More Crazy 💊

“What if Penny had stood down and done nothing at all? Would everyone — including Neely — have emerged from that subway car unscathed?” asks @DavidAFrench. “We can’t know for certain, and that lack of certainty creates the conditions for violence.” https://t.co/3SVgVRvAZh

— New York Times Opinion (@nytopinion) May 14, 2023

Granting all the caveats (this tweet was created by the Times, not Mr. French; it’s an excerpt and I can’t read the column (pay wall), so it could be badly out of context, but: WHAT THE FREAKIN’ HELL?

Isn’t French supposed to be the smart one? The “conditions for violence” were created by “uncertainty”? Is that the same root for domestic violence? And does he advise the same cure?

From what I understand, Mr. Neely didn’t touch anybody. Does French think words and gestures are enough to allow assault (at a minimum)? I don’t think Penny had justification for so much as laying hands on Neely.

 I’m a little curious as to how French makes this situation a societal failure. Yes, Neely should have received better mental health care, but I’m thinking Penny needed some, too. Resorting to violence was just not justified here, but the law puts that burden on Mr. Penny.

Would everyone have emerged “unscathed” had Penny not acted?  He did, though, and the question of law now is: was he justified? Does that uncertainty also create “the conditions for violence”?

I’ll retire to Bedlam…