I don't know if I would like Daniel Penny, him being an ex-Marine and all, but I'm convinced he did the right thing when he subdued the mentally ill guy who was acting in a threatening manner on the subway.
It's an injustice that he was ever put through a trial, but I'm glad he wasn't convicted. I was afraid the jury would do that thing where they hate to let an innocent person go completely free, so they convict him on some nonsense "lesser charge".
Heroism isn't a behavior anyone should be discouraging.
It doesn't matter what your "race" is, or whether you are closely related to the mentally ill person. This benefits YOU, too. Why act like you want aggressors running rampant, victimizing whoever they feel like? You don't want that unless you want more cops, because more cops would result, and this would just cause more problems for everyone.
Society shouldn't allow government to punish (or even arrest and try) those who step up and protect their fellow humans from those posing a credible threat. Even if the aggressor dies in the process or soon after.
Stop acting like you identify with the bad guy rather than those standing between the innocent and the bad guys unless you want the rest of us to assume you are a bad guy, too.
If you are a piece of garbage who is calling for "vigilantes" (anti-vigilantes; criminals running around committing archation, if we're being honest) to go after "white" people who aren't committing any crimes, just because of their "race", don't be surprised when this doesn't work the way you imagine. I mean, seriously!
Penny is not an "ex-Marine" -- once a Marine, always a Marine.
ReplyDeleteThat's only tangential to the situation he was in, though. There was a threat to himself and others, and he acted to neutralize that threat. Perhaps his training informed his ability to do so, but he appears to have done so "in good faith." It's not like he was dancing around celebrating having had the opportunity to kill someone. There seems to be no evidence that he even intended to kill the person threatening himself and others.
While I do feel sorry for the guy who died -- he appears to have had serious mental problems -- that doesn't make Penny the "bad guy." Some situations don't leave ANY of the participants better off than they were before.
[thumbs up] or "like" or something of that nature
DeleteDaniel Penny had no way of knowing about Jordan Neely's sad life story or his profound mental problems. He sought to keep people safe from someone who appeared to be dangerous. Penny didn't intend for Neely to die, even the prosecution conceded that much.
ReplyDeleteDo you believe in mental institutions? Neeley came from a poor family, so they didn't have the resources to commit him to a high class sanitarium or let him live in their basement.
Mental institutions are a tough case. I don't believe in coercive funding of anything. I also don't believe in imprisonment.
DeleteMostly, I think what happened, except for arresting Penny, was a reasonable outcome in a bad situation. When someone archates or makes a credible threat to do so, defensive force can be used to protect others. If the archator dies in the process, that's not the fault of the defender. You could say it's not Neely's fault, either, but if he had hopped into a tiger enclosure at the zoo and punched a tiger in the nose, he would have most likely died. Actions have consequences, even if the one acting doesn't understand that. It's how reality works.
If you've heard of the New York Post, they have an interesting commentary on the case. The editorial claims that Daniel Penny's acquittal resulted from the D.A.'s office poor handling of the case. There's no doubt that D.A. Alvin Bragg is a low rent hack. There is the implication that Penny would have been found guilty of something if the prosecution hadn't done such a poor job. Here's the link:
ReplyDeletehttps://nypost.com/2024/12/15/opinion/braggs-antics-told-daniel-penny-jury-the-trial-was-a-sham/