The term “Lone Wolf” now seen as Racist by some on the Left Liberals should knock off the identity politics when it comes to mass murder.

Home  »  Evil  »  The term “Lone Wolf” now seen as Racist by some on the Left
Print This Post Print This Post
Oct 4, 2017 No Comments ›› admin

By Lynn Woolley

A lot of us on Talk Radio can’t explain why some people go on murderous rampages. This latest nut in Las Vegas – a 64-year-old white guy – came out of nowhere and killed 59 people for no apparent reason.

Stephen Paddock. Was he Pure Evil? A Lone Wolf?

Like President Trump, I have referred to this type of massacre as “pure evil.”

Authorities often describe people like Stephen Paddock as a “lone wolf.” Essentially, the term means he could not have been profiled.

Now, some on the Left are saying that those terms are racist – nothing more than a way to excuse white men from shouldering any responsibility. Alexandra Petri, in the Washington Post, says a white man becomes a “wolf” as soon as he raises the gun.

She says a “terrorist” must be “Something Else” – or certain people would see a potential terrorist in the mirror each day. She says:

“We all know who is allowed to become a wolf.”

Video: President Trump uses the term “Pure Evil.”

Petri’s column is, by definition, racist.

What she writes is offensive – but that may be the point. I’d never heard of her before this column, which I saw reprinted in the left-wing Dallas Morning News, and so she may have been trying to be outrageous. She did succeed at that.

Alexandra Petri (WaPo)

But here’s thing. Millions of people – mostly males – have lots of guns. Some hunt, some collect, some are dealers, and others keep them for self-defense. These men are of all races, and live in all 50 states. Few of them ever become involved in a gun accident or any type of violence. Most of them are knowledgeable about guns and practice safety to the max.

When one of them goes bad, the term “lone wolf” is used to mean that this guy was not part of a larger movement. Like Radical Islam. Therein lies the rub. Progressives, as Dennis Prager has said, never seem to fight Radical Islam. They fight the real enemy – Islamophobia. That is the way liberals think.

This may be where Petri is going with this column.

Paddock probably was not a good subject for profiling. Maybe he was; he did buy a lot of guns and ammo. If so, perhaps we should have connected the dots. Most of the time with “lone wolf” shooting, there are no dots to connect – at least not until after the fact.

But with Radical Islam (what I think she was referring to with the term “Something Else”), there is a movement that works to radicalize young Muslims and entice them to kill for Allah. We should have been able to head off the shootings at Fort Hood and San Bernardino, and we should have headed off the bombing at the Boston Marathon – which was done without the use of guns.

It appears to me that if we even think of profiling radicalized Muslims—who CAN be profiled, then Petri sarcastically thinks we should do the same to millions of white guys:

“All across America white men, some young, some of middle-age, are turning into wolves. Always, after they commit acts of terror, it is revealed out that these perpetrators were not men after all. They were beasts, mindless monsters whose evil was abstract and cold and terrible.”

Well, yes. Paddock was a sub-human who, like others before him, went out in a blaze of gunfire. Paddock was evil. He was pure evil. He killed with a gun. The Tsarnaev brothers were also pure evil. They killed with a pressure cooker. Juan Corona was pure evil, and he killed with machete. Were they all terrorists? No.

Nidal Malik Hassan was. He killed for political reasons related to his Islamic beliefs. So did the brothers. In other cases, it’s harder to tell. But in her racist rant, Petri accuses authorities of letting white, male, shooters off the hook:

“One thing is clear: These are not terrorists. You know what a terrorist is. A Terrorist must be Something Else, or the people who apply labels to such things would have to look in the mirror every day and see a potential terrorist. They would have to admit that what they are afraid of is not the same as terrorism. They would have to admit that the horrible violence that happened in Las Vegas is not an aberration. And then — No. The shooter was alone. He was a fluke. He was a wolf.”

This woman is sick.

The violence in Las Vegas IS an aberration. And it’s one that allows leftists such as her to pine for more gun control. But they cannot name a single law (short of the government confiscating all guns) that would have stopped Stephen Paddock.

Ruben Navarette

Meanwhile, Ruben Navarette, a usually sane writer who has been a guest on our radio show multiple times, has gone off a similar deep end.

In a column entitled: “Is it time to start profiling white guys?” he states that white men scare him. He explains why:

“And so, after the Las Vegas massacre — where a 64-year-old white man named Stephen Paddock carried 23 guns into a hotel suite on the 32nd floor of the Mandalay Bay Resort and Casino and opened fire on an outdoor concert crowd, killing at least 59 people and wounding more than 520 others — it’s fair to ask: ‘Is it time for authorities to start profiling white males who purchase unusually large amounts of high-powered weapons and ammunition?’”

It is time, he declares, one graph later:

“Yes, it is. And why not? There is plenty of evidence that law enforcement officers routinely profile blacks, Latinos and Muslim Americans. It’s become part of police work.”

This column earned him a spot on FOX News’ “Tucker Carlson Tonight” on Tuesday, where he, frankly, sounded a bit racist to my shell-like ears. And I like the guy.

Video: Tucker takes on the usually-logical Ruben Navarette over profiling white males

Liberals should knock off the identity politics when it comes to mass murder.

Mass murders have been committed by people of all races and colors and by both sexes. Some can be explained – and some remain mysteries. Right now, law enforcement offices are trying to figure out what Paddock was all about and what motivated him. It’s hard to speculate until we know more.

I do know this. If he acted alone, the term “lone wolf” is appropriate – and has nothing whatsoever to do with race as Petri implies. If he was not mentally ill, wasn’t over-medicated, and wasn’t radicalized by ISIS – then what was he, Ms. Petri? What was he, Mr. Navarette?

I’ll tell you. He was pure evil.

lynn@BeLogical.com

Tagged with: , , , , , , , ,

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

%d bloggers like this: