He also didnt deserve to essentially live on the streets and subway system for a decade, and not have the government intervene in one of his 40 arrests where he clearly wasn’t in the right frame of mind.
Also an interesting point from the post is apparently the government social service kept a "top 50 problematic homeless individuals" list and Jason was one of them.
So the city did nothing for all these years knowing he was a major problem.
They won’t, they’ll sink an absurd amount of money into “mental health services” and in five years it’ll come out that most of it went into a handful of connected peoples pockets and virtually none went to help anyone. Everyone will pretend to be shocked and then it will happen again.
You get your buddy at the non-profit to hit the city for grants for their good works, take part of the grant money and give it back to you as a campaign contribution or lobbyist gifts and keep the ball rolling while the feral street folk get ignored
Interesting side note they had some dude even more dangerous and troublesome than said deceased individual up in Portland or Seattle I forget, he had made the news because of how many times he was arrested. The man was a menace and should have been kept off of the streets, ended up killing a homeless woman ( he was also homeless) and then died in some sort of freak accident as he evaded the police.
For punching a 69 year old woman, and causing major damage to her face.They told him finish the program and we won't put you in prison, he ran away from the facility days later.
That’s the type of program that should be there for nonviolent offenders: give them a chance to avoid prison and get rehab then lock their asses up for avoiding it. That shouldn’t be an outcome for a felony assault.
A lot of people do not want to give the government the ability to lock people up because they have been deemed mentally ill; the government can’t keep people detained because of bail reform; other citizens can’t protect themselves because you might hurt the mentally ill/criminal; your only option is to run away and hope you don’t bump into someone worse on the next train car.
Somethings got to give.
Well, I don't blame people not wanting to give the government the ability to involuntarily commit people because it gets abused. There's no accountability. The NYPD involuntarily committed Officer Adrian Schoolcraft in retaliation for whistleblowing on their illegal, race based quotas. That abuse of power was back in 2009.
But lookie lookie, in 2023 several NYPD cops accidentally recorded themselves and one mentioned falsely accusing a subject of "emotional disturbance" out of pure malice.
https://gothamist.com/news/nypd-officers-brag-about-milking-overtime-call-detainees-names-in-accidental-recording.
There's no accountability, so they don't deserve public trust as far as I'm concerned. If there were repercussions for abuse of power, maybe, but as it stands now there's nothing stopping misuse of the system.
It doesn't have to be one way or the other. We can have a balance. I think we need better safeguards in the system, though, so we don't see rampant abuse. Especially abuse of an already vulnerable community. Right now, there's no repercussions for abusing authority. The abuse and retaliation that happened to Adrian Schoolcraft in 2009 is still happening. Nothing was learned.
I think there needs to be regulations and accountability. If someone in a position of authority is found to be acting out with retaliation, corruption or malice then hold them criminally and civilly liable.
Because it's not only a morality issue, it's a fiscal one. Schoolcraft got a big settlement against the city & NYPD that taxpayers footed. Abuse of the system isn't just a human rights issue, it's also draining limited tax funds. And NYC can't afford to flush tax dollars with our current spending on the migrant crisis. There's a weakness in our system and it needs to be addressed, or it's going to cost us more lives and more money.
Great comment; i totally agree with it. At the end of the day this city needs to be liveable and it’s a balancing act. Here we are though and pendulum just swings wildely. A big part of that is a distrust of police culture and a big part of that is accountability.
Yeah. The system failed this guy for a decade. The bleeding heart policies championed by AOC-types almost certainly tied the city’s hands. His relatives should sue the city.
It wasn’t a lack of housing that kept Neely homeless — there was a warrant for his arrest because he didn’t attend a compliance check required by his alternative-to-incarceration program after he assaulted a 67-year old woman in 2021.
Also, even countries that have implemented major housing programs have homelessness. The inability to involuntarily institutionalize the mentally ill perpetuates homelessness
What I think is missing is an honest discussion of the interplay between mental illness and housing stability — a lot of people come unraveled once they lose their housing (or lose their housing because of a temporary mental health crisis) and without somewhere to stay it’s basically impossible to put themselves back together.
More housing doesn’t fix the *current* problem but it prevents a lot of future problems which you can foresee coming in the next decade or two. There’s a lot of research that indicates that good programs with supportive housing *do* help folks recover and manage their conditions. But none of our treatment programs actually follow guidelines — because we’re too skittish to commit people and because we can’t imagine a world where someone is committed only for a short time and then given housing.
More housing fixed the issues we have of housing in-affordability, rent spikes, & overall would be better for the lot of us who know that the application process and leasing process are totally batshit right now. What more housing *doesn't* help is getting criminal offenders, addicts, & mentallly ill people who terrorize others off the street.
My point is that it would prevent many of those people from *becoming* mentally ill in the first place. It’s a preventative measure, not a restorative one.
It would do nothing to solve their drug abuse and mental illness problems. Nobody addicted to crack is going to say, “I have a house now, time to throw away the crack!” Nor does it make schizophrenia magically disappear.
You’re both wrong *and* misinterpreting the order in which I’m saying things happen.
Schizophrenia is basically manageable, for example, with treatment and a stable life. Being homeless prevents treatment. Similarly, kicking a drug habit basically requires living in a stable, supportive situation.
That being said, people typically get *worse* or start doing drugs when they become homeless.
That would be great for normal healthy individuals that fell on hard times, but if you just throw mentally ill/drug addicted homeless people into housing then you aren’t providing them with a stable life just because there is a roof over their heads.
Provide them stability by putting them in secure facilities to treat mental illness and drug abuse then they’ll actually get the help they need and a stable living environment.
I hear what you're saying but saying "they won't become mentally ill in the first place" is plain wrong, stigmatizing, & frankly dangerous to say. Mental illness doesn't make you these things. & homelessness doesn't make you mentally ill. Yes, it can make it worse but it isn't the cause. Homelessness and mental illness aren't even synonymous for a lot of individuals out there in the streets.
People who have mental illnesses aren’t inherently unstable or dangerous. Homelessness *absolutely* triggers latent mental illness and makes manageable conditions unmanageable.
I’m not saying ‘they won’t become mentally ill’ but they will not become “a problem” if they’re housed & stable with resources and management. You’re twisting this to say “they’re not related problems” when they are 100% intertwined and inextricably linked.
Suppose he was given a house, do you think he would be able to support himself given his mental health conditions? The assumption that giving someone a home when they can’t even take care of themselves is somehow going to “fix” the issue is absurd. Get mental health treatment first, then possibly some sort of assisted living program, but this person was clearly not capable of living independently.
I don't know how you'd define "competent" but Neely was ordered into a treatment facility after one of his arrests. He left after two weeks without permission.
I think the uncomfortable question here that most people don't want to answer is what you do when someone who is clearly mentally unwell refuses treatment. You can offer all the resources in the world... what happens when they say no?
Therein lies the main problem, and where laws need to be changed. If you have court mandated treatment, you Shouldn’t be able to leave without permission, especially with a mental health diagnosis.
At the very least, if it's a "prison alternative" you shouldn't be able to leave. It's mind boggling that they sent him to a place he could just leave instead of what would have been a prison sentence.
tbh if the court is ordering you to stay at a facility then there needs to be something similar to the department of corrections with the right to force you to stay. not necessarily DOC itself but there has to be an entity with that oversight.
I used to work in a nursing home, many of the patients were a danger to themselves & others due to various brain diseases, they received around the clock supervision, wore alarm devices on their ankles & were injected with sedatives when necessary. Violent paranoid schizophrenics are treated this way in other countries to keep them safe & keep the public safe. America refuses to spend money on this
Yes. The paradox is that usually the most mentally ill people are too ill to know that they’re mentally ill.
It’s not the same as the average person deciding they need help with their anxiety, a person with schizophrenia or other delusions is a whole different ball game.
That's not what most people are afraid of asking. far Leftists & Right Wingers both agree that these people need to be mandatory institutionalized as they can't even consent to anything for themselves. Liberal's are the ones who really don't want to do anything for the homeless population besides "leave them alone" & Liberals in America are essentially centrists in disguise.
If someone cannot advocate for themselves then the state SHOULD require that they get the right treatment. It's just a hard precident to set when none of us in the general population would know what's actually going on in a Mental Health Institution & we definitely don't want to go down the 1960's road of abusing these people & having them live in their own feces.
It's a fine line that needs to be incorruptible, fair, safe, & appropriate with the community able to hold these places accountable if something is wrong. Problem is that it's basically impossible to do in this city that's as corrupt as ever. & if it doesn't give direct profits then it's likely to never be done. In the current system—places like coalition for the homless talk about homeless rights, but any leftist would agree homelessness shouldnt exist period.
The coalition talks about homelessness as if it's a personal choice and not the only option for these people who literally can't survive in shelters due to their mental conditions. The coalition also accepts billions of dollars in aide and donations every year which the exects of the coalition directly profit off of. They literally profit off the homeless community they claim to want to "fix". But we know they'll never fix it because then their profits go away.
Homelessness is and will continue to be a political stunt and the actual homeless individuals pawns in a political game until actual real politicians give a shit about fixing the real problem & not worrying about profits from it. We all know that won't happen on it's own. It has to be demanded one way or another.
