‘Unethical And Unethical-ler,’ As The Daunte Wright Ethics Train Wreck Speeds “The Great Stupid”Across The Land

As if it needed any help…

The police-involved death of 20-year-old black man Daunte Wright, which on its apparent facts (“Oopsie!”) did not indicate either racism or police brutality, quickly demonstrated that this was yet another car on the George Floyd Ethics Train Wreck, itself but an extension of the Ferguson Ethics Train Wreck, which emerged from the Trayvon Martin Ethics Train Wreck. All have converged to intensify The Great Stupid, as many parties have learned nothing from the previous fiascos, and too many have learned the wrong things.

Recent unethical developments:

1. Naturally, there was a second night of riots. This is stupid and unethical by definition. So are media accounts like this one, picked at random, from The Boston Globe, about the previous night’s disturbances: “Officials announced curfews, schools suspended in-person classes, professional sports teams canceled games and businesses boarded up after a first night that included peaceful protests – but also clashes between police and demonstrators, as well as looting of local businesses.”

It included peaceful protests, you see, but then there was the rioting and the violence and the looting. This isn’t journalism, it’s spin. It is like writing, “the mob contained reasonable, concerned citizens, but also those who burned down businesses and attacked police.” It sets out to minimize negative reader perceptions—out of what motive? Sympathy? Bias? Incompetence? Malice?

Added: Dr. Emilio Lizardo adds this on the topic of the news media trying to establish the “peaceful protest” narrative.

2. In last night’s “mostly peaceful” rioting, the crowd chanted “Hands Up! Don’t Shoot!” There is no evidence that anyone ever said that; I wonder how many of the rioters know this? We can thank Black Lives Matter for that thoroughly embedded lie, as well as Michael Brown’s thug pal, whom the news media immediately granted unshakable credibility as he seeded an earlier riot.

3. NFL players immediately weighed in on a still developing situation that they have no expertise in, no excuse for speaking public about, and nothing but Colin Kaepernicksim—loosely described as ignorant and arrogant grandstanding—to contribute to. Here are samples:

This from a member of an occupation that just loves it when a beer-swilling fan says, “How can a professional football player fumble at a time like that?” Here’s another:

How many struggles have you been in with a larger individual resisting arrest, Torrey? How often have you held a police taser?

4. Brooklyn Center City Manager Curt Boganey, speaking  to reporters, declined to say whether he believed the officer should be fired and that she would get “due process” after the shooting. Can’t have that! Because he had indicated that he would wait for the facts to be determined, speak to the officer and her partner, review the video—you know, that “due process” thingy, Boganey was immediately fired by Mike Elliott, the city’s first African American mayor. The city council voted in an emergency session to give him “command authority” over the police department.

This “will streamline things and establish a chain of command and leadership,” the mayor wrote on Twitter. I can’t argue with that: lynch mobs always streamline things.

5. From the Other Side of Stupid, the right wing media dug up a video of the victim, Daunte Wright, brandishing a pistol and acting like a street hood. As with George Floyd, the character deficits of the shooting victim are completely irrelevant, and it is unfair and misleading to drag such a video into the conversation.

6. Leaving the stupidest for last, here’s irredeemable “Squad” member Rashida Tlaib:

Be proud, Democrats!

We now return you to the usual scheduled stupidity.

49 thoughts on “‘Unethical And Unethical-ler,’ As The Daunte Wright Ethics Train Wreck Speeds “The Great Stupid”Across The Land

  1. There was talk that Wright had an outstanding warrant.

    Out of curiosity, I looked up his record. Two Petty Misdemeanors for disorderly conduct and small amount of marijuana possession from August of 2019. Petty Misdemeanors are deemed “non-criminal” offenses, for what it is worth. Neither case shows an active warrant.

    Pending criminal cases are not publicly available without the case number, so, if there was an outstanding warrant, I was unable to find out what it was for.

    This is the sort of information that should be released at some point. It could be relevant both to the officers mind-set, as well as Wright’s.

