| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
And that's it? These people are bad people. Shoot them or send them to jail. Don't ask any further questions. Don't bother finding out why there was a riot in the first place or whether anything can be done to avoid future riots. After all they're just bad people. Sometimes bad people riot. There's nothing you can do about it except crack down harder, right?
I am not saying that the rioters should not be held accountable for their actions. They should be. Criminal proceedings are definitely in order.
Nor am I saying that the riots were justified. Or that, even if justified, they were a logical practical way of betting the situation. Far from it.But there are social conditions that make riots more likely. If you want to reduce the chance of rioting, those conditions should be changed.
None of this is new.
With respect, my friend, we know why these riots are happening. One group of rioters, rocking their neighborhoos and burning down 100-year-old businesses in response to a drug dealer losing a shootput with cops, followed by other groups noting that they can cause mayhem with very little i the way of repercussions. A mob mentality takes over, lower elements seek whatever reason they have to vent frustration. Maybe some of them didn't get up in the morning thinking "I'm gonna break a window and throw rocks at the police today", but their involvement in mob violence still threatens the innocents in their community and is still their decision. They deserve jail, and in violent areas, they still deserve to be bean bagged until they quit rioting. And if a man rushes a cop with a pipe, he deserves to be shot. You can eulogize that he wasn't really a bad person, just got caught up in it all. But that's the sort of nonjudgemental rationalization that allows crime to spread and the welfare state to succeed. A man that steals cash from wounded kids lying in the streets is a bad person.
Look, I get the argument that a broken group dynamic can make seemingly normal people do weird things. But we're all innocent until we're guilty. A person that does bad things repeatedly is a bad person. A person that does heinous things once has much to answer for and very little defense. Furthermore, we all suffer stress and most of us are exposed to some combination of violence, injustice and pressure. We don't normally respond by taking tvs from electronics stores and setting cars on fire. Those acts reveal low character. When someone cracks an old lady on the head for the cash in her wallet, we can go ahead and judge that.
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Gailbraithe, we agree on something? How the hell did that happen. I guarentee you we disagree on why people arent buying anymore, though.
I think it's because they don't have jobs. What other possible reason could it be?
If you want to invest in infrastructure because we need it (bridges collapsing, roads undrivable, etc), I'm all behind that. But using infrastructure as a means of increasing the labor force or getting money moving, I have to disagree. During the Great Depression, I'm sure it worked well enough, but nowadays, you don't have 800 guys working to build a project by hand, instead you have 8 guys running machines. You now get the average cost of a job created by such things as $200,000 per job. Because all the money is going into largely expensive projects, but not into large individual salaries or large numbers of smaller salaries.
This is a good point, which is why we need a carefully structured stimulus package with a Buy American clause that directs the money for the machine towards American manufacturing jobs.
Like right now, here in Seattle, we're planning to build this massive tunnel to replace the Alaska Way Viaduct (a major commercial traffic route) because its a huge raised highway that was damaged in the quakes we had a decade or so again, and it'll likely come down San Francisco style if we have another serious quake. And the biggest single expense is, of course, the tunnel boring machine. Which we're buying from Japan. Now, I actually don't really have a problem with that, because Japan is cool in my book, but I'm patriot enough to wish it had gone to an American company with American factories.
Since a lot of the manufacturing in America is gone, one thing we could do is create investment bonds to fund a manufacturing bank, which would be under private ownership -- specifically worker ownership -- to build the tools and machinery we need for these infrastructure projects. Then they could expand and reinvigorate the American manufacturing sector by competing with these destructive transnational corporations, which could lead to a permanent solution to many of the problems of corporatism, while preserving both the free enterprise system and the benefits of corporate economies of scale (whcih are key to meeting consumer demand in a nation of 300 million+).
The Mondragon Corporation is a model of the sort of thing I'm talking about. It's basically a worker-owned corporation rather than a share-holder owned corporation, so its produces far more social stability than the nearly sociopathic megacorporations we've come to know and loathe. And it's a 100% free market entity, so its not a growth of government at all, which should make conservatives happy.
