I've made no such assertion. I've simply asked for some evidence that the riots were caused by government being oppressive.
So are you purposefully avoiding the Socratic question?
Which requires us to ask what is "oppressive?"
Definitional fallacy.
Is it oppressive to impose arrest, try, convict, and jail those who engage in strong-arm robberies?
Nice straw man argument, nothing to do with the topic.
Is it oppressive to collect taxes?
Yes it is oppressive to use the violent coercion of the state to collect taxes from those who don't voluntarily want to pay them.
Was Washington out of line for putting down the Whiskey Rebellion?
Yes he absolutely was out of line. Now ask yourself why he didn't go after West Virginians? Learn some non state approved history.
You might note my post in which I argued that in many instances, personal liberties--especially for blacks (who just happen to be the racial demographic engaging in most rioting)--have greatly expanded in the last 20 to 60 years.
Fallacy argument. Granting liberties to some while wholesale dropping them for all isn't comprable at all.
Are you really going to argue that the government is more oppressive toward blacks today than it was in 1959 with Jim Crow laws and legally enforced segregation? On other sites I've seen some ague that the welfare state has been far more damaging to blacks than was Jim Crow. But accepting welfare is voluntary while Jim Crow was mandatory.
When did I ever state this? More fallacy straw. Yet while you are on the subject you mean the Jim Crow laws enforced by the police? When the protest rose against those laws and the enforcers are you going to argue they were less oppressive than the slave laws before that?
I also pointed out that many of the areas of increased government power likely to bother us white gun owners (how many inner city, lower-income blacks do we have on this board) are probably not even on the radar of the inner city blacks rioting.
Wow you are on a fallacy roll. Now you are going to make a bigoted statement about the ignorance of blacks and innercity folks. Here's a clue you don't have to be a gun owner or even very knowledgable about rights to know when police are abusing your community.
Those of paying the bills might be mighty unhappy about obmacare, welfare, free cellphones, etc. Do you really think the recipients of those goodies are bothered by that expansion of government power? The power to take money from Peter and give to Paul rightly bothers Peter a lot, but rarely does Paul object.
Do you think the Tories and the hundreds of thousands of Brits who benefitted by mercantilism of the crown and parliment cared about their fellow citizens suffering from it? Do you think those who revolted gave a rats ass about those who were benefiting from the existing system?
No one has much bothered to counter those claims. Instead, they've attacked like a bunch of religious nuts being confronted by the heretical questions about whether God exists. It seems there are too many here who hold some positions so dogmatically that they are not capable of even entertaining any notion that those positions might be flawed.
Tu quoque much? In other words pull that rafter out of your own eye first. Others have offered very valid counters you evade and obfuscate....because they don't fit in with your statist apologia.
How about this, what is the potential that the riots, and the shooting of an Asian and a Hispanic police officer by a black man might have at least as much to do with general racial unrest as with government oppression?
Why do you keep making it a race issue? Cops are out of control two cops paid their lives for it. Just like redcoats were killed who might have nothing to do with oppressing their fellow british citizens.
The media makes a point to mention every time a white cop (or white or even "white-Hispanic" citizen) shoots a black man. I had to go looking quite specifically to determine the races of the principals who are the subject of this thread.
Telling us more about you than you think. I don't give a rats ass about the ethnic background of those involved.
Put in other terms. If tomorrow the US government immediately became a perfect example of libertarian or even minarchist philosophy, would the real causes of the riots and shootings in Missouri, LA, and NYC end? What do you think happens about 30 minutes after a libertarian/minarchist government doesn't send welfare checks into the inner cities?
Who were you accusing of false dichotomy earlier?
No true minarchist/libertarian/anarchist beleives in a perfect utopian society. Yet the very problems you point out have been either constructed by or aggravated by the very state you are offering apologia for.
I'd rather have the tempestous sea of liberty than your effing boot on my neck for the illusion of safety.
By clinging dogmatically and unthinkingly to the line that "government oppression" is responsible for the riots and shootings, you have precluded other, possibly more powerful reasons for the violence at least among those who are making the news this month.
By ignoring the obvious perpetuation and encouragement and out right immunity given to those who are enforcing the oppression, you are part of the problem.
At least us religious nuts will generally concede that there is certain dogma beyond rational debate. I didn't realize that "government oppression is responsible for the violence in the news" was such a sacrosanct belief among some here.
When you offer some rational debate let us know......