    This whole seems like it would have been completely avoidable.

    -Jut

    • wo Petty Misdemeanors for disorderly conduct and a small amount of marijuana possession

      I’d say 3/4’ths of the 20-year-olds I’ve come across in my life have tried marijuana and done something that could be classified as disorderly conduct whether or not there was a cop there to nab them for it so I have no idea what it says about an officer’s mindset to interact with a typical college-aged kid.

    • Well, it turns out he had a bench warrant for failure to appear at a hearing following a summons from March 3, 2021.

      He was charged with Gross Misdemeanor Possession of a pistol without a permit in a public place and Misdemeanor fleeing a police office by means other than an automobile.

      The offense date for these was June of 2020.

      And, it looks like he also had a pending charge for Aggravated 1st Degree Robbery, but that was already in proceedings.

      -Jut

    • Let’s assume arguendo that the officer was mistakenly told there was an outstanding warrant.So what? A citizen’s duty in such circumstances is to obey the officer and allow it all to be straightened out. You don’t resist arrest. You don’t attempt to flee. Who tells those in these situations to struggle with an officer trying to do his or her job and provoke a potential crisis? What evidence is there that anyone is better off resisting than obeying the law? You get shot running away or fighting or trying to flee in a car, and so the next parent tells his kid to be terrified of the police because they hate blacks and are just itching to have an excuse to kill you. So they resist arrest.

      • Of course most folks think it’s FUNNY if a sovereign citizen or other non-black righty gives the police a hard time and gets roughed up as a result. Look up P. Barnes if you need support for that contention. If you don’t want to bother, he’s a chief bailiff in a court in the Midwest who stood firm against a mouthy sovereign citizen, then tazed him when he tried to push his way past. The comments are mostly about what an idiot the guy was for trying to push past or snark about how he got what was coming to him. Talk about lefty Andrew Meyer, though, who got tazed by the University of Florida PD for going on an unhinged rant at John Kerry, though, suddenly it’s not so funny. The left wants a monopoly on a lot of things, as I’ve often said. They also want immunity from certain things, and the duty to cooperate with law enforcement is one of them. After all, no lefty is ever doing anything but going about his/her business, with the exception of peacefully protesting injustice or standing up for the oppressed, so law enforcement has no reason to bother them, right?

      • Jack. My recollection is that you certainly haven’t held consistently that the citizen has an ethical duty always to follow orders from the Authorities, such as the police, and then ‘sort it out later’. You have lined up at least tacitly in support of 2nd amendment gun rights arguments that the People need the means to confront tyranny. And the US is full of instances of (sometimes heroic) resistance to Authorities attempting to assert power in ways the resisters have considered illegitimate. It doesn’t seem to me the ‘American way’ to obey now and ‘sort it out later’. That is closer to the ‘Australian way’ which you generally criticise as being only for wusses. (I remember your evident disdain when we surrendered our guns to John Howard after Port Arthur in 1996).

        • Andrew,
          There is a huge difference between our 2nd amendment so that we as a group of people are able to protect our God given rights from tyrants or to protect our hearth and home from those seeking to do us harm and an individual resisting a lawful order by the people that same group has entrusted with the power to arrest those who are unwilling to comply with rules of the agreed upon social compact.

          This disarming of Aussies after Port Arthur was a politically expedient move and Aussies acquiesced to the demands of John Howard. However, when China wants your continent you will be looking to Americans with guns.

        • Seems like comparing apples to amphibious landing craft. A bit of delay devoted to peacefully sorting out the details of a traffic stop, or some other minor incident, is orders of magnitude beyond ceding a Constitutionally protected right in the hopes that those devoted to destroying it might eventually have a change of heart.

  2. 1. After 100+ nights of rioting in Portland, this seems like small potatoes. The Democratic leadership WANTS chaos, danger, and a climate of terror. Those who might stand up to the Great Stupid otherwise will not if they are afraid that their business or house might be the next to get burned down by an angry mob. BLM is basically the Democratic Party’s brownshirts, whether they will admit it or not.

