Thursday, September 01, 2005

Escape From New Orleans

I. Do not underestimate how stupidly or cruelly people will act when they determine their behavior will have no adverse consequence to themselves.

II. Prevention is almost always cheaper and easier than curing.

If you buy into the two above statements, then you should understand my next: III. Looters should be shot early and often.

It seems the earlier policy in Post Apocalypse New Orleans of ignoring the looting in order to rescue civilians has backfired. Now the looters, armed and emboldened, currently have the upper hand. The newest news off cnn.com notes that relief and rescue efforts have stopped at night because of armed gangs ambushing vehicles with supplies and (seemingly) randomly shooting at others.

I saw an interview with the police chief of Miami last night. During this interview he said something like, ‘We used to go and shoot looters when things like this (disaster) happened, but I think we’ve gotten past that kind of thing now.’ HARHARHAR. In other words, ‘We are a civilized people. We value life over property. We have no word for ‘protecting property’ in our culture!’ It’s like some poorly written character on Star Trek talking down to the audience about how wrong it is to kill those who are merely stealing! Silly atomic age humans!

When you let a person do wrong and you let them get away with it, you invite them to do bigger wrongs. When cops fail to stop looters from looting you embolden the looters to commit worse crimes. From the looter’s point of view this is merely an intelligent and evil reaction to their new circumstances. If the cops can’t stop me from stealing, they probably can’t stop me from stealing guns. If they can’t stop me from stealing guns, how can they stop me from killing someone? Or shooting at a rescue chopper for kicks?

Not only do you invite a specific criminal to escalate their own behavior, but you invite others to learn from the criminal’s actions and modify their own behavior. This escalation is the direct opposite of deterrence.

Would looters, bandits and gunmen have been deterred by an initial spate of killings by police? I like to think so; it seems difficult to believe the current situation could be worse. Was this even an option for the outnumbered and uncoordinated police? Unknown, but I’ve read of incidents on both sides of that coin. When confronted by evil, inaction is most often the worst policy.

Instead of prevention (i.e. killing looters) now we must face the cure stopping rescue procedures while thousands of National Guard units are mobilized to retake Post Apocalypse New Orleans.

Oh, a last somewhat related point: place your bets on when the international community and/or the U.N. will come to the United States aid with food, shelter, money and other aid. Any time now… Any time… HARHARHAR!

1 Comments:

At 9:21 PM, Blogger Kwik2Jujj said...

"Snake Plissken. I thought you were dead!" My mind was running along the Escape From New York meme yesterday, when it occurred to me that this is the first time since the movie that we've had more than a hypothetical opportunity to depopulate and isolate an entire major American city. Weird and awful.

As for shooting looters, the biggest downsides I see are (1) being forced to kill a modest number of miscreants for what is otherwise a brief jailing offense, and (2) the lesser possibility of killing a few actual innocents in the confusion. However, (and I believe you were making this point) there's just undeniable upsides to a shooting policy under these circumstances. There are innocent people who are dead and dying because criminals who should have been deterred are not deterred. You'll never see a full and accurate accounting, but say fifty criminals of varying stripe had been shot in the first 36 hours. How many subsequent murders, carjackings, lootings, arsons and beatings would have been avoided?

But even that is small potatoes compared to the fact that private efforts to help people will simply not take place in an atmosphere of lawlessness. Government tends to be massive, deliberate, and slow. This is truer the higher up you go (local, state, federal). And even government has to subcontract for a lot. In situations like this, private manpower and capital can be life and death in the short run. When civil authority does not have the will and the backbone to impose order, private manpower and capital will simply refuse to show up. It is in this way that fainthearted, kid-glove responses cost lives.

 

Post a Comment

<< Home