Reaction to the Flour Riot of 1877

Hello, my name is Kenia Cuenca. My reactions to "Flour Riot of 1877" are as follows, I found it surprising that the rioters didn't steal the flour that had been raised up in price. It was too expensive for the people of New York to buy. Only the wealthy could afford it, which made people angry. Since there was enough flour for people to buy at a lower price, the store owners made it seem like there wasn't enough flour, so that they can charge more for the high demands of the very little flour that was left. This of course could not be true because there was a large amount being imported. So basically what the rioters did was go to the stores that had flour and dump the flour on the floor. Which to me didn't seem like a good idea because it was winter and people were hungry. Instead I believe what they should've done was steal it. Although it's hard to steal the flour since a pack weights too much, for a single person to carry it and run at the same time from the police. When talking about it in class as a group, a classmate said that they did that as a form of retribution to show the authority that if they can't have it no one can. The people selling it can't make a profit and the rich wealthy people can't buy it any longer, which means that the poor people made their point across, that raising prices and taking advantage of them well bring them to take drastic measures. As to me I believe what the rioters did could've ended much worse. As the article states "They attempted to relieve themselves by putting its possession out of their power altogether", they didn't want to be controlled. In a way they felt like they were the ones that had control after they dumped the flour. Plus they went against the authority.