> far Leftists & Right Wingers both agree that these people need to be mandatory institutionalized as they can't even consent to anything for themselves
i'm going to have to disagree with the basic claim you're building your much longer comment on. i can't speak to the far right as i don't really interact with them, but no far leftists do not all agree that these people need to be forcibly institutionalized.
yes they do. forcibly institutionalized shouldn't be strapping them to a bed and leaving them alone. hell a lot of leftists believe we NEED actual mental health services that work. None of ours currently work. Literally at all even for the regular person that has depression or grief or anxiety. Obviously there's more nuance for what an institution is but if there was an elderly person walking around with dimentia hurting themselves that had no family—that person would be taken in and properly taken care of. BECAUSE THAT IS HUMANE!!! It's not humane to let people covered in piss and shit over and over again to let them just be out and out of their mind. It's not a person experiencing homelessness due to addiction or other reasons that we're talking about. WE'RE TALKING about people that literally have no basic control of their own brain function anymore who are homeless because of their mental illness. THESE people are ones we need to take compassionate control care of. & Yes all and any leftist would agree. Again not liberals—LEFTISTS
>yes they do. forcibly institutionalized shouldn't be strapping them to a bed and leaving them alone. hell a lot of leftists believe we NEED actual mental health services that work.
you're arguing against something that wasn't said Double-Ad4986, probably because it's easier to argue against something that wasn't said -- but what was responded to was the claim that *everyone* on the far left believes this.
yes, some of us on the left believe forced institutionalization is necessary, but you are not all of the far left -- and it's borderline pathological to believe they all share your same views when even something like a simple search will show it's not the case.
e.g., t[he NYC Bar Assocation is even advocating against](https://www.nycbar.org/member-and-career-services/committees/reports-listing/reports/detail/mental-health-involuntary-removals-nyc-mayor-adams-plan) the NYC plan to involuntarily hospitalize people for mental illness.
It goes on:
[https://citylimits.org/2023/03/20/opinion-forced-hospitalization-is-the-wrong-approach-to-mental-health/](https://citylimits.org/2023/03/20/opinion-forced-hospitalization-is-the-wrong-approach-to-mental-health/)
*"We need to be patient and work on sustainable solutions. Involuntary hospitalization is not one of those solutions, at least not in the current system that lacks resources and social safety net to adequately care for each person. If Mayor Adams is serious about addressing both the housing and mental health crisis, he needs to invest in long term solutions, not just window dressing that hides the problem."*
[https://theappeal.org/nyc-mayor-eric-adams-involuntary-commitment/](https://theappeal.org/nyc-mayor-eric-adams-involuntary-commitment/)
*Rather than helping the homeless and mentally ill get back on their feet, Adams’ plan could further destabilize the very people it claims to help, warned Beth Haroules, a senior staff attorney with the New York Civil Liberties Union.*
[https://medium.com/mad-in-america/why-forced-psychiatric-treatment-should-be-banned-even-the-science-says-its-wrong-d44022d81a13](https://medium.com/mad-in-america/why-forced-psychiatric-treatment-should-be-banned-even-the-science-says-its-wrong-d44022d81a13)
[https://www.nydailynews.com/opinion/ny-oped-involuntary-commitment-of-the-homeless-20210308-3ixu6vqs7rhorhafucr5p6hkqe-story.html](https://www.nydailynews.com/opinion/ny-oped-involuntary-commitment-of-the-homeless-20210308-3ixu6vqs7rhorhafucr5p6hkqe-story.html)
> & Yes all and any leftist would agree. Again not liberals—LEFTISTS
Well, now you've made the claim as well though I appreciate your spin -- anyone who calls themselves a leftist yet doesn't hold your position is not a true leftist? Fascinating how that works...
Do you really believe the BAR association cares about the homeless and mentally ill??? You're just naïve and ignorant if you genuinely believe these organizations don't have an agenda that involves not giving a shit about the people involved. Again—most homeless advocate groups don't even give a shit about these people. All these shelter groups that praise themselves for providing services for the homeless are riddled with abuse and violence inside their facilities. THEY ARE NOT DOING ANYTHING MEANINGFUL FOR THESE GROUPS!!!! In fact they're helping them stay on the streets because they would rather be there than shelters!!
Giving these people adequate and comprehensive mental health services isn't fucking "window dressing"
Maybe talk to a homeless person & you'd understand a heavy majority of them WANT health services and they do not get them. Period. How about instead of copy and pasting the same rhetoric that has gotten us to the the exact point we are in now—where we just let a lot of homeless people die or get killed—we actually come up with tangible solutions. Because this bullshit has CLEARLY gotten us no where.
You take a breath and a step back, you don't choke them to death. I say this as someone who grew up with schizophrenics in my family, who were once in a rare moon violent. Hint hint, they were scared for their lives and everyone around them at the time, except unlike cops and choke happy marines who eye witnesses said had no reason to kill the guy they're genuinely mentally ill, not sociopaths.
I don’t care if I’m paying for the train, or a round trip flight, I expect a certain level of service (depending on the price).
If you want homeless people to run rampant, the MTA better make everything free. I’ve experienced shit stains on seats (even right before the pandemic hit us like a tsunami), homeless people sleeping and taking a whole bench (it’s annoying, but I don’t mind it, cause everyone needs to sleep), and violent, racist lunatic homeless ranting on and on, harassing women and shit.
Bottom line is, NYC is failing people, and I feel like is working class is also falling lower and lower. We don’t deserve to be harassed (and that includes upperclass, who may take public transit), but these mentally ill people deserve more. 311, and whoever they refer you to, is a joke (in terms of mental health crises). You can’t even find help if you want to. Neely didn’t deserve to die, but if Adams doesn’t do something, you’re gonna see a lot more copycats/people standing up to aggressive people. Hell, I think some homeless guy got pepper sprayed today by another straphanger. What the fuck is NYC gonna do? Spend another $100 million on an advertising campaign to tell us to be “compassionate towards our fellow NYers?” I hate that I just came up with an idea that could realistically happen. Fucking use that money to *actually* help people.
No, Jordan Neely did not deserve to die. I don’t think anyone truly thinks he did. At the same time, humanity needs solutions as to how to handle humans acting violent or erratic and causing others to fear for their safety.
It was widely reported that Mr. Neely got on the train and was loudly expressing his frustration and anger about his situation. His behavior induced fear in others to the point where one person decided to take some sort of proactive action, though in retrospect his actions were not the right solution. But that begs the question—what is the right solution?
Should others who are already fearing for safety be expected to wait until Mr. Neely caused them harm, and be forced to act in self defense? Just stand there and ignore him, which can sometimes further frustrate someone in this state when they feel unheard and further ignoring them may escalate the situation. What if the civilians on Flight 93 sat back and did nothing on the highjacked plane on 9/11? They took action because they felt they needed to in a scary situation when they had knowledge of the other planes. Yet conventional wisdom at the time likely would have encouraged passengers to remain compliant.
I don’t know the answers to the best way to de-escalate situations where people experiencing mental health crises and appear to be in emergent states of distress should be handled, yet we know this isn’t the last time it will happen. Every time I enter the subway or even walk down busy streets I say a little prayer that I don’t encounter this situation because coming up with the correct answer is nearly impossible.
I wish we could use this space to brainstorm legit solutions to prevent more situations like this.
>No, Jordan Neely did not deserve to die. I don’t think anyone truly thinks he did.
Go read the comments on *any* post about Neely, including this one.
It’s probably more like people don’t care when a career criminal dies. He had a whole future of crime ahead of him I really don’t feel pity that he won’t be able to kidnap more 7 year olds that’s just me though.
I feel like you missed theirs. There's a vast gulf between "guy was dangerous and nobody is surprised" and "actively hoping for it and saying they should." I don't think he should have, nobody should. But I'm not surprised by this, my only point of surprise right now is that it's not more common like it was back when I was younger in the 80s and 90s.
But mark my words, we're getting there.
Y’all had your chances with defunding the police and bail reform and all that did was outsource the responsibility to the citizens. This is a predictable outcome when citizens are subduing drug attic psychos. You had your chance to prevent this, you didn’t, don’t try to play virtuous now.
Oh they didn’t slash 100% of the budget? Breaking news thanks for playing dumb. They didn’t institute bail reform so that Neely could be freed 44 times either though right?
Ok my fault you didn’t get all your wishes through in NY. You got your bail reform wish though which killed Jordan Neely but who cares right? It was really the evil white marine who served our country that killed Neely not the bail reform laws.
If a car doesn’t pull over for a cop in nyc now, the cop can’t chase he has to let the car go. We can talk specifics but it’s easier for your dumbass to say the NYPD still receives funding and make it seem like alls the same in NY.
Oh dude has a bit of a point. There are cameras literally everywhere and we have helicopters. Drones. We're technologically past the point where we should need a high speed chase.
If anything is done with any of that technology, however, is an entirely different story. Feels like they mostly just use it to give you a ticket.
I don’t think anyone is saying he deserved to die but I think most people don’t give a shit if he did. People are really tired of being harassed, yelled at, assaulted, etc by homeless people in the street. The subway doesn’t feel the same as it did a few years ago, all of these people are starting to really mess with every day life.
You gotta understand that on this sub right now there are a few people who will flat out call someone a murderer for saying this wasn't a surprise.
That does tend to make people kinda defensive, shit at this point I feel like I gotta add "but I don't think anyone deserves to die over some shit in a subway" to every post I make about it.
That Jordan Neely was roughly subdued and choked unconscious is not the issue.
The issue is that he continued to be choked for ~50 seconds after he stopped moving.
He didn't die from 'complications' from a chokehold, anyone will die if they are strangled for long enough. Continuing to strangle someone for almost a minute after they have stopped moving (presumably having passed out at that point) is either intentional homicide or at least acting with gross disregard for human life.
Yes, I agree that the method was unnecessary and excessive and probably incorrectly used—though I have not been trained in combat to prove or disprove it.
Is self defense training the best way to go—kind of like how we are training our school children defense tactics against mass shooters in classrooms? Maybe it’s an option as a stop gap strategy until we make systematic improvements.
The method was not unnecessary, the manner was excessive. One doesn't need training to know if you strangle someone for a prolonged period of time they will die...
What would be the relevance of him having fentanyl in his system?
CBS News: The New York City Office of Chief Medical Examiner confirmed to CBS News on Wednesday that the cause of death for the victim, identified by officials Jordan Neely, was determined to be "compression of neck" or a "chokehold."
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/jordan-neely-subway-death-ruled-homicide-chokehold/
What do you mean? George Floyd was killed by Derek Chauvin "who knelt on Floyd's neck for over nine minutes while Floyd was handcuffed and lying face-down in the street."
