“We were bored and didn’t have anything to do, so we decided to kill somebody.”

Ace:

The three boys who decided to kill an Australian college athlete out of nihilistic boredom were black.

This is relevant.

Why?

For several reasons. First, because the allegedly elite media routinely chooses to suppress information that is not helpful to their narrative. We knew that Trayvon Martin was black and George Zimmerman was white — oops, “White Hispanic” — from the first moments of political agitation for Zimmerman’s lynching.

The media will only write about white (or White Hispanic) violence against blacks or other minorities, never the other way around.

This is ridiculous. The media is supposed to report a somewhat accurate reflection of a category of things I’ll call Things That Really Happened, not employ novelistic techniques to forever cut out anything extraneous to the “plot” and pump up sections that emphasize the “theme” of the work.

Whether or not the boys are black, white, or other is not quite central to this story. And yet it remains, in itself, relevant. And then what makes it move from “relevant” to “central” is the bizarre reaction of our media in ruthlessly suppressing basic facts.

That dynamic — this infinite and insulting condescension of the media towards blacks, the perpetual choice to treat them as children; and the related insulting condescension towards whites, the reflexive decision to omit any sort of “unhelpful” racial facts due to fears that if whites find out blacks commit street crimes we’ll just go crazy with racial persecutions — illustrates how ineffably retarded our “National Discussion on Race” is and will always be, if the media continues to have its stupid way.

The very fact that the media refuses to report such basic information illustrates that this certainly is very relevant to any discussion about it.

No one who is this determined that a fact should not be reported is actually unconcerned by this fact. The very act of such determined suppression indicates the great concern.

One does not actively endeavor to suppress that which one is hardly thinking about. If you were hardly thinking about it, you’d mention it, simply because you took no active steps to not mention it.

The other part of this, of course, is that The Narrative always requires a Bad Guy — and fictional narratives always need a strong through-line and emotional arc — and if we can’t mention the fact that there is a nihilistic strain of thought in the less reputable quarters of the black underclass, we’ll have to shift the spotlight to something else.

Like, the case of this Atlantic piece, the urgent need for universal background checks laws.

Here’s the thing: I have not yet seen it reported that this gun was bought from a any reputable person who would have had the right to carry it in the first place. That is to say, if the man who sold or gave away this gun was himself a criminal not legally permitted to own it, obviously he would not have himself done the paperwork for a background check in his subsequent transfer of ownership.

Now, it is possible that the gun was procured from such a person, and that a background check might have had some usefulness here. (Although three youths looking to kill someone don’t really need weapons beyond a bit of heavy metal to do so — a length of pipe will do.)

But notice how quickly we just assume all Politically Helpful Premises here. We don’t need to actually establish them. Indeed, this particular writer doesn’t have curiosity enough to ask if this is a case in which background checks would have kept the gun out of the kid’s hand. He isn’t even aware that this is a question in the first place. It is a “fact” so deeply embedded in his worldview he’s not even aware it exists at all. It’s just one of the background Laws of Physics in his world, one that he doesn’t even notice at all because it’s just always working without much notice. Like gravity.

Read more