New Zealand, Texas… you’ve got a thing for sheep, don’t you Terr?
The owners of the businesses that were looted and burned while the touchy-feely-bleeding-heart-hands-off Highway Patrol cops sat there and watched them burn might beg to disagree, Gandhi.
Gandhi? You used Gandhi as an insult?
Snerk.
Maybe you could get really down and dirty and call him Desmond Tutu or something. Or Dalia Lama. Boy, that would hurt.
Because I own what is mine and don’t own what is theirs?
Seriously, I don’t get this question. Is it supposed to be a gotcha?
They should’ve considered the possibility that supporting a police force which murders jaywalkers might lead to a certain amount of unfocused anger on the part of those in the targeted population.
Crappy cops make everyone less safe, even those small businesses that are people too, my friend.
If you don’t understand the question, there is no chance you would understand the answer. Others will, others have, and we will try and get along without you as best we can.
he did, he used Gandhi as an insult. seriously, back when he referred to “slitting throats” I was sure:
TROLL
Again, do you have some evidence of a murder having occurred that the FBI has not been made aware of? If so, why are you sitting on it instead of sharing it with them?
Yes, I’m using the name of the man who believed the Jews in Nazi-occupied Europe should have committed mass suicide as an insult.
Sight hijack: I understand why Gandhi is condemned for statements like that, but… Isn’t that what pacifism is all about? No war or violence under ANY circumstance?
I will also note that the linked article calls the discussion over Gandhi’s statements and opinions “complex.”
You’re acting like shooting someone to defend my stuff and shooting someone to take their stuff are somehow equivalent actions. They’re obviously not. In the first case I’m defending myself from a thief; in the second case I AM a thief, and a murderer to boot.
Lethal force may not be justified if my stuff is being stolen. But asking whether or not I would murder people to take their property is a complete non sequitor.
So if there is a coherent point you are trying to make, stop being an obtuse pseudo-intellectual and explain it. Otherwise, admit you are babbling and move on.
I’ve made it, and I do not require your approval or your permission. My name is right there, nobody makes you read it. Skip right along, don’t waste your time, I’ll get over it.
Just for my own part, I always find it amazing when someone places a higher value on things than people.
+1
Offered for moral encouragement.
Funny you should mention that. I appreciate the irony that the elucidator is refusing to elucidate a non-lucid point.
This is dumb as fuck. Even for you. The answer is that I have no moral claim to something that belongs to someone else. I do have moral claim to what is mine.
From what I can tell it seems that most of the businesses looted were corporate or chain stores like the Quik Trip. QT’s are the equivalent of 7-11’s.
Now they showed a nearby tattoo parlor with about 10 men outside, some black, and they didnt go near that store. Same with some other privately owned stores. Plus in many cases some of the peaceful demonstrators have stood guard outside private businesses.
Well to be honest, there were many people holding up there cell phone cameras recording the action so they might not actually need to send in a highly visible news crew. Ive seen situations were the number of reporters way outnumbered the people they were reporting on. So you might see a dozen reporters surrounding some guy dancing around. Or lets say some cops are trying to wrestle someone to the ground a a dozen reporters swarm in and get in the way.
What news crews SHOULD do is have reporters on staff from various backgrounds and races who can easily mix in with a crowd and get first hand stories.
I don’t think it’s necessarily corporate vs. private; doubt any of the looters think on that level. What are they going to do with a tattoo iron? Looting a Kwik-E-Mart or Best Buy will yield more tangible goods. Let’s be honest, they don’t ply their craft to make a political statement, but to profit. The reality is, corporate chains own the most shit, thus they make the juiciest targets.
Well, so much for “we’re not going to enforce the law with tear gas”;
It’s almost as if shaking hands and kissing babies isn’t all it takes to stop a riot.