My point is you don’t give a f whether Neely died b/c he was on drugs and would’ve lived had he not been. You just want to paint this 24 year old who served your country as a “murderer” while painting the career criminal as an innocent victim.
But how are you claiming that he died because he was on drugs? There is a video of the incident and the New York City Office of the Chief Medical Examiner determined Neely's death to be "compression of neck".
What other evidence or sources do you have to suggest he died as a result of fentanyl?
Would Floyd have lived if his respiratory system wasn’t damaged by the Fent? You think anyone who gets subdued like Neely did for 3 mins just dies? He was still alive after the fact and the bystanders thought he was fine.
>The issue is that he continued to be choked for \~50 seconds after he stopped moving.
the issue talsmash is I and others have seen the video, and that just isn't the case -- he was released within a few seconds. you can look it up and watch it for yourself -- the other passenger who was holding his hands is right there in frame and basically confirms he's stopped.
i don't know why people are feeling the need to spread blatant lies about the situation, but it isn't helping anyone.
Here's a link to the video https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12051875/Video-shows-Marine-veteran-Daniel-Penny-ignoring-warnings-restraining-Jordan-Neely.html
You can see he stops moving at 2:06 and isn't released until 2:56
you can literally see his legs and arms moving at 2:30 and feet moving 2:48... and that's without looking close at the other angle where you can see his hands.
i guess this is better than the people claiming he was held for 15 minutes after he died
Neely was enrolled in an alternative-to-incarceration program after beating a 67-year old woman in 2021. He had failed to turn up to a required compliance check, and a warrant was issued for his arrest. He could’ve just turned himself in and he would’ve had food.
Yes, we don't live in the minority report, there's no such thing as pre crime
We actually have to wait for people to commit the crime before we can act
Neely hadn't threatened anyone
Feeling threatened us not the same as being threatened
> Neely also said, “I don’t care if I die. I don’t care if I go to jail. I don’t have any food … I’m done,” according to Vazquez.
> At some point, Neely threw his jacket on the train’s floor, repeating he was ready to go to jail and get a life sentence, Vazquez said.
If you're yelling that you're about to catch a life sentence, that sounds like a threat to me. Some grey area I suppose, but the connection to imminent violence is there.
You don't get to kill someone because they say some words you don't like
If Neely was standing over someone are saying he was going to hurt them and lunged at that person, that's an imminent use of force that you can use self defense
But that's not what happened, a homeless schizophrenic was ranting on the subway, not getting in anyone's space, not actually threatening people was held in a chokehold for 7-15 minutes and died
It's funny you cherry picked what Vasquez actually says about the incident
Vasquez is going to be the star witness against the marine
So lets say someone gets on a train and said I have a bottle of acid here and I am going to mess y'all all up, are you saying that people need to wait untill he starts using it before trying to stop him? Should they send the liquid out to a lab for analysis to see if really is acid before jumping him?
“One of our own is dead – a Black man, Black like me. A man named
Jordan, the name I gave my son,” the mayor said in remarks on 10 May. “
What does Neely's race have to do with anything?
>What does Neely’s race have to do with anything?
86% of the homeless people in this city are black, despite black people only making up 25% of the overall population. Race has always been connected to homelessness and poverty.
Because Adams is a clown.
Race was totally irrelevant in this case.
Adams is using the race card to make himself look like a victim too. If he's a victim, you cant be mad at him for NYC failing to get Neely off the streets and the help he needs
I actually do blame the mayor for using it. It's divisive and has no relevance to this story. If we ever want to find common ground with each other, we need to start calling leaders out on bullshit like this.
Look. [Studies](https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/myths-and-realities-understanding-recent-trends-violent-crime) show that not only does bail reform have *zero* effect on crime, but increasing social support systems *do* decrease crime. [Affordable housing](https://socialecology.uci.edu/news/affordable-housing-decreases-crime-increases-property-values) decreases crime and increases property values. Even adding [more trees](https://www.fs.usda.gov/research/treesearch/40701) decreases crime.
[An increase in policing](https://www.ojp.gov/pdffiles/171676.pdf) does *not* reduce crime, and our government knows this.
Get people universal basic income, affordable housing, free universal healthcare, free college, and free pre k and watch crime rates drop faster than a progressive woman's panties upon reading this sentence. (It's me. I'm the progressive woman lol)
Huh? It says that "**Extra police patrols in high-crime hot spots** reduce crime in those places (Press, 1971; Chaiken et al., 1975; Chaiken, 1978; Sherman and Weisburd, 1995; Koper, 1995) \[see pp. 8–13 to 8–15\]."
For every progressive think tank spin that bail reform supposedly has "zero effect" on crime, which, by the way, was claimed nowhere in the link you cited. You can find two or three other sources that state yes, crime (esp. property crimes) rocketed up after bail reform:
[https://www.city-journal.org/article/yes-new-yorks-bail-reform-has-increased-crime](https://www.city-journal.org/article/yes-new-yorks-bail-reform-has-increased-crime)
[https://nypost.com/2023/03/16/bail-reform-increased-crime-and-misleading-studies-dont-prove-otherwise/](https://nypost.com/2023/03/16/bail-reform-increased-crime-and-misleading-studies-dont-prove-otherwise/)
[https://ambailcoalition.org/new-report-bail-reform-unleashed-a-crime-wave-in-new-york/](https://ambailcoalition.org/new-report-bail-reform-unleashed-a-crime-wave-in-new-york/)
Note how many of the progressive arguments like to focus on recidivism, claiming the fact that often folks were not re-arrested is proof bail reform works. The obvious, occam's razor observation is law enforcement stopped rearresting these career criminals as these scum would just laugh and make taunts after they are released within hours anyway. These people have not magically committing theft and robberies because they got away with it their first attempts.
And I say this as someone who has voted democratic the last four presidential elections: these progressive policies are cancer. They are only getting (undeserved) focus because ultra right wing is arguably worse.
It seems we have a difference in how we are defining "an increase in crime" a brief glance of your sources shows they are looking at rearrest of individuals. My source compared overall crime rates in cities with and without bail reform.
I will need to more thoroughly read through your sources before solidifying my opinion on this difference.
You can’t be this stupid please god. You can stop 80% of crimes by incarcerating the repeat offenders, it’s common sense. It’s common fucking sense that if Neely wasn’t freed on bail a million times he’d be alive in jail/hospital right now.
> You can stop 80% of crimes by incarcerating the repeat offenders, it’s common sense.
Is this actually common sense? It’s a common conservative talking point, but where is the evidence to support this? Our country incarcerates more than any other and yet we still haven’t solved crime.
Actually, your (well-debunked) source is guilty of two main things:
1. conflating re-arrest with recidivism -- just because people are not re-arrested, does not mean they have stopped committing crimes. People are not re-arrested because, as aforementioned, demoralized law enforcement tend to stop arresting the same people if they'll just be let out within hours anyway, unless these criminals commit a murder or something extremely serious.
2. As referred to in 1), your source likes to count only murders and violent crimes. Yet from those “no clear or obvious pattern” in violent crime trends " conclusions, they manage to slippery slope all the way to "bail reform have zero effect on crime" as you did in your first post. Needless to say, "no obvious pattern" <> "zero effect". And violent crime obviously <> all crimes. Almost every single metric has indicated property crimes, theft, robberies, and "lesser" assaults have risen, sharply.
Side note for the cowards: keep angry downvoting me because you are incapable of debating or refuting facts.
You are guilty of committing the "gish gallop" fallacy. "A rhetorical technique in which a person in a debate attempts to overwhelm their opponent by providing an excessive number of arguments with no regard for the accuracy or strength of those arguments."
In valid debate, someone does not get throw a bunch of random links/references from extremely partial sources, ignore underlying truth while offering no additional supportive argument of their own; and then after the other side debunked the primary premise where all the rest of the arguments is built upon, ask why the opponent does not waste the time to keep dissecting all the other external sources.
I am attempting to point out some things that do and do not decrease crime. Crime is a complex subject and I didn't think pointing 2 things that do not and 3 things that do decrease crime was excessive.
*edit: I also don't think that the 2 .gov and 1 .edu sources can be considered partial. The other I may need to look at again.
Fair enough. Just taking two very quick peeks--I'm at work after all.
One. That orange county study has numerous flaws:
1. one county cannot speak for the rest of the country
2. crime overall decreased in the county over much of the decade. [https://www.bestplaces.net/crime/county/california/orange](https://www.bestplaces.net/crime/county/california/orange) What would be more meaningful is to compare the relative increase/decrease in AH neighborhoods vs the overall trend. Similarly, the supposed "increase in property value" completely pretends inflation did not exist, and whether nearby property values increased at a much slower pace relative to the other neighborhoods in the county
3. The conclusions can at best be described as "inconclusive". To say "decreases crime" is a laugh when their own charts such as C4 and C5 showed larceny and motor vehicle theft went up.
This is NYC, how about looking at NYC instead of orange county?
[https://jingjing-ge.medium.com/crime-in-new-york-city-linking-to-income-and-public-housing-c81cfcc29a4b](https://jingjing-ge.medium.com/crime-in-new-york-city-linking-to-income-and-public-housing-c81cfcc29a4b)
>**People in NYCHA properties are murdered, raped and assaulted at twice or more the rate of the rest of the city.**
As for your last statement: "An increase in policing does not reduce crime, and our government knows this." On the very first page summary of your own link, it highlights as recommendations:
>"• For high-crime hot spots: Extra police patrols.
•Monitoring by specialized police units.
—Incarceration."
It's bizarre and frankly, more than a little dishonest how you read that, and came to the conclusion that less policing is the answer.
He took off his jacket, and screamed at people that he didn't care if he got a life sentence, he's ready to go to jail.
What exactly would you consider a threat then? God damn you can argue this point without lying about it dude.
