Minneapolis Riots

  • Thread starter Thread starter ArtPop
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
OurLadyofSorrows said:
I believe he should address the nation and talk to the protestors.
Click to expand...
With someone else writing the address. Let’s just say his ability to match the tone of, oh, for example, the Queen, isn’t a strength of his.
Reminds me how much I value constitutional monarchy where the head of state is non-political and not elected. No concern for rallying up one’s base and no need to score points in this system.
 
Last edited:
There have been social changes in the last 50 years that have taken place by means of legislation, and it was primarily the non-violent protests and rallies of the Civil Rights movement that led to these changes rather than the riots of the '60s. The only thing that the riots led to was the election of Richard Nixon.
 
Last edited:
meltzerboy2 said:
How can any President NOT address the nation at a time like this? However, if Trump does speak, he needs to be careful to show some sympathy with the protesters and particularly toward the death of George Floyd. Then he might show his toughness in fighting the criminals who are looting.
Click to expand...
Someone should be crafting a very careful speech, handing it to him, and ensuring he reads it word for word.
Yes there are places opposite the White House now burning, but please show some leadership, lead out your people to quell what is so much more ramped up then any protests or riots have been in the past.

These protests are also spreading globally now
 
Last edited:
OurLadyofSorrows said:
a semi trailer truck has ploughed into protestors
Click to expand...
Fortunately, the semi didn’t hit anyone. Although the initial reporting indicated it was intentional (and the video looks horrible!), there’s been a lot of conflicting reports. I’ve watched the video 50 times and the only explanation that matches the facts is that he accidentally found himself on the closed freeway and was trying to stop. I think it’s likely that will be the final explanation once it’s all sorted out.
 
Last edited:

New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo lashed out at protesters calling to reopen the state earlier this month, saying at a news conference, “you have no right to jeopardize my health … and my children’s health and your children’s health.” Cuomo’s directives have been enforced throughout the state: A New York City tanning salon owner told Fox News he was fined $1,000 for reopening briefly last week, calling the situation “insane” and saying he already was “broke”.
On Friday, though, Cuomo said he “stands” with those defying stay-at-home orders: “Nobody is sanctioning the arson, and the thuggery and the burglaries, but the protesters and the anger and the fear and the frustration? Yes. Yes, and the demand is for justice.”

The mayor of Washington D.C., Muriel Bowser, vowed $5,000 fines or 90 days in jail for anyone violating stay-at-home orders. This weekend, though, Bowser defended the protests: “We are grieving hundreds of years of institutional racism. … People are tired, sad, angry and desperate for change.” An angry mob of rioters in the city turned its rage on a Fox News crew early Saturday, chasing and pummeling the journalists outside the White House in a harrowing scene captured on video.

And, Los Angeles Mayor Eric Garcetti threatened in March to cut power and water for businesses that reopened, saying he wanted to punish “irresponsible and selfish” behavior. In recent days, he has encouraged mass gatherings, even as he condemned violence. “I will always protect Angelenos’ right to make their voices heard — and we can lead the movement against racism without fear of violence or vandalism,” he said.
 
ArtPop said:
What are your thoughts on this? Are they justified in their destruction because it’s for a good cause?
Click to expand...
It’s been pretty overwhelming to see all of this.

We know while there were protestors who became rioters, there were people going in there and are damaging property on purpose and protestors who are trying to stop it (because they know they will be blamed for it). We also know there are cops who are using unnecessary force on protestors who aren’t causing harm, which just escalates things further.

It seems there’s an intention to start violence to discredit the movement as a whole. Even heard something about the police saying that some people were linked to white supremacist groups.

There are definitely people there who are using this as an excuse to act like they’re in The Purge, which just harms the black community even more.

Many of the protestors are actually peaceful, yet we have Trump failing to recognise this. Even prominent Conservative pundits like Matt Walsh (who’s Catholic) has openly said that he doesn’t see protestors and rioters as two groups.

It’s been really frustrating to see how people are minimising the protests as merely riots by looters.

I find ‘are violent protests good’ type of questions difficult to answer. Generally they have some effect, if we look at history. That’s how progress happened. That doesn’t mean that I’m okay with it, because obviously I have sympathy for business owners and innocent people getting hurt, but it also doesn’t mean I have a clear answer on it.
 
pnewton said:
I had one thought today. I wonder if the lockdown and subsequent high unemployment has contributed to the pool of people available to go and protest, riot or otherwise engage in activity apart
Click to expand...
Trevor Noah posted an insightful video about this. The incident with Amy Cooper definitely riled people up, because people saw a white individual who understands the dynamics between black people and the police, and tried to use it against a man. People always talk about this, but it’s one thing to see someone blatantly trying to do it on camera. Also staying at home and being agitated at ineffective government etc does contribute to it.
 
