• Watch Out for Scammers!

    We've now added a color code for all accounts. Orange accounts are new members, Blue are full members, and Green are Supporters. If you get a message about a sale from an orange account, make sure you pay attention before sending any money!

St Louis riot

I would say I would agree about the police needed to bring it down a notch. But I am not an officer and do not know what I would do in a situation where I think harm could possibly be done to myself or others. I think they did a good job in the fact no one was hurt. I also think media did nothing but stir the pot. Things are bad here. But not what the media has made it appear to be. I think both were to blame for things escalating.
I also would be courious if the looting and riot had not happened. Would the police had even brought out the gear?
 
Last edited:
KYpatriot said:
According to reports the protest has totally changed character now that the state police have taken over. The state police took a softer approach, put away the .mil equipment and snipers on armored vehicles/tear gas etc. Serious question...did the unilateral de-escalation that the state police did actually lead to de-esacalation on the part of the protesters? I think it did. I think if the camo guys were still out there on the trucks pointing rifles at people that this thing would still be rockin.

I wonder if breaking up a protest with force or threat of force is more likely to enrage rather than contain violence these days in the age of twitter and social media. I think the protestors looked like the idiots they were while the images were of them looting and acting like fools, but when the 82nd airborne showed up the whole feel of the story and sympathies changed because the visuals all changed. You have people in t-shirts and mothers holding babies standing across from guys that look like they dropped in from afghanistan. Perhaps it is time to fight smarter not harder these days. What would that look like/how could that be accomplished?

This was a close run thing...all it would have took was a protestor in the crowd shooting one of those cops and we could easily have had a kent state times ten. Had the police opened up with automatic weapons from armored vehicles after taking some potshots who would win in the long run?

I am adamantly against the militarization of the police mostly because of the potential threat to the citizenry but also because I think it makes them worse rather than better at their jobs. I am absolutely positive that people act differently based on how they are dressed, as silly as that sounds it has been my experience whether in the military or civilian business, it just changes things. When the bros "gear up" it totally changes their mindset, and that can work for you or against you depending on what your job is. On a military mission it helps; when I was geared up and strapping in to a fighter you can bet my mindset was turning to combat, I even felt more lethal. In my opinion on a policing call this same phenomenon leads to bad judgment and makes it easier to act as a soldier than a police officer. When we make ourselves look like tough guys we tend to act more like tough guys and do things like the two officers who arrested the two journalists, roughing one of them up, because they didn't pack their things fast enough. Im sure the chief loved that one.
Click to expand...

Could not have said it any better.

However, while (temporary) peace has been restored, the tensions will continue to rise until the pot boils over again. On one side are the elitist with their desire to 'govern' others making empty promises to gain votes, on the other side are the gullible self-declared victims that feel entitled to what others have earned, and I am caught in the middle with only one wish - to be left alone by both sides so I can put food on my table and enjoy my life.

The militarization and lack of accountability of police and federal agencies is a problem that needs to be addressed though. We can either address this now with initiatives like copblock, wikileaks, etc. and by supporting whistle blowers who expose the lies and corruption of the system or we can wait until the pot of racial and economic tensions boils over and deal with it then. If we do not do anything, then this country will revert back into a colony of subjects regardless of how the races deal with each other.

Now is an excellent time to remind 'Mr. Sniper' who aimed his AR15 at the masses that he is not on the hunt for Al Qaeda, his commander that the USA is not (yet) a banana republic, and the 'leaders' (elected or self-elected) that they run the risk of being be dragged into the streets one day if they keep pitting one group of citizens against another for their own gains. The mere existence of this country proves that The People have certain expectations and that their tolerance has limits.
 
Last edited:
KYpatriot said:
According to reports the protest has totally changed character now that the state police have taken over. The state police took a softer approach, put away the .mil equipment and snipers on armored vehicles/tear gas etc. Serious question...did the unilateral de-escalation that the state police did actually lead to de-esacalation on the part of the protesters? I think it did. I think if the camo guys were still out there on the trucks pointing rifles at people that this thing would still be rockin.

