User Comments, Suggestions, or Complaints | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertising
Buy MLB playoff tickets, plus 2011 World Series, 2011 ALCS tickets and NLCS game tickets. We also have Texas Rangers playoff schedule, tickets to Red Sox games and Yankees game tickets. Plus, buy Phillies baseball tickets, Tigers playoff tickets and the biggies like ALDS baseball tickets and 2011 NLDS tickets. |
Demarini, Easton and TPX Baseball Bats
|
AllianceTickets.com has cheap MLB Tickets. Get all your Colorado Rockies Tickets, Seattle Mariners Tickets, San Francisco Giants Tickets and all your favorite baseball tickets here. We also carry cheap Denver Broncos Tickets, Seattle Seahawks Tickets and Denver Nuggets Tickets. |
Page rendered in 0.8915 seconds
54 querie(s) executed
Reader Comments and Retorts
Go to end of page
Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.
My understanding is that after Hugo FEMA changed their rules. I think they will only replace your house once if you live in a flood plain.
That being said, it's those bastards in southern California that burn me - 30 million people who live in a place God never intended, and we keep replacing their $5 million homes every mudslide. Or wildfire. Or earthquake.
Those are some people who should be blackballed from ever being cops again anywhere (and thrown in prison for as long as possible). If you become a policeman, you have to be held to a higher standard in an emergency. Hopefully, there is identifiable video of all of the cops participating in looting so they can be fired when this is over.
At this point, I'd like the good people left behind, of which there are many, to have guns because I know the bad guys have them.
People have a right to use handguns to protect their homes, but taking to the streets to protect a hospital is going way too far. That's what we have police for, and there is no reason they shouldn't be able to mobilize in numbers to protect large concentrations of people, even with the manpower shortage that inevitably occurs during a natural disaster.
Well, with respect, I think you seriously underestimate what is going on down there.
I'll point out that this was silly before anyone else does. Obviously, once everything floods, inaccessability is a very good reason for not being able to get where you need to go.
The magnitude of what is going on is why I don't think your scenario is realistic. Do you really think a handful of good people taking to the streets to protect <fill in the blank> are going to accomplish anything other than getting killed? This isn't a movie.
I think you have something just short of an entirely unreasonable view of the reality in California.
I agree if you think the gangs are looking for a fight. They're looking for a pushover and they're going to find a lot. And, of course, you're right. A handful of armed good guys probably won't accomplish much. But they aren't likely to accomplish much standing without recourse as the gangs approach. I don't pretend that having guns will magically save you. Just that not having guns won't save you either and help is a long, long way off.
The levee breaking is something they could probably repair; the real fear that the planners have is actually not related to the levee breaking. But a hurricane that dropped an ungodly amount of water on the city would cause flooding within that would be supplemented by water cresting the intact levees and running over. There were all kinds of plans to rebuild the levee. But to respond to the real disaster scenario, I think the only projected plan was to try to figure out how to build other ways out, so that people could abandon the city more quickly. But that's incredibly complicated.
It's not like San Francisco where engineering can reduce the problem dramatically, I don't think. It's more like Pompeii.
- “If we can deal with this, we’ll be a better a better football team in the long run,” Saints coach Jim Haslett said. Later on in the Times-Picayune piece, they quote him saying some more odd things.
More from Haslett: “We know our guys are concerned about their families, the city, their own property, not knowing when we're going back, and when we do, what we're going to see. I know it's hard for them, but there's one thing about the NFL -- there's always adversity in this league. This is probably the highest form of adversity, and if we can handle this, we'll be all right. Our thoughts and our prayers go out to those who are left behind.”
http://www.nola.com/newslogs/breakingtp/
Months ago, I'd planned on visiting NO (and Jackson) this week ... glad I didn't book those tickets.
"Considering"? Though it might be considered a humanitarian effort to let the Saints play their games untelevised in a darkened stadium that fans can't get to.
Like Haley Barbour who keeps comparing Mississippi to much larger tragedies (tsunami, Hiroshima).
Though it might be considered a humanitarian effort to let the Saints play their games untelevised in a darkened stadium that fans can't get to.
I dunno, playing home games on a field that is three feet underwater in a domed stadium without functioning plumbing or air conditioning seems like it would give a large home-field advantage.
Larger, of course, in terms of the number of dead. Property damage is probably pretty close between those three events, so maybe it isn't so stupid.
It's not like they're practicing in those conditions, so I can't imagine not going to the bathroom would help Aaron Brooks and drowning would help Deuce McAllister.
