Savages Run Amok
The rest of us merely cower in fear because we’re not ready to deal with the problem in the only way it can be dealt with: through violence.
For a country so deeply ashamed of it’s history of lynchings, it seems wildly indifferent to the ones happening in 2022, in plain public view. Take a look at what happened to Jin Shin in Fort Worth, Texas, last month. It’s appalling:
Fort Worth police arrested 28-year-old Markynn West earlier this week for the murder of 43-year-old Jin Shin.
It happened on the morning of Aug. 15 after a minor traffic accident near South University Drive and the Interstate 30 westbound entrance ramp.
According to an arrest warrant affidavit, Shin was driving a Jeep Cherokee. He rolled forward at a red light and hit the bumper of a silver Honda Elantra that had three women inside.
The two drivers opened their doors to check on the damage. The three women got out of the Elantra and approached Shin’s Jeep. The affidavit states Shin was boxed into his vehicle door by the females.
Several more people arrived in other cars to support the three women. West was one of those people, according to the affidavit.
"There were seven people gathered around Shin," the police document states.
Security video from the area showed that as Shin stood outside his Jeep the confrontation escalated into a physical fight. West got into his face and another person punched him in the back of the head.
Right off the bat, the seven savages who surrounded Shin unlawfully detained him, which is a felony, then proceeded to assault him in deadly fashion, also a felony. This was all bad enough, but it got worse:
Shin backed away from the fight and retrieved a handgun from the passenger side of his Jeep. Around the same time, West went back to his car and got his own gun, the affidavit states.
By that point, someone in the group had taken Shin’s keys and they were blocking his access to the Jeep.
Shin tried to get to his vehicle, and that’s when West fired multiple shots, according to the affidavit.
"Shin retreated around the front of the accident to the passenger side of the vehicles. Markynn pursued him, also moving around to the passenger side of the vehicles but behind the accident. As he came around the vehicles, he raised both arms and extended the handgun toward Shin. He fired multiple shots again," the arrest warrant affidavit states.
Shin tried to run away but collapsed and died.
On second though, this isn’t a lynching, since lynchings are committed under the guise of justice. Shin’s killing is worse than that: it’s a thrill murder, committed out of sheer pleasure. I doubt these savages were truly angry at Shin: they just found a reason to bully, intimidate, terrorize, and, ultimately, physically harm and kill a human being. And over what? A minor fender-bender?
It’s part of an increasing trend of what journalist Steve Sailer calls “crimes of exuberance,” committed with a sense of joy or a desire to harm others. There’s no other reason why a man surrounded by seven murderous souls, who wasn’t even armed at the time he was attacked, would’ve posed any kind of threat to the others. They killed him because they could and wanted to.
There was also this incident which occurred at a Tupelo, Mississippi convenience store. A repeat-offender forced the clerk, 33-year-old Parmvir Singh, to open the safe. After he did as he was told, Singh was made to sit down and, well, this happened (WARNING: Explicit):
We often hear people describe any police shooting, even the ones on justifiable grounds, as “executions.” I wonder what those same people would call this, since there’s absolutely no justification for it whatsoever?
Authorities, from politicians to the bureaucrats and even law enforcement officers, often tell citizens that complying with a criminal’s demands is a far safer bet than attempting to defend yourself or attack the criminal. Depending on the context, this may be true, but the murder of Singh is a reminder that entrusting your safety to a criminal is, ultimately, a fool’s errand.
The doctrine of “let the professionals handle it” becomes increasingly hollow, as these incidents prove something we’ve all known for a long time: once the savages are let loose, there aren’t enough police or even soldiers to keep us safe. Order and public safety are less the result of constant enforcement, but more deterrence: people just don’t do terrible things because the incentive structure is such that behaving delinquently is so costly, the benefits are overwhelmingly outweighed by the consequences.
To establish deterrence, however, the law must not only be enforced, but it must be enforced in such a manner that it sends the message that there’s no upside to crime. Nobody will come to your defense and you may lose more than your freedom in the process. Sending such a message requires the use of violence. America has, unfortunately, become so anti-violence, that the only people willing to employ violence are criminals themselves. The rest of us merely cower in fear because we’re not ready to deal with the problem in the only way it can be dealt with: through violence.
Rod Dreher, as usual, explains the stakes:
Do you think American society, as it stands today, has the focus and the determination to stop this crime wave? No, me neither. What's it going to take? Parmvir Singh's people are the kind -- Asian immigrants -- who build up society and cities, not burn them down. Our country is not administered -- not at the governmental, business, academic, media, or private institutional level -- by people who give a rat's ass about the Parmvir Singhs, who never cause trouble, and who just want to live decent lives of work and accomplishment, and raise their children to do the same. This is increasingly not a country that works for them.
