It appears the words"peaceful protest" actually means "lit fuse".

[Spamature]

If an incident causes people come out in large numbers to protest over a long standing issue. Authorities should consider that the clock has started running down on that community's patience and time in which they have to react to the grievance has become limited.

 

[Dawg]

HELL YEAH..............burn the damn HOOD DOWN..............amazing how you *edited* think this is going to Improve ya hood.......where ya PO blacks that got they LIFE SAVING MEDS AT CVS..........going to get they pills tomorrow.........*edited* done burn't down CVS...............

 

[Spamature]

HELL YEAH..............burn the damn HOOD DOWN..............amazing how you niggas think this is going to Improve ya hood.......where ya PO blacks that got they LIFE SAVING MEDS AT CVS..........going to get they pills tomorrow.........niggas done burn't down CVS...............

You seem happy about it

 

[UPNYA2]

If an incident causes people come out in large numbers to protest over a long standing issue. Authorities should consider that the clock has started running down on that community's patience and time in which they have to react to the grievance has become limited.

Yeah!

Because NOTHING screams out, "I am protesting the long standing issue of oppression from law enforcement personnel!", like running out of a CVS store you have set on fire with an arm load of toilet paper, Cheetos and 2-liter bottles of Orange soda, right?

Just like how the "Authorities should consider that the clock has started running down on that community's patience and time in which they have to react to the grievance has become limited."................. Those who view and defend this type of behavior as some perverted form of "protest", some bizarre "right", as some imagined "freedom of speech" might also do well to consider that the clock has started running down on our nation's patience and time in which they have to re-think the way they respond to each and every grievance, real or perceived, will also become limited at some point.

And when these people are left to themselves by the civilized among us, who will they have to blame and attack? Who will work to earn the "stuff" they all feel entitled to take in order to make themselves feel better the next time something upsets them? When enough of the victims of their rage get fed up and leave them, let them have the towns they are burning, elect to move to where others more like themselves are, who will the "outraged" lash out at then?


Each other.



Good plan actually. Who will miss them when they take out one another? When people fight for anarchy the best way to defeat it is to let it run it's course. MOST who want it now only do so because there are still so many who do not, and sadly those people actually protect these who THINK that they do want complete anarchy.

The problem is, if or when there IS complete anarchy, if or when every person truly does have to do and provide for themselves, most of these wanna-be bad-ass anarchist running around ignoring the law and doing whatever makes them feel better will be left among themselves and will fall prey to the bigger, badder asses there with them.


Again, not a completely undesirable thing in the over-all scheme of things............

 

[marvin martian]

If an incident causes people come out in large numbers to protest over a long standing issue. Authorities should consider that the clock has started running down on that community's patience and time in which they have to react to the grievance has become limited.

Great idea. Let the racist anarchists destroy the homes, businesses and property of the residents of the city. That'll show 'em...

 

[as seen on tv]

The right of people to peacably assemble shall not be abridged.

The constitution provide no such protection for arson, looting, assault, wilding . . .

 

[Fast Eddy]

When people riot it is no longer peaceful assembly, so start busting heads on these animals.

 

[Spamature]

When people riot it is no longer peaceful assembly, so start busting heads on these animals.

And if busting heads was the cause of the original protest ?

 

[Fast Eddy]

And if busting heads was the cause of the original protest ?

Its not a reason to riot. Address the issue legally.

 

[Spamature]

The right of people to peacably assemble shall not be abridged.

The constitution provide no such protection for arson, looting, assault, wilding . . .

Then pay attention while they're asking for redress of their grievances peacefully and react as if not doings so will result in this kind of outcome instead of waiting for it.

 

[Spamature]

Its not a reason to riot. Address the issue legally.

The very fact that something is a longstanding issue means there has been a failure to address it in the first place.

 

[Spamature]

Yeah!

Because NOTHING screams out, "I am protesting the long standing issue of oppression from law enforcement personnel!", like running out of a CVS store you have set on fire with an arm load of toilet paper, Cheetos and 2-liter bottles of Orange soda, right?

Just like how the "Authorities should consider that the clock has started running down on that community's patience and time in which they have to react to the grievance has become limited."................. Those who view and defend this type of behavior as some perverted form of "protest", some bizarre "right", as some imagined "freedom of speech" might also do well to consider that the clock has started running down on our nation's patience and time in which they have to re-think the way they respond to each and every grievance, real or perceived, will also become limited at some point.

And when these people are left to themselves by the civilized among us, who will they have to blame and attack? Who will work to earn the "stuff" they all feel entitled to take in order to make themselves feel better the next time something upsets them? When enough of the victims of their rage get fed up and leave them, let them have the towns they are burning, elect to move to where others more like themselves are, who will the "outraged" lash out at then?


Each other.



Good plan actually. Who will miss them when they take out one another? When people fight for anarchy the best way to defeat it is to let it run it's course. MOST who want it now only do so because there are still so many who do not, and sadly those people actually protect these who THINK that they do want complete anarchy.

The problem is, if or when there IS complete anarchy, if or when every person truly does have to do and provide for themselves, most of these wanna-be bad-ass anarchist running around ignoring the law and doing whatever makes them feel better will be left among themselves and will fall prey to the bigger, badder asses there with them.


Again, not a completely undesirable thing in the over-all scheme of things............

In order for people to respect the law. The law has to respect the people.

 

[Spamature]

Great idea. Let the racist anarchists destroy the homes, businesses and property of the residents of the city. That'll show 'em...

Or try to prevent it.

 

[UPNYA2]

In order for people to respect the law. The law has to respect the people.

Why?

As we can all see right here you defend violence from "the people" when it is in "protest" of them being "disrespected".

Sooooo.............. Using that EXACT same, for lack of a better word, "logic" of yours, it would stand to reason you would also have to defend violence AGAINST "the people" when it is in "protest" of them being "disrespectful" of the law, would it not?





(Just playin', no need to actually reply. We all already KNOW that no dem/lib ever entertains the notion that they might ought to consider DOING themselves as they demand others do. One of the perks of having NO actual morals based upon a strong felt belief, only what they pass off among themselves as "morals" which is based only upon how they might promote a liberal social or political position.)

 

[Spamature]

Why?

As we can all see right here you defend violence from "the people" when it is in "protest" of them being "disrespected".

Sooooo.............. Using that EXACT same, for lack of a better word, "logic" of yours, it would stand to reason you would also have to defend violence AGAINST "the people" when it is in "protest" of them being "disrespectful" of the law, would it not?





(Just playin', no need to actually reply. We all already KNOW that no dem/lib ever entertains the notion that they might ought to consider DOING themselves as they demand others do. One of the perks of having NO actual morals based upon a strong felt belief, only what they pass off among themselves as "morals" which is based only upon how they might promote a liberal social or political position.)

You can ignore the problem or you can get angry about the outcome.

You don't get to do both.

 

[Spamature]

This was a comment on protest. I didn't mention race. Why is it in race relations.

 

[Dawg]

You seem happy about it

and you seem to be acting stupidly

 

[Dawg]

And if busting heads was the cause of the original protest ?

if a busted head has animals burning. looting and destroying neighborhoods, they should be shot like animals with rabies...........

try guessing why their are no riots in my neighborhood_____________

 

[Dawg]

In order for people to respect the law. The law has to respect the people.

yeah, criminals have so much respect for the laws of this land and POlice

 

[Dawg]

Or try to prevent it.

how do you prevent thugs from traveling from one riot to the next__________or the gang bangers in the city______________GO