And I guess I'd challenge the notion that replacing Obama with someone who intends to restore the economy to power is anything close to tyranny. In fact, don't you think Constitutional conservatives would argue that the best plan is to limit the role of government in small business development, and to stop using Randesque phrases like "windfall profits", "fair share", "shared sacrifice", etc?
Wow. A lot of movement in this thread since church started. Back with mre.
|
And that's it? These people are bad people. Shoot them or send them to jail.
I'd hand them over to the residents, to deal with as they see fit.
If the jails are full, cuff them to the railings outside the shops they looted, the homes they burned.If their rioting is caused by a common grass-roots dissatisfaction with the government, then they have nothing to fear, right? They'll get tea and cake, and sympathy.
If, on the other hand, they are thieving, murdering scum, then they'll get what they deserve.
Don't ask any further questions. Don't bother finding out why there was a riot in the first place or whether anything can be done to avoid future riots. After all they're just bad people. Sometimes bad people riot. There's nothing you can do about it except crack down harder, right?
You could sterilise them, so they don't breed.
But there are social conditions that make riots more likely. If you want to reduce the chance of rioting, those conditions should be changed.
The only 'social conditions' these vermin will accept, is 'You fools work all your lives, and I take everything you own, before pissing on the rest'.
And even then, they'll be whinging that they're 'held down by the system', or some such crock of BS.
Saw a reference to a 50-1 joblessness to opening ratio in the first affected riot area. I have to point out two things:
First, UK unemployment lasts forever. So long as you can fill out your paperwork, there's no end to the benefit, which is a broken fund running a huge chunk of the budget. So evaluating government stats on how many unemployed there are has an inherent flaw. I am not saying the statistic is wrong in its raw form. I am saying it's tough to get truth from a labor department that releases single indicators. How about (my second comment) an evaluation of how a broken system like eternal unemployment impacts the growth of business? After all, offer people government benefits in exchange for not working and what happens? Crime, drugs, unemployment, broken homes, and ultimately the destruction of civility and civil service in a region. Like right outside Chicago, or even my home city of Tulsa.
Which I think is a scary thought, because a few here have predicted riots here in the US, and I think that some powder kegs only need an excuse. And I hope we find some solutions to our problems and start dealing honestly with these communities before that does happen.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Really? The messageboard's Culture Warriors are picking London as their new battlefield of choice?
Here's a view from the coalface that offers more then just simple soundbites.
Typical overprivileged Tory. "Oh boo hoo hoo, why won't those darn poors just pull themselves up by the bootstraps and get a job?" The height of hilarity is that she then accuses others of their "privilege" right after whining about how brave and hard it is to be an upperclass Tory.
Did you miss earlier when I stated that there's one job opening for every fifty four unemployed in some towns?
Oh hey, there's this.
"Go and volunteer in a primary school and sit with those who are struggling to read, go and become a school governor, go and do a bit of training to become an adult advocate so that when one of these kids goes through the judicial system and their parents can't or won't participate in the process, you can be called on to speak to and for them. "
Done that, haven't done that yet, done that.
Woops!
Saw a reference to a 50-1 joblessness to opening ratio in the first affected riot area. I have to point out two things:
First, UK unemployment lasts forever. So long as you can fill out your paperwork, there's no end to the benefit, which is a broken fund running a huge chunk of the budget. So evaluating government stats on how many unemployed there are has an inherent flaw. I am not saying the statistic is wrong in its raw form. I am saying it's tough to get truth from a labor department that releases single indicators. How about (my second comment) an evaluation of how a broken system like eternal unemployment impacts the growth of business? After all, offer people government benefits in exchange for not working and what happens? Crime, drugs, unemployment, broken homes, and ultimately the destruction of civility and civil service in a region. Like right outside Chicago, or even my home city of Tulsa.
You're right silly me people enjoy being unemployed and unemployable, they enjoy poverty, they enjoy having no viable income. People just turn to drugs because they have so much money they don't know what to do with it, and there's broken homes not because the police overwhelmingly target minority men over white men (despite white men being far more likely to have drugs on them in the car), but because them uppity poors just hate families!
Wait no, that's wrong, and you're full of it. You're also dehumanizing them to the point of sociopathy. And yeah, having an utter lack of empathy for other human beings is sociopathy.
