I read this post by Dave Hoffman at Co-Op a few days ago, and it’s bothered me since.  It comes from a story in the Philly Inquirer.

As the SEPTA subway train rocked forward, a thirty-something guy leaned over near the doorway and gently planted a kiss on the little boy at his side.

When the train neared the Fairmount Avenue stop shortly after midnight on Thursday, the man reached out like an adoring parent and directed the 3- or 4-year-old tyke to an open seat.

Then he flew into a monstrous rage.

Without uttering a word, police said, the unidentified man whipped out a double-claw hammer and began bludgeoning a 20-year-old man who was dozing off in his seat.

For five long minutes, SEPTA surveillance cameras captured the deranged attacker – who was still on the loose late last night- digging his hammer into the man’s head and neck.

At this point, Dave breaks from the story to note that random acts of violence upset our sense of order and safety, noting that it particularly upset his as he was on this train two hours earlier.

Through it all, disgusted investigators said, at least 10 passengers stood by and did nothing as the random attack moved from the train to the platform, when the hammer-wielding maniac tried to push his victim down onto the train tracks.

When the beating was finished and the suspect fled with the little boy, the victim staggered back onto the train, bloodied, confused and alone, said Detective Kenneth Roach, of Central Detectives.

And even then, no one tried to help him.

“Somebody should have helped this guy,” Roach said. “I understand the [other] guy had a hammer, but they outnumbered him at least 10 to one.”

Dave likens this scenario to Kitty Genovese.  I don’t think the situations are the same, though there are similarities in the fact that people refused to get “involved”.  But the Kitty Genovese situation didn’t involve people putting themselves at risk, whereas here anyone taking action would have been confronting a man with a claw hammer and the willingness to use it.

I’m sure people who are licensed to carry a handgun will point out that had someone on that SEPTA train been armed, he could have taken out the man without risk to himself.  This is no doubt true, but I hope to avoid hijacking this story for the purpose of promoting the benefits of gun possession.

Dave sees the underlying question here as being why the 10 onlookers did nothing, either individually or as a group.  He pins the problem in the lack of individual responsibility of the group.

The problem was that there were too many subway riders – no individual person felt responsible for helping to stop the attack. It’s a good reminder that if you ever need help in a group setting, try to get an individual’s attention, and say “You! Yes, I mean you! Help me!”

While this makes some sense, I wonder if it would have been any different had there been only one bystander.  In fact, even if there was a armed bystander on the train, would that person have been willing to act, and then suffer the police investigation and interrogation.  Probably yes, since the act of possessing a gun suggests a desire to use it.  This is meant as a positive, meaning a will to protect themselves and others where people without a gun may suffer from far greater doubt.

But I wonder whether this reflects the abject selfishness that has overcome society.  Everything is about “what’s good for me, screw you.”  We get away with this attitude because of anonymity, whether in a group, in a car or on the internet.  It frees us from any personal responsibility for what we do or say.  We never have to see into the eyes of another person if we don’t want to.  We can just turn away, whether by turning our heads, hitting the gas or logging off.

The man with the claw hammer seems obviously crazy.  This assumption, of course, does nothing to help the victim of his attack.  Most of us have a bone in our head that makes us want to be a hero, to help someone.  Most of us have another bone in our head that stops us from doing something stupid.  Which bone prevails at any given time is a matter of our internal calculus of cost/benefit.  Then, there are some with an over-developed bone that compels us to rush in blindly, no matter what the risk or potential harm.

Unless you’ve found yourself on your own SEPTA train, watching some guy about to bring a claw hammer done on the head of another person, you don’t know what you would do.  Not for sure.

I’ve found myself in this situation twice in my life.  Both time, I reacted immediately, without any thought or hesitation.  It was pure reflex.  In retrospect, it would probably the wrong move based upon a strict cost/benefit analysis, but I never did the math.

It’s harder for me than it was for Dave (or the Philly cops) to castigate the onlookers for doing nothing.  I understand why they froze, why they felt that it wasn’t a good day to die.  Each of us has to make the decision for ourselves.

And, as is my way, this seems like a good time for a song: