NPR Morning Edition Story: Julio Diaz "Treats His Mugger Right"

Wonder how long it will take for this story to make it onto the snopes pages.

"Yea, but I didn't think people actually behaved that way," the teen said. "

Right. (BS meter hits the peg so hard it wraps around it. Twice.) All teenage muggers use words like "actually behaved". Sounds more like a journalism major having a fantasy, to me.

Click to expand...

+1 total fabrication. I'd bet money on it.

What, no backrub?

Click to expand...

I haven't had a good laugh in a while I realized after reading this... Thanks!

Seriously though, Shame on NPR not calling this person on such a blatant machination of the cerebral cortex.

and to think, he could have just shot the kid at the station and saved himself the $20.

So what caliber hug will diffuse the majority of potentially violent encounters?

Sounds more like a journalism major having a fantasy, to me.

Click to expand...

Lord knows there have been a rash of these fake stories, from the NYT on down. Folks learn that if you strum certain left-wing heart strings among the editors you can get front page center. It's the fast track to career promotion in today's media. The same problems infect a great deal of gun-related reporting.

All these BS stories do not refute the mounting toll of innocents murdered daily around this country...

Funny how the media on one hand will sensationalize murders and brutal criminal behavior, yet will latch on to gun control as a progressive thing to propmote.

Someone else has already addressed that this aired well before 01 April. If I recall correctly (I listen while driving to work) this was one of the Story Corps recordings. A google search gives this website for the Story Corps project: http://www.storycorps.net/ .

Essentially, mobile recording booths rotate around the country and people can record whatever they feel like recording. Some of these get played on NPR. I think the ultimate destination of these recordings is the Smithsonian or something, but I do not know for sure. I presume that the Story Corps website will give more details.

Since these are literally stories, as opposed to produced news, there is no journalistic requirement for veracity checking. If a story is not true, it should not be construed that NPR has any responsibility for the untrueness of the story.

Further, if the story is untrue, the teller would have not only made up the story but also gone to the trouble of seeking out and taking time to go to one of these Story Corps setups. Yes, it is possible that this is a prank, but going to all this trouble seems a bit much to me for a prank, so I tend to believe the story teller.

Regarding the language that the story teller gives for his assailant - we have no idea what the background is of the teller of the story. A journalistic background is not to be presumed - the teller could be a pipefitter for all we know. How many times have any of us recounted what someone else said as an anecdote and given a verbatim account of what the other guy said? This is exactly why hearsay is generally not admitted as evidence in court - we all tend to translate others' words into our own personal language. What we think the other person "means" is more important than what they actually say.

There is no gun control message in this story. This sort of reaction may well be useful for a CCW holder in some instances, especially in light of how if a knife is produced within 25' or so the CCW holder is pretty much SOL anyhow. Each potential situation is different - the story teller sensed that he could handle the situation the way he did and it worked out for him. Surely we pro-gun / pro-CCW folks are not trying to dictate that violence MUST be responded to with arms? Surely we won't say that there is not a place for behavior as demonstrated by Gandhi, the Dalai Lama, Jesus Christ and countless other figures espousing non-violence as a choice rather than an imposed rule?

I don't know that I would have reacted the way the story teller did - rather, I probably would have fought. But, the right to bear arms is a right, not a requirement. Responding to violence either in kind or with active non-violence like the story teller did are both valid choices. Indeed, both choices must be available to the individual if we are to maintain a free society.

But, the right to bear arms is a right, not a requirement. Responding to violence either in kind or with active non-violence like the story teller did are both valid choices.

Click to expand...

Responding to a real armed mugger with empathy is a choice, but it's a REALLY STUPID CHOICE. That's why folks here are pointing out this was likely a ripoff of some old Readers Digest fiction. If you've ever lived in a rough neighborhood you know if you drop your defenses you're asking to suffer far worse than a mere mugging.

Whether or not you cooperate in handing over your money is a valid decision to be made under the circumstances--primarily whether you're armed. But choosing to try to be friendly is incredibly foolish and will probably not end as this fictional account ended. The people who do this kind of thing are barely human, and you'd be safer petting a griz.

There is no gun control message in this story.

Click to expand...

Yes there is. The message is that you don't need to respond to violence with violence. If you just lend a hand and an ear these troubled souls will come around and be good kids again. This is a mainstay of anti-gun agitprop. They constantly confuse the political tactic of strategic nonviolence with refusal to defend yourself against individual criminal aggression.

Well, the guy(s) that broke into MY home kicked my Jack Russell Terrier so bad that she needed a trip the vet and a brace.

Those criminal types SURE are nice.


2 years later, and Hattie still runs when someone comes to the door.

I'd love to find the guy that killed the trust in my little pup-- and almost killed her.


-- John

While I'm personally EXTREMELY skeptical about mr. Julio Diaz's story, I dont know the man, and I wasnt there.Plus, MUCH stranger things have happened in the world, so one never knows.I'd guess he made it up, or HEAVILY imbellished/altered MOST of the facts/details to make a point, to get his 15min. of fame, for some social/political agenda reason, etc.But again. FAR starnger things have happend, so....

2 years later, and Hattie still runs when someone comes to the door.

I'd love to find the guy that killed the trust in my little pup-- and almost killed her.

Click to expand...

There is nothing that makes me see red more than animal cruelty. I have to hope there is some sort of cosmic justice, karma, whatever in store for such cretins. Glad your dog is still with you.

"It's astonishingly stupid, assuming it really happened. The whole thing has an odor to it, though. Thugs don't turn to mugging because they didn't get a hug that morning."

I hope you're not a Christian. You'd miss the whole turn-the-other-cheek lesson here. (I'm not prosletyzing - I'm an Atheist) Stories like this are centuries old. The turning point of Les Miserables is a very similar story.

