Appropriate response to rioting

[jimbogumbo]

Are you kidding me? 

I saw the police tear gassing them, punching them, and a cop actually shot and killed a woman breaching the private part of the chambers through a broken window.

Also, the arrests are just beginning.  When we had BLM riots in my city, by the end of the night I think only something like 5 or 6 people had actually been arrested. 

It's just not true that there was so much more restraint here compared to BLM riots.

And for the record - I thought the cops should have shot the BLM rioters and I wish they would have shot (more) of these too. (Well, what I really mean is, it should be completely legal and a best practice for them to do it.)  Rioting is rioting.  It's a straw man argument that people are only in favor of that and prosecutions when it's black people doing it.  Lock all of these up with long prison terms!

She was shot INSIDE the Capitol after breaking in. The gassing was also on people who had broken in.

I saw one punch, when someone was knocking guards to the ground.

Did you not notice there were no long line of police in riot gear, with batons, gassing and macing the giant crowd surrounding the building and on the steps? Did you not see the bearded man breaking a window with a shield about an hour and a half after the building was under siege with no police around him?

Contrast that with citizens on the street having all that done to them this summer. Suggesting the response this time was equivalent is just bizarre.

The response has not been equivalent several times. Recall folks with weapons storming in to the statehouses in Michigan and Idaho. The differences in responses are obvious to everyone except those in complete denial.

[lightning]

. . .

How is it "whataboutism" to say that all violent protest should be dealt with summarily? The Jan. 6 rioters don't deserve any more sympathy than anyone else involved in that kind of violent rioting.

It should be obvious.

But if you need an example, look what happened with the thread that you started. It sucked part of the fora into defending BLM protests, instead of keeping the focus on Trump, Republicans, MAGA, ....

It only "sucked part of the fora into defending BLM protests" inasmuch as they felt the need to defend BLM protests. Anyone willing to renounce violent protests for any cause are free to be as explicit as they want about the Jan. 6 events. 

Trying to make two different sets of rules is always going to be more complicated than making one set of rules to be applied consistently.

It looks like we can find common ground with a statement where we can both agree. Handling big riots are complicated, yes. We can agree with that, also.

So, let's start a simple application of the statement where we find common ground:

Let's start with the simplest of scenarios.

If a 12-year-old African American boy, at an urban playground, points his toy gun at a cop, the cop will apply the same rule of engagement as if it were a white 12-year-old boy, at a suburban playground, pointing his toy gun at the cop.

Easy peasy, yes?

[mahagonny]

Are you kidding me? 

I saw the police tear gassing them, punching them, and a cop actually shot and killed a woman breaching the private part of the chambers through a broken window.

Also, the arrests are just beginning.  When we had BLM riots in my city, by the end of the night I think only something like 5 or 6 people had actually been arrested. 

It's just not true that there was so much more restraint here compared to BLM riots.

And for the record - I thought the cops should have shot the BLM rioters and I wish they would have shot (more) of these too. (Well, what I really mean is, it should be completely legal and a best practice for them to do it.)  Rioting is rioting.  It's a straw man argument that people are only in favor of that and prosecutions when it's black people doing it.  Lock all of these up with long prison terms!

She was shot INSIDE the Capitol after breaking in. The gassing was also on people who had broken in.

I saw one punch, when someone was knocking guards to the ground.

Did you not notice there were no long line of police in riot gear, with batons, gassing and macing the giant crowd surrounding the building and on the steps? Did you not see the bearded man breaking a window with a shield about an hour and a half after the building was under siege with no police around him?

Contrast that with citizens on the street having all that done to them this summer. Suggesting the response this time was equivalent is just bizarre.

The response has not been equivalent several times. Recall folks with weapons storming in to the statehouses in Michigan and Idaho. The differences in responses are obvious to everyone except those in complete denial.

Let's see what things are like in preparation for the inauguration, now that we've had a better look at the lay of the land.
I believe it would be hard for most of us here to speculate about how much security should have been there Wednesday, given that nothing like this has ever happened before.
As for the summer, of course if one anticipates not only a demonstrating group but also a counter demonstrating group then that's another thing for law enforcement to try and prepare for. Protecting the peaceful demonstrators. But it's not something I could assess very well yet. You do have to have police with all the equipment because, who knows when you show up to a mostly peaceful demonstration, that a mostly peaceful demonstration could break out!
What is the head butting about here anyway? Can't we agree that you should have the personnel you need, and learn from the mistakes that were made?

[Cheerful]

nevermind, deleted

[ergative]

Also: property damage is entirely irrelevant. When you gather up a very large group of people, some property damage is almost inevitable, and it's basically impossible for anyone to stop it from happening. But it's also not a big deal.

