“We were in a moving train,” said a 52-year-old woman, who spoke on the condition that she not be named because she is both a victim and a witness to a crime. “You’re not really sure what you need to do. . . . This man is holding a bloody knife. I don’t think anyone was going to try and stop him... I watched [the attacker] drop-kick him in the head several times, like he wanted to kick his head off... We saw the perpetrator kicking the man. He had him on the ground, punching him, kicking him and stabbing him.... I would have to say that my instinct was to stay put and try to become as small as possible.... I’m looking, but I don’t want to be noticed by him.... I really thought when he had my dad stand up and he was standing up close to him that he was going to knife him. I didn’t know what he would do after he got money off my father.... I think we were all trying to stay away from him considering he had a knife... People who were in front of us were saying, ‘Don’t do that.’... I did not want him to think that he had to hurt us because we would identify him. I wanted him to think that he could walk away from this, and that’s what he did."I've compressed the woman's quote from a longer article, which is in The Washington Post and titled "Horrified passengers witnessed brutal July 4 slaying aboard Metro car." The headline writer, for whatever reason, decided not to frame things in terms of the failure to help, which is horrifying witnessed from a distance much farther than the length of a Metro car.
July 12, 2015
"[P]assengers trapped in the moving train huddled at both ends of the car and watched in horror as [Jasper] Spires punched 24-year-old Kevin Joseph Sutherland until he fell to the floor, then stabbed him until he was dead."
"Court documents say the victim was cut or stabbed 30 or 40 times, in the chest, abdomen, back, side and arms. Police said the assailant then threw the victim’s cellphone and returned to stomp on Sutherland’s body."
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
200 comments:
I sure am glad no one had a gun, someone could have been killed!
Note the phrase "concealed carry permit" was not mentioned in the article. Lemmings.
So, 10 passengers watched a 5'5" guy with a knife murder an innocent man by stabbing him 30 to 40 times, kicking him in the head and body, more. The same suspect then robbed the other passengers while taunting them. I'm assuming that some combination of several passengers could probably have overcome the bad guy and issued a sound thrashing. But it would have required someone to take the initiative.
The suspect had been arrested for robbery just days before, but prosecutors decided to reduce the charges to a misdemeanor and release him, because he was unsuccesful in actually taking anything in that attempt. Which probably means lazy prosecutors looking for an excuse to dump the case.
BTW, this crime was a black on white incident. Had it been reversed, it would be front page news, requiring a national conversation over whether we dig up some long-dead guy and move him or something. But instead, it's just another routine thing, exclusive of any race issue.
Althouse knows well how to bait her readers with a news story.
Well, now, where is our progressive president and his DOJ? They're going to have to ban knives.
Suppose somebody'd had a gun and they'd shot Spires, killing him, but saving Sutherland's life by preventing most of the stab wounds.
This took place in DC. How would that person would be treated by the media and by the justice system? As good guy?
"Althouse knows well how to bait her readers with a news story."
And it is quite a revealing story on several fronts.
Lives of white train riders matter!
If only he had received his rightful reparations, this wouldn't have happened.
Althouse's racialism continues - 85% of white murders are committed by other whites.
Had the attacker been white or Hispanic the riders would have intervened and overppwered him. Unfortunately for thr victim, there's this stereotype white people have, that black males are immensely strong and athletic, with superb street fighting skills. I call it the Blogosphere's Quasi-Homoerotic Black Male Physical Superiority Fetish, though here it occurred in real life.
"Althouse's racialism "
Funny, I don't see any mentions of race in Althouse's post.
On further thought, I suspect that working-class white men would have intervened and saved the victim. Unfortunately you're not likely to find too many of them on the DC Metro.
Peter
I'm so sorry, Kevin Joseph Sutherland. I'm sorry for your family.
The Washington Post writes the story this way to show people that, if they don't try to save some random stranger by using a gun, they will survive. And then maybe people won't want guns any more.
This is the same thing that happened in London, with Fusillier Lee Rigby. Tens of people watched a man get stabbed to death and then watched his killer stand around and talk about it. Nobody even considered there might be something they could do about it.
That's the society you can create, if you write enough stories about saving yourself by not getting involved.
It remains next to impossible to obtain a concealed carry permit in the District of Columbia unless you are politically connected.
And, of course, DC won't recognize CCH permits from Virginia or any other state.
So, yet again, another murder in a "Gun Free Zone."
Going close up unarmed against a thug with a knife pretty much guarantees you will be cut or stabbed. From 20 feet, however, I can consistently put 5 rounds into the X-ring.
AReasonableMan said...
Althouse's racialism continues -
She didn't mention race, and apparently "racialism" = any mention of race which doesn't portray blacks as victims.
85% of white murders are committed by other whites.
True, and 90-95% of black murders are committed by blacks, but a black guy is 15 to 20 times more likely to murder a white guy than vice-versa. And no, that's not because of the black/white proportions in the general population, which works both ways, it's because of incidents like this.
Interestingly, there are no comments allowed for this article at the WaPo.
I wonder why?
I wonder what the percentage is for murders committed by democrat voters/democrat leaning people?
"Althouse's racialism continues - 85% of white murders are committed by other whites."
I'm assuming you are white ARM as your comments scream metrosexual PC. Your 85% figure requires that Hispanics are all white, sort of like George Zimmerman.
White 5,537 murders
Black / African American 6,261 murders
black/African American 13% of the population
white alone 77%
So, 13% of the population commit 35% of the murders 13% of the population have more murder victims than 77%.
white murderers are 33% of the cases. The rest are unknown or other. Murderers of blacks are 98% black.
If Senator Tammy Baldwin (D. WI) would have been on that train, she would have stopped it.
But the only train Senators ride is between their offices and their debating chamber.
Humperdink said...
Note the phrase "concealed carry permit" was not mentioned in the article. Lemmings.
Because as JackofVA says, even after winning several 2nd cases, the police department refuses to issue any unless you have political juice.
They are back in court stalling again.
PS:
Question: After a knife fight, what do you call the guy who is bleeding from head to toe as he is rushed to the ER?
Answer: The winner
White lives don't matter. Stop posting irrelevant stuff that serves no political purpose.
I heard about this, and I just assumed it happened in an isolated car at night with no one around. I'd hope if I had been on the train, I'd've done something different. Hopefully, I'll never have the opportunity to figure out if I would've done better.
I can't believe this isn't a bigger story.
It's fascinating, isn't it, how the Trayvon Martin case became a national fascination and this story is a big nothing.
Fernandinande said...
She didn't mention race,
Didn't have to. Despite the fact that statistically there was a 6 out of 7 chance that this murder of a white was committed by another white we all knew, before we clicked on the article, what his race would be. That is just how Althouse rolls.
Nothing wrong with that, necessarily - racialism is part of life. But there is no need to ignore it either.
If only SC had removed that confederate flag before the fourth rather than on the tenth, this never would have happened.
Which one looks luke the President's son?
If the murderer had been white the WAPO would have found a way to imply the killer was motivated by homophobia or Islamophobia.
In Phoenix this could never happen. Of course in Phoenix, you can carry a samurai sword (in addition to whatever guns happen to have handy, concealed or not) on our light rail system. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CrWiUGgyPWU.
So we should ignore murders of blacks by whites, because... over 90% of blacks murdered are killed by other blacks? What odd notions of notability you have, ARM.
Inter-racial murder is rare, so we should ignore it!
Intra-racial murder is commonplace, so it's not newsworthy!
Any other topics you want to tut-tut at Althouse about for commenting on?
I don't know about that, ARM.
I made no assumptions regarding race while reading this post. I didn't know what kind of "train" this was. Heck, I didn't even have a inkling that this took place in the USA until she mentioned the Washington Post at the end of her post. I only thought that the horrific nature of the crime and the witnesses reaction was the point of posting.