I wonder if breaking up a protest with force or threat of force is more likely to enrage rather than contain violence these days in the age of twitter and social media. I think the protestors looked like the idiots they were while the images were of them looting and acting like fools, but when the 82nd airborne showed up the whole feel of the story and sympathies changed because the visuals all changed. You have people in t-shirts and mothers holding babies standing across from guys that look like they dropped in from afghanistan. Perhaps it is time to fight smarter not harder these days. What would that look like/how could that be accomplished?

This was a close run thing...all it would have took was a protestor in the crowd shooting one of those cops and we could easily have had a kent state times ten. Had the police opened up with automatic weapons from armored vehicles after taking some potshots who would win in the long run?

I am adamantly against the militarization of the police mostly because of the potential threat to the citizenry but also because I think it makes them worse rather than better at their jobs. I am absolutely positive that people act differently based on how they are dressed, as silly as that sounds it has been my experience whether in the military or civilian business, it just changes things. When the bros "gear up" it totally changes their mindset, and that can work for you or against you depending on what your job is. On a military mission it helps; when I was geared up and strapping in to a fighter you can bet my mindset was turning to combat, I even felt more lethal. In my opinion on a policing call this same phenomenon leads to bad judgment and makes it easier to act as a soldier than a police officer. When we make ourselves look like tough guys we tend to act more like tough guys and do things like the two officers who arrested the two journalists, roughing one of them up, because they didn't pack their things fast enough. Im sure the chief loved that one.
Click to expand...

Where the police geared up the first night they rioted and burned down a convenience store?
 
No not to my knowledge. To the officer being black and the police have riot gear on the night of the riot and the shooting.
 
Last edited:
What do you mean rhyno I dont get your question. My understanding was it turned violent when the police tried to break up the big gathering/protest in the streets when they showed up in riot gear. Was this destined to be a riot, or provoked into one is my first question, and how best do you handle a protest to prevent a riot is another, and finally how do you contain a riot without actually causing it to escalate instead is another. Of course you cant let people burn down a city without responding, but it is telling to me how things de-escalated when the state police took over the scene and took it down a notch or two in their approach. Instant communication and media have changed group dynamics, meaning the old take it to em approach may do more harm than good now. If I was a police chief in a big metro area I'd be studying that subject hard.
 
KYpatriot said:
What do you mean rhyno I dont get your question. My understanding was it turned violent when the police tried to break up the big gathering/protest in the streets when they showed up in riot gear. Was this destined to be a riot, or provoked into one is my first question, and how best do you handle a protest to prevent a riot is another, and finally how do you contain a riot without actually causing it to escalate instead is another. Of course you cant let people burn down a city without responding, but it is telling to me how things de-escalated when the state police took over the scene and took it down a notch or two in their approach. Instant communication and media have changed group dynamics, meaning the old take it to em approach may do more harm than good now. If I was a police chief in a big metro area I'd be studying that subject hard.
Click to expand...

It's part me not knowing, and part leading up to something else.

The first night of rioting, the same night the convenience store was burned down, where the police in riot gear?

If they were then they (police) responded wrong, but if the rioters burned down and started looting then the police came out in riot gear then they responded right, and subsequent use of riot gear would be warranted.
 
Rhyno said:
It's part me not knowing, and part leading up to something else.

The first night of rioting, the same night the convenience store was burned down, where the police in riot gear?

If they were then they (police) responded wrong, but if the rioters burned down and started looting then the police came out in riot gear then they responded right, and subsequent use of riot gear would be warranted.
Click to expand...
To my knowledge and watching news feeds there was not riot gear the night of the riot
 
Jrb572 said:
To my knowledge and watching news feeds there was not riot gear the night of the riot
Click to expand...

