Police have no clues on the murder of Harry Stone
after 60 year old Harry Stone was shot dead by a black man in a passing car as he jogged in the Kansas City suburb of Raytown, police captain Ted Bowman is still completely stumped
as to why Stone was killed.
“Even grasping at straws and imagining motives, we have been able to find nothing in the man’s background or time or place or associations or his relationships or his history,” Bowman has said.
Is Bowman really that stupid? Does he actually expect that there be some personal relationship between the community-minded Stone and the black lowlife who killed him? Is he not aware that when blacks murder or otherwise harm whites, it is almost always stranger-murder, and, in a great number of case, not done for reasons of robbery, but just to harm or kill or the sake of harming or killing? So why would there be anything about Stone’s background or time or place or assocations or relationships that would explain the murder? A black man killed a white stranger. It happens all the time. But Bowman, as your typical politically correct police captain, cannot openly state that, so he is compelled to keep looking for a relationship or a motive to explain the killing.
It’s also no mystery to the commenters at Lucianne.com, the first 11 of whose comments I’ve copied below. As one of them puts it,
“unexplained”—we now know what the code word is for black on white violence.
Every sentient person in America knows the answer. But the police captain on the case professes not to know the answer.
Reply 1—Posted by: lakerman1, 5/20/2012 8:51:23 PM
- end of initial entry -
What other explanation is there, other than random gang violence. Kill an old white guy.
Reply 2—Posted by: bubby, 5/20/2012 8:59:38 PM
It’s CRT in action. All whites are racist and killing them is ok because the laws against doing that were all written by whitey. So this shooting is justified it’s ok. Blacks killing blacks is ok to but if a white hispanic shoots a black well that is just outrageous.
Reply 3—Posted by: Thwarkmaster, 5/20/2012 9:06:12 PM
In the housewares department of a Target store in Dallas, a black guy took a butcher knife out of its packaging and plunged it into a young white woman’s back.
As many as 100 black yutes stood in line, each waiting his turn to kick and club two white people at a stop sign.
We’re seeing violent black on white attacks every day, so as far as I’m concerned, this one is no mystery at all.
Reply 4—Posted by: skedaddle, 5/20/2012 9:08:43 PM
The detective might be right about it not be gang related—it might simply be Holder’s people out gunning down a white guy. I live in the KCTV market area and this is the first time I’ve heard the shooters race identified but I knew it anyway. Race relations are going to be set back a hundred years before we get these race thugs out of DC.
Reply 5—Posted by: Coy860, 5/20/2012 9:13:09 PM
Probably just another “justice for Trayvon” action..
Reply 6—Posted by: Blackeagle, 5/20/2012 9:19:17 PM
If Obama had had a white father, he would have looked like Harry.
Reply 7—Posted by: Hazymac, 5/20/2012 9:35:42 PM
This was a thrill killing by some more of the soulless youths of today who are so remorseless and inhuman that when they get locked up, they terrify even hardened older criminals. What’s happening on the streets is essentially an undeclared war on law abiding citizens. Life means nothing to these gangbangers. I hope the cops will find the perpetrators, and I hope they fry for what they did.
Reply 8—Posted by: RoseOfTexas, 5/20/2012 9:36:34 PM
“unexplained” ~ we now know what the code word is for black on white violence.
Reply 9—Posted by: Charactercounts, 5/20/2012 9:37:38 PM
#3, nothing new about that. All the way back to the 60’s, friends and relatives recall getting beat up, mugged or worse. Most of the perpetrators were African-American.
Reply 10—Posted by: ranger06, 5/20/2012 9:43:15 PM
This sort of think is exactly the reason I stopped cleaning my guns while driving …
But seriously—life is short and you never know when your time might be up—hug your loved ones like there’s no tomorrow …
Reply 11—Posted by: Fosterdad, 5/20/2012 9:46:57 PM
The police don’t have a motive? Here’s the motive—jogging while white.
Patrick H. writes:
I think that what the police and media who use the misleading word “random” are struggling to articulate in response to killings such as that of Harry Stone is the sense that the killings were not planned, organized, thought out, or executed in a sophisticated, efficient way. The word “random” is used here as a code word informing the public that the killing was not premeditated, but was instead impulsive, in-the-moment, thoughtless, unplanned, unprovoked, reflexive, mindless, etc. The word “random” used in this way means precisely the kind of killing so disproportionately done by blacks. But the word “random” misses something about these killings: they are not purposeless, they are not unintentional, they are not accidents. They are deliberate, and they are deliberately targeted: at the vulnerable, the unarmed, the defenceless, the old (notice how many of the victims are older?) and especially at whites.
Posted by Lawrence Auster at May 20, 2012 11:49 PM | Send
Harry Stone did not die just because he happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time (which would be truly “random”). Yes, he was targeted because he was in the wrong place (near armed blacks) at the wrong time (when they were looking for a victim), but also because he was in the wrong state (unarmed), in the wrong state of mind, concentrating on his workout. And of course, most importantly, he was the wrong (i.e., right) type: he was white.
But it wasn’t as if these savages planned to kill Harry Stone in particular. That would have required a level of foresight and self-control beyond them. But if “random” is the wrong word to use for the killing of this fine old man, then what is? I suggest we use the word opportunistic. The killing of Harry Stone was opportunistic. That word works best, I think, because it does not downplay the intentionality of the act, the particularly human evil of it, but it does keep a sense of its impulsiveness, its mindlessness, the particularly savage in-the-moment animal quality … in other words, its blackness.
Not that I think the media or police will ever have the courage even to go so far as to use “opportunistic” instead of “random.” But there’s nothing to stop us from substituting the right word for the wrong one. Perhaps a campaign to prod the media into adopting my suggestion?