It’s worth noting neither President Joe Biden, prominent Asian-American politicians (mostly Democrats), nor the national media, have had much to say about this story. This isn’t to say they should, but given that they grace us with their outrage after mass shootings, especially those perpetrated by Whites, or any other crime with even the slightest hint of racism as a motivation, you’d think the especially heinous murders of Shin and Singh would tug their heartstrings and motivate them to speak up.
This all comes on the heels of a harrowing few days earlier this month in the city of Memphis, Tennessee. Days after the body of Eliza Fletcher was discovered after she was murdered, a mass shooter live-streamed his homicidal rampage on Facebook:
The shooter, 19-year-old Ezekial Kelly, killed four people and injured three. This fits the statistical definition of a “mass shooting,” though the media isn’t covering it as one. In fact, both media coverage and public outrage on the incident has been limited to the local Memphis stations.
The situation in Memphis has gotten so bleak, it drove a local reporter to tears:
It’s important to remember that Memphis has long been one of America’s most violent cities. After a seeming drop-off, it seems like it’s picking up steam once again:
In recent posts, I spoke of how Northern Ireland seemed in a state of peace in the mid-1960s, until a couple of homicides in summer 1966 changed the vibe within the country. Three years later, Northern Ireland was wracked by massive civil unrest, resulting in British troops deploying to the country. Likewise, the 2017 death of Sarah Halimi, a Jewish woman, at the hands of an African immigrant Islamist, stirred a reckoning of sorts in France over what was happening to their country. Halimi’s death wasn’t unprecedented, but it did force people to confront the fact there was something seriously wrong about the country. How often, in the contemporary West, do you see this many people protest in favor of enforcing the law?
I’m not sure the U.S. is there yet. Certainly, people see that bad things are happening, but are they at the point where they see crime as a national crisis in the same way mass shootings and racism are frequently viewed as national crises? Are we ready to take to the streets the same as the French and demand the state fulfill its end of the deal to keep order and uphold the rule of law? I don’t think so.
For one, crime rates have certainly arisen, but are still relatively low compared to historic highs. Those who regard crime with no concern about often cite this fact, as if we’re supposed to wait until crime reaches early-’90s levels before we’re allowed to worry about it. Which leads to the next point - crime is something we’re not allowed to notice, period. If we do, we have to be very careful how we talk about it. You can’t go any further than calling them “crazy.” Otherwise, there’s no judgment of criminals, as if we’re all equally likely to engage in the same sort of recklessness and savagery they engage in.
How divorced from reality are we about crime in this country? Watch this jaw-dropping video from start to finish:
What baffles me about this incident are the (non-)reactions to a man drawing and using a hatchet in a public area. Nobody ran away, with even some bystanders walking right up alongside the hatchet man, as if they felt he posed no danger to them or anyone. I don’t expect people to take on a violent man wielding a bladed weapon, but I do expect them to at least try to get away from the danger. If he’d drawn a gun instead, I’d bet reactions would’ve been very different.
It speaks to the fact Americans see guns as the only kind of violence that could cost someone their life and that there’s no use in getting up in arms about any other means of violence, including a hatchet. It also speaks to the kayfabe nature of life in America, where an incident like this is something you film for the exhibition of others, with no other purpose beyond that. If you correctly observe there’s something very wrong with someone pulling a hatchet and threatening people with it in public you’re a fear-monger who watches too much Fox News. Again, however, had he used a gun instead, not only would the reactions of the people involved had been different, it would’ve been viewed as evidence of America’s “gun violence” problem, as opposed to a crime problem. The way in which the Regime has managed to shape our perceptions is remarkable, in a very tragic way, of course.
By the way, what do you think happened to the hatchet man?
When a man who destroyed property and threatened people with a hatchet is released on his own recognizance, we’re living under anarcho-tyranny. If the Regime isn’t outright legalizing savagery, they’re definitely normalizing it. Once normalized, it becomes very difficult to bottle it back up. In fact, any attempt to bottle it back up may result in a backlash, not from a crime-weary public, but from the criminal class themselves, along with their allies within the public. This is the point where our next civil war may kick off and our country will be forced to experience a reckoning once again, but it’s doubtful, within the existing order, that reckoning will remind us of the importance of maintaining law and order at all costs.
In the meantime, what can we do? The law still says we can defend ourselves, right? Yes, but only within certain acceptable parameters. The enemy uses firearms and hatchets without fear, while the citizenry is held to exacting standards when it comes to the use of lethal force. In times like these, we must take all measures to avoid encountering criminals, but if we do, we must be willing to place our own bodies on the line in defense of ourselves, our loved ones, and livelihoods. There’s nobody else coming to our aid, folks. When it comes down to it, we must be willing to fight, lightly armed or not at all, as fiercely as the woman in this video:
Are you up for it?
Max Remington writes about armed conflict and prepping. Follow him on Twitter at @AgentMax90.
If you liked this post from We're Not At the End, But You Can See It From Here, why not share? If you’re a first-time visitor, please consider subscribing!
Black folks wine and complain how they are discriminated against ant yet. They do the same shit over and over to other ethnic groups.