Alright there seems to be a major disconnect here. How does stopping a burglary become impossible if there aren't enough prisons (NOT jails, the two are different).

It seems like a total non-sequitur to me.

I find it highly dubious that any HR endorsed riots, I have never heard of an HR department or really anyone endorse violence. At most I have heard that people understood the frustration. Right to protest yes lots support it, riots and violence never by a major person or hr type. I also find when people post that someone endorsed violence, such as top democrats endorsed it, it’s actually they endorsed the right to protest and condemned violence.

Edit: in the briefly posted and then deleted reply to my comment, it was shown to be 100% the case the comment was conflating “we support the right to protest but condemn any violence” with “we support violence”

In fact the comment even said: ‘Every company in the Bay Area was "making a statement" on BLM events that were characterized exclusively by massive vandalism and violence.’

Why yes they were making statements, but not in support of violence, they were making statements condemning violence. I work for a Bay Area company, and our ceo like pretty much all companies said “we support people’s right to protest but are against any violence.”

The article in question.

The police weren't defunded, they didn't have staffing cut.

If the police are sitting there watching a crime happening, and aren't doing anything about it, they should be fired. Of course, they can't be fired because their union won't let that happen.

The correct response here is indeed "Fucking police".