How he gonna get his money?

[barbos]

What exactly about this situation or victim makes the assumption he was going to buy expensive stuff reasonable?

Why would he buy thrift store stuff? The US is flooded with cheap clothes. So much so that a bunch of NGOs dump ship loads of all the excess on third would countries. There is no plausible scenario where a 17 year old needs to steal to obtain thrift store quality clothes. The stuff can be easily obtained from non-profits or for petty cash.

The proof is in the Facebook photos. He appears to have had a reasonable enough wardrobe for school purposes.

Also, one can steal clothes from these collection boxes, and no one will shoot you for that.

 

[laughing dog]

What exactly about this situation or victim makes the assumption he was going to buy expensive stuff reasonable?

Why would he buy thrift store stuff? The US is flooded with cheap clothes. So much so that a bunch of NGOs dump ship loads of all the excess on third would countries. There is no plausible scenario where a 17 year old needs to steal to obtain thrift store quality clothes. The stuff can be easily obtained from non-profits or for petty cash.

The proof is in the Facebook photos. He appears to have had a reasonable enough wardrobe for school purposes.

Your response is an example of the excluded middle: thrift store shopping or expensive stuff. Try again.

 

[Derec]

Your response is an example of the excluded middle: thrift store shopping or expensive stuff. Try again.

I had already mentioned the middle - cheap, but decent, new clothes you can get from a place like Walmart or Target or Ross.
And you ignored Axulus' point about Facebook photos where he is shown to have decent clothes to wear. He even had jewelery. He wasn't forced into a life of crime by some dire need.

 

[Derec]

You really are not grasping what I am saying. Unless you can say that absent this one burglar, NO burglaries would occur AT ALL, then you are not addressing my position AT ALL.

But the statement by the cousin of "this one burglar" is what prompted this discussion. Are you admitting that Nautika Harris is full of shit?
And obviously absent "this one burglar" there'd still be burglaries, because there are many burglars around. But I would say vast majority of them are like Trevon, and very few if any at all are like Jean Valjean.

I am not interested in individuals here; I am taking a STATISTICAL approach,

So may we see your STATISTICS on motivations for burglaries?

and saying that the failure of US society to take the necessary steps to give citizens a certain minimum level of wealth WILL INEVITABLY lead to crime;

But the US does provide myriads of programs to help the poor. Again, we are talking about stealing for wants, not needs.

]and that while that crime cannot be predicted - either in the detail of who will be a perpetrator or who will be a victim - the argument that crime AS A WHOLE could, potentially, be prevented in such a social structure (by policing, or by deterrence, or by people all choosing to get jobs instead of turning to crime), is insane.

Well your idea of giving 17 year old thugs enough free money that they are not tempted to engage in criminal activity is not going to eliminate crime AS A WHOLE either.

The very tedious and oft repeated debate on these boards about whether a given shooting in a given set of circumstances was or was not 'justified' is completely irrelevant to my point. Theft and burglary is common in the US, DESPITE homeowners being able to use deadly force; DESPITE harsh sentences for convicted offenders; DESPITE the fact that it is an incredibly risky thing to do. And the reason for this is that NOT ALL AMERICANS CAN GET WHAT THEY WANT BY LAWFUL MEANS.

I want a Tesla Model S. I can't afford it. So the government should provide me a Model S so I am not tempted to steal one or burgle houses to raise enough cash. Brilliant!
It is not the job of the government to provide all its citizens' wants.

Not at all. I am accepting that if reasonable wants are not met, then you will have unreasonable levels of crime.

Do you think Trevon had reasonable wants?

Of course, there will always be people with unreasonable wants who commit crime whatever support they are given; but they are very few and far between.

Depends on your definition of "reasonable".

Nevertheless, you are assuming facts not in evidence. You think your assumptions are reasonable; but I disagree - and it is irrelevant to my point either way. I don't care about the specifics of this case; they are irrelevant to the wider point, which is that crime is a function of poverty - hence the sister's quite perceptive question, 'How he gonna get his money?'.

His cousin's question was about the specifics of Trevon's case though. I think her question showed the unreasonable levels of entitlement rather than being perceptive.

No, I am not. I don't give a flying fuck about this burglar as an individual; just as a symptom of a far larger (and far less tedious) issue.

It sure sounds like you are offering justification for these types of crimes.

Are you seriously going to argue that nobody in the USA today has unmet NEEDS?

I am saying vast majority of robberies or burglaries are not driven by any unmet needs. Again, this is not a Dickensian novel or Les Miserables.

