Category: Crime

At a time when leftists are attempting to assassinate Supreme Court justices — never mind gas at $5 a gallon and the risk of Ukraine turning into World War III — our federal government is arresting Republicans who made the mistake of thinking America is still a free country:

A Republican candidate for Michigan governor has been charged with misdemeanors for his role in the 2021 post-election riot at the U.S. Capitol, further complicating an already messy GOP primary. . . .
Ryan Kelley, 40, was arrested in western Michigan and appeared at a brief hearing in federal court in Grand Rapids, where he was released from custody without posting bail. The government did not ask that Kelley be detained.
His arrest came hours before the House committee investigating the insurrection holds a widely anticipated public hearing, showing never-seen video, audio and an array of evidence highlighting the deadly violence that erupted on Jan. 6, 2021.
Kelley walked away from the courthouse, joined by his wife and other family, saying only that he would comment later. His campaign posted on Facebook two words: “political prisoner,” and the chairman of the state GOP accused Democrats of “weaponizing our justice system” against poltical opponents.

Kelley is charged with a misdemeanor. The affidavit for his arrest stipulates that Kelley never entered the Capitol. Just being in attendance at the protest is evidently a crime now, and how soon before they start rounding up everybody who expresses doubt about the administrative capacity of President Eight-One Million Votes? You could go to federal prison for having a Trump bumper sticker, I guess.

Look, we don’t expect expert marksmanship from gang-bangers gunning it out on the streets of Philly, but oh, what an opportunity they missed!

After reassuring multiple people by text that my partner and I had been tucked safely in bed at 11:30 on Saturday night, I finally cracked and posted a general reassurance on Facebook. No, we had not been near the shooting on South Street in Philadelphia, where we live, that resulted in 3 deaths and 11 major injuries. But people’s concerns weren’t misplaced. We had been at a party in that neighborhood just the night before. Saturday’s was the ninth mass shooting in the city this year alone, according to the Gun Violence Archive. There have been shootings at train stations and house parties. One group of victims was going to the prom. These things really are a matter of luck in a society that’s swimming in as much gun violence as ours.

Doggone it, where’s an armed thug when you really need one?

This is mere sarcasm, of course. I do not actually wish Amanda Marcotte had been killed in an urban shootout, but it is ironic that she had been in that vicinity 24 hours earlier. Dana Pico at First Street Journal gives Marcotte’s column a thorough fisking, thus sparing me the trouble. However, to summarize her theme briefly, it seems to be Marcotte’s contention that, because a majority of U.S. shootings involve “people of color,” Republicans actually encourage criminal violence:

“It is nothing more than a new version of the Southern strategy,” [Philadelphia DA Larry] Krasner told Business Insider. “They’re saying ‘big cities, lawless,’ except all the big cities they’re talking about are very Democratic and have huge Black and brown populations.”
This race-baiting is especially gross when one considers that, despite the paranoia of the white GOP, racial minorities are more likely to be victims of gun violence. But that underscores just how nasty and cynical the Republican strategy here is. They back policies that lead to violence that harms people of color, then they blame people of color in order to get votes from racist white people. For Republicans, it’s all political upside.

Neither Marcotte nor Krasner has ever had to face any well-informed critic in debate. Liberals merely hurl the accusation of “racism” at their opponents and, believing this sufficient to discredit anyone, conduct themselves as if they possess a monopoly to discuss the underlying policy issues. In her column, Marcotte takes a jab at Arizona Republican candidate Blake Masters, who recently had the temerity to say of the current violent crime rampage in America: “It’s gangs. It’s people in Chicago, St. Louis, shooting each other very often, you know, Black people frankly.” You may say that this statement is “racist,” but that doesn’t mean it’s not also true. Let anyone consult the official data about violent crime from the Department of Justice, and you will discover that black males, who constitute about 7% of the U.S. population, perpetrate about 50% of the nation’s homicides, attempted murder, aggravated assaults, etc. Black males are also about half of the nation’s homicide victims. In 2019, the most recent year for which we have official data, there were 13,927 murder victims, of whom at least 7,484 (54%) were black, including 6,446 (46%) who were black males. (The reason I say “at least” 54% of murder victims were black is because some jurisdictions don’t officially identify victims by race, so there were an extra 1,808 homicide victims whose race was not reported to the FBI.)

