Is Lynching Next?
Herald Sun: Bashed man first fatality in French riots [09nov05] — Will there be more riots tonight? They are going for the record.
IGNORING the Government’s threat of a curfew, youths rioted for the 12th night in France, torching more than 800 vehicles and injuring four police.
The nightly protests against racism and unemployment dropped markedly in the greater Paris region, where violence had increased to the point of shooting at police, but continued unabated in other cities.
The chaos claimed its first life when Jean-Jacques Le Chenadec, 61, succumbed to injuries he suffered when beaten by rioters last week.
The renewed violence followed a warning by Prime Minister Dominique de Villepin that he would take a firm line against lawbreakers.
Hmmm. Might be time for the army to step in. I’d suggest the German army.
Time to shoot these twerps.
This could spread rapidly to the rest of Europe. Most European countries have a 2% or greater Muslim minority. A European crack down could lead to increased terrorist action around the world. These simmering Islamic domestic problems was another reason Europe wanted Bush to stay out of Iraq. The old sow the wind reap a whirlwind problem. It’s fine to make fun of France, but it could be a burning fuse.
In an informative piece on the Newshour last night, the 2 French commentators both said they did not think the violence would spread to other European countries. That France was unusual in its culture and government’s unwillingness to integrate and welcome foreign immigrants, while Britain, the Netherlands, and Germany have all had more extensive outreach programs. At least they made the effort.
The length of these riots reminds me of the British cop’s usual line:
“Stop, or I’ll tell you to Stop again.”
> Time to shoot these twerps.
They don’t have any guns! The police in Europe are all pussies.
All the 60s radicals on this site complain about and hate American police for their overzealousness, but this is the other side of the coin. Out of control lawlessness.
“All the 60s radicals on this site complain about and hate American police for their overzealousness, but this is the other side of the coin. Out of control lawlessness.”
Well said! This should be a lesson to all those that think Europe is some kind of Utopia. Be happy you live in the US.
Actually, we do have ‘cop’s with guns’ here, just not beat cops. If we need to subdue a criminal we use battons (knighsticks) and CS spray.
Pussies? Hardly. Are guys have to get right up close and personal with the bastards and thwack them one using stength, rather than rely on the power of a bullet.
Problem with average cops having guns is your average petty thief will start carrying one.
If you honestly thing leathal force is the answer to a bunch of broke ass teenages and twenty somethings throwing rocks you seriously need your head looked at mate. Bean bags, water cannons and other non-lethal force will work if deployed correctly and with enough man power – something French Officals don’t seem to be able to grasp.
We’ve got lawlessness under control in this country? Who knew?
“If you honestly thing leathal force is the answer to a bunch of broke ass teenages and twenty somethings throwing rocks”
Hundreds of cars burned, businesses destroyed, 1 dead, hundreds injured. I think its a little more then teens throwing rocks. In my book these punks are dangerous and sometimes deadly force is necessary in the real world.
I agree. But look what started this whole downhill spiral; you have the police cap some punk and it’s only going to get worse.
I think it’s time they need to get the military involved, yes. They need mobile detention units, a large presence in one of the run down areas. Knock the shit out of them with non-lethal weapons and lock as many as they can up for a couple of nights. Do that in two of the most notorious areas, get national media attention showing they are taking no crap and make a point.
At the moment the French Auths are being pussies. It seems they don’t want to perpetuate things further as it was a policing incident that set it off.
I can’t say I agree with lethal force in this scenario. It would just make things worse. Unless, of course, they wasted them all.
As a general rule, I agree with the application of lethal force – when the threat is to national security, it stops a crime that would be grievously harmful on a major political/economic level, or someone is willing to take life or lives.
A simple Property for Life argument is negligible in my eyes no matter how much damage is being done.
But looks like the Frech police have made a hash of this.
Excuse typos.
I was in Paris last week-end. I even drove there… Had no troubles…
Dear Jack Lear:
The problem in France is that neither the French nor the rioting “youths” want the “youths” to become French. Why then allow them in the country in the first place? The same could be said of the USA, but PREVIOUSLY, immigrants to that greatest nation on God’s green earth wanted to be and did become AMERICANS. Futher, they were largely welcomed by the so-called natives so long as they assimilated. NB that last word as it is critical for the survival of any society/nation/state. It may be ironic that a French philosopher once noted that a nation that feels guilty for everything it is and everything it does will lack the will and power to defend itself.
Which leads us to lethal force. Lethal force, a Law of Nature and Nature’s God , is predicated in the right of liberty i.e. self-defense, something acknowledged by any enlightened person. Further, inasmuchas private property represents an extension of the individual, said defense naturally extends to one’s property. Thus, we assert that all persons are entitled to life, liberty and property, absent the last of these liberty cannot exist.