Personal responsibility is irrelevant while the society is structured such that not everyone can possibly meet a civilized standard of personal responsibility. We need not be able to say WHO, specifically will fail (nor who, specifically will succeed despite hardship) to be able to predict that MANY will.

Personal responsibility is always relevant and part of it involves being cognizant of one's means.

Discussing 'personal responsibility' is irrelevant to the wider question of theft and burglary at the criminological level; You might as well try to understand the Niagara Falls by reference to the motion of individual water molecules.

Difference being, water molecules are incapable of making choices. Trevon Johnson was capable of making choices, and ...

 

[whichphilosophy]

Your response is an example of the excluded middle: thrift store shopping or expensive stuff. Try again.

I had already mentioned the middle - cheap, but decent, new clothes you can get from a place like Walmart or Target or Ross.
And you ignored Axulus' point about Facebook photos where he is shown to have decent clothes to wear. He even had jewelery. He wasn't forced into a life of crime by some dire need.

I don't know all the details, but even persons in dire need still make the choice whether or not to rob.

 

[laughing dog]

Your response is an example of the excluded middle: thrift store shopping or expensive stuff. Try again.

I had already mentioned the middle - cheap, but decent, new clothes you can get from a place like Walmart or Target or Ross.
And you ignored Axulus' point about Facebook photos where he is shown to have decent clothes to wear. He even had jewelery. He wasn't forced into a life of crime by some dire need.

You need to explain why this has anything to do with the reasonableness of the assumption that he must be using the proceeds to by expensive shoes or other forms of conspicuous consumption.

 

[Derec]

You need to explain why this has anything to do with the reasonableness of the assumption that he must be using the proceeds to by expensive shoes or other forms of conspicuous consumption.

His cousin said he was using the proceeds of his thug life to buy clothes. Since he wasn't walking around in rags, it's a reasonable assumption he was seeking to buy expensive clothes. Expensive shoes are also very popular among with the lawbreaking urban crowd, so it's not a stretch that his tastes did not stop at his ankles.

By the way, this Twitterer is on a different level of stupid than even you. Did not think that was even possible. Note "intersectional feminist" and "social justice" in her description. Social justice == not caring what the black kid did, the fact that he is black is enough to declare him an innocent victim. Also, I think the homeowner was black anyway.

 

[Nice Squirrel]

Son, those resale shoes are not expensive shoes.

Here are good mid-range shoes. http://www.allenedmonds.com/shoes/


someday: http://www.allenedmonds.com/shoes/m...2.html?dwvar_SF2022_color=2022#sz=18&start=66

 

[laughing dog]

His cousin said he was using the proceeds of his thug life to buy clothes. Since he wasn't walking around in rags, it's a reasonable assumption he was seeking to buy expensive clothes.

It took you almost a month to come up with the moronic excluded middle fallacy that it is either rags or expensive clothes. You are not fooling anyone with your bigoted and idiotic assumptions.

 

[Nice Squirrel]

His cousin said he was using the proceeds of his thug life to buy clothes. Since he wasn't walking around in rags, it's a reasonable assumption he was seeking to buy expensive clothes.

For all people, there are more choices than only rags or expensive clothes. You are not fooling anyone with your moronic assumptions.

No he is right. Thug life requires only clothing found in McDonalds dumpsters, or the bespoke Hip Hop shops of Savile Row.

 

[Derec]

His cousin said he was using the proceeds of his thug life to buy clothes. Since he wasn't walking around in rags, it's a reasonable assumption he was seeking to buy expensive clothes.

It took you almost a month to come up with the moronic excluded middle fallacy that it is either rags or expensive clothes. You are not fooling anyone with your bigoted and idiotic assumptions.

No, it did not "take me a month". I was reminded of the case/thread when I saw the moronic tweet.

As to "excluded middle" we already had the discussion - there is plenty of decent, inexpensive clothes in the US such that nobody is forced to burgle houses just to put clothes on their back. Trendy, brand-name clothes, quite a different matter.

 

[Derec]

Son, those resale shoes are not expensive shoes.

Here are good mid-range shoes. http://www.allenedmonds.com/shoes/


someday: http://www.allenedmonds.com/shoes/m...2.html?dwvar_SF2022_color=2022#sz=18&start=66

Not the kind of shoes we are talking about here, and you know it.

These ugly things go for $220 for example.

 

[ronburgundy]

“You have to look at it from every child’s point of view that was raised in the hood,” said Harris. “You have to understand… how he gonna get his money to have clothes to go to school? You have to look at it from his point-of-view.”

I'm baffled by this statement.

It's a shocking state of affairs.

You're baffled that some people feel empathy toward others?

