|
| Author
|
Post |
 
|
|
JBToolFist
F L I N T O I D
|
As the upcoming mayoral primary gets closer, we're going to hear a lot of rhetoric about how crime is so bad because there are no jobs.
Don't make the mistake of believing this fallacy.
Violent crime is NOT the result of being unemployed. (violent crime did not rise appreciably during the depression)
Violent crime is the result of BAD parenting and a lack of respect for other's lives and rights.
Until we get control of the problems of (1) "babies having babies" and (2)not holding sperm donors accountable for their children, we'll continue to suffer from this madness rampant in the city of Flint. |
_________________
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=07pLGIgyfjw
"If you ain't from Flint, then it's like straight up F*&^ You!" - The Dayton Family
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RiV_ue-PbL4 |
|
Mon Jul 09, 2007 12:35 am |
|
|
Ted Jankowski
F L I N T O I D
|
|
|
Mon Jul 09, 2007 7:16 am |
|
|
andi03
F L I N T O I D
|
| Prove it, you made the statement, now back it up. |
_________________
Build a bridge and get over it! |
|
|
Mon Jul 09, 2007 7:31 