From what I could see it was street cops in regular uniforms at first. Then things got hairy, and they brought out helmets and shields. Necessary as they were getting bricks thrown at them. Then later when things got really bad an there were reports of shots fired, started seeing the Lenco Bearcats and the heavy armor come out. That's when the rifles, tear gas, beanbags, and pepperball guns came out too. So there was a gradual escalation of show of force as things got worse. That matches policy in most departments of trying to stand back and protect yourself while letting the rage burn out. I would certainly have been wanting to gear up as heavily as possible if I were on that line. Not a safe or comfortable place to be, when you've got an angry gang-heavy crowd with a tendency toward violence and a recent history of shooting at the police helicopter. It's a half-step farther to shooting at the cops on the line.

Who knows whether more earlier would have helped, or whether less would have. I doubt less would have had any positive effect because the looting was in full swing already anyway. As far as why it calmed down later, the looters have had to go home to their own neighborhoods to watch their new TV's and drink the stolen beer. That leaves the part of the crowd that is protesting because they're angry, but perhaps less inclined toward violence and crime. Looting generally only lasts for so long before people have to go home with the stolen stuff and sleep off their drunk.
 
Last edited:
Podunk police departments that heavily geared up with Mil gear is going to lead to a bad incident in my opinion. you have 100 cops on line with AR's it only takes one shot to start a serious battle, maybe not in this neighborhood but in many others for sure. I hope all parties learn a little from this, punk kid should not have been shot , residents should not have burned down what is most likely hard to come by stores in their neighborhood, the reverends need to stfu, let real reverends do the sermonizing. Holder and Obama, well, they need to let the state and locals handle it until the NG raises the white flag and asks for help. The police chief could handled this incident a little better with more info in the beginning. I hope all parties here use this incident to learn and avert future death and destruction.
 
ArmyJerry said:
Podunk police departments that heavily geared up with Mil gear is going to lead to a bad incident in my opinion. you have 100 cops on line with AR's it only takes one shot to start a serious battle, maybe not in this neighborhood but in many others for sure. I hope all parties learn a little from this, punk kid should not have been shot , residents should not have burned down what is most likely hard to come by stores in their neighborhood, the reverends need to stfu, let real reverends do the sermonizing. Holder and Obama, well, they need to let the state and locals handle it until the NG raises the white flag and asks for help. The police chief could handled this incident a little better with more info in the beginning. I hope all parties here use this incident to learn and avert future death and destruction.
Click to expand...

Depends on where the towns are located. If you think a town with a 20,000 population is podunk then my town of 4k ish, people is practically a ghost town, but I can say with certainty our police force has a need for AR15s and some even have full autos which I have no issue with. Why? Because the main highway going through town is one of the biggest routes to smuggle drugs, and other things across the state. Seeing as how you pass through about 4 towns from the north edge to the south edge.
 
Don't think for one minute that things were quieter last night with the Hi Po in charge. They were just under orders to not arrest anyone. I have heard stories of more cops getting hurt last night, more cop cars broken into and 911 calls going unanswered. It is all smoke and mirrors, that things were more peaceful.
 
I could be wrong and the kid could have been pointing a shotgun at the guys head but I am not seeing the police supporting this as a "good" shoot. The second part of the question can be answered in many ways, such as him being so scared for his safety he shouldn't be a cop., or just ignore the question because every American has a right to self defense, but you have to have a reasonable fear for your life or safety. Either way, I would like to see more/all evidence one way or the other, so far I only seen the video of him forcefully pushing someone in a "Robbery" which looks like a shoplifting case gone bad to me. I am guessing this shooting is the result of a series of unfortunate incidents.

SPEAK338 said:
Army Jerry
What do you mean " punk kid should not have been shot" does the officer not have a right to self preservation?
Click to expand...
 
Were the LA Riots really over 1 PCP smoking, hyundai racing man....

Nope... they were years in the building from having a police chief that was disconnected from his community....


Most people break some laws... traffic laws come to mind....


When you look at the arrest sts for the area- % blacks arrested vs % blacks of the population... you can see where the easy arrests are made...


Kids with more money smoke dope in a home... poorer kids smoke dope in a car...
Adults with more money get drugs delivered... poorer adults buy from the street corner...


