Jump to content
clapclapclap

Summer riots/protests damage & tactics documentation thread (no politics, please)

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Buzzrock said:

Regarding the tactic of blocking cars

 

Bahaha. Are people supposed to read that and support their cause or be upset at the police reaction?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Captainant said:

https://www.virginiamercury.com/2020/07/30/did-white-supremacists-really-orchestrate-riots-in-richmond-its-complicated/

But Richmond officials have presented no direct evidence showing white supremacists organized the protest, encouraged violence or participated in any property damage.

As of Wednesday evening, neither the Richmond Police Department nor the mayor’s office had provided additional evidence of white supremacist influence.

The confusion in Richmond appeared to arise from an unlikely alliance between members of Black Lives Matter 757, an independent, Hampton Roads-area group that has clashed with other Black Lives Matter leaders and progressive organizers, and a boogaloo supporter named Mike Dunn, who appeared with the BLM757 group in Richmond. Dunn insists he is not a white supremacist and both he and BLM757 say Dunn’s group had left the protest before it turned  raucous. 

I’m sure you like their headline, but there is zero evidence that alt right groups participated in any violence or rioting. Apparently one group of alt right people that align with BLM and antifa (how that is considered an alt-right group is beyond me) were there for the protests. Zero arrests, zero evidence provided to support their bullshit political agenda and statements.  

Basically they saw some white dudes in Hawaiian shirts and tried to project the violence on right wing individuals. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Dahobbs said:

It is literally what he said. He may not have meant it that way (I honestly can't tell at this point), but he did say it. 

I don't believe you'd know, (or admit) the truth if it bit you on your ass. If you're on a road way blocking the free flow of traffic, not allowing people to pass, and if they try to move around you or back up you stand in front of or begin banging on their car (which has been documented in several video clips),  yelling at those folks, making menacing moves toward them, banging on their car, that's for damn sure an act of terrorizing people. That some of you try to say it's not, let's put your wife, daughter, grand ma and and your grampy in that situation, and see what they say about it.  Let' s see what you say about it when they do thousands of dollars  damage to your car.

 Yes cars have caused death by being used as a weapon against protestors. I believe that's been the minority, and only a couple of those have been actually pre meditated  (Charlottesville).  There are videos after videos showing people in vehicles being caught in these street protests and being attacked by protesters. Those are probably just andecdotal evidence though aren't they ?

If you're forcibly detaining someone from leaving a location (while they're in their car or on foot for that matter), holding them against their will, I said that could be construed as kidnapping which would be incorrect based on the full definition of kidnapping, which also involves the act of transporting the victim, to be by the book kidnapping.  You're still detaining someone illegally because you've decided your self proclaimed right to block a freeway or surface street trumps their rights to drive their car down that roadway without you stopping them.

Posters here have tried to say there is no violence in these protests , that rioting Is not violent, that you can compare a riot/protest in a roadway to an after football game traffic jam, or deny actual mages of violence, and video evidence of people in vehicles being  assaulted speaks to a dishonesty that is far worse than me being incorrect about the definition of kidnapping. You can pile on all you want, but that only illustrates the cabal mentality perfectly.  Goal post moving is an art by some here, Dahobs with his "oh it's just like after a football game" is among the more galacticaly stupid comments I've seen floated here in a while. That kind of dishonesty is astounding, but has come to be expected from many.

Mayor Stoney of Richmond was wrong about his no BLM motivated violence over the weekend. I know more than a few people in local, and state level gov't, and the police who have the actual intel of the incidents who laughed, at that bald faced lie. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Enchubben said:

https://www.virginiamercury.com/2020/07/30/did-white-supremacists-really-orchestrate-riots-in-richmond-its-complicated/

But Richmond officials have presented no direct evidence showing white supremacists organized the protest, encouraged violence or participated in any property damage.

As of Wednesday evening, neither the Richmond Police Department nor the mayor’s office had provided additional evidence of white supremacist influence.

The confusion in Richmond appeared to arise from an unlikely alliance between members of Black Lives Matter 757, an independent, Hampton Roads-area group that has clashed with other Black Lives Matter leaders and progressive organizers, and a boogaloo supporter named Mike Dunn, who appeared with the BLM757 group in Richmond. Dunn insists he is not a white supremacist and both he and BLM757 say Dunn’s group had left the protest before it turned  raucous. 

