ybe.

You've noticed that I've been ignoring the story about the Ukrainian refugee woman who got stabbed to death in Charlotte when she was on the light rail train. Well, it turns out that now it's morphed from a crime story into a big political story because now the anti-MAGA press of the world has decided that the way the people on the right, the MAGA supporters, are talking about it somewhat obsessively is that it's obviously kind of racist and so CNN had a big hit piece on that. And I wasn't going to talk about it because I don't do crime, but now that it's sort of a political thing and a persuasion thing and it's now slopped into my domain, I'll give you my thoughts on it.

Number one, if she had not been a hot blonde, would we be talking about it? You tell me. If she had not been a hot blonde, literally some kind of a model I think, would we even be talking about this? Don't people get stabbed and murdered kind of often? You know, way more than because it's not somebody pretty and they're not from Ukraine and it's not a black attacker and a white victim. But if she's pretty and we've got video, that makes a big difference. And it fits into a narrative that a lot of people are seeing in the larger world beyond this one thing. There's a lot of discussion about the crime rate and who's committing the crimes and is that something that needs to be addressed.

So it kind of fits the right's narrative perfectly and it's just made for memeing and it's just made to be viral because of her looks. So the anti-MAGA people, they're doing their best to try to figure out how it can be racist. And I do believe I've seen it myself that in the comments, not so much what the big influencers are saying, that doesn't sound racist to me, but a lot of the comments are flat out as racist as you could possibly be. Now, you could argue whether that needs to be stopped or not. And you could also argue is it racist if you're talking statistically? Right? So that's what people would say. It's like, well, if I'm just talking about the statistical risk, that's not that racist, is it? But there are other people who are using certain language that you would, most of you I think we would agree is over the line. But that's the real world. In the real world there are people who are going to go over every line and you see that online. So I would imagine that your feed would be different from mine, which should be different from everybody else's. I may see more of it than you do.

We believe, but I'm not positive this is true. So there's still a little fog of war in this story. But is it true? Because I haven't seen it and I wouldn't know if it was real if I saw it, that there was a video that came out after the main murder video on the train that showed the murderer saying quote that he got that white girl which would strongly suggest that he had a racial motive even if he's a crazy person. So you know, that's good enough to throw it in that does it prove something about the bigger world? Personally I saw this as more like a crazy person situation, but I saw Greg Gutfeld's monologue. I was watching that and he points out that for a crazy person he certainly made a lot of sane judgments about how to get away and how to plan it. So it's always a mixed bag. It's not so crazy that you're running around naked throwing your feces but there are pockets of non-craziness.

So what do you do with that? So obviously race was part of the story and remains part of the story. And then Trump seizing on a situation because he's anti-crime as you know and so now CNN says he's seizing on the moment because it's getting a lot of attention so he wants to maybe get in front of it. And anyway he's threatening to withhold federal dollars from the city of Charlotte because of that murder. And I don't know who said this. I saw a quote online, but the quote might have been Trump, but somebody said, "I guarantee that if I find what I think I'm going to find, they're not going to have your federal tax dollars going to their public transportation system. Zero. None."

So there's some allegation, but I'm not entirely sure who's making it, unless it's Trump, that they know something about Charlotte that's corrupt or dirty. Now, have you noticed the pattern yet that every local government is corrupt or it seems that way? Except, correct me if I'm wrong, it feels like it's just always Democrat government. Yeah. Every story I know it's not literally true. There are obviously Republicans who have been arrested and indicted and stuff for crimes. It's not like it doesn't exist. But the news that I see, isn't it suddenly like 10 to one in one direction? And what do you do about that? It's like 10 to one, isn't it?

And then that murder is bringing into the larger conversation the following statistics that I see literally every day on social media. I don't know if these are exactly true or true enough, but it's what people are saying. So that's the important part. But I keep seeing on social media people saying black people make up 13% of the US population, but they claim, and I don't know if this is true, that black people commit 56% of the murders. Now, is that true? And then do you further calculate how many of them were other black people who were the victims? Because it would be mostly, right? Like would it be three quarters of their victims would also be black or more than three quarters, right?

Then there are a whole bunch of other statistics. The murder rate among black people is six to eight times higher than among white people blah blah. So that's the sort of stuff that's going around social media and Elon Musk is getting into it by saying that a small group of criminals are the repeat violent offenders. Now that is a far less racial way to approach this. So I think Elon Musk is probably going on the most productive path because as soon as it gets into a race, nothing happens. Everybody just hates everybody. So you could just forget that. But if you were to focus on the repeat offenders, that's purely a behavioral thing and it only kicks in if objectively speaking somebody's been convicted a certain number of times for a certain number of things, certain type of things. So but the vast majority of all crime is committed by people who have at least three prior arrests. So these are pretty measurable things.

So Elon is saying if we look at that and lock up the repeat criminals our crime situation would be vastly improved. I remember when that was a thing in California. I think it got reversed, but for a time there was that three strikes thing and people argued before that was implemented that if you locked up the people who did the vast majority of the crimes, you know, the three strike people, they actually argued that if you locked up in jail and kept them there forever the people who did 80% of all the crimes that it wouldn't change the crime rate. That was actually what smart people were saying in public in their arguments. Well, it's not going to change the crime rate just because you put the people who do all the crimes in jail forever. And I used to jokingly say, "So let me see if I understand your hypothesis. Your hypothesis is that if they lock up 100% of the people who are doing 80% of the crimes that the crime rate won't go down, but rather the people who were not planning to do any crimes would increase the number of crimes they were committing beyond what they had planned to make up for the repeat criminals being in jail. That's how you would get a balance and nothing would change, right?" And the conversation would quickly turn into insult because when people realize how dumb their opinion is. That's not really an opinion, is it? That's really just somebody's a dumb. People who are in jail don't commit crimes outside of jail. I mean, unless they have access to a telephone I guess, or a henchman to do their work like a crime boss. But generally speaking, if you're in jail, it does stop you from murdering mostly except in jail.

If you're wondering why are some communities more dangerous than others, and you don't have enough of a racist opinion about why, let me give you a lesser racist opinion about why some places are more dangerous. Apparently according to Neuroscience News, aggression is contagious. Meaning that if you observe your parents in particular, so it's more a family thing. Observing strangers doesn't have the same effect. It must have some, but if you observed family members being physical, yeah, you were more likely to be that way yourself. But I went immediately to Grok and I said, "Can you tell me, Grok, is violence and aggression, are those things inherited?" Because it would make sense to me that if they were hereditary, you know, not 100%, but at least in any way, that it might not be because you're watching your family be aggressive. It might be because you all have the aggressive gene. So it seems to you that maybe the cause is that you're observing it or you're around it. But it could be according to Grok that there are some people who think that aggression is about 50% inherited. So the studies of twins I guess 50% of variance in aggressive behavior might be genetic.

So here's my suggestion for fixing things. If the people who are being violent are being perpetuated by seeing their family being violent and it becomes this cycle. Maybe the best thing you could do because it's hard to fix that directly. I mean what are you going to do? People spend time with their family. How are you going to stop that? So if you can