Lawrence Auster describes the way the media obscures moral agency in criminal behavior, particularly when minorities are involved:
But the Times lowers its own credibility by referring to the event as a “robbery gone wrong.” There should be zero tolerance for this nihilistic phrase which has the effect of removing the quality of moral judgment from both the robbery and the murder. “Robbery gone wrong” is meant to suggest that the criminals intended an armed robbery, not a murder, and that an armed robbery is not so bad, but that somehow the event got out of hand and they ended up, against their own intention, killing people. It just happened, don’t you know. It’s just one of those unfortunate things that just keep happening to people, especially to black people who never had a break. But of course when criminals commit armed robbery they are prepared to kill their victims. That’s why they’re armed. The readiness to murder, and the likeliness of murder, are even more evident when the criminals break into their victims’ residence and hold them at gun point.
Subscribe To This Feed
Roach-
I admire your flashes of brilliance. But this subcutaneous theme of yours-(spoken thru others) that blacks 1) have a badge-of-honor monopoly on violence and 2)overstate the mitigative circumstances of their seemingly-perpetual criminality-ought to be a thing to easily get beyond.
Armed robbery like most violent crime aint about race; it’s about money-specifically, not having any. Being broke and/or living in desperation takes moral agency from the realm of the noumenal conscientiousness into the colorless primordial divide. Hope you don’t get there.
Said otherwise, are there a horde of armed robbers emanating from the 100k circuit? I didnt think so.
If you demand and preach moral agency, then allow everyone to pass Go.
Please, no more racial reality for Resh. He’s sensitive and is unable to process the facts.
Poverty doesn’t make people rob. Wealth doesn’t make them good. Good character sets the stage for $100K wealth, but people who make far less don’t induldge.
This was not chiefly a post about black crime, but rather about a peculiar phrase used by the media to deprive robbers in general, who happen to be 60% black in a society 12% black, of moral agency for their violence.
Dont forget that robbery, a felony, was potentially punishable by death under early English common law. The reason is because it was understood that certain crimes, when undertaken, evidence a certain indifference to the possibility of grave harm or death that could happen to the victim. There is nothing such as a “robbery gone wrong”; the English had it right–when you rob somebody, you’re basically disregarding the possibility of grave injury or death to your victim. This is also why we have a felony-murder rule in the US.
“Robbery gone wrong” is a pretty good marker for the moral obtuseness of the mainstream media, but my favorite stupid journalism phrase remains “senseless murder.” Our Dumb Reporters Club can’t fathom why killers don’t limit themselves to sensible murders.
It is so wrong someone should make it stop!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I think robbery has gone so wrong because the people who do robbery are using violence and that they are taking people property they should not because they would not like it if someone took there things!!!!