    2. I’d say none of them. Just like no one knows for a fact that Christ said “do unto others as you would have them do unto you,” that phrase has become an article of faith for blacks and leftists. You just don’t challenge it.

    3. (shrug) This is unfortunately par for the course now. Every time something like this happens, a bunch of big, stupid guys whose sole skill is that they know how to toss a ball around will weigh in like they are gods giving pronouncements from the mountain, and idiots will lap it up.

    4. Fascist much? Firing officials who dare ask for due process and power grabs are hallmarks of budding fascism.

    5. Sauce for the goose, sauce for the gander. If the left is going to make it impossible for accused cops to get due process, then the right is fine to show the victims as the shitbag thugs they are.

    6. OK, so no more policing or corrections. Just WHAT does she suggest? Gads, these idiots are the greatest salespeople the gun industry ever had.

      • I doubt anyone has either the time or the inclination. I just happen to believe that if only one side is shooting, the other side will soon be dead.

        • You mean like how the police keep shooting and black men keep ending up dead?

          Hey everyone! Steve says rioting is sauce for the gander, go burn some shit down.

          • You mean how black men keep committing crimes at a much higher rate than anyone else? Or how black men keep resisting lawful police action and ending up dead? And I’d be careful what you wish for, you just might get it.

          • It’s not just black men. Have you ever watched Cops? I have and I’ve seen aggression no matter the color but if the questioned person just stops, listens, and follows directions ( which sometimes, I admit, are not easy to follow with different orders given seconds apart) then things don’t usually go south. What I’ve observed in my 70 years on earth observing others is there are some bullies in every profession, even in law enforcement. What’s to be done about that? Better filtering of perspective employees, better training, or strong discipline after someone dies as a result of an aggressive individual? Defunding? How about having no law enforcement? If that then who will people call when a burglar is breaking into their home? Ghostbusters? I don’t know the answers but I do know there are too many decisions made in this era that are based on emotions instead of people working together to reach a sensible solution. Common sense has flown the coop and emotions rule the day!

            • People who like exercising power, including bullies, will always gravitate to jobs like policing, and as was the situation in the Old West, the same personalities who were criminals often switched sides, sometimes more than once.That’s a natural fact of law enforcement: people who don’t like forcing people to do what they don’t want to do don’t become police. Thus you get Derek Chauvins, and worse. The response of “well, if that’s the way it is, we just won’t have police, then!” is infantile.

              • Now I lay me down to sleep. Beside my bed my Glock I keep. If I wake up and you’re inside… the coroner’s van is your last ride!

      • “Officials announced curfews, schools suspended in-person classes, professional sports teams canceled games and businesses boarded up after a first night that included peaceful protests – but also clashes between police and demonstrators, as well as looting of local businesses.”

        You know… I have no patience for this. I never did… I’ve always mocked the whole “fiery, but peaceful” thing. But in the wake of September 6th, they’ve completely given up that narrative. tens of thousands, perhaps hundreds of thousands of people were in DC to protest on January 6th, and only a couple of hundred people rioted.

        What’s the same? We’ll, they’re both riots within greater movements. They’re both violent, having ended in deaths, they’re both illegal. They’re both political violence, and there were riots in DC in 2016, ending in the burning of several churches, in opposition to Trumps inauguration.

        What’s different? Honestly lefties… Go ahead and take a swing at this. I see Valky prowling in the comments. I can make a whole lot of differentiations that make the BLM riots worse:

        -Their supporters aren’t trying to differentiate from them, or distance themselves from it. There aren’t a whole lot of people that support the Jan 6 MAGA riot. There aren’t any Republicans setting up GoFundMes to pay the bonds of those people. They aren’t calling this a reasonable response to their issues.

