Could the other passengers on that ill-fated train in Charlotte, N.C, have intervened to save Iryna Zarutska?
My personal observation? They might have. However, the record of the government's involvement in Good Samaritan situations has been such that nobody wanted to get involved. Daniel Penny is a name that leaps to mind.
Glenn Beck recently pondered the question with his co-host, Steve Burguiere, aka Stu:
STU: We see what happens when they do, with Daniel Penny. Our society tries to vilify them and crush their existence. Now, there weren't that many people on that train. Right?
At least on that car. At least, it's limited. I only saw three or four people there; there may have been more. I agree with you, though. Like, you see what happens when we actually do have a really recent example of someone doing exactly what Jason wants and what I would want a guy to do — especially a marine — to step up and stop this from happening. And the man was dragged by our legal system to a position where he nearly had to spend the rest of his life in prison.
I mean, I — it's insanity. Thankfully, they came to their senses on that one.
GLENN: Well, the difference between that one and this one, though, is that the guy was threatening. This one, he killed somebody.
STU: Yeah. Right. Well, but — I think — but it's the opposite way. The debate with Penny was, should he have recognized that … this person might have just been crazy and not done anything?
On the question of whether or not to intervene, I'm going to trust the instincts of a Marine over those of someone who hasn't served, based on his military experience alone. So, there's a variable that anyone stepping into that situation must consider.
Another variable is that when you're dealing with someone with obvious mental issues, as was the case both in the Penny case and in the case of Zarutska's murder, what the perp is going to do is a total wildcard. Therefore, the legal concerns are also very much a wildcard. Even though Penny was successful in defending the person being attacked and was eventually exonerated (which, at the time, was very much a 50/50 proposition), he faced arrest, possible job loss, large legal bills, and harassment from whatever group the attacker was part of.
And finally, will stepping in do more harm than good, given the physical ability of the person considering taking action? We know that often, people on an adrenaline rush from mental problems, like the attackers in both these cases, can overpower the average person. Consider age differences, physical condition, and the fact that the perp was armed with a fairly substantial blade, while bystanders generally are not armed (they are prevented by law), and you begin to see why someone might be at least reluctant to stand between the attacker and his victim.
Envision with me, if you will, for a moment: What would have happened if other people on the train were armed and thereby fully capable of defending Zarutska? Or better yet, what might have happened if the perp had the understanding that others on the train were as likely armed as not, and he didn’t have a snowball’s chance of surviving his intended attack?
I suggest Iryna Zarutska was as much a victim of a well-intentioned government that disarmed her possible defenders as she was a victim of her mentally troubled attacker. I note with no small amount of irony that the laws restricting the actions of Good Samaritans were supposedly written to protect citizens.
(Oh, and yes, in the Zarutska case, mental illness was decidedly involved. The perp claimed that the reason he killed her was that she was reading his mind.)
Related: Leftism Killed Iryna Zarutska
Now, before we leave the weight of the slow response in this situation on the shoulders of the other passengers, let’s note that some of them might not have noticed what was happening initially. Let’s also point out that attacks on the subways of New York, or, for that matter, in any major city in the country, are not uncommon.
City life, to a larger degree than rural life, depends on people not seeing anything. There ends up being a kind of invisible wall between citizens, and particularly between them and petty criminals. As I’ve suggested, this ends up being part and parcel of people not wanting their lives disrupted by a court case they’d not planned on, or (God forbid) being attacked themselves as a result of their well-intentioned intervention.
What is the cure for this tragic situation?
First, allow average citizens the right to self-defense. Permitless concealed carry should be the law of the land. You know — “shall not be infringed” and all that.
Yeah, I know — it’ll be the wild west, etc. — all the standard gun-grabbing arguments. I have a one-word answer to that: Chicago. The strictest gun laws in the nation have resulted in, in just one recent weekend, something like 47 shootings with 17 fatalities. Also, let’s point out that Zarutska's death didn’t involve firearms at all.
Second, let’s remember that the perp in this case, Decarlos Brown Jr., has a history of mental illness and criminal behavior, and he had already been arrested no less than 14 times — now 15.
Brown's past was extremely troubled, according to an entry on Wikipedia:
On April 11, 2014, he was convicted of breaking and entering. While on probation, he was arrested for armed robbery and possession of a firearm by a felon.[15] Brown was incarcerated for more than five years in state prison.[16][15] Upon release, he initially lived with his family, but his mother told ABC News that he was diagnosed with schizophrenia at this point and displayed violent behavior at home.[16] His mother said she sought involuntary commitment but was denied. The Associated Press reported that involuntary commitments are difficult to obtain unless a court finds the person to be dangerous.[17] As a further complication, North Carolina reduced the capacity of state hospitals in the early 2000s, and the average wait time for a psychiatric bed was 16 days in 2024.[18] After Brown stopped taking psychiatric medication, his mother brought him to a homeless shelter.[16] In January 2025, he repeatedly called 911 about a "man-made material" inside him that was controlling his body. Brown was charged with misuse of 911 and released without bond.
The obvious question society should be asking is: Why was Brown still on the streets, with a record like that? The experts decided he wasn’t a threat, I suppose. Sorry, gang, but this is a failure of government. And the sad part here is that such failure can happen in any city in the country. This will doubtless go to many committees over the next few years, after which nothing will actually change.
Join the conversation as a VIP Member