N/A

Edited November 14, 20178 yr by Account Deleted

I'm not entirely sure what the United State laws are in their entirety, nor what each State law is vs. another (I'm Canadian), but isn't that sort of "protest" illegal? Isn't that obstruction or impeding traffic of some sort? They're literally stopping people who have actual Jobs from getting to them, all those Transport Trucks incapable of meeting their time quota and unable to drop off their goods at the given time. It may be "peaceful" by no violence (yet), but it's far from making a point or clear cut message, all it's doing is angering motorists, I know I'd be furious and could care less about an ignorant protest if it was keeping me from my job to put food on my family's table. 

A couple years back, here in Canada we had the Native Americans protesting their "rights" I believe they were angry that the government were treating them the same as every other Canadian citizen and they thought they were some sort of special human being. They wanted to be exempted from having to pay any sort of Tax, so on and so fourth. They ended up blocking numerous highways, as well as Train tracks keeping passenger and cargo trains from going to their destination. The entire situation was rectified by a hefty fine and a few days in jail, the bigger the role of a given protester the bigger the fine and jail sentence. (a lot of the "chiefs" who led individual protest groups were handed months of jail time and fines). 

What I don't get is a lot of the protests are far from peaceful, especially the Ferguson protests as an example. Protesters lighting cars and local businesses on fire, lighting houses and whatever else they can get their ignorant hate filled hands on fire. Why would you damage your own neighborhood? Damage businesses not even related to anything? Why would you put a family out on the street by burning their house down to further your agenda? It's sad, pathetic and ignorant in its most pure form. 

I'm by no means racist, I'm all for equality - but if the black community thinks lighting their own neighborhood on fire, thinks blocking people from getting to their job is going to further their "rights" or agenda, they couldn't be any farther from the truth. I for one, don't have any sympathy for anyone protesting here whatsoever, nor anyone in the Ferguson protests, you lose all credibility when you burn your own neighborhood down and put people out on the street and keep those from just trying to make a living. Is this what is going to happen every time someone that happens to be black gets killed now? Burn a few things down, block traffic? Maybe they should change their chant from "Black Lives Matter" to No One Else Matters But Black Lives.

Edited August 30, 201510 yr by Solidefiance

I'm not entirely sure what the United State laws are in their entirety, nor what each State law is vs. another (I'm Canadian), but isn't that sort of "protest" illegal? Isn't that obstruction or impeding traffic of some sort? They're literally stopping people who have actual Jobs from getting to them, all those Transport Trucks incapable of meeting their time quota and unable to drop off their goods at the given time. It may be "peaceful" by no violence (yet), but it's far from making a point or clear cut message, all it's doing is angering motorists, I know I'd be furious and could care less about an ignorant protest if it was keeping me from my job to put food on my family's table. 

You don't need to be American to know that this is all very illegal. Impeding traffic on a public motorway is absolutely illegal, because it stops people from doing what they're doing while putting other people's lives at risk (Never walk onto a public roadway). 

Whether we like it or not, these people have the right to protest whatever they want. But the point is if you're going to protest something, do it productively. This means do things the way change is supposed to be done, the democratic way. This means gatherings have to be legal, and instead of burning buildings and throwing rocks, engage public officials to address concerns in your community. Elected officials want to hear your concerns, and want to work with you to find a solution, after all that's their job. They most certainly don't want to associate with you if you have a negative image, instead of being a progressive movement of passionate individuals, you have a group of mostly one sided, law-breaking, mass of people who aren't passionate enough about a topic to form an official, productive group (For example Martin Luther King or even the ACLU), nobody is going to want to help you. 

tl;dr You don't like the way something is? Fine. But go about it in a productive way to address it, and work with your elected officials to solve it. Law is a powerful tool. 

You don't need to be American to know that this is all very illegal. Impeding traffic on a public motorway is absolutely illegal, because it stops people from doing what they're doing while putting other people's lives at risk (Never walk onto a public roadway). 

Whether we like it or not, these people have the right to protest whatever they want. But the point is if you're going to protest something, do it productively. This means do things the way change is supposed to be done, the democratic way. This means gatherings have to be legal, and instead of burning buildings and throwing rocks, engage public officials to address concerns in your community. Elected officials want to hear your concerns, and want to work with you to find a solution, after all that's their job. They most certainly don't want to associate with you if you have a negative image, instead of being a progressive movement of passionate individuals, you have a group of mostly one sided, law-breaking, mass of people who aren't passionate enough about a topic to form an official, productive group (For example Martin Luther King or even the ACLU), nobody is going to want to help you. 

tl;dr You don't like the way something is? Fine. But go about it in a productive way to address it, and work with your elected officials to solve it. Law is a powerful tool. 