I’m sure you like their headline, but there is zero evidence that alt right groups participated in any violence or rioting. Apparently one group of alt right people that align with BLM and antifa (how that is considered an alt-right group is beyond me) were there for the protests. Zero arrests, zero evidence provided to support their bullshit political agenda and statements.  

Basically they saw some white dudes in Hawaiian shirts and tried to project the violence on right wing individuals. 

I have no doubts that white supremacists would try to make it look like BLM was solely behind the violence, and destruction Saturday night. I also know there are enough BLM activists in Richmond that they were also involved. There are incidents daily in Richmond involving BLM activists (several arrests just yesterday after an altercation agitated by BLM members or sympathizers). Stoney was flat out lying. He's an idiot with an agenda that doesn't involve protecting the city.  He's fired 2 police chiefs in less than 2 months because they said, "we are not going to allow violence in our city". Fired both of them almost immediately after those comments were released.  He doesn't have an agenda...not at all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ThE vIoLeNcE wILl CoNtInUe ReGarDlEsS - surly big brains 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yet you condemn all police based on the actions of individuals...

Except....I wrote these exact words right above yours.

This.
And by they way, “bad” cops doesn’t just mean those that murder someone. It includes those who will lie under oath to fuck over someone, who will rough someone up knowing they can get away with it, who will arrest someone for a bullshit made up charge because they didn’t show the cop enough respect, etc. When you realize that is the class of issues, the percentage of “bad” cops is a lot bigger than you’d like to think. Then, when you add in the percentage of cops who know exactly what their fellow officers are doing, and let them get away with it and don’t protect us from those bad cops....yeah, we’re getting really damned close to “all of them.” And you know that.
We’re not saying all cops are murderers. We’re saying what I said above.

Again, only some percentage of cops are the first type of “bad cop.” But functionally all cops are the second type of bad cop (they cover for the bad actors, and don’t protect us from them). And these are people who have a job that is literally to protect the people from bad guys.

You know that’s the case, and you know that’s what I said and meant.

But why would that matter in 2020 America? Sure, I think all cops are murderers. Go with that, if that helps you sleep at night.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
59 minutes ago, MillerEP said:

 

Soooooo some fuck sticks tried to rob a bank. Wtf does that have to do with anything?

Were I still a criminal I'd be exploiting the protests to my advantage as well.

Edited by MissingInAction

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Onboard 2.0 said:

Posters here have tried to say there is no violence in these protests , that rioting Is not violent,

can you quote these posts

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
can you quote these posts

Bad a teammate asserted that there can be no violence against inanimate objects...ie the burning of cars, graffiti, and destruction of buildings is not violence. I’m paraphrasing of course, but the post is out there somewhere.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Questions: Are we saying that all of the riots around the country were done by white supremacists or just the ones in RIchmond?  In the photos on this thread, it looks like some of the rioters may not be white supremacists. I say that not because I profile but because I have heard that white supremacist groups have a pretty strong policy of no non-whites allowed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Celery Man said:

can you quote these posts

I'm not going back, and finding them.

BT has said destruction of property is not violence.

Brisket has tried to use his anecdotal evidence (which always get shouted down expect for certain groups, the Cabal) to say he was at a rally, and there was no violence so there isn't really any violence.  That's Despite hundred if not thousands info images, and videos showing BLM.com created destruction of property, vehicles, etc.

 Dahobbs made some outlandishly, stupid comparison of protesters blocking roadways, and not allowing people to pass to a post game traffic jam.  

We have protesters in the city of Richmond riding bikes on road ways 3-4 abreast along the monument sections of Monument Avenue not allowing motorists to pass off and on all day long, trying to instigate incidents.  Same thing as a post game traffic jam ?  Really ? Again, among the most stupid, dishonest,  things I've ever read on this site. Honesty just isn't his strong suit, when he can't respond with anything relevant.  

Others here have tried to say oh you being stopped on the road by protesters is just an inconvenience.

Still others have just flat out said there really hasn't been any violence, and if it was the police instigated it.

Jerry Nadler was quoted on record saying the violence in Portland is a right wing myth.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Onboard 2.0 said:

I'm not going back, and finding them.

BT has said destruction of property is not violence.

Brisket has tried to use his anecdotal evidence (which always get shouted down expect for certain groups, the Cabal) to say he was at a rally, and there was no violence so there isn't really any violence.  That's Despite hundred if not thousands info images, and videos showing BLM.com created destruction of property, vehicles, etc.