The riots make me sick... specifically it is the looters who make me sick...

Watching the media get tear gassed... well I would like to see what let up to the event...


If you toss the 1st two amendments in the constitutional trash bin, we are one step from full socialism.......
 
The de escalation of looting and rioting probably has 2 or 3 reasons. First all of the looters arrested were not from Ferguson. Thugs that came into town to take advantage of the situation for some free stuff. Secondly the low hanging fruit is gone. They cleaned out the alphabet the first night. From auto supply stores to hair weaves. Most of the stores with anything left on the shelves were guarded by armed men. Not too many thugs willing to risk there life for some freebies. Third reason is the color of the men brought in to bail out the locals. When the protesters were riled up by the race baiters, Al Sharpton, Jessie Jackasson and the New Black Panthers, they were being oppressed by the "Man". When they bring in the HWY Patrol and the face is one of their own. Never mind that the majority of officers were black. They had comfort that it is no longer a fight against a ruling white police. What do you think the tactics of the new man in charge and his minions were going to be if violence had erupted again? Stand back and watch it burn?
 
There will come a day, when men will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by their character......

Fat fucking chance there MLK.

The recently ventilated Mr. Brown had committed a strong armed robbery of the convenience store, walks outside and meets Officer Wilson. Mr. Brown and Officer Wilson have two very different mind sets, as Officer Wilson was initially unaware of the robbery from the report I heard.

So Mr. Brown thinks Officer Wilson is there to arrest him for the robbery, and assaults Officer Wilson, is this correct? Officer Wilson sustained injuries from the assault by Mr. Brown, and shot his fat ass because not only did he hurt him physically but emotionally as well. I know how I get when someone hurts my feelings so I can relate.

Now Mr. Browns attorney, a real piece of work, says Mr. Brown put up his hands in the universal sign language of surrender and nothing before that matters. Office Wilson should of just winked and offered Mr. Brown a piece of gum.

But it mattered to Mr. Brown, he didn't want no white cops gum, just a good stolen cigar, so him and Mookie could continue chilling and relating and shit. BTW, the other guy that was in the store with Mr. Brown was/ has not been charged for the robbery. Coincidence or unbelievable case of bending the law?

I'm waiting to find out when that character thing is going to happen.
 
If Mr Star Witness (his friend) tells his story under oath and the forensics or other evidence prove him a liar. Then I believe since he was there, he may find himself in trouble.
 
"Crap! TV is out. Guess I'll go protest the Michael Brown shooting and pick up a new one."
 
jrassy said:
There will come a day, when men will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by their character......

Fat fucking chance there MLK.

The recently ventilated Mr. Brown had committed a strong armed robbery of the convenience store, walks outside and meets Officer Wilson. Mr. Brown and Officer Wilson have two very different mind sets, as Officer Wilson was initially unaware of the robbery from the report I heard.

So Mr. Brown thinks Officer Wilson is there to arrest him for the robbery, and assaults Officer Wilson, is this correct? Officer Wilson sustained injuries from the assault by Mr. Brown, and shot his fat ass because not only did he hurt him physically but emotionally as well. I know how I get when someone hurts my feelings so I can relate.

Now Mr. Browns attorney, a real piece of work, says Mr. Brown put up his hands in the universal sign language of surrender and nothing before that matters. Office Wilson should of just winked and offered Mr. Brown a piece of gum.

But it mattered to Mr. Brown, he didn't want no white cops gum, just a good stolen cigar, so him and Mookie could continue chilling and relating and shit. BTW, the other guy that was in the store with Mr. Brown was/ has not been charged for the robbery. Coincidence or unbelievable case of bending the law?

I'm waiting to find out when that character thing is going to happen.
Click to expand...

