Gutfeld: Police shootings and the race to conclusions

Last night, riots erupted after a pair of deadly shootings. My observations:

It's impossible to know all the facts this fast, but in the world of "social injustice," one can't afford to wait. After terror, our leaders say "don't jump to conclusions," but not in these situations. Why is that?

Fact is humans lump unique acts together, if it suits them. Meaning: No matter how different Tulsa was from Charlotte, it's easy to form a theme from both making it less complex and more black and white. Even if a police officer and victim is black.

What drives each act, though, is compliance. Once that first step goes south in a traffic stop, it creates a cascade of actions that can go south, too.

The Tulsa and Charlotte shootings are way different. But they all started in one place: Perceptions of noncompliance and reactions ramp up as part of training.

Each time an officer -- black or white -- confronts someone, noncompliance triggers the training, the adrenaline, the fear, the unbending mind of law enforcement.

Last, compliance doesn't just apply to cop work, but to life. Lately it seems we're abandoning any form of conflict resolution. We can't discuss this stuff, without retreating to specific sides. We've all been there in our unbending minds, where emotion transcends truth.

And so violent protest seems less rare these days; as media and activists green light it as a replacement for reason, facts become annoying hurdles to action.