• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Is damaging/destroying property ever an acceptable or justifiable form of protest?

Is damaging/destroying property ever an acceptable or justifiable form of protest?


  • Total voters
    42

X Factor

Anti-Socialist
Dungeon Master
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 1, 2010
Messages
61,606
Reaction score
32,215
Location
El Paso Strong
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Conservative
Once again, asking for your own opinion here, not what the law is. Poll on the way.


Oh and, though this won't be covered by the poll, I'm also interested in knowing whether you are more likely or less likely to support protestors that damage property?
 
Re: Is damaging/destroying property ever an acceptable or justifiable form of protest

"Ever"? I would have to say it's highly unlikely that it would be justified. I'm not 100% sure when it could be justifiable, but perhaps there's something I cannot think of where it would be.

That being said, what we're seeing now certainly is not. That's just rioting for the sake of rioting.
 
Re: Is damaging/destroying property ever an acceptable or justifiable form of protest

Once again, asking for your own opinion here, not what the law is. Poll on the way.


Oh and, though this won't be covered by the poll, I'm also interested in knowing whether you are more likely or less likely to support protestors that damage property?

No it isn't, IMO. I would find it very difficult to try to justify something like that. Destroying/damaging/stealing other people's property is wrong, and I certainly wouldn't support protesters that resort to those kinds of violent tactics. Plus, damaging property is pretty much tactical and strategic suicide. Violent protest isn't a effective way of getting your message across to people; it just makes you look like a bunch of mindless hooligans.
 
Re: Is damaging/destroying property ever an acceptable or justifiable form of protest

"Ever"? I would have to say it's highly unlikely that it would be justified. I'm not 100% sure when it could be justifiable, but perhaps there's something I cannot think of where it would be.

That being said, what we're seeing now certainly is not. That's just rioting for the sake of rioting.

I was thinking about it myself, like what if we were made aware of some child prostitution ring operating out of some house, would it be justifiable to go bust up the house and property of the ring leaders? But then I thought that wouldn't actually be a form of protest so much as just trying to hurt, in some way, someone rightfully despised. Protest, to me, is about gathering attention and support for some cause or belief and, so in that context, damaging property in order to obtain those goals is not ever justified and will likely have the opposite effect.
 
Re: Is damaging/destroying property ever an acceptable or justifiable form of protest

Wait for it ... it's Wednesday, you know what comes next. ;)
 
Re: Is damaging/destroying property ever an acceptable or justifiable form of protest

Wait for it ... it's Wednesday, you know what comes next. ;)

Thursday?

I sincerely have no idea what you mean.
 
Re: Is damaging/destroying property ever an acceptable or justifiable form of protest

As a form of protest? No. As revenge? Maybe. :)
 
Re: Is damaging/destroying property ever an acceptable or justifiable form of protest

Ever?!? Of course. A protest against an oppressive regime may well require illegal tactics, and that can include property damage.

Peaceful protest is preferable, of course, but that just doesn't always happen.
 
Re: Is damaging/destroying property ever an acceptable or justifiable form of protest

Once again, asking for your own opinion here, not what the law is. Poll on the way.


Oh and, though this won't be covered by the poll, I'm also interested in knowing whether you are more likely or less likely to support protestors that damage property?

Regardless of whether it can be justified, on completely utilitarian grounds I'd be curious if damage of property ever helped the message of the people doing it.

Well there's this little historical footnote in American history...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boston_Tea_Party
 
Re: Is damaging/destroying property ever an acceptable or justifiable form of protest

Once again, asking for your own opinion here, not what the law is. Poll on the way.


Oh and, though this won't be covered by the poll, I'm also interested in knowing whether you are more likely or less likely to support protestors that damage property?

Not acceptable. I won't judge a whole movement by the actions of a few though. I either support or don't support "the cause." Property destruction by a few has nothing to do with my support.
 
Re: Is damaging/destroying property ever an acceptable or justifiable form of protest

While the Boston Tea Party does come to mind, it is worth noting that the East India Company and the British Empire were indistinguishable, and that makes some difference.
 
Re: Is damaging/destroying property ever an acceptable or justifiable form of protest

Regardless of whether it can be justified, on completely utilitarian grounds I'd be curious if damage of property ever helped the message of the people doing it.

Well there's this little historical footnote in American history...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boston_Tea_Party

Ask the founders of the USA.

