Remember in the 1980s when urban crime, mostly by blacks even then, had skyrocketed and Bill Clinton won the presidency on a tough on crime platform? Hundreds of thousands more cops, three-strikes, stop-and-frisk. It all worked, and crime rates plummeted. Then the idiot leftists started their "mass incarceration" lie. I interact with these social justice numbskulls every day and they cannot get to any rational consequences point with their stupid-making bleeding heart. The criminal justice system is racist because... hey, look at those statistics. So, pull back and be nice and those poor minorities will behave better. These libtards actually believe this. And as their belief system crumbles... proven wrong with the expected jack in crime because there are fewer cops and Soros DAs are not prosecuting, and liberal DEI judges are letting them off anyway... they try to fix the data and lie in the media that crime has declined.
Going back, it was liberals that screamed about the problems with involuntary commitment and worked with government cost-cutting conservatives to rid ourselves of asylums.
What you are talking about here I see as simple morality combined with objective consideration of the consequences for rules and rule enforcement. Liberals have proven that they lack the ability to factor either. They are really flawed and incomplete cognitive processing people that should never be given keys to rule.
THAT is the problem in a nutshell. Bill Clinton was not really one of them. The cohort of people that fit into the real left-liberal cohort were bit players in the overall governance of the country. But changes to the economy happened and left liberals gained income and wealth and then used that to infest our institutions. Now they are entrenched and making a big fucking mess of almost everything.
I'm in Tokyo right now and guess? I haven't been anywhere that seems the least big dangerous. You can walk down a dark alley and there will be two 19 year old girls sitting on a stoop eating noodles. We could have that in America, too, but it requires a different set of rules for what we consider acceptable in our society.
I've never been there, but on my list. I think too that cultural and ethnic homogeneity breeds more genuine care for the people of the community as they are part of the same family. Visiting thise places you are a guest of the family. With too much cultural and ethnic diversity from too much immigration without assimilation, that family and community bond is weakened.
JH: It’s all well and good to say, “Due process is important!” That’s absolutely true, it is, but what about the rest of the chain that led to this guy being free to murder someone? Why wasn’t this guy in jail?
It doesn't seem like he got due process, does it? It seems like he avoided it. He's been avoiding it for a long time.
The system isn't doing a very good job delivering due process. It is failing horribly.
Right. Due process means the process you are entitled to. It shouldn’t be interpreted to mean endless process for the purpose of avoiding justice, for decades.
"whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People
to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government,
laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. "
40 years? That seems pretty optimistic. I wouldn't be shocked if it happened in the next 5 years. Hope it doesn't, and odds are, it won't, but we're not headed toward anywhere good at the moment,.
This notion of "due process" is an interesting one. We all want to see "due process". We all want to see the system work so that the guilty are held properly accountable for their crimes and that justice is served.
The question you've brought to light here is "what happens when 'due process' itself is broken?"
Here in the UK we've had a woman jailed for a tweet in which, after the terrible stabbings of young girls by one of the "usual suspects", she expressed her frustration by writing "burn the hotels down with all the immigrants in them, for all I care".
The "for all I care" part is crucially important here because it's a particular construction that signifies frustration rather than intent - and everybody (apart from morons or those with an agenda) understands the nature of this kind of 'idiomatic' construction.
She was heavily pressured to plead guilty to a charge of inciting racial hatred (or similar), being led to believe that not doing so could lead to a significant jail sentence. Despite her plea she received a sentence of 30 months in jail.
In other cases we've seen people convicted of serious sexual assault, including rape, being handed lesser sentences which are sometimes suspended.
One presumes that in these cases, the tweet and the assaults, "due process" was properly applied and yet no person in their right mind (i.e. no one who isn't one of the broke-woke) would think that 'justice' has been properly served here. Due process here is clearly not fit for purpose - it is clearly broken, to some extent.
When 'due process' is a broken process, and one that favours the criminals and not the innocent victims, where do people turn to for justice?
The same thing happens in the US legal system. 90% of court cases reach please deals. The entire legal system on both sides of the Atlantic would grind to a halt if everyone insisted on jury trials.
Society works when the letter of the law and the spirit of the law go hand in hand, the letter of the law prevents excesses and unfairness from affecting judgments by standardizing punishments and formalizing the rules, the spirit of the law provides the guiding principles that orient the letter of the law in the correct direction and accounts for the edge cases. The problem is that when there is a split between the 2, you get a divergence where law becomes an obstacle to be worked around rather than a foundation, and because law is static and built on underlying assumptions, it's easy to find loopholes.