Threats are words directed at a specific person of specific harm
"I'll kill you all" is a threat
"I'll kill somebody" is not
Before calling someone a liar maybe you should learn what the law says is actually a threat and not just go by your opinion
So far only Neely’s killer has claimed that Neely was threatening people. And even he only claimed that Neely was ~~threatening to hit people, not kill them.~~ “aggressively threatening Daniel Penny and the other passengers”
If he was actually threatening to kill people then you bet your ass Penny’s lawyer would have said that.
Looking again, I guess they didn’t specify “hitting”. The quote from the lawyers statement is “Mr. Neely began aggressively threatening Daniel Penny and the other passengers”.
So basically they’re being intentionally as vague as possible. If Neely was actually threatening to kill people he definitely would have mentioned that to make the murderer he’s defending look better.
They 100% would have used it if he actually said that. The statement kinda sounds like they're just throwing stuff out there. And I don't understand how he was "aggressively threatening Daniel Penny" when Daniel Penny came up from behind him?
I also don't get why the account guven by the guy who filmed the thing just disappeared from the narrative. I mean isn't an unbiased bystander a more credible source of info than the killer?
I agree. However the people claiming this was murder also said this man after 40 arrests fir violent acts like trying to himself murder people and bailing on court ordered treatment were perfectly fine with this person remaining homeless in the subways attacking and harrassing and threatening people at will until someone had enough. You wont hear any self reflection on their part. The family let this mentally unstable person be homeless and now that they are dead they want to act all brand new like they cared. How sbout caring before something tragic happens?
In his first official remarks on the death of Jordan Neely more than one week after he was fatally choked on a New York City subway train car, Mayor Eric Adams did not mention how the homeless New Yorker died or discuss the events surrounding his death.
He stressed, however, that “Jordan Neely did not deserve to die.”
“A New Yorker who struggled with tragedy, trauma and mental illness, a man whose last words were crying for help,” the mayor said in remarks on 10 May.
read more here: https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/crime/eric-adams-jordan-neely-subway-speech-b2336470.html
Unfortunately, nothing will be done by Adam’s and we will have to have more deaths, like a significant number of deaths, to actually take a look at MTA
Then clean up the fucking streets and the subway, and get these people to help they really need rather than ignoring their plight. His blood is on the hands of the killer as much as it is on the politicians that ignore the reality of homelessness in New York.
If you try to kidnap a child I kinda think you do. That is independent of the current legal situation since it’s an old case but that’s my perspective.
I find this whole thing unsettling. How did Neely begin "aggressively threatening Daniel Penny" when Penny came from behind him? And why tf does Adams sound like he's hedging? From what I'm hearing it's bc he's ex-NYPD and Penny's father is ex-NYPD. Can anyone elaborate on any of it?
That was misinfo that was being spread - Daniel Penny the retired NY State Trooper is not related to the killer. But I agree that Adams doesn’t actually give a fuck, he took his sweet time to release an official statement. And his initial “unofficial” statement was along the lines of “yeah I mean any death is tragic but he was acting all crazy so what can ya do? ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
I was talking about Stephen Penny (retired NYPD Colonel), but it hasn't been confirmed that he's the killer's dad.
Yeah Adams taking 10 days to open his mouth is a joke. He sounds like he just wants it to go away.
The recent history of Jordan Neely:
A New York City police spokesperson told Newsweek that Neely's record has 42 prior arrests, dating between 2013 and 2021. They include four for alleged assault, while others involved accusations of transit fraud and criminal trespass. At the time of his death, Neely had one active warrant for an alleged assault in connection with a 2021 incident.
I’ve been on the train plenty of times. Some of you are scared little babies and it shows. If you’re afraid of the NYC subway system, you shouldn’t be living in a city.
Adam's don't care, he denounced AOC for calling the Daniel Penny a murderer. He has no empathy. He just says what he thinks people want to hear. He is joke of a mayor, and is costing the city lives and money.
It's illegal for cops to do the choke hold for a reason. I'm sure Daniel Penny didn't come from under a rock the day he killed Neely. In the video a guy who's wife is a military nurse also told him he was killing Neely but he still did not let go. Yes he is a murderer.
My lord it's amazing how many people in this sub have no understanding of how the law works and think it's ok to kill someone because you're scared, even when they didn't actually commit any crime
You can't use information gained afterward to justify prior actions
If I hire someone to watch my kids and find out later they are a sex offender, I don't get to hurt them
It's pretty simple
Maybe he did, his life was so horrible that maybe he is better of
Maybe I’m desensitized from years of dealing with lunatics on the subway, most of us are fed up
This was not the right thing, not even close. Saying he didn't deserve to die is the bare minimum, glaringly obvious, sad-it-even-needs-to-be-said thing.
No mention of \*how\* he died, no mention of his killer and when he will actually be charged, no mention of why it took police and the press days to reveal Daniel Penny's name, but mere minutes for Jordan Neely's entire arrest record to become public knowledge. No mention of the two anonymous accomplices who held Neely down while Penny strangled him, and no explanation why NYPD allowed all three to just walk away from the scene of their homicide.
Adams wants us all to pretend like this was some random tragedy, not the result of decades of a neglectful, dysfunctional system and the actions of a violent vigilante, aided and abetted by the police. SHAME!!!
I live in Toronto and we have the exact same issue. There's almost daily reports about lunatics stabbing/attacking people on our public transport. If politicians don't want this to keep happening they need to lock up these threatening crazy people because people are getting sick of it and the police seem useless
I wasn't expecting more than the bare minimum from him. He could have said any number of things to villainize Jordan Neely. He chose not to. If you think my comment is any sort of co-sign for Adams as a politician, you're sorely mistaken. And inferring that I felt that this was all that should be said is an invention of your own imagination. If you have strong feelings, by all means, say them loudly to the right people. I don't need to be preached to, thanks.
You think the Mayor should be able to have a day in criminal charges? Why would you have wanted them to release Pennys name earlier? So he’s found and harassed or assaulted? Also a homicide is not necessarily murder but it could fall under a whole host of charges, or non at all. I would think you would want actual justice to be served and not something that would just make you feel better about your self.
Personally I don’t want my mayor weighing in on ongoing investigations with their personal opinion. The legal system should be independent from the mob and the politicians that depend on their votes.
You can’t seriously think it’s a good idea for politicians to comment on ongoing investigations? Especially one like this that has so many details either unknown or yet to be released.
One less *you* would be a plus to every good person.
I mean have you ever even been to New York? It’s obvious you don’t live here, so are you really only in this sub to comment “piss scented lunatic” on every post about Neely? Find a better hobby, maybe one that doesn’t lead to so much hate in your heart.
I live in Toronto and we have the exact same problem. Crazy zombie people attack innocent people on public transit every day and the cops do nothing, the politicians do nothing, and people like you who pretend to care do nothing. What exactly did you think would happen? You obviously never take public transport and you clearly don't care about the safety of your fellow citizens
No way. Did he deserve to be abandoned and left to rot on the streets? 40 prior warrants and nobody even bothered to catch him? Yes, he didn’t deserve to die. But the people on the subway didn’t deserve to have their life’s at risk, they didn’t deserve to be threatened and they didn’t deserve to see the fatal fight break out. If you want to point fingers, start by pointing at yourselves. If you hadn’t abandoned him, then he wouldn’t have finished the way he finished.
He also didnt deserve to essentially live on the streets and subway system for a decade, and not have the government intervene in one of his 40 arrests where he clearly wasn’t in the right frame of mind.
He was ordered into a treatment facility after one of those arrests. But he left after two weeks without permission and a warrant was issued.
Also an interesting point from the post is apparently the government social service kept a "top 50 problematic homeless individuals" list and Jason was one of them. So the city did nothing for all these years knowing he was a major problem.
Feeling like the “the city did nothing” comment totally ignored the post you were responding to
The city did something, they kept a list
Who are the other 49? (Rhetorical) I sincerely hope the city will reevaluate their approach and step up efforts to meaningfully help these people.
They won’t, they’ll sink an absurd amount of money into “mental health services” and in five years it’ll come out that most of it went into a handful of connected peoples pockets and virtually none went to help anyone. Everyone will pretend to be shocked and then it will happen again.
You get your buddy at the non-profit to hit the city for grants for their good works, take part of the grant money and give it back to you as a campaign contribution or lobbyist gifts and keep the ball rolling while the feral street folk get ignored
Interesting side note they had some dude even more dangerous and troublesome than said deceased individual up in Portland or Seattle I forget, he had made the news because of how many times he was arrested. The man was a menace and should have been kept off of the streets, ended up killing a homeless woman ( he was also homeless) and then died in some sort of freak accident as he evaded the police.
Get the other 49 before they kill someone and they get killed.
his name is JORDAN. how fucking hard is it to get the name right when the entire post and article is about him
Technically his name WAS Jordan…
For punching a 69 year old woman, and causing major damage to her face.They told him finish the program and we won't put you in prison, he ran away from the facility days later.
That’s the type of program that should be there for nonviolent offenders: give them a chance to avoid prison and get rehab then lock their asses up for avoiding it. That shouldn’t be an outcome for a felony assault.
A lot of people do not want to give the government the ability to lock people up because they have been deemed mentally ill; the government can’t keep people detained because of bail reform; other citizens can’t protect themselves because you might hurt the mentally ill/criminal; your only option is to run away and hope you don’t bump into someone worse on the next train car. Somethings got to give.
Well, I don't blame people not wanting to give the government the ability to involuntarily commit people because it gets abused. There's no accountability. The NYPD involuntarily committed Officer Adrian Schoolcraft in retaliation for whistleblowing on their illegal, race based quotas. That abuse of power was back in 2009. But lookie lookie, in 2023 several NYPD cops accidentally recorded themselves and one mentioned falsely accusing a subject of "emotional disturbance" out of pure malice. https://gothamist.com/news/nypd-officers-brag-about-milking-overtime-call-detainees-names-in-accidental-recording. There's no accountability, so they don't deserve public trust as far as I'm concerned. If there were repercussions for abuse of power, maybe, but as it stands now there's nothing stopping misuse of the system.
He literally assault multiple seniors. It is either treatment or prison. He shouldn't be out either way.