It's not that I don't know if it's illegal or not, it's the fact that I know if I was an Officer either responding to that call or an Officer in Ferguson I know I'd be terrified to do much of anything in fear of being torn a new asshole (for a lack of a better term). I didn't watch the whole video either, so I wasn't sure what eventually happened. I was more horrified at the fact that these people are physically keeping people from doing whatever they need to do to make a living and be productive in this world. Primarily I would wonder if the Officers in this case would be a lot more lenient and timid to put fourth any force to remove them, although I can wholeheartedly feel their arms being torn in two directions, a direction where if they don't do their job - they could be fired, and alternatively if they do their job they get put into an unnecessary spotlight of bogus claims of "police brutality" 

I don't even think more than half of these people know what they are actually protesting either, I think a lot of them just showed up to put a bit of drama into their life for one reason or another. Plenty of them look more like followers rather than leaders, the leaders look more like they're herding brainless sheep into an agenda that they themselves aren't quite sure about. With the majority of protests involving the black community more or less being violent, it's starting to look like all they wanted was a scapegoat, rather than any sort of equality. Kind of like feminazi's, where "equality" is just a word to use to make it seem "right" in their eyes, but what they actually preach is hatred for all men vs. any actual equality efforts. The same seems to be forming for these protesters too, seems like all they care about is making their quality above all and to silently hate anyone else who either disagrees or chooses not to follow, although, it seemingly is far from silent in this case. Doesn't seem like they take any consideration in for any other race, or human being regardless of colour or background, whether or not people have jobs or whether or not if they burn their own city to the ground. 

What's sad is that underneath the feminazi's and violence from all of this is that there are people who really want to make changes, and all their efforts and time are being casted aside because the Media eats up anything that can produce a higher viewer count. 

It's not that I don't know if it's illegal or not, it's the fact that I know if I was an Officer either responding to that call or an Officer in Ferguson I know I'd be terrified to do much of anything in fear of being torn a new asshole (for a lack of a better term). I didn't watch the whole video either, so I wasn't sure what eventually happened. I was more horrified at the fact that these people are physically keeping people from doing whatever they need to do to make a living and be productive in this world. Primarily I would wonder if the Officers in this case would be a lot more lenient and timid to put fourth any force to remove them, although I can wholeheartedly feel their arms being torn in two directions, a direction where if they don't do their job - they could be fired, and alternatively if they do their job they get put into an unnecessary spotlight of bogus claims of "police brutality" 

I don't even think more than half of these people know what they are actually protesting either, I think a lot of them just showed up to put a bit of drama into their life for one reason or another. Plenty of them look more like followers rather than leaders, the leaders look more like they're herding brainless sheep into an agenda that they themselves aren't quite sure about. With the majority of protests involving the black community more or less being violent, it's starting to look like all they wanted was a scapegoat, rather than any sort of equality. Kind of like feminazi's, where "equality" is just a word to use to make it seem "right" in their eyes, but what they actually preach is hatred for all men vs. any actual equality efforts. The same seems to be forming for these protesters too, seems like all they care about is making their quality above all and to silently hate anyone else who either disagrees or chooses not to follow, although, it seemingly is far from silent in this case. Doesn't seem like they take any consideration in for any other race, or human being regardless of colour or background, whether or not people have jobs or whether or not if they burn their own city to the ground. 

What's sad is that underneath the feminazi's and violence from all of this is that there are people who really want to make changes, and all their efforts and time are being casted aside because the Media eats up anything that can produce a higher viewer count. 

Of course, it's all messed up the logic that goes on here. 

I guess what would happen would depend on what the supervisors decided what to do, they'd have to address the situation and I also didn't watch the video, but I'm sure whatever call they made was a reasonable one. They know everybody is watching it unfold so that's taken into consideration too. 

Somebody brought it up, but a similar thing happened here in Massachusetts last winter I believe when a bunch of black lives mater (white people actually) attached themselves to construction barrels and just sat in the middle of the highway. What a mess, as if the Boston commute wasn't bad enough. 

