Talk:Police riot
{{WikiProject banner shell}}
to this page and add the quality rating to that template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.![]() | Law Enforcement Start‑class | |||||||||
|
{{WikiProject banner shell}}
to this page and add the quality rating to that template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.![]() | Chicago Start‑class Mid‑importance | |||||||||
|
I don't know about anyone else, but I've also heard the word used to refer to the act of the police (off-duty and/or on-duty) themselves rioting.
Nonsense
This article does not have a NPOV.
- I agree. The statement In August 1988, a riot erupted in Tompkins Square Park in New York when police, some mounted on horseback, brutally attempted to enforce a newly-passed curfew for the park. Bystanders, artists, residents, homeless people and political activists were caught up in the police action that took place during the night of August 6-7. In an editorial, The New York Times dubbed the incident a "police riot",[2] and it became known as the Tompkins Square Park Police Riot. This is pure pro-activist bullshit. The police weren't the ones rioting, the rioters that were not complying with their orders, were. This entire article is pejorative. Equinox137 (talk) 05:30, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
NPOV
I have to agree with Nonsense above. When police willfully ignore human nature they are responsible for the consequences. Police riot is not a pejorative, it is a description. Gregbard 22:58, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
deleted: "... a pejorative term that became increasingly more common through the late 20th century, implying ..."
I'm removing the tag, since there ain't much of a controversy brewing back here on the talk page. bobanny 22:53, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
It's still there...Actio (talk) 20:35, 1 August 2008 (UTC)
How about these changes?
I believe I've made some changes that should be acceptable to all parties, toning down the emotionally laden language and making sure multiple points of view are expressed. Does anyone still think this page merits a POV tag? 66.95.123.6 (talk) 22:35, 5 March 2009 (UTC)
- And it also looks like there's no justification for a fact tag, as nobody is disputing anything. I'm clearing out the tags. Jaysbro (talk) 16:11, 11 March 2009 (UTC)
- Not good enough. "Police Riot" is strictly a term used by police-bashers to excuse any action, no matter how extreme, if the police so much as shoot a single can of pepperspray. The pure use of the term, and allowing the article to exist in its current fashion, IS a political statement. The article should be removed in its entirety, or revised to reflec tthe FACTS of the matter; There has not been a "police riot" that was not preceiptiated by an actual civilian riot, witht he sole, and tragic, excpetion being the racism-driven actions during the civil-rights era (which are listed under a diffrent terminology, "police brutality", elsewhere). 174.25.25.232 (talk) 04:54, 23 January 2010 (UTC)Andering J REDDSON
- Bishopsgate Climate Camp, London G20 summit 2009. To my knowledge, not a single punch was thrown by activists.