A 25-year-old Chicago woman with a concealed carry license shot and killed a man who attempted to rob her at gunpoint last week. Police say the armed 19-year-old man approached the young woman at a bus stop in Chicago’s Fernwood neighbourhood Tuesday morning. Surveillance video captured across the street from the bus stop shows a struggle between the two before the woman pulls out her own firearm and shoots the man in the neck.
One less rat, you might think. However, a woman defending herself from an armed male mugger is, it turns out, terribly problematic:
“If she had let him rob her” is an interesting series of words. “She should not have had a gun in the first place,” says Zack.
Mr Ford, now busy deleting tweets, is “LGBTQ Editor” at ThinkProgress. And, says he, a “proud SJW.”
Update, via the comments:
To recap. According to Mr Ford, our “proud SJW,” the lone woman being attacked at a bus stop on her way to work shouldn’t have defended herself – because, we’re told, “If she had let him rob her, even at gunpoint, both likely would have survived.” And apparently, the well-being of the mugger – who was mugging while on probation – trumps any desire for self-defence, even if the victim fears for her life. At which point, I think one has to ask an obvious question. In the case of the mugger, survived to do what? Continue mugging women, presumably. Which, in turn, raises the question of exactly how many assaults and armed muggings, or worse, a mugger’s survival is worth.
Answers on a postcard, please.
“She should not have had a gun in the first place,” says Mr Ford, piously. “A gun death is a gun death.” Again, note the flattening of value, such that the lives and well-being of the law-abiding are reduced in importance until they barely equal those of the habitual violent criminal.
This, then, is woke morality. “Social justice.”
Via Dicentra.
Women should just let themselves be mugged. For social justice!
Women should just let themselves be mugged. For social justice!
It’s an odd moral calculus, and quite telling. I’m tempted to wonder if Mr Ford’s mugger-friendly philosophy extends to other violent crimes against women.
If she had let him rob her, even at gunpoint, both likely would have survived
Pro tip, Zack: We don’t care if the muggers survive.
You know, it’s rather odd.
Most people use a portion of the finite number of hours that they are alive to earn money. Stealing from them is effectively stealing those hours of life as well.
If she had let him rob her, even at gunpoint, both likely would have survived…
The key word here, certainly in her case, is “likely”.
Also this.
If you read the news item and watch the video, linked above, it’s worth noting how Mr Ford’s fretting contrasts somewhat with the views of locals who were interviewed following the events.
And in news that will surprise no-one, the mugger in question was not unknown to the police. Which, given rates of recidivism and the fact that muggers are almost never caught on a first offence, raises the question of exactly how many assaults and armed muggings of women, or worse, this creature’s life was worth.
What if he didn’t stop at robbery? Should she have let him rape her? Should she have let him kidnap her? Should she have let him imprison and enslave her for as long as he liked? Should she have let him kill her?
How does that old saying go? “Gun control is the belief that a woman bleeding to death in the gutter is morally superior to one carrying a firearm”.
“The punishment for armed robbery is not death”
It isn’t the penalty for jaywalking either, but you can still find yourself under a bus.
Zack Ford is not upset at these alternatives.
“Also this.”
And this, in reply:
“If you’re not a victim, you’re of no political use to them.”
If she had let him rob her, even at gunpoint, both likely would have survived…
…and if the robber hadn’t fled the scene after being shot he likely would have survived. There that’s an easy game to play sitting in my comfy chair.
If anyone has trouble with comments not appearing, email me and I’ll jiggle the spam filter.
Isn’t feminism and sjw all about equality? /s
“God made men (And women). Sam Colt made them equal.”
“If you’re not a victim, you’re of no political use to them.”
This seems relevant:
There is, I think, a pattern.
The key word here, certainly in her case, is “likely”.
IOW, Zack had zero clues what he was talking about (a shock, I know), and regarding the mugee, “likely” means “probably wouldn’t have”.
Wait, now I’m confused. Are we for, or against, toxic masculinity this week?
It’s so difficult to keep up.
What if he didn’t stop at robbery? Should she have let him rape her? Should she have let him kidnap her? Should she have let him imprison and enslave her for as long as he liked? Should she have let him kill her?
Isn’t this effectively what the old Cold War leftist intellectual logic “Better Red than dead” was really about? Gotta give Ford props for consistency.
And still progressives will tell us “property is theft,” like that’s a bad thing.
The Punishment for being Zack Ford ought to be a tenner in a nice progressive gulag. Poetic justice for an SJW, donchaknow.
Pro tip, Zack: We don’t care if the muggers survive.
That.
the mugger in question was not unknown to the police. Which, given rates of recidivism and the fact that muggers are almost never caught on a first offence, raises the question of exactly how many assaults and armed muggings of women, or worse, this creature’s life was worth.