And I completely agree, these people have terrible tunnel vision. A lot of them have no vision at all on what they want done and the ones that do are fixated on this notion and are willing to block out facts and common sense. For example, they see a White Officer shoot a Black man, but what they don't see is that it was in self defense by some drugged up guy with a knife. Stuff like that. 

If you want to solve a problem, you need to be open minded, willing to look at all angles and of course as I said early, be democratically productive about it too. 

Graham v. Connor and Tennessee v. Garner. Those have established use of force guidelines and when lethal force is allowed on EVERY CITIZEN. It's absolutely asinine to make an exception for black people, or any other ethnic, racial, or gender group. 

You're still missing the point entirely. Black people and minorities are killed at disproportionate rates. I'm not going to debate that with you, its a fact. They're asking for use of force policies be CHANGED to limit when and to what extent force can be used. "Well there's already guidelines established" is a redundant thing to say, because that's the whole point of the movement. To CHANGE policies.

And come on, you know they're not asking for "an exception". 

And limiting the use of force WILL get officers killed. It's already getting them killed because officers are too scared to act because the media will ruin their lives

What officers have been killed because they were too scared to act because of the media? You completely just pulled that out of your ass. In nearly all of the controversial cases of police killings, there was not a legitimate threat towards the officer. So in all of those cases, the officer would be alive.  

And that's the problem. There IS NO DEFINITIVE guideline for use of force. Every officer will perceive a threat differently, and there is no archetypal classification of a threat. A suspect that is 6'6 275lbs may not be considered a serious threat by the officer that is 6'3 250lbs. But that same suspect may be considered a threat by the officer that is 5'9 180lbs. Then you can consider things like accessibility of a weapon, presence of drugs or alcohol, the physical condition of an officer, knowledge of suspect, reason he is considered a suspect, etc. And it's already established that courts will look at Use of Force cases from the viewpoint of an officer, that has a half a second or less to make the decision to pull the trigger. 

See but that's the problem, we can't really entirely on split second decisions to decide whether or not a human being gets to live. Look at the Tamir Rice case, they drove right up to a possibly armed person, and gunned a 12 year old boy down in literally two seconds. That's not a split second decision, that's a pattern of recklessness and disregard for human life. Look at the Eric Garner case, that also wasn't a split second decision. Garner pleaded for his life for an extended period of time before ultimately dying. Not every situation is "a suspect reaches quickly into his jacket, is he reaching for a gun or his ID?". If that were the case, everyone would understand how tough of a situation that is. There are countless cases where if the officers showed more restraint, both they and the citizen would still be alive. The reason why we respect police so much is because they sacrifice their own safety to protect our communities. If they're overly aggressive and paranoid, it gets unarmed citizens killed. That's counter productive to the very reason that we have police in the first place.

If the standard for killing a citizen is a perceived threat, then it is not at all a radical position to ask that they improve or re-evaluate their perception skills.

And why don't these "activists" go through an abbreviated academy? Why don't they learn what is taught to officers. What the force continuum is. When use of force is justified. Why you're shooting. How you're shooting. Because I'd be willing to bet that 99% of these activists don't even know what the case laws are that are the backbone to state statutes or departmental policies regarding use of force. Or what a basic force continuum is. If you don't know about those, then shut up and sit down because it's awfully hard to change something when you don't even know what you're trying to change.

Oh, please. That's a standard that I'm willing to bet that you don't apply to any other movement. I'm willing to bet you don't think pro-life activists should conduct a mock abortion before having the audacity to stand up for what they believe in. What you're really saying in that paragraph is that it pisses you off to see people question an organization that you hold to a high regard.

 

Listen, I don't care if you or anyone supports or doesn't support BLM. But lets be clear about what their positions are, because there's not going to be an actual discussion about the issue if everyone is believing the lies being told about them.

N/A

Edited November 14, 20178 yr by Account Deleted

The blacklivesmatter movement is stupid, plain and simple, Riley has failed to give any credible sources saying that their movement is not racist, it is racist, it is a one sided, ignorant, insignificant movement, every time I see it, I spit on it, disgraceful. Nothing but a bunch of idiots celebrating the lives of THUGS. 

The message they have on their website is just as bad. http://blacklivesmatter.com/

                   

Considering that they commit the most crime, it is not a disproportionate rate one single bit.

