I don't doubt that Trump's goal is to escalate and take advantage of the situation.
But the fact that LA and cities like it accept a high level of lawlessness and destruction of property as "normal" already casts doubt on their willingness or ability to handle the situation.
Their recent track record is not good when it comes to law and order, and people living there deserve to not live in danger or fear of mob destruction.
Why do you seem more concerned about damage to insured property than the civil liberties and rights of human beings being grossly violated?
You should seriously self-examine your thought process here as to why you're more upset about buildings than families and lives. It probably has a lot to do with what media and online content you consume.
I'm concerned about property owned by me as well as my personal safety and that of the people I care about. Mobs can break into my home and kill me or violate my mom. That's a valid concern.
If you please, I would find your argument more compelling if I wasn't personally aware that the damage from protests in 2020 was very little compared to normal day to day activity in cities, or the typical damage after a popular sporting event, as well as my awareness that the most famous incidents of damage from BLM protests were from positively identified undercover police officers and white supremacist agitators.
Given these facts, can you justify moving America towards more of a police state (and abdicating more of our liberties) because of... why?
My neighborhood was severely damaged. Many people left and never came back and many stores never reopened. I live in an apartment building which could easily be compromised and then I'd be a sitting duck for whoever wants to break into my apartment. The riots got out of hand because folks were afraid to implement law and order.
Ironically, we had protests yesterday, the police came out in huge numbers and as far as I can tell everything was peaceful. The protesters got their protest and the rest of us got to keep our lives and property.
Which neighborhood? This is the first time I've heard of that level of deep scale damage, and I was at protests at least once a week that entire period.
I've also heard of not a single instance of protestors breaking into private homes to harm people there.
Sorry to be so skeptical but your experience is apparently singularly novel.
As for police keeping protests peaceful, my experience is the complete opposite - protests are peaceful, and then the cops show up and start pushing people around, or their undercover officers try to kick things off by throwing things or shoving people. American cops escalate.
I hear very similar stories from folks in the greater metro area about what happened in Detroit in 2020 to this day. I lived here then and there were no fires, looting, or destruction here at all. It's been well documented, but that perception can't be broken and they continue to talk about how dangerous and destructive it was.
I'm also realizing now that depending on the time period, stores not "reopening" in a neighborhood (for how long were they closed?) was probably due to COVID.
It doesn't. Just an example from recent memory of how things can get out of hand if there's no law and order. My city suffered a lot from the drstruction and violence and I would prefer it not happen again.
What I’m just not getting is how there should be this new urgency or desire is all. We’ve had protests, some of which turned into riots, throughout American history. A certain amount of law and order has always been imposed by the authorities (when they haven’t made it worse). It seems like you want that amount to change everywhere, “there should be a desire to nip violent protests in the bud,” but the only reason is because you personally experienced a lot of negative results from riots in 2020. Maybe it’s just your city?
It's not a new desire on many people's part. Many residents of eg. LA, Chicago, NYC have been lamenting the decline of law and order since (and also before) the 2020 riots. Politicians and law enforcement in these cities have shown that they either won't or can't enforce the law.
In a situation like that eventually either mobs or federal law enforcement need to get involved. Of those two choices, maybe you prefer the former. Many people prefer the latter though.
I'm a liberal (not progressive) in Chicagoland (in Oak Park, right next to Austin) and this lamentation for the decline of law and order is news to me. Homicides are sharply down since the Rahm Emanuel era.
Do you think federal agents that refuse to identify themselves, present warrants, or follow due process is law and order? Do you think peace officers that shoot munitions at unarmed civilians walking home is a fair trade for suspension of the first amendment?
That's the reason why people are protesting. If you wanna provide evidence about "your city", be specific, because places like Portland, Seattle, Austin, SF, NYC, Boston, and more are doing just fine.
Historically, armed aggressors of the state don’t just give power back to the nonviolent and peaceful.
Further, peaceful protest has been happening vis-à-vis constituents contacting their representatives - and also congregating in the streets - in the months leading up to this.
You're on the wrong side of this, plain and simple.