Which I think is a scary thought, because a few here have predicted riots here in the US, and I think that some powder kegs only need an excuse. And I hope we find some solutions to our problems and start dealing honestly with these communities before that does happen.
We won't find solutions if you refuse to examine the rioters as people and not just "vague criminality"
I'd hand them over to the residents, to deal with as they see fit.
If the jails are full, cuff them to the railings outside the shops they looted, the homes they burned.
If their rioting is caused by a common grass-roots dissatisfaction with the government, then they have nothing to fear, right? They'll get tea and cake, and sympathy.
Yes, vigilantism is known for it's success.
Wait, no it's not, it's awful and unjust in every sense.
If, on the other hand, they are thieving, murdering scum, then they'll get what they deserve.
You could sterilise them, so they don't breed.
Is it Godwinning if someone is literally advocating genocide and sterilization?
The only 'social conditions' these vermin will accept, is 'You fools work all your lives, and I take everything you own, before pissing on the rest'.
And even then, they'll be whinging that they're 'held down by the system', or some such crock of BS.
That is a fairly accurate description of the rich, yes.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I'd like to see a social service be created where the government offers $5,000 to men if they have a vasectomy and put their sperm on ice (so they can have kids later if they want). If they pay the $5,000 back, they get the sperm back.You could sterilise them, so they don't breed.
You are advocating literally wiping out the poor and non-whites.
Congrats.
I'd like to see a social service be created where the government offers $5,000 to men if they have a vasectomy and put their sperm on ice (so they can have kids later if they want). If they pay the $5,000 back, they get the sperm back.You could sterilise them, so they don't breed.
Today, in Dallas, Tx, it was only a high of 103 or 104; thats 39 or 40 celsius; I say "only" because it's been at least 100 degrees for 35 or more days, and it's been 108 two days ago......
Somebody heard crying outside this house in Dallas. Police were summoned; they found a 2 year old outside, unsupervised. They found a 6 month old baby crying on the kitchen floor inside.
They found the mother and two friends passed out in the bedroom, surrounded by a cloud of marijuana smoke.
|
|
Today, in Dallas, Tx, it was only a high of 103 or 104; thats 39 or 40 celsius; I say "only" because it's been at least 100 degrees for 35 or more days, and it's been 108 two days ago......I'd like to see a social service be created where the government offers $5,000 to men if they have a vasectomy and put their sperm on ice (so they can have kids later if they want). If they pay the $5,000 back, they get the sperm back.You could sterilise them, so they don't breed.
From this I'd've thought you were talking about the unviability of sperm on ice because of heat waves.
If you want to invest in infrastructure because we need it (bridges collapsing, roads undrivable, etc), I'm all behind that. But using infrastructure as a means of increasing the labor force or getting money moving, I have to disagree. During the Great Depression, I'm sure it worked well enough, but nowadays, you don't have 800 guys working to build a project by hand, instead you have 8 guys running machines.
So what you're saying is, "We should BURN all machines."
|
|
That is a fairly accurate description of the rich, yes.The only 'social conditions' these vermin will accept, is 'You fools work all your lives, and I take everything you own, before pissing on the rest'.
And even then, they'll be whinging that they're 'held down by the system', or some such crock of BS.
OH SNAP!!!
I think I have a man-crush on you, Prof.
Wait, no it's not, it's awful and unjust in every sense.
I await your condemnation at the awfulness and unjust actions of the vigilantes rioting in the streets of London.
Wait, no it's not, it's awful and unjust in every sense.I await your condemnation at the awfulness and unjust actions of the vigilantes rioting in the streets of London.
OH SNAP!!!
you gave me a tingle down my leg, like when Obama speaks and that CNN guy gets a tingle down his leg.
I disagree with you but let's not get into name-calling, unless all you have to offer is insultsYour attempts to cover up the fact that you refuse to read the news doesn't mean those links didn't happen.
The way I can see it, you can continue to be just like Shifty and attempt to ignore the massive amount of information I'm pulling down here so you can yammer on some more about BOOTSTRAPS, or you can actually respond to them and offer news of your own.