Zero.
Looks like Zack has deleted his entire Twitter history.
“Zero”.
Yes indeed.
And given that Zack values the life of a vicious thug over those of his victims, and agitates on behalf of the thugs, well, I would emphatically maintain that his is also worth zero.
Mugger’s lives matter! Probably doing the work Americans just won’t do.
Anybody remember Faisal Hussein?
https://phantomsoapbox.blogspot.com/2018/07/toronto-danforth-shooter-wednesday.html
Somebody should ask Zack Ford how many people he’s willing to sacrifice for his precious principles. He should break it down by men, women, children and specify which minorities they come from.
Let’s all take turns giving Zack a bionic wedgie. He can’t resist it.
Stealing from them is effectively stealing those hours of life as well.
Now you sound like the Six-Fingered Man. “Please, tell me how you feel. And be honest — this is for posterity.”
Is the lady with the gun guilty of toxic femininity?
And now Zack’s Twitter page is back, but with all content after 4 Oct 2017 deleted in an Orwellian airbrushing of his past.
Oops, no, that’s a pinned tweet from 2017.
Let’s all take turns giving Zack a bionic wedgie. He can’t resist it.
Zack would likely enjoy that. I was thinking waterboarding instead…
Anybody remember Faisal Hussein?
Phantom, he’s back in the news today.
Zack Ford seems to have a history of creatively dishonest “journalism”
https://medium.com/@jesse.singal/a-response-to-zack-fords-dishonest-thinkprogress-article-atlantic-cover-story-is-a-loud-dog-1bb36b4f6aad
via:
http://ace.mu.nu/archives/379203.php
In Australian slang, “zack” is the old fashioned term for sixpence. I think this guy is worth every penny of it.
Pro tip, Zack: We don’t care if the muggers survive.
To recap. According to Mr Ford, our “proud SJW,” the lone woman being attacked at a bus stop on her way to work shouldn’t have defended herself – because, we’re told, “If she had let him rob her, even at gunpoint, both likely would have survived.” And apparently, the well-being of the mugger – who was mugging while on probation – trumps any desire for self-defence, even if the victim fears for her life. At which point, I think one has to ask an obvious question. In the case of the mugger, survived to do what? Continue mugging women, presumably.
“She should not have had a gun in the first place,” says Mr Ford, piously. “A gun death is a gun death.” Again, note the flattening of value, such that the lives and wellbeing of the law-abiding are reduced in importance until they barely equal those of the habitual violent criminal.
This, then, is woke morality. “Social justice.”
Zack’s solution to the problem of gun crime: just do what they say and no-one will get hurt. Sounds like that would make for a pleasant society to live in.
Zack’s solution to the problem of gun crime: just do what they say and no-one will get hurt. Sounds like that would make for a pleasant society to live in.
Well, that’s the thing, I suppose. The contortions above were presented as righteous and compassionate, as some self-evident moral elevation; when in fact they suggest perversity, a pathological unrealism, and a casual contempt for the victims of crime. It rather throws into relief the priorities, or feigned priorities, of the type. And Mr Ford is very much of a type.
See also Zoe Williams, mentioned upthread.
Zack’s solution to the problem of gun crime: just do what they say and no-one will get hurt. Sounds like that would make for a pleasant society to live in.
Not entirely unrelated, this.
This, then, is woke morality.
“Morality”. I don’t think they have clue one as to what that word means, or what function it’s supposed to serve. But then that’s typical of the Left.
This, then, is woke morality
Which, in general, comes down to “be nice to evil people”.
It has been noted before that much of leftist thinking can be explained as hatred of civilization and hatred of one’s own people–oikophobia.
Not entirely unrelated, this.
“Outside of the delinquent left, it’s hard to see gangs of predatory vermin…as particularly sympathetic or deserving of indulgence.”
Yes. Words like “vermin” should be used to describe these creatures.
Which, in general, comes down to “be nice to evil people”.
The reactions of many leftist commentators to the London riots of 2011, linked upthread, are quite revealing. According to Laurie Penny and China Miéville, we mustn’t refer to looters, arsonists and muggers as feral, even when they’re burning random people out of their homes and beating firefighters unconscious, as this would be terribly mean.
I kid you not.
As Theodore Dalrymple said in response to Mr Miéville, “Leniency toward criminals is not a form of sympathy for the poor, but a failure to take either their lives or their property seriously.”
Yes indeed, David.
Laurie Penny said she has “no problem with principled, thought-through political ‘violence’ “.
One could point out to her that Pinochet’s violence was principled and thought-through, but she would not understand the point.
Yes indeed, David.
What struck me at the time was just how much their perverse, almost romantic commentary jarred with actual footage of the riots and thuggery – footage that was readily available, round the clock, and frequently horrifying. It was as if they were hallucinating some fantasy version of events.
