French Riots.

[Mr.48 0]

Nobody seems to be postings this so I will:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/7115267.stm

 

I cant help but agree with the French PM, all these rioters are just criminal hooligans and should be treated as such, no more "misunderstood youth" coddling. These assholes want a fight? Give them one, if these guys are throwing Molotov cocktails and shooting then shoot back, and not just with rubber bullets and tear gas. I wouldnt even put martial law out of the question to show these guys some real terror as they get hunted down on the streets and get their asses deported, and if they have no other citizenship throw them in prison, preferably with hard labor, or boot-camp.

And the supposed "outrage" these morons are rioting over is even more retarded this time around than 2 years ago. A pair of retards on a non-street legal vehicle, with no helmets, crash into a police car and the police is at fault?

Edited November 27, 2007 by Mr.48

[Feuersturm 0]

Wow. Any excuse for violence works I guess.

If the police died instead does that mean they could go around shooting people in their homes?

According to the logic of the townspeople...I guess so.

[Mehman 0]

I partially agree with Mr.48. There's no way that they should behave like that in acts of venegance, those two kids stole a motorcycle, rode it at top speed and crashed into a police car. I'm more willing to believe the statement from the police at this moment than the rabbling rioters. I agree that the police should do more to fend for themselves than tear gas and rubber bullets, they can't do much else, perhaps hose them down, but they can't start shooting every rioter, that's just manslaughter. And the rioters are kids.

 

Also, I'd say that the police themselves are also to blame for this situation. They are at fault too, because I suspects, as in every country, the rioters being mostly immigrants and poorer people that the police targeted them more frequently, treated them more roughly and thus in a way also caused this shit hole. We had a similar situation around here, the cops being kings of the road, crashed into a car and killed three guys, but evaded punishment.

But nobody started a riot. So where could the problem be?

 

It looks like they are kids, without anything to do, that came out to protest. And that adds to a mass, out of which a few individuals that are pissed off at the police for various reasons, like perhaps feeling uneven and unnecesary brutality, start throwing molotov cocktails and stones, then the rest follow. And voila, you've got riots.

 

[BoB 0]

French society is fucked. Now all we need is for them to drop out of the EU....

[Mr.48 0]

but they can't start shooting every rioter, that's just manslaughter. And the rioters are kids.

 

I'm not saying they should shoot any rioters on sight. But if a rioter uses a firearm (which a bunch of these rioters are), the police should respond in kind, when someone is trying to kill you, you dont fool around. If someone is about to throw a molotov cocktail thats also using a deadly weapon and endangering many lives, so rioters spotted lighting them should be shot on sight as well. As for them being kids, I say that if they fall into either of the above categories it shouldnt mater, a bullet fired or fire started by a 10 year-old is just as deadly as a 20 year-old.

 

If I'm in Afghanistan and a 10 year-old tries to kill me or my buddies with his daddy's AK, I'm gonna shoot him dead, end of story.

Edited November 28, 2007 by Mr.48

[IconOfEvi 0]

...

 

Stop taking my job :P! (seriously, I had like three windows about this stuff and was about to post.)

 

Oh well. :). Anywaaaaays.

 

Yeah, 80 injured, as of yesterday:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/7114175.stm

 

Thats like insane. This is just typical youth thinking their aggrieved and thus have to right their precieved wrong. I agree with 48 - these guys are waaaaaay out of line. Now I'm not sure what the gun policy is in France, but I'm assuming to stand its near Britain's. Why aren't the police responding back with deadly force????. If they're using handguns, from what I assume of French gun laws, they're already criminals, coupled with firing at a police officer. Couple that with the horrendous immigration policy of France and look at the shit you get (Algerians)...then again Britain is not too different in a way, right (Pakistanis)? With Spain not too different, right (Moroccans)? With Germany and Belgium and its ilk not too different either, right (Turks)? When you let crazy people come in swarms instead of dribs and drabs and then tell them its perfectly fine to carry your all your cultural baggage with you instead of integrating, I guess we're seeing that culmination. I guess we in America should be glad that our illegal swarms aren't crazy ass Muslims with a deathwish :ph34r:. Then again, thats what you guys in Europe get for years of batshit stupid immigration policy.

 

Then again, we aren't ones to talk. <_< :P

 

EDIT - Oh, and looking at the last one...turns out the last riot was sparked by the police ARRESTING SOMEONE WHO DIDN'T PAY THE TRAIN FARE.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/6503809.stm

 

WHAT. THE. FUCK.

 

EDIT - This article http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/7116978.stm has a good summary of whats been going on since Sarkozy's come back and perhaps why if they police fire back...yeah.

Edited November 30, 2007 by IconOfEvi

[Rattuskid 0]

If they're using handguns, from what I assume of French gun laws, they're already criminals,

 

I always thought that France was one of the most pro-gun nations in Western Europe.

[Korona 0]

You need to understand who "Sarko" is and what he represents to the youth of the Paris slums. The French ideal is that France has a single ethnicity and a single culture. If you are a French citizen you are French. It doesn't matter if you are Muslim or Christian or Whatever. You keep all that outside of public life. That means these guys are denied their identity. It's considered un-french to regard yourself as an asian or whatever.

On the other hand you have, despite the ideal, a lot of racism, as well as very "good" labour laws. A worker has a lot of rights, and it is hard to hire and fire people. That means employers don't like taking "risky" people on because they can be total shits, and it's really hard to get rid of them. The concequence is that youths from this subcultre can't express their cultural herigate, can't get a job (who wants to hire a delinquant, especially an Arab one?!) and are generally despised by mainstream society.

 

Now along comes Sarko with a programme that claims to help people like this, but the perception is that he is making things worse.

Tie that in to Sarkosy's fairly brutal suppression of the 2005 protests and you have a lot of people who absolutely loathe this guy.

 

 

As for "if they are shooting, why don't the police shoot back"... it's because the French police aren't gung-ho fucktards. If you shoot bullets into a crowd you kill people.

[Mehman 0]

As for "if they are shooting, why don't the police shoot back"... it's because the French police aren't gung-ho fucktards. If you shoot bullets into a crowd you kill people.

 

Ding ding! And that's only going to make things worse. A couple more dead kids will only cause MORE rioting.

 

And the whole shoot to disable is bullshit. Police officers from around the world have proven this on many occasions. They shoot to kill. And killing somebody right in front of them all, will probably just piss them off more, seeing how there are most likely 200 rioters vs 40 cops. Goes who wins in this fight.

 

I agree that the rioters are going to the extreme, but that doesn't allow armed police officers to go to extremes too. They have more guns than one nut with a shotgun. They will not see who is holding what. It is dark, there is smoke, everything is burning, the wrong people will die.

 

The riots will stop soon enough, when they've had enough.

Edited November 29, 2007 by MehMan

[Korona 0]

When you let crazy people come in swarms instead of dribs and drabs and then tell them its perfectly fine to carry your all your cultural baggage with you instead of integrating, I guess we're seeing that culmination. I guess we in America should be glad that our illegal swarms aren't crazy ass Muslims with a deathwish :ph34r:. Then again, thats what you guys in Europe get for years of batshit stupid immigration policy.

 

Sorry, I think I missed this, what are you saying? You wish your parents had to stay in India? Or are you actually saying that it should be one rule for you and another for everyone else?

 

The French involved here are born and raised French citizens. When they came to France, the country their parents were comming from was also France, given there was no distinction made between "colonies" and the motherland. Furthermore most of these families are people who fought for France, and often suffeed greatly for it. France owes them. The racism in your post strikes me as hugely ironic given your own cultural background.

 

In the UK we have a different policy based on diversity, where cultures are encouraged to express their traditions. That means strong ethnic communities and so people are sometimes slow to learn English. That leads to people going blablabla they should integrate, so it isn't perfect, but I think that in France there is a massive problem simply because to go to the other extreeme.