 Dahobbs made some outlandishly, stupid comparison of protesters blocking roadways, and not allowing people to pass to a post game traffic jam.  

We have protesters in the city of Richmond riding bikes on road ways 3-4 abreast along the monument sections of Monument Avenue not allowing motorists to pass off and on all day long, trying to instigate incidents.  Same thing as a post game traffic jam ?  Really ? Again, among the most stupid, dishonest,  things I've ever read on this site. Honesty just isn't his strong suit, when he can't respond with anything relevant.  

Others here have tried to say oh you being stopped on the road by protesters is just an inconvenience.

Still others have just flat out said there really hasn't been any violence, and if it was the police instigated it.

Jerry Nadler was quoted on record saying the violence in Portland is a right wing myth.

Yup, my comparison was stupid, not the one comparing a crowd in a road to terrorism and kidnapping... What a child you are. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Dahobbs said:

Yup, my comparison was stupid, not the one comparing a crowd in a road to terrorism and kidnapping... What a child you are. 

My comparison was closer to the truth than you juvenile comparison of a post football game traffic jam. I've clarified my comments, and stated I was incorrect about it meeting the standards of actual kidnapping. The willful detention of someone from moving about freely is OK with you though ?  You think that's justified ?  You have the honesty, or character to admit your example is in no way a relevant comparison to a rioting or protesting blocking streets or interstates ?

 

I'll wait for the crickets.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Onboard: "PROTESTERS IN THE STREETS ARE KIDNAPPING DRIVERS BY NOT LETTING THEM MOVE FREELY!!!"

Also Onboard: "federal officers arresting people without charges or probable cause and disappearing them with unmarked vehicles is not kidnapping"

lolk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Onboard 2.0 said:

My comparison was closer to the truth than you juvenile comparison of a post football game traffic jam. I've clarified my comments, and stated I was incorrect about it meeting the standards of actual kidnapping. The willful detention of someone from moving about freely is OK with you though ?  You think that's justified ?  You have the honesty, or character to admit your example is in no way a relevant comparison to a rioting or protesting blocking streets or interstates ?

 

I'll wait for the crickets.....

Did I not at the very beginning of this discussion say they should get permits to block traffic if possible? Did I not say that I agreed that aggressive and violent behavior would be wrong? I've met you halfway and you've just been an ass because you want to categorize an entire movement based on an outlier (and maybe imaginary) event. 

If you meant violently blocking the road, then next time say that. Instead, you said blocking the road in general would be a terrorist act and kidnapping and that occupants I'm vehicles would be terrified. I correctly pointed out that people get stuck on the road all the fucking time. It isn't innately terrifying. Some protests could be terrifying, I agree. A sit in on a road isn't. A parade across a rode isn't. But you cant hear anything I say because you go blind the rage the moment anyway disagrees with your exaggerations. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Bevo said:

Questions: Are we saying that all of the riots around the country were done by white supremacists or just the ones in RIchmond?  In the photos on this thread, it looks like some of the rioters may not be white supremacists. I say that not because I profile but because I have heard that white supremacist groups have a pretty strong policy of no non-whites allowed.

It's compilations of "anonymous" sources and "unverified" innuendo taken as gospel by those desperate to deflect the blame.   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If only Onboard would take the five minutes he's delayed by the terrorist bicyclists to think about the inconvenience (to put it extremely mildly) our Justice system inflicts on people of color, maybe he wouldn't be such a myopic dumbass. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
That's Despite hundred if not thousands info images, and videos showing BLM.com created destruction of property, vehicles, etc.

You realize that each camera can take more than one picture, right?  You could have two outbreaks of violence, and someone could take 5,000 pictures of each, and you'd be able to say "HERE ARE 10,000 PICTURES OF RIOTING!"

I could post twice as many pictures taken at demonstrations where there was NO violence.  Shit, I have probably 50 such pictures on my own phone.  Including some cool ones of some black dudes on horseback actually providing security to make sure no shenanigans took place (really thought that was cool, and a callback to a fact a lot of us don't realize -- black men were among the first real-deal cowboys in Texas ; they didn't come late to that game, they helped start it).  But I agree that mere anecdotes are not great evidence.  Yet you and Miller are very, very fixated on every image you can find of violence, TO THE EXCLUSION OF ACKNOWLEDGING ANY OTHER IMAGES.

