06 June 2026

It's What Happens

Most rational people aren't racist.

They really believe that you shouldn't punish groups for the crimes of individuals.

But when the police refuse to punish an individual because they are a member of a group, rational people start to become mistrustful of that group.

This is not because the group, as a whole, is bad; it's because they know that a small number of the members of that group will realize they can commit, virtually, any crime with impunity.

So they become rationally racist.  The rational part is what distinguishes them from bigots.  Bigotry is irrational racism.  It's both simple and difficult to tell the two apart.

A corollary to the cops not enforcing the law, when the members of a protected group commit the crimes, is the rise of vigilantism.

Measures to put distance on the protected group become notable. 

The law needs to be colorblind, and what matters is the crime not the demographics of the perpetrator.

Otherwise the people will reclaim the power they delegated to the police and decline to recognize the legislation promulgated in their name by politicians they'd previously delegated to represent them. 

Then it won't be a republic any more. 

3 comments:

  1. Not to mention, coming blindly to the defense of a member of the group, no matter the evidence of their guilt, does not help.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I love your correct use of the phrase "delegated to the police".

    Far too many people (including the police themselves, apparently) seem to believe that law enforcement was "abdicated to the police".

    My position has always been that the police force exists to perform (as a full-time task) the necessary law enforcement duties that the people have neither the time, inclination, nor skills to perform.
    To me this does not, in any way, preclude the enforcement of the law by ordinary citizens (i.e. those without the imprimatur of a badge and a snazzy gang uniform).

    Of course, the police should face the same consequences as the ordinary citizen for the inappropriate or unjust enforcement of the law. In many cases, "Qualified Immunity" is an abomination.

    ReplyDelete

You are a guest here when you comment. This is my soapbox, not yours. Be polite. Inappropriate comments will be deleted without mention. Amnesty period is expired.

Do not go off on a tangent, stay with the topic of the post. If I can't tell what your point is in the first couple of sentences I'm flushing it.

If you're trying to comment anonymously: You can't. Log into your Google account.

If you can't comprehend this, don't comment; because I'm going to moderate and mock you for wasting your time.