More incarcerations doesn't mean more crime, it means more arrests. If anything that shows that black people are disproportionately arrested, which is already proven to be true.

http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/jun/01/black-americans-killed-by-police-analysis

He wasn't killed but easily could have been, it was close enough: http://goo.gl/nRKAe

Remind me again how that was a bad outcome? No one was killed, the suspect was caught and is going to serve hard time. We respect police so much because they sacrifice their safety to protect the community, not because they drive around shooting people at their own digression. When that officer refused to shoot, he gave up some of his safety because he didn't want to kill someone. Whatever his reasons were for doing that, he deserves a medal. I find it strange that you're pointing to a case of incredible bravery on the part of an officer as a symptom of a larger problem. 

Limiting use of force, what the hell does that even mean? Like what would that look like? What they are doing now is protecting the citizens and keeping the public safe. Most of the victims of police shooting are criminals with lengthy criminal records. Look at the Michael Brown case, he robbed a store, and assaulted the officer before being shot. Now most people wouldn't have robbed a store in the first place. Or if you seriously assault an officer, guess what goes up? Your chances of being shot for being a complete idiot

Limiting use of force means....limiting use of force. The Eric Garner case is a perfect example of that. BLM is saying that police have a tendency to use too much force....so they should use less.

Your first sentence there exactly describes the split second decisions officers have to make, other than it is not about if the suspect gets to live, but whether the officer has to defend himself. Yes the Eric Garner case, do you know how big Garner was? 6'3", 350lbs, and in bad health(which contributed to his death). The officers were smaller and lighter. But still, how the hell would you go about arresting a man that big, who is resisting? If he wouldn't have resisted, none of this would have happened. 

That's exactly the problem, people don't respect the police and the law anymore.

Hey I have an idea, how about when someone says they can't breathe, stop doing an illegal lethal choke hold on them? Or is it still the victims fault because he's fat?

You're probably right! But we can apply it to this movement, so why not?

Why not force an entire movement to go through police training and law classes before exercising their first amendment rights? Hmm....

Black Lives Matter is a steaming pile of horseshit! They seem to think they're special, and no one else matters. It should be All Lives Matter, we're all equal.

 

Now I don't know if you're just a troll or not, but this is a community for a police modification where 99% of people definitely support police, so you're not gonna get much support from others... just saying.

Let me ask you something.

Are these protesters saying that white people aren't men? 

The blacklivesmatter movement is stupid, plain and simple, Riley has failed to give any credible sources saying that their movement is not racist, it is racist, it is a one sided, ignorant, insignificant movement, every time I see it, I spit on it, disgraceful. Nothing but a bunch of idiots celebrating the lives of THUGS. 

The message they have on their website is just as bad. http://blacklivesmatter.com/

Their policy positions are extremely moderate, I find it a little scary that you hate them that much....

And I'm also amused that nearly everyone on this forum has completely missed the point of the movement, but everyone still remains very confident that they understand it. Sigh...

N/A

Edited November 14, 20178 yr by Account Deleted

1. More incarcerations mean more arrests, for crimes committed.

Unless people of color are disproportionately arrested.

http://www.sentencingproject.org/images/photo/12_lifetime_likelihood_race.png

2. The whole fucking thing was a bad outcome.

 

Everyones alive, and the suspect will serve hard time for the crime he committed. Sounds like a working justice system. 

3. You can't limit the use of force, because you don't know when you need to use it and how much. It's a case by case scenario.

It's a fairly broad request, because its a fairly broad problem.

4. How about you find another, better way to subdue a suspect as big as Garner. Do you know how often officers get the "Oh I can't breathe" shit?

How about you don't subdue Garner, since all he was doing was selling untaxed cigarettes after breaking up a fight? Both Eric Garner and Freddie Gray died because their arresting officers ignored their pain. Those are just high profile cases. If someone is begging for air, I'd expect people who's job it is to "serve and protect" to make sure he's OK, instead of continuing to choke him out with a banned and lethal chokehold.

5. Wouldn't be possible or feasible.

Glad we agree.

6. That picture does not represent BLM, therefore it is completely irrelevant. It shows black people fighting for their rights and against slavery most likely in the 60's. I entirely support that.