 

Far from saying "oh its okay not to integrate", It is a social taboo to consider yourself anything other than French, any mention of your cultural roots aren't just discouraged but actively suppressed and censored. Forced integration is a bad thing. I am really supprised how little you empathise with these people's situation. Are Americans not racist towards Indians? In France the Arabs are treated like how Blacks were in the Southern States.

 

I think this is Sarko's big test and I expect him to fail becasue he won't comprimise.

[IconOfEvi 0]

Well, aside from the fact dad was mainly in Africa, Funny how you mention so many lulz.

 

First, I'm totally amazed and happy that Sarkozy won, simply because an immigrant himself, he has risen up and become the most powerful man in the country. He kinda gives hope to me, in a way.

 

Now, as for the immigrants, yes I'll admit I was kinda hasty to generalize the immigrants to France with the immigrants to Britain. And yes, you're mostly right, its just that...not everyone is the child of a veteran. Now as for Britain...fuck, if you call encouraging women to walk around in burkas (their cultural choice, amirite?) (Birmingham) just encouraging diversity...damn. Good luck.

 

And goddamn...why is it that all the natives think that just because two people are immigrants, they stick together ese?? And why do you seem to think that my parents came illegally? Firstly, dad went to Britain around 60s, when Indians were being kicked out of Africa with all that "Africa for the Africans BS", and its lucky he got there even. Long story, but its took nearly forever for them to get a visa here. But did they go over illegally? Could have, but didn't. Same with my aunt/uncle family...they applied about after we got here (1989-90), they only got here last year or so. But hey, because we're immigrants. I'm supposed to sympathize with that dude who jumped over the border last year and is now settled pretty good. Or with the people who come in massive waves because Labour feels like feeling good, when we had to wait God knows how long.

 

And about integration - you seem to think we're some foreign species or something, the way you talk. We gotta be different, because God forbid people integrate. Its now racist if I say immigrants should integrate, supposedly? Whats the use of having a vibrant society if the people don't integrate? What do you want them to be 'diverse' for? To gawk at them? 'Appreciate' their culture up close? Since when did immigrants become zoo animals? IDK Korona...apparently I gotta feel sympathy not only with border jumpers but with those people brandishing EUROPE IS THE CANCER, ISLAM IS THE AWNSER now too simply because we're immmmigraaaants. Or who decide to take out their 'built in frustration' by torching everything?

 

Now Korona, I really do feel for the Algerians because in a way, the French kinda tried putting them in ghettoes - out of sight, out of mind. But still, you know we've lost our minds when riots start over some dude who slammed into a police car. And as for racism...ha ha ha. You're a good one. Of course I experience goddamn racism. Not really so much anymore because schoolkids grow up over time, but still...I have this nagging suspicious that despite God-knows how many applications, I haven't even gotten a call. IDK if its racism and more really they don't wanna embarass themselves trying their name <_<.

 

So you could drop the holier than thou attitude, right?

Edited November 30, 2007 by IconOfEvi

[Godwin 0]

Well, aside from the fact dad was mainly in Africa, Funny how you mention so many lulz.

 

First, I'm totally amazed and happy that Sarkozy won, simply because an immigrant himself, he has risen up and become the most powerful man in the country. He kinda gives hope to me, in a way.

 

Now, as for the immigrants, yes I'll admit I was kinda hasty to generalize the immigrants to France with the immigrants to Britain. And yes, you're mostly right, its just that...not everyone is the child of a veteran. Now as for Britain...fuck, if you call encouraging women to walk around in burkas (their cultural choice, amirite?) (Birmingham) just encouraging diversity...damn. Good luck.

 

And goddamn...why is it that all the natives think that just because two people are immigrants, they stick together ese?? And why do you seem to think that my parents came illegally? Firstly, dad went to Britain around 60s, when Indians were being kicked out of Africa with all that "Africa for the Africans BS", and its lucky he got there even. Long story, but its took nearly forever for them to get a visa here. But did they go over illegally? Could have, but didn't. Same with my aunt/uncle family...they applied about after we got here (1989-90), they only got here last year or so. But hey, because we're immigrants. I'm supposed to sympathize with that dude who jumped over the border last year and is now settled pretty good. Or with the people who come in massive waves because Labour feels like feeling good, when we had to wait God knows how long.