Good one! From what I am able to get from the new, Brown actually entered the cop car, and fought with Officer Wilson, one report said, "they struggle for Officer Wilson's gun" and shots were fired in the cop car. Brown jumps out, and runs-maybe to get his gun, or his friends with guns, who knows. I believe it is safe to say, if a guy jumps in a cops car, beats on the cops, tries to get the cops gun and then jumps out, it is very reasonable to assume he is armed and intends to do more violence. I'll bet they don't release the autopsy report right away, if it shows Brown was high as a kite, with several different drugs in his system and had been a regular user.
 
The new man in charge has show his policy last night. The looting starts again and the police back off and let it happen. I guess the tax payers will have to protect his own property. The new man in charge has decided he would rather let them destroy and take your property than to hurt their feeling or act civilized.

Poor store owner gets some product stolen then pushed around by a thug. Then the police release the video of it. He boards up his store and the police stand back and let it get cleaned out. When he opens his store again it will be hard seeing the same hoodlums that trashed your store come in and act like they had no part in it.
 
Last edited:
DarnYankeeUSMC said:
The new man in charge has show his policy last night. The looting starts again and the police back off and let it happen. I guess the tax payers will have to protect his own property. The new man in charge has decided he would rather let them destroy and take your property than to hurt their feeling or act civilized.

Poor store owner gets some product stolen then pushed around by a thug. Then the police release the video of it. He boards up his store and the police stand back and let it get cleaned out. When he opens his store again it will be hard seeing the same hoodlums that trashed your store come in and act like they had no part in it.
Click to expand...

Wondering how the race baiters are going to spin this, especially after what surfaced about Mr. Brown.

On a brighter note: Some locals are apparently stepping up for community policing against looters.
 
Last edited:
Doesn't really matter where they're from, the way the police responded was inexcusable. Of i was the store owner I would be suing the police.

Sounds like some community members stepped up to stop the looters, but it was probably after all the good stuff was taken.
 
DarnYankeeUSMC said:
The new man in charge has show his policy last night. The looting starts again and the police back off and let it happen. I guess the tax payers will have to protect his own property. The new man in charge has decided he would rather let them destroy and take your property than to hurt their feeling or act civilized.
Click to expand...


Is he French?

Nice NATO ROE. That has never worked for anyone.

Must be empowering for the looters to know that they will never get caught.

The SOP should be : they will never get away!
 
Last edited:
What do DSW shoes and Ferguson have in common?

They both have 10 thousand black loafers...
 
Rhyno said:
Doesn't really matter where they're from, the way the police responded was inexcusable. Of i was the store owner I would be suing the police.

Sounds like some community members stepped up to stop the looters, but it was probably after all the good stuff was taken.
Click to expand...

So when the police respond in "riot gear" and "tanks" according to [MENTION=25047]KYpatriot[/MENTION] and a few others in an effort to squash things it actually escalates them. When the police back off in order to deescalate the situation its inexcusable. What's the proper response here then? Can't have it both way folks.
 
Rhyno said:
Doesn't really matter where they're from, the way the police responded was inexcusable. Of i was the store owner I would be suing the police.

Sounds like some community members stepped up to stop the looters, but it was probably after all the good stuff was taken.
Click to expand...
Doesn't really matter where they are from? You've to be kidding! Those coming in from afar, to loot, demonstrate by their actions, (those of traveling to the area) their intent. The "Community Organizers" that stepped up to stop the large number of looters? How did they do this? Were they singing old time gospel? I think the looting stopped, when there was nothing else left that was easy to carry off. What ever happened to "looters will be shot"-has worked in the past, and work well, I guess that would be super-duper inexcusable?
How often do these same "community organizers" step up to stop robberies? Are they only stepping up after the stores are well looted, or do they 'step up' when the local trash is stealing cigars by force and intimidation?
 
Slapchop said:
So when the police respond in "riot gear" and "tanks" according to [MENTION=25047]KYpatriot[/MENTION] and a few others in an effort to squash things it actually escalates them. When the police back off in order to deescalate the situation its inexcusable. What's the proper response here then? Can't have it both way folks.
Click to expand...

Well is a good thing I'm not KYPATRIOT pr a few others.