Jack, may I ask you how lethal force “would just make things worse”? Moreover, how is the proscription of lethal force compatible with mobilzation of the military?
Cheerio,
Terence
RTaylor, I was wondering when someone was going to BLAME BUSH FOR THE FRENCH RIOTS!!
Hell, it’s a sad time we live in when taking a stand against terrorism is considered contemptible.
T.C., most folks who take responsibility for civilian oversight of local police have learned that bigotry and corruption are the two essentials of lousy policing. No different in France than the US. I’ve known cops who joined their local force because it was easiest way to buy and sell drugs. I’ve known one damned good cop who hopped through three different jurisdictions before he found a place where an honest cop was appreciated.
In a good deal of the US — like France — joining the police force is like joining the state highway dept. You don’t get to lean on a shovel; but, the kickbacks are bigger. And, usually, no one complains if you’re a bigot — except the people you “keep in line”.
I take it the letters GIGN mean nothing to you…?
Eidard,
It would seem if you filter out all the bigots and corrupt cops, you end up with a bunch of pussies, like in France.
I don’t want pussies keeping the peace in my neighborhood. I live in Oakland.
Hey, maybe I _am_ police material.
Perhaps Eideard and Ed should do their protesting in France.
They have a shitload of nuclear facilities you can chain yourselves to.
Step 1 – Stop all immigration into France from the middle east. By definition it looks like France has met it quota.
Step 2 – Prosecute any individuals that they can identify to the max. Re-introduce the Guillotine.
Step 3 – Deport anyone associated with these crimes – including family members. This will create the social pressure for social order that is obviously missing and reduce the number of “idle hands” available for rioting.
Step 4 – Deport the radical clerics – perhaps this should be step 1
Step 5 – Reconsider your criticism of the rest of the world
Bush has anything to do with internal French socail problems now – that is the most fragrant of fecal matter of a male bovine beast.
Has anyone considered that the French corruption around oil for food that caused so many muslims to suffer starvation in Iraq may be a motivating issue here? It is likely more of a cause than any unmet French responsibilities that George Bush may have failed to assume.
Indeed, captured Iraqi diplomatic files show Sadam expected France to protect him by vetoing any action in the UN because the French were so deeply involved in the corruption at the highest levels. This certainly prolonged the muslim suffering in Iraq and the files show that it encouraged Sadam to refuse any UN inspections looking for WMDs.
Yes the reasons for war may have been embellished, but by blocking UN inspections, the French did their part to elevate the suspicion that something was there too – making the false intelligence even more believable. Given that the US knew about the French induced UN corruption, is it any wonder that we felt justified in obviating the UN with unilateral action.
The French have no one to blame in their internal inferno but themselves and have they little right for criticism of the US given the flames in the middle east that they fanned through the UN. As for the other Euros that are complicit in Oil for food, who are now anticipating potential muslim social disorder on their own turf, perhaps they should consider this french connection as part of it.
Reply:
As I said, I agree with the use of deadly force. Just not here.
The riots were set off because of the deaths of two teens who were pursued by French Police. The riots started as an uprising against police action, and they grew because of the unrest in the ghettoized parts of the Paris region.
Shooting to kill isn’t the answer here.
The police are civil servants. They are bound to up hold the nations laws for the good of the citizens. They do not however act in a utilitarian manner. They have to also act in the best interest of the criminal. In this case, the criminals are rioters. They claim they aren’t seen as Frech Citizens. The police shooting at them is only going to serve to reinforce this fact. They have to do subdued, detained and assimilated themselves.
The military simply give more man power. You don’t have to declare martial law or get the guns out because you involve the military. They are simply a resource that can be used effectively to contain and prevent the rioters more efficiently.
Self defense is by legal definition the use of equal force. You can not preempt the use of lethal force. If some punk set fire to your car whilst you were safely away from it, and you shot him you would be prosecuted for murder, not manslaughter, because the use of force you used was not proportionate to the force used by your victim.
I live in England, and despite recent events, we have some of the best tactical response, armed response and arms police in the world (please note “response”) We don’t need beat cops to carry and 9mm – because our general population doesn’t have the easy access to guns. This is why murder rates in the US are so much higher.