Because I write about crime on a regular basis — not just when it’s political convenient because of some atrocity that gets nationwide headlines — the facts on this subject are very familiar to me. If anyone was truly shocked by what Blake Masters said, it’s because either (a) they don’t know the facts or (b) they understand that we’re not supposed to say this kind of stuff aloud, no matter how true it may be.

Since the Black Lives Matter movement grabbed the spotlight in 2020, it’s common to see activist types claim that “black-on-black crime” is a racist myth, a phrase conjured up by white supremacists, rather than the simplest way to describe about half of the crime committed in the United States. The number of young black men killed by police is an insignificant fraction of the thousands of young black men killed by other young black men every year. However, it is important to point out that black criminals are themselves but a small fraction of the U.S. black population (total 45.5 million). Inasmuch as violence perpetrated by black criminals jeopardizes the safety of law-abiding black citizens, it is not in the best interests of the black community to tolerate, ignore or excuse such crime. Yet tolerating this menace is exactly what liberals like Amanda Marcotte and Larry Krasner want to do. The real enemy of the black community is not Republicans like Blake Masters, it’s white liberals.

And since I may claim to be an expert on the subject of racism — having been conspicuously accused of it, by folks recognized as professionals in this regard — let me just say that liberals don’t understand the correlation between crime and racism. The prevalence of crime in urban black communities is often explained away by liberals who imply that the gang-bangers are somehow victims of racism. But racism doesn’t cause black crime; if anything, it’s the other way around. There are certainly genuine racists in the world, people who hate other people on the basis of mere differences in physical appearance. But much of what is condemned as “racism” in America isn’t hate, it’s fear, and it isn’t based on skin color or hair texture, but rather on behavioral differences, including differences in rates of violent crime. BLM’s anti-police crusade, and the efforts of “progressive” DAs like Krasner, are aimed at reducing or preventing the arrest and incarceration of black criminals, which will logically have the effect of increasing the perception of danger. If you want to reduce what Marcotte calls “racial paranoia,” turning loose carjackers and armed drug dealers is probably not good policy, and yet turning criminals loose is exactly what liberals advocate in the name of “social justice.”

Of course, it’s racist — “RAAAAACIST!” — to disagree with a liberal, so Marcotte will continue pretending that there’s no problem in Philadelphia that can’t be solved by electing more Democrats, and Krasner will continue turning loose criminals, and nothing I say will deter either of them. However, my advice to Marcotte (or anyone else living in Philadelphia) continues to be, “Get out, before they kill you.”

Don’t blame me if you end up as a statistic. I warned you.

In the wake of the mass shootings in Uvalde and Buffalo last month, Democrats and their media friends want to tell a story about how this is a “crisis” for which “assault weapons” are to blame, and we need to enact “common-sense laws” to prevent such atrocities.

22 mass shootings. 374 dead.
Here’s where the guns came from

That’s the headline on an Associated Press story by Michael Sisak which says that the gunmen in Uvalde and Buffalo “are just the latest suspected U.S. mass shooters whose ability to obtain guns has raised concern”:

After the shootings, which together left 31 people dead, President Joe Biden renewed calls for stronger gun laws and questioned whether people as young as 18 should be allowed to purchase firearms. In the past, Biden has called for banning assault-style weapons and expanding background checks. Many Republicans oppose the measures.
A look at how suspects in mass shootings over a decade obtained guns, based on police accounts, court documents and contemporaneous reporting . . .

Now, that’s interesting — to get that headline number, the Associated Press had to go back a decade, i.e., to 2012. during Obama’s first term. In other words, over the past 10 years, the kind of “mass shootings” that generate national headlines have occurred about twice a year, producing less than 40 deaths annually. Keep in mind that, according to the FBI, there were 16,425 murders in the United States in 2019 (the last year for which we have complete data). Compared to that number, 40 deaths a year is two-tenths of a percentage point, a proverbial drop in the bucket.

