Looting and rioting in Chicago apparently triggered by a police shooting

[Derec]

So Chicago is not looking good these days.
Chicago protests: Restrictions imposed after chaotic night of unrest

Police Superintendent David Brown said the area would be restricted from 20:00 to 06:00 and a "heavy police presence" would continue until further notice.
He said the "shameful destruction" was "fuelled by misinformation" about a suspect shot by police on Sunday.
Social media videos showed hundreds of people looting and confronting police.
As of Monday, Chicago police had arrested over 100 individuals for looting, disorderly conduct and battery against police, among other charges.
In addition to widespread damage, police reported an exchange of gunfire with suspects in the early hours of Monday. City officials had temporarily suspended public transport services to the city centre area and raised bridges.
A number of videos posted on social media show vandalism and damage to shops - some of it miles from the downtown area. Some clips show individuals walking out of shops with items. In one video, a police officer is struck in the face with an object apparently flung by an individual in the street.
Officials said 13 officers were injured throughout the night, including one who was struck by a bottle. A civilian and a security guard were also injured by gunfire.
In one incident, police said they were arresting a suspect carrying a cash register when a vehicle passed by the officers and fired shots. According to the Associated Press news agency, looters left behind boxes of rocks they had brought to smash windows.

As the BBC article says, the violence was triggered by one Latrell Allen being shot by police. Let's see what happened.

Man shot by police Sunday charged with attempted murder of officers; COPA asking for footage

A man shot by police Sunday has been charged with attempted murder of police as COPA asks for additional footage of the incident.
Latrell Allen, 20, was arrested in the 5600 block of South Aberdeen at around 2:45 p.m. Sunday after police said he pointed a gun and fired multiple rounds at Chicago police officers.
“During the foot pursuit the offender turned and fired shots at the officers, the officers then returned discharging their weapons,” police said Sunday.

Of course, his mother claims he dindu nuffin.
Mother Of Man Shot By Police In Englewood Before Downtown Unrest Says He Had No Gun, Was Trying To Run Away

“He said: ‘Mom, the police shot me!’ I said, ‘They shot you?’ He said, ‘Yeah, they shot me five times!’” Larticsa Allen said. “I said, ‘Latrell, did you shoot them?’ He said: ‘No mama, I did not shoot them. I was just running.’”
Latricsa Allen said another one of her sons got into a fight with a younger male from the neighborhood at a local park. Latrell was there too, and someone flagged down police and started chasing those who ran, including Latrell.
[...]
His mom confirmed pictures posted on social media of a man holding weapons are pictures of him.
Savini: “So he’s got two guns in the picture. What does the image say to the public?
Latricsa Allen: “It says terrible, be careful of him.”
Savini: “And what you’re telling us, that despite images like this that we see online of him, he’s not that kind of guy. He’s been arrested, but he’s never been convicted. He was just trying to run away.”
Latricsa Allen: “Yes.”

LMAO! This Savini guy is really pushing the dindu narrative along with the mother! So much for objective reporting I guess ...

The reality, as you might have guessed, is quite different.


On the right is the photo of the gun recovered by police after they shot Allen. In the middle is Allen posing on social media with a gun that looks like the one on the right. Looks to be a S&W Sigma.


So yeah, another dindu narrative disproven. Doesn't matter to #BLMers who are still going to use him as an excuse for violence.

 

[Gun Nut]

So yeah, another dindu narrative disproven. Doesn't matter to #BLMers who are still going to use him as an excuse for violence.

The alleged dialog with the apparent gangster's mother is textbook dindu. But what is this "narrative" you speak of? Gangster's being gangsters at the drop of a Kanga isn't a "narrative".. especially not a "political narrative" that anyone is paying any attention to.

 

[laughing dog]

The account I read is that there were rumors that an unarmed 15 year old was shot. That does not excuse the reaction of rioting.

And nothing excuses the deliberate use of bigoted dialog in an OP.

 

[Trausti]

To her credit, the mayor condemned the looting. She also criticized the local prosecutor and judges for being too lenient on criminal activity. Only major dem mayor to do so. Wish more dem politicians would support law and order.

 

[Derec]

But what is this "narrative" you speak of?

