(05-30-2020 11:00 AM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(05-30-2020 10:17 AM)Rice93 Wrote:  OO, I was specific about "looters" because that's the term that Trump used in his tweet.

Reason #1 at the forefront. Lolz.

Quote:Yes... force is sometimes required when things get out of control. Even deadly force when innocent lives are threatened. Of course I get that.

So in the context of last night, I guess thing weren't 'out of control' enough for you?

And then you also seemingly note that deadly force is *only* proper 'when innocent lives are threatened.'

What we are seeing now is the biggest threat to civil order in our country undoubtedly in the last 50 years; maybe even the last 150 years.

And your statement of "even deadly force when innocent lives are threatened" really is somewhat opaque. In an instance of civil lawlessness on vast scope (like last night), the mere act of the continued, endemic, and lawless actions foster a threat to 'lives'.

How does the team of ten cops act when they face a mob of hundreds, some of whom are streaming out with TVs, some of whom destroying property, and some of whom are tossing gas bombs here and there. Does your selective dogma of 'only when innocent lives are threatened' make much sense there?

The *real* danger (and the most substantial danger) of a riot (or continued civil disobedience) isnt simply 'a fire', or simply a 'beating', or simply a 'shot fired'.

The most pressing danger to the society is the fact of continued lawlessness.

And that is something that you dont seem horribly aware of, or have much concern over. *That* is the point that is germane to your nitpick behavior of 'looting' no force, 'rioting' maybe force, 'domestic terrorism (whatever the heck that is) definitely force', 'arson perhaps force' view of the issue.

Each of those individually has a 'danger to society', perhaps a 'danger to life' associated with it. In the midst of mass civil unrest, the danger of each of the above goes *far* beyond the danger of the individual act.

But you consistently try to avoid that context. I have a decent guess as to why. Three letters.

Do you have an issue with Governor Walz's promise to meet looting with 'overwhelming force'? If you are up in arms over Trump's tweet, you really should be just as torqued up over that one, mind you.