In other words, 99.8% murders are not “mass murders.” As much as recent shootings — two high-profile incidents in the span of a week — may have contributed to the sense of a “crisis” that demands legislative action, these incidents are not a statistically significant phenomenon, when viewed in the larger context. Also, many of the mass shooters didn’t use rifles to commit their crimes:

• Samuel Cassidy used three 9-mm pistols to kill eight people before committing suicide in San Jose, California, in 2021.
• Robert Long used a 9-mm pistol in a shooting rampage that killed eight women at massage parlors in the Atlanta area in 2021.
• DeWayne Craddock used two .45-caliber pistols to kill 12 people in Virginia Beach in 2019.
• Ian Long used a .45-caliber pistol to kill 11 people and then commit suicide in Thousand Oaks, California, in 2018.
• Dimitrios Pagourtzis used a shotgun and a .38-caliber pistol to kill 10 people in Santa Fe, Texas, in 2018.
• Dylann Roof used a .45-caliber pistol to kill nine people in Charleston, South Carolina, in 2015.
• Aaron Alexis used a 12-gauge shotgun to kill 11 people at the Washington Navy Yard in 2013.

So, of the 22 “mass shootings” included in the Associated Press list, seven didn’t involve a rifle. These shootings accounted for 52 of the 374 dead in the AP headline. And examining the details of the 22 mass shootings chronicled in the AP story, there is no reason to believe they would have been stopped by any of the “common sense” laws Democrats propose.

Meanwhile, in New York:

Democratic lawmakers in Albany plunged into the national debate on Thursday, wielding supermajorities to enact protections denied elsewhere in the wake of recent mass shootings and a conservative shift in other states and on the Supreme Court.
The State Legislature passed a broad package of gun bills that will raise the minimum age to buy a semiautomatic rifle to 21, ban most civilians from purchasing bullet-resistant body vests and revise the state’s so-called red flag laws, making New York the first state to approve legislation following shootings in Buffalo and Texas that left a total of 31 dead.

So, in a state where Democrats wield complete control, this is what they’ve done, and what will it do to reduce the homicide rate in New York? Probably nothing, because the Democrats in New York are against effective public-safety strategy, i.e., putting criminals in prison.

First of all, thanks to the generosity of our readers, my mother-in-law’s fundraiser for the Walk for Life to benefit Richland Pregnancy Services has nearly doubled its original goal of $500. With about 36 hours to go until Saturday’s event, if only someone gave $64, they’d be at $1,000.

Speaking of pregnancy, you may remember the shooting in Kansas City, where 26-year-old Leona Hale told police she was pregnant when they tried to arrest her for carjacking, and then she got shot by the cops. A witness claimed that Hale was unarmed, but now the prosecutor has released this image from a police officer’s body camera.

Is that a pistol in your hand, or are you just happy to see me? Hale has been charged with unlawful possession of a firearm, unlawful use of a weapon and a misdemeanor of resisting a lawful detention. And speaking of criminals who are going to prison . . .

Creepy Porn Lawyer and Democrat Michael Avenatti Gets Four Years https://t.co/owVckX6508 pic.twitter.com/H1tpGRSiz0

— Evi L. Bloggerlady (@MsEBL) June 2, 2022

Yes, former MSNBC/CNN star Michael Avenatti — whom Brian “Tater” Stelter promoted as a 2020 presidential candidate — is going to have lots of time to think about his future in the penitentiary:

Disgraced attorney Michael Avenatti was sentenced to four years in prison by a federal judge Thursday for stealing nearly $300,000 in book advance money from porn star Stormy Daniels.
A portion of his sentence will be served concurrent to time he’s already doing in a separate extortion case — but the fallen lawyer will have to serve 30 months of the new sentence after that, Manhattan federal Judge Jesse Furman ordered.
During the sentencing hearing, Avenatti, wearing beige jail fatigues, choked up at times as he addressed Furman, describing how his life had been upended since his arrests on a number of federal charges.
“I’ve brought embarrassment and ridicule upon myself and innocent third parties, including my family, my children, my friends and the legal profession,” he told Furman.
“I have destroyed my career, my relationships and my reputation and done collateral damage to my family and my life. There is serious doubt as to how or if I will recover any semblance of a normal life or peace,” Avenatti added.
The loudmouth lawyer, who rose to national fame during Donald Trump’s presidency by representing Daniels, stole two book advance payments from the porn star in 2018 that totaled nearly $300,000, a jury found at his trial earlier this year.

Maybe he could strike up a pen pal relationship with Amber Heard.

They seem to have so much in common . . .

Park MacDougald has a very interesting article inspired by this month’s mass shootings, and he begins thus:

Rampage shooters tend to be losers. The archetype of the modern school shooter, Eric Harris, frequently wrote in his diary about his feelings of alienation and resentment over his lack of social success. . . .
Elliot Rodger, the 2014 Isla Vista shooter whose “manifesto” was a laundry list of complaints about his loneliness and sexual rejection, felt particularly resentful toward his female classmates, whom he saw as “mean, cruel, and heartless creatures that took pleasure from my suffering”. Unable to attract a girlfriend, he settled on revenge. “If I cannot rise above them,” he wrote, “I will destroy them.” . . .

Now, I have written extensively about Elliot Rodger, and the crucial point is that the Creepy Little Weirdo seems to have imagined that he was “rejected” by girls that he never even talked to. You start examining so-called “incel” culture, and one of the things you realize is that the problem goes far beyond the fact that these guys can’t get a girlfriend. They don’t have any friends at all. They are introverts, afflicted by a deficit of social skills, and they have all sorts of weird ideas bouncing around inside their heads — including dangerous ideas which they never talk about to anyone in real life, instead seeking out like-minded weirdos on the Internet. Most of the commentary you see on these guys attempts to shoehorn them into some kind of political category. Liberal journalists always want these shooters to be some kind of “right-wing” phenomenon, and will stretch the available facts to fit that narrative, if at all possible.

Park McDougald avoids that predictable dead-end trip, and thereby manages to come up with valuable insights:

According to the sociologist Nathalie Paton, rampage shootings represent a perverse expression of some of our culture’s dominant values, including self-expression, autonomy, and authenticity. . . .
The shooters, Paton argues, highlight another contradiction in the dominant ideology. Everyone is supposed to be an individual, and all individuals are respected equally. Yet beneath this injunction and guarantee are all the typical modes of conformity and hierarchy we would expect of a human society. The beautiful, the talented, the athletic, the funny, and the interesting rise above the ugly, the clumsy, the anxious, the introverted, the boring, and the resentful.
These relative statuses, for the losers, are all the more painful for being nothing other than a reflection of who and what they actually are.

You can read the whole thing. The point is that the “dominant ideology” in our culture (i.e., liberalism) does seem to “guarantee” equality. Of course, no such thing as “equality” has ever existed in human history — we are, by our very nature, keenly attuned to social hierarchy — and so the losers receive no coherent explanation of their status as losers. The cultural narrative of the “dominant ideology” is essentially a lie, but anyone who contradicts the narrative is denounced as a Thought Criminal, a proponent of “hate,” as if lying to people were an act of love.

Thus we return full-circle to Elliot Rodger. His final video was a shocking irony: Here he is, sitting in the BMW his parents gave him, with the glorious scenery of sunny California behind him, declaring that his “suffering” was the justification for murdering random strangers.

People who are truly suffering — somewhere in the slums of Calcutta, perhaps — must be amazed that this rich kid thought of himself as a victim. But this is where the celebration of “equality” leads. Anyone who is unhappy or unpopular considers themselves to be oppressed somehow, and the imaginary unfairness of their predicament becomes a grievance that inspires them to do crazy and dangerous things. Some of them become murderers. And others become Democratic voters.

 Crazy People Are Dangerous.