The state of immigration in Europe is a perfect example, lawfare is used to keep violent and destructive immigrants in the country and maintain absurd rates of very clearly fraudulent asylum claims despite that not being the original intention of refugee conventions and civil rights laws. But the activists see these laws as merely an obstacle and find ways around them which leads people to reject the laws that are clearly not working as they were intended which leads to accusations of fascism
I live in California which has been leading the nation in the soft on crime downward trend. The. only thing I heard from a few liberal extremists that were. not openly praising the assassination of Charlie Kirk was we need for more gun control laws. They ignore the fact that most of the perps have extensive arrest records, a few convictions but let out of prison early, and were legally prohibited from owning a gun. The legal gun owners are not the problem. The problem is people that are too dangerous to be in society are not being locked away until that time they are no longer a danger, and for some, the time they are no longer a danger to society is after their death. enforcing the laws and not giving criminals a pass is a deterrent to those who are on the fence. They want to see what happens to someone before they engage in that activity. If the someone gets away with it, then they are sure they will also.
In school, it works this way. The teacher reprimands a student for breaking a rule. The student says, well so and so did the same thing and nothing happened to him; it's not fair. Student complains to the parent and the parent complains to an administrator. A meeting is held an the teacher is told he is being unfair because the rules are to apply equally to all. If one gets away with breaking the rule, everyone gets away with breaking the rule.
I respond life is not fair and sometimes you get caught and sometimes you don't. But we are supposed to be about equity.
I have been saying for sometime that I will not be surprised when vigilantly justice becomes common. Stop prosecuting the offenders or let them off with a light sentence, the victim or the victim's loved ones will take justice into their own hands. Either the government ensures due process and justice or the people will enforce a justice without due process.
Great commentary. I'll add another broken system to your list : healthcare. Have a procedure at any price the hospital chooses, that you only find out about afterward, regardless of the procedure fixes your problem or not. Absolutely no one can tell you the cost until it's done, and if you regurlarly pay for insurance, your costs will likely be more than the infamous "uninsured."
I had some significant, albeit happily temporary, medical issues over the last few years. Imagine paying 700 per month for health insurance and THEN PAYING 7k in deductibles on top of it. Thanks Obama.
Well said, John. I hope you’re right but I’m afraid that demanding new rules is not the next step. People by and large ignoring the rules may come next. That, of course, could mean street battles, if not a civil war, God forbid.
The beginning of this essay was unnecessary. If you haven't figured out by now that being a rules stickler, calling for unity, and griping about opportunity costs in the budget is invariably used for partisan political purposes, you're officially a moron. You shouldn't even be allowed into the discussion.
At the very, very bottom of it all are the 2 well-known sayings: (1) it [subjective or non-existent application of law to pet ferals BECAUSE they are pet ferals] is a feature, not a bug; and, (2) the system is what it DOES, not what it says.
All the arguments about morality and justice - - though important to us as whites, as we want a rational rules-based system to exist - - simply don't matter to Jews and browns and blacks.
Browns and blacks just want gibzz-me-dat free stuff and get-out-of-jail free cards; that is literally all they want, because (due to low IQ) they assume all this stuff happens magically and have zero idea that the current gravy train is provided to them by a huge superstructure built by whites. They assume the magic free stuff will go on forever, with them simply taking and taking; upkeep? maintenance? making things work as opposed to just taking? what in the world is all that?
As for Jews, it's literally their game plan: collapse white civilization and rule over the brown/black horde as privileged kings; no more pesky intelligent whites to get in the way.
One can only obey the rules if everyone else is in agreement and will obey the rules also.
As I think I commented before, you can box in school with the other 10th grader with whom you'll be eating lunch in a couple of hours when you're 16 years old according the rules of the Marquess of Queensborough because both of you obey the rules and refrain from kicking each other in the crotch and gouging each other's eyeballs out.
But if you follow the rules of the Marquess of Queensborough when 4 or 5 "urban youths" attack you on a darkened street at night in the downtown of an American city, you're gonna lose and probably get killed.
We are in an alley fight in America like the hypothetical guy attacked in the dark street above.
Our enemies don't care a fig about things like the Constitution.
So the solution is mob violence and summary execution? Do better.