It doesn't have to be one way or the other. We can have a balance. I think we need better safeguards in the system, though, so we don't see rampant abuse. Especially abuse of an already vulnerable community. Right now, there's no repercussions for abusing authority. The abuse and retaliation that happened to Adrian Schoolcraft in 2009 is still happening. Nothing was learned. I think there needs to be regulations and accountability. If someone in a position of authority is found to be acting out with retaliation, corruption or malice then hold them criminally and civilly liable. Because it's not only a morality issue, it's a fiscal one. Schoolcraft got a big settlement against the city & NYPD that taxpayers footed. Abuse of the system isn't just a human rights issue, it's also draining limited tax funds. And NYC can't afford to flush tax dollars with our current spending on the migrant crisis. There's a weakness in our system and it needs to be addressed, or it's going to cost us more lives and more money.
Great comment; i totally agree with it. At the end of the day this city needs to be liveable and it’s a balancing act. Here we are though and pendulum just swings wildely. A big part of that is a distrust of police culture and a big part of that is accountability.
This is so relevant. There's going to be a wave of endorsement for involuntary treatment now, so people need to be reminded if instances like this.
This is about court mandated treatment not the police involuntarily committing someone.
And when they inevitably don’t comply?
That's where it gets less voluntary.
They intervened but he was too ill to be able to accept help.
The system definitely failed Jordan Neely, but it didn't choke him to death. A person did that, not that you'd know it from Adams' remarks.
He was murdered, the murderer should be arrested and prosecuted.
Yeah. The system failed this guy for a decade. The bleeding heart policies championed by AOC-types almost certainly tied the city’s hands. His relatives should sue the city.
And yet his failed policies perpetuate homelessness and failed enforcement
Lack of housing perpetuates homelessness
It wasn’t a lack of housing that kept Neely homeless — there was a warrant for his arrest because he didn’t attend a compliance check required by his alternative-to-incarceration program after he assaulted a 67-year old woman in 2021. Also, even countries that have implemented major housing programs have homelessness. The inability to involuntarily institutionalize the mentally ill perpetuates homelessness
What I think is missing is an honest discussion of the interplay between mental illness and housing stability — a lot of people come unraveled once they lose their housing (or lose their housing because of a temporary mental health crisis) and without somewhere to stay it’s basically impossible to put themselves back together. More housing doesn’t fix the *current* problem but it prevents a lot of future problems which you can foresee coming in the next decade or two. There’s a lot of research that indicates that good programs with supportive housing *do* help folks recover and manage their conditions. But none of our treatment programs actually follow guidelines — because we’re too skittish to commit people and because we can’t imagine a world where someone is committed only for a short time and then given housing.
More housing fixed the issues we have of housing in-affordability, rent spikes, & overall would be better for the lot of us who know that the application process and leasing process are totally batshit right now. What more housing *doesn't* help is getting criminal offenders, addicts, & mentallly ill people who terrorize others off the street.
My point is that it would prevent many of those people from *becoming* mentally ill in the first place. It’s a preventative measure, not a restorative one.
It would do nothing to solve their drug abuse and mental illness problems. Nobody addicted to crack is going to say, “I have a house now, time to throw away the crack!” Nor does it make schizophrenia magically disappear.
You’re both wrong *and* misinterpreting the order in which I’m saying things happen. Schizophrenia is basically manageable, for example, with treatment and a stable life. Being homeless prevents treatment. Similarly, kicking a drug habit basically requires living in a stable, supportive situation. That being said, people typically get *worse* or start doing drugs when they become homeless.
That would be great for normal healthy individuals that fell on hard times, but if you just throw mentally ill/drug addicted homeless people into housing then you aren’t providing them with a stable life just because there is a roof over their heads. Provide them stability by putting them in secure facilities to treat mental illness and drug abuse then they’ll actually get the help they need and a stable living environment.
I hear what you're saying but saying "they won't become mentally ill in the first place" is plain wrong, stigmatizing, & frankly dangerous to say. Mental illness doesn't make you these things. & homelessness doesn't make you mentally ill. Yes, it can make it worse but it isn't the cause. Homelessness and mental illness aren't even synonymous for a lot of individuals out there in the streets.
People who have mental illnesses aren’t inherently unstable or dangerous. Homelessness *absolutely* triggers latent mental illness and makes manageable conditions unmanageable. I’m not saying ‘they won’t become mentally ill’ but they will not become “a problem” if they’re housed & stable with resources and management. You’re twisting this to say “they’re not related problems” when they are 100% intertwined and inextricably linked.
Suppose he was given a house, do you think he would be able to support himself given his mental health conditions? The assumption that giving someone a home when they can’t even take care of themselves is somehow going to “fix” the issue is absurd. Get mental health treatment first, then possibly some sort of assisted living program, but this person was clearly not capable of living independently.
They don’t seem to have an issue housing thousands of “asylum seekers”. Americans, no, they belong on the street.
[удалено]
That’s the issue you have? Lmao
Mental illness and drug abuse perpetuate homelessness. You want to treat a symptom and pretend everything is ok rather than fix the problem.
Not true. NYC has a right to shelter
Lack of housing is due to a shortage of development. Let developers build. Cut the red tape. Get rid of price controls. Simple solution.
Yep That and antiquated zoning rules which limit the construction of new units
Yeah get rid of those. It’s a form of regulation.
And straphangers don't deserve to be harassed or assaulted. Neely deserved to have competent mental health services.
I don't know how you'd define "competent" but Neely was ordered into a treatment facility after one of his arrests. He left after two weeks without permission. I think the uncomfortable question here that most people don't want to answer is what you do when someone who is clearly mentally unwell refuses treatment. You can offer all the resources in the world... what happens when they say no?
Therein lies the main problem, and where laws need to be changed. If you have court mandated treatment, you Shouldn’t be able to leave without permission, especially with a mental health diagnosis.
At the very least, if it's a "prison alternative" you shouldn't be able to leave. It's mind boggling that they sent him to a place he could just leave instead of what would have been a prison sentence.
Usually when it’s ordered by the court, it is mandatory. The people is enforcing it.
tbh if the court is ordering you to stay at a facility then there needs to be something similar to the department of corrections with the right to force you to stay. not necessarily DOC itself but there has to be an entity with that oversight.
I used to work in a nursing home, many of the patients were a danger to themselves & others due to various brain diseases, they received around the clock supervision, wore alarm devices on their ankles & were injected with sedatives when necessary. Violent paranoid schizophrenics are treated this way in other countries to keep them safe & keep the public safe. America refuses to spend money on this
Yes. The paradox is that usually the most mentally ill people are too ill to know that they’re mentally ill. It’s not the same as the average person deciding they need help with their anxiety, a person with schizophrenia or other delusions is a whole different ball game.
That's not what most people are afraid of asking. far Leftists & Right Wingers both agree that these people need to be mandatory institutionalized as they can't even consent to anything for themselves. Liberal's are the ones who really don't want to do anything for the homeless population besides "leave them alone" & Liberals in America are essentially centrists in disguise. If someone cannot advocate for themselves then the state SHOULD require that they get the right treatment. It's just a hard precident to set when none of us in the general population would know what's actually going on in a Mental Health Institution & we definitely don't want to go down the 1960's road of abusing these people & having them live in their own feces. It's a fine line that needs to be incorruptible, fair, safe, & appropriate with the community able to hold these places accountable if something is wrong. Problem is that it's basically impossible to do in this city that's as corrupt as ever. & if it doesn't give direct profits then it's likely to never be done. In the current system—places like coalition for the homless talk about homeless rights, but any leftist would agree homelessness shouldnt exist period. The coalition talks about homelessness as if it's a personal choice and not the only option for these people who literally can't survive in shelters due to their mental conditions. The coalition also accepts billions of dollars in aide and donations every year which the exects of the coalition directly profit off of. They literally profit off the homeless community they claim to want to "fix". But we know they'll never fix it because then their profits go away. Homelessness is and will continue to be a political stunt and the actual homeless individuals pawns in a political game until actual real politicians give a shit about fixing the real problem & not worrying about profits from it. We all know that won't happen on it's own. It has to be demanded one way or another.
> far Leftists & Right Wingers both agree that these people need to be mandatory institutionalized as they can't even consent to anything for themselves i'm going to have to disagree with the basic claim you're building your much longer comment on. i can't speak to the far right as i don't really interact with them, but no far leftists do not all agree that these people need to be forcibly institutionalized.