Seriously, if I lived in Oakland I’m sure I’d want my locals be armed to the teeth. As it is, with our gun control laws we don’t need to worry about that as much. The chances of someone pulling a gun are slim here. The only reasons to own a gun are to hunt, to protect, and to commit crimes. You don’t need to defend with a gun if your attacker doesn’t have one. More police in central London and areas like Nottingham where gang crime is a problems are seeing Armed Police take to problems areas. Immediately the need for anyone in the general public for having a gun is negated – bar hunters – which you can get a permit for. What is wrong with that I ask? I’m sure I’ll get railed for being a hippy peaceloving non-realist and told that it’s I American’s constitutional right to own a gun. I understand the need for guns in the US and if I as there I’d probably own one myself out of fear/self preservation. As it stands, I am not, and I am happy with the control laws here that make it difficult and against the law for me to own something that I can point at someone and kill them by moving my finger 3/4 of an inch.
Anyway I digress. The fact is, the majority of these rioters are kids. The article address them as such. The issuing of a curfew for kids under 16 shows the main demographic (they could have easily made it under 18 or even total but they didn’t). Opening fire on minors in riots that were sparked by the death of two minors caused my police intervention is simply not a good idea, and it is my opinion that in this situation the use of non-lethal force is needed.
Thanks for your reply.
Well, TC, if you prefer corrupt cops, don’t complain about drugs on the street or any other of the illegalities that may be part of your urban landscapes. I prefer honest cops. Those that I know — work damned hard at protecting honest citizens.
Of course, your stereotypical perceptions are as droll and incorrect as could be expected. As anyone who has read all of my comments would know, I happen to support the use of nuclear-generated power. Just the flavors that aren’t welfare plans for [the old] Westinghouse and GE — the least productive and most unsafe designs.
Isn’t England the place where a criminal broke into a guy’s house, the owner shot him, and they put the owner in jail? You mention Oakland, but their school board a few years back voted to require all police that enter school property be unarmed.
Yeah, that was R vs Martin 2000. The guy in question was a farmer who has the weapon for shooting rabbits (though without a licence).. It wasn’t the first time his house and he waited for them to come again and shot them as they were running away. A 16 year old kid was killed. It was deemed an unreasonable use of force, but had mitigating circumsances (trespass, provocation) so was given a 5 year sentance. He serves 2/3 of it.
Oakland Police? Oakland, CALIFORNIA? Not Oakland, Oregon?
OAKLAND POLICE? Geez, they can’t even stop a bunch of kids doing “sideshows”, and after the Raiders lost…in 2003, there were riots. Oakland was hard pressed to deal with it, AND they had to call in a lot of help to quell …about 200 people…?
http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2003/01/27/MN98171.DTL
Geez, when it comes to riot control…I’d vote for the Berkeley Police, and/or the UC Campus police.
Sorry Eideard, I’m trolling.
I totally agree, meetsy. The Berkeley and UC police got to practice on hippie protesters 40 years ago, and they still don’t take any crap.
I admire heartfelt protest. But you’ve got to expect some roughing up.
Otherwise, it would be like a picnic in the park. We’d all be protesting!
What I’m anticipating most is The Economist’s analysis of how badly Sarkozy has damaged his presidential prospects with his “these people are scum” remark. He is/was an up and coming, very promosing center-right politician who actually likes the U.S. His missteps may be our loss.
T.C., you did manage to thoroughly confuse me since you usually seem to be a straight arrow. I have this bad habit of taking folks at their word.
About everyone protesting? Most folks, even those deeply committed to a serious ideology, really aren’t likely to place themselves into public protest. Even with no danger. Try to get your neighbors out to demonstrate for a traffic light or a stop sign — unless someone has been run over [recently!]. They’ll sign a petition and maybe donate a buck or two. But, even a “monstrous” gathering over a controversial and unpopular issue, say, at City Hall — turns out what? A fraction of 1% of the population?
you must miss the POINT of the protests in the Bay Area… I’d wager that 80-90% of the people who turn out for peace protests, and the like, aren’t doing it to change anything…it’s mostly bored teens and 20-somethings looking to meet the other sex….and get laid!
As for riots….those are mostly groups of too much testosterone raging, repressed anger, and lack of any clear leaders….fueled by the “rush” of destroying something, banding together with “us v.s. them” and just…uhhh, boys being boys. Women tend to not riot — fyi.
Never been in the Bay Area except on holiday — once. Been in lots of civil rights demos that were 100% serious. Been in “be-ins” in Central Park that were 99% stoners. Lots of in-betweens.
I’d agree about women — though, I’ve never been courageous enough to attempt Black Friday at WalMart or a Washington’s B’Day Sale, say, in Chicago!
The French Interior Minister largely solved the problem. He has already deported 120 rioters, and had others suggest that citizenship would be taken away so they could be deported too. That quieted things down a little, just like the introduction of student deferrals quieted down campus protests over Vietnam.
Rioting is hard work…they may have just run out of steam.
I think they should cut off their thumbs! Oh…wait, that was some other story, wasn’t it? But, still, hard to throw rocks and torch cars without a thumb.