3 ms·

Well, the mobs have at least been pretty peaceful. So much as they have a goal it's to get attention. They probably had a dozen different targets they try to hi

Well, the mobs have at least been pretty peaceful. So much as they have a goal it's to get attention. They probably had a dozen different targets they try to hit in a day, tell any media that show up why they are there, and then move on. Actually having a good reason is unimportant - they are just trying to hack a way into a news cycle.

prepend 4y ago
> pretty peaceful I don’t like this description. Peaceful protests are peaceful. Pretty peaceful protests aren’t peaceful. There was a protest in my town recently where a cop car was set on fire and a bunch of windows were smashed. Maybe 200-500 people total but it was described as “mostly peaceful.” While that is true as I think only 10 people were arrested and more were violent, but that’s like 5-10% violent and the rest peaceful. I don’t think that’s earnest and truthful and I’d rather like to know if a group is peaceful or not.
- anigbrowl 4y ago
  There's a fundamental difference between property and people, and many people consider interpersonal violence as the dividing line between what's peaceful or not. This cannot be decided unilaterally. Using a zero-tolerance approach leads to outcomes like police gassing crowds of thousands of people because one individual flung a water bottle in their general direction.
  - prepend 4y ago
    Oh certainly. A burned car is a different form of violence than someone beaten or killed. But “mostly peaceful” protests are the bad kind of protests. I think they are more accurately described as light riots or something or mostly peaceful riots. Or some inflection point between a lawful, peaceful protest and a violent protest. The police actually just kind of watched the protesters smashing and burning stuff and they certainly werent tear gassing people. But I think that they do need to do something to stop violent/mostly peaceful protests and arresting 9 out of 100-200 rioters doesn’t seem to be reducing the number of riots.
  - dumpsterdiver 4y ago
    While I agree there is a difference between committing acts of violence against people and inanimate objects, I would consider damaging or destroying a person's home or primary means of transportation (perhaps one and the same) as a direct attack upon that person's well-being. It's not accurate to say that a protest is mostly peaceful when random citizens lose their ability to drive to work and subsequently take on unexpected costs that might devastate them financially.
- cudgy 4y ago
  How is 90-95% peaceful not “mostly peaceful”?
  - prepend 4y ago
    I mean that “mostly peaceful” isn’t a good label as it downplays the important piece that most protests are peaceful. So a “mostly peaceful” is actually a violent protest. It’s like describing someone charged with domestic abuse as “mostly a loving spouse who almost never beat their spouse.” True, but disingenuous.

prepend 4y ago

> pretty peaceful I don’t like this description. Peaceful protests are peaceful. Pretty peaceful protests aren’t peaceful. There was a protest in my town recently where a cop car was set on fire and a bunch of windows were smashed. Maybe 200-500 people total but it was described as “mostly peaceful.” While that is true as I think only 10 people were arrested and more were violent, but that’s like 5-10% violent and the rest peaceful. I don’t think that’s earnest and truthful and I’d rather like to know if a group is peaceful or not.

anigbrowl 4y ago
There's a fundamental difference between property and people, and many people consider interpersonal violence as the dividing line between what's peaceful or not. This cannot be decided unilaterally. Using a zero-tolerance approach leads to outcomes like police gassing crowds of thousands of people because one individual flung a water bottle in their general direction.
- prepend 4y ago
  Oh certainly. A burned car is a different form of violence than someone beaten or killed. But “mostly peaceful” protests are the bad kind of protests. I think they are more accurately described as light riots or something or mostly peaceful riots. Or some inflection point between a lawful, peaceful protest and a violent protest. The police actually just kind of watched the protesters smashing and burning stuff and they certainly werent tear gassing people. But I think that they do need to do something to stop violent/mostly peaceful protests and arresting 9 out of 100-200 rioters doesn’t seem to be reducing the number of riots.
- dumpsterdiver 4y ago
  While I agree there is a difference between committing acts of violence against people and inanimate objects, I would consider damaging or destroying a person's home or primary means of transportation (perhaps one and the same) as a direct attack upon that person's well-being. It's not accurate to say that a protest is mostly peaceful when random citizens lose their ability to drive to work and subsequently take on unexpected costs that might devastate them financially.
cudgy 4y ago
How is 90-95% peaceful not “mostly peaceful”?
- prepend 4y ago
  I mean that “mostly peaceful” isn’t a good label as it downplays the important piece that most protests are peaceful. So a “mostly peaceful” is actually a violent protest. It’s like describing someone charged with domestic abuse as “mostly a loving spouse who almost never beat their spouse.” True, but disingenuous.