 

And about integration - you seem to think we're some foreign species or something, the way you talk. We gotta be different, because God forbid people integrate. Its now racist if I say immigrants should integrate, supposedly? Whats the use of having a vibrant society if the people don't integrate? What do you want them to be 'diverse' for? To gawk at them? 'Appreciate' their culture up close? Since when did immigrants become zoo animals? IDK Korona...apparently I gotta feel sympathy not only with border jumpers but with those people brandishing EUROPE IS THE CANCER, ISLAM IS THE AWNSER now too simply because we're immmmigraaaants. Or who decide to take out their 'built in frustration' by torching everything?

 

Now Korona, I really do feel for the Algerians because in a way, the French kinda tried putting them in ghettoes - out of sight, out of mind. But still, you know we've lost our minds when riots start over some dude who slammed into a police car. And as for racism...ha ha ha. You're a good one. Of course I experience goddamn racism. Not really so much anymore because schoolkids grow up over time, but still...I have this nagging suspicious that despite God-knows how many applications, I haven't even gotten a call. IDK if its racism and more really they don't wanna embarass themselves trying their name <_<.

 

So you could drop the holier than thou attitude, right?

 

Apart from the fact that that was very difficult to read, I think you missed Korona's point.

 

[IconOfEvi 0]

In hindsight, I think I did too. :unsure:

 

Still a decent rant.

 

SPEAKING of France...LOLWUT?!

Edited November 30, 2007 by IconOfEvi

[Rattuskid 0]

I think you missed multiple points Korona was making, and took to arguing with a wall about all the points he didn't make.

 

I may not always agree with Korona, but he's very skilled at wordsmithing exactly and only his point of view, and I've caught myself slipping off on tangents in replies, despite what he's said, many times. Read twice, post once.

Edited November 30, 2007 by Rattuskid

[Mr.48 0]

Now along comes Sarko with a programme that claims to help people like this, but the perception is that he is making things worse.

Tie that in to Sarkosy's fairly brutal suppression of the 2005 protests and you have a lot of people who absolutely loathe this guy.

 

How exactly did Sarkozy "brutally" suppress the 2005 riots (notice how I refuse to use the word protests, because wanton destruction of public and private property and endangering innocent peoples lives do not fall under the word "protest" for me)?

 

If anything the French government didnt act nearly as fast or as decisively as I would have liked. If anything like this happened where I live I would want the police to immediately impose a curfew and start cracking some skulls if anyone tries to torch cars and buildings, not to mention shooting at police officers and torching buses with passengers on board. And this is what I think they should do now.

 

As for "if they are shooting, why don't the police shoot back"... it's because the French police aren't gung-ho fucktards. If you shoot bullets into a crowd you kill people.

 

Dont twist my words, I never said they should just start opening fire on crowds, I said that if they see someone shooting at them, or about to set a building on fire, they should kill the asshole on the spot to protect their own lives and those of the general population.

 

 

[Windows V 0]

I have this nagging suspicious that despite God-knows how many applications, I haven't even gotten a call.

 

Have you tried 7-Eleven?

[IconOfEvi 0]

I have this nagging suspicious that despite God-knows how many applications, I haven't even gotten a call.

 

Have you tried 7-Eleven?

 

Ladies and Gentlemen, I rest my case.

[dave1001 0]

Btw, you're not the only one who has problems finding employment. I have a pretty decent resume, nothing for people to discrimate against me more than anyone else (northern european heritage, blond hair, blue eyes), yet I've filled out countless resumes for years, and probably less than 1 out of 100 ever results in an interview, part of that is the economy of my city isn't doing so well, perhaps you're overlooking similar difficulties?