Not sure what good it will do to discuss “white privilege” when we are discussing the morality (well, lack thereof) of firebombing buildings and dragging people from their vehicles in order to beat them, so maybe we can drop those two words from our vocabulary. I’m of the opinion that the existence (or not) of “white privilege” does not excuse the wrongs committed by rioters, nor does it even merely deprive them the slightest bit of their responsibility for their actions. I also believe that any “movement” which its members believe cannot succeed without the terrorization (because that’s what this is) of innocents, does not deserve to succeed at all. I’m not convinced that racial equality is a cause which deserves to fail, so I am then of the opinion that terrorist acts (which, yes, these are) are not the way to go about advancing the cause.

This should cover the current and all future race crises.
 
“It is therefore an error to judge the morality of human acts by considering only the intention that inspires them or the circumstances (environment, social pressure, duress or emergency, etc.) which supply their context. There are acts which, in and of themselves, independently of circumstances and intentions, are always gravely illicit by reason of their object; such as blasphemy and perjury, murder and adultery. One may not do evil so that good may result from it”.-Catechism of the Catholic Church 1756
 
Last edited:
Wampa said:
Fortunately, the semi didn’t hit anyone. Although the initial reporting indicated it was intentional (and the video looks horrible!), there’s been a lot of conflicting reports. I’ve watched the video 50 times and the only explanation that matches the facts is that he accidentally found himself on the closed freeway and was trying to stop. I think it’s likely that will be the final explanation once it’s all sorted out.
Click to expand...
He has been charged now.
 
In my city, small businesses got vandalized and looted. These are owned by people who were encouraged to “invest in the city” and be part of its “rebirth”. We aren’t talking Target or Walmart here.

Do you think these riots might have an influence on other small investors wondering if they should invest in the city, or else in the suburbs?
 
Last edited:
How could this possibly shock anyone? If any of this shocks you, you have been sleeping.
We live in a culture that slaughters 10’s of millions of human beings.

Yea, I know, don’t bring abortion into this discussion. Well, you, don’t bring racial violence into it. See how that works? We all have our blind spots don’t we.

If you don’t respect the life of every human being, you are the problem, and you contributed to George Floyd’s death by condoning violence.
 
Last edited:
goout said:
Yea, I know, don’t bring abortion into this discussion. Well, you, don’t bring racial violence into it.
Click to expand...
That is a silly comparison. A good case can be made for racial violence affecting the Minneapolis riots. There is no serious case that abortions have caused the Minneapolis riots.
 
I keep seeing the MLK quotes and and other references to this genuinely great man.

People forget that Rev King (the media always calls him Dr. King) was a clergyman whose primary aim was preaching the gospel, civil rights was his main ministry. He was brought up under the old system of Reason, Faith, and absolutes of Judeo Christian morality.

His statements are properly understood only in that context. That context has largely been destroyed by the media and education systems. The kind of formation he got is nowadays more similar to curriculum of home schoolers or very classical private schools than the local public school.
 
Last edited:
Anrakyr said:
Not to be uncharitable but what?
Click to expand...
Not sure what is not understandable about this statement. If you want to claim racism, you need to show actual evidence that Officer Chauvin’s actions were motivated primarily due to the person’s status as an African American. I have not seen any actual evidence of this demonstrated either in the video or elsewhere. Not saying this isn’t the case, additional evidence may come out that proves this link. But to date, there is nothing to indicate this was the motivating factor. People of all races are killed by officers. Sometimes this involves, white on black, black on white, white on white, and black on black. Just because a white officer used excessive force on a suspect does not prove racism, anymore than it would prove racism if a black officer used excessive force on a white suspect. If you want to charge that the crime was motivated by racism you will need to provide more substantial evidence to sustain this claim.
Anrakyr said:
These are conflicting statements.
Click to expand...
No it isn’t. Truth is independent of what someone might believe. It is objective of the observer.
 
Last edited:
blackforest said:
It occurs within the context of many incidents.
Click to expand...
No it doesn’t. Each crime is its own entity. We don’t try any other criminal offense based on information from other crimes committed by other defendants. Each criminal charge must be proven based on the evidence provided in that individual case.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top