North Carolina law calls for mandatory life imprisonment for a conviction of first degree murder. The only question is whether he will spend the rest of his life in prison or in a secure mental health facility. I’ll leave that to the jury.
If you would like to talk about what we should do with mentally unstable career criminals who haven’t killed anyone after they have served their sentence, that’s a great conversation to have. But there are no easy answers here.
I think you may have missed the point of John's article. His point was that you have to enforce these laws, or they create dangerous situations. Why did the D.A. and the judge let the stabber out of jail, when he could have been kept in prison for many more years? I would guess his race had a lot to do with it, because the Left havers on and on about "too many black men are incarcerated!" When the system of law enforcement is flouted by the Left, it creates unacceptable danger to those who depend on the laws for their safety. At the point, the rules are for fools who are willing to be victimized. Maybe the mob violence would force the Left to consider that there are worse outcomes by not enforcing the laws, because logic and reason is not working with them, unfortunately. I don't want to see lynchings or death squads either, but this Left wing lunacy has to stop.
I think “left wing lunacy” doesn’t address any of the real problems. It’s a crude attempt to score political points.
NC is a purple state. Republicans had a veto proof majority until the last election. It’s also a structured sentencing state where judges have little discretion in sentencing.
Jail and prison are not the same thing. He was sent to prison for an earlier crime and was released when his sentence was up. That’s how it works.
He was later arrested for other petty crimes and released on bail because there are only so many spaces in jail and it costs money to keep people behind bars before trial. That’s why bail exists.
The judge probably looked at the relatively minor charges and granted bail. He was probably one of dozens of similar cases that day. She ignored his deteriorating mental condition. She got it wrong.
He needed to get sent for mental evaluation, but nobody, Republican or Democrat, wants to push for this. Even Trump is cutting the very mental health facilities that he would have needed.
This is the broken window theory.
We should be more like Singapore.
Remember in the 1980s when urban crime, mostly by blacks even then, had skyrocketed and Bill Clinton won the presidency on a tough on crime platform? Hundreds of thousands more cops, three-strikes, stop-and-frisk. It all worked, and crime rates plummeted. Then the idiot leftists started their "mass incarceration" lie. I interact with these social justice numbskulls every day and they cannot get to any rational consequences point with their stupid-making bleeding heart. The criminal justice system is racist because... hey, look at those statistics. So, pull back and be nice and those poor minorities will behave better. These libtards actually believe this. And as their belief system crumbles... proven wrong with the expected jack in crime because there are fewer cops and Soros DAs are not prosecuting, and liberal DEI judges are letting them off anyway... they try to fix the data and lie in the media that crime has declined.
Going back, it was liberals that screamed about the problems with involuntary commitment and worked with government cost-cutting conservatives to rid ourselves of asylums.
What you are talking about here I see as simple morality combined with objective consideration of the consequences for rules and rule enforcement. Liberals have proven that they lack the ability to factor either. They are really flawed and incomplete cognitive processing people that should never be given keys to rule.
THAT is the problem in a nutshell. Bill Clinton was not really one of them. The cohort of people that fit into the real left-liberal cohort were bit players in the overall governance of the country. But changes to the economy happened and left liberals gained income and wealth and then used that to infest our institutions. Now they are entrenched and making a big fucking mess of almost everything.
I'm in Tokyo right now and guess? I haven't been anywhere that seems the least big dangerous. You can walk down a dark alley and there will be two 19 year old girls sitting on a stoop eating noodles. We could have that in America, too, but it requires a different set of rules for what we consider acceptable in our society.
I've never been there, but on my list. I think too that cultural and ethnic homogeneity breeds more genuine care for the people of the community as they are part of the same family. Visiting thise places you are a guest of the family. With too much cultural and ethnic diversity from too much immigration without assimilation, that family and community bond is weakened.
JH: It’s all well and good to say, “Due process is important!” That’s absolutely true, it is, but what about the rest of the chain that led to this guy being free to murder someone? Why wasn’t this guy in jail?
It doesn't seem like he got due process, does it? It seems like he avoided it. He's been avoiding it for a long time.
The system isn't doing a very good job delivering due process. It is failing horribly.
Right. Due process means the process you are entitled to. It shouldn’t be interpreted to mean endless process for the purpose of avoiding justice, for decades.
"whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People
to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government,
laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. "
Centralized government is a failed business model. It's time to roll the United States back to 1820 and let the cards fall where they may.
