The Descent of Woman

by eriposte

Sad to say, the list of conservative law professor bloggers who aren't a complete disgrace to the law profession and to humanity itself has been depleted further by 1.

Via Atrios, via Fables of the Reconstruction, via Unqualified Offerings, there's conservative law professor Ann Althouse (bold text is my emphasis) :

WARNING ADDED: If you've come here from another website and think you already know what this post says, I would recommend that you calm down and read what I've actually written. Some really foolish, hotheaded remarks have been made about this post. Don't let yourself be manipulated.

ORIGINAL POST: It's terrible that the poor man was shot to death yesterday by the London police who had reason to think he was a terrorist. But should we worry that the shoot-to-kill policy will result in more deaths?

[eriposte note: Harmless and thoughtful you say? Well, continue reading this post from July 24, 2005...]

...Similarly, everyone -- at least in London -- now knows not to run from the police, especially not onto a train and while wearing bulky clothing.

Is it not true that yesterday's sad mistake has already solved the problem it represents? In fact, a further good has been created: as ordinary persons change their behavior and drop the bulky clothing and unnecessary running, the real terrorists will stand out more. Indeed, if anyone ever behaves like Jean Charles de Menezes again, the presumption that he is a terrorist will be so overwhelmingly strong that the police really must kill him.

Althouse, whose post Jim Henley describes as the "most stupendous combination of dumb and sick in - maybe years", continues with this priceless update (bold text is my emphasis):

UPDATE (8/18/05): Leaked information from independent investigation indicates that Menezes himself didn't "behave like Jean Charles de Menezes," so the shoot-to-kill policy was not what it seemed and is in fact something that we should worry about. Who knows what policy the police were following the day they killed Menezes? Fortunately, there hasn't been another incident like it, at least not yet. I would think the incident itself has forced them to change whatever that policy was.

OK. So it's all just a misunderstanding, right? Uh-huh (bold text is my emphasis):

ANOTHER UPDATE: After ranting near incoherence all day, one of the commenters finally expressed himself in a way that gave me a clue what was pissing him off so bad. He read the phrase "a further good has been created" to mean that I thought that it's worth it that the man died, because a higher good had been created, offsetting the death, as a sort of crude utilitarian observation. The phrase "a further good" just means there is a second good thing that has resulted, not that the good made it worth killing an innocent man, as if I would have, if I knew in advance what was happening, authorized shooting the man in order to produce the good!

I see. So Menezes did not behave like the guy whom Althouse thought should be shot and killed in the future. Yet, people not behaving in the way Menezes did NOT behave would be a "good" thing.

Well, all I can say is Althouse has this most appropriate quote near the top of her blog:

"She's smarter than me" – Glenn Reynolds