Free Fire Zone

Posted on by

It’s rapidly becoming a Berg’s Law: if the media doesn’t give any demographic details about a violent criminal (say, a white Hell’s Angel with an umbrella), you can infer the rest.

When I saw the initial coverage of Saturday morning’s bloodbath in the Warehouse District, I treated it as a test.

Up until noonish yesterday (Sunday)? Even after the arrest was made? Not a word about the shooter.

So – was I right?

What do you think?

Carroll was arrested in 2016 for a variety of felonies egregious enough for Mike Freeman to put down his bottle for a moment at try to make an example of.

Carroll ended up getting all charges dismissed, in exchange for pleading guilty to “disorderly condcut”.

Remember – public safety is a privilege.

112 thoughts on “Free Fire Zone”

  1. y’know, I could go over to some lefty blog & call the host & the other commenters dumb poopy-head commies, but I don’t.
    I wonder why that is?

  2. I dunno, because you’re not intellectually and politically curious, and you’re big thing is ratification of self via the exchange of compliments between peers.

  3. Oooo, Michelle McDonalds, now THAT’s a slam. I can’t stand family law. Although, just for clarity, the Supreme Court candidate was Michelle MacDonald, with an extra A and no S on the end. Precise spelling counts when defaming someone.

    I was actually hoping to be lumped with Michelle Bachmann, who is not only a conservative lawyer but holds a Master of Laws in Taxation from William and Mary.

    At least I didn’t get lumped with Michelle Obama.

  4. Oh I read the lefty blogs, JK. I just don’t find value in commenting on them.
    Anyhoo, for all you know I am a bot or a sock puppet of MBerg’s.
    It is interesting that you project real people onto the comments here. For all you or I know, the person who writes under the name “Joe Doakes” is a teen age emo girl & Hillary Clinton fan.

  5. You got me Joe, I didn’t look up her name for the correct spelling before writing… I picked between one of 2 conventional assumptions for spelling.

    It’s, as I say, a matter of temperament. Michelle MacDonald went to Harvard and still resides squarely in the center of the conservative island of misfit toys.

  6. “It is interesting that you project real people onto the comments here…”?

    OK, why is that interesting

  7. resides squarely in the center of the conservative island

    An “island” which exists only in your dreams, as evidenced by her rousing reception at all the GOP conventions, even the first, and the adulation the Judicial Election Committee gets from the rest of the MNGOP.

  8. We’ve covered this before, you all think those types are great guys.

    “We” have never covered John Gilmore. You have no idea what I think about his social media persona. I’ve never written or commented about it. Ever.

    And Glahn? Do go on.

    If your friends of the blog lawyer count includes “Joe Doakes”, for instance, the category definition for the lawyer types around here is, I’m properly thinking, “Michelle McDonalds”.

    So – you group one lawyer you don’t like, with another you’ve never met and know literally nothing about but the Doakes persona, and slop ’em both together with a Loony Toons cartoon of a woman, and impose that on the whole group?

    Fascinating.

    And this from a guy who invoked “dog whistles” oh so long ago.

  10. “You are wrong.” Not interesting.
    “You are wrong because I say so.” Not interesting.
    “You are wrong because you are stupid.” Not interesting.
    “You are wrong because you lack credentials.” Not interesting.
    “You are wrong because you agree with X, who is also wrong.” Not interesting.

    “Here are the facts that prove you are wrong.” Interesting but also hard work, and sometimes impossible, which is why that phrase is rarely written by Liberals.

  11. “We” have never covered John Gilmore. You have no idea what I think about his social media persona. I’ve never written or commented about it. Ever.

    With righty gadfly creep and racist internet troll being the category definition, I draw a comparison to Tom, who you kept insisting was cool because he was right on the issues.  Recall that its germane to this post because Gilmore’s thing is being Twitter reply guy on local crime stories going, hey ya know those perps are black doncha?

    Yeah, I do Mitch.  I think Michelle Macdonald is a nutball idiot lawyer.  My impression there is informed by press reporting.  I think Joe Doakes is a nutball idiot lawyer.  My opinion is informed by SiTD, where he writes things like the Gamestop / RobinHood bubble was a Biden conspiracy and no new Google maps pics for George Floyd square is a lefty conspiracy.  I draw a comparison there between nutball idiot lawyers and I do have a category definition for these people.

