Some people are all about how riots make changes (stonewall for instance), and while they aren't wrong, I have to wonder if riots with looting (and destroying unrelated property; I can see the logic of lighting up Minneapolis PD but not Target or Autozone) end up reinforcing negative stereotypes upon certain communities. Old Bubba Cletus is going to watch the riots on TV and go, "See, Betty-lou, I told you bout them 'n-words'. Lookit what they doin. That's why I dun like living among 'n-words'." Sure, change can be "forced" in this way, but at what cost? If all this ends up doing is making the general public more biased against at least inner-city blacks, when there's already a stereotype of black people being "(more) violent" and prone to crime, it's overall counter-productive, no matter what small measures are put in in reaction to the riots. Which of course, ensures that attitudes towards the inner-city never change.
If this was Beijing and not Minneapolis, the riots would be over before they got started, and every single rioter would be either riddled with real bullets or run over by tanks if not arrested. That's the thing about riots; they only work against an at least partially moral government.
LYING