The narrative that police is shooting all these innocent black people for no reason. Even when they shoot at police, the narrative is that they were unarmed and "didn't do nothing".

 

[Derec]

The account I read is that there were rumors that an unarmed 15 year old was shot. That does not excuse the reaction of rioting.

I agree that it does not excuse it. Even if a 15 year old was shot, it would not have justified rioting and looting.

And nothing excuses the deliberate use of bigoted dialog in an OP.

What "deliberate use of bigoted dialog"? The only dialog in the OP is the actual conversation between the CBS reporter Dave Savini and the perp's mother Latricsa Allen. Note also that Savini's account is generally sympathetic toward both the perp and his mother.

 

[laughing dog]

The account I read is that there were rumors that an unarmed 15 year old was shot. That does not excuse the reaction of rioting.

I agree that it does not excuse it. Even if a 15 year old was shot, it would not have justified rioting and looting.

And nothing excuses the deliberate use of bigoted dialog in an OP.

What "deliberate use of bigoted dialog"? The only dialog in the OP is the actual conversation between the CBS reporter Dave Savini and the perp's mother Latricsa Allen. Note also that Savini's account is generally sympathetic toward both the perp and his mother.

Ms. Allen actually said "dindu nuffin"?

 

[repoman]

God damn these blacks filming their looting

https://twitter.com/Breaking911/status/1292854486726332417

 

[southernhybrid]

FYI, there have been riots and looting throughout most of history, and not just in the US. I'm going to link a list of riots that go back to the early 18th Century. I know there were some that happened earlier. The people who rioted were black, white, the police, the Irish, etc. etc. It was always the result of one group of people who believed they were being oppressed or treated unfairly. So, what did anyone expect this time. I pretty much expected that if this movement grew very large, eventually there would be riots and looting. It's what humans do. Sometimes it's effective and sometimes it's not, but I doubt it will ever change.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_incidents_of_civil_unrest_in_the_United_States

For tjat matter, could we call The Boston Tea Party a riot, or was that justified because it was a bunch of white people who did it?

So, please take a peek at the list and you will learn a bit of history. Just click on any of the dates and you will learn what caused the riot or looting. I did a little research a few months ago, when the protests started. I learned a lot. I also remember some riots and looting that happened during the anti war protests during the Viet Nam War. I attended a few peaceful protests in New Jersey, but I remember a few in New York City that resulted in riots. This is nothing new. It's unfortunate, but I doubt it will ever end.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

It's what I've been saying--BLM only cares if the person is black, not whether the police acted properly. This is not how you fix problems, this is how you stir up racial hatred.

 

[ZiprHead]

FYI, there have been riots and looting throughout most of history, and not just in the US. I'm going to link a list of riots that go back to the early 18th Century. I know there were some that happened earlier. The people who rioted were black, white, the police, the Irish, etc. etc. It was always the result of one group of people who believed they were being oppressed or treated unfairly. So, what did anyone expect this time. I pretty much expected that if this movement grew very large, eventually there would be riots and looting. It's what humans do. Sometimes it's effective and sometimes it's not, but I doubt it will ever change.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_incidents_of_civil_unrest_in_the_United_States

For tjat matter, could we call The Boston Tea Party a riot, or was that justified because it was a bunch of white people who did it?

So, please take a peek at the list and you will learn a bit of history. Just click on any of the dates and you will learn what caused the riot or looting. I did a little research a few months ago, when the protests started. I learned a lot. I also remember some riots and looting that happened during the anti war protests during the Viet Nam War. I attended a few peaceful protests in New Jersey, but I remember a few in New York City that resulted in riots. This is nothing new. It's unfortunate, but I doubt it will ever end.

Was the Tulsa race massacre because the white people thought they were being disadvantaged?

 Tulsa race massacre

 

[Toni]

The account I read is that there were rumors that an unarmed 15 year old was shot. That does not excuse the reaction of rioting.

I agree that it does not excuse it. Even if a 15 year old was shot, it would not have justified rioting and looting.

You always write about these incidents as though they are isolated incidents and that police have no other choices or simply make terrible, unavoidable mistakes.