Well, there is the problem.
I still haven't found info or reports on the river upstream, so I'm assuming the levee system that keeps the river on course is mostly intact. If anyone has other info, I'd like to hear it.
Can they possibly bus that many people to Houston? I was thinking they should take them by warship. Empty the hangar of a carrier and transport them there.
I think I'd rather drown.
May you never have to make that choice. I susupect many of those that do will disagree with you.
Most recent reports say that there are about 10,000 people in the Superdome. Between a bunch of school and charter buses and military vehicles, that's pretty manageable. At maybe 50 people per bus, that's 200 trips. I bet Houston school systems could handle lending out 200 buses for a day. Even at twice that many trips, that's not unreasonable.
I don't know how they get from the Superdome to whereever they can bring the buses to. And how to get the rest of the scattered residents out is even harder.
It is somewhat insensitive to the dead in SE Asia, but I agree that it definitely isn't a stupid comarison. The major difference between the two tragedies is that people here had time to evacuate. Without advance warning of the hurricane and the levee breaches, the gulf coast states could easily have had casualties over half a million.
so? it's not like they'll be getting their netflix selections from the mailman anytime soon, probably.
this link in the lounge. It's a 2000 article that was right on the money forecasting the effects of such a major hurricane hitting NO.
I also saw a piece on a news magazine show (Dateline, perhaps) a year or two ago that discussed the sinking delta.
Unfortunately, people have been saying this about New Orleans since I was in elementary school growing up in Mobile (3 decades ago) and probably before. There were sporadic efforts but for the most part hurricanes passed to the east or west and the dire predictions didn't come true so no one wanted to spend the money. Katrina wasn't even the worst-case scenario when it finally hit, though it's hard to tell the difference now.
Last I heard, it was closer to 30,000. There were 10,000 on just the first day, before the people who didn't leave their homes started making their way there.
I guess Houston does make the most sense, though I'm not sure why they all have to go in the Astrodome. If there are people with no place else to go, sure, but I'd think a good portion of them may have family elsewhere that they just couldn't get to before the storm hit.
We could be talking about a couple of months living in the Astrodome. Maybe they'll open up the owner's old apartment.
The Texans have already offered Reliant Stadium, though I think LSU Tiger Stadium makes the most sense.
What are the odds the Saints play in Los Angeles this season? I had heard Baton Rouge as a possibility. I can't imagine a scenario where they play a single game in New Orleans.
Isn't Tulane in NO as well?
30,000 people trying to use one bathroom? And Vince Namoli would REALLY be "pissed" if they sent them to Tampa instead.
I heard a headcount estimate of 24,000, but whatever it is, it's huge, and there will be problems galore with them in the Astrodome. They had A/C issues and other issues in the Superdome. I started to propose getting hundreds of churchs in Louisiana and SE Texas to take 25-200 people each, but that would be hard to deal with in other ways.
Brilliant and insightful comment there, genius.
Washing Away homepage
I admit it was a tacky joke, but it's still less offensive than the calls for murder and the Krauthammer comments -- which were all made *seriously*.
Anyway, I suspect that this bit of commentary is more to your taste.
Junior College + Florida = Adam Carolla's punchline
Anyway, the same blog has screenshots here
showing how the press coverage is wrt looting. It's looting when blacks do it, "finding" when whites do it.
All which neatly explains the calls, here and elsewhere, for murdering looters.
BTW, if the nanny destroys the second link, too, the missing word is the n word, plural.
But the A/C and plumbing issues in the Superdome were a direct result of the hurricane - no power and no running water. I don't think the Astrodome would be pleasant, but it would be a heck of a lot better than the Superdome. And at least the Astrodome still has its roof intact.
Retardo, I think the call for shooting looters is more out of concern for safety of people, not property. How long does before looting becomes rioting? Already there are reports of a cop being shot by "looters."
Post 139 of the Lounge got there first. That means I found AFP's racism, but Retardo looted it.
New Orleans faced a horrifying trio of challenges -- rising water, stranded people and a refugee situation that is getting worse by the hour.
Did zoo animals escape? I know there was a shark swimming through the city, but I haven't heard of the tigers or something getting out. That would be pretty wild. During the depression, people stormed several zoos and slaughtered animals for food. Given everything else that's going on, it's surprising that this hasn't happened.
Tulane updates
As for the people who are looking to take advantage of the situation to steal computers and televisions and such, they're the lowest of the low, regardless of whatever color they happen to be.
