What do you think about looters?

[Majinash]

So something has come up today in my area that really irks me and I want to get some opinions from other people.

Yesterday in my area there was a fatal police involved shooting. My post isn't about this, this is just the catalyst to the events today. I hope the thread doesn't get derailed by this because I know how much the internet hates police.

Today a Vigil was held for the dead 18-year old, packed with people. There was also a protest near the police station. For the most part things went well, a little bit of minor vandalism like spraypainting ect, police telling people to disperse ect. I don't have to full story on that part yet (most news on it is lacking on these events)

What it HAS become is riots and looting. All I see on the news right now are shots of people breaking into gas stations, auto parts stores and a Walmart. People are breaking stuff, stealing tires and rims. At one point the news anchor on scene had to cut his report short because gunfire broke out.

This is the part that pisses me off. Regardless of what happened to leading up to that man's death, how is this helping? Someone owns that auto parts store, people work in that Walmart. What do they have to do with anything? Why do these people think a police involved shooting means they get to go on a rampage? Does this encourage change for the better?

This is mostly about riots. I understand civil unrest, I understand civil disobedience, I understand people using force to fight for what they believe in.

This is none of those. What is this? Is this people using someone's death to justify their selfish actions to their friends? Why do people think the solution to police violence is indiscriminate violence? More people are suffering and I see no positive outcome... unless you just got new rims for your car.

This feels like a horrible way for people to remember this victim. Now he isn't just the victim of a shooting, he is the cause of a riot.

Anyone here ever been a part of a looting riot? anyone ever been a victim of looting? What do you guys think of these situations. Not just this specific one but of other examples.

 

[Zhukov]

I think it looks like great fun.

Sadly, it's also a total dick move. Pretty damn hard to justify too. "Young Bob was killed. We should steal some TVs! It's what he would have wanted!"

I imagine in those scenarios it's a one-thing-leads to another situation. With some other people taking advantage of the chaos to steal, burn and generally party it up.

Never been involved in any such thing myself. Closest I've come were some rather rowdy protests. Those were fun.

 

[BathorysGraveland2]

Well it's stealing. It's taking advantage of the situation (the misfortune of others) for your own personal gain. The mentality is pretty tried and true by now. The looters aren't so much protesters as people taking advantage of the situation a protest presents.

 

[Flames66]

I think looters should be shot.

In theory I agree that the people being looted should defend themselves and their property with lethal force. However, I think it would be far too easy for the fuzz to use looting as an excuse to do away with the people protesting their actions.

 

[Floppertje]

I think there's multiple facets to this. On the one hand, it's a violent outlash at an uncaring system (and let's face it, if anything spells 'uncaring corporate giant' it's probably wallmart), on the other hand it's a kind of 'this is ok now' thing. As a society, we've constructed this template where we sort of agree on what you can and cannot do in certain situations and places. For example, there's no rule against it, but you wouldn't go read a book in the middle of the dancefloor of a night club. So when we change from 'normal rules' to 'riot rules', people aren't quite sure what is ok and what is not. At this point, the broken window theory sets in: if you leave a matress out somewhere and it doesn't get cleaned up quickly, soon it'll be joined by a broken down fridge, some bags full of garbage, a couch and a couple of corpses. When some asshole sets an example and nobody corrects them (in this case because the cops are busy), the rest of society goes 'well, I guess that's ok in this situation.'
Finally, it's a crime of opportunity. The cops are busy, everything is in chaos and all those TV's are just there for the taking. There's little perceived risk, so why not? To them, I expect it's kindof like downloading a movie.


Disclaimer: I wrote this to EXPLAIN looting, not to justify it. Looting is bad, mmmkay? Personally, I think that anyone who enters another person's property to hurt them or take their stuff waives their rights (yeah, I know it would be a total legal shitstorm. this is why I'm not the president. also because my country doesn't have a president.)

 

[Verlander]

It's opportunism, but it's to be expected. The powers that be are opportunistic in their own way anytime they're given the opportunity.

