Were the Rescue-Halting Gunshots Related to Threats Against Looters?

[On the Road]

I've been thinking about the rescue effort being called off because of gunshots, and wondering about why anyone in the middle of a disaster would be firing guns. It doesn't seem to make sense. I was trying to put myself in the place of someone who would do something that stupid.

Then I remember the martial law, zero-tolerance, shoot-to-kill policy announced a couple of days ago. Who knows how that was communicated on location, much less how it was picked up by the people on the ground? I can imagine some teenage looter in the midst of anarchy, holding a looted Wal-Mart rifle, seeing a government helicopter or military vehicle and thinking "They're killing looters! They're after me! Fire back!" However ignorant, that's the only situation which makes sense to me psychologically.

If that is true, then adding threats of violence to the disaster relief effort is backfiring in a very big way and costing people's lives.

[demnan]

1. You're dealing with a situation

where no government help, only harassment from police has ever been offered some of these people. You're dealing with the breakdown of people's ability to think straight. I agree with your assessment.

[On the Road]

3. I Don't Blame the Police Trying to Control a Dangerous Situation

but nothing that I've seen suggested the situation was especially dangerous. Just a bunch of store inventory, most of which would have been ruined anyway.

The attitude of the poor toward law enforcement is different from middle-class attitudes. Largely because the EXPERIENCE of poor people with law enforcement is different from middle-class experiences.

[Kagemusha]

2. Looter apologists are really straining these last 24 hours

And how would these people know about such a policy without TV's or hand-crank radios? Megaphones? Rumor? And I thought the rescue being halted was, specifically, an ambulance helicopter. Any way you cut it, the person firing is not an animal; he is a human being, and better is expected of him than to willfully decide to fire a weapon at an ambulance helicopter. I'm sure there's other situations out there but, I just do not see this as defensible as some sort of "the government's at war with me, I have to fight back!" freedom fighting campaign.

Friend, if you have to try this hard to find a justification, that's an indication of how much of a logical stretch it is. My problem, personally, has nothing to do with stopping the looters from blocking rescue operations through fear and intimidation (and irrational lashing out because they're scared and tired and hungry and what not). My problem is, why can't the rescue effort walk and chew bubble gum at the same time? What can I say to you except, we really could use those National Guardsmen for Louisiana who are sitting in Iraq right now?

[On the Road]

4. This Had Nothing to Do With Looting

This had to do with why people were firing guns.

In any crowd control operation, it's imperative to avoid panic and avoid violence. The feds introduced the threat of violence where it wasn't necessary.

[oasis]

5. Right wing propaganda to cover up Bush's slow rescue response.

He is exposed to the world as a hypocrite.

[tx_dem41]

6. DU civilization is officially...

coming to an end.