If, as you claim, you "knew" the race angle before clicking through then I think you're the one jumping to conclusions about how "Althouse rolls." Based on posting history, two recent Muslim stabbing non-muslim to death in Bangladesh stories, I'd say you'd be foolish to assume this wasn't an equal possibility.
But the only train Senators ride is between their offices and their debating chamber.
It's called the Gravy Train.
I hope the people on the metro are haunted by their inaction for the rest of their days. I don't know if I would have intervened -- I'm much taller than the perp -- but I like to think that I would do everything I can. For one thing, I'm usually carrying stuff that can be thrown.
The perps should be commended for honoring the GUN FREE ZONE and using just fists, feet, and knives.
I suspect the headline writer either similarly would refuse to take action.
The police can't be in every train car, every building, or always able to get there in time. Sometimes, people have to take action.
"... we all knew, before we clicked on the article, what his race would be."
Didn't even occur to me. Sounds like a case of projection on your part.
Could some liberal explain why the Travon Martin killing became a National story, while poor Kevin Sutherland became an anonymous footnote?
Original Mike said...
Didn't even occur to me.
Two possibilities:
1) You are lying.
2) You have no insight into Althouse's racialist sensibility. Perhaps you are too close.
I don't spend my life obsessed by race like you do.
"I think you're the one jumping to conclusions "
I'll bet ARM has one of those Racialism Dog-Whistle Detectors. I hear they give them out as premiums with New York Times re-subscriptions.
Dozens of people cower while a person is killed with repeated (30) stabs of a knife. This is absolutely what a huge all powerful federal govt wants, no, requires, of its citizens in order to stay in power. A free, self actualizing citizenry, is a threat to the govt. That's why the police departments all lie when they say their mission is to protect, when in fact they do nothing to protect, only after a crime do the act, as required by the constitution.
What is "racialism", anyway? A way to call somebody a racist while maintaining a bit of deniability?
The attacker "may have been high on synthetic drugs" combined with the violence of the attack and the implied notion that he has a mental history ("would talk to himself") makes me doubtful witness intervention would have achieved anything other than more injured. As a former police officer I have tried to handcuff men on drug/psychotic fueled rages. It is nothing like a normal fight. A man in that state can exhaust 15 healthy fit male cops in their 20/30's. After he is finally cuffed with legs and elbows bound by velcro straps he will still thrash about fighting until injected with a sedative at the hospital. Of the ten witnesses we only know the age/sex of two F/52 and M/76 - not peak fighting years. While I often am disappointed at public apathy and willingness to intervene, in this case it is understandable.
I surmised, before reading reading the article,that both perpetrator and victim were black.
"What is "racialism", anyway? A way to call somebody a racist while maintaining a bit of deniability?"
I'm thinking the charge of "racist" has become so overused that the race mongers feel they need a fresh term.
Would an armed populous handle this differently?
Let's roll. Not.
Kevin Sutherland on gun control:
Since I am in politics, there is one phrase coined by our Founding Fathers that really strikes me. When they founded this nation, they set out to create a “more perfect Union.” The important distinction in this phrase is that our Union is not perfect. More than 225 years later, despite so much change, this is still true. It is likely that we will never achieve absolute perfection, but I believe that the heart of American exceptionalism is that we never stop trying. If history is any guide, the forces for progress always succeed eventually, no matter how formidable their opposition is. Our fight is not merely for new gun control measures or even new mental health programs. It is for the creation of an even more perfect Union.
That is why I am a liberal. . .
Kevin Sutherland on race relations and the SC church shooting:
In my opinion there are few things that are more offensive to the victims of this crime than refusing to address the racism, much of which is institutionalized, glorified and celebrated in the South (including with the help of symbols like the Confederate flag), that cultivated this incident.
Well, I find it pathetic that 10 people stood by and made no attempt to stop the brutal murder of another human, especially considering the killer was only 5'5". This - 30 to 40 stab wounds, repeated kicking to the head and body - didn't happen in an instant. It must have taken some period of time. And not one individual tried...something to save the young man who died.
Great.
I see nothing in the OP that even hints of a race issue in the incident, trolling slams - ARM - on the blogger to the contrary. Race may be a legitimate topis, but AA didn't bring it up.
This reminds me of a story a while ago in Houston. A man armed with a knife tried to kidnap a high school girl from her bus stop. Her fellow students defended her and saved her, with the help of a bus driver who arrived in the middle of the fracas.
http://abc13.com/archive/9262496/
Folks in DC: this is how it's done.
Note on the setting: Westside is a huge HS in HISD (7th largest district in the US). The school is a mix of every ethic and socio-economic group, and, while I'm sure it's possible to get a very lousy education there, it's also quite possible to get a very good one.
This sort of situation is an instant test of character.
It's a hard thing to respond while everyone else is passive.
Part of this reluctance is social anxiety, and part I think is lack of training. Not training in the particulars of knife-fighting, but in training to be aggressive and assertive.
As for the danger - well, this is one thing both Christianity and Bushido agree on - death is lighter than a feather, duty is heavier than a mountain. Is living a little longer worth that much?
JCC said...
Race may be a legitimate topis, but AA didn't bring it up.
You obviously don't understand how editing works.
JCC/
Have you read Cacimbo Cacimbo just above? If not please do so. And, btw, my wife, an RN of over 40 yrs agrees. Crazies on drugs often have unbelievable strength. And she's worked in Phila, New Orleans, Louisville, all over SoCal and SF area--seen it all..
I have spent my time in the ghetto.
And around the world, in not-always-nice places.
And on too many occasions, confronted with threats of violence.
This is in fact a difficult ethical, moral, philosophical question, which in these cases one is asked to solve in an instant. To be useful to other people, it is a question that has to be pre-solved.
Is life worth dishonor ? What counts as dishonor ?
Can you live usefully and honorably after falling into dishonor ?
People will disagree on this.
Yeah what Virgil said. Drugs are the wild card in these scenarios...perps just aren't normal anymore.
ARM is quite right. This story is not such to inspire a kumbaya moment or to cause whites to reflect on their innate racism. Therefore the least said about it the better.
Again, this is a question people will have to solve for themselves, in an instant. Whether the answer is right or wrong is a question for the person involved, in one sense.
What is certain is that in a frame of reference outside the personal, there is a right and wrong answer as well.
Assume a case where someone intervened, and was also killed, failing to save the victim.
Assume a case where someone intervened, and though he was killed, the victim survived.
Assume a case where someone intervened, survived, and saved the victim.
And then there are the passive survivors.
From an external frame of reference, the moral choices made by these, interveners and passive survivors, cannot be equivalent. Some choices are moral and some are immoral, even maybe that of the successful intervener.
Of these cases, some sinned, and some passed the test.
Who ?
Human tradition, and most religion, backs the choice of the interveners, successful or not. It is people like this that count as martyrs, or receive posthumous Medals of Honor.
The rest have a good excuse for shirking their duty, given the extreme situation. But it is indeed shirking.
William said...
Therefore the least said about it the better.
Not at all. I am looking forward to the next 6 posts by Althouse on lunatic whites killing other whites.
When I rode the commuter train into San Francisco every morning -- hugely pregnant and standing up -- every man in that car was on his Ipod or looking at his phone. Nobody offered me a seat unless I asked, and even then -- if it was a young, healthy, professional male -- he looked a bit surprised at the request.
This told me a lot about the people I was dealing with.
Not surprised at all.
My prayers to Kevin Sutherland and his family.
We can play coulda-woulda-shoulda forever here. The knife is a factor and so too would be the crazy-strong effects of drugs. But they just spice up the basic moral question.
