Baltimorei

[gimmethesimplelife]

Because an attack on business is a sound justification for execution without trial, right? Just like walking/driving while black justifies whatever brutality head-banger police want to dish out. I guess it's only a police state when somebody else is being roughed up.

+1000 Rob

[Tradd]

Arson of an occupied building is grounds for use of lethal force in many states.

But it's obvious that the thugs hold protected status with many.

[CathyA]

I listened to the Dershowitz interview, and what he said made a lot of sense. I can't remember if it was he or rather the interviewer who mentioned the prosecutor's talk about it being the young people's time...... .including herself. As Dershowitz said, it isn't the job of the Prosecutor to "fix" things, but to follow the law. Should be interesting how it all plays out, in terms of following the law versus trying to keep the crowds from getting angry/destructive again. I guess the jury doesn't have to follow the law though.....But what happens then? The judge intervenes with his/her opinion?
As was mentioned in the interview, the police who showed up later actually had harsher charges than the police who started the whole thing. And the driver of the van got the harshest charge?? This is a real mess.

[Gregg]

Because an attack on business is a sound justification for execution without trial, right?

+1000 Rob

As Tradd eluded to above, its not the property, its the potential for "collateral damage". The burned out shops could be repaired, but the family heirlooms, pet cats, grandmothers and small children in adjoining or adjacent spaces couldn't be. Is an arsonist in that setting so different from a mass shooter in a mall? Should the police just let a gunman keep shooting innocent people until he runs out of ammo and can be peacefully arrested or should they use (potentially) lethal force to stop him before others are hurt or killed? How would you answer if your loved ones were in the mall or in the apartment above the burning convenience store?

[LDAHL]

Arson of an occupied building is grounds for use of lethal force in many states.

But it's obvious that the thugs hold protected status with many.

I would think that shooting those engaged in endangering other people's lives would be more expeditious than convening a restorative justice committee.

Also, I saw a New York Times editorial that said you're not allowed to use the word "thug" anymore.

[CathyA]

Yeah....it's the "T" word.

[Alan]

I saw a New York Times editorial that said you're not allowed to use the word "thug" anymore.

Yep, I heard someone on NPR last week saying the same thing. According to him, it's the new "N" word and only black people may use it because when anyone else uses it, it's racist. It makes me wonder why liberals assume all thugs are black?

[catherine]

Yep, I heard someone on NPR last week saying the same thing. According to him, it's the new "N" word and only black people may use it because when anyone else uses it, it's racist. It makes me wonder why liberals assume all thugs are black?

I saw that CNN piece with Erin Burnett and Carl Stokes where that whole idea originated--CNN played it almost on a continuous loop. So I can see how maybe Stokes was incensed, but I think it was probably an unintended consequence of that interview that suddenly "T" became "N"--I've always assumed a thug can be of any race, and I'm a liberal.

[CathyA]

Hmmm......I had the feeling that it was probably the blacks who were offended by the "T" word.

[iris lilies]

+1000 Rob

i would like you two to ruminate on the pain and suffering of all of the pets who died in a deliberate arson fire of a newly built condo complex near me. It was so sad,they held a memorial for all of the pets. No humans were harmed.

i certainly feel like executing the asshole who perpetrated that crime.