This is going to be a long one with lots of words. It also might cause you to question some of your firmly-held beliefs. Hopefully you’ll read through to the end. If you don’t agree, that’s cool. This isn’t one of those “I’ll unfriend you if you don’t agree with this” posts. You’re welcome to unfriend me if you want. But, if you unfriend me solely because you don’t agree with my opinion then we weren’t really friends to begin with.
On a separate thread, I asked people to state the most ridiculous things they’ve been asked to do or believe lately. One of the items I submitted was that we’re supposed to believe that rioting and looting are valid and acceptable forms of protest. I had a couple people say that they believe that rioting and looting is an acceptable form of protest.
So, I asked if it would be acceptable for me and a bunch of other 55+ year-old white guys to burn down Minneapolis because we believed we were being discriminated against. The answer is, of course it’s not. I’ll explain why in a bit but first I want to address one of the arguments in favor of looting Target stores as a form of protest.
One person asserted that America was founded by terrorists and that looting and rioting is, essentially, an American tradition. This argument doesn’t hold up for several reasons.
- Slavery was an American tradition but it isn’t anymore. Societies change. Merely pointing to something that happened nearly 250 years ago and using that as an excuse for similar behavior today isn’t a valid argument.
- Terrorist activities are no longer considered “woke”. Very few civilized people in the world believe that terrorist activities are OK. One easy-to-spot exception is ISIS. There are probably a couple others but literally billions of people believe that terrorism is a very bad thing. Now, you might argue that these violent protests aren’t considered “terrorism”. But, if you’re using “America was founded on terrorism” as an argument in favor of the destruction then you’ve already self-classified this as terrorism.
- The people in colonial times were being repressed but had no voice to change it. Remember “taxation without representation”? That’s not the case anymore. Police departments are local issues, not national/Federal issues. The President has very little power to change how things work at the city level. But you do. The same political party have controlled/governed most major U.S. cities for decades. You want change? Vote. If you keep electing incumbents, why should you expect something to change? If you keep doing what you’re doing you’re going to keep getting what you’ve got.
- Back in the 1700’s there were very few communication tools available. You were limited to pretty much word-of-mouth with leaflets/pamphlets being distributed by person, horse/mule or boat. Today, everyone has the potential to instantly communicate with millions, if not billions of people. We have simply outgrown the need for violent protests.
But, let me get back to the reason that it’s not OK for a bunch of 55+ year-old white guys to riot/loot as a form of protest. Because it’s not OK for ANYONE to do it.
If you’re truly interested in equality, people need to be equal under the law. Everyone is guaranteed the right to peacefully protest. No one is guaranteed the right to steal sneakers or electronics or jewelry. So, if we’re equal under the law, either everyone is allowed to burn, loot, pillage and otherwise cause destruction, or no one is. The people who claim that it’s their right to steal a flat-screen TV are merely attempting to justify what everyone agrees is a crime.
To date, we’ve had tens of millions of dollars of damages done by rioters. Because of the riots, many people have lost their livelihoods and several police officers have lost their lives. But, when the police in Atlanta call in sick to support their own cause, which BTW is a PEACEFUL protest, they are vilified. You don’t get to have it both ways. Either all protests are valid forms of expression or none are.
So, ask yourself: Are all causes allowed to use violence? Are pro-life people justified to use violence to stop abortions? Are people who desire immigration reform allowed to trash LA because they don’t want a wall built? Would it be OK for a 2nd amendment supporter to start a riot? What about people who want to protest a bad call that denied their team a championship? Is it OK for them to loot/trash their city? How many people need to support my cause before I can use violence? Is two enough? Twenty? Two hundred?
Let’s for a minute assume that it is OK for every cause to use violence to make their point. How far is too far? How much damage can I cause? Is there a limit to how many fires can I start? Can I use a gun? If it’s OK to burn down someone’s place of business is it OK to burn down their house? If it’s OK to burn down a business, how about a church? If it’s OK to loot a jewelry store, is it OK to rob someone else who happens to be at the protest? If it’s OK to start fires, can I use a flamethrower. If it’s OK to use Molotov cocktails can I use other types of IEDs? How many lives can be lost? Is there a difference in the number of protesters who can be killed versus the number of police, security guards and bystanders before it becomes unacceptable?
Fortunately, we don’t need to answer any of these questions because we already have an answer. This is not a difficult issue. Anyone who riots, loots and causes other destruction, regardless of the reason, is a criminal and should be treated as such. Because, doing these things is a crime. It’s that simple.
