England riots

Whats needed is a truly accurate account of what actually happened, because I just don't see any logic in a man pulling a gun out while he's surrounded by policemen that he knew were following him. He sends a text message saying he's being followed, gets stopped by police and then decides to just whip out a gun? That makes no sense to me. This is a person thats already been arrested before, let me remind you. All i'm saying is that, he clearly already knows the process and procedure of an arrest and there would be no reason for him to pull that gun out. Were there any eyewitnesses other than police? Why was there a police issue bullet in a cops radio? The situation is fishy regardless.

Some people never learn, which is why there are repeat offenders. Only he can explain why he would do it. From our view, it seems fairly obvious that you shouldn't whip a gun out with police tailing you. And that's another thing that the police have against them if (when?) they get a trial- it's their word against his since possibly no one else saw or hear anything, leading them to probably be freed on no jail time or probation or anything. Police bullet in the radio would suggest that: the police officers shot at each other (lol) or a bullet ricocheted off something and still had enough kinetic energy to pierce the radio. Also possible dead guy was using a police issued weapon/bullets, not too hard to do that either.

Then there's movie logic where they'd much rather die than become dead at the hand of something larger than them (like a cocaine ring or something).

Rioting still doesn't give anyone reason to loot. This is what i found most stupid and ridiculous about the Oakland riots. not only did they have nothing to do with the reason for the protest, but it also interrupted innocent peoples' store fronts, robbed them of their honest efforts, and made them scared for their own personal securities. I mean, they fricken tried to rob SEARS and a Foot Locker for crying out loud.