And again, it’s the police starting the riot. They don’t even have a reason to. People standing around watching tv is not disruptive to the public order.
I think that’s being a bit harsh on the police/guards. They’re just trying to turn off public equipment that has been hijacked by a hostile (to their current government) entity. It’s entirely justified that they take it down. The riot really starts when someone who appears to be a regular person in the crowd tackles the guard. That is when the riot really gets started and the guards start exerting any force on the people. Up until then, there’s zero conflict between the people and the guards. And if that tackle hadn’t happened, there might well not have been a riot at all. Likely would have been a mob, though, and a lot of pressure on the guards to withdraw, but wouldn’t have necessarily had the spark needed to become outright violence.
And again, it’s the police starting the riot. They don’t even have a reason to. People standing around watching tv is not disruptive to the public order.
@ Vicious Sand:
But what the public may learn from that broadcast is very dangerous. The greatest enemy of tyrants is the truth.
@ Vicious Sand:
I think that’s being a bit harsh on the police/guards. They’re just trying to turn off public equipment that has been hijacked by a hostile (to their current government) entity. It’s entirely justified that they take it down. The riot really starts when someone who appears to be a regular person in the crowd tackles the guard. That is when the riot really gets started and the guards start exerting any force on the people. Up until then, there’s zero conflict between the people and the guards. And if that tackle hadn’t happened, there might well not have been a riot at all. Likely would have been a mob, though, and a lot of pressure on the guards to withdraw, but wouldn’t have necessarily had the spark needed to become outright violence.
Frith ra wrote:
Not any longer seems to be..