Amazon.com Widgets

Do riots work to make change (yes) or do they simply incite chaos and violence (no)?

  • Riots make change

    People who riot try to change something. They want freedom, they want to prove a point, and they want to express their opinions to the country or even the world. When Gray died in Baltimore, people rioted because they wanted to show police and everyone else that people should not be racist. In conclusion, riots do make change.

  • Depends who's Involved

    Let's be honest, we aren't blind. We do see the difference in people. We do stereotype.

    If a riot consisted mainly of young coloured men, it would be seen as a violent act of uneducated thugs. If it were a group of young white men, they would be seen as uneductaed estate kids/ trailer trash.

    However, if it was middle-aged women, of a motherly disposition, in my opinion, it would seem as either they deserve to be heard out or the sexist view that they don't know what they're talking about.

    In all cases, a riot that causes a LOT of trouble for the people in charge, consists of MANY people, and doesn't diminish in numbers over a fee days, will be a riot that causes change.

  • Riots Have Created Change

    Many people see riots as just violent criminals looking for a reason to promote more violence. Historically there have been hundreds (perhaps thousands) of riots throughout the United States. Every single riot that has taken place with a political motive has produced changed. For example, in Ferguson, we will never know for sure if the Department of Justice stepped in because of the riots or not. What we do know is that the oppression and abuse of the local police had been going on for years prior to the riots and the Department never once stepped in to take a look to see if police were overstepping their boundaries. Same thing in Baltimore, until riots took place no police officer in Baltimore had ever been held accountable for their actions.

    We certainly we have right to voice our opinions, cast our votes and to protest. What we are seeing though in our country is that voice of the minority is often unheard and their rights are stripped away by those who are in power. We honor our men and women who serve in our military who protect our freedoms, preserve our way of life and defend us from foreign enemies. Let me remind you all that the birth of our nation was founded on riots. Anyone remember the Boston Tea Party? We rioted against the dictatorship of England, our nation was born out of riots and rebellion.

    We can examine all the evidence throughout history of politically charged riots and truly never with absolute certainty if the changes that come after the riots are a result of the riots or a result of the protesting. What we do know is that protesting alone doesn't work, it is often ignored and suppressed and falls on deaf ears. Riots on the other hand cannot be ignored, when people are fed up with oppression, limited freedoms and injustice and have exhausted all other methods to have their voice heard and instigate change, then as a last resort they put their lives on the line and resort to riots.

    There has certainly been riots that did not produce change. Riots that break out over a beloved sports team losing for instance, won't create change. Every single riot that had a political motivation has created positive change. We can look at the smoldering buildings, the burning police cars, injuries suffered during riots and simply dismiss rioting as a lewd act on vandalism. The scenes that we saw in Ferguson, NYC, Baltimore and in other cities this year were often described as "war zones" by people have seen war. War is never pretty, innocent people often get caught in the middle and it's difficult to rebuild areas that have been affected by war. These same points apply to riots. Innocent people get caught in the middle, it's difficult to rebuild in these areas and it certainly isn't pretty but, is it necessary? It is as necessary as the wars we fight to preserve our freedoms abroad.

  • They definitely make a change

    When a riot starts people opposing the situation see riots on TV breaking news. Once a breaking news tragedy goes on TV politics have to get involved to get the citizens back in line. They try to help satisfy the citizens need but not over do it. Silenece will never get anything done but acting specially in huge amounts with other citizens can. I do believe their are people out their that do it to harm society but there will always be those people.

  • The Ukrainian situation proves that riots work.

    Well, as much as I detest violence it looks like recent history proves me wrong on this one. What's going on the Ukraine right now? Their impeached President is on the run, the illegal updated Constitution has been scrapped, and power is being redistributed. All because people took to the streets with force and violence.

  • Yes, riots do work to make change.

    Riots work to make change because they bring attention to an issue that may have already been talked about several times. Riots show how passionate people are about an issue because of their risk for hurt and harm. Riots cause political entities to react quicker than when constituents take a less aggressive approach.

  • They do make change.

    I know it is an unpopular sentiment among my fellow lefties, but sometimes riots do have to happen in order for change to take place. Standing outside of a city hall with tacky signs and chanting "Hell no, we won't go." isn't even going to make the law bat an eye. A riot, though, will.

  • You can't fight fire with fire

    Solving problems and creating problems are two different things. Yes riots are expressions of opinion but the change that they create only harms a movement. The news will not support violent outbursts because they have 'a good cause'. Media focuses on the violence. If the media is given something they can hold against a movement, they can ruin the movement. Support is diminished and the only thing people will remember is the violence. If you wish to express something or create change then do it in a way that gets the public on your side. If you have public sympathy and support you can do much more than a riot could ever achieve.

  • Depends who's Involved

    Let's be honest, we aren't blind. We do see the difference in people. We do stereotype.

    If a riot consisted mainly of young coloured men, it would be seen as a violent act of uneducated thugs. If it were a group of young white men, they would be seen as uneductaed estate kids/ trailer trash.

    However, if it was middle-aged women, of a motherly disposition, in my opinion, it would seem as either they deserve to be heard out or the sexist view that they don't know what they're talking about.

    In all cases, a riot that causes a LOT of trouble for the people in charge, consists of MANY people, and doesn't diminish in numbers over a fee days, will be a riot that causes change.

  • Riots have long since ceased to be effective in the US

    While a case could be made that some of the riots in the 60's helped to effect social reform the last legitimate Riot to make any difference was December 16, 1773 Boston Tea Party. In this modern age riots do nothing but make everyone look bad. Government looks inept, Cops look like dicks and Rioters look like opportunistic thugs. And all it does is further the gap between the disenfranchised and fuel the "see this is why" mentality.

  • Baltimore riot bad?

    It just cause chaos and maybe cause damage to people. It shows barley any reason I heard they want you to riot so they can show you that you are the bad guys. This does not really show much when your destroy and burn things down like buildings I see no reason to do that at all.

  • Right to Protest or Unrest?

    The very definition of the word 'riot’ implies the lack of coordination, a common goal, focus, and a positive outcome; riots do nothing but create damage and destructive behavior and are not at all protected by the Constitution of the United States. Many people confuse the concept of ‘riot’ with ‘protest’ because many protests can become violent and uncontrolled very quickly if a common focus is not held fast. The reason that protests are upheld in our laws is to protect a person and group of people’s rights to express displeasure and help to encourage public officials to change policies and laws. Riots, on the other hand, are punished (and rightfully so), because they are simply gatherings of more than one person for the sake of violence or displays of uncontrolled behavior. While some riots erupt because of a sports team’s triumph or a positive event such as a concert, many of them erupt because a protest loses its focus and the people involved become uncoordinated, confused, frightened, and then defensive. Once this has happened, it is common for people to simply join in because of a psychological principle that explains a ‘diffusion of responsibility’ which allows people to behave unbelievably aggressively (which is usually repressed and then released when one is no longer inhibited by fear of retaliation or punishment) and exhibit negativity that would normally be held back by society’s constraints in their personal perception. While organized protesting is one of the most incredible forms of implementing change that the USA encourages and takes part it, rioting is an entirely different set of circumstances and has an entirely negative outcome.

  • Lots of people get hurt

    All riots do is cause chaos and violence. They don't help solve the problem they just get people hurt. They start fires and tip over cars vandalize everything in sight. They don't help get the message across to anyone. Plus once a riot start even more people get hurt once the police are involved.


Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
No comments yet.