As a practical matter flailing somebody with a belt (especially if it has a big metal buckle) is sometimes enough to distract them. If half a dozen passengers did that, plus swarm him, knock him down, kick him, they could buy time while the Metro cops woke up and ambled over for a look.
Also a cane is a wonderful weapon. There is a Filipino martial art devoted to the simple but deadly evolutions of that silly little stick.
But what we get is this. I'm sure the President will offer healing words, just as soon as he gets back from golf.
AReasonableMan unreasonably wrote:
Despite the fact that statistically there was a 6 out of 7 chance that this murder of a white was committed by another white we all knew, before we clicked on the article, what his race would be.
Your stats only work for overall murders of whites, ARM, not murders committed in the course of felony robbery. Try again!
virgil xenophon said...
Crazies on drugs often have unbelievable strength.
No they don't.
PCP and Violence
"Despite its reputation in the media as a drug that causes bizarrely violent behavior and gives users superhuman strength, research does not support the idea that PCP itself is the cause of such behavior and strength. Instead, those who experience violent outbursts while under the influence of PCP often have a history of psychosis or antisocial behavior that may or may not be related to their drug abuse.
Additionally, someone under the influence of PCP is often unaware of the dangers and limitations they face, and may react to physical confrontations in a way that makes it seem as though they have extraordinary muscular strength."
Name any other specific drug and I'll refute the claim that it can produce "unbelievable strength".
From the perspective of the murdered person I doubt it matters exactly what they were doing at the time. Dead is dead.
I agree on the lack of gentlemanly courtesy on San Francisco trains. I see it all the time. I trained my children, as children, to give their seats to women, the disabled and the elderly, in spite of the consensus.
BTW, giving over seats is not a Chinese custom, or at least not one in practice. You will see no such gentlemanly behavior in Hong Kong.
It is a Filipino custom, or was in my day.
jCC said... [hush][hide comment]
Well, I find it pathetic that 10 people stood by and made no attempt to stop the brutal murder of another human, especially considering the killer was only 5'5". This - 30 to 40 stab wounds, repeated kicking to the head and body - didn't happen in an instant. It must have taken some period of time. And not one individual tried...something to save the young man who died.
Great.
Yeah, it's a shame you weren't there to kick his ass. BTW 30 frenzied stab wounds would take less than a minute.
@virgil -
I suspect I have more experience in such than either your wife or the other poster, But in any event, whether the 5'5" killer was high or not does not absolve citizens from coming to the assistance of an innocent victim who was being brutally murdered while they stood by. Do we now administer tox screens to suspects before deciding whether we should intervene? Does morality depend on the blood test results? Someone high may actually have been easier to control. But we don't know, and I suspect the Metro occupants didn't either, having not tried.
When would the circumstances have demanded action? A child victim? A woman? Someone in a wheelchair? Maybe an ethnic minority when race was obviously a factor in the attack? Where is their comfort level no longer undisturbed sufficiently to have insitigated some reaction, if 40 stab wounds and superfluous kickis to the head didn't do it?
I will say that I suspect if one single person had acted, others would have piled on. There was some kind of group inaction at work.
Suppose Mr. X had been on the DC Metro that day, and as a resident of Virginia with a CCH permit, he had been armed.
Further suppose Mr. X had planted 5 rounds of .38 hollow point into the killer thereby terminating the problem.
Question: How many years would Mr. X be sentenced to after the DC justice system finished?
For bonus points, would Mr. X have any money left after the civil case against him concluded?
For an double bonus, how long would Mr. X live in prison before he was shanked?
You obviously don't understand how editing works.
Let's not be coy about this. Are you or are you not claiming that Althouse originally posted this with a racial angle and later edited it out?
What Cacimbo said. My work takes me to the courthouse and I have seen several instances of a young man just absolutely losing it, for whatever reason. It is SO HARD to subdue a young strong person. The worst case I saw involved a muscular but shorter man. So many police and sheriffs piled on top of him that it looked like a cartoon or kung-fu scene. And just like a cartoon, he was able to actually throw them off of him a few times so that they scattered. He kept this up for over 15 minutes without seeming to tire. Add slippery conditions from sweat and blood and it's even harder for others to grab and keep a berserker's hands and body controlled.
If I was in such a situation, I can only hope to have the courage to intervene. I may fail this hard test, I make no claims about my ability to pass it.
Still, it does say something that out of 10 none passed.
Re: knife fights. One of the most compelling videos I've ever seen is this one; it's very brief, you should watch it. It's a recreation of what a real knife-fight looks like and it's just crushing. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LRukPq1qTfI
"This told me a lot about the people I was dealing with. "
That they believed in women's equality?
There's never any shortage of keyboard Kommandos and internet tough guys. First, we don't know how long the assault took place, I suspect it was probably over in a couple minutes. Which means most people were probably in shock and trying to process what was going at the start. Once, they got over their disbelief, the women, old men, and smaller men probably assumed a the bigger, stronger males would take action. Its part of crowd psychology that people often don't do anything because they assume some else - someone closer, bigger, stronger - will take action. You can throw in the fact that most people probably didn't know what exactly was going on. A robbery? A fight? Maybe it was one criminal bashing another? Those closest probably knew it was robbery, but what everyone else?
Paul Zrimsek said...
Let's not be coy about this. Are you or are you not claiming that Althouse originally posted this with a racial angle and later edited it out?
You missed the point, badly.
Another problem with using a gun in that situation, is collateral damage. Fire off a few rounds and you hit the bad guy but you may also hit an innocent bystander, in which case you'd get your ass sued off.
In fact, if you wounded the bad guy and stopped the assault, he probably would sue you for excessive use of force. He'd argue he was just defending himself against the victim when you opened fire and tried to kill him. Put the case in front of an all black DC civil jury and I don't like the shooter's odds.
Of course, the cities are only going to get better, aren't they?
That's one reason why, after living outside DC, and outside SF, and LA, and Sacexcremento, when it came time to leave the military, I picked a small(ish) community in the intermountain west where most people are polite, helpful, and armed.
It's a strange force of habit, when I walk into a store or restaurant I immediately glance around and see what items could be picked up and used as a weapon or distraction in case of emergency. We're not entirely crime free here, but it's helpful to go through the mental scenarios as a matter of practice. Also, as I'm discovering with having a bum ankle, I might invest in a cane soon, like the one my father brought back from Turkey, that had a nice 14" blade inside. Much less random than a blaster. -CP
People don't think about the consequences. If you intervene in a murder, or even witness one, you are condemned to twenty years (or more) of going downtown to the courthouse and dealing with the criminal justice system, and the endless appeals, and delays. These places stink, and the people are all ugly.
I finally had to leave the State, and only then would the city stop calling me, as they would have to pay for my transportation and lodgings, to sit through another appeal.
No. Every man for himself. That's my motto. If someone killed me on a train, I wouldn't care, and I certainly wouldn't want to condemn a person to the slow wheels of justice in America, trying to save my sorry ass.
I expect DC to be worse than Portland, in this regard.
"That they believed in women's equality?"
You are being sarcastic I think.
No, the bigger fact is that they were not gentlemen.
And that is "gentlemen" in the broadest sense. Traditional peasants have this notion of honor as well as aristocrats.
What it says about our modern upper middle class -
That they have no sense of traditional values, that they have no sense of the obligation to self-sacrifice, that they have no honor, are untrustworthy, and have no sense of duty, no sense of community, no sense of charity.
They are C.S.Lewis' men without chests, Eliots hollow men.
Ms. Althouse has abandoned her stance of cruel neutrality in her presentation of this article; she alludes to being deeply disturbed by the account. I felt the same and probably for the same reason; I think it is the immediate understanding that this could be MY SON. He's in college, and he and his friends use subway transportation in Philly and NYC. They are all tall and well-muscled young men and not one of them has any experience fighting. One homicidal maniac with a knife might get stopped by all five of them if they attacked back---but there would be serious injuries and the knife-wielder could still end up killing every one of them.