<sighs>
Actually, I read the Economist, and the Financial Times, and the Times. But, like I said, I'm interested in debate. Instead, you offer chunks of news text, the odd insult, and no argument at all. And I'm, like, in London. I grew up in London. I work in London. I really don't need you telling me from your ivory tower on another continent about what conditions are like on the ground here. I can see the smoke from my office window, thanks.
So, OK, what is your prescription for solving this current problem?
Oh, that's just.....anecdotal.
Wait, no it's not, it's awful and unjust in every sense.I await your condemnation at the awfulness and unjust actions of the vigilantes rioting in the streets of London.OH SNAP!!!
you gave me a tingle down my leg, like when Obama speaks and that CNN guy gets a tingle down his leg.
I get a trickle down my leg when I hear you speak.
I get a trickle down my leg when I hear you speak.Wait, no it's not, it's awful and unjust in every sense.I await your condemnation at the awfulness and unjust actions of the vigilantes rioting in the streets of London.OH SNAP!!!
you gave me a tingle down my leg, like when Obama speaks and that CNN guy gets a tingle down his leg.
It's better to be feared than loved.
I'm advocating offering family planning and seed capital to those who want it. It's a voluntary program, noone is forced to participate. And, yes, I do believe it will eradicate a large amount of poverty as it will lead to people having kids later in life when they are more economically capable
My idea was to take some highschoolers on a field trip to Wal Mart with me when I went to buy formula and diapers. Then they can go to the condom aisle and do a price comparison.
|
My idea was to take some highschoolers on a field trip to Wal Mart with me when I went to buy formula and diapers. Then they can go to the condom aisle and do a price comparison.I'm advocating offering family planning and seed capital to those who want it. It's a voluntary program, noone is forced to participate. And, yes, I do believe it will eradicate a large amount of poverty as it will lead to people having kids later in life when they are more economically capable
I thought they frowned on sex ed south of the border.
I thought they frowned on sex ed south of the border.My idea was to take some highschoolers on a field trip to Wal Mart with me when I went to buy formula and diapers. Then they can go to the condom aisle and do a price comparison.I'm advocating offering family planning and seed capital to those who want it. It's a voluntary program, noone is forced to participate. And, yes, I do believe it will eradicate a large amount of poverty as it will lead to people having kids later in life when they are more economically capable
This is home ec the hard knocks way, man.
I'm hoping for that fear induced shriveling effect.I know, wishful thinking.
And RIP to the three decent Muslim men who were killed in the riots whilst returning home from trying to defend their Mosque from the looters and rioters.
Purposefully run down on a footpath all three killed by a hit and run.
The fact that 'Prof' and 'Gail' can happily sit there and advocate such acts of domestic terrorism is beyond the pale, how can they with clear conscience act as apologists for these rioting vigilantes and excuse the enormous damage they do and the lives they take.
Sickening.
I notice they aren't 'pulling down' those news articles...
Really? The messageboard's Culture Warriors are picking London as their new battlefield of choice?
Here's a view from the coalface that offers more then just simple soundbites.
Typical overprivileged Tory. "Oh boo hoo hoo, why won't those darn poors just pull themselves up by the bootstraps and get a job?" The height of hilarity is that she then accuses others of their "privilege" right after whining about how brave and hard it is to be an upperclass Tory.
Did you miss earlier when I stated that there's one job opening for every fifty four unemployed in some towns?
Oh hey, there's this.
"Go and volunteer in a primary school and sit with those who are struggling to read, go and become a school governor, go and do a bit of training to become an adult advocate so that when one of these kids goes through the judicial system and their parents can't or won't participate in the process, you can be called on to speak to and for them. "
Done that, haven't done that yet, done that.
Woops!
Good grief, I knew the waters were good and chummed by this point, but jeez.