  12. I draw a comparison

    So we’ve gone from “Mitch thinks X about Gilmore” to “This is JK’s internal mental comparison”.

    Ahoy, goalposts. It was nice being in the same field as you.

  14. Mitch, I’m not moving goalposts.  You keep challenging me to flesh out my observations, and I do.

    You never flesh out to defend anything you write, and instead constantly call to the authority of supposed pillars of debate framework, like “gaslighting” and “goalpost moving”.

    Weak stuff.

  15. It’s interesting, JK, because the only thing that you know about the commenter is the words that he or she writes. Yet you go on to criticize the imagined person, and not the words. That is very odd.

  17. Who is this “John Gilmour” and what did he do to become the subject of Kraephammer’s daily 2 minutes of hate?

  19. The hockey player thing is a fair joke directed at me. The reality is though that in my mind the way you spell Gilmore is indexed to Pink Floyd.

    None of this is smear, it’s truth

  20. The fixation in lawyers is weird, too. Being admitted to practice law means one is licensed to perform a specific activity, which says nothing about one’s ability to reason to a correct conclusion.

    Was there a childhood trauma related to lawyers?

  21. I’m not fixated on it. Mitch thinks his blog has a smart sensibility because he’s got lawyer readers and you as a lawyer contributor.

    I’ve argued that’s not true, with what you write making the case for it not being true, Joe.

  22. You never flesh out to defend anything you write, and instead constantly call to the authority of supposed pillars of debate framework, like “gaslighting” and “goalpost moving”.

    Because you do both. A lot. As I’ve pointed out, correctly, several times in this thread.

    But sure – let’s get back on point:

    You made one fair point – even a neutral reporter wouldn’t generally talk about gang affiliation until that was a confirmable fact.

    But when the Twin Cities media refers to street violence, even though the vast majority of the shootings fit the “gang (or at least posse) warfare” profile, that the RCSO’s intelligence says much of the city’s violence over this past two years has been the settling of decades-old gang beeves (and Henco is no different), that prosecutors in both counties acknowledge it’s a fact (privately, off the record), they call it, invariably, “gun violence”.

    As in “the guns are the problem”.

    It’s dishonest, it feeds tribalism, and…well, I guess those are features, to our political class, not bugs.

    Is it “dog whistling” to point out that African-American teens and 20-somethings are highly overrepresented in gangs in the Twin Cities? That the Asian and Latino gangs have largely ebbed, and that white gangs only seem to “appear” when there’s a riot to blame someone for?

    If you’re a dog? Perhaps. Otherwise, it appears to be a criminological fact (albeit not a commentary on black people at large, in case you felt the urge to conjure that into a “dog whistle” as well) and a tragic waste of a lot of potential, one that many North Side and Dayton’s Bluff residents would refer to as “straight from Captain Obvious”.

    The media’s reporting on this is “tiptoeing” at best, dishonest at worst.

    I’ll await your next deflection. Sort of.

  23. I’ve argued that’s not true

    And failed, and been largely marginalized over it.

  24. I admit – state unequivocally – that I’ve mentioned Bill Glahn at least twice in the last few months. I may even have linked to a tweet – or even two. I find the man to be interesting and amusing as he documents, often with the help of the CrimeWatchMpls twitter feed, how life in the Twin Cities in general and Mpls in particular has worsened over the last 30 years. Bad Bill. Bad, bad, racist Bill.

  25. Mitch, I take it you found Joe’s google maps screed and his Gamestop / Robinhood thing the opinion of a credible, informed smart person. I mean, dumb question right, cuz, you publish this idiotic garbage as if you do.

    Yeah right, me having failed at argument is the problem.

  26. I take it you found Joe’s google maps screed and his Gamestop / Robinhood thing the opinion of a credible, informed smart person

    Can’t say I remember reading it, much less formed an opinion on it.

    Question: how does Joe’s, or anyone’s, opinion translate into my opinion?

    Because I published it? By that, er, logic then I apparently need to answer for you and the Emeries and Dog Gone as well.

    Because it was a post, not a comment? I don’t have to agree with anything to post it. I don’t have to state a disagreement to prove any disagreement I may or may not have.

    Next.