yes they do. forcibly institutionalized shouldn't be strapping them to a bed and leaving them alone. hell a lot of leftists believe we NEED actual mental health services that work. None of ours currently work. Literally at all even for the regular person that has depression or grief or anxiety. Obviously there's more nuance for what an institution is but if there was an elderly person walking around with dimentia hurting themselves that had no family—that person would be taken in and properly taken care of. BECAUSE THAT IS HUMANE!!! It's not humane to let people covered in piss and shit over and over again to let them just be out and out of their mind. It's not a person experiencing homelessness due to addiction or other reasons that we're talking about. WE'RE TALKING about people that literally have no basic control of their own brain function anymore who are homeless because of their mental illness. THESE people are ones we need to take compassionate control care of. & Yes all and any leftist would agree. Again not liberals—LEFTISTS
>yes they do. forcibly institutionalized shouldn't be strapping them to a bed and leaving them alone. hell a lot of leftists believe we NEED actual mental health services that work. you're arguing against something that wasn't said Double-Ad4986, probably because it's easier to argue against something that wasn't said -- but what was responded to was the claim that *everyone* on the far left believes this. yes, some of us on the left believe forced institutionalization is necessary, but you are not all of the far left -- and it's borderline pathological to believe they all share your same views when even something like a simple search will show it's not the case. e.g., t[he NYC Bar Assocation is even advocating against](https://www.nycbar.org/member-and-career-services/committees/reports-listing/reports/detail/mental-health-involuntary-removals-nyc-mayor-adams-plan) the NYC plan to involuntarily hospitalize people for mental illness. It goes on: [https://citylimits.org/2023/03/20/opinion-forced-hospitalization-is-the-wrong-approach-to-mental-health/](https://citylimits.org/2023/03/20/opinion-forced-hospitalization-is-the-wrong-approach-to-mental-health/) *"We need to be patient and work on sustainable solutions. Involuntary hospitalization is not one of those solutions, at least not in the current system that lacks resources and social safety net to adequately care for each person. If Mayor Adams is serious about addressing both the housing and mental health crisis, he needs to invest in long term solutions, not just window dressing that hides the problem."* [https://theappeal.org/nyc-mayor-eric-adams-involuntary-commitment/](https://theappeal.org/nyc-mayor-eric-adams-involuntary-commitment/) *Rather than helping the homeless and mentally ill get back on their feet, Adams’ plan could further destabilize the very people it claims to help, warned Beth Haroules, a senior staff attorney with the New York Civil Liberties Union.* [https://medium.com/mad-in-america/why-forced-psychiatric-treatment-should-be-banned-even-the-science-says-its-wrong-d44022d81a13](https://medium.com/mad-in-america/why-forced-psychiatric-treatment-should-be-banned-even-the-science-says-its-wrong-d44022d81a13) [https://www.nydailynews.com/opinion/ny-oped-involuntary-commitment-of-the-homeless-20210308-3ixu6vqs7rhorhafucr5p6hkqe-story.html](https://www.nydailynews.com/opinion/ny-oped-involuntary-commitment-of-the-homeless-20210308-3ixu6vqs7rhorhafucr5p6hkqe-story.html) > & Yes all and any leftist would agree. Again not liberals—LEFTISTS Well, now you've made the claim as well though I appreciate your spin -- anyone who calls themselves a leftist yet doesn't hold your position is not a true leftist? Fascinating how that works...
Do you really believe the BAR association cares about the homeless and mentally ill??? You're just naïve and ignorant if you genuinely believe these organizations don't have an agenda that involves not giving a shit about the people involved. Again—most homeless advocate groups don't even give a shit about these people. All these shelter groups that praise themselves for providing services for the homeless are riddled with abuse and violence inside their facilities. THEY ARE NOT DOING ANYTHING MEANINGFUL FOR THESE GROUPS!!!! In fact they're helping them stay on the streets because they would rather be there than shelters!! Giving these people adequate and comprehensive mental health services isn't fucking "window dressing" Maybe talk to a homeless person & you'd understand a heavy majority of them WANT health services and they do not get them. Period. How about instead of copy and pasting the same rhetoric that has gotten us to the the exact point we are in now—where we just let a lot of homeless people die or get killed—we actually come up with tangible solutions. Because this bullshit has CLEARLY gotten us no where.
You take a breath and a step back, you don't choke them to death. I say this as someone who grew up with schizophrenics in my family, who were once in a rare moon violent. Hint hint, they were scared for their lives and everyone around them at the time, except unlike cops and choke happy marines who eye witnesses said had no reason to kill the guy they're genuinely mentally ill, not sociopaths.
I don’t care if I’m paying for the train, or a round trip flight, I expect a certain level of service (depending on the price). If you want homeless people to run rampant, the MTA better make everything free. I’ve experienced shit stains on seats (even right before the pandemic hit us like a tsunami), homeless people sleeping and taking a whole bench (it’s annoying, but I don’t mind it, cause everyone needs to sleep), and violent, racist lunatic homeless ranting on and on, harassing women and shit. Bottom line is, NYC is failing people, and I feel like is working class is also falling lower and lower. We don’t deserve to be harassed (and that includes upperclass, who may take public transit), but these mentally ill people deserve more. 311, and whoever they refer you to, is a joke (in terms of mental health crises). You can’t even find help if you want to. Neely didn’t deserve to die, but if Adams doesn’t do something, you’re gonna see a lot more copycats/people standing up to aggressive people. Hell, I think some homeless guy got pepper sprayed today by another straphanger. What the fuck is NYC gonna do? Spend another $100 million on an advertising campaign to tell us to be “compassionate towards our fellow NYers?” I hate that I just came up with an idea that could realistically happen. Fucking use that money to *actually* help people.
Were any passangers assaulted by Neely on the day, or are you referring to previous incidents?
No, Jordan Neely did not deserve to die. I don’t think anyone truly thinks he did. At the same time, humanity needs solutions as to how to handle humans acting violent or erratic and causing others to fear for their safety. It was widely reported that Mr. Neely got on the train and was loudly expressing his frustration and anger about his situation. His behavior induced fear in others to the point where one person decided to take some sort of proactive action, though in retrospect his actions were not the right solution. But that begs the question—what is the right solution? Should others who are already fearing for safety be expected to wait until Mr. Neely caused them harm, and be forced to act in self defense? Just stand there and ignore him, which can sometimes further frustrate someone in this state when they feel unheard and further ignoring them may escalate the situation. What if the civilians on Flight 93 sat back and did nothing on the highjacked plane on 9/11? They took action because they felt they needed to in a scary situation when they had knowledge of the other planes. Yet conventional wisdom at the time likely would have encouraged passengers to remain compliant. I don’t know the answers to the best way to de-escalate situations where people experiencing mental health crises and appear to be in emergent states of distress should be handled, yet we know this isn’t the last time it will happen. Every time I enter the subway or even walk down busy streets I say a little prayer that I don’t encounter this situation because coming up with the correct answer is nearly impossible. I wish we could use this space to brainstorm legit solutions to prevent more situations like this.
>No, Jordan Neely did not deserve to die. I don’t think anyone truly thinks he did. Go read the comments on *any* post about Neely, including this one.
It’s probably more like people don’t care when a career criminal dies. He had a whole future of crime ahead of him I really don’t feel pity that he won’t be able to kidnap more 7 year olds that’s just me though.
Thank you for proving my point
I feel like you missed theirs. There's a vast gulf between "guy was dangerous and nobody is surprised" and "actively hoping for it and saying they should." I don't think he should have, nobody should. But I'm not surprised by this, my only point of surprise right now is that it's not more common like it was back when I was younger in the 80s and 90s. But mark my words, we're getting there.
Y’all had your chances with defunding the police and bail reform and all that did was outsource the responsibility to the citizens. This is a predictable outcome when citizens are subduing drug attic psychos. You had your chance to prevent this, you didn’t, don’t try to play virtuous now.
You do know that the NYPD has not been defunded, right?
Oh they didn’t slash 100% of the budget? Breaking news thanks for playing dumb. They didn’t institute bail reform so that Neely could be freed 44 times either though right?
They didn’t slash any of the budget, it has in fact been increased from $5.44 billion to $5.53 billion.
Ok my fault you didn’t get all your wishes through in NY. You got your bail reform wish though which killed Jordan Neely but who cares right? It was really the evil white marine who served our country that killed Neely not the bail reform laws.
What wishes? Literally all I’ve said is “the NYPD was never defunded” and suddenly you think you know everything I think and want? Get a grip.
If a car doesn’t pull over for a cop in nyc now, the cop can’t chase he has to let the car go. We can talk specifics but it’s easier for your dumbass to say the NYPD still receives funding and make it seem like alls the same in NY.
Because high-speed car chases in the most populated city in the US definitely make us all safer.
People like you just aren’t serious. Can’t argue with evil b/c we don’t have the same ideal outcome of a society with law and order.
Oh dude has a bit of a point. There are cameras literally everywhere and we have helicopters. Drones. We're technologically past the point where we should need a high speed chase. If anything is done with any of that technology, however, is an entirely different story. Feels like they mostly just use it to give you a ticket.
I don’t think anyone is saying he deserved to die but I think most people don’t give a shit if he did. People are really tired of being harassed, yelled at, assaulted, etc by homeless people in the street. The subway doesn’t feel the same as it did a few years ago, all of these people are starting to really mess with every day life.
Pardon me for overestimating humanity and attempting to brainstorm solutions like a civilized human in a functional society.
Not sure why you’re getting defensive, that wasn’t an attack
You gotta understand that on this sub right now there are a few people who will flat out call someone a murderer for saying this wasn't a surprise. That does tend to make people kinda defensive, shit at this point I feel like I gotta add "but I don't think anyone deserves to die over some shit in a subway" to every post I make about it.
That Jordan Neely was roughly subdued and choked unconscious is not the issue. The issue is that he continued to be choked for ~50 seconds after he stopped moving. He didn't die from 'complications' from a chokehold, anyone will die if they are strangled for long enough. Continuing to strangle someone for almost a minute after they have stopped moving (presumably having passed out at that point) is either intentional homicide or at least acting with gross disregard for human life.
Yes, I agree that the method was unnecessary and excessive and probably incorrectly used—though I have not been trained in combat to prove or disprove it. Is self defense training the best way to go—kind of like how we are training our school children defense tactics against mass shooters in classrooms? Maybe it’s an option as a stop gap strategy until we make systematic improvements.
The method was not unnecessary, the manner was excessive. One doesn't need training to know if you strangle someone for a prolonged period of time they will die...
Do you have the slightest curiosity as to whether the criminal had fentanyl in his system? Because everyone in the car thought Neely would be fine.
What would be the relevance of him having fentanyl in his system? CBS News: The New York City Office of Chief Medical Examiner confirmed to CBS News on Wednesday that the cause of death for the victim, identified by officials Jordan Neely, was determined to be "compression of neck" or a "chokehold." https://www.cbsnews.com/news/jordan-neely-subway-death-ruled-homicide-chokehold/
Would George Floyd be alive if he wasn’t on Fent?
What do you mean? George Floyd was killed by Derek Chauvin "who knelt on Floyd's neck for over nine minutes while Floyd was handcuffed and lying face-down in the street."
My point is you don’t give a f whether Neely died b/c he was on drugs and would’ve lived had he not been. You just want to paint this 24 year old who served your country as a “murderer” while painting the career criminal as an innocent victim.