As for you Retardo, I envision you as the kind of scum-sucking lowlife who would push his own grandmother out of the way in order to be the first one to get on that bus to Houston.
There was some footage yesterday of a seal that was (oddly enough) stranded someplace dry, and people were trying to keep it hydrated. I believe it got washed out of an aquarium in Biloxi.
Is there really a big problem with people stealing TV sets in flooded areas? I'm just having a hard time imagining people going through the trouble of wading through flooded streets carrying stolen TV sets.
Electronics, furniture, clothing, computers. Everything must go.
I stand by what I said earlier about the looters-if they're taking food, that's one thing. Last I checked, booze, jewellery and electronics weren't necessities of life though, and there's no excuse for taking them. The police who are doing so are even worse. Shoot em all, regardless of skin colour.
By the way, is anyone else just amazed at how quickly New Orleans descended into lawlessness? I'm kind of amazed that apparently no one in New Orleans had more than 12 hours of food supplies on hand, and so quickly needed to resort to liberating it from stores. I've seen some pretty able bodied people doing so-I'm pretty sure that their talents could be useful in helping out some of the elderly or infirm who are suffering through this and need to be moved or whatever.
I don't. The extent that it's a concern for people is that it's a concern for a certain class or race of people's financial well-being.
I dont think *any* cop, right now and for the next few days, should be on looting detail. It's a waste of resources and ultimately, lives. This is a case of moral triage, and it's an outrage that not only have there been calls to shoot first and all that, but that there's any protest wrt "looting". To me, the prime objectors, the finger pointers, are likely racist but more to the point, simply just more concerned with property than people. I expect some freaks to worry about jewelery being looted, but Szym thinking that it matters surprised me. I mean, that's crass even for a libertarian. People are drowning and being poisoned, you know.
That's one of the advantages of today's flat-screen panel TVs, I guess. They're lighter and less bulky. They still need power, though, and a lot of them don't have TV tuners any more, so they won't be much use for a while.
Last I checked, booze, jewellery and electronics weren't necessities of life though,
I'm with you on the jewelry and electronics, but I have trouble begrudging people in that kind of condition some booze. For medicinal purposes. (I'm only somewhat joking. The guy who carted off a cart of liquor, or the inevitable drunken rioters, are taking it too far.)
hmmm ... did i miss someone calling for not further maiming krauthammer? i do that pretty much every time i see one of his columns, & have been doing so long before this storm.
No ####. That's why it's so appalling that some people, many of whom look quite capable of doing something to help those poor people, take this as an opportunity to get new clothing, a crate of vodka and a 40" TV.
I had this same discussion at dinner last night and came to the conclusion that it's foolish to waste any police resources right now on dealing with the looters. I suspect many of those of us calling for shooting them feel the same way. That doesn't mean I don't wish that that they'd send up a guy in a helicopter with another guy with a sniper rifle to pick some of these bastards off, but if I had to make the decision myself, I'd task them to saving peoples lives.
I don't think anyone here would argue that resources should be diverted to shooting looters-I think the "shoot looters" comments reflect more on the utter lack of morality of those looting consumer goods at a time like this.
probably not anyone who's ever spent much time there ...
Haven't read Lord of the Flies, have we? The idea that people are all wonderful and beautiful is a comforting myth. Many, hell, most, are. But a sizeable number simply aren't.
Retardo, I hear what you're saying, but I'm guessing that much, if not most, of the looting is property being taken from people of color. Race riots historically destroy much more property of people of color and of the lower economic classes than the rich or even middle class. And I think the outrage at looting is the idea of able-bodied people kicking others when they're down. I'm sure racism has something to do with it for some people but I've seen photos that show whites looting and I'm just as angry with them as the blacks.
I do agree that preventing looting is pretty low on the list right now, especially since much of the looted property will simply have to be abandoned to the rising water.
The opening paragraph of the newest CNN story uses a word I never thought I'd see employed to describe a situation within the United States:
New Orleans faced a horrifying trio of challenges -- rising water, stranded people and a refugee situation that is getting worse by the hour.
My wife and I caught this at lunch while watching a report. American refugees. I also never would have imagined such a thing but now that its happened it seems a fairly obvious outcome.
The mayor said Wednesday that Hurricane Katrina probably killed thousands of people in New Orleans.
I've been really surprised the news outlets haven't been giving higher estimates. Take Mississippi, they keep saying that 120 died. It looks to me like we KNOW 120 died and they haven't reached a lot of areas or fully explored many others. The death toll is going to be staggering at the end of the day, especially since the death may only just be beginning.