It was as if they were hallucinating some fantasy version of events.
Reality is a Fascist plot to oppress women and minorities.
Zack ford is obviously an utter wanker.
A gun death is a gun death.
This wasn’t a gun death. The gun survived.
I’m tempted to wonder if Mr Ford’s mugger-friendly philosophy extends to other violent crimes against women.
Well, it was a good socialist crime.
Other violent crimes by men against women add to statistics readily twisted to favor Marxoid narratives. That is excepting, of course, crimes committed by men in the country illegally, or who have emigrated to the corrupt West from the Lands of Peace; those are uncrimes that do not happen, being ideologically impossible.
those are uncrimes that do not happen, being ideologically impossible.
Heh. I may have to borrow that one.
A gun death is a gun death.
No, Zack. An innocent person matters a hell of a lot more than a lowlife mugger.
pst314,
via:
Ace’s colorful and elaborate insults for our new friend Mr Ford are absolutely hilarious. =^D
What a willfully obtuse stance to take.
The punishment for robbery isn’t death.
Oh. Is armed robbery the punishment for standing at a bus stop minding your business? No? Why, it’s almost as if a logical, consistent, and fair punishment rubric decided upon and executed by a neutral 3rd party via the consent of the voters (aka the criminal justice system) HAS NOTHING WHATSOEVER TO DO WITH SELF-DEFENSE IN THE MOMENT.
I know these people HATE the police, but I imagine most of them would begrudgingly accept an officer shooting a robber who pointed a gun at them while attempting escape from State-designated “punishment for robbery”. All the BLM idiots at least pretend that the gunned-down perps were acting passively, otherwise people – black, white, etc – would laugh them out of the room.
There’s so much wrong with this take it’s difficult to know where to start.
There’s so much wrong with this take it’s difficult to know where to start.
Mr Ford seemed determined to minimise the attack. It was quite perverse. Sadly, he deleted the tweets in question before I could screengrab them all. I remember he insisted on referring to the attacker as a “would-be mugger,” as if the crime were trivial or hypothetical, which seems a tad evasive. In that, if someone physically attacks you and tries to rob you, and you end up on the floor after having a gun pulled on you, I think you can say that you were mugged, by a mugger. The fact that the mugger didn’t get far with your belongings seems rather incidental, all things considered.
https://www.theamericanconservative.com/dreher/the-mindlessness-of-progressive-identity-politics/
If anyone can get past the paywall on the original article, I’d like to know what it says.
Sadly, he deleted the tweets in question before I could screengrab them all.
One could use a utility to make it as easy as one click to grab an entire Twitter thread.
he insisted on referring to the attacker as a “would-be mugger,”
“Would-be mugger” is somewhat related to “not real socialism”.
Mr. Ford is a Marxist and clearly demonstrates his belief in the same Marxist paradigms that Lenin and Stalin used to create the Gulag.
Criminals as we think of them–thieves, murderers, rapists, robbers etc–are merely brothers who have been victimized by the greater class struggle. They are not bad people though they are forced to do bad things. These are the people who, according to Solzhenitzen, ran the camps. The politicals, imprisoned under section 58, were true enemies of the state and were guilty of wrong-thought. They were believed to be irredeemable and were on the receiving end of much of the camps’ sadism.
In Ford’s mind a gun owner is commiting a wrong-thought political crime and is irredeemable and responsible for the actions of the assailant. The armed robber is a victim of the greater class struggle and isforced into his situation by the inequity of his circumstances.
Steve E: You are correct.
If she had let him rob her, even at gunpoint, both likely would have survived
And of course robbery victims have been killed by just a blow to the head, while others have suffered permanent neurological damage.
In the end, Zack is a reminder that a sane society treats Marxists as enemies more evil than mere muggers.
Not a lot Pogonip, that you wouldn’t see here. Not worth chasing around to read, although amusing of itself.
You’ve probably read this already, for example:
Hopefully, this will lead to a major increase in concealed-carry permit applications (and approvals) in Chicago. An armed society is a polite society.
Martin accused him of exercising white privilege
If she had known he was black, she would have accused him of being an Uncle Tom.
The shot to the neck was not trick-shooting. This woman was fighting for her life and almost missed her target.
“Areva, I hate to break it to you, but you should’ve been better prepped,” he responded. “I’m black.”
Proving, once again, in a blind taste test, White Privilege isn’t really a thing.
No need for New Coke then, no need for New Coke now.
Proving, once again, in a blind taste test, White Privilege isn’t really a thing.
[ Rolls pickled egg along bar. ]
On the house.
Speaking of crimes and misdemeanors here’s another monster appropriating someone else’s culture.
