Rioting aftermath in Kenosha

  • Thread starter Thread starter AlNg
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
blackforest said:
Stand down as in, “Make some arrests, but no more than six people, please.” Far-fetched and silly.
Click to expand...
Stand down, as in allow a mob to block off city blocks to form a “Chaz”, or allow rioting in Portland for 2 months, as an example.
It isn’t silly. It’s dangerous.
blackforest said:
Democrats tend to cluster in urban areas. There’s no evidence that a Republican mayor would do a better job at preventing and prosecuting police violence.
Click to expand...
Rudy in New York is a recent example. At that time, it was perhaps the safest major city in the country.
 
This might be a good time to recall the events at Harpers Ferry in 1859. Then, as now in Kenosha, a group of 22 people resorted to violence to attempt to address injustice. Then, as now, the violence was not itself a just response to that injustice. Then, as now, the violence was a not very unexpected reaction to injustice. Did John Brown’s raid solve the problem he was trying to address? No. In the same way the riots in Kenosha are not solving the problem of police brutality. They are counter-productive. And they should be totally expected in the same way that some sort of violence was inevitable in 1859. So people can talk all they want about how the rioters should be locked up or otherwise dealt with harshly. And perhaps that is right. But unless the problem of police brutality is addressed, and hopefully in a less violent way than the war that started the next year after Harpers Ferry, we can expect more of the same.
 
Last edited:
Peaceful protesters are alright but we are seeing quite a bit of bullying. People got killed last night in… Wisconsin of all places. Some people in these inner cities really hate those who are just destroying businesses, property.

It seems like what we are hearing is some sort of “woke” defenses. This does not help the problem.
 
JacobF said:
When an officer is giving you an order, you probably won’t have the opportunity to consult a legal professional during that instance. When an officer is trying to arrest you, you comply and consult a legal professional later.
Click to expand...
The fact that this is good advice for the one being arrested does not imply that not following it justifies anything the officer may choose to do.

Parents of black boys often give them “the talk” about how to go above and beyond to stay out of trouble and avoid being the victim of police violence. But we should all long for the day when such extreme precautions are not necessary.
 
Last edited:
As I argued upthread, the entire premise and OP of the thread is a deflection, focusing on riots while ignoring what caused them.
JonNC said:
Stand down, as in allow a mob to block off city blocks to form a “Chaz”,
Click to expand...
Again, I’m sorry you feel the police of Kenosha are incompetent. Given what happened to Mr. Blake, however, I’m afraid I share your sentiments.
 
I’m sorry you feel that Jacob Blake’s life - and how it was nearly taken from him

The rioters are in the wrong. The vast majority of peaceful protesters are doing the right thing. But no, let’s ignore them. It’s so much more sexy and inflammatory to focus on 6+ arrested radicals who likely weren’t even from Kenosha.
 
Justice is suppose to be regulated to the court room. Not the trigger finger of a cop.
 
JacobF said:
When an officer is giving you an order, you probably won’t have the opportunity to consult a legal professional during that instance.
Click to expand...
Agreed, you don’t. That’s why I’ve spoken with my legal professional to have that information ahead of time. The acquisition of that knowledge would need to be proactive, not reactive. Ex: if an officer expresses that he wants to search one’s car, for many scenarios one can decide to not give consent to the search and refuse it.
JacobF said:
When an officer is trying to arrest you, you comply and consult a legal professional later.
Click to expand...
Even for the arrest, it is good to know one’s legal obligations and rights and more importantly to know when to direct officers to present their inquiries to one’s legal representatives and otherwise keeping one’s mouth shut.
 
Jesus is also forgiving and loving.

And that is Old Testament God.
 
Here in the US you would have to be plain loco to walk away from the cops when they have their guns drawn and pointing at you. You would have to be double loco to then walk to your vehicle and reach into said vehicle while cops are following you with guns pointing at you. Anyone can get a gun here in the US, lawfully or illegally, doesn’t matter, law abiding citizen or criminal. doesn’t matter. Naturally cops know this, they don’t know if they are facing a potential life threatening situation every time they pull someone over or try to apprehend someone. They may have to react in a split second on whether they might live or die, and so unfortunately mistakes are made, they must face this pressure every day. Cops have families, they feel the anxiety each time they’re on duty if they’ll see their family again, it’s one of the consequences they face with having an armed society…shoot first or die.
 
Peter never seems to have really embraced the idea of nonviolence: He not only used his sword to cut off the soldier’s ear in Gethsemane, he also never teaches on the idea of loving our enemies, turning the other cheek, or blessing those who curse us. Jesus does, of course. Paul does. Even John does. But in Acts and in 1 and 2 Peter, we have no examples of Peter ever embracing this central teaching of Jesus. Perhaps Peter was still holding on to “an eye for an eye” as his rule, and not “love your enemy.” (Yes, I know that this is an argument from silence, but it is more consistent with Peter’s character, than with God’s character, to strike someone dead for lying)
 
LeafByNiggle said:
Parents of black boys often give them “the talk” about how to go above and beyond to stay out of trouble and avoid being the victim of police violence. But we should all long for the day when such extreme precautions are not necessary.
Click to expand...
I was given that talk as well, it works regardless of your skin color.

We will never move beyond the need for people to be respectful rather than combative when they are being detained.
 
Some things don’t add up according to Jewish Tradition.

Both Ananias and Sapphira are buried instantaneously: According to historians, it was common practice to bury dead bodies soon after death, but not immediately afterwards. Typically, the body was first prepared for burial [and this was an involved, time-consuming process where the body was stripped, bathed, anointed with oils and certain burial spices, and then the limbs were bound and wrapped in cloths before burial.] There is also a precedent for the burial procession to start at the home of the deceased, surrounded by family members, and then leading out of the city to the burial site or tomb. So I have to ask, why wasn’t Ananias’s body held until his wife could be there to help prepare his body for burial? This would have been the most normal reaction to someone who had died. However, they do not inform the wife. They do not wait for her to help prepare his body for burial. Why? Perhaps because they were already anticipating that she would be killed next.

Why are men allowed to bury Sapphira? According to those same First Century Jewish customs, only another woman could prepare a woman’s body for burial. But in the details provided to us in Acts, there were only men who carried out both bodies to the tomb for burial. Why is that? Why did they just skip those important steps about preparing the body for burial? Did they rush the process because they didn’t want anyone to investigate the details of their deaths?
 
Is it likely that the Holy Spirit killed two people on the eve of the outpouring of the Holy Spirit upon the Church? Jesus made a big deal about how He came to give us abundant life and that Satan is the one who comes to “steal, kill and destroy.” If the argument is that God could not allow such sin to spread throughout the Body of Christ, then please explain why God isn’t killing pedophile pastors, or greedy televangelists who swindle the elderly out of their social security checks. I personally don’t believe that it is consistent with the character of God [as revealed to us by Jesus] to do such a thing.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top