Vancouver Riots

The words used most frequently to describe the rioting that occurred in Vancouver after the Game 7 Stanley Cup loss are "embarrassing" and "shameful".  Much better than "tragic" and "deadly".  No one died.  No buildings were torched.   It was all over before 11:00 pm.  Three hours of mayhem, property damage, and looting over a few blocks.  Hundreds of volunteers came out the next day to clean up.  By its end, the city was back together, except for some boarded up windows. By other standards, not that much of an event.

However, people in Vancouver are plenty upset that this occurred.  There doesn't seem to be any excuse, except some young people wanting to see some action, being drunk, having a stage, and an opportunity to grab some free stuff.   People around the world with legitimate concerns of poverty, democracy, and oppression are demonstrating for their rights; in Vancouver, they riot for electronic gear to sell on the internet, on the excuse of  losing a hockey game.  The image spread around the world is that of hooligan children of affluent parents; any child of the third world (think Tahrir Square) would know better.

It's interesting that my liberal friends seem more upset than the conservative, law and order types.  After all, they are the ones who usually complain about heavy-handed police presence, being too quick to arrest, and violating rights.  None of that here.  Suddenly the call is for more police, more crowd infiltrators, removal of the rowdy early, examination of back packs, put up more fences, have a more secure venue, raise the drinking age, and jail time for those convicted.

The electronic age has changed the dynamics.  While some looted and broke windows, just as many seem to have been taking pictures.  Together with surveillance cameras, the events were well documented.  Some of the rioters have become internet celebrities, something they weren't counting on in the apparent anonymity of the crowd. Some have had their addresses and phone numbers published, to the great discomfort of their families.  Their fifteen minutes of fame may cost jobs, scholarships, and result in criminal charges.  A kind of people's justice has sprung up, some might say vigilantism by the internet.  The legal protection for young offenders not to have their names revealed isn't much use when their actions have already been splashed online.  It will be interesting to see if the pictures can be used in court, unless actual witnesses come forward, but some already stand condemned and are feeling the effects.