If only.
So you can look forward to a Civil War in 40 years?
40 years? That seems pretty optimistic. I wouldn't be shocked if it happened in the next 5 years. Hope it doesn't, and odds are, it won't, but we're not headed toward anywhere good at the moment,.
This notion of "due process" is an interesting one. We all want to see "due process". We all want to see the system work so that the guilty are held properly accountable for their crimes and that justice is served.
The question you've brought to light here is "what happens when 'due process' itself is broken?"
Here in the UK we've had a woman jailed for a tweet in which, after the terrible stabbings of young girls by one of the "usual suspects", she expressed her frustration by writing "burn the hotels down with all the immigrants in them, for all I care".
The "for all I care" part is crucially important here because it's a particular construction that signifies frustration rather than intent - and everybody (apart from morons or those with an agenda) understands the nature of this kind of 'idiomatic' construction.
She was heavily pressured to plead guilty to a charge of inciting racial hatred (or similar), being led to believe that not doing so could lead to a significant jail sentence. Despite her plea she received a sentence of 30 months in jail.
In other cases we've seen people convicted of serious sexual assault, including rape, being handed lesser sentences which are sometimes suspended.
One presumes that in these cases, the tweet and the assaults, "due process" was properly applied and yet no person in their right mind (i.e. no one who isn't one of the broke-woke) would think that 'justice' has been properly served here. Due process here is clearly not fit for purpose - it is clearly broken, to some extent.
When 'due process' is a broken process, and one that favours the criminals and not the innocent victims, where do people turn to for justice?
The same thing happens in the US legal system. 90% of court cases reach please deals. The entire legal system on both sides of the Atlantic would grind to a halt if everyone insisted on jury trials.
Society works when the letter of the law and the spirit of the law go hand in hand, the letter of the law prevents excesses and unfairness from affecting judgments by standardizing punishments and formalizing the rules, the spirit of the law provides the guiding principles that orient the letter of the law in the correct direction and accounts for the edge cases. The problem is that when there is a split between the 2, you get a divergence where law becomes an obstacle to be worked around rather than a foundation, and because law is static and built on underlying assumptions, it's easy to find loopholes.
The state of immigration in Europe is a perfect example, lawfare is used to keep violent and destructive immigrants in the country and maintain absurd rates of very clearly fraudulent asylum claims despite that not being the original intention of refugee conventions and civil rights laws. But the activists see these laws as merely an obstacle and find ways around them which leads people to reject the laws that are clearly not working as they were intended which leads to accusations of fascism
A society held together only by legalism is a society that is disentegrating.
I live in California which has been leading the nation in the soft on crime downward trend. The. only thing I heard from a few liberal extremists that were. not openly praising the assassination of Charlie Kirk was we need for more gun control laws. They ignore the fact that most of the perps have extensive arrest records, a few convictions but let out of prison early, and were legally prohibited from owning a gun. The legal gun owners are not the problem. The problem is people that are too dangerous to be in society are not being locked away until that time they are no longer a danger, and for some, the time they are no longer a danger to society is after their death. enforcing the laws and not giving criminals a pass is a deterrent to those who are on the fence. They want to see what happens to someone before they engage in that activity. If the someone gets away with it, then they are sure they will also.
In school, it works this way. The teacher reprimands a student for breaking a rule. The student says, well so and so did the same thing and nothing happened to him; it's not fair. Student complains to the parent and the parent complains to an administrator. A meeting is held an the teacher is told he is being unfair because the rules are to apply equally to all. If one gets away with breaking the rule, everyone gets away with breaking the rule.
I respond life is not fair and sometimes you get caught and sometimes you don't. But we are supposed to be about equity.
I have been saying for sometime that I will not be surprised when vigilantly justice becomes common. Stop prosecuting the offenders or let them off with a light sentence, the victim or the victim's loved ones will take justice into their own hands. Either the government ensures due process and justice or the people will enforce a justice without due process.
Great commentary. I'll add another broken system to your list : healthcare. Have a procedure at any price the hospital chooses, that you only find out about afterward, regardless of the procedure fixes your problem or not. Absolutely no one can tell you the cost until it's done, and if you regurlarly pay for insurance, your costs will likely be more than the infamous "uninsured."
I had some significant, albeit happily temporary, medical issues over the last few years. Imagine paying 700 per month for health insurance and THEN PAYING 7k in deductibles on top of it. Thanks Obama.