Notice that the train car doors were LOCKED, so no one could escape from the sicko with a knife, and no one who might have had the means to subdue him could enter. What is this stupid policy of locking people in a train car? And what's the point of having doors if you can't open them?
Here in NYC, you used to be able to walk between the cars, Now they mostly keep them locked, "for your safety." Gee, thanks! I'll really appreciate how they look out for my safety as my head is being cut off while I'm banging on the door.
In a case like this, one must accept all risks, beyond just injury or death. Including legal liabilities or ongoing legal annoyance. Not all possible injuries are physical.
Still, honor requires it.
Read this and the comments. I started with the view someone should have tried to help. But I fully understand why no one would want to confront a wild man with a knife. It would have taken several people charging him simultaneously and, of course, still would have been personally dangerous.
It seems to me the only practical solution to the issue of someone trying to help would have been a person with a firearm. Even that would have been risky with innocents presumably behind the killer.
Since law abiding persons with firearms seldom kill people, it seems the answer probably is to liberalize concealed carry permits.
"Paul Zrimsek said...
Let's not be coy about this. Are you or are you not claiming that Althouse originally posted this with a racial angle and later edited it out?"
No, apparently ARM believes that Althouse posted this because the assailant was black, but then coyly left that fact out of the post so she could deny racism. And what's really cool is that all of us readers understand what she's doing, so we also can revel in our secret racism.
The murder of the 24-year-old white man occurred 1.9 miles east of the White House on the Red Line of Washington's Metro at 1 p.m. on the Fourth of July.
The schools certainly don't help in teaching the young to be gentlemen. The subject matter does not help with useful values. In my day we had to memorize Macaulay's Horatius and the like.
Filipino history was a long list of dead heroes, rebels, executed patriots.
I didn't read my way down here, but I did a control + f on this whole comment thread and no one used the word Goetz yet.
How about that. Memories are short. Find me some examples of this happening in public this way where concealed carry is part of the legal culture.
I need a sanctuary of my own. Interesting times, no?
Original Mike said...
And what's really cool is that all of us readers understand what she's doing, so we also can revel in our secret racism.
Get a grip, Mike. If I wanted to say that I would have just said it.
I have yet to read any version of this story that tells me the actual demographics of the crowd of witnesses. I could see how a crowd of women and/or elderly people might not get involved in such a situation. I am 49, but physically fit, and I would like to think that I would have done something other than just watch, but I don't really know since I wasn't there. However, I can say this- if I were there and did nothing, I wouldn't want anyone I knew to know it- it would be deep shame I would be feeling.
"If I wanted to say that I would have just said it."
Then what are you saying? You've been on this accusatory kick for awhile now and it's tedious.
Oh, I posted too quickly. You're only calling Althouse racist. Her readers get a pass.
Mezzrow,
I was thinking about Goetz when I read the very first comment in this thread, and Bob Boyd also addressed the issue indirectly. Had someone shot Spires before he had done more than stab his victim once or twice, would that person have been called a hero? I am not so sure.
>Blogger buwaya puti said...
"That they believed in women's equality?"
You are being sarcastic I think.
No, the bigger fact is that they were not gentlemen.
And that is "gentlemen" in the broadest sense. Traditional peasants have this notion of honor as well as aristocrats.
What it says about our modern upper middle class -
That they have no sense of traditional values, that they have no sense of the obligation to self-sacrifice, that they have no honor, are untrustworthy, and have no sense of duty, no sense of community, no sense of charity.
They are C.S.Lewis' men without chests, Eliots hollow men.
Right: They had been "enlightened" out of any notion that a visibly pregnant woman was not just another humanoid capitalist worker, but a female deserving of special consideration by men. Perish the thought!
In fairness, when I described this to a male co-worker (whose wife had recently had a baby), he said that he always offered his seat to pregnant women, as that was "the best thing he'd do all day." So while the majority had no sense of cultural obligation or self-consciousness about their behavior, certain individuals still some vestigial sense of . . . I dunno, chivalry? Can we still say that?
Anyway, it was an eye-opener. I guess my point is that there may have been nothing culture-wise telling the men (i.e., physically stronger people) on the train to intervene. Passivity and self-interest were the norm, and their instinctive response under pressure.
At 12:58 ARM wrote:
"You missed the point, badly."
And at 1:34 ARM wrote:
"Get a grip, Mike. If I wanted to say that I would have just said it."
This is why the moniker "AReasonableMan" must be understood to be ironic. ARM cannot be held responsible for anything he does or does not write.
Bernhardt Goetz, where are you when we need you?
Althouse's racialism continues - 85% of white murders are committed by other whites.
That is a meaningless statistic.
I bet the percentage for Black people killing Black people is even higher, yet every time a White person kills a Black person it becomes a national crisis.
What are the raw numbers of Black people killing White people versus White people killing Black people?
Terry said...
ARM cannot be held responsible for anything he ... does not write.
Am I also responsible for the things you don't write?
Not at all. I am looking forward to the next 6 posts by Althouse on lunatic whites killing other whites.
How about a few about Blacks killing Blacks? Since that happens much more often.
When I rode the commuter train into San Francisco every morning -- hugely pregnant and standing up -- every man in that car was on his Ipod or looking at his phone. Nobody offered me a seat unless I asked, and even then -- if it was a young, healthy, professional male -- he looked a bit surprised at the request.
This told me a lot about the people I was dealing with.
Why were the men expected to give up their seats? I thought men and women were equal now?
What sacrifices are women expected to make for men?
You missed the point, badly
The point apparently being:
If you ever bring up or discuss anything that ever makes Black people look bad, even if you don't mention their race, you are a racialist.
No, the bigger fact is that they were not gentlemen.
Why are men still expected to be gentlemen, when women are no longer expected to be ladies?
Maya S said..."When I rode the commuter train into San Francisco every morning -- hugely pregnant and standing up -- every man in that car was on his Ipod or looking at his phone. Nobody offered me a seat unless I asked, and even then -- if it was a young, healthy, professional male -- he looked a bit surprised at the request."
Long ago, I learned that there was a strong chance that I would be berated loudly for sexism by the recipient of such acts of common courtesy if the act took place near a university or in a town with a large activist population.
Because to be a gentleman is an end in itself, with no reference to anyone elses opinions. It is measured against an ideal, not against a norm. There is more honor, indeed, in being in opposition to prevailing opinions.
So did we ever decide whether Althouse is responsible for the stuff she didn't write?
Gahrie said...
How about a few about Blacks killing Blacks?
Since Althouse writes almost exclusively for a white audience it would seem that the murder of whites would be of the greatest interest to her readers. After all, 'White lives matter'.
The purpose of the schools I went to was explicitly to "educate Christian gentlemen". This was the objective of the Christian Brothers (La Salle).
In almost 30 years living in the SF bay area (albeit with some extended absences), with major universities in every direction, I have never had a case where I was berated by a woman for leaving her my seat. Indeed, often I was thanked, or she expressed glad surprise.
The people are not as far gone as their leaders.
I'm old enough that I was raised to yield my seat to a lady, pregnant or not. I don't take public transport that much, though, so I've only had to do so maybe a couple of dozen times. And out of that small number, twice I've been berated.
"I'm not a damsel in distress to be rescued."
"You don't have to patronize me."
And this is in friendly, Midwest-nice Chicago. I imagine (just a guess) a guy's odds of getting this response is a lot higher in San Francisco. As you say, people are trained in their behavior. There's a fair chance you need to blame the sisterhood, not the guys who are respecting "the concept that women are human beings."