The truth is that black people in the US have been waiting fairly patiently to be treated as human beings for centuries. How long do you think they must wait? I mean, look how pissed you are at women running for political office and black people having babies with each other and white men not being the first in line for every good thing that society has to offer 100 percent of the time.

Riots and looting are not excusable but they are understandable when it feels as though the weight of society is pressing down on your neck until you cannot breath.

Harlem
BY LANGSTON HUGHES
What happens to a dream deferred?

Does it dry up
like a raisin in the sun?
Or fester like a sore—
And then run?
Does it stink like rotten meat?
Or crust and sugar over—
like a syrupy sweet?

Maybe it just sags
like a heavy load.

Or does it explode?

 

[Toni]

FYI, there have been riots and looting throughout most of history, and not just in the US. I'm going to link a list of riots that go back to the early 18th Century. I know there were some that happened earlier. The people who rioted were black, white, the police, the Irish, etc. etc. It was always the result of one group of people who believed they were being oppressed or treated unfairly. So, what did anyone expect this time. I pretty much expected that if this movement grew very large, eventually there would be riots and looting. It's what humans do. Sometimes it's effective and sometimes it's not, but I doubt it will ever change.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_incidents_of_civil_unrest_in_the_United_States

For tjat matter, could we call The Boston Tea Party a riot, or was that justified because it was a bunch of white people who did it?

So, please take a peek at the list and you will learn a bit of history. Just click on any of the dates and you will learn what caused the riot or looting. I did a little research a few months ago, when the protests started. I learned a lot. I also remember some riots and looting that happened during the anti war protests during the Viet Nam War. I attended a few peaceful protests in New Jersey, but I remember a few in New York City that resulted in riots. This is nothing new. It's unfortunate, but I doubt it will ever end.

Was the Tulsa race massacre because the white people thought they were being disadvantaged?

 Tulsa race massacre

Yep. Because black people had a little something for themselves that was better than a shack.

 

[Toni]

It's what I've been saying--BLM only cares if the person is black, not whether the police acted properly. This is not how you fix problems, this is how you stir up racial hatred.

The racial hatred is stirred. But this is not happening on the side you are thinking. Or don't you read Derec or Trausti's posts?

Racial hatred has been stirred for several hundred years and from time to time, the pot boils over. Or the mixture explodes.

It may not be right. It may not be 'justifiable' to most people. But it is absolutely predictable.

What incentive do people have when they see others like them ground under the heels of legal authority? What incentive do people have when they see such dramatic differences between what is assumed of them and what is expected for others? We're at the boiling over point. This will not change unless all of society changes.

 

[Derec]

God damn these blacks filming their looting

https://twitter.com/Breaking911/status/1292854486726332417

If only there was a prosecutor willing to do her job and prosecute these criminals. But, whom am I kidding, these people are Kim Foxxx' voters - she doesn't want to alienate them.

 

[Derec]

To her credit, the mayor condemned the looting. She also criticized the local prosecutor and judges for being too lenient on criminal activity. Only major dem mayor to do so. Wish more dem politicians would support law and order.

Indeed. What use is it if police arrest 100 people if there is no prosecution? They get the message that these crimes are tacitly condoned loud and clear and they commit them over and over again!

Portland is the same way.
Multnomah Co. DA’s office won’t prosecute many arrested in Portland protests

No prosecution for rioting or property damage crimes. Those things are now officially ok to do in Portlandia!

 

[Derec]

The racial hatred is stirred. But this is not happening on the side you are thinking. Or don't you read Derec or Trausti's posts?

Racial hatred is definitely on the #BLM side. Have you not seen what that #BLM organizer was saying - she thinks it's ok for black people to loot as a form of "reparations".
I have zero hatred for anybody on the basis of their skin color. But I do detest people who use their race to claim they should have special rights and privileges or that laws should not apply to them.

It may not be right. It may not be 'justifiable' to most people. But it is absolutely predictable.

It is definitely not justifiable.

What incentive do people have when they see others like them ground under the heels of legal authority?