So, here you go -- two BLM dudes, on horseback, actually working for the cause of ensuring that a march was and remained peaceful.  That is, not only was BLM not fomenting violence, they actually had a plan and took action to prevent it:

 

 

bee555b1405c6f8c95740d99de618604.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

27 minutes ago, Hate said:


Bad a teammate asserted that there can be no violence against inanimate objects...ie the burning of cars, graffiti, and destruction of buildings is not violence. I’m paraphrasing of course, but the post is out there somewhere.

Ah ok, I'm not parsing too deeply into B_T's posts and that makes sense. Also not trying to fling shit at him but he certainly represents one end of the spectrum or closer to it more than most folks on here.

I'd re-ask my previous question - IF the issue that people have with the protests is the connected violence, was the expectation that unconstitutional application of federal force against the wishes of state and local government against citizens exercising their 1st amendment rights (no, they aren't just targeting violent people rioting as can be and has been demonstrated) would help achieve that goal? If yes, do you still believe that that is the case? If no, then what do you think was actually being accomplished? If it's some sort of "you can't let people get away with this kind of <insert whatever>" can you explain why these people are targeted in this way when other less peaceful protesters were not?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, Captainant said:

image.thumb.png.8850873c15d580404f55b720b25c700d.png

Sure seems like a completely un-biased news source and definitely not characteristic of astroturfing sites used to get FB boomers riled up.

Any other completely non-political gems you'd like to share from your FB follows?

spacer.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Captainant said:

disappearing them with unmarked vehicles

LE has never used unmarked vehicle before?  Good to know.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Captainant said:

@MillerEP care to actually add anything to the conversation, or just using this thread as your link dump?

A picture is worth a 1000 words? I think the pictures above say that not all protests are non-violent and that some of the protests could be termed riots.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Captainant said:

@MillerEP care to actually add anything to the conversation, or just using this thread as your link dump?

I'm sorry,  is this coming from the same person who earlier said he had "no idea" about drivers being attacked and pulled from their cars by protesters.  I gave you a few, here are many more.  In the context of the dangers of protesters blocking traffic and how quickly this can escalate.  

Something, something, something adding to the conversation

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So...that first horribly incriminating video of the jacked up truck with multiple flags driving right through the middle of a BLM protest....you really think that helps your argument here?  You don't think that it's maybe, kinda sorta, POSSIBLE, that Ricky Redneck was driving right through the protest to taunt people and start some shit?

No, that doesn't justify a violent response.....but it was damned sure intended to provoke a response.  The bear shouldn't bite you.  But if you poke the bear, you're a fucking asshole.

When you go out looking for trouble, you shouldn't feign shock, surprise, and anger when you find it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

this isn't very complicated.  protest all you want, get a permit when required, and don't parade down streets unless you have a permit to do so.  the permit will have to come with some agreement by the city to cordon off the area.  if this is done in an orderly fashion there is a) police presence to stop the rioters who hijack the protest and b) keep dumbasses away.

The rest is just bloviating.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Captainant said:

image.thumb.png.8850873c15d580404f55b720b25c700d.png

Sure seems like a completely un-biased news source and definitely not characteristic of astroturfing sites used to get FB boomers riled up.

Any other completely non-political gems you'd like to share from your FB follows?

I understand the source's other views can be problematic, so I tried to only post videos and pictures without any additional comments or attachments since the spirit of the thread is to document what is occurring during the protests as far as damage and tactics go. Unfortunately beggars can't always be choosers when finding a source, but the video shown is what it is.

Edited by MillerEP

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

.you really think that helps your argument here? 

Of course it does.  This is again, in the context of allowing these protests to block and occupy major roads.  It's not solely an indictment of the crowds.  There are also numerous clips of drivers instigating occurrences.  Does anyone not think that the Omaha leadership is trying to mitigate these incidents before they spark up and spin out of control and people get hurt and property destroyed.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, BabaYaga said:

Does anyone not think that the Omaha leadership is trying to mitigate these incidents before they spark up and spin out of control and people get hurt and property destroyed.  

Read what you just wrote.

Holy shit.

The government gets to use violent force against the people because.....it fears that some of them might...at some point in the future....do something bad?  

Amazing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

Read what you just wrote.

Holy shit.

The government gets to use violent force against the people because.....it fears that some of them might...at some point in the future....do something bad?  