> Long ago, I learned that there was a strong chance that I would be berated loudly for sexism by the recipient of such acts of common courtesy if the act took place near a university or in a town with a large activist population.
That's too bad. I'm going old-school as far as my son's manners (opening doors, etc), and he's spending his entire life around girls with the same education, ability, and ambitions as him. Is it just me, or are these things not incompatible?
Anyway, hopefully he won't get a lot of blowback.
You know, if I were in that situation, I'd like to be able to carry a gun.
Or a walking stick.
A humble walking stick is really useful against a crazy guy with a knife.
ARM, it was not me, but you that wrote "Get a grip, Mike. If I wanted to say that I would have just said it."
This was after you made the incomprehensible comment "You obviously don't understand how editing works." in response to JCC's very comprehensible comment (even with the typo: "Race may be a legitimate topis, but AA didn't bring it up."
To a normal person, it looks like you accused AA of injecting race into her post. When it was pointed out to you that AA did not, in fact, bring up race, but that you did, you fell back on the kind of obscure hand-waiving that liberals often engage in during debate. Hence the amusing contrast with your later comment "Get a grip, Mike. If I wanted to say that I would have just said it."
The correct answer to a woman who berates a man for yielding his seat is to apologize for offending her. But to remain standing regardless.
However, even as an almost daily rider into downtown San Francisco, for decades, I have never had this happen.
The correct answer to a woman who berates a man for yielding his seat is to apologize for offending her
So, men must act as gentlemen, women may behave as they please.
If a woman acts like a jerk, the man must apologize for causing her to behave badly.
You sir, are indeed a feminist.
Hardly a feminist !
You can ask my wife and daughter about this !
No, I am merely old-fashioned, and I see no reason to change.
One does not change just because others don't reciprocate.
Be true to your own nature, or your ideal for your own nature, not theirs. If you lose by it, in some material sense, then that is just as well. Matthew 16:26
Terry, I don't think you are the final arbiter on what is or isn't easily comprehended. The role of editors in directing the readers attention towards what they think is important and away from what they don't want to talk about is hardly obscure knowledge. You guys bring it up this same point regarding the MSM almost daily.
You are still using obscuring gestures, ARM. You seem to believe that, despite not mentioning race, AA was "directing the readers attention towards what they think is important and away from what they don't want to . . ."
Please explain how AA did this using the editoing process. If she wanted to direct the reader's attention towards the race of the murderer and his victim, how did she do that w/o mentioning either?
To a normal person, you seem to be projecting your racial obsession on others.
I don't think you are a normal person, Terry. Sorry but it's the truth.
To a normal person, you seem to be projecting your racial obsession on others.
It is what the Left does.
Matthew 16:26
I'll see your Matthew 16:26 and raise you Matthew 7:6, b.p.
"Please explain how AA did this using the [editing] process."
She noticed the story in the first place. In ARM-land, that makes her a "racialist" (whatever the hell that is).
Apparently, for Althouse to be a Respectable Blogger, she would have carefully vetted the story first, realized that it involved inconvenient truths about a member of a protected class, and shoved it down the memory hole.
I think, even at 72 years of age, with a good knife(not a boxcutter) I could kill several unarmed people in a railcar.
About intervening:
Actually someone did intervene. And was promptly murdered. I might have objected myself if some random stranger had grabbed my phone. And I might have also been murdered.
Which is ironic, since if I’m confronted on the street by a knife-flashing mugger demanding my phone I will give it over without objection, breathe a sigh of relief and report it to the police afterwards.
Matthew 7:6 advises against reproving the unreceptive sinful with religious arguments.
That does not refute my point. I do not advise reproving angry feminists. Merely to behave as a gentleman for ones own sake.
@Fernandinade Not every person who takes drugs becomes violent/super strong. Even when some become violent they do not display the crazy strength. But when it does happen, no matter what the study may say every police officer I know will tell you different. Perhaps part of the reason is drugged/psychotic people sometimes become temporarily immune to pain. Here is an example of when a man on pcp cut the skin off his own face:
http://www.practicalhomicide.com/Research/MasonVerger.htm
Punching someone who is causally flaying themselves is not effective.
@JCC Not sure what exactly you are claiming to have experience at, but as a police officer in the ghettos of Brooklyn during the height of the 80/90's crack epidemic I can assure you I have plenty of experience fighting drug fueled crazies. Your statement that "Someone high may actually have been easier to control" is baffling. True, someone zoned out on heroin usually doesn't resist hard, but heroin addicts are not known for "rages". I think most people have never actually encountered someone in this state and do not fully understand how brutally and fast the action occurs. Ultimately we all have to live with our own conscience and these people have to live with theirs. Knowing how unlikely it is they could have achieved anything other then their own death that I am willing to give them a pass.
ARM, you're correct that Althouse's editorial decisions lead readers to what she deems the important angle of a given story. However, in this case the only reasonable understanding of the intent of her editing process is that it is the non-intervention of the other passengers she is leading us to consider. No race angle was mentioned until you brought it up. You are simply wrong that this story is some kind of thinly-vieled racist ploy on Althouse's part to get her pack of undercover bigots riled up. It seems more like that is what you'd like this all to be.
Althouse posted numerous stories about black on white killing? Maybe one or two over the years, but none spring to my mind immediately. Maybe I'm wrong, could you provide some examples?
Since other commenters have pointed out to you that bringing up race was your editorial decision, instead of acknowledging the possibility that you were perhaps mistaken -- as one might expect a reasonable man to do -- all you've responded with is nonsensical snark.
A to the C said...
nonsensical snark.
Is Drudge a race-baiter?
A yes or no is sufficient.
I ™it now, the murderer was a Son of Obama™ and Disciple of St. Trayvon™ on an entirely justified Chimpout. the white racist victim had it coming.
I'D like to think I would have jumped up and kicked the shit out of the knife-wielding maniac, but when it comes down to it, I have an 18 month old son at home that I'D really like to see grow up. Also, having had a gun stuck in my face once or twice, I can assure you it is much easier to cast judgement on the non-intervention of the witnesses from the safety of a couter screen. Being there is a whole different can of worms. Most of us never have to deal with violent confrontations on a personal basis. Freezing up is a pretty natural reaction.
Sucks for the poor victim and his family. Life is precious and beautiful. I wonder if this maniac will ever truly understand what he took from this poor guy and his family.
Ha! ARM, too funny. Yes, I suppose Drudge could be considered a race-biter in some cases. So what, though, so could the NY Times & WAPO. What does Drudge have to do with this story? You implied that Althouse's sneaky editorial process in this case was under the radar race-baiting. Would that be the case anytime she links to a crime story with a black perp & white victim? Or is there something about this particular story that I'm missing? Or, could you just perhaps be wrong?
I have had guns in my face several times as well (what was I doing wrong, to get into this sort of mess so often ?). In none of them was anyone at risk other than myself though.
You are right, fear and surprise are paralyzing. It puts one (or me anyway) in a drugged state, where things seem unreal, and its hard to move without violent trembling. As I said above, this situation is a hard test.
It helps to have sorted out the social and philosophical questions beforehand however. Be reconciled, the moment of death is likely to come at any time. We have to die anyway, beyond a certain point it's more important how one dies, than when one dies.
Or, could you just perhaps be wrong?
The Left never admit that they are wrong.
Disparate coverage. The murderer and/or victim must represent a politically incorrect interest.
OK. So reasonable people can agree that Drudge is a chronic race baiter. He presents a large number of stories that show blacks in a poor or terrible light and does not routinely do the same for whites, with some exceptions (e.g. Ted Kennedy and Bill Clinton). This is easily seen by comparing the stories he highlights (often from the Daily Mail) with the Daily Mail, which is a more equal opportunity chronicler of human depravity.