IF this is a true story, the protagonist took a chance, and it paid off. Sometimes it doesn't. Its too bad the world has evolved to the point of cynicism where we think an example of human decency is a BS hearts and flowers story. I hear a LOT of people on this board say "I REALLY don't want to shoot someone who mugs me, but I will..." I don't ever hear of any of them doing something like this. Dr. King and Gandhi thought and acted more bravely than most would do and faced violence every day. Its easy to return violence with violence, difficult to turn the other cheek. I consider this man to be as brave as any soldier, and was far braver in this situation than I would have been. I'd have shot the mugger and ruined both of our lives.

Each potential situation is different - the story teller sensed that he could handle the situation the way he did and it worked out for him. Surely we pro-gun / pro-CCW folks are not trying to dictate that violence MUST be responded to with arms? Surely we won't say that there is not a place for behavior as demonstrated by Gandhi, the Dalai Lama, Jesus Christ and countless other figures espousing non-violence as a choice rather than an imposed rule?

Click to expand...

I think that the rancor targeting this story on THR reflects intense discomfort with the choice made by the social worker. If story had been about him shooting the mugger, people would be high fiving themselves to death on THR - nobody would doubt the story.

But because the social worker chose a peaceful alternative, 80% of the posts are sure its a lie. What is that about?

I think the story illustrates the ethical dilemma we face if we use a lethal weapon for self defense.

There are some on THR who let politicians decide their ethics - if it's legal, it 's right. You can stop reading this post now.

For those of us who think for ourselves, if you are attacked by a criminal who is using a lethal weapon and you have a lethal weapon, there are 4 possible outcomes (ranked from worst to best):

1. criminal dies and you die
2. criminal doesn't die, and you die
3. criminal dies and you don't die
4. criminal doesn't die, and you don't die

The social worker chose the best possible outcome of the 4. Can there be any doubt about that?

The social worker's response was courageous and compassionate - why does that make so many on THR so uncomfortable that the only choice is to deny the story?

I suspect that this story makes so many of uncomfortable because once we choose option #3, we don't know and will never know if #4 was possible.

The problem here is that it's probably only ethical to shoot if you are forced to choose between #2 and #3 - but not if you are choosing between #3 and #4.

So the moral weight of the story is that since #4 was possible - the proof being that it happened - most of us would have chosen #3. But choosing #3 when #4 is a possible choice is wrong (though perfectly legal under the circumstances).

The rub is that we don't know in advance if #4 is possible.

Mike

What the hell?

I'm neutral on NPR, meaning that I take it with a grain of salt but don't dismiss it out of hand. It's a way to catch some "world events" if I wish while driving, and I happen to like classical music, the kind that NPR plays here. I don't care for their political leanings, and I don't care for some of their programs, or their penny-begging fund-drives...but at any rate:

Let's step back and look at our responses. What motivation does someone have to get on the radio and MAKE UP a story like this completely? Did it say anywhere in the story that this was a "good response to any mugging attempt," or that it was "recommended by this station, its underwriters, and its sponsors?" I didn't get that, if so.

If something like this happens, it just might be worth talking about. Maybe, just maybe, the social worker who told his story felt like telling a story about something unusual that he did.

It was an individual who encountered another individual under unusual circumstances, at which point a very unusual thing happened. It isn't a parable, it isn't a propaganda piece so far as I can tell. It is a very subtle piece of propaganda, if so; I'd think that NPR would rather just run a "blatantly anti-gun" piece if they wanted to preach to the choir, as the majority of their listeners are already anti-gun from what I can tell.

Take off your tin foil hat and enjoy a little good news, people.

All that I know for sure is that I like what the moderators have said the most

I possess a very sensitive, personal, "BS detector" and right now the needle is bent over the stop and the cover has shattered!

The story reads like the BG that invaded a wine tasting party in DC..
group hug at the end. I call BS

Snake or Scorpian parable

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-P70hbHBdl0&feature=related

Maybe, just maybe, the social worker who told his story felt like telling a story about something unusual that he did.

Click to expand...

Perhaps. But I do take issue with NPR's story selection. You will never hear a personal account where someone successfully used their CCW to ward off an assault. At least not on National Peoples Radio.

But I do take issue with NPR's story selection. You will never hear a personal account where someone successfully used their CCW to ward off an assault.

Click to expand...

I wonder if that NPR or self-selection. How many people who successfully used their CCW to ward off an assault want to talk about it on NPR?

How many have lawyers that will encourage them to go on NPR and "brag" about using a weapon?

Mike

and i say to myself, what a wonderful world...

lets all sing kumbaya.

The message is that you don't need to respond to violence with violence.

Click to expand...

How could anyone disagree with that? If we carry, are we forced to respond with violence.

We have a choice of how to deal with violence. We don't need to respond with violence any more than we need to respond with non-violence.

This is a mainstay of anti-gun agitprop.

Click to expand...

Oh, good - more name calling to demonstrate our immense intellectual superiority over them dang soft-headed liberals:

You're smell like farts, and I called your story 'agitpriop'!
Na, na, na, na, na.
You're smell like farts, and I called your story 'agitpriop'!
I'm smarter than you are!
I'm smarter than you are!

Mike

there are 4 possible outcomes (ranked from worst to best):

criminal dies and you die
criminal doesn't die, and you die
criminal dies and you don't die
criminal doesn't die, and you don't die

Click to expand...

1. criminal dies and you die
2. criminal doesn't die, and you die
3. criminal doesn't die, and you don't die
4. criminal dies and you don't die

There - fixed it for ya...

cant you just feel the baby boomer love