Boston, Massachusetts, is known as the birthplace of the American Revolution. But, for many decades, it also has been known as one of the centers for American collectivism, pushing socialist legislation, promoting leftist politicians, and spreading collectivist ideology around the nation and the world.
Hewing to that recent “tradition,” a group of vandals just attacked 43 SUVs in Boston’s ritzy “Beacon Hill” neighborhood, puncturing their tires in the name of...
...stopping “Anthropogenic Climate Change.”
Ari Blaff reports for National Review:
“A group of climate activists has claimed responsibility for puncturing the tires of at least 43 SUVs in the Beacon Hill suburb of Boston and attaching notes to the vehicles informing owners that ‘your gas guzzler kills.’”
Which just warms the heart, knowing how much these people care.
“The group, known as the Tyre Extinguishers, acknowledged responsibility in a blog post published on Thursday, the night following the vandalism.
‘The group took this action to render the large greenhouse gas emitting vehicles unusable, directly preventing the outpouring of emission from the vehicles into our atmosphere which further contribute to climate change and air pollution,’ the official statement reads.”
To add to their childish approach, the “Tyre Extinguishers” even took photos of their activities and boastfully posted them on Twitter.
They “care” so much, the actually believe that a “gas guzzler” kills, and want to strand their owners. But, will they apply that standard to, say, ambulances, which exhibit far worse fuel economy than those eeeevil SUVs?
Related: Court Rejects Multi-State Attempt To Stop Biden’s Arbitrary 'Cost Of Carbon' Impositions | MRCTV
Indeed, a moment of research could tell these Climate Cultists that ambulances get some of the worst fuel efficiency of any well-known road vehicle. A study published in 2011 by PubMed notes that the average is well below 10 miles per gallon.
“During the study period, a fleet of 35 diesel ambulances operated for 277,849 unit-hours and traveled 1,902,710 miles. Detailed mileage data were available for 66,527 unit-hours, 23.9% of the sample. Overall, vehicles averaged 6.6.89 (6.71, 7.08) miles per gallon (mpg)…”
How about police cars? UNC School of Law Enforcement Blog Writer Jeff Welty recently noted that the popular Crown Victoria Interceptor is:
“EPA rated for 16 m.p.g. in city driving, but due to the large amount of idling inherent to police use, many agencies see more like 6 to 8 m.p.g.”
So, will these holier-than-thou vandals include those types of vehicles in their target list, or are the “Tyre Extinguishers” going to make their own calculations about what THEY see as the cost-benefit threshold for ambulances and police cars, basing their decisions on their own preferences… the kinds of preferences they did not allow the SUV owners to exhibit?
The stopping point for any ethical analysis of this criminal behavior is the acknowledgment that these thugs intentionally damaged other people’s property. That’s the only thing that should matter. But, if one wanted to jump into speculation, and swerve into the “consequentialist” lane here, one could ask:
“Did any of these vandals think about what their victims might need their vehicles to help them do? Did the ‘Tyre Extinguisher’ gangsters give an iota of consideration to the needs of these other folks? What if some of those vehicle owners were expecting new babies, or needed to get to a hospital for cancer treatments, or worked in an ER, or as a firefighter—?”
Oh, what’s this? One of the victims DOES work as a firefighter… Writes Blaff:
“One victim told a local Boston news outlet that a neighbor was prevented from commuting to his firehouse because of the violence. ‘My parents didn’t need to go anywhere immediately this morning, but I know another person in the neighborhood who’s a firefighter and couldn’t get to the fire station.’”
In a dark turn of imagination reminiscent of Saki or a “Twilight Zone” episode, one could imagine a “Tyre Extinguisher” vandal caught in an irony of his own creation, clipped by a purportedly “climate friendly” and nearly silent EV while he or she deflated a tire on a Beacon Hill SUV… Then, one can envision the poor sod lying there on the tarmac, fully expecting the EMTs to save him, but, tragically, their ambulance was stuck due to flat tires, or the EMTs never got to work, because this now-injured “Climate Cultist” deflated their tires a few hours earlier.
Not exactly instant Karma, but close.
Of course, one does not really wish them harm, but these carbon-hating neo-luddites are BRINGING harm to the property of others, and they think they are justified.
Despite the glaring lack of evidence supporting claims that human use of petrochemical fuel is leading to a “Climate Crisis,” despite the fact that many climate doomsayers have been exposed for either discussing how to manipulate their data to fit their preferred outcomes, for not revealing their sources and methodologies in court, or for using faulty ground-based data inputs, these criminal “activists” have bought into one of the most perfectly constructed false narratives in history in order to “justify” their criminality.
It's the idea that was generated in order to place all human activity into a collectivist corral, the idea any little thing you do has enough of a cumulative effect on the “global climate” that government forces should preempt your behavior – for the collective good and the collective future.
Of course, not only is this theory really a means to reach their ends of collectivist global control of energy, to impose a world energy tax, to run an ever-growing system of mega-government, mega-corporate favoritism, fascism, and central planning, it also is predicated on nothing close to real science or even any concept of real injury. As I wrote for MRCTV last week:
“…even IF one accepts the unproven notion that man’s use of the internal combustion engine is causing a catastrophic change in planetary climate activity, these politically-tied culprits also overlook the fact that any costs associated with such a possible ‘cause-effect’ relationship only can be quantified through initial tort (person-against-person) claims for damages that are proven in a court, in front of a jury.”
So, let’s leave things with these questions…
Which action holds a justified position as being citable and provable in a suit for person-on-person injury – someone using an SUV for all the myriad things he does in the economy, or someone damaging that property?
It’s time the fantasists of Climate Fascism stop playing, because they are playing with other people’s property and lives, and they are harming others. Period.
Related: The Propaganda Push: Central Bank Releases Unfounded 'Climate Cost Reports' | MRCTV