The number one cause of bankruptcy in the USA is medical bills.
Well said, John. I hope you’re right but I’m afraid that demanding new rules is not the next step. People by and large ignoring the rules may come next. That, of course, could mean street battles, if not a civil war, God forbid.
Charlie Kirk was not murdered by a liberal. When you start lying, I stop reading.
The beginning of this essay was unnecessary. If you haven't figured out by now that being a rules stickler, calling for unity, and griping about opportunity costs in the budget is invariably used for partisan political purposes, you're officially a moron. You shouldn't even be allowed into the discussion.
Charlie Kirk wasn't murdered by a literal. He was murdered by a Groyper - a "black pilled" nihilist.
On a similar note:
https://youtu.be/B6U1nOMQsnY
At the very, very bottom of it all are the 2 well-known sayings: (1) it [subjective or non-existent application of law to pet ferals BECAUSE they are pet ferals] is a feature, not a bug; and, (2) the system is what it DOES, not what it says.
All the arguments about morality and justice - - though important to us as whites, as we want a rational rules-based system to exist - - simply don't matter to Jews and browns and blacks.
Browns and blacks just want gibzz-me-dat free stuff and get-out-of-jail free cards; that is literally all they want, because (due to low IQ) they assume all this stuff happens magically and have zero idea that the current gravy train is provided to them by a huge superstructure built by whites. They assume the magic free stuff will go on forever, with them simply taking and taking; upkeep? maintenance? making things work as opposed to just taking? what in the world is all that?
As for Jews, it's literally their game plan: collapse white civilization and rule over the brown/black horde as privileged kings; no more pesky intelligent whites to get in the way.
THAT ... is where we are.
One can only obey the rules if everyone else is in agreement and will obey the rules also.
As I think I commented before, you can box in school with the other 10th grader with whom you'll be eating lunch in a couple of hours when you're 16 years old according the rules of the Marquess of Queensborough because both of you obey the rules and refrain from kicking each other in the crotch and gouging each other's eyeballs out.
But if you follow the rules of the Marquess of Queensborough when 4 or 5 "urban youths" attack you on a darkened street at night in the downtown of an American city, you're gonna lose and probably get killed.
We are in an alley fight in America like the hypothetical guy attacked in the dark street above.
Our enemies don't care a fig about things like the Constitution.
We cannot do business with them.
We need a separate country.
So the solution is mob violence and summary execution? Do better.
North Carolina law calls for mandatory life imprisonment for a conviction of first degree murder. The only question is whether he will spend the rest of his life in prison or in a secure mental health facility. I’ll leave that to the jury.
If you would like to talk about what we should do with mentally unstable career criminals who haven’t killed anyone after they have served their sentence, that’s a great conversation to have. But there are no easy answers here.
I think you may have missed the point of John's article. His point was that you have to enforce these laws, or they create dangerous situations. Why did the D.A. and the judge let the stabber out of jail, when he could have been kept in prison for many more years? I would guess his race had a lot to do with it, because the Left havers on and on about "too many black men are incarcerated!" When the system of law enforcement is flouted by the Left, it creates unacceptable danger to those who depend on the laws for their safety. At the point, the rules are for fools who are willing to be victimized. Maybe the mob violence would force the Left to consider that there are worse outcomes by not enforcing the laws, because logic and reason is not working with them, unfortunately. I don't want to see lynchings or death squads either, but this Left wing lunacy has to stop.
I think “left wing lunacy” doesn’t address any of the real problems. It’s a crude attempt to score political points.
NC is a purple state. Republicans had a veto proof majority until the last election. It’s also a structured sentencing state where judges have little discretion in sentencing.
Jail and prison are not the same thing. He was sent to prison for an earlier crime and was released when his sentence was up. That’s how it works.
He was later arrested for other petty crimes and released on bail because there are only so many spaces in jail and it costs money to keep people behind bars before trial. That’s why bail exists.
The judge probably looked at the relatively minor charges and granted bail. He was probably one of dozens of similar cases that day. She ignored his deteriorating mental condition. She got it wrong.
He needed to get sent for mental evaluation, but nobody, Republican or Democrat, wants to push for this. Even Trump is cutting the very mental health facilities that he would have needed.
In a sane society, shooting this man without trial would make no one sad.
So mob violence, then?
No, vigilante violence. No mob needed!