Tamir Rice vs The Bundys

Because you’re not supposed to waste a good crisis, a large share of the leftwing population (including Bernie Sanders) has chosen to eat a bunch of paste and try to make a racial issue out of the lunatic takeover of a wildlife refuge by a bunch of crazies in the ass-end of nowhere.

Comparing the two situations requires some impressive mental gymnastics because they have nothing in common. Tamir Rice was a victim of a trigger-happy police force, a corrupt prosecutor, and a flawed justice system. Possible solutions to the Tamir Rice injustice include better police training, the creation of an independent rather than incestuous prosecutor’s office, and possibly reform of the grand jury process.

The Bundy crew, meanwhile, are militia, terrorist group, and organized criminals – at the same time. Apparently, the far left thinks that the government should be charging in guns blazing like a Russian counter-terror op in Dagestan because that’s what happened with Tamir Rice, nevermind that the response to one kid versus the response to an armed band of criminals will always be different (exhibit A: how police respond to armed bank robberies). The solution here is to make the bastards surrender and throw them in jail for as long as possible.

Further, in the Rice case, agents of the government broke the law. In Oregon, the lawbreakers are private citizens.

Yes, you could make a reasonable argument that if Tamir Rice was a white kid named Tyler Rice, he’d still be alive. However, you can’t make an argument saying that if the Bundys were black/arab/whatever, that the government would handle it any differently beyond rhetoric. The FBI has pretty specific procedures for this sort of thing. As for what happens when the government goes in guns blazing, here’s some footage from a little incident that happened back 1993 in Waco, Texas:

But hey, why let facts get in the way of the narrative.