Overprivileged? The lady's a teacher- she's hardly a fat cat, and while she's not 100% on a lot of her points, she doesn't deserve such snide contempt. The fact that you've done two out of the three suggestions anyway seems to indicate you're hardly diametrically opposed to each other. I'm a pretty hard Liberal, but I've not been so blinkered that I cannot see some value in a reasoned opinion, even if I don't like all of it. It certainly beats the empty-headed "they need more guns to shoot 'em all" jingle that's been knocked out this thread
I lived in London (Lewisham) about ten years ago and it's sad to see a neighborhood I liked gut itself so harshly. That said, the tension cracks were visible in 2001- I can't imagine how much worse it got in the years since, considering what's been going on in the UK.
Wait, no it's not, it's awful and unjust in every sense.I await your condemnation at the awfulness and unjust actions of the vigilantes rioting in the streets of London.
Ok, you could refer to my posts starting at the start of this thread and ending at the end of this thread, where I routinely state that the riots are a bad thing and that those involved are not "good people" or doing "good things."
But then you'd have to read my posts. Guess that won't happen.
And RIP to the three decent Muslim men who were killed in the riots whilst returning home from trying to defend their Mosque from the looters and rioters.
Purposefully run down on a footpath all three killed by a hit and run.
The fact that 'Prof' and 'Gail' can happily sit there and advocate such acts of domestic terrorism is beyond the pale, how can they with clear conscience act as apologists for these rioting vigilantes and excuse the enormous damage they do and the lives they take.
Sickening.
I notice they aren't 'pulling down' those news articles...
[troll]Now they'll suddenly change opinion because Muslims got killed.[/troll]
But then you'd have to read my posts. Guess that won't happen.
Your limp condemnation has about the harshness of fairy floss. On one hand hand you halfheartedly condemn, and then turn around and completly justify the actions as though they are "good boys, just acting a bit naughty - BUT ITS ALL YOUR FAULT!"
I guess thats just the typical Bourgeoisie attitude we can expect.
[troll]Now they'll suddenly change opinion because Muslims got killed.[/troll]
I highly doubt that at all.
Simply put though, the Pakistanis are some of the MOST socially disadvantaged in that country, yet there they were defending community assets and trying to prevent their scant resources and community (not Government or corporate) owned propert from being destroyed.
Who rebuilds that for them if it goes up in flames?
These attacks are not by youths against Government or 'big buisiness', these attacks are quite frequently against the people doing it the toughest.
And thse attacks have resulted in cold hearted murder.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'd like to see a social service be created where the government offers $5,000 to men if they have a vasectomy and put their sperm on ice (so they can have kids later if they want). If they pay the $5,000 back, they get the sperm back.You could sterilise them, so they don't breed.
You are advocating literally wiping out the poor and non-whites.
Congrats.
Agreed- that's just nutty.
Rather then some kind libertarian mass sterilization, how about a few well run Family Planning clinics and associated school programs? Time and time again, FP has been internationally shown to be the supercharger for getting people out of poverty.
But then you'd have to read my posts. Guess that won't happen.Your limp condemnation has about the harshness of fairy floss. On one hand hand you halfheartedly condemn, and then turn around and completly justify the actions as though they are "good boys, just acting a bit naughty - BUT ITS ALL YOUR FAULT!"
I guess thats just the typical Bourgeoisie attitude we can expect.
Yes, saying that the rioters are bad, that those being hurt are innocent victims, and that we should focus on rehabilitation and finding the root cause of the riot in order to prevent it - wait, I didn't literally advocate for mass sterilizaiton, vigilantism and murder? How half-hearted of me!
And jackasses are saying that if we come from poor roots and are heavily discriminated against, we can't help ourselves, but must act like these people.
The left will never learn that it is that sort of patronizing attitude that causes the poor to spit in the left's outreached hand.
Nobody saying that first one but you. So hmmm, I wonder who's being spat on?
I'm advocating offering family planning and seed capital to those who want it. It's a voluntary program, noone is forced to participate. And, yes, I do believe it will eradicate a large amount of poverty as it will lead to people having kids later in life when they are more economically capable
No, you're advocating we force people who need money to under go sterilization.
Family planning involves condoms, safe sex practices, Family Planning clinics, and sexual education.
You're stating "The poor don't get to have kids."
That's a LIE
Not the first, and certainly not the last.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Vasectomy.....I'd do it for 2 grande right now.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
With respect, my friend, we know why these riots are happening. One group of rioters, rocking their neighborhoos and burning down 100-year-old businesses in response to a drug dealer losing a shootput with cops, followed by other groups noting that they can cause mayhem with very little i the way of repercussions.