#s 6 and 7 tie together, so stay with me. (and FYI, that was during the civil rights movment, not slavery)

So the protesters were part of the "I am a man" demonstrations. By holding signs that said, "I am a man", they were reminding people that they are human beings, because they're being treated as if they're not. The signs don't say "white people are men too" because white people are being treated like human beings. The signs don't mention the humanity of white people because white people at that time were at the top of the social ladder.

Now, decades later, we have the Black Lives Matter movement. By saying  "Black Lives Matter", they are reminding people that they are human beings, because they're being treated as if they're not. They're not saying "white lives matter too" because white people are being treated like human beings. The signs don't mention the humanity of white people because white people are still (according to them) at the top of the social ladder.

So plop anyone from this forum back in the 60s, and you would be the guys shouting "WHITE PEOPLE ARE MEN TOO" at the I am a Man protesters. Its very important that you know the historical background to the BLM movement.

Organizations like Fox News are twisting their message to say "only black lives matter", when that's not at ALL what they're saying. Say whatever you will about the movement, but you should know what they really stand for before essentially accusing them to be a black supremacy group.

 

Organizations like Fox News are twisting their message to say "only black lives matter", when that's not at ALL what they're saying. Say whatever you will about the movement, but you should know what they really stand for before essentially accusing them to be a black supremacy group.

All I'm going to say is that you know your movement is an epic failure when the purpose of the movement is confusing and misleading. Let's drop the statistics and use some old fashion common sense for a second, good sir. When someone chants "black lives matter", what do you honestly think someone that isn't a part of the movement is going to assume? "Oh they're chanting 'black lives matter' but they don't literally mean that only black lives matter, it's more than that". No, that's not what the average person is going to assume. The average person, as evidently happening right now, is going to assume that the "black lives matter" movement only suggests that the deaths of black people by police are relevant; and nothing else matters unless the victim is black. I'd much rather support an "all lives matter" or a "stop police brutality" movement, but a "black lives matter" movement is just opening a can of worms. 

But wait, this is where it starts to get kind of funny. Recently there was a case I saw on the news earlier this weekend about a white person that was supposedly innocent, and killed by police. People began to start a "white lives matter" movement as a result, but it was quickly deemed racist and abandoned. Of course, it's perfectly fine to have a black movement, but not a white one. It's very hard to take such a movement seriously with such backwards logic. I've been on the side of law enforcement this entire time, and that's exactly where I'm going to remain by the looks of this "movement". 

Hell, I might even create my own movement. "#Policelivesmatter".

Everyones alive, and the suspect will serve hard time for the crime he committed. Sounds like a working justice system. 

That officer got incredibly lucky. He could have easily been killed but for whatever reason the suspect decided that beating him unconscious was enough, the next officer might not be so lucky. Are you saying that if that officer had shot and killed the suspect it would have been police brutality? I know an officer's job is to "serve and protect" and that there is a certain amount of risk that goes with the job but does that mean that an officer should allow people to beat him unconscious with his own weapon? How much abuse should they take before they take action?

That officer got incredibly lucky. He could have easily been killed but for whatever reason the suspect decided that beating him unconscious was enough, the next officer might not be so lucky. Are you saying that if that officer had shot and killed the suspect it would have been police brutality? I know an officer's job is to "serve and protect" and that there is a certain amount of risk that goes with the job but does that mean that an officer should allow people to beat him unconscious with his own weapon? How much abuse should they take before they take action?

No I don't think that officers should allow that to happen, but I don't think its an example of how movements like BLM are calling for officers to be killed, as someone else alluded to.

All I'm going to say is that you know your movement is an epic failure when the purpose of the movement is confusing and misleading. Let's drop the statistics and use some old fashion common sense for a second, good sir. When someone chants "black lives matter", what do you honestly think someone that isn't a part of the movement is going to assume? 

I had no problem coming to the conclusion that they are chanting that because they're being treated as if their lives don't matter. Maybe that's a difference in perspective, but I can't see how anyone could reach another conclusion, and still hold firm on their original impression even after someone has explained the real merits of the movement to them.

But wait, this is where it starts to get kind of funny. Recently there was a case I saw on the news earlier this weekend about a white person that was supposedly innocent, and killed by police. People began to start a "white lives matter" movement as a result, but it was quickly deemed racist and abandoned. Of course, it's perfectly fine to have a black movement, but not a white one. It's very hard to take such a movement seriously with such backwards logic. I've been on the side of law enforcement this entire time, and that's exactly where I'm going to remain by the looks of this "movement". 