  27. This Kraephammer character is a object lesson in why lefty websites censor conservatives.

    Lefties like to believe they’re Galaxy Brain heroes, put on Earth to save everyone from the foul consequences of human existence and found a new Utopia. Trouble is, they not only suffer from Dunning Kruger syndrome (intelligent leftists are as rare as 4 leaf clovers), the majority are battling with various mental diseases (this has been clinically verified). They’re poorly socialized to boot.

    The result is an annoying, precocious child, ever butting into conversations between adults. They never, ever have cogent statements to make, and can be counted on to rely on insults within minutes (you poopy heads are stupid!) Their reaction to being corrected is to run out of the room and slam the door.

    The problem is, right wing websites and blogs think there is something noble in letting them act out in the comments. It’s the same, fatally flawed logic that sees value in negotiating legislation with them in Congress. What they need is a sound spanking and a time out in the corner.

  28. This is pretty interesting as process Mitch. You don’t read Joe’s posts before you put them up? How is it you can be assured you’ve constructed perfectly cogent and pitch perfect post titles and conclusion paragraphs around them?

    And you don’t know that you agree with Joe, because you didn’t read his stuff? But he is a lawyer, so you’re reasonably assured he has smart things to say….

  30. What part of “I don’t have to agree” = “don’t read?”

    Is that another whistle in your head?

  31. You said “Can’t say I remember reading it”. But you posted it.

    Not being able to agree with him is in conflict with the smart sensibility you feel he brings to the blog

  32. We’re now in the phase where Kraephammer seems to think he’s like Jose Ferrer playing Barney Greenwald in The Caine Mutiny, with a line of questioning homing in on THE TRUTH.

    Not remembering a post has nothing to do with agreeing or disagreeing with anything. I’ve written 17,000+ posts since 2006. The odds that I remember any given one of them on any given day – to say nothing of one I didn’t write, personally – are pretty long.

    Not being able to agree with him is in conflict with the smart sensibility you feel he brings to the blog

    That’s an intellectual check the fact simply don’t cover. I don’t need to agree 100% with anyone who writes here.

    This line of argument owes less to Barney Greenwald than Barney the Dinosaur.

  33. Joe Doakes wrote X
    X was wrong
    Mitch failed to disavow X
    Failing to disavow X proves Mitch agrees with X, which was wrong
    Mitch is wrong, too.

    That analysis would not work as a statement of logical reasoning even if X was wrong, which remains asserted but unproven. Aren’t software engineers supposed to be able to write basic ‘if-then’ statements?

  35. Kraephammer, why don’t you start your own blog?
    You realize, I hope, that virtually everything you read on the internet — including the “mainstream” news sites — is opinion.
    Joe Doakes gives his opinion. you disagree, and give your argument why he is wrong.
    Then you throw in some personal insults.
    Not sure why you racism is a hot button issue for you. This country has a lot of problems, racism is not one of them.

  36. If this thread is getting tiresome (and it probably is…), I’ll do my part in not belaboring points and being pedantic for answers on different questions, and just let it die.

    I’m not egregiously insulting people at this point.  I do have observations about the quality of thought here, and what it means to the assumptions of smartness at the blog and across the larger conservative movement.  So I do yes contextualize here and there in terms of stupid, idiotic, and smart, etc.  That’s a proper context and is not terribly abusive, and I don’t think at all out of step with the rest of the guys in the comments.

    I think Joe writes some consistently dumb stuff.  Its dumb, stupid… Those are the right words.  It’s a reflection of quality, it’s not a mere insult.

    Racism is a problem.  It’s not a non problem.  You’ve got a perspective problem saying that as you do.

  37. John Kraephammer wrote:
    “I’ll do my part”
    You failed.
    “I’m not egregiously insulting people at this point”
    Low standards. Raise them.
    “I think Joe writes some consistently dumb stuff”
    Like this sentence? You should look inward.
    Good luck!

  38. Mitch Berg: “The point is, our media will never acknowledge that the crime problem in the Metro is related to gangs – a tiny percentage of the metro populationIs this perp affiliated with a criminal enterprise? Care to wager a shiny new quarter?”

    https://minnesota.cbslocal.com/2021/05/26/jawan-carroll-faces-murder-charges-in-downtown-mpls-shooting-that-killed-2-including-ust-student/?

    “According to the complaint, Carroll is associated with “Tres Tres”, a violent north Minneapolis street gang.”