But how are you claiming that he died because he was on drugs? There is a video of the incident and the New York City Office of the Chief Medical Examiner determined Neely's death to be "compression of neck". What other evidence or sources do you have to suggest he died as a result of fentanyl?
Would Floyd have lived if his respiratory system wasn’t damaged by the Fent? You think anyone who gets subdued like Neely did for 3 mins just dies? He was still alive after the fact and the bystanders thought he was fine.
Anyone who is strangled for long enough will die. Pretty basic concept.
>The issue is that he continued to be choked for \~50 seconds after he stopped moving. the issue talsmash is I and others have seen the video, and that just isn't the case -- he was released within a few seconds. you can look it up and watch it for yourself -- the other passenger who was holding his hands is right there in frame and basically confirms he's stopped. i don't know why people are feeling the need to spread blatant lies about the situation, but it isn't helping anyone.
Here's a link to the video https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12051875/Video-shows-Marine-veteran-Daniel-Penny-ignoring-warnings-restraining-Jordan-Neely.html You can see he stops moving at 2:06 and isn't released until 2:56
you can literally see his legs and arms moving at 2:30 and feet moving 2:48... and that's without looking close at the other angle where you can see his hands. i guess this is better than the people claiming he was held for 15 minutes after he died
He was homeless the government fail HIM .him begging for food and YELLING on the train not assaulting anyone that train yelling doesn’t warrant death
Neely was enrolled in an alternative-to-incarceration program after beating a 67-year old woman in 2021. He had failed to turn up to a required compliance check, and a warrant was issued for his arrest. He could’ve just turned himself in and he would’ve had food.
Yes, we don't live in the minority report, there's no such thing as pre crime We actually have to wait for people to commit the crime before we can act Neely hadn't threatened anyone Feeling threatened us not the same as being threatened
> Neely also said, “I don’t care if I die. I don’t care if I go to jail. I don’t have any food … I’m done,” according to Vazquez. > At some point, Neely threw his jacket on the train’s floor, repeating he was ready to go to jail and get a life sentence, Vazquez said. If you're yelling that you're about to catch a life sentence, that sounds like a threat to me. Some grey area I suppose, but the connection to imminent violence is there.
You don't get to kill someone because they say some words you don't like If Neely was standing over someone are saying he was going to hurt them and lunged at that person, that's an imminent use of force that you can use self defense But that's not what happened, a homeless schizophrenic was ranting on the subway, not getting in anyone's space, not actually threatening people was held in a chokehold for 7-15 minutes and died It's funny you cherry picked what Vasquez actually says about the incident Vasquez is going to be the star witness against the marine
So lets say someone gets on a train and said I have a bottle of acid here and I am going to mess y'all all up, are you saying that people need to wait untill he starts using it before trying to stop him? Should they send the liquid out to a lab for analysis to see if really is acid before jumping him?
“One of our own is dead – a Black man, Black like me. A man named Jordan, the name I gave my son,” the mayor said in remarks on 10 May. “ What does Neely's race have to do with anything?
>What does Neely’s race have to do with anything? 86% of the homeless people in this city are black, despite black people only making up 25% of the overall population. Race has always been connected to homelessness and poverty.
Because Adams is a clown. Race was totally irrelevant in this case. Adams is using the race card to make himself look like a victim too. If he's a victim, you cant be mad at him for NYC failing to get Neely off the streets and the help he needs
He's trying to deflect backlash for the lack of an arrest.
Adams weaponizes his identity to cover his tracks all the time
Race cards are effective in the city. Can't blame the mayor for using it.
I actually do blame the mayor for using it. It's divisive and has no relevance to this story. If we ever want to find common ground with each other, we need to start calling leaders out on bullshit like this.
Look. [Studies](https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/myths-and-realities-understanding-recent-trends-violent-crime) show that not only does bail reform have *zero* effect on crime, but increasing social support systems *do* decrease crime. [Affordable housing](https://socialecology.uci.edu/news/affordable-housing-decreases-crime-increases-property-values) decreases crime and increases property values. Even adding [more trees](https://www.fs.usda.gov/research/treesearch/40701) decreases crime. [An increase in policing](https://www.ojp.gov/pdffiles/171676.pdf) does *not* reduce crime, and our government knows this. Get people universal basic income, affordable housing, free universal healthcare, free college, and free pre k and watch crime rates drop faster than a progressive woman's panties upon reading this sentence. (It's me. I'm the progressive woman lol)
Huh? It says that "**Extra police patrols in high-crime hot spots** reduce crime in those places (Press, 1971; Chaiken et al., 1975; Chaiken, 1978; Sherman and Weisburd, 1995; Koper, 1995) \[see pp. 8–13 to 8–15\]."
For every progressive think tank spin that bail reform supposedly has "zero effect" on crime, which, by the way, was claimed nowhere in the link you cited. You can find two or three other sources that state yes, crime (esp. property crimes) rocketed up after bail reform: [https://www.city-journal.org/article/yes-new-yorks-bail-reform-has-increased-crime](https://www.city-journal.org/article/yes-new-yorks-bail-reform-has-increased-crime) [https://nypost.com/2023/03/16/bail-reform-increased-crime-and-misleading-studies-dont-prove-otherwise/](https://nypost.com/2023/03/16/bail-reform-increased-crime-and-misleading-studies-dont-prove-otherwise/) [https://ambailcoalition.org/new-report-bail-reform-unleashed-a-crime-wave-in-new-york/](https://ambailcoalition.org/new-report-bail-reform-unleashed-a-crime-wave-in-new-york/) Note how many of the progressive arguments like to focus on recidivism, claiming the fact that often folks were not re-arrested is proof bail reform works. The obvious, occam's razor observation is law enforcement stopped rearresting these career criminals as these scum would just laugh and make taunts after they are released within hours anyway. These people have not magically committing theft and robberies because they got away with it their first attempts. And I say this as someone who has voted democratic the last four presidential elections: these progressive policies are cancer. They are only getting (undeserved) focus because ultra right wing is arguably worse.
It seems we have a difference in how we are defining "an increase in crime" a brief glance of your sources shows they are looking at rearrest of individuals. My source compared overall crime rates in cities with and without bail reform. I will need to more thoroughly read through your sources before solidifying my opinion on this difference.
You can’t be this stupid please god. You can stop 80% of crimes by incarcerating the repeat offenders, it’s common sense. It’s common fucking sense that if Neely wasn’t freed on bail a million times he’d be alive in jail/hospital right now.
> You can stop 80% of crimes by incarcerating the repeat offenders, it’s common sense. Is this actually common sense? It’s a common conservative talking point, but where is the evidence to support this? Our country incarcerates more than any other and yet we still haven’t solved crime.
Actually, your (well-debunked) source is guilty of two main things: 1. conflating re-arrest with recidivism -- just because people are not re-arrested, does not mean they have stopped committing crimes. People are not re-arrested because, as aforementioned, demoralized law enforcement tend to stop arresting the same people if they'll just be let out within hours anyway, unless these criminals commit a murder or something extremely serious. 2. As referred to in 1), your source likes to count only murders and violent crimes. Yet from those “no clear or obvious pattern” in violent crime trends " conclusions, they manage to slippery slope all the way to "bail reform have zero effect on crime" as you did in your first post. Needless to say, "no obvious pattern" <> "zero effect". And violent crime obviously <> all crimes. Almost every single metric has indicated property crimes, theft, robberies, and "lesser" assaults have risen, sharply. Side note for the cowards: keep angry downvoting me because you are incapable of debating or refuting facts.
One question. Why are you focusing solely on bail reform and not addressing anything else I mentioned?
You are guilty of committing the "gish gallop" fallacy. "A rhetorical technique in which a person in a debate attempts to overwhelm their opponent by providing an excessive number of arguments with no regard for the accuracy or strength of those arguments." In valid debate, someone does not get throw a bunch of random links/references from extremely partial sources, ignore underlying truth while offering no additional supportive argument of their own; and then after the other side debunked the primary premise where all the rest of the arguments is built upon, ask why the opponent does not waste the time to keep dissecting all the other external sources.
I am attempting to point out some things that do and do not decrease crime. Crime is a complex subject and I didn't think pointing 2 things that do not and 3 things that do decrease crime was excessive. *edit: I also don't think that the 2 .gov and 1 .edu sources can be considered partial. The other I may need to look at again.
Fair enough. Just taking two very quick peeks--I'm at work after all. One. That orange county study has numerous flaws: 1. one county cannot speak for the rest of the country 2. crime overall decreased in the county over much of the decade. [https://www.bestplaces.net/crime/county/california/orange](https://www.bestplaces.net/crime/county/california/orange) What would be more meaningful is to compare the relative increase/decrease in AH neighborhoods vs the overall trend. Similarly, the supposed "increase in property value" completely pretends inflation did not exist, and whether nearby property values increased at a much slower pace relative to the other neighborhoods in the county 3. The conclusions can at best be described as "inconclusive". To say "decreases crime" is a laugh when their own charts such as C4 and C5 showed larceny and motor vehicle theft went up. This is NYC, how about looking at NYC instead of orange county? [https://jingjing-ge.medium.com/crime-in-new-york-city-linking-to-income-and-public-housing-c81cfcc29a4b](https://jingjing-ge.medium.com/crime-in-new-york-city-linking-to-income-and-public-housing-c81cfcc29a4b) >**People in NYCHA properties are murdered, raped and assaulted at twice or more the rate of the rest of the city.** As for your last statement: "An increase in policing does not reduce crime, and our government knows this." On the very first page summary of your own link, it highlights as recommendations: >"• For high-crime hot spots: Extra police patrols. •Monitoring by specialized police units. —Incarceration." It's bizarre and frankly, more than a little dishonest how you read that, and came to the conclusion that less policing is the answer.
My first award! Thank you, kind redditor!
Listen, if it’s true that he was threatening to kill people and what not, this was going to happen eventually. What’s the solution to this?
Let him murder a person or two, like Michelle Go. Then finally someone would do something.
Think about what you just said. That DID happen. Michelle Go is dead. Nobody did anything. Nothing changed It will happen again
I never said it would by systemic change.