The only thing I didn't like about their first response was the camo wearing. Everything else was justified.
 
pawprint2 said:
Doesn't really matter where they are from? You've to be kidding! Those coming in from afar, to loot, demonstrate by their actions, (those of traveling to the area) their intent. The "Community Organizers" that stepped up to stop the large number of looters? How did they do this? Were they singing old time gospel? I think the looting stopped, when there was nothing else left that was easy to carry off. What ever happened to "looters will be shot"-has worked in the past, and work well, I guess that would be super-duper inexcusable?
How often do these same "community organizers" step up to stop robberies? Are they only stepping up after the stores are well looted, or do they 'step up' when the local trash is stealing cigars by force and intimidation?
Click to expand...

In the scheme of breaking the law, no it doeant.
 
I agree with you, the camo is ridiculous but sometimes in order to overcome force, greater force needs to be employed. Hugging it out doesn't always work.
 
This is a wake up call for people who think the police have to protect you. YOUR protection is YOUR business! After a few looters get shot this will slow them down
 
Slapchop said:
So when the police respond in "riot gear" and "tanks" according to [MENTION=25047]KYpatriot[/MENTION] and a few others in an effort to squash things it actually escalates them. When the police back off in order to deescalate the situation its inexcusable. What's the proper response here then? Can't have it both way folks.
Click to expand...


Citizens need to be citizens and stop asking government to do what they should already be doing.

You guys are looking for a silver bullet to solve a problem that has been decades in the making. If you think you can solve a problem like ferguson with "just a few bigger weapons" and "just a little looser ROE" well I have heard that before somewhere, and here we are ten years later with less liberty in our own country, NO privacy, and guess what we still have terrorism as big a threat as ever. Now lets consider Ferguson and other places like it. We have a created a whole class that doesn't have to lift a finger to eat and feels entitled to anything that someone with more money, or is who is white, owns. Everything is always someone else's fault, and our own government enables and encourages their lifestyle with program after program that take and take from me and other productive people and give it to them.

Human nature being what it is, am I supposed to be shocked when the results of all this is that we have created a bunch of professional criminals? More to the point, am I supposed to happily give more of my money to create and empower a domestic army capable of policing people that violent, when I know I have to live under that too? Why should I? As usual, the only winners are government, who happily use one problem THEY created to scare us all into letting them have more and more power to solve that problem, which they never will anyway. It is time to let people bear the consequences of their choices, both as individuals and as communities. From the largest "too big to fail" banks to the "too poor to fail" do rag wearing thug, it is not government's job to protect them from themselves at the expense of my liberty and my property. This is the same government by the way that continually wants to limit my weapons and ability to defend myself while uparmoring their own means of control and ability to project force. No thanks, Ill keep the riots instead. If they want to burn down their own neighborhoods, have at it. If you own a store there you ought to know the risks, and if you are dependent on police to defend your property there then you are not the kind of person who needs to be owning property in those neighborhoods.

One thing is for certain, we have manufactured problems in this country that it would take the 1st ID and an armor division to "solve" in cities in every state in America. If thats what y'all want, if thats what you are willing for America to look like just so a convenience store in a ghetto is "secure", then have at it because Ill be long gone by then. I am hoping that yall are smarter than that and can play a longer game. Im hoping that when a bunch of animals collect their free tvs and hair extensions that you are not scared or shortsighted enough to be played by those who want to bring the same means of control they want in Ferguson to every community in America, because that is what we are getting as we speak, and what some of you are asking for whether you realize it or not.

Get this through your heads...the police cannot protect you, it is not their job to protect you personally, and you don't want police that are capable of protecting you. This isn't their fault, and no matter how many bearcats or mraps or full-autos we give them they still won't have the tools to solve it. Its our fault, and our problem to solve. Protecting you is YOUR job. If your community is going to hell in a hand basket do something about it, be a leader, or leave, but dont ask for robocop in every town in America because you were too scared or too lazy to fulfill your responsibilities as a citizen. I'd rather see all the Fergusons burn if a police state is what it takes to keep them, and maybe next time we learn how to build on the ashes a better community in a FREE state.

