Let’s talk about the death of Jordan Neely. If you’re not familiar with the story, he was a mentally ill homeless man behaving erratically on the New York subway. Daniel Penny, characterized as a “24 year old ex-Marine”, put Mr. Neely in a headlock which he held for three minutes. He was assisted by several other of the car’s passengers. Mr. Neely was taken to a hospital where he was pronounced dead. The death has resulted in demonstrations, complaints of racism and anti-homeless bigotry, and an endless torrent of columns and op-eds.
I suspect I’m the only person here who has taught self-defense. As practically anyone who teaches self-defense will advise, the first rule of self-defense is avoidance. The second is defusing the situation. You don’t resort to force unless there is no other alternative.
Mr. Neely was not harmless. He had assaulted an elderly woman a couple of years ago.
I think there is a slippery slope here. The slope goes from avoidance to “stand your ground” to force when you feel threatened to shoot first and ask questions later. Not only is that not effective self-defense it’s no way to organize a workable society.
In my pre-doctor life I did mental health first on the psych ward as a corpsman and then in mental health ERs in Philly. I have restrained hundreds of people. We worked in teams of 2 to 10 and really tried to avoid hurting people. In the rare circumstance you were caught alone then the rules were a bit different and survival took higher priority.
In this case I feel like I dont know enough. Was Neely just loud and annoying or was he attacking people? Avoidance would be hard on a subway. I would note that just based upon what I saw it didnt look like a true choking chokehold so I was surprised the guy died. I would expect a secondary health issue like a cardiac issue. Anyway, if the guy was actually going after people they had the right to defend themselves and the guy should be let go.
Steve
Based on the accounts I have read he was not attacking people but he was frightening them. As I noted in my post the first recourse should be avoidance. The point of the post is that although you have a right to defend yourself life-threatening action shouldn’t be your first recourse.
I should mention this is not just theoretical on my part. I have successfully defended my self on the street hand-to-hand against one and many opponents. Running away is better than fighting.
Have you forgotten Neely’s race?
Sharpton has not.
Guilt or self defense will be determined on the streets as in Minneapolis.
You should be just as surprised that George Floyd died.
Most people have heard stories about someone being accosted, raped, threatened, beaten up while a crowd just stood around gawking, maybe taking cell phone pictures and doing absolutely nothing to help the person being victimized. I’ve often wondered how or why people become so insensitive and emotionally disengaged instead of pro-actively helping.
However, the prosecution of Daniel Penny’s quick action to subdue a man threatening others – something garnering gratitude from those witnessing the event —- explains why people are reluctant to get involved, putting themselves at risk in order to protect someone else. Neely, who died after being tackled, had been arrested 40+ times before, once almost throwing a person off the platform, was acting erratically and menacing to others. If Penny’s courageous act is prosecuted, the inclination to shrink back or walk away from assisting anyone in need will become more the standard. Is that what our culture is now encouraging?
Running away is better than fighting.
If you’re the one being attacked then running away may be the best option. But, when someone else is being victimized then the calculus of what to do changes.
My husband and I are no strangers to being caught up in untoward events. He helped save a woman from being raped – heard her screaming in the alley and ran out with a frying pan (only weapon on hand) and chased the guy away. All our neighbors stood on their balconies and never moved a muscle. Another time, as we were driving by a neighborhood bus stop, saw 2 teenage girls beating up an old man. We stopped, found they were trying to rob the poor man, held them until the police arrived. Again, I remember a crowd gathering around and cars slowing to rubber-neck, curious to see what was going on, but too self-contained to help out.
We need to separate out reality from TV. The stories where everyone stands around and watches someone get raped or beaten when they could have realistically been able to help are notable because in reality they don’t happen all that often. In reality family, friends, neighbors, passersby frequently jump in to help subdue mentally ill people threatening others. They do it without killing. This event was pretty unusual.
Steve
Steve, a couple of weeks ago (where I live), a man taking the train from downtown LA to the coast was harassed, then beaten up, had his cell phone taken away by a group of young hoods. A crowd watched, filmed the incident but did nothing to stop the attack. Finally the police arrived and he was taken to the hospital.
The reality is that people do get accosted, especially in metropolitan areas. As laws have softened dealing with crime, those with criminal proclivities are emboldened. Fentanyl usage is also up, along with a current spike in overdoses and death. This is not a TV series, but life that has become more difficult, and even jaded under the progressive policies that are seemingly supported by people like you.
BTW, Daniel Penny has a massive number of people supporting him, via an online funding site, collecting a million dollars for his defense in a few days., including a donation from me. Knowing there are still people out there willing to pitch in and help, when you’re in a position of fear and helplessness, renews one’s faith in mankind. Also, Steve remember that Neely had a long and violent arrest record, including trying to kidnap a little girl, throwing someone off a subway platform, and was harassing and threatening a woman on the subway when Penny intervened and subdued him. Afterwards, there are photos of Penny and others rendering aid to him. Like the people directly involved with this incident, Penny’s intervention was greatly appreciated, and may have avoided someone getting hurt or dying at Neely’s hands, rather than Neely being unintentionally taken out in a move to restrain him.
jan, that incident made the news as it was unusual. It happens every few weeks and when it does it gets coverage. What never gets covered are the many times a day events where a mentally ill person gets violent or threatening and is successfully restrained by family, friends, neighbors, passersby or first responders. Its very unusual that someone gets killed when being restrained. It should be investigated.
I also take some issue with the idea of the “crowd”. Sometimes the “crowd” is 4 or 5 people and they are a mix of ages and some women. The criminals may be 3 or 4 guys, all young. The crowd would be massacred. Even when the odds would be more in their favor an organized group has an advantage over a bunch of people who dont know each other. There are plenty of times when the action of the crowd was shameful but other times the gang leaves before people can decide what to do. Its real life and not movies and sometimes people freeze.
Still, in this situation we are not talking about stopping a robber but someone who sounds like everyone around him should have been able to tell he was mentally ill.
Steve
Its very unusual that someone gets killed when being restrained. It should be investigated.
Unusual events happen under chaotic, erratic times. We are living in times dominated by racial bias (black crime is treated more lightly than white crime), the prevalence of lenient drug and criminal policies, a dearth of mental health services, undermanned police departments having police more reluctant to provide law and order protection in public places – creates an environment where lay people feel more personally responsible for their own welfare. Where subway crime has continued to rise, without any inkling of subsiding, the action of Penny was a reasonable reaction to someone threatening others. The fact that his restraining hold caused Neely’s death was an unintended consequence to the type of behavior Neely was exhibiting, not a blatant attempt to hurt the guy.
“The fact that his restraining hold caused Neely’s death was an unintended consequence to the type of behavior Neely was exhibiting, not a blatant attempt to hurt the guy.”
I didnt realize that you wee there and witnessed the whole thing.
Steve
jan: The fact that his restraining hold caused Neely’s death was an unintended consequence to the type of behavior Neely was exhibiting, not a blatant attempt to hurt the guy.
Penny wasn’t charged for a “blatant attempt to hurt the guy,” but that he “recklessly caused the death of another person,” that is, second-degree manslaughter. If the matter goes to trial, the jury will hear the evidence. No one, whether innocent in fact or not, wants to go through the ordeal of a criminal process, but a person has died at the hands of another.
When someone is reacting to someone else’s violent, threatening behavior often that reaction is based on stopping the violence, not necessarily moderating how it’s done. It’s an adrenaline moment, where the primitive brain reacts versus the analytical brain – kind of a subset of the fight or flight syndrome.
Our comment from yesterday has not appeared. We tried reposting, but it says it is a duplicate.
Zachriel