Brady Bunch wrote:

Just Fred wrote:

I think we can all agree that non-violent protest is preferable to rioting, but a couple questions for you:

1.  What happens when your protests are ignored?  What if, no matter how noble the cause, nobody and/or the people in power won't listen?

2.  The recent protests are a special case in that the very people and policies you are protesting against are the same people charged with overseeing and monitoring the protest. Tough situation for everyone involved.

In some ways, the violence that erupted in Baltimore took the nation's eyes off the ball which was the history of the Baltimore PD and police brutality.  Now that the rioting has subsided, where do we go from here?  The reasons for the rioting still exist.

I'll take the bait and play along.

1.  Where have the protests been for this before the Freddie Gray murder in Baltimore?  This has been happening for years, voer $5 million paid out in settlemen claims in recent years and they didn't protest.  They just started protesting last week, I think you need to give it more time than 1 weeks worth of protests.  Non-violent protests worked for MLK Jr. and changed society.  Also seemed to work for the gay community to get same sex marriage.  You have to change people's hearts and minds, and violence will NEVER do that.

2.  The police were allowing the protestors in Baltimore to demonstrate peacefully as they wanted, they did nothing to instigate the riots on Monday or make the situation any worse

Perhaps the Gray death was the straw that broke the Camel's back?

Goose wrote:

Except cause the death of a man in their custody.

First, while it appears that may be the case, we don't know that for sure yet.  Didn't just about everyone believe Michael Brown was killed unjustly by a police officer in Ferguson in the days after his death?  Based on the evidene, it turned out to be a different scenario.  So I prefer to wait until more facts and information come out before I say the police caused his death.

Second, I understand they are protesting the injustice they believe the police caused.  I took Fred's statement to mean how can they trust the cops to oversee the protests fairly and justly, and my response was based on how they handled the peacefule protests, both before Monday and since then.  I don't believe they have done anything to show they aren't handling this well.
 

Brady Bunch wrote:

Goose wrote:

Except cause the death of a man in their custody.

First, while it appears that may be the case, we don't know that for sure yet.  Didn't just about everyone believe Michael Brown was killed unjustly by a police officer in Ferguson in the days after his death?  Based on the evidene, it turned out to be a different scenario.  So I prefer to wait until more facts and information come out before I say the police caused his death.

Second, I understand they are protesting the injustice they believe the police caused.  I took Fred's statement to mean how can they trust the cops to oversee the protests fairly and justly, and my response was based on how they handled the peacefule protests, both before Monday and since then.  I don't believe they have done anything to show they aren't handling this well.
 

I agree with both of the above. 


 

Goose wrote:

Brady Bunch wrote:

Just Fred wrote:

I think we can all agree that non-violent protest is preferable to rioting, but a couple questions for you:

1.  What happens when your protests are ignored?  What if, no matter how noble the cause, nobody and/or the people in power won't listen?

2.  The recent protests are a special case in that the very people and policies you are protesting against are the same people charged with overseeing and monitoring the protest. Tough situation for everyone involved.

In some ways, the violence that erupted in Baltimore took the nation's eyes off the ball which was the history of the Baltimore PD and police brutality.  Now that the rioting has subsided, where do we go from here?  The reasons for the rioting still exist.

I'll take the bait and play along.

1.  Where have the protests been for this before the Freddie Gray murder in Baltimore?  This has been happening for years, voer $5 million paid out in settlemen claims in recent years and they didn't protest.  They just started protesting last week, I think you need to give it more time than 1 weeks worth of protests.  Non-violent protests worked for MLK Jr. and changed society.  Also seemed to work for the gay community to get same sex marriage.  You have to change people's hearts and minds, and violence will NEVER do that.

2.  The police were allowing the protestors in Baltimore to demonstrate peacefully as they wanted, they did nothing to instigate the riots on Monday or make the situation any worse

Perhaps the Gray death was the straw that broke the Camel's back?

I am sure it was, and that is fine.  But it has only been a week's worth of protests, unfortunately it will probably take longer than that.  Fred specifically asked what happens if the protests are ignored, I pointed out it has only been 1 week. 
 

Goose wrote:

Well, they did describe the initial, peaceful protests as, " a lynch mob.".
And, Gray died in the Baltimore PD custody. I don't know if it was premeditated, accidental, or caused by an overzealous officer.
But he did get his neck broken in police custody, and the PD s responsible.

 
But what if the PD isn't responsible? What if Freddie Gray was responsible? Shouldn't we let due process play out before making that determination?

Last edited by The Man (4/29/2015 7:38 pm)