I know exactly the case you're talking about, and there's a perfectly logical reason why there isn't a "white lives matter" movement. Don't in any way take this as an argument, because its more of a cultural discussion.

White Lives Matter does not exist because white people are still at the top of the social ladder. Try not to freak out when you hear this, but white privilege is a real thing. Combine all the statistics we've seen about disproportionate arrests, shootings, killings, etc. Even if you don't believe that research is accurate, bear with me. Do you really think that after hundreds of years of slavery, segregation, lynching, etc, that we were suddenly able to do away with racism in our society? I'm not just talkign about individual racist people, but I'm talking about systemic racism in our culture. Its not a question of whether or not "cops are racist", but more that justice, from top to bottom, is not blind. White Lives Matter doesn't exist because its a given that white lives have always mattered. Do you really think that white druggies in Beverly Hills are being roughed up by police in the same way that black people are in the hoods of Baltimore? No way, we all know that isn't the case, and its just something that we accept. I mean these are all things that we know exist, but when we bring it up in the context of police brutality, people lose their minds and pretend that these things don't exist. I've always believed that the problem isn't a matter of individual racist cops, but that its a cultural problem we've yet to address. 

So now back to the case of the white kid that was killed. The existence of a White Lives Matter movement is to suggest that white people are the overall victims in our society, and if you look at things like the criminal justice system, as well as the lasting effects of our country's history, that's just not the case. What it sounds like happened in the case you mentioned is a cop freaked out when the car started driving and shot the kid. That's a terrible thing and it didn't have to happen, but in the grand scheme of things, its not a symptom of a larger racial problem, or a cultural disregard of "white life".

No I don't think that officers should allow that to happen, but I don't think its an example of how movements like BLM are calling for officers to be killed, as someone else alluded to.

I'm not saying that the BLM movement is calling for officers to be killed. I'm saying that the way the media is reporting on police shootings is having a direct negative impact on how police officers perform their job.

I'm not saying that the BLM movement is calling for officers to be killed. I'm saying that the way the media is reporting on police shootings is having a direct negative impact on how police officers perform their job.

Someone else was saying that, not you. Yeah, I think its possible that the currently level of media attention could have a negative impact on how police officers perform their job. But it still seems like a secondary issue, since the original issue was questioning them killing us. It just seems kinda disingenuous to flip the conversation in order to prioritize how the media coverage of police killings is affecting police.

But still, of course we have to keep our cops safe. Everyone can agree on that. I definitely would like to see research into the effects of media attention on police safety.

So wait, statistics aside - common sense and morals speaking above all else. Let's say for sake of discussion that the BLM movement has NOTHING to do with race, or brutality whatsoever. Let's just say it's a plain Jane movement to stop abuse against, oh, I don't know the Elderly? How do you legitimately say with a straight face that any of them are doing anything productive? Forget race, forget ethnic background, what would be said for a bunch of thugs running around lighting old age homes on fire, lighting local businesses, houses and cars on fire? What would be said for the complete blockade of traffic, preventing those with actual jobs to provide for their families? Blocking trucks, trains, you name it from dropping off their goods, goods that keep businesses, grocery stores, what have you alive and kicking so they too can provide for their families and keep the delicate eco system going? 

I don't care what colour you are, black, white, pink, orange, red, if you block me from getting to my job that allows me to provide for my family you bet your bottom dollar that I will run your ass over and you will not see an ounce of sympathy. But y'know what? There is more to it, it's much more elaborate, statistics back in not just for a global race but for each case by case scenario where each of the people shot have an extensive background of criminal behavior. What I find so hypocritical is that you see the families of those shot saying nothing but garbage, "oh he was a good man, would never hurt a fly" meanwhile the kid has a list of drug use, robberies and violence all strewn throughout his life. 

So, why exactly is anyone protecting these thugs? They haven't done a single productive thing in life, they sure weren't model citizens and I suppose those who participated in the festivities of burning down your own neighborhood weren't far off either of getting the Citizen of the year award. The entire movement is hypocritical, the movement became nothing but a scapegoat it became a reason to pull down your own neighborhood for absolutely no reason at all. It's a sham, plain and simple. I guess if we apply the logic that goes into the brains of these "peaceful protesters" It means that I can burn down my local grocery store because I find the price of Milk to be outrageously high! 

#ThePriceOfMilkMatters!