Why Is Austin Media Refusing to Release Description of At-Large Austin Shooter? Just Kidding. You Know Why.

Early Saturday morning, a gunman shot and injured at least 19 people outside an Austin, Texas, bar. Rick Moran reported:

Sixth Street in Austin, Texas, was crowded with post-Covid revelers on Friday night when a man described as “black” with a thin build and “dreadlocks” opened fire outside a bar. At least 13 people were taken to the hospital. Of the 13 wounded, 11 were in stable condition with two critical.

On Saturday afternoon, the Austin Police Department updated its website to say that one suspect is in custody, while another is still at large. Earlier in the day, police released this description of the suspect:

The suspect(s) remains at-large. It is unknown if there is one, or multiple suspects involved. There is one suspect described as a black male, with dread locks, wearing a black shirt and a skinny build. The area will be closed for an extended amount of time to process the crime scene. Investigators are collecting and reviewing camera footage and surveillance video.

That description—black, male, dreadlocks—was not only in an official announcement by the APD, but it was all over social media as well on Saturday. But the city’s flagship newspaper, the Austin-American Statesman, is refusing to release the description of the suspect, a dangerous mass shooter who is still on the run, because—you guessed it—it would be racist to do so. The newspaper explained in an Editor’s Note appended to its main story on the shooting:

Editor’s note: Police have only released a vague description of the suspected shooter as of Saturday morning. The Austin American-Statesman is not including the description as it is too vague at this time to be useful in identifying the shooter and such publication could be harmful in perpetuating stereotypes. If more detailed information is released, we will update...

Thank you for the link, and I am largely onboard.

However, I think he makes a mistake by stating it is 3% of the population causing 45% of the crime. (He says that it is black males in a given age group responsible)

That much is true, but I believe it not only understates the nearly ludicrous seriousness of the problem, but unfairly tars every black male in that age range.

There are ten million black men in that age range (if his calculation is correct) but out of that ten million, it is a minority of that which is responsible for 45% of crime (I prefer to focus on violent crime which includes homicides, aggravated assault, armed robbery, and rape) which is why I bring in the statistic of 1/3 of black men with felony convictions as a rule of thumb. It is a given that not all black men who have committed violent crime have a felony conviction, but it is also a given that many of the black men who DO commit violent crime do so repeatedly and will show up on more than one recorded case.

Note: The 1/3 of black men with a felony conviction is also a Leftist construct from a study they did for an ideological purpose which I will accept as a starting point, and also because it is good to use their own “data” against them.

That is approximately 3,300,000 black males committing 45% of violent crime, which is 1% of the total population which makes the problem even MORE insanely stupid.

So that is where we differ, I think he is too broad.

There are millions of responsible black men in that age range that are trying to get by, trying to make a living, and trying to raise a family. We cannot lump them in. Granted, many of them may be adherents of toxic “Black Culture”, but many of them also do not agree with treating women as whores, or education as “acting white”. They are Americans and should be treated as such.

If we lived in a town of 10,000 people, and statistics showed that only 100 people were causing nearly half the murders, rapes, and assaults, normal, sane people would reasonably say that those 100 people should be sought out and punished or removed from the town.

But these are not sane times, that is for certain.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.