    OH NOES, Mitch’s “care to wager a shiny new quarter” rhetorical gauntlet of certitude is wrongo!

  40. Mitch you know what this also means?  Your gang crime and media jag wasn’t actually a fertile topic for a Berg’s law.  Cuz, the media does describe gang crime as gang crime.  What’s the case is your perception of reality was wrong, for that.

    You are on much stronger ground making a fuss about “gun violence” editorial treatment, but such that you’d get to that you’re a slave to your sloppy biases and reflexive axe grinding.

  41. Pump the brakes, sport.

    Reporting a fact – the perp was in a crew, just like I said he would be – is not the same as the local media acknowledging a Gang Violence, as opposed to “Gun Violence”, problem. I mean, you pasted it right there, yourself.

    Also:

    OH NOES,

    “Oh noes?”

    Chrissake, are you Eric Pusey in real life? We are all dumber for you having used that phrase.

    Mitch’s “care to wager a shiny new quarter” rhetorical gauntlet of certitude is wrongo!

    As we’ve seen – no. Not at all.

    And I should start wagering quarters on you prematurely declaring victory and having it yanked away from you. I could cover my hosting fees with a few bucks left over.

  42. Liberals sneer that unemployed coal miners should ‘learn to write code.”

    Plainly, writing code must not be very difficult if ignorant blue collar laborers can be expected to pick it up quickly enough to make a living.

    Does that make them software engineers?

  43. I do have observations about the quality of thought here, and what it means to the assumptions of smartness at the blog and across the larger conservative movement.
    What is the emoticon for raspberry given while crossing the eyes?

  44. Gosh, I guess I will wander over to JK’s blog and make a few comments about the quality of thought presented by him and his commenters, in the context of the larger nut ball community which views people like George Floyd and Daunte Wright as heroes.
    Oh wait Kraephammer does not have a blog.
    The poisonous thing that #BLM and white liberals are doing is promoting the idea that blacks, purely on the basis of being black, constitute a criminal element within a law-abiding white culture.
    It is not a legitimate part of black culture — or any culture — to be a predatory criminal.

  45. “I think Joe Doakes is a nutball idiot lawyer. My opinion is informed by SiTD, where he writes things like the Gamestop / RobinHood bubble was a Biden conspiracy and no new Google maps pics for George Floyd square is a lefty conspiracy. I draw a comparison there between nutball idiot lawyers and I do have a category definition for these people.”

    The Secret King said he was leaving the building, but for clarification:

    I did not claim the Gamestop short squeeze was a Biden Administration conspiracy. I did not claim Google’s failure to update images was a lefty conspiracy. The alleged basis for concluding that I write dumb stuff does not exist.

    Mitch allows posts/comments expressing opinions he does not personally hold. The alleged basis for concluding Mitch is dumb, does not exist.

    Insisting that things which do not exist rule pne’s life is a delusion, a form of mental illness.

  46. I didn’t say I was leaving. I was in fact getting self conscious about flogging the dead horse of this post, and signaled I could drop it. But we can talk about it if you want.

  47. You can certainly call me on an inaccurate or inadequately detailed paraphrase, if you think I did that.

    What is your position on the Game Stop short squeeze, Joe?

    http://www.shotinthedark.info/wp/?p=76650&cpage=1

    I recall and see it here as you being being impervious to education about SEC rules and trade clearing, preferring instead a non evidentiary supported spitball that the Biden administration stepped in to save the shorts.

    The Gmaps thing is similar.

  48. No, John, I won’t give you the benefit of the doubt. You lied about what I wrote and then insulted others based on your lie.

  49. LOL. You trolled me back in here, now you’re retreating when I appear.

    That’s not a lie, Joe. It’s what you said, and defended at several points..

    I’ve largely not insulted anyone since Tom’s been gone. There are probably a couple small exceptions. The exercise of observing your writing and calling it dumb is not an insult. It’s an evaluation of quality.

    Generally, I can’t believe how triggered you guys get. What a bunch of Nancy’s.

  50. I really hate to pile on but… I can remember Lawyer Joe stating unequivocally— the election was stolen and Sidney Powell’s lawsuits were going to expose this ‘fact’. I also seem to remember Lawyer Joe commenting the AZ audit was going to provide evidence of election fraud.

    “No reasonable person would conclude that the [my] statements were truly statements of fact,” ~ Sidney Powell

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.