        -The targets. And that’s not the point Democrats think it is. With BLM, you have mostly black rioters looting or burning small businesses. With the MAGA riots you had rioters storm the capitol building, full of congressmembers. Pick the metric, what makes the terrorizing of private citizens more acceptable than the terrorizing of members of congress? The left is all about power, who has more power? A small business owner, or Nancy Pelosi? Play your own game. Meanwhile, in Danger of being accused of invoking a 2A rationalization, those members of congress had been carrying water for the riots for the last year, and then when they got the smallest taste of the fires that they themselves have been stoking, they devolve into quivering, tearful masses of privilege. With absolutely no respect: Get fucked. I don’t support the rioters, but maybe take this as a learning situation and grow some empathy for all the people you routinely turn a blind eye to because they break your narrative.

        -The size/scope of the riot. We just had a summer of love last year, something like 20 people died in those riots, property damage was orders of magnitude higher. There is no objective metric that someone could use to compare the two and come away with “The MAGAs were worse”.

        -What I think someone on the left would say: “These guys were trying to stop our election, and that makes it much worse because this was a coup! They threatened our democracy!”

        To which I say: Please spare me. Democrats have demonstrated no respect for Democracy that I can sense. They routinely come up with new and exciting ways to skirt the system because they can’t be bothered to play within it, and then they whinge like beaten puppies every time their schemes fail or the Republicans do the same damn thing to them they just finished doing to the Republicans. And while I tihnk we can all agree that trying to capture or intimidate members of congress is not a good thing, illegal, and fully deserves charging to the full extent of the law, but political violence is political violence. “No peace, no sleep!” Right? “Give me what I want, or else!” is “Give me what I want or else!” regardless of the “or else!”. I can’t get past this enough… I said it above: The difference is the targets. And if you’re torn up about the sleep AOC lost, but not the lives ruined in the riots, then that says something about you, and it ain’t great.

        But more, and on the topic of “They’re stealing our election!” I mean…. Does anyone really believe this? I suppose some of them might have, but if they did, I think that speaks to mental capacity; America is too large to be overthrown by a couple hundred LARPers, most of which weren’t in gear. The MAGA shaman in the buffalo hat wasn’t exactly loaded for bear. The guy who was pictured stealing Pelosi’s podium didn’t even bother to cover his face. Only a small fraction of the small fraction that rioted had zip-ties or gear. And we’re supposed to sit here and pretend like they’re the biggest issue America currently faces.

        No, I won’t play your games, I don’t belong to your church, I’m not going to self flagellate, you can just get fucked.

      • So you think it is ethical for criminals to rape, steal, burn, murder and terrorize as they please, but think it is unethical for innocent people to defend themselves from that behavior? I don’t think I want to live in a society that lives according to your understanding of ethics.

        • Very few of them admit it, but yes. I’m beginning to think the unflattering moderate v. radical Muslim comparison also applies to lefties. There is a perception and stereotype that the only difference between the radical Muslim and the moderate Muslim is that the radical is the one doing the bombings, etc., while the moderate is the one cheering him on, rationalizing his actions, providing everything but the weapons for him, donating to the “charities” that pass money on to him, setting up the GoFundMes to bail him out of jail and hire lawyers for him, etc. The radical lefties of course are the folks throwing the Molotov cocktails, fighting with or trying to kill the police, kicking people in the head without letting them see it coming, and so on. The moderate lefties are the ones writing endless posts and tweets cheering them on, rationalizing their actions, and making excuses for them, hating on anyone who tries to stop them, providing hotel rooms, buses, food, anything but the actual weapons, so they can get the actual weapons, pointing them in the directions of those who will provide the weapons, setting up and donating to all the “charities” that are just fronts for money flowing right to the radicals, setting up funds to get them out of jail and off with a slap on the wrist, and so on. Maybe they should all be treated the same.