With all due respect, this is not why the riots started. Firstly was the guy who was killed a convicted drug dealer? He might have been, but I haven’t actually read that in any primary source. Secondly, evidence is emerging that seems to indicate that they guy did not fire at police.
Beyond that, if the shot ‘drug dealer’ had been a middle class lad from a good neighbourhood, you wouldn’t expect to end up with a riot like this. The reason for the riot (not a justifiable reason in my books, but the reason) is because of severe social problems, government neglect, possibly police harassment (justified or not), poverty, and a culture of glorifying violence and gang culture. It is a complex issue and requires a complex solution.
I don’t think that anyone involved in violence or looting in this riot should be excused, they should definately be dealt with by the law, but at the end of the day the issues behind all of this need to be addressed (carefully, sensitively, over a long period, probably costing a lot of tax payer money) if you want to stop this from happening again. Arresting the bad people and enacting stricter policing will not solve the problems in the long run.
Unfortunately the horrific violence of these riots are not likely to lead to all the issues being properly addressed. The knee jerk (but somewhat understandable) reaction of politicians and people affected by the violence will be to punish without addressing the reasons.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Just as a side note, quite a few of the people arrested for looting during the riots have not been ‘the poor, downtrodden and disenfranchised’ but people firmly from the middle class, people form good families and people with jobs. Not sure what they are rebelling against ... ooh, free stuff, lulz!
|
|
On the other side of things, how hard done by and disenfranchised do you have to be, exactly, to justify brutally bashing and robbing a foreign student during the riots? Society has treated me so poorly, I think I’ll break this recently arrived exchange student’s jaw, threaten him with knives and steal his stuff ... then when he was lying there in the gutter, another group came along and stole more of his stuff. Nice.
And then there’s the people / persons who drove over and killed three guys trying to protect their neighbourhood (as mentioned above). Social justice? I don’t think so.
Just as a side note, quite a few of the people arrested for looting during the riots have not been ‘the poor, downtrodden and disenfranchised’ but people firmly from the middle class, people form good families and people with jobs. Not sure what they are rebelling against ... ooh, free stuff, lulz!
Prolly paying for everybody else's shit all the time.
That's a LIE]You're stating "The poor don't get to have kids."
No, it isn't.
"Hey, these people are in crippling poverty and have no source of income. My idea is to butcher their social services so they have no house, no food, they already can't get a job, but in return, we'll give them money not to have kids."
You are stating that the poor don't get to have kids. The poor who incidentally tend to overwhelmingly be minorities.
Many people in first world countries choose to not have kids until they are financially ready. That's all this program does - help people with the choice to not have kids until they are financially ready.
No, a program that talked about safe sex, condoms, utilized Family Planning centers and clinics, and encouraged better sexual education at the school level would help people with the choice.
You are telling them "I will let you buy food for yourself if you become sterilized."
You're patronizing the poor and treating them like childish idiots unable to handle such a choice. And, like I said, it is that patronizing attitude by the left which has caused the poor to spit in the left's outstretched hand.
Yep, I sure am patronizing the poor by asking they be treated humanely and provided with education and health care
"Hey, these people are in crippling poverty and have no source of income. My idea is to butcher their social services so they have no house, no food, they already can't get a job, but in return, we'll give them money not to have kids."
He quite clearly never said that.
You have just chosen once again to make up your own version of what people said (which bears no resemblance at all) and then decry them as wrong. The amount of vitriol you add to their posts is alarming, and it well matches your own.
So his point stands.
THAT'S A LIE.
|
|
Just as a side note, quite a few of the people arrested for looting during the riots have not been ‘the poor, downtrodden and disenfranchised’ but people firmly from the middle class, people form good families and people with jobs. Not sure what they are rebelling against ... ooh, free stuff, lulz!Prolly paying for everybody else's s&*@ all the time.
Heh.
“My hard earned tax dollars pay these people’s welfare cheques and now they’re looting wide screen TVs – screw that, I want some of that action!”