The debate "A riot is the language of the unheard" was started by
April 2, 2016, 6:48 am.
11 people are on the agree side of this discussion, while 10 people are on the disagree side.
People are starting to choose their side.
It looks like most of the people in this community are on the agreeing side of this statement.
fadi, wmd, RyanWakefield, Julia_lee, xaveragexjoesx, codyray16, SwaggerPoptart, neveralone and 3 visitors agree.
Spawn, swat, enro, rob5998, moneybagboyz123 and 5 visitors disagree.
somehow yes. however, if this is the case, why do such people let it run through violence?
riot is the language of the unheard,.. not to be confused with the 80s band "quiet riot"
yeah man! i agree
Riots also can go hand in hand with looting, assault, criminal activities that break down order. A riot will consist of more than mere civil disobedience and to condone riots or view them as the unheard, silent, or oppressed speaking out is mistaken. Certainly the oppressed have acted in a manner of civil unrest such as marching or utilizing numbers of sit ins, but once you start trapping officers, obstructing traffic for medical vehicles, stealing, and hurting innocent people, it cannot be attributed to seeking justice or a voice. The voice may have also been heard, but very, very unpopular (insert "Free serial killer", here, the Tsarnaev brother for example in the case of his fangirls, or maybe just someone shot who tried to kill an officer and the riots over trials).
dang, good point.
Riots are means by which frustrated individuals can vent their emotional discontent while refusing to make productive changes within their own lives.
It was at one point. But it has since gone political with paid provocatuers.