Althouse, more than any blogger I have read, regularly links to and comments on Drudge. So, we can say with reasonable certainty, that either Althouse is blind to race baiting or is comfortable with this tactic, in a business context. This is not to say that either Drudge or Althouse are racists. As a gay Jew, Drudge is probably, at a personal level, not unsympathetic to minorities, but business is business. I think Althouse plays a sly game on race. I could be wrong, she could just be clueless.
He presents a large number of stories that show blacks in a poor or terrible light and does not routinely do the same for whites, with some exceptions
1) Bullshit.
2) The main reason he covers Black on White crime is to point out the hypocrisy of the MSM and the Left (I repeat myself).
Cacimbo Cacimbo said...
@Fernandinade Not every person who takes drugs becomes violent/super strong.
None of them do.
But when it does happen, no matter what the study may say every police officer I know will tell you different.
So some cops are anti-science; what else is new?
I read in the MSM about one guy who was super-strong from meth and it took > 12 cops to control him. Then it turned out he was just drunk. Oops. It's just an excuse for not being able to overpower someone.
Here is an example of when a man on pcp cut the skin off his own face:
http://www.practicalhomicide.com/Research/MasonVerger.htm
Yeah, "Michael No-last-name" the undocumented Urban Legend.
Snopes:
"This case, whose details were supposedly contained in 'closed medical records' published only in Geberth's book,"
...
Given this and some other incongruities of the story, we're not quite ready to put it in the "True" column yet."
I don't doubt that some people do really weird things - like the face-eating cannibal (in FL?) who wasn't on any drugs, though "the authorities" reflexively and incorrectly mentioned PCP - but single, undocumented examples don't prove anything except that some people sometimes do crazy stuff.
Drudge? WTF does Drudge have to do with this story, ARM, other than provide you a great big "Squirrel!!" to bring up when people try to figure out why you keep kinda-sorta accusing Althouse of being a racist? The original link was to the WaPo. Nobody, but nobody, brought up Drudge 'til you did. Just like nobody started screeching about race until you did.
"It seems more like that is what you'd like this all to be."
Ding, ding, ding! We have a winner!
JCC said... So, 10 passengers watched a 5'5" guy with a knife murder an innocent man... ironrailsironweights said...
Had the attacker been white or Hispanic the riders would have intervened and overppwered him. -- Nonsense! I'd like to see you intervene unarmed against a man with a knife. Even if he could be overpowered and outnumbered, those closest to him would risk death or serious injury from the knife. And he may have be short, but that doesn't mean he wasn't strong, and he was apparently in a ferocious rage. Let's see you risk getting maimed, crippled, blinded, castrated, or killed by a man with a knife.
Were Mr. Sutherland not, unfortunately, dead, I'm sure he would have clucked in disapproval of this unfortunate event but blamed systemic white privilege for the actions of the attacker.
B.P.: I'm sorry, I was being too obscure in my references. What I meant when alluding to 'pearls before swine' was that your explanations of masculine (or indeed, any sort of) honor will be completely lost on most commenters here, who acknowledge no such thing.
Fernandinande said...
Cacimbo Cacimbo said...
@Fernandinade Not every person who takes drugs becomes violent/super strong.
None of them do.
Correction: none of them become super-strong. Some occasionally become violent, with alcohol and some prescription drugs, esp Xanax - being the main cause. Alcohol is probably the worst drug for affecting peoples' behavior, yet most drunks are never violent.
Gahrie said...
2) The main reason he covers Black on White crime is to point out the hypocrisy of the MSM and the Left (I repeat myself).
Paco Wové said...
The original link was to the WaPo.
You guys need to get your story straight.
Neither Drudge or Althouse routinely report stories, they just selectively editorialize on the news provided by, wait for it, the MSM.
@ Gahrie, Paco, Terry et al
I don't know why you continue to try to engage with ARM. He runs together incoherent arguments (you missed the point...you're a race baiter...you obviously don't understand...etc), insults everyone and generally makes no sense at all. He's a troll, and seemingly delights in it.
@Cacimbo -
Respective life experience aside, we're discussing an event in which a group of 10 adults allowed a dug-addled 5'5" midget with a knife to butcher another human without even an effort - not a raised voice from the WP article - as they stood by mute. Forget the pass for the civilians. What would you haev done?
What commenter A to the C said:
""no race angle was mentioned until you brought it up. You are simply wrong that this story is some kind of thinly-vieled racist ploy on Althouse's part to get her pack of undercover bigots riled up. It seems more like that is what you'd like this all to be."
is still true, ARM. You still seem to be trying to call Althouse a racist without actually calling her a racist. It really seems to bug the shit out of you that anybody would notice this crime, even though it took place in the middle of the day, on July 4th, in the middle of tourist D.C. You seem desperate to sweep it under the rug. Why is that?
JCC — don't worry, I realize that ARM is not interested in any kind of real debate or dialog. His verbal contortions are more amusing than Garage Mahal's or Ritmo's, though, which is why I bait him sometimes. A personal failing, I know.
"Is Drudge a race-baiter?
A yes or no is sufficient."
Another sign of ARM's unreasonableness. We have, of course, no idea what ARM means by "racebaiter", but since he considers Althouse's post here, in which race is not so much as hinted at, as being "racebaiting", we can be assured that whatever ARM's definition of racebaiting is, it is not reasonable.
Paco Wové said...
which is why I bait him sometimes
So you acknowledge that your 'arguments' are bullshit, intended for some purpose other than arriving at the truth.
ARM took the occasion of a black man savagely murdering a white man without provocation to call out whites for racism. Abso-fucking-lutely amazing! This is the sort of thing that drove Dylann Roof to commit murder. Roof was wrong to kill, but the facts behind his given reasons for doing so were correct -- blacks are still ahead of whites in body count, year after year, and will be this year, even after he killed nine. Who remembers Aaron Alexis and how many he killed (13, mostly white), or any other black mass/spree killer? Does anyone even remember Malvo and Muhammad? Remember Omar Thornton? He murdered 8 whites back in 2010, and now he's just one of Obama's many forgotten sons.
I'd just like you to explain what "racialism" is, ARM. And why you think Althouse is guilty of it.
Amuse me.
Char Char Binks said...
This is the sort of thing that drove Dylann Roof to commit murder. Roof was wrong to kill, but the facts behind his given reasons for doing so were correct -- blacks are still ahead of whites in body count, year after year,
All this venom because white deaths at the hands of blacks are approximately twice the number as black deaths at the hands of whites, not counting police killings of blacks, which would bring the numbers much closer.
Men kill women at approximately 4 times the rate at which women kill men. For white men the rate is even higher. Are women justified in writing off white men as just a bunch of thugs?
"ARM took the occasion of a black man savagely murdering a white man without provocation to call out whites for racism."
This is what I meant when I implied that ARM's reasoning was not that of a "normal" person.
Are women justified in writing off white men as just a bunch of thugs?
No, but that hasn't stopped them has it?
Neither Drudge or Althouse routinely report stories, they just selectively editorialize on the news provided by, wait for it, the MSM.
Actually, Insty spends most of his time linking to stories covered by bloggers that are ignored by the MSM, especially when it comes to Black on White crime.
"This is what I meant when I implied that ARM's reasoning was not that of a "normal" person."
I think you can remove the quotes around "normal", Terry. ARM's actions are those of a frantic apologist, someone who desperately wants to quash any kind of disscussion of race and crime in this country. Why? Beats me, but his reliably NYT-liberal stance on most topics gives a clue. Anything that verges near to the Danger Topics gets this sort of blanket Racism!!!! response, presumably an attempt to either squash discussion or get it redirected into some other channel. Thus Drudge, thus male-on-female killings. Anything but stay on topic!
What's a 'racialist', ARM?
Gahrie said...
