That's not even it, it's the assumption that honesty is absolute (It isn't) and should be based upon the rules of the system even for those who have disregarded said rules.

Ever heard the term honour amongst theives? Well, I don't know about that, but I've lived in the shittest of shitty council house districts all my life and by and large people are good to those living in the same situation as them and help eachother out.

Or, you know, just not riot in the first place, and not even risk it.

Well, unfortunately, the institution which governs their lives is the one they are being disloyal to, and the one that's just going to fuck them harder if they break the rules. I'm all up for them starting a peaceful protest, because I trust in democracy, not Big Brother; but when they kick off like this and lash out at innocents, it diminishes their point somewhat, doesn't it? Common sense should tell them this, so what it seems like to the general public is that they're either short-sighted and dumb, or not out to make a point at all and just being assholes.

This is going in circles, there's no point in continuing the argument further because you're just putting your hands over your ears singing 'Tralalala police please protect me and the rest of middle england from these rioting scum who could only get a job if they tried harder tralalalala'.

No, I'm just saying the rioters are bad people, because regardless of their economic circumstances, rioting is not the answer, nor should they be excused for resorting to that kind of behaviour. How that's so unreasonable and difficult to understand is beyond me, unless you're an anarchist or something.

I don't think you know what 'Anarchist' means.

Also, how many times am I going to repeat myself in saying THERE IS NO EXCUSE FOR WHAT THE RIOTERS HAVE DONE

There are reasons. Failing to understand these reasons and just labelling all rioters as bad people by proxy means you are living in a fucking box.

Enjoy your ignorance.

You could easily be interpreted as an anarchist if you defended a set of people who were expressing a disregard for the state, via action such as rioting.

Saying the rioters had a reason for their actions means you think they were completely justified. A reason is essentially a valid excuse, which you have agreed with me that they don't have. I don't get your distinction. Are you defining 'reason' as a contributing factor? But even then, seen as though none of them were physically starving, none of them needed to riot. This is why I don't think their position is a reason to riot, it's what they perceive to be an excuse, and a poor one at that.

I call the rioters out as bad people because they are rioting. No good people want to cause innocent victims harm.

pffthahahaha

As it turns out, I am a philosophical anarchist, however:

1. I do not condone rioting
2. This was not anti-government rioting

Uh... no it doesn't? If I killed my future wife for commiting adultery then I'd have a reason for my actions, but it wouldn't justify them.
uh

That's... um, fairly Marie Antoinette of you. People don't need to be physically starving to be resentful and unhappy.
People are people. Your worldview is amazingly black and white.

I guess that's just where our opinions differ about how to define a reason. To me, it wouldn't be a reason for you to kill her, just your excuse for it. But that's apples and oranges.

Well, they didn't literally need to riot, they might have wanted to, but it wasn't imperative to their survival.

Maybe you're right on this one, but I suppose again, whether someone is a bad person or not is personal opinion. I just can't feel much sympathy for those who wish harm upon innocents. That's just me, sorry if it offends you.

Anarchy is derived from the Greek word anarkhē; an meaning without and arkhē meaning authority.

Some one who wants unemployment benefits from the government is not an anarchist.