 

[Imperioratorex Caprae]

Nothing warrants looting. It is not a form of protest, not at all and shows how opportunistic and criminal folks can be when they find no one is around to stop them. Its theft, usually done in a violent way (conducted during a riot or disaster, quite possibly resulting in someone getting hurt or killed in the process).
I find that it also ruins any credibility those who were taking up for some cause ever had. The people who do these things should be found and dealt with by police. Hell there's a shit ton of video evidence considering how many people like to record shit these days (and I've seen the video). So cops have at least a portion of people who were involved caught on tape. All they need do later when the riots taper off is launch a round up investigation (staggered of course so they don't overload their precincts) and arrest these pisspoor excuses for humanity.

 

[Therumancer]

I think looters should be shot.

In theory I agree that the people being looted should defend themselves and their property with lethal force. However, I think it would be far too easy for the fuzz to use looting as an excuse to do away with the people protesting their actions.

The way I see it is that no authorities are ever going to be entirely trusted. For the most part though I'd actually trust the police to do something like this than regular folks to administer vigilante justice, as that just pits one mob against another.

For the most part I think a big part of the problem is that the lack of repercussions is why you have these looting sprees, people have no fear of the authorities stopping them, and figure even if they are stopped it's worth the risk of a couple nights in jail vs. the payoff of a new TV or whatever.

Speaking for myself however, I'd probably go with a sort of middle ground solution. I'd take the kid gloves off the cops when it comes to using non-lethal ordinance, and suspend the rights of those targeted during a right from being able to sue the police force for injuries or whatever. Then I'd let the police pretty much go to town with rubber bullets, tear gas, mace, bean bag rounds, and whatever else. Sure, some people will die, and many will likely be injured in such a chaotic situation, but nowhere near the body count of just flat out telling the police "shoot on sight". Going in with lethal force (ie live ammo) should be reserved in cases where the rioters are armed, or themselves attempting to use lethal force or whatever (and the threat of the police escalating to real bullets if they push can be a deterrent to resistance).

The way I see it is this, at the end of the day you want to stop people from figuring "oh hey, a lot of people are freaking out, I'll go rob a store" and carrying off a bunch of stuff. The police dropping the guy with a 12 gauge slug or a few rounds from a 9mm will do the job, and be a deterrence against this kind of behavior, but frankly it is a little excessive in most riots of this sort. On the other hand you shoot the dude with a beanbag round (which can break ribs and such) your going take the dude out, he might die, but it's highly unlikely, and your going to stop his looting without killing him, and the guy is probably going to hurt enough not to be in a hurry to do it again. Of course the thing is with weapons like this, people CAN die, especially if they have a medical condition or whatever (the same with most non-lethal weapons) and of course bones can be broken and everything else. In a riot situation which is pure chaos you can't always control the situation as well as you might want to during a takedown either. That's why I'd say the police should be protected from civil actions or whatever. Basically some dude shouldn't be able to put his medical bill for busted ribs on the police department because he got taken down with a rubber bullet trying to flee with a new toaster. Some guy who dies from being tazed likewise shouldb't be a crime for the police, or a suit the family can bring. Now yes, one could suppose this could be abused (anything could) but at the end of the day I think you'd get similar results with less actual bodies.

Now of course there are exceptions to this, in certain cases like disaster areas or super-large scale riots where rather than being contained, the riots are over a huge area, I'd agree with lethal force being used by both the police and home/store owners. In such a case the only real way to stop it is to pretty much get people off the streets and enforce a curfew of sorts temporarily until the rioting breaks down. With that much stuff going on the police are likely to be hugely outnumbered and there isn't going to be the facilities to deal with the number of people being brought down. In such a case a lot of people will be shot, but you have to weigh that cost in restoring order against the cost of not doing it. On the other hand this level of rioting is VERY, VERY, rare. For example during Katrina I actually felt the police should have been shooting a lot of the looters. In your typical local riot over a shooting or whatever, I'd imagine the police can call in support from the state troopers and other groups if needed, contain it, and at that point they should be able to handle it with non-lethal ordinance. Take down say 500 rioters with real bullets and you have 500 dead people, take them down with tasers and beanbags none are likely to die, but even if you have a few people killed that's a heck of a lot better than 500 corpses.