Actually, Insty spends most of his time linking to stories covered by bloggers that are ignored by the MSM, especially when it comes to Black on White crime.
Which at 15% of white murders would be focusing on the molehill, at the expense of the mountain. For what purpose would one do this?
Since, according to you guys, I am just reflecting the MSM, given what mainstream means, isn't clearly the case that you are not the 'normal' ones? By the very meaning of the words. Isn't this obvious?
The stats for crimes and race are available on the FBI website. Theere is nothing especially surprising to be discovered; if you are white you are far more likely to be killed by a Black than a Black is to be killed by a white, but for Both Blacks and whites, you are far more likely to be killed by someone of your own race (do we even use that word anymore?) than of another race. This is intuitive because most people are killed by people they know -- friends or family -- than by strangers. Most people of whatever race have friends and family of the same race.
A murder in broad daylight, on July 4th, in a crowded red line Metro car. Nothing to see here, folks! Move along, you racists!
MSM is overwhelmingly elitist, Democrat and liberal, ARM. It is not "normal".
Example: Less than 50k new students will be admitted to the Ivies this year. This is a very small percentage of college freshman. How much time does the MSM spend covering admission to the Ivies compared to simply college admission? NBC seems especially eager to tell its consumers all about admission to the Ivies.
Which at 15% of white murders would be focusing on the molehill, at the expense of the mountain. For what purpose would one do this?
I don't know.
Why does the MSM focus on White people killing Black people instead of the vastly bigger problem of Black people killing Black people?
"My favorite part about the Obama era is all the racial healing." - Jon Gabriel
ARM: Since, according to you guys, I am just reflecting the MSM, given what mainstream means, isn't clearly the case that you are not the 'normal' ones? By the very meaning of the words. Isn't this obvious?
Why yes, of course. Your views are characteristic of the incurious masses bunching up at the center of the intelligence bell curve, to which the MSM must cater and flatter to get the adverstizing simoleons. The left side of the curve isn't reading the news at all. That leaves us non-normals along the right side of the curve (aka more intelligent readers) to discern things as they really are.
We don't really hold it against you that you hop around all over the place in inchoate malapprehension of the information falling into your purview - you're just normal, and lack the cognitive chops to organize it logically and understand it.
I don't know why people are talking about race here. The point of the post is that the passengers didn't help the victim, that they cowered at the ends of the train while a young man was stabbed 30 to 40 times and repeatedly kicked and stomped. I didn't write about the murderer and his motivations. I wrote about the inactive onlookers.
"I don't know why people are talking about race"
People are talking about race because A Reasonable Man called you a racist. It sounds like you want to shoehorn this into a Kitty Genovese box, but that has already been discussed.
Anglelyne said...
That leaves us non-normals along the right side of the curve (aka more intelligent readers) to discern things as they really are.
And yet all those ivy league students, academics and the leaders of high tech industries lean left. Something in your thinking is not adding up.
"I don't know why people are talking about race here."
I've often wondered if you read all the comments. I've assumed not (doesn't seem possible) but wasn't sure. Seems like I have my answer.
...that is, people have already discussed why this case is different from the canonical (rather than real) Kitty Genovese case. Mainly, because personally confronting an armed, possibly crazed, possibly drugged, attacker is different than simply calling the police. It calls for sacrifices that most modern Americans may not be ready to make.
Ann Althouse said...
I don't know why people are talking about race here.
Isn't the subtext always the most interesting part?
You mean the subtext about people reading race into things that have nothing to do with race?
There are probably a lot of reasons for not acting- shock, fear, uncertainty about the situation, and the assumption that someone other than you will step forward. Agree with the other commenters who said if one person had acted then others would have also followed. I am sure that guilt over this is something that the survivors will have to live with the rest of their lives. Sin of omission.
When the only one to hear the dog whistle is you, you are the dog.
Terry said...
You mean the subtext about people reading race into things that have nothing to do with race?
You non-normals only see what you want to see.
Instapundit is a another chronic race-baiter, by the way. Do I detect a theme here?
ARM: "And yet all those ivy league students, academics and the leaders of high tech industries lean left."
For basically the same reason that those believing in less government were poorly represented in the Politburo.
I can think of one case in particular where a leader in a high tech industry is no longer a leader in the high tech industry. Does Mozilla ring a bell?
"Do I detect a theme here?"
What theme is that, troll?
What's a 'racialist', by the way?
It's just really too difficult to figure out how this lop-sided lefty/conservative imbalance occurred.
Just too difficult.
I mean, it sounds like racist, which is a bad bad thing! So it must be bad, right?
I don't know why people are talking about race here.
1) ARM brought it up.
2) Are you implying that if the races had been reversed here, you would have ignored it? If so I call bullshit.
The point of the post is that the passengers didn't help the victim, that they cowered at the ends of the train while a young man was stabbed 30 to 40 times and repeatedly kicked and stomped.
If you intervene, not only do you run the risk of getting killed, even if you survive and succeed the best you can hope for is to be ignored.
I didn't write about the murderer and his motivations. I wrote about the inactive onlookers.
We know. Black on White crime is always ignored by those of you the Left. We were just pointing that fact out. Again.
And as others have pointed out, if the onlookers had been permitted to own guns, maybe someone would have intervened. But I bet you are against open and concealed carry also..right?
The point of the post is that the passengers didn't help the victim, that they cowered at the ends of the train while a young man was stabbed 30 to 40 times and repeatedly kicked and stomped
Can you imagine the outcry from the left if a white guy had stepped in used lethal force to stop this future scholar/gentle little guy/just studying for his SAT type of guy from finishing off his ad hoc task?
And if an hispanic had stepped in, before you could bat an eye, that guy would have been morphed via the MSM coverage into a "white hispanic" seeking to revive the confederacy and attempting to create a long history of colonial oppression.
But hey, it's a brother stabbing some white dude.
What's the big deal?
If only in the last hundred years or so we had been able to gather some data points about what happens when the leftists gain control of institutions and governments. Then we might have been able to deduce a few things related to the lefties willingness to tolerate dissent from their orthodoxy.
Alas.
ARM: "You non-normals only see what you want to see."
Other "non-normals" included those who desire greater freedom in communist states:
In the Soviet Union, a systematic political abuse of psychiatry took place and was based on the interpretation of political dissent as a psychiatric problem. It was called "psychopathological mechanisms" of dissent.
Not to worry Terry. Being called "non-normal" by the likes of ARM places you in fine company indeed
Here in Texas, on a Dallas DART train, if what Ann posted happened, some CHL holder would have capped the would-be killers ass.
Another gentle giant turning his life around and thinking of going to college.
I think one of the passengers should have stepped up and asked the fellow why he was doing what he was doing, expressed sympathy with his lot in life (being non-white and all), and encouraged him to express his feelings of frustration over his experiences dealing with privileged whites.
Hopefully, this non-violent intervention would have saved the victim's life. But, of course, that would have been a secondary consideration to providing a supportive environment for this troubled man.
Probably nobody has mentioned that the car is shorter when the train is moving, though I haven't read all the comments.
That puts everybody even closer to the scene of the crime.
Lorenz contraction. Time is screwed up a little too, so witness accounts will differ.
Officer ARM arrives at the scene of the crime, and finds the wretched remains of person who has been stabbed to death.
Officer ARM: Holy cow! This is a white guy!
(turns to bystander)
Officer ARM: You! Did a Black guy do this?
Bystander: I don't know, he had his back to me.
Officer ARM: What are you, some kind of racist? Now, was it a Black guy or a white guy?
Bystander: I said I don't know!
Officer ARM: You f'n racialist! I'm running you in! For racism!
So Althouse would what, charge the crazy man with the knife swinging her purse so no one could call her a coward? In her dreams.
richard mcenroe said...