[mastermind 0]

And the whole shoot to disable is bullshit. Police officers from around the world have proven this on many occasions. They shoot to kill. And killing somebody right in front of them all, will probably just piss them off more, seeing how there are most likely 200 rioters vs 40 cops. Goes who wins in this fight.

That's because you don't shoot to disable. You don't point a gun at something you don't intend to kill. It's as simple as that.

[IconOfEvi 0]

Btw, you're not the only one who has problems finding employment. I have a pretty decent resume, nothing for people to discrimate against me more than anyone else (northern european heritage, blond hair, blue eyes), yet I've filled out countless resumes for years, and probably less than 1 out of 100 ever results in an interview, part of that is the economy of my city isn't doing so well, perhaps you're overlooking similar difficulties?

How on earth?...

 

In a short, yes. In a long...most def yes, Racine unemployment is infact highest in state :(. I mean we're not like say Gary, but the fact that manufacturing was main bedrock of the economy...bleh.

[Korona 0]

Now along comes Sarko with a programme that claims to help people like this, but the perception is that he is making things worse.

Tie that in to Sarkosy's fairly brutal suppression of the 2005 protests and you have a lot of people who absolutely loathe this guy.

 

How exactly did Sarkozy "brutally" suppress the 2005 riots (notice how I refuse to use the word protests, because wanton destruction of public and private property and endangering innocent peoples lives do not fall under the word "protest" for me)?

 

If anything the French government didnt act nearly as fast or as decisively as I would have liked. If anything like this happened where I live I would want the police to immediately impose a curfew and start cracking some skulls if anyone tries to torch cars and buildings, not to mention shooting at police officers and torching buses with passengers on board. And this is what I think they should do now.

 

As for "if they are shooting, why don't the police shoot back"... it's because the French police aren't gung-ho fucktards. If you shoot bullets into a crowd you kill people.

 

Dont twist my words, I never said they should just start opening fire on crowds, I said that if they see someone shooting at them, or about to set a building on fire, they should kill the asshole on the spot to protect their own lives and those of the general population.

 

 

Depends on your cultural perspective I guess, but Sarko basically treated the rioters like scum, painting them as a load of foreign detritus washed up on pure French soil, even going so far as to deport a load of them, when in reality these were French citizens, born and raised. God knows where he "deported" them to. Since the events of 2005 were basically a reaction to the crap condecending way they are treated by the majority of French society, I think it's safe to say that Sarko's response, while it may have suppressed the violence in the short therm, did nothing to help in the medium to long term.

Look at what happened the next year when they tried to introduce the CPE, noone trusted the government, and it was looking almost like a revolution.

 

As for being able to pick off an individual with a gun inside a crowd of rioters. How would it help? Lets say that they knew for sure it was a real gun, and not a table leg or a cap-gun designed to scare the police. Ok, so you have a load of pissed off people with access to guns. Killing one of them would probably mean the next night a load more have guns.

AFAIK noone was shot or died, so a non-lethal response seems to be best.

 

Perhaps you are suggesting that, if the police are brutal enough these people will be so scared of the state that they wont step out of line. But do you really want to live in a police state?

[Mr.48 0]

Depends on your cultural perspective I guess, but Sarko basically treated the rioters like scum, painting them as a load of foreign detritus washed up on pure French soil, even going so far as to deport a load of them, when in reality these were French citizens, born and raised. God knows where he "deported" them to. Since the events of 2005 were basically a reaction to the crap condecending way they are treated by the majority of French society, I think it's safe to say that Sarko's response, while it may have suppressed the violence in the short therm, did nothing to help in the medium to long term.

Look at what happened the next year when they tried to introduce the CPE, noone trusted the government, and it was looking almost like a revolution.

 

Well first of all considering the chaos these people wreaked over a bullshit reason I would certainly label them scum myself. Second I'm not aware of anyone who was born in France getting deported, mind citing a reference?

And finally I can sympathize with a minority group being discriminated against, but the violence they resorted to when peaceful protest would have been sufficient snuffed out any sympathy I had for them. Theres a reason people think Ghandi was so awesome, and its not because of his funny glasses.

