution and battery of black people in the streets. Damaging police property including their cars and precincts is a powerful (if legally risky) expression of that anger.

>>coffee+4g
We are On 21st century, we know violence doesn’t stop violence, crime doesn’t stop crime. People should use modern tools to reduce racial issues. Like voting or social media’s, never burn a state property. Tax money could be used for better things But now the police department will buy 2 more cars.

>>rafael+6k
>We are On 21st century, we know violence doesn’t stop violence, crime doesn’t stop crime.

No, we don't know that.

Historically it has been violence that stopped violence, and crime (like toppling an unjust government, breaking segregation laws, etc) that stopped crime.

>People should use modern tools to reduce racial issues. Like voting or social media’s, never burn a state property.

Yeah, they've tried blogging about it. There are also tons of books on the matter, vlogs, articles, etc. They voted Obama twice. Didn't work.

A few months of angry riots and a few burned down police departments though, could send a very clear message to politicians and police chiefs, and help change laws to restrict police abuse.