>Based on the article you posted, it sounds like the protest in Oregon was violent, or at least that some people at that protest were violent. There's not enough in the article to know whether that protest was a riot. (Not surprisingly, I don't take police characterization of it as a riot at face value.)
>
>ROFL and LOL!!!!! You never disappoint me, do you? So it wasn't violent enough for you and you don't trust the police. Let's hope that you never have to call the police for help. There are plenty of pictures of people at this protest that were bashing in car windows and looting shops. If that's not a riot then I don't know what is. Open your eyes.

The news outlets WANTED it to be a riot - because that is good for their ratings - so the were quick to call it one - if one person breaks a window and there are 10 other people standing next to them then they will call it a riot. I know the police were criticized for calling it worse than it really was. As for trusting the police - it would be foolish to think that police personal are anymore trustworthy than anyone else - and seeing how they spend most of their life surrounded by bad people, they're probably less trustworthy than most folks. Every single day you read about bad cops doing illegal things - so if you don't believe this then you are in denial (what a shock).