    • I mean… I’ve pointed it out, several times:

      The left is absolutely dyslexic and inconsistent; holding dozens of unreconcilable positions, but getting by by covering their positions in semantics and never attempting the reconciliation. Well, sometimes situations force a reconciliation, and things get ugly. The two positions “All Cops Are Bad/Defund The Police”, and “Guns Are Bad/Only Cops Should Have Guns” already went to war, and “All Cops Are Bad” won. We just had three different “mass shootings” in the last couple of weeks. When’s the last time you heard about them? Oh sure, the performative bobbleheads bobbled for a day or two, but the story just didn’t have legs like it would have a year or two ago.

    • No, I see this dangerous position pointed out at least a dozen times/week. The left just doesn’t frequent those places on the internet. It isn’t hypocrisy, the left truly wants the law applied and enforced differently depending on race and ideology. The same people who don’t want GameStop looters arrested DO want the ATF to enter people’s homes without a warrant and seize any guns they find. Those same people don’t mind if the FBI grooms a couple of Muslims to attack a cartoon drawing contest and provides them with weapons and body armor. These same people do, however, mind if a career criminal is arrested for illegal possession of a firearm.

      Career criminals unwittingly work for the government. They are encouraged and encouraged to create disorder so that the rest of us will give up our rights and become controllable. That is why gun control legislation only applies to people who aren’t hurting people with firearms. It is applied in places where the legal possession of firearms is not a problem.

      If Hunter Biden violates gun control laws and isn’t punished, why would we expect things to be different for other career criminals? (OK, that was a cheap shot, but its early and I’m in a bad mood).

  3. Point number 1 of all these episodes before getting to all the other ethical lapses should pretty much always be:

    #1 – This wouldn’t have happened if the individual hadn’t resisted arrest.

    Now we are free to argue all we want about whether or not the law or regulation he was being arrested for is wrong or not. But it is the law.

    We can opine about the nobility of civil disobedience and living with the consequences of such – but civil disobedience in these circumstances will always lead to a fight that isn’t going to go well for the arrestee on a continuum of additional charges to possibly getting shot.

    ——

    This isn’t hard.

    ——-

    “Resisting Arrest doesn’t carry the death penalty”

    No it doesn’t. But getting shot while resisting arrest isn’t the death penalty anyway and it’s a facile argument.

    • We can opine about the nobility of civil disobedience and living with the consequences of such – but civil disobedience in these circumstances will always lead to a fight that isn’t going to go well for the arrestee on a continuum of additional charges to possibly getting shot.

      Submission to arrest and/or apprehension is inherent in civil disobedience.

  4. On the subject of The Flight Of The Innocent, the Great Stupid picks up steam with a gale force tail wind; TX State Representative Terry Meza (D-Irving) has introduced HB196, would repeal the state’s “Castle Doctrine.”

    (bolds/caps/italics mine throughout)
    ” ‘I’m not saying that stealing is okay,’ Meza explained. ‘All I’m saying is that it doesn’t warrant a death penalty. Thieves only carry weapons for self-protection and to provide the householder an incentive to cooperate. They just want to get their loot and get away. When the resident tries to resist is when people get hurt. If only one side is armed fewer people will be killed.’

    “Meza was quick to reassure that her bill would not totally prevent homeowners from defending themselves. – Under her new law, ‘… THE HOMEOWNER’S OBLIGATION IS TO FLEE the home at the first sign of intrusion. If fleeing is not possible, he must cooperate with the intruder. But if violence breaks out it is the homeowner’s responsibility to make sure no one gets hurt. The best way to achieve this is to use the minimum non-lethal force possible because intruders will be able to sue for any injuries they receive at the hands of the homeowner.

    ” ‘In most instances THE THIEF NEEDS THE MONEY MORE THAN THE HOMEOWNER DOES‘ Meza reasoned. ‘The homeowner’s insurance reimburse his losses. On balance, THE TRANSFER OF PROPERTY IS LIKELY TO LEAD TO A MORE EQUITABLE DISTRIBUTION OF WEALTH. IF MY BILL CAN MAKE THIS TRANSFER A PEACEFUL ONE so much the better.’ “

  5. Offtopic.

    Jack you’ve got about 5 minutes to reply to my email before the results are announced and predictions become worthless.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.