It Ain’t For Their Benefit
A short thread of possible interest, on a subject we’ve touched on before.
If an illustration of crime would help, this one is quite vivid:
What would you do in this case?
— The Post Millennial (@TPostMillennial) September 4, 2023
The story here. Note the line,
Update, via the comments:
Regarding the video above, commenter anon a mouse suggests,
Not, I think, unreasonable. Assuming one were interrupted while making a nice pot of tea. Though I’d imagine it’s easier to think of such things when you’re not taken aback by the unreal nightmarishness of it all.
Pst314 adds,
Again, I’d guess that many of those who’ve witnessed or experienced serious, aggressive criminality may have been wrong-footed and inhibited by their own disbelief – their own struggle to process the alien behaviour that they’re seeing. Sociopathic activity and feral predation can – to the civilised – seem bewildering and surreal.
If another horror-show example is needed, here you go. Note the merriment. The sense of fun.
It’s perhaps worth noting that egalitarian assumptions don’t exactly help on this front – say, the belief that such creatures are just like us, only more oppressed, and that their wellbeing is somehow a matter of great importance. A conceit that is not only wrong, and insulting, but which is often disabling when it really matters.
If, for instance, someone with a big, shiny knife is breaking into your home in the middle of the night, you should not, ideally, be distracted by any great concern for whether or not your attempt at self-defence results in them getting injured or ceasing to be. Not least because their ceasing-to-be would be a very good thing. A gift to the world.
And yet, among our betters, we see all kinds of mental contortions and obvious dishonesties:
It’s pretentious, neurotic, and morally revolting.
See also this chap, who, being sophisticated, can’t bring himself to use the term Molotov cocktail. You see, it was only a “beer bottle stuffed with toilet paper and gasoline” that was thrown, “non-violently,” into someone’s car. No biggie.
And we mustn’t forget Mr Zack Ford, a “proud SJW,” who believes that women should allow themselves to be mugged, or worse, lest their muggers come to harm.
Consider this an open thread. Share ye links and bicker.
The thread linked in the post is still rumbling on.
A fine seems . . . insufficient.
Shot without warning…
Some years ago my wife’s extended family rented a huge house on 15 acres in the foothills south of Port Angeles, in Washington State, east of the lovely Olympic National park.
On a post at the farm-gate entry was a notice.( From memory, though I’m sure I have a pic somewhere):
“No Hunting without permission from owner. Gunfire in this area will be reported. Gunfire directed toward the house may be returned without warning.”
I was amused. Most of the family were startled but shrugged it off as just one of those country things.
No gunfire was heard over the week we were there , though it may not have been hunting season, and in any case the area was, at best, suited only for shooting, not hunting.
Jesus, they’re like hyenas.
True. Though the article…hmmm…a selfie may have been done but it looks like he posed for another person’s photo. Also, I wouldn’t call that ‘vandalism’, but either way it was stupid. More than likely someone with a significant ‘liberal’ and/or liberal arts background showing off. At this point I’m kinda surprised that these great works of art are so accessible. Between the increasingly stupid, like this guy, and the evil ones, not just muzzies but the fossilheads as well, nothing would surprise me. Cultural suicide being what it is.
And yet there are those who object to the term feral when describing such creatures.
I think it’s accurate but you can call it ‘larking’ if you want. The perpetrator should face something more substantial than the inconvenience of a small fine.
The term “influencer” has taken generational self-importance and an overwhelming sense of entitlement to new levels, or depths. It’s not malicious, it’s just so bloody bloody stupid.
Mind you in a world and more specifically an education system that inexorably churns out poorly educated young adults with child brains who feel morally obligated to disparage the past and glorify the shallow present (see also “latest thing”) what else can you expect.
How about callous? Your typical “influencer” is a creature with a gargantuan sense of entitlement and a microscopic sense of responsibility. Overwhelmingly callous, often enough malicious.
Public caning, plus full restitution.
But it *IS* for their benefit that we imprison criminals. Because when we let criminals run rampant that eventually leads to vigilantism….which leads to dead criminals.
So, really, we’re doing them a solid by jailing them. We’re keeping them away from the people who will eventually kill them.
That’s the cope anyway. Someone else will eventually do the vigilantism, then conservatives sit quietly and politely while the onesy-twosy George Zimmermans and the Daniel Pennys and numerous unnamed others have their lives ruined by the system. They even jump on the vigilantes for “doing it wrong”. Thus more outrage by the criminal class and their allies and the criminals run rampant some more. Then more one-offs. And conservatives duck and cover some more. But eventually…eventually, it takes. Just keep your head down and someone else will pay the price.
Public caning, plus full restitution.
Ah! The rattan. Low rates of recidivism after a length of well seasoned bamboo has been wielded across the buttocks.
https://twitter.com/wanyeburkett/status/1672685681737453568
I’m smart enough to know you’re a fucking idiot if you don’t think that the T part of LGBT isn’t working overtime to prove you wrong.
It’s all rather surreal, in a dismaying, dysgenic, dystopian kind of way. And note the ferals who stop their cars and jump out, not to help the lone woman being robbed, or to see if she’s alright, but to assault her, to drag her to the ground, and to then steal more stuff themselves. There’s an air of blood-in-the-water.
And an opportunity to judge people by the content of their character.
Meanwhile, in Merseyside, a new initiative to help the true victims…
And on the general subject:
As someone notes in the subsequent comments, “A strong argument for ‘3 strikes’ laws.”
I’m smart enough to know you’re a fucking idiot if you don’t think that the T part of LGBT isn’t working overtime to prove you wrong.
Correct.
Oh, have a heart. Why if you just woke up one morning to find yourself in police custody, you know, like in some sort of Kafka story, I’m sure you would appreciate some ‘help’ as well.
Hells, it’s a strong argument for the death penalty.
Funny how it’s always the ‘LGBT activists’ who find ‘sexual relationships between adults and minors are ‘mostly harmless.”
Columbia University has some explaining to do.
As an aside, it seems highly probable neither Marshall Burns’ or Theo Sandfort’s electronic devices would bear much scrutiny.