It's no myth that people on the left, democratic voters, do not want to prosecute all of the guilty rioters. Para just admitted it. As well as no interest in the difference between accidentally knocking over a public wastebasket because people are pressing against you and it couldn't be helped versus smashing windows so you can steal. And then getting defended in the media for seeking restitution for debts owed because of slavery.

Broken property can be replaced. It's not the kind of crime that merits a response resulting in loss of life or limb.

By that standard, bombing empty buildings is no big deal.

It isn't a very big deal when nobody is hurt or put in danger, no. It's not a good thing, obviously, but it's also nowhere near as big a deal as actually hurting someone.

Case in point: big collective national yawn at the bombing on Christmas day that leveled a block of Nashville and disrupted telecommunications, but didn't hurt anyone because the buildings were empty.

[Kron3007]

I don't know why people are equating this event with BLM (well, I have an idea).  In the BLM protests we saw protests that sometimes turned violent.  In this case, you had a group of of "protestors" that stormed your capital building while it was full of your government officials.  These are not the same, and I find it crazy that there was not a stronger response. 

If the security forces didn't see this potentially happening, they were not doing their job.  I find it remarkable that a rag tag group of protesters would be allowed to breach the security of what should be one of the most well protected buildings in your country. 

[writingprof]

Here's a strategic question for you Marxists.  When Comma-Luh implies in a tweet that the Capitol rioters were not tear-gassed*, is she aware that there are numerous videos of Capitol rioters being tear-gassed?  Is she stupid, or does she think we're stupid?  Also, if there's really so much racism out there, why are people constantly having to make up instances of racism?

*"We have witnessed two systems of justice: one that let extremists storm the U.S. Capitol yesterday, and another that released tear gas on peaceful protestors last summer."

[apl68]

I fear that IF shop owners were encouraged to shoot looters, that extreme looters would shoot the owners first and then lead the rest to loot.  So in addition to property damage, even more lives would be lost and the journey to Mad Max land would be further along.

Yes.  The very last thing we need is to encourage vigilante response to rioting.  That would be another dangerous escalation.

As horrifying as the riots of the past 12 months have been, it's really extraordinary that the loss of life hasn't been considerably worse.  That tells me that all of the parties involved--law enforcement, would-be citizen vigilantes, and the majority of BOTH blocs of protestors--have been using more restraint than they've been credited with.  Parasaurolphus pointed out above that the great majority of BLM demonstrations did not lead to rioting.  The same holds true for the great majority of right-wing protests as well.

[marshwiggle]

I fear that IF shop owners were encouraged to shoot looters, that extreme looters would shoot the owners first and then lead the rest to loot.  So in addition to property damage, even more lives would be lost and the journey to Mad Max land would be further along.

Yes.  The very last thing we need is to encourage vigilante response to rioting.  That would be another dangerous escalation.

As horrifying as the riots of the past 12 months have been, it's really extraordinary that the loss of life hasn't been considerably worse.  That tells me that all of the parties involved--law enforcement, would-be citizen vigilantes, and the majority of BOTH blocs of protestors--have been using more restraint than they've been credited with.  Parasaurolphus pointed out above that the great majority of BLM demonstrations did not lead to rioting.  The same holds true for the great majority of right-wing protests as well.

My gut feeling (I'd love to hear from any sociologistsor psychologists who can confirm or deny) is that riots collect a lot of people who just want to break stuff and/or steal stuff. So the real angry zealots who are willing to face getting arrested or worse are a relatively small part of the crowd. (Think of all the people taking selfies of themselves rioting and posting them online; clearly it's more about the "excitement" of the event than the political cause behind it.)

I imagine the riots with lots of bloodshed have a higher proportion of zealots.

[apl68]

I fear that IF shop owners were encouraged to shoot looters, that extreme looters would shoot the owners first and then lead the rest to loot.  So in addition to property damage, even more lives would be lost and the journey to Mad Max land would be further along.

Yes.  The very last thing we need is to encourage vigilante response to rioting.  That would be another dangerous escalation.

As horrifying as the riots of the past 12 months have been, it's really extraordinary that the loss of life hasn't been considerably worse.  That tells me that all of the parties involved--law enforcement, would-be citizen vigilantes, and the majority of BOTH blocs of protestors--have been using more restraint than they've been credited with.  Parasaurolphus pointed out above that the great majority of BLM demonstrations did not lead to rioting.  The same holds true for the great majority of right-wing protests as well.

My gut feeling (I'd love to hear from any sociologistsor psychologists who can confirm or deny) is that riots collect a lot of people who just want to break stuff and/or steal stuff. So the real angry zealots who are willing to face getting arrested or worse are a relatively small part of the crowd. (Think of all the people taking selfies of themselves rioting and posting them online; clearly it's more about the "excitement" of the event than the political cause behind it.)

I imagine the riots with lots of bloodshed have a higher proportion of zealots.