I'll also say some vigilante Wal Mart manager or whatever gunning people down left and right isn't likely to help you restore order in a practical sense in most situations... and I'm a big advocate of personal armament. Shooting people during a home invasion, okay, but firing into crowds? I'm less cool with that even during your typical riot. Not to mention that the store manager will likely get himself killed trying it, because once he starts shooting (assuming the rioters are not also armed and laying waste to the place, but that's generally only in movies) he's going to become the target of all those people wanting to take him out. To put it into perspective, you might notice how few people your "average gun toting maniac" usually takes out, even after planning, when dealing with a crowd. Typically one of these guys enters into a crowded place and has like 4 or 5 guns and hundreds of rounds of ammo, he doesn't usually get all that many people before someone, either the police, or people in the crowd, take him down. I personally wouldn't encourage anyone individually try and face down a bunch of rioters, even when armed. The police on the other hand are organized, and trained to handle this kind of thing as groups which is why they are really the only viable option.

 

[babinro]

There's not much to say here as we all probably share the same general opinion

I find that looters bring out the absolute worst in humanity. They show that hundreds/thousands of people are gladly willing to ruin other peoples lives the moment they feel they can get away with it. They'll do this over something as petty as some electronics.

It's disgusting.

I'm not completely ignorant though...I know people do this all the time in a legal sense as well especially in the business world. But looting shows just how common and rampant this kind of human outlook is throughout the world.

The act itself is also completely childish. Hilariously so if not for the real life harm that results from it. This is no different than a 3 year old throwing a tantrum. It's just about the absolute worst way to voice an opinion and get what you want.

Note: I also realize that many looters could care less about the issues and are simply taking advantage of the situation for personal gain.

 

[Smooth Operator]

Well you might not see it as a protest but they sure do, doing something blatantly against the law to one of the biggest richest conglomerates in the world right now... that is a "fight the power" double whammy right there.
Obviously people escalate it to looting because of our basic inclinations to greed and conflict, but they will always interpret it as a higher purpose.

Does it change anything? Well violent protest are always bound to change something, but which way it will swing you can never know for sure. The chances to have authorities back off are just as good as them going even crazier.

 

[Riff Moonraker]

So something has come up today in my area that really irks me and I want to get some opinions from other people.

Yesterday in my area there was a fatal police involved shooting. My post isn't about this, this is just the catalyst to the events today. I hope the thread doesn't get derailed by this because I know how much the internet hates police.

Today a Vigil was held for the dead 18-year old, packed with people. There was also a protest near the police station. For the most part things went well, a little bit of minor vandalism like spraypainting ect, police telling people to disperse ect. I don't have to full story on that part yet (most news on it is lacking on these events)

What it HAS become is riots and looting. All I see on the news right now are shots of people breaking into gas stations, auto parts stores and a Walmart. People are breaking stuff, stealing tires and rims. At one point the news anchor on scene had to cut his report short because gunfire broke out.

This is the part that pisses me off. Regardless of what happened to leading up to that man's death, how is this helping? Someone owns that auto parts store, people work in that Walmart. What do they have to do with anything? Why do these people think a police involved shooting means they get to go on a rampage? Does this encourage change for the better?

This is mostly about riots. I understand civil unrest, I understand civil disobedience, I understand people using force to fight for what they believe in.

This is none of those. What is this? Is this people using someone's death to justify their selfish actions to their friends? Why do people think the solution to police violence is indiscriminate violence? More people are suffering and I see no positive outcome... unless you just got new rims for your car.

This feels like a horrible way for people to remember this victim. Now he isn't just the victim of a shooting, he is the cause of a riot.

Anyone here ever been a part of a looting riot? anyone ever been a victim of looting? What do you guys think of these situations. Not just this specific one but of other examples.

I refer you to the Rodney King riots, where a whole populace also used THAT as an excuse to riot, loot, and burn things. I am sorry if what I am about to say offends someone, but the truth hurts, I suppose. There is a certain element that will use things like this as an opportunity to loot and riot, and get away with general lawlessness, and will only use a tragic event like this as a shield. Personally, I think they are the scum of the earth, and should be irradicated.