This thread is about the unrest being triggered by a guy (Latrell Allen) shooting at police and being shot himself, then rightly charged with attempted murder.
Is that what you mean by "ground under the heels of legal authority"? Should black people not be subject to "legal authority"? How would you handle people of the chosen race shooting at police officers? Because any real law enforcement is described as being "ground up under the heels of legal authority" by people like you. But you are very selective as to who deserves scrutiny by legal authority.

What incentive do people have when they see such dramatic differences between what is assumed of them and what is expected for others?

Everybody, regardless of race, is expected to not loot.
Everybody, regardless of race, is expected to not shoot at police officers.
What the hell are you talking about?

We're at the boiling over point. This will not change unless all of society changes.

Our society must not cave to extortion by racist extremists from the #BLM. I hope there is a backlash soon when people realize that #BLM is not a benign slogan, but a very destructive, extremist movement!

 

[ronburgundy]

FYI, there have been riots and looting throughout most of history, and not just in the US. I'm going to link a list of riots that go back to the early 18th Century. I know there were some that happened earlier. The people who rioted were black, white, the police, the Irish, etc. etc. It was always the result of one group of people who believed they were being oppressed or treated unfairly. So, what did anyone expect this time. I pretty much expected that if this movement grew very large, eventually there would be riots and looting. It's what humans do. Sometimes it's effective and sometimes it's not, but I doubt it will ever change.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_incidents_of_civil_unrest_in_the_United_States

For tjat matter, could we call The Boston Tea Party a riot, or was that justified because it was a bunch of white people who did it?

So, please take a peek at the list and you will learn a bit of history. Just click on any of the dates and you will learn what caused the riot or looting. I did a little research a few months ago, when the protests started. I learned a lot. I also remember some riots and looting that happened during the anti war protests during the Viet Nam War. I attended a few peaceful protests in New Jersey, but I remember a few in New York City that resulted in riots. This is nothing new. It's unfortunate, but I doubt it will ever end.

The OP is racist bile, but your argument loses credibility by bring the Tea Party into it. They didn't take merchandise for personal profit. They symbolically destroyed a specific product and only that which was owned by a specific company that was directly involved in imposing oppressive taxes without representation. If they looted like yesterday's Chicago riots, they would have stolen the most expensive merchandise having nothing to do with their cause from random shops, some owned by those who supported their grievances, and shot random innocent Bostonians who got in their way. And had they done that they would be largely unknown to history and viewed negatively as immoral opportunists, not as justified defenders of a righteous cause.

 

[Keith&Co.]

The OP is racist bile, but your argument loses credibility by bring the Tea Party into it. They didn't take merchandise for personal profit.

Um, yes, they did.

They symbolically destroyed a specific product and only that which was owned by a specific company that was directly involved in imposing oppressive taxes without representation.

The Stamp Act actually lowered the price of tea in the Colonies. The tea company got a monopoly and were able to make deep cuts but still earn a profit.
Tea smugglers, then, could not compete with the lower prices of legal tea.
So people like John Hancock, a major tea smuggler, organized the Tea Party because the tea on those ships was cutting into his personal profit from black market tea.

not as justified defenders of a righteous cause.

Yeah, The Rich Get Richer. Good cause.

 

[ronburgundy]

Um, yes, they did. The Stamp Act actually lowered the price of tea in the Colonies. The tea company got a monopoly and were able to make deep cuts but still earn a profit.
Tea smugglers, then, could not compete with the lower prices of legal tea.
So people like John Hancock, a major tea smuggler, organized the Tea Party because the tea on those ships was cutting into his personal profit from black market tea.

not as justified defenders of a righteous cause.

Yeah, The Rich Get Richer. Good cause.

Disingenuous bullshit that is unbecoming you Keith. The British government massively taxed tea into the colonies other than that imported by the British East India Company, thereby creating a monopoly and creating the smuggling market. The Townsend Act also used the revenues of these taxes on tea and other goods to directly pay salaries of royal governors who had been paid by the local elected assemblies, thus eliminating the major source of democratic influence on the governors. Thus, the tea that was dumped (not stolen and sold for profit) had very direct relation to the political injustice as did the one company who owned the tea that was destroyed. Again, had they been like current looters, they
wouldn't have touched tea let alone dumped it into the harbor. They would have looted locally owned merchants with more valuable goods and shot any of them or their wage earning employees who got in the way.