Hinske says it much better than I did.
Really? How?
"I had this same discussion at dinner last night and came to the conclusion that it's foolish to waste any police resources right now on dealing with the looters."
Wow, that's charitable of you, in your bourgeois insulation.
Look, none of the people I've seen "looting" were in any better straits than those swimming through the streets. What the #### can they do? The "looters" are trapped, too.
If you're stuck in a place with no electricity, with no idea of when you'll be evacuated much less when you'll return to "normal" life, you not only get a lot of leeway for being desperate or crazy, but you also get leeway for stealing stuff that you might be able to trade, later, for necessities.
"If it were MY store, I might shoot at people looting nonessential goods"
Not me. My house, yes. It'd be an Alamo situation. But we were never talking about personal property, we're talking about stores that are insured and which contain goods that have no psychological value to the owner. Stores aren't ####### home to peoples' wedding rings or grandparents' silver. There's a huge difference. Hence the "property is property" insult that comes with the "shoot the looters" commentary. I'm sorry, but there's no ####### way that stealing twinkies or even TVs from stores is morally equivalent to stealing someone's wedding rings. And i've yet to hear an instance where homes were being looted; the outrage is the sympathy for poor poor Wal-Mart and Walgreens.
By Tuesday morning, I knew the death toll would be high because the state EOCs had yet to release any numbers. By contrast, in Florida post-Charley, a count was available quite soon.
Look, stealing is generally wrong.
But this is ####### America. We don't ####### murder thieves in this country.
Maybe there are fascists with you up in Canada who are into that, but not here.
Well that was pretty clearly the argument that I was making so I'm beaten.
Look, none of the people I've seen "looting" were in any better straits than those swimming through the streets. What the #### can they do? The "looters" are trapped, too.
Go loot yourself a boat and get to work. I guarantee you that all of these people out stealing consumer goods could find someone in worse straits than they happen to be at the moment, who's in need of some sort of assistance. Go to a hospital and ask what you can do to help. Find a cop and tell him that you're an able bodied young man who's willing to do what he can to help out. Go to the SuperDome and offer to help the people there with whatever it is that they need help with.
Maybe there are fascists with you up in Canada who are into that, but not here.
Meh, we don't execute children. Po-ta-to, po-tah-to.
No. I made a deal with my relatives to come back and meet my ex-gf here in memphis if she came through. she did, so I'm back for a few days.
Memphis got some high winds; about 70,000 without power but it wasn't bad here downtown. I'm sure we got rain in Ark. but I dont think anything else was bad. Rice dries out quickly in the sun so the rain probably only delayed the harvest a couple of days maximum. We were to start cutting Monday, anyway. It's very early.
Anyway, she's the only girl in my past that I would have married, but noooo we could never make it work though we stayed close all through it. Now, I get proposed to. "Please come live with me!" I said no; she's hurt; goes home. I would have said yes in a heartbeat two years ago. Fukola.
The Colonial Pipeline, which carries refined fuels from Houston and the SE to New York harbor ultimately has been severed due to power outages in Louisiana.
Could lead to gas supply crunches and will exacerbate higher fuel prices.
"Oh, great! Now the city is overrun by baboons!"
"Well, isn't that the fault of the voters?"
Wouldn't this also be true of almost every single person in the area? Why hold just the looters to this standard? Should we judge the average young guy at the Super Dome as being unworthy because he's not helping? Heck, what about those of us outside the area? The Red Cross is looking for volunteers to help out in any way - including manpower time to do grunt work like answering phone banks in places that are nowhere near New Orleans. The same problem you have with looters can be directed at a substantial portion of the US population.
Yes, but they aren't *negroes*.
I think it is true of almost every able bodied person in the area. I don't know the makeup of the people at the SuperDome, but young men in my age/family bracket (mid 20's, no kids there to look after or elderly/disabled parents to take care of) should be helping. At least those able bodied young people sitting in the SuperDome aren't causing problems, and to be blunt, they aren't so obviously callous, leaving aside the Retardo vision of a new, long lasting society in New Orleans that uses liquor and TV's as currency.
The Red Cross is looking for volunteers to help out in any way - including manpower time to do grunt work like answering phone banks in places that are nowhere near New Orleans.
Are they having a hard time getting enough volunteers? I'd guess that the need/volunteer ratio is a lot closer to 1 outisde of New Orleans than in New Orleans.