I have absolutely NO use for a thief. My house was broken into once, and while I was angry that it happened, I was MORE angry about the fact that I didnt catch them in the act, and rid the world of one more piece of scum.

 

[Riff Moonraker]

It's one of those crimes that everyone thinks is disgusting (which rightfully so, it is) but I think everyone if not most people would definitely partake in given the chance.

I would have to disagree. I think you might be surprised how many people out there still have some morals, and a sense of whats right and wrong.

Now, if the situation were a life and death situation where your child or family member needed something, and you had no options (ie a situation where you could not get any of the needed items legally, because of a disaster or something where you were trapped in a particular area, and nothing was open) then thats different. A good example of this would be Katrina, where there WERE people looting, but only doing it so their child could have formula, or something of that nature. Unfortunately, some took that as an opportunity to get flatscreen TVs and such, too, and that is again wrong.

If I were in a situation where I had to go somewhere and steal something like formula, or baby food, or something like that for my family to survive, I would do it. But IF and WHEN everything got back to normal, I would honestly try and go back and offer money for what I took.

 

[Epicspoon]

You may not like what I have to say but here it is.

The fact is that an innocent unarmed person was killed by an authority figure. That is not something that should happen. Ever.

Now perhaps people are using this as an excuse to go crazy and that's not okay but here's the thing, that cop who shot the kid? Normally the most he would get for this is a slap on the wrist. You can tell because of the way the police are trying to spin the incident that they don't really care. They're trying to avoid responsibility by saying the kid attacked him but it was really just an abuse of power. I used to live in Missouri where this is happening and I recall an even worse event that happened years back a few days before Christmas. There was a giant sting operation where they went after anybody with any sort of long standing debt. They flat out lied to people and said they were giving them money for christmas gifts and then arrested everybody who showed up. And the people who didn't show? They stormed their homes and took them away without warrants or anything of the kind. My mom was one of the people that showed up and got arrested, the long standing debt she got taken away for was the result of somebody stealing a check from her checkbook and buying one gallon of milk when she had no money left in the bank. She had no idea about it beause the bank never contacted her and at the time she was on anxiety medication. They took away her prescription medication when she was arrested and refused to let her have it when it was time for her to take it. She had an anxiety attack which developed into a heart attack and nearly died. When she had her heart attack instead of giving her medical attention like they should have they told her to get off the floor (she couldn't) and when she didn't they started beating her during her heart attack. She nearly died. The police force never faced any consequences for their sting operation.

My point is cops in Missouri are corrupt whether we like it or not, there's a few reasons we left the place and that's a big one. So yeah maybe people are suffering because of this but at least the looters have a chance of facing their crimes. The cops never do, but with an event like this outside forces are going to be forced to assess the situation and take action and if they determine that this came about because of the police forces incompetence and refusal to take responsibility then it's going to bring about a very necessary change.

I don't condone the actions of the looters and rioters but this is something that needs to happen because it really forces people to look at the police and realize that it's their fault. Anything smaller than this and nobody would care.

 

[bug_of_war]

Looting seems to be a very American thing. I'm not pointing fingers, and I accept that I may be well in the wrong, but every time I hear the word "looting" it always seems to be associated with something happening somewhere in America. Is it? Or would someone from another country or more historically knowledgeable than me like to lay some shit down?

 

[lacktheknack]

They're a pack of thieves and robbers. If a friend of mine went looting during a riot, I'd cut off contact entirely.

There's literally no way to adequately justify stealing thousands of dollars of stuff.

 

[Odbarc]

Looting is acceptable when a town or devastated by disaster and you're collecting things you need to survive. Like food, amenities, batteries.

Taking TVs, electronics, that's just plain criminal regardless of the reason or circumstance. It's not like the people are using it to get news information and need instructions from the government.

 

[Stasisesque]

Looting seems to be a very American thing. I'm not pointing fingers, and I accept that I may be well in the wrong, but every time I hear the word "looting" it always seems to be associated with something happening somewhere in America. Is it? Or would someone from another country or more historically knowledgeable than me like to lay some shit down?

It's not an American thing.

The 2011 London riots turned to mass looting. I live in London so got to watch it happen, but the looting was really the least concern, people died during those riots.