Another gentle giant turning his life around and thinking of going to college.
This guy knows how to read between the lines. It's not so difficult.
Interesting thread at Reddit on this, including someone that states they DID stay with the young dying man, and another that is a friend that is understandably po'd that no one helped.
https://www.reddit.com/r/washingtondc/comments/3cfp1p/horrific_details_in_the_murder_of_au_grad_kevin/
"Onthetrainthrowaway 527 points 5 days ago:
I was on the train car when he was attacked. My wife and I were sitting in the front of the car (the attack happened in the middle), ...My wife noticed the knife, and went into the next car to tell the driver ... so I hit the call button to tell the driver. This almost cost me my life, as in the time it took for me to stand up and hit the button, the assailant had walked up to me. It was only once he got close that I saw the knife. He told me to shut up, which I did, raising my hands. ...He then, almost as an afterthought, robbed the older couple. He then assaulted Kevin again, ...Metro workers got on the train and told everyone to get off and not to touch Kevin, but my wife relayed instructions from 911 that someone needed to sit with him and try to keep him awake. I sat with Kevin, held his hand, stroked his head and kept telling him to breathe, and that he was going to see the fireworks next year. I sat with him until he died. By the time the paramedics showed up, he had stopped breathing.
My wife and I have spent the last couple days going over and over what happened, trying to think about what we could have done differently. ...More than anything else, I wish I had known some kind of emergency first aid that may have helped Kevin make it long enough for the paramedics to arrive. I know, intellectually, that his wounds were far too bad for it to have probably made a difference, but this is what is going to haunt me for a long time.
What I don't wish is that I had somehow tried to attack the assailant. I am a little bit larger than he was, but I would not have won. It's scary, because if we had been sitting closer and had seen the attack start I probably would have tried to help, and would have been stabbed.
We asked the police if we could/should have done something differently, and they said that we did the right thing- get to safety and get help (well, I guess my wife did the right thing, I'm kind of a dumbass). ...
I am lucky to be alive. But Kevin is not, and my heart breaks every time I think about it."
"atpkeab 5 points 23 hours ago:
To everyone who thanks this man for watching my friend die, stop.
You could have saved him and you didn't, all you needed was one other person and you could have stopped this, all of this. We could be in the hospital right now holding Kevin's hand and not preparing to bury him.
It would be one thing if you were trying to protect your wife or the others from this madman but you weren't, because all of his rage was focused on Kevin and you were trying to protect yourself.
...There were almost a dozen people on that train, and none of you did anything. It makes me sick.
You're just as much to blame, all of you on that train. I'm sure it was terrifying, but if just three of you tried to intervene you would have saved his life, not could have, would have. He was a psycho with a knife, but you were grown men and women and if just a few of you tried to stop him you could have.
I blame all of you and I hope this haunts you for the rest of your life."
The story is of note, not necessarily because of the racial connotations, but because of the time of the event, the location, and the number of onlookers — all of which are out of the norm for this time of act.
Very easy to say: I would have fought him. I would have stopped him. Just as you might say: I wouldn't let him take my phone, I'd stop him. Well, that thinking didn't do much for the victim here. Maybe he also thought people would help him. Just like those who say they'd intervene are assuming that they would have assistance -- that it would be like Flight 93.
People made that comparison at a news story I read about this case. But there's a huge, seemingly obvious difference: The other bystanders on Flight 93 knew they were already dead if they did nothing. But the people on this train had a chance to survive by doing nothing, and potentially much to lose by stepping in.
Also, we know in retrospect that this asshole only had a knife, and not a knife AND a gun. But the people didn't know that at the time, did they? Shouldn't that factor into any risk calculation?
Given the details described, he should have been called out immediately by anyone in the crowd with a CCW and a weapon. The perp either immediately changes his behavior or dies. That's why the second amendment is so important. Instead of a coach full of victims a life is saved and a killer is silenced regardless of color.
Sad story. Sad comments. If the comment copied from the other passenger and from the victim's friend are honest, that was gripping stuff.
Race does not have much, if anything, to do with this, other than as a frustrated reaction by some to the venom of the race hustlers who seize upon situations of whites killing blacks.
The situation does show the value of concealed carry. I realize many people hate guns, but with 200 million in circulation and the level of urban violence, I think the case for concealed carry is very strong.
Here, sure, two or three brave souls could have made a coordinated rush of the guy with a fairly good chance of success, but it is asking a lot of strangers to risk their lives like that. I'm 64, in pretty good shape at 6'2' and 200 pounds, but if I somehow worked up the courage alone, I have not been in a fight in about 50 years and probably would have been easy pickings for a young guy with a knife. Without a gun, it would have taken one hero with good skills and/or element of surprise, or a charge by two or three brave guys risking their lives.
Sad, sad, sad.
As to the victim, I think just about any guy (and many gals) would have reacted with an aggressive "hey, what you are doing" if a punk grabbed our cellphone. Obviously, in hindsight here, not a wise move, but almost automatic.
Are we really in a world (or at least in some urban areas) where we need to allow punks to take our stuff and we say nothing?
Gahrie said...
The correct answer to a woman who berates a man for yielding his seat is to apologize for offending her
So, men must act as gentlemen, women may behave as they please.
If a woman acts like a jerk, the man must apologize for causing her to behave badly.
You sir, are indeed a feminist.
Actually he's a gentleman in the truest definition of the term.
Kansas City said...
"Race does not have much, if anything, to do with this..."
then
Kansas City said...
"Are we really in a world (or at least in some urban areas) where we need to allow punks to take our stuff and we say nothing?"
Put 2 + 2 together, KC.
Althouse, I might go for the guy if I thought about it, I'm probably twice his size, but people who are not inured to violence are not always good at it. As Carter said to Brumby, I'm a big man but I'm out of shape and with him, it's a full time job.
What little I know about knife fighting is if you don't have one, get a jacket or something you in your weak hand and try and catch the blade. But basically, if I committed myself to attacking an armed man with my bare hands, it would all be a total commitment, that is, I would be on him and hitting him until I wasn't afraid of him anymore, i.e., probably until he was dead, not moving, or clearly submitted in word and deed, i.e. dropping the knife.
So the guy hits him. Pulls the knife. I yell NOOOOO in slow motion style and launch. Ninety seconds later I am bleeding from three knife wounds and the guy's neck is broken.
So a white guy just brutally killed a black honor student half his size. What happens then? I will just be fine? Or will you join the mob calling for the maximum for me? Am I liable for incorrect saving of the person? Of course I am, and you, belle dame sans merci, just have more to talk about. I guess it would be more interesting if I saved you, I guess.
Kansas City said...
Read this and the comments. I started with the view someone should have tried to help. But I fully understand why no one would want to confront a wild man with a knife. It would have taken several people charging him simultaneously and, of course, still would have been personally dangerous.
It's a shame no one felt they could help. But in reading the main WAPO article and a few others it seems most of the 10-12 people were women, and the men late middle age to elderly. It's not clear to me how many people capable of acting were available, and numbers aren't as useful on a metro car because the aisles are pretty narrow.
Horrible story. I just can't imagine watching that and especially listening to the now deceased young man.
Terry said... "you are far more likely to be killed by... friends..." If they kill you, they're not your friends.
Jupiter provides some input that made me think. I have to concede the overall urban violence problem obviously has something to with the degeneration of the black family and culture, so urban violence has something to do with race.
When I said race does not have much, if anything, to do with this, I was thinking small at to the specific incident. Even there, I might be wrong. All the bystanders saw it was a black man attacking a white guy. It might have affected them and, in a macro version, the degeneration of the black culture contributes to the environment where such violence occurs two miles from the White House.
Just wait till the story about the undercover or off-duty cop in the car comes out.
Post a Comment