Well, yes, you are, because you ignored the other part of the argument directed to comments you had made.
Actually, the last CNN report I was listening to said that the looters were targeting both stores and homes.
And it's not about sympathy for shopkeepers. #61 hit it right on the head. The city is completely devastated, and these people are apparently uninjured and healthy enough to be out slogging through the water and carrying off televisions and arming themselves with handguns. Why not carry off some water, drive around or walk around or boat around and throw it up onto roofs where people are stranded?
People who loot drinking water and canned good because they've got 12 people trapped back at a house for lord knows how long, that's excusable. But the rest of them, the ones looting for greed or personal gain or just out of the thrill that comes from breaking the law, they can all rot in hell because they're only making a bad situation worse. Black or white.
Just found it
To me, the prime objectors, the finger pointers, are likely racist but more to the point, simply just more concerned with property than people. I expect some freaks to worry about jewelery being looted, but Szym thinking that it matters surprised me. I mean, that's crass even for a libertarian. People are drowning and being poisoned, you know.
Given a choice between stopping a looter and saving someone from drowning, obviously I'd opt for the latter.
Rarely is the choice that cut and dried, though. A cop in one side of the city where it's relatively dry can't do much to help a helicopter pick someone off a roof eight miles away.
Looting food, or diapers, or clothing under these circumstances is, in my opinion, reasonable. I'd do it myself and make a mental note to make restitution. I would also be willing to give the benefit of the doubt to a random person I see looting the same items, especially if those goods would be destroyed by rising water anyway. I would expect that most storeowners, if I found them three months later (or whatever) and told them what I'd taken and why, would probably be OK with it.
Looting jewelry has nothing to do with race and everything to do with stealing for easy profit and I would have no problem with a cop shooting such a person on sight. If someone has the bandwidth to break into a store and steal jewelry, *they* should be out stopping someone from drowning.
Obviously given the conditions there people aren't going to be getting away with a truckload of widescreens, but if there were a way to search evacuees and leave behind the people with pocketsful of rings, I'd be fine with that, too.
Acquiring the basic necessities of life by unseemly means can be justified. A tennis bracelet doesn't qualify.
This is my issue. I basically agree with (a), though I think Retardo is right to trouble the too-easy absolute condemnation.
I need a lot of further explanation of the jump from (a) to (b). The government can't just kill people because they're stealing stuff. That's not how this works.
You would authorize the police to shoot a looter? Doesn't that seem like a harsh penalty?
Sorry.
How about "put back the tie pin before I count to three", and *then* we can shoot 'em?
I don't consider looting at a time like this - especially necessities or perishable items - to be that morally objectionable. I certainly don't think people should be shot on sight for it. The stuff in those stores is mostly a write-off anyway at this point, as the stores are going to be closed for months.
I do wish though that some more orderly way of distributing those supplies could be contrived. My worry about allowing looting is that what happens when two guys, go for the same jewelry store? What happens when looters try to steal from other looters? What happens when a shopkeeper or homeowner does decide to defend his property? When does looting become rioting? People are stressed out, potentially armed and/or drunk. In situations like that, lawlessness or the perception thereof seems dangerous both to the looters and others.
I do think the suggestion that all these would-be looters should go help in the rescue efforts is a bit much, though. While some of them could certainly be helpful, I imagine that a lot of them would just be getting in the way or potentially putting themselves and others in danger.
And here
I do think the suggestion that all these would-be looters should go help in the rescue efforts is a bit much, though. While some of them could certainly be helpful, I imagine that a lot of them would just be getting in the way or potentially putting themselves and others in danger.
If that's true, then they need to do what the mayor and FEMA and the governor are suggesting: evacuate. Go to the evacuation points and get out of the city.
If there's gunplay and roving gangs and looting, that's just one more thing that has to be dealt with. And while the focus of attention has been on rescuing people, there has also obviously been some focus on the looters. They are just making the situation that much worse.
And I don't buy the argument that it's okay to take this stuff because the stores are a total loss anyway. Do you really think they're walking off with waterlogged stereos and ruined clothing? They're taking the stuff that could be salvaged down the line (well, assuming they stop the rising water one of these days).
And of course the ones that shoot police and other fellow looters and try to loot children's hospitals.
I'm in favor of looters shooting other looters.
In fact, I think they should round up everyone who wants to loot and put them in one place and let them fight it out. The one who lives gets run of the city, at least until the police find him.