A white, French-Canadian comedian with dreadlocks has been denied a spot at the appropriately named Snowflake Comedy Club at the Universite du Quebec a Montreal because of his hairstyle:
[ Calls for feinting couch and smelling salts stat ]
the appropriately named Snowflake Comedy Club at the Universite du Quebec a Montreal
Sounds jolly.
[ Rolls pickled egg along bar. ]
Is it supposed to have hair on it?
Sounds jolly.
Nobody does irony like the Quebecois even when it’s mostly unintentional.
Is it supposed to have hair on it?
[ Slides electric razor along bar. ]
Thanks, Chester! What did Areva say when the guy informed her was black?
The bar is operated by the UQAM branch of the Public Interest Research Group, which focuses on environmental and social issues. In its Facebook statement, the co-operative says…. that wearing dreadlocks is “a privilege” for a white person, whereas a black person with the same hair “is going to find himself refused access to job opportunities or spaces (apartments, schools, parties, sports competitions, etc.)”
Ironytastic.
The bar is operated by the UQAM branch of the Public Interest Research Group…
You sure that isn’t the Public Research Interest Group ?
Zack Ford is now groveling on twitter in an unseemly, unmanly manner. To quote:
I preferred him when I thought he was just a low-grade moron. Kissing the arses of the people you’ve offended is revolting. Better they just stay offended.
Pogonip:
https://youtu.be/i1Ffaa9V2-I
You better listen before YouTube pull it.
Areva must have been hired via Idiot Privilege.
Related: the quality of criminal in my jurisdiction (he did make it easy for us).
Greg Robinson, a UQAM professor specializing in black history,
Just more evidence of that a study of “black history” is about anger, not scholarship. “Dreads” have a recorded history in just about every civilization of the last few thousand years.
Proving, once again, in a blind taste test, White Privilege isn’t really a thing.
Seemingly stumped for a solid argument, Ms Martin reaches for her stand-by “white privilege” accusation, while saying there isn’t time to explain why said accusation should be deferred to as a decisive mic drop. It just is, apparently. Alas, her amulet didn’t work. I suppose the question is whether Ms Martin, a CNN analyst, will at any point pause to reconsider her assumptions and the pernicious, insulting nature of the conceit she relies on when losing an argument.
I’m guessing not.
I’m guessing not.
Natch. As a CNN analyst, her job depends on being pernicious and insulting to anyone on the right. It’s how you rise to the top of that crab basket.
David Webb should be required to announce his skin color several times during his broadcasts. And he needs to stop talking white. Boycott of advertisers TBA.
David Webb should be required to announce his skin color several times during his broadcasts…
TBF, and to eliminate any such confusion in the future, everyone should revert to the manner of WWII broadcasts, but instead of starting with something like “Hello, London calling, London calling…”, one has to announce race, sex, political gender, pronouns, etc.
True, it could be a bit unwieldy, “Hello, cishet black male male he him his calling…”, “Hello, lesbian Asian otherkin identifying as male they them xers calling…”, but if it saves one CNN talking head embarrassment, isn’t it worth it ?
Alas, her amulet didn’t work.
Reminded me of the video featured in a post last year of a particular University Panel scold fest where they talked about Africans calling down lightening against their enemies and becoming incredulous when an audience member states the obvious that that isn’t possible. I couldn’t find the link but Ms Martin certainly believes she can bring down the lightening.
Reminded me of the video…
Oh yes. That was a fun one.
“lightning” not “lightening”
Under the circumstances and given the context of the misuse of the word, some time with the Scoldomatic may be appropriate. I surrender myself.
some time with the Scoldomatic may be appropriate
I’m waiting for new coils. You could, however, surrender to the moral realignment bonnet.
There may be some singeing.
surrender to the moral realignment bonnet.
As long as there are trashy tabloid magazines to read while undergoing the process.
There’s plenty from which to choose, though the most recent is from 2007.
As long as there are trashy tabloid magazines to read while undergoing the process.
And someone will distractedly ask about your holidays.
Realignment bonnet: I recently saw one for sale in an antique store. Damned scary item.
BTW ref dredlock ‘appropriation’, I recently read complaints that people who simplify their lives and move into tiny houses are guilty of poverty appropriation. Horrors.
Adam,
David Webb should be required to announce his skin color several times during his broadcasts…
What makes Ms Martin’s assumption especially blockheaded is that Mr Webb is a fairly frequent contributor to the Fox News Channel – he’s been on the television where viewers can see that he’s black.
Farnsworth,
True, it could be a bit unwieldy, “Hello, cishet black male male he him his calling…”, “Hello, lesbian Asian otherkin identifying as male they them xers calling…”, but if it saves one CNN talking head embarrassment, isn’t it worth it ?
Coming soon, to a woke college radio station near you!