ilovefuzz.com

D.o.S. wrote:Shit's absolutely mental over there.

Depending on who you're listening to, it's either inevitable backlash from the socially ostracized, or a result of a kind of Rodney King 2.0 situation (cops killed a black guy), or a bunch of people taking advantage of what was a ridiculously relaxed police response.

its actually both.

and the police response that sparked the riots was from the obscelely corrupt British Metropolitain Police Force

soo.. why are they destroying there city ? did i miss something

because the police shot a habitual criminal who fired on them.

psh, think theyre us after the stanley cup or something.

dubkitty wrote:because the police shot a habitual criminal who fired on them.

i had heard that his weapon was not fired.

I read that the cops shot the dude, it ricocheted and hit a cop or some crap like that

i've seen all those and i think a couple others besides. in any case, even if he didn't fire, he was an armed criminal.

D.o.S. wrote:In my experience, breaking shit and enacting violence doesn't generally get people to agree with what you're doing.

I'm not justifying it but there are numerous examples in history if you care to look. I also want to point out that in wars or political revolutions, history is written by the winners, not the agree-ers. so the question should really be "has anyone ever had a successful campaign of anything ever in history with a little violence"

I'm torn on this.

On one hand, I love a good revolt against an apparently corrupt police system.

On the other hand, looting and destroying your city makes you an asshole.

Could they not just... I dunno... protest without breaking shit? I'm in the awkward position of rooting for the police just because I feel for the non-rioters that live in the area.

thats the thing about being poor and living around corrupt police and in a shit area though

yeah dude, im an uneducated white american male, but I know that the situation there is shit.

I am all for protest, but destroying a city is stupid. I want those assholes contained because its gonna hurt innocent people

exactly. this is pretty much a classic "product of their environment" situation as far as the rioters go.

McSpunckle wrote:Could they not just... I dunno... protest without breaking shit?

The original protest (by family, friends, etc of the shooting victim) WAS peaceful until a group of pissed-off-at-the-world types showed up and took over.

McSpunckle wrote:I'm torn on this.

On one hand, I love a good revolt against an apparently corrupt police system.

On the other hand, looting and destroying your city makes you an asshole.

Could they not just... I dunno... protest without breaking shit? I'm in the awkward position of rooting for the police just because I feel for the non-rioters that live in the area.

You just have to destroy the right stuff.

This has turned into po' people stealing shit en masse

McSpunckle wrote:I'm torn on this.

On one hand, I love a good revolt against an apparently corrupt police system.

On the other hand, looting and destroying your city makes you an asshole.

Could they not just... I dunno... protest without breaking shit? I'm in the awkward position of rooting for the police just because I feel for the non-rioters that live in the area.

Everybody involved is an asshole except these people:



...and maybe even those people.

i mean, when they were peacefully protesting there weren't threads on ILF about it.