 

As for being able to pick off an individual with a gun inside a crowd of rioters. How would it help? Lets say that they knew for sure it was a real gun, and not a table leg or a cap-gun designed to scare the police. Ok, so you have a load of pissed off people with access to guns. Killing one of them would probably mean the next night a load more have guns.

AFAIK noone was shot or died, so a non-lethal response seems to be best.

 

Perhaps you are suggesting that, if the police are brutal enough these people will be so scared of the state that they wont step out of line. But do you really want to live in a police state?

 

If someone else picks up the gun and starts shooting it shoot them as well, eventually they are bound to realize that shooting at police will more than likely get you killed. As for no one getting shot you apparently didnt actually read the article I posted since you seem to have missed this little bit: "some officers suffered bullet wounds, while others were hurt by stones, fireworks and petrol bombs thrown at them in Villiers-le-Bel."

 

 

And I'm not suggesting that a police state is a good thing, but everything is relative and once in a while police need to remind people that lawlessness will not be tolerated, thats their job after all, alond with protecting the safety of the general population which these rioters are clearly endangering.

 

 

[Andre27 0]

I'm not going into the background of these riots. It's my opinion one should not try to force internal issues with violence.

Having seen several documentaries on the dutch TV about these neighbourhoods, it's fair to say that the current government is not solely to blame for this situation.

 

It's a criminal subculture which has been ignored for a long time (by the former french socialist government b.t.w.). Criminals should either make a serious effort to work within the system and get a job or be prepared to do serious jail time. Penal Colonies would not even be a bad idea (why not use Corsica, should be fun with Sarko's mansion situated there :P).

[Korona 0]

Yeah I had a brain fart, police were getting hit by shotgun pellets and that large calliber bullet, but still, police trying to shoot protesters dead would lead to the deaths of bystanders. If the US army can't spot these guys I doubt the french riot police could accurately identify them in the middle of an angry crowd. Also, look at the troubles in Ireland. Use of force isn't condusive to long-term peace. If you want to retain your aspect of dominance you actually need to restrain the use of force. Finally the bottom line is that trust in the government is very fragile. It would take the death of just one bystander to plunge the whole country back into more riots.

 

I don't think that shooting at police officers or burning cars can be condoned, but a hard line against these people will invariably tar them all again with the same brush. The riots aren't exactly a form of legitimate protest, but the situation is really bleak. Racism and poverty means jobs for these guys are really hard to come by. What are you going to do when you live in a shithole and noone with give you the chance to prove you can work for your living? Simply suppressing them with tons of riot police is like saying "get back in your hole scum". You don't have to be actually be a rioter to feel angry that the only time the government does anything significant it's to flood the streets with riot police.

 

 

"You say, fortify, reaction; you divide!"

[Kaiser_Smeghead 0]

Btw, you're not the only one who has problems finding employment. I have a pretty decent resume, nothing for people to discrimate against me more than anyone else (northern european heritage, blond hair, blue eyes), yet I've filled out countless resumes for years, and probably less than 1 out of 100 ever results in an interview, part of that is the economy of my city isn't doing so well, perhaps you're overlooking similar difficulties?

 

My hometown is very similar. Trying to get a good job here is pretty difficult, since the only employers who are hiring treat you like shit or just don't give you a lot of hours. I have been looking for a good full or part time job but all i seem to be getting are casual work offers. It sucks hard, especially when you are trying to save up money for a car or make enough income to get an apartment. I have a decent resume and some pretty good references but I always get the feeling that as soon as I hand in a resume, it just gets thrown out without even being looked at.

 

Anyway, back to the riots.

 

I agree with Mr.48 that rioters throwing molotov's or shooting at security forces should be shot, but it would just end up causing more problems. innocents would almost definitely be hurt or killed, and then every idiot with a cellphone camera would be swarming the area, posting youtube video's of "police brutality", pissing off more people and possibly causing more riots.