Also there's no argument that its ok to loot from Wal-Mart, but not you friendly neighborhood retailer. Doesn't matter whether the victim is a large corporation or an individually owned-and-operated store.
Are you serious? Execution? For Robbery? Sure, the crime is morally reprehensible, but would you support the execution of robbers in a non-disaster situation? That punishment simply does not fit the crime.
I am very suprise how much I agree with RETARDO right now.
I know it sounds harsh, but once looters have made that particular choice, they face the consequences. For me, anyway.
and how is execution an approriate consequence for that action? Certainly, arresting and prosecuting these criminals is not feasible at this point. Wouldn't it be better to let them get away than to SHOOT THEM?
I am completly flabbergasted that abitrary executions are even been floated as a probable solution to post-disaster looting. Western Civilization my ass.
I guess my problem is that, among other things I've already noted, the "shoot the looters" people are recommending a punitive action that should never be taken for *any* crime against property, whatever the circumstances. If there are murders and rapes, then we can maybe begin to be reasonable about brute force in retaliation.
This #### happened with the LA riots and the same types said the same thing then. This is just an excuse for people who think niggers like to steal hubcaps to say, "shoot em all and let God sort them out". If not the racist thing then it's the comfy middle-class yuppie preoccupation with the sanctity of chattel property: nevermind that people are drowning, dear god, these poor blacks and white trash need to get jobs (hence the calls for them to steal boats to work with the police) or respect the flooded Wal-Mart's right to its possessions! When #### like this happens, you can see what's really important to some people, and what's not. And the biases are presented in stark relief.
There have been calls to shoot people for stealing. Murder. Now is it so far-out that I've called property-trumps-all types crypto-fascists? They are showing their true colors, as I knew they would. I only hope the army and cops in NOLA aren't of the same stripe.
As many of you reading this thread probably know, my girlfriend more than likely LOST HER ####### HOUSE in the hurricane. Both of her parents' places of work have undoubtably been destroyed. So, as you might imagine, she's going through a little bit of a rough time.
Now my jackass ####### piece of #### roommate decided today would be a good ####### day to call her and ask her to give him about $100 because of "damages" she caused to our apartment while she stayed with me for 6 weeks this summer. These damages include removing hair from the couch left behind from her dog and refilling the ####### propane tank on his ####### grill. FOR THE ####### RECORD, I already told him 3 weeks ago that I would pay for the new tank of propane as soon as he got it refilled (he has a car, I don't).
Let's recap - she lost her ####### house and both of her parents are now unemployed. My piece of #### roommate decided to ask her for money. ####### prick.
Hahah thus spake the voice of Primer Wall Street.
My condolences to you and your gf, man.
Indeed.
When they're done shooting the looters, I hope they come after your roommate.
(that's a joke, before anyone overreacts)
Hahah thus spake the voice of Primer Wall Street
Sorry, I'm going to disagree a bit. It is always wrong to take stuff that belongs to others, even if they're people you don't like. I think there is an exception in this highly extraordinary circumstance because of the desperate situation many of these people are in. Taking necessities is fine, I won't begrudge anyone that. Taking jewlerly, etc. is wrong. Hence, I won't get on a moral high horse if they grab what they need.
At the same time, even though this might be wrong, we should be reasonable about what were advocating as a solution.
How good are you at fighting? Because that is seriously an asskicking worthy offense.
I'd throw him out of the apartment too (good time as any for the girl to move in).
I'm having a hard time finding how race fits into either scenario. If someone *can't* leave, for whatever reason, we bend every resource to assist them. If someone *won't*, because they were too arrogant or are now profiteering rather than purely surviving, screw 'em.
I think the only salvageable "shoot the looters" position would be that you're nipping the situation in the bud before it gets to that stage.
I'd be somewhat all right with riot-control actions like shooting bean-bags (not bullets unless the police were under threat), while also making it perfectly clear to the people left in the city that (a) nobody is going to be allowed to die of thirst while there is still bottled water in a supermarket somewhere in the city. (b) everyone is going to be evacuated and provided with what they need to survive.
I agree. Maybe Wal-Mart is a bad example since it does sell necessities. I agree with you -- "taking" necessities from a store, either Wal-Mart or a neighborhood store, may be justified.
I'm not sure if anyone said it here, but I've read elsewhere that people condone looting of a large chain store, but not their neighborhood retailer. This is where I disagree. It's no less wrong to steal an HDTV from Wal-Mart than it is to steal it from a neighborhood retailer.
And there's, perhaps, dozens of homes like that one.
You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.
<< Back to main