Some scenes of life become etched in your mind, remaining there — perhaps for the remainder of your life.
Recently, as did many, through broadcast media, witnessed in horror and disbelief (inclusive of in the eyes of Iryna Zarutska herself) as she was fatally stabbed by Decarlos Brown, on her way home on the light rail in Charlotte, North Carolina.
It will haunt me, and rightly so. For those who saw the video replayed again and again, it should also thus indelibly remain with them.
Zarutska, 23, was a model newcomer to the country after escaping Russia’s invasion into Ukraine. According to special agent in charge of FBI, Charlotte, James Barnacle, she “immediately got a job the first day she was allowed to work; she got a work permit here . . . She worked at a senior citizen center.
“She worked at a pizza place. She took care of animals in the neighborhood. . . ” She was learning English and was returning home from her work at the pizza place where she had already impressed colleagues.
Declarlos Brown, 34, has a history of encounters with law, beginning in 2011.
He plead guilty to a 2013 charge of felony larceny, but a judge suspended his sentence, ordering two-year’s probation instead.
Four months into that probation he robbed a man at gunpoint, pleading guilty again and spent five year and seven months in prison.
Three years ago, he was arrested on charges of assault on a woman.
In April and May of 2024 and again in January of 2025 he was arrested for misusing 911.
A judge released Brown, a homeless man, the same day he was arrested this year on a “Written Promise to Appear.”
Even his mother commented that he shouldn’t have been freed that time.
On July 28, 2025, a judge ordered his mental capacity to be evaluated within a week.
If it was enforced, Decarlos Brown likely would have been found to be a danger to himself and society more than three weeks before he stabbed Zarutska on Aug. 22.
In the wake of the heinous crime, Vi Lyles, the Democratic Mayor of Charlotte asked for the “same compassion, diligence, and commitment as cancer or heart disease.”
“We will never arrest our way out [of] issues such as homelessness and mental health,” she wrote. Facing backlash, she quickly backtracked, writing, “(W)e need a bipartisan solution to address repeat offenders who do not face consequences for their actions and those who cannot get treatment for their mental illness and are allowed to be on the streets.”
Funny when, and how, lawmakers see reason.
America has ceded control of her public spaces to agents of mayhem who are either enemies of peace, or who refuse to accept the dangers they pose to themselves and society.
People who are affected the most are the ones who can afford the least.
Take public transport, for example.
Outside of New York City, usage skews to those who can’t afford anything else.
This means they are held hostage — figuratively and literally — by those who make buses and light rail their home.
Each week, somewhere in the United States, innocent people are threatened and met with violence, sometimes with deadly consequences, and overwhelmingly perpetrated by those who refuse care.
Sometimes it works against them too, as it happened on a New York subway when Daniel Penny confronted Jordan Neely who was threatening passengers. Yet Penny was forced to endure the trauma of a jury trial, which very easily could have deprived the Marine Corps veteran of his freedom for life.
- Should we accept that the homeless and the mentally disturbed make public spaces their homes?
- Do we really need to have a cogent answer to where else they can be before throwing them out?
Let’s consider a parallel situation. A homeless man comes and defecates on your driveway:
- Do you really think where else he can be before you throw him out?
- Do we allow a deranged man to make a home in the middle of a public road?
We do not, because he is a danger to himself and society.
Why would we not have the same logic to sidewalks, public parks, and public transport?
Conflating two separate problems — homelessness and safety in the public domain only complicates the status quo.
It’s past time we acknowledge that reality.
Progressives will cry outrage against enforcement of public nuisance laws, among others, and involuntary commitment.
This writer’s experience says they are more likely to live in gated communities or in safer neighborhoods cocooned by well-resourced police, and/or private protection.
Their parks are well-lit and have police on call to shoo away the undesirable.
They are more likely to drive to work, and their work locations are in office buildings protected by private security.
In other words, they are the most removed from the consequences of their idiotic edicts.
You can afford to be progressive only if you can afford the costs or find a way to have us lesser mortals to pay for your privilege.
Not so for the rest of us.
It’s time we take back spaces we already paid for. We shouldn’t hesitate in doing so.
(All opinions are of the author alone, and do not necessarily represent that of any organization he may be part of. The author alone is responsible for any error or omission.)
Partha Chakraborty, Ph.D., CFA is an economist, a statistician, and a financial analyst by training. Currently he is an entrepreneur in Water technologies, Blockchain and Wealth Management in the US and in India. Dr. Chakraborty lives in Southern California. Read Partha Chakraborty’s Reports — More Here.
© 2025 Newsmax. All rights reserved.