Boston Tea Party - American Revolution - HISTORY.com

Edit: Shucks Cardinal, you just beat me to it.

Yep, I knew that was coming. :lol: When I think of the Boston Tea Party, my normal, red blooded American thinking is, "**** yeah!!!" :rock I really do wonder though, if it was effective at gaining support at that time or if it's been somewhat romanticized by history. I really don't know.
 
Re: Is damaging/destroying property ever an acceptable or justifiable form of protest

Once again, asking for your own opinion here, not what the law is. Poll on the way.


Oh and, though this won't be covered by the poll, I'm also interested in knowing whether you are more likely or less likely to support protestors that damage property?



Generally speaking, no... and I typically frown a great deal on protesters who damage property, especially random property, or do stupid crap like block roads causing innocent people to be unable to proceed about their lawful occasions.

Thing is, most of the time this happens, they're destroying their own neighborhoods and businesses... or destroying property at random without any concern for whether the owner ever did them any wrong or not.

The Boston Tea Party was an example of a TARGETED destruction of property (ie Tea) aimed at a specific issue (tax stamps) with a specific political goal (against taxation without representation). THAT, though it was still illegal, is an example of a relatively intelligent use of protest on property.... though I doubt the owners of the tea shipment were at all pleased.
 
Re: Is damaging/destroying property ever an acceptable or justifiable form of protest

No, never, especially the way we're seeing the political left doing it, with random destruction of private and public property that has nothing at all to do with what they're protesting. They're breaking things for the sake of breaking things.
 
Re: Is damaging/destroying property ever an acceptable or justifiable form of protest

If it isn't at least sometimes, all you Americans might want to rethink your second amendment...
 
Re: Is damaging/destroying property ever an acceptable or justifiable form of protest

No, never. And sit-ins and non-compliance also count as damaging of property since you're basically stealing the profit of a business owner. The police have every right to break up those things with force.
 
Re: Is damaging/destroying property ever an acceptable or justifiable form of protest

If it isn't at least sometimes, all you Americans might want to rethink your second amendment...

Me shooting you for going onto my property isn't protest. That's self-defense.
 
Re: Is damaging/destroying property ever an acceptable or justifiable form of protest

No....
 
Re: Is damaging/destroying property ever an acceptable or justifiable form of protest

Me shooting you for going onto my property isn't protest. That's self-defense.

True...but the whole "revolt against a tyrannical government" thing seems to have a commonality with what the protesters would think they are doing...
 
Re: Is damaging/destroying property ever an acceptable or justifiable form of protest

True...but the whole "revolt against a tyrannical government" thing seems to have a commonality with what the protesters would think they are doing...

If your government is actively terrorizing you, you have every right to self-defense. I haven't seen a case of that happening in this country, except for maybe during Japanese internment, conscription, and slavery.
 
Re: Is damaging/destroying property ever an acceptable or justifiable form of protest

If your government is actively terrorizing you, you have every right to self-defense. I haven't seen a case of that happening in this country, except for maybe during Japanese internment, conscription, and slavery.

The question was: Is damaging/destroying property ever an acceptable or justifiable form of protest? I answered Yes, sometimes. The 2nd amendment would appear to agree, is all I'm saying. As to what constitute a government actively terrorizing you, well, I'm sure that would be relatively subjective and open to interpretation. But, nevertheless, it would appear that, according to your constitution, damaging / destroying property (given that one's life would be seen as one's most valuable property) is supported...sometimes. :)

So, by extension, if you answered No to the question, you are opposed to the 2nd amendment. Not that big a leap, is it?
 
Re: Is damaging/destroying property ever an acceptable or justifiable form of protest

You want to protest and destroy your own stuff be my guest. Leave my stuff and stuff my taxes paid for alone.
 
Re: Is damaging/destroying property ever an acceptable or justifiable form of protest

The question was: Is damaging/destroying property ever an acceptable or justifiable form of protest? I answered Yes, sometimes. The 2nd amendment would appear to agree, is all I'm saying. As to what constitute a government actively terrorizing you, well, I'm sure that would be relatively subjective and open to interpretation. But, nevertheless, it would appear that, according to your constitution, damaging / destroying property (given that one's life would be seen as one's most valuable property) is supported...sometimes. :)

So, by extension, if you answered No to the question, you are opposed to the 2nd amendment. Not that big a leap, is it?

Except that the examples that I gave again were not protest, but self-defense.
 
Back
Top Bottom