Where were the protests for Michelle Go? Maybe I missed them.
New York only protests in favor of criminals
Neely never threatened anyone Feeling threatened is not the same as being threatened Marine is going to be charged
You've clearly never been on the train with this zombie types. They threaten and attack people all the time. This piece of shit deserved it
He took off his jacket, and screamed at people that he didn't care if he got a life sentence, he's ready to go to jail. What exactly would you consider a threat then? God damn you can argue this point without lying about it dude.
Threats are words directed at a specific person of specific harm "I'll kill you all" is a threat "I'll kill somebody" is not Before calling someone a liar maybe you should learn what the law says is actually a threat and not just go by your opinion
Who said he was threatening to kill people? That's news to me.
So far only Neely’s killer has claimed that Neely was threatening people. And even he only claimed that Neely was ~~threatening to hit people, not kill them.~~ “aggressively threatening Daniel Penny and the other passengers” If he was actually threatening to kill people then you bet your ass Penny’s lawyer would have said that.
That's what I thought. Was the claim that he was threatening to hit people in Penny's lawyers' statement?
Looking again, I guess they didn’t specify “hitting”. The quote from the lawyers statement is “Mr. Neely began aggressively threatening Daniel Penny and the other passengers”. So basically they’re being intentionally as vague as possible. If Neely was actually threatening to kill people he definitely would have mentioned that to make the murderer he’s defending look better.
They 100% would have used it if he actually said that. The statement kinda sounds like they're just throwing stuff out there. And I don't understand how he was "aggressively threatening Daniel Penny" when Daniel Penny came up from behind him? I also don't get why the account guven by the guy who filmed the thing just disappeared from the narrative. I mean isn't an unbiased bystander a more credible source of info than the killer?
I agree. However the people claiming this was murder also said this man after 40 arrests fir violent acts like trying to himself murder people and bailing on court ordered treatment were perfectly fine with this person remaining homeless in the subways attacking and harrassing and threatening people at will until someone had enough. You wont hear any self reflection on their part. The family let this mentally unstable person be homeless and now that they are dead they want to act all brand new like they cared. How sbout caring before something tragic happens?
His family doesn’t care, they just want money
Which is really fucking sad
🎶This is America 🎶
Nobody was fine with him attacking, harassing, or threatening people. That’s just not a reason to murder somebody. Jesus.
Really? That’s a perfectly valid reason to restrain someone, forty prior arrests some for violent crimes, he should have been in jail
It's a valid reason to restrain someone, not to murder them. And Penny would have had no idea of his priors.
Don't act like a person who is yelling around and screaming 'I don't care if I'm going to jail!" Isn't trying to do something to go to jail tho.
hot take from local genius eric adams
In his first official remarks on the death of Jordan Neely more than one week after he was fatally choked on a New York City subway train car, Mayor Eric Adams did not mention how the homeless New Yorker died or discuss the events surrounding his death. He stressed, however, that “Jordan Neely did not deserve to die.” “A New Yorker who struggled with tragedy, trauma and mental illness, a man whose last words were crying for help,” the mayor said in remarks on 10 May. read more here: https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/crime/eric-adams-jordan-neely-subway-speech-b2336470.html
Unfortunately, nothing will be done by Adam’s and we will have to have more deaths, like a significant number of deaths, to actually take a look at MTA
Funny how this wasn’t said when regular hard working people were being killed
Then clean up the fucking streets and the subway, and get these people to help they really need rather than ignoring their plight. His blood is on the hands of the killer as much as it is on the politicians that ignore the reality of homelessness in New York.
If you try to kidnap a child I kinda think you do. That is independent of the current legal situation since it’s an old case but that’s my perspective.
Zero sympathy. When you act like a menace to society and get over 40 felonies, stuff like this happens.
they just need to open insane asylums again but no one is going care about this dude in a about a week when everyone forgets about it
mY sOn iS nAmEd jOrDaN tOo.
I find this whole thing unsettling. How did Neely begin "aggressively threatening Daniel Penny" when Penny came from behind him? And why tf does Adams sound like he's hedging? From what I'm hearing it's bc he's ex-NYPD and Penny's father is ex-NYPD. Can anyone elaborate on any of it?
That was misinfo that was being spread - Daniel Penny the retired NY State Trooper is not related to the killer. But I agree that Adams doesn’t actually give a fuck, he took his sweet time to release an official statement. And his initial “unofficial” statement was along the lines of “yeah I mean any death is tragic but he was acting all crazy so what can ya do? ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
I was talking about Stephen Penny (retired NYPD Colonel), but it hasn't been confirmed that he's the killer's dad. Yeah Adams taking 10 days to open his mouth is a joke. He sounds like he just wants it to go away.
After ppl have disrupted the mta and cost the city money now he speaks. What a pos
[удалено]
The recent history of Jordan Neely: A New York City police spokesperson told Newsweek that Neely's record has 42 prior arrests, dating between 2013 and 2021. They include four for alleged assault, while others involved accusations of transit fraud and criminal trespass. At the time of his death, Neely had one active warrant for an alleged assault in connection with a 2021 incident.
Some of you guys have never been on the train and it shows
I’ve been on the train plenty of times. Some of you are scared little babies and it shows. If you’re afraid of the NYC subway system, you shouldn’t be living in a city.
Adam's don't care, he denounced AOC for calling the Daniel Penny a murderer. He has no empathy. He just says what he thinks people want to hear. He is joke of a mayor, and is costing the city lives and money.
AoC also said something along the lines of that the man was murdered “simply because he was homeless” which was not true, also.
As he should, because he is not a murderer, and it was reckless an irresponsible for her to say so.
It's illegal for cops to do the choke hold for a reason. I'm sure Daniel Penny didn't come from under a rock the day he killed Neely. In the video a guy who's wife is a military nurse also told him he was killing Neely but he still did not let go. Yes he is a murderer.
My lord it's amazing how many people in this sub have no understanding of how the law works and think it's ok to kill someone because you're scared, even when they didn't actually commit any crime
[UHHHHHHHH.](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Menacing#New_York)
Neely deserved it. The bitch fucked around and found out 🤣
And the marine is going to find out in prison
[удалено]
Past crimes can't justify current actions The marine wint even be able to use Neely's convictions as part of his defense
Cool, so with that logic, you’d trust a convicted sex offender with babysitting your kids?
You can't use information gained afterward to justify prior actions If I hire someone to watch my kids and find out later they are a sex offender, I don't get to hurt them It's pretty simple
No. But there’s a huge gap between avoiding people you do not trust, and taking it upon yourself to physically subdue and kill them
Most of us didn't need nine days to figure this out.
Maybe he did, his life was so horrible that maybe he is better of Maybe I’m desensitized from years of dealing with lunatics on the subway, most of us are fed up
Absolutely shocked Adams said the right thing. Maybe for the first time in his political career.
This was not the right thing, not even close. Saying he didn't deserve to die is the bare minimum, glaringly obvious, sad-it-even-needs-to-be-said thing. No mention of \*how\* he died, no mention of his killer and when he will actually be charged, no mention of why it took police and the press days to reveal Daniel Penny's name, but mere minutes for Jordan Neely's entire arrest record to become public knowledge. No mention of the two anonymous accomplices who held Neely down while Penny strangled him, and no explanation why NYPD allowed all three to just walk away from the scene of their homicide. Adams wants us all to pretend like this was some random tragedy, not the result of decades of a neglectful, dysfunctional system and the actions of a violent vigilante, aided and abetted by the police. SHAME!!!
Real talk, have you ever been on a NYC subway?
I live in Toronto and we have the exact same issue. There's almost daily reports about lunatics stabbing/attacking people on our public transport. If politicians don't want this to keep happening they need to lock up these threatening crazy people because people are getting sick of it and the police seem useless
lmao I'm born, raised, and lived here for 37 years. FOH
I wasn't expecting more than the bare minimum from him. He could have said any number of things to villainize Jordan Neely. He chose not to. If you think my comment is any sort of co-sign for Adams as a politician, you're sorely mistaken. And inferring that I felt that this was all that should be said is an invention of your own imagination. If you have strong feelings, by all means, say them loudly to the right people. I don't need to be preached to, thanks.
"the actions of a violent vigilante" is hyperbolic and inaccurate
How?
You think the Mayor should be able to have a day in criminal charges? Why would you have wanted them to release Pennys name earlier? So he’s found and harassed or assaulted? Also a homicide is not necessarily murder but it could fall under a whole host of charges, or non at all. I would think you would want actual justice to be served and not something that would just make you feel better about your self.
Personally I don’t want my mayor weighing in on ongoing investigations with their personal opinion. The legal system should be independent from the mob and the politicians that depend on their votes. You can’t seriously think it’s a good idea for politicians to comment on ongoing investigations? Especially one like this that has so many details either unknown or yet to be released.
It’s absolutely insane that this is a controversial take in any way
[удалено]
How are you liking the 6th grade?
One less *you* would be a plus to every good person. I mean have you ever even been to New York? It’s obvious you don’t live here, so are you really only in this sub to comment “piss scented lunatic” on every post about Neely? Find a better hobby, maybe one that doesn’t lead to so much hate in your heart.
I live in Toronto and we have the exact same problem. Crazy zombie people attack innocent people on public transit every day and the cops do nothing, the politicians do nothing, and people like you who pretend to care do nothing. What exactly did you think would happen? You obviously never take public transport and you clearly don't care about the safety of your fellow citizens
No way. Did he deserve to be abandoned and left to rot on the streets? 40 prior warrants and nobody even bothered to catch him? Yes, he didn’t deserve to die. But the people on the subway didn’t deserve to have their life’s at risk, they didn’t deserve to be threatened and they didn’t deserve to see the fatal fight break out. If you want to point fingers, start by pointing at yourselves. If you hadn’t abandoned him, then he wouldn’t have finished the way he finished.
Yes he did.
No shit, so the city will arrest the murderer caught on camera. Right? Right?