That may be a factor, but I doubt it's as simple as that.  Unwise escalation or panic by the authorities is often responsible for much of the bloodshed at a riot.  Like the Boston Massacre, where rioters pelting a detachment of soldiers panicked them into firing into the crowd.  Then you have murder riots where members of a particular ethnicity or religion are deliberately targeted for mass murder.  We have some frightful examples of that in our own history, and they still happen often in other parts of the world. 

[mahagonny]

Here's a strategic question for you Marxists.  When Comma-Luh implies in a tweet that the Capitol rioters were not tear-gassed*, is she aware that there are numerous videos of Capitol rioters being tear-gassed?  Is she stupid, or does she think we're stupid?  Also, if there's really so much racism out there, why are people constantly having to make up instances of racism?

*"We have witnessed two systems of justice: one that let extremists storm the U.S. Capitol yesterday, and another that released tear gas on peaceful protestors last summer."

Darn good questions. I have a friend on FB who appears to be unable to discuss this week's events without insisting everything we've been through is about racism. This is mania, and it has become common. This is professional health care worker with expensive college education. (!) The idea is, the bogeyman of unacknowledged, as yet unrecognized racism is lurking everywhere and threatens to outpace our efforts to spot him. Very similar to the communism phobia of McCarthyism.

[Sun_Worshiper]

Here's a strategic question for you Marxists.  When Comma-Luh implies in a tweet that the Capitol rioters were not tear-gassed*, is she aware that there are numerous videos of Capitol rioters being tear-gassed?  Is she stupid, or does she think we're stupid?  Also, if there's really so much racism out there, why are people constantly having to make up instances of racism?

*"We have witnessed two systems of justice: one that let extremists storm the U.S. Capitol yesterday, and another that released tear gas on peaceful protestors last summer."

Darn good questions. I have a friend on FB who appears to be unable to discuss this week's events without insisting everything we've been through is about racism. This is mania, and it has become common. This is professional health care worker with expensive college education. (!) The idea is, the bogeyman of unacknowledged, as yet unrecognized racism is lurking everywhere and threatens to outpace our efforts to spot him. Very similar to the communism phobia of McCarthyism.

Kind of like you two: Unable to discuss this week's events without irrelevant references to BLM or the left. This thread as one of several examples.

[ergative]

Comma-Luh

What are you trying to do here? Do you actually want to engage in discussion, or are you just trolling?

[jimbogumbo]

Here's a strategic question for you Marxists.  When Comma-Luh implies in a tweet that the Capitol rioters were not tear-gassed*, is she aware that there are numerous videos of Capitol rioters being tear-gassed?  Is she stupid, or does she think we're stupid?  Also, if there's really so much racism out there, why are people constantly having to make up instances of racism?

*"We have witnessed two systems of justice: one that let extremists storm the U.S. Capitol yesterday, and another that released tear gas on peaceful protestors last summer."

I stated much the same thing. They were gassed inside the building, the night before, and several hours after it all began. My frustration is and was with the lack of response at the beginning, which was the result of seriously poor planning. A Politico story asserts that the Capitol Police have over 2,000 personnel and a budget of over $460,000,000. Why were they not there in gear, and why was the crowd allowed to rush the building without gas and flash-bangs being deployed? Why were other forces (such as the Virginia State Police) not there earlier?

[mahagonny]

Here's a strategic question for you Marxists.  When Comma-Luh implies in a tweet that the Capitol rioters were not tear-gassed*, is she aware that there are numerous videos of Capitol rioters being tear-gassed?  Is she stupid, or does she think we're stupid?  Also, if there's really so much racism out there, why are people constantly having to make up instances of racism?

*"We have witnessed two systems of justice: one that let extremists storm the U.S. Capitol yesterday, and another that released tear gas on peaceful protestors last summer."

Darn good questions. I have a friend on FB who appears to be unable to discuss this week's events without insisting everything we've been through is about racism. This is mania, and it has become common. This is professional health care worker with expensive college education. (!) The idea is, the bogeyman of unacknowledged, as yet unrecognized racism is lurking everywhere and threatens to outpace our efforts to spot him. Very similar to the communism phobia of McCarthyism.

Kind of like you two: Unable to discuss this week's events without irrelevant references to BLM or the left. This thread as one of several examples.

Well, how about if Marshwiggle had posed the question this way: 'what do you suppose are the thought processes of law enforcement with regard to responding to rioting? And what if any will be the effect on their thought processes of the events in 2020 and 2021 going forward?' The questions he posed may be taken as an effort to equate the scenarios.  Jan 6 and summer 2020. But irrespective of posters and their sensibility the police, state attorneys general, governors, et al will certainly be talking about this among themselves. What should they be thinking about, in your view? We pay their salaries.