She isn't saying that her brother did no wrong. She is saying that when people are desperate, they might steal without being the kind of evil person that deserves to die so you should shoot them the moment they give you a legal excuse to.

 

[ronburgundy]

You need to explain why this has anything to do with the reasonableness of the assumption that he must be using the proceeds to by expensive shoes or other forms of conspicuous consumption.

His cousin said he was using the proceeds of his thug life to buy clothes. Since he wasn't walking around in rags, it's a reasonable assumption he was seeking to buy expensive clothes. .

So, the only time you have ever bought clothes that were not excessively expensive is when you were wearing "rags"?

Weird. 99.9% of humans buy average basic clothes while wearing non-rag average clothes, prior to those clothes turning into rags.

 

[TSwizzle]

“You have to look at it from every child’s point of view that was raised in the hood,” said Harris. “You have to understand… how he gonna get his money to have clothes to go to school? You have to look at it from his point-of-view.”

I'm baffled by this statement.

It's a shocking state of affairs.

You're baffled that some people feel empathy toward others?

I don't see that statement as expressing empathy, no. What I find baffling is her attitude that breaking into houses to steal people's money in order to finance her brother's thug life is something I need to understand and live with. Maybe it's a black thang and I just don't get it, me being the color and all that.

 

[Malintent]

Talk about assuming facts not in evidence. What makes you think this homicide victim was going to buy expensive anything, let alone expensive sneakers?

It's a reasonable assumption. We are not talking Jean Valjean stealing a loaf of bread here.

It is not just an assumption. In the youtube video that the cousin released (where she is filmed stating that he was justified for robbing other people, because he was black and that was his culture), she is wearing hundreds of dollars worth of jewelry, accessories, and hair extensions... I guess we should presume they were all gotten from stolen money too?

- - - Updated - - -

I'm baffled by this statement.

It's a shocking state of affairs.

You're baffled that some people feel empathy toward others?

She isn't saying that her brother did no wrong. She is saying that when people are desperate, they might steal without being the kind of evil person that deserves to die so you should shoot them the moment they give you a legal excuse to.

No. she was saying that his actions were justified (not wrong) and that the property owner's actions were not (were wrong).

She said that owning property does not come with the right to portect it and that being poor gives you the right to take whatever you can get away with, and being shot at for that is not fair.

 

[JonA]

Lot of bigotry passing through this thread. And it's hard for me to understand it.

Do folks really think this lowly of the poor? That they are nothing but stupid monkeys being bounced around helplessly from one external stimulus after another? A product purely of the world around them with no ability to use reason and compassion to distinguish the right from the wrong and then act accordingly?

What was 'wrong' with Johnson that causes some to exempt him from the same standards of moral behavior to which we hold almost all other members of our species?

 

[Nice Squirrel]

Son, those resale shoes are not expensive shoes.

Here are good mid-range shoes. http://www.allenedmonds.com/shoes/


someday: http://www.allenedmonds.com/shoes/m...2.html?dwvar_SF2022_color=2022#sz=18&start=66

Not the kind of shoes we are talking about here, and you know it.

These ugly things go for $220 for example.

Only $220? My shoes cost $325.

 

[Derec]

Only $220? My shoes cost $325.

Assuming your shoes are like the ones you posted about before and not some baller branded sneakers, again, completely different thing and you know it.

 

[ronburgundy]

It's a reasonable assumption. We are not talking Jean Valjean stealing a loaf of bread here.

It is not just an assumption. In the youtube video that the cousin released (where she is filmed stating that he was justified for robbing other people, because he was black and that was his culture), she is wearing hundreds of dollars worth of jewelry, accessories, and hair extensions... I guess we should presume they were all gotten from stolen money too?

- - - Updated - - -

I'm baffled by this statement.

It's a shocking state of affairs.

You're baffled that some people feel empathy toward others?

She isn't saying that her brother did no wrong. She is saying that when people are desperate, they might steal without being the kind of evil person that deserves to die so you should shoot them the moment they give you a legal excuse to.

No. she was saying that his actions were justified (not wrong) and that the property owner's actions were not (were wrong).

She said that owning property does not come with the right to portect it and that being poor gives you the right to take whatever you can get away with, and being shot at for that is not fair.

She did not say his actions were justified. She said they were motivated by desperation and not evil. Yes, she (and all decent human beings) think that it is wrong to kill a child just so you don't lose your TV. That is why in nearly every place not ruled by authoritarian medieval religion or fascist dictators (i.e., Republican controlled states, Islamic states, and communist countries), it is illegal to deliberately take a person's life who is fleeing just to recover your property.