Amazing.

Arguing with the straw-man in your own head again.  Not surprising....

Quote

Omaha police said more than 75 protesters were taken into custody Saturday night.

Quote

Once protesters blocked the roadway, police announced the demonstration was "unlawful" and began taking people into custody.

Quote

Sunday, Omaha police said most charges were for "obstructing traffic" and "failure to disperse." According to police, no one was injured and a pepper ball was deployed.

A.  Singular.  One.  For a specific and defined purpose.  Unlawful demonstration.  Obstruction.  Failure to disperse.  Nobody is this fucking dense.  Which by itself, with no other incidents of significant violence across the country, maybe they let them do their thing.  With a large number of recent events of attacks, shootings, and property destruction, no.  Omaha decided to act immediately and squash this before it flared up and got out of control.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
39 minutes ago, Captainant said:

@MillerEP care to actually add anything to the conversation, or just using this thread as your link dump?

I am contributing to the conversation by posting videos and pictures related to the thread's topic, so you can reserve your own judgement. I'll very rarely go into the cloak room, and don't want to engage in politics here. When I want to be heard I'll say it loud and clear when I cast my ballot in November. 

Since you ask though, and without taking any of the other bait dangled, my personal opinion is that everything isn't black and white. I am for some civic disobedience, but against law breaking. Two wrongs don't make a right. The moment one person infringes on the rights of another person or their property (or we the people's property), regardless of who they are, or whatever belief they may hold (even misguided ones from either spectrum) I am against it. So it's situational.

Edited by MillerEP

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, BabaYaga said:

With a large number of recent events of attacks, shootings, and property destruction, no.  Omaha decided to act immediately and squash this before it flared up and got out of control.  

Cool.  So, thoughtcrime is a thing.  Just want to bookmark this for later.  Like, you know, maybe if there are right-wing demonstrations after the election, with some violent incidents.  Just want to be able to pull this back up as a reminder.

As for me, I've always been pretty strongly against thoughtcrime.  Then again, I think that governmental draconian policing is not a good thing if we are to be a free people, and always have, regardless of the cause at issue, so, there's that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, MillerEP said:

Two wrongs don't make a right. The moment one person infringes on the rights of another person or their property, regardless of who they are, or whatever belief they may hold (even misguided ones) I am against it. 

Do you feel that way when the "person infringing on the rights of another person" is a police officer/government paramilitary trooper, say, one of those folks using a nightstick or teargas against an individual protester who hasn't committed or openly threatened to commit a single violent act?  Because if you get on board the train with that logical consistency, you might be surprised that most of the people here who you think oppose your take actually agree with it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Calihorn said:

People being terrified of property damage are always good for a laugh

Guess you’ve never had your property damaged. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Poe It Up said:

Guess you’ve never had your property damaged. 

I have, don't give a fuck.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Captainant said:

@MillerEP care to actually add anything to the conversation, or just using this thread as your link dump?

On 7/27/2020 at 5:45 PM, blacklab said:

I enjoy threads like this. I have no idea, nor do I care about the politics behind the people making these tweets. I find what is happening on the videos newsworthy and worth watching. 

If you don't like it don't come in this thread. 

...

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
6 minutes ago, high side 3 way said:

Come damage my property, you won't be laughing much anymore.

Gonna need you to point out where I said I was rioting.

Edited by Calihorn

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, workswithseed said:

spacer.png

 

Wat?

It was a multi post, I guess he deleted the first one

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

Cool.  So, thoughtcrime is a thing.

No, but unlawful demonstration, obstruction, and failure to disperse are.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, BabaYaga said:

No, but unlawful demonstration, obstruction, and failure to disperse are.  

which are all just thoughtcrime.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Hate said:


Bad a teammate asserted that there can be no violence against inanimate objects...ie the burning of cars, graffiti, and destruction of buildings is not violence. I’m paraphrasing of course, but the post is out there somewhere.

property crime isn't violent crime and arson is counted as arson.  violent crimes are murder and non-negligent manslaughter, rape, robbery, and aggravated assault. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


mpu


Football ... Basketball ... Baseball ... Other Sports ... Recruiting ... Gambling ... Movies & TV ... Music ... Hobbies ... Lulz ... Food & Travel ... Daily Texan ... Help ... For Sale ... Politics ... Board Discussion
×
×
  • Create New...