Cops are for individual crimes like theft, the drunken rowdy on Friday night, domestic squabbles between families or neighbors. It is patently unfair to ask them to maintain the very fabric of society and rescue us from anarchy - they cant do that in a Constitutional Republic like ours. They are not here to prevent us from looking like Mogadishu, that isn't their job in a free society, and if we make it so then we will no longer be a free society. As Slapchop said, you can't have it both ways, there is no free lunch. Decide what kind of country you want, one with the illusion of security or a free one. Stop asking government to do what you should be doing yourself because freedom comes with responsibility or it isn't really freedom.
 
Slapchop said:
So when the police respond in "riot gear" and "tanks" according to @KYpatriot and a few others in an effort to squash things it actually escalates them. When the police back off in order to deescalate the situation its inexcusable. What's the proper response here then? Can't have it both way folks.
Click to expand...

The problem in Ferguson is the same as the problem with US foreign policy, when you fuck it up from the jump there is no way to retreat and de escalate with any credibility. So the only course of action is to ratchet up the pressure and create relief valves -distractions to shift the focus off the policy itself.

I strongly encourage all to watch the following video. Remember, it doesn't change until a significant group of people make it change.

[video]https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=jUow1DhAubA[/video]
 
Slapchop said:
So when the police respond in "riot gear" and "tanks" according to [MENTION=25047]KYpatriot[/MENTION] and a few others in an effort to squash things it actually escalates them. When the police back off in order to deescalate the situation its inexcusable. What's the proper response here then? Can't have it both way folks.
Click to expand...

KYpatriot answered that very eloquently here http://www.snipershide.com/shooting/bear-pit/264705-st-louis-riot-4.html#post3263573.

What bands the looters and the progressive liberals together is the notion that others are responsible for fixing their world. There is really no difference between the middle class mom who ignores the rights of other citizens in a futile attempt to have her children be safe at school and the looter who ignores the rights of other citizens because he/she want a material slice of the American dream. If you want safer school, be a parent and do something against bullying and marginalization in YOUR school. If you want a TV, then go ahead and earn it.
 
Last edited:
KYpatriot said:
Citizens need to be citizens and stop asking government to do what they should already be doing.
Click to expand...

I didnt quote your whole thing because it was big, but I 100% agree with everything.

Police were to heavy handed so they were replaced. Replacements didnt do enough. Cant win.

This whole thing will not end until individuals and business owners step up to defend themselves, their city, their business's from these looters and rioters with up to and including deadly force. Worked for the Korean's in LA and it would work for these people in Ferguson.

Wasnt it the Supreme Court that said that the police job isnt to protect the individual? So protect yourselves, protect your city, protect your business your damn self. I think the people of Ferguson are starting to realize this and even the crowds last night were shouting to stop the looting and then stood strong and blocked the entrance to the convenience store.
 
Curfew from midnight to 5 a.m.???

Why start the curfew so late? Shouldn't it be about 8-9 p.m. to about 5 a.m.?

I'm just thinking back to the L.A. Riots curfew, which was basically dusk-to-dawn.

Doubt it will work, though. At least in the L.A. Riots the cops used the darkness to work over the ghetto bastards who disobeyed the curfew. Can't see this happening this time around.
 
I don't care anymore, if I was the police chief I would just refuse to deal with it and let them take care of themselves.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Veer_G
For All the KWilsons of the World, With Their "Unique" Points of View
Replies
37
Views
2K
pitdog85
P
Maggot
Welcome to St. Louis
Replies
2
Views
507
Krav69
K
Maggot
Follow the $$$
Replies
30
Views
2K
woojos
W
P
GQ Magazine Confessions of a Drone Warrior
Replies
29
Views
3K
Phil1
P
D
Sidearms & Scatterguns CCW shooting incident (long read)
Replies
19
Views
1K
11B-B4
11B-B4
Top Bottom
Back