After Pournelle finished the first set of "There Will be War" anthologies, he started a series that ran for two books called "Imperial Stars" (because, he joked, "There Will be Government" was an awful title). Much like TWbW before it, it was a series of essays and fiction centered around how people would end up governing each other - which overlaps heavily with war.
One essay that stuck out had as its premise that to the ideal tribesman, rooted in order and tradition and set place, the barbarian and the chaos and apparent formlessness were anathema. Yet the barbarians kicked the tribesmen's asses. To the barbarian, members of civilization, following their rules , seemed weak and pathetic like tradition-bound tribesmen - yet, as long as the civilization actually held to discipline and had a sens of self, the civilization regularly kicked the barbarian's asses.
Of course, the civilizations eventually invited the barbarians in.
The questions raised were what to do with the barbarians among us - though at the time the question was asked, it was somewhat race neutral - and what will the next step look like?
Oath of Fealty by Niven and Pournelle appears to be an attempt to answer that question.
Nevertheless, the first point remains. We have those among us who, regardless of why they have lower IQ, shorter-term time preferences, genetic markers for aggression - the so called "warrior gene" - and other factors including the relative prevalence of other personality traits, simply do not get the concept of civil behavior, restraint, personal property (the last is especially anathema to rich white leftists and BPD's), and so on. They want what they want, and they'll take it.
Unless the civilization enforces the rules.
The solution, of course, is to enforce the rules, and to punish, outlaw, or otherwise make it impossible or difficult for those who refuse to play the civilization game to take advantage of the "sheep".
No, it's not nice. But then, "nice" isn't a virtue.
And yes, given the fact that a demographic comprising roughly 13% of the population is responsible for half of the violent crimes in the states, the results will be disproportionate by demographic per capita. But then, the SF bay transit authority stopped releasing survellance videos of crimes committed because it might cause people to become racist. Which makes me surprised that the NYPD released the following twitter vid:
No, we can't allow it. But the protest of the post rings hollow, because we do allow it. Take the new bail standards, or total lack thereof, in NYC. Criminals are no longer consistently locked up until trial, or forced to put money into bail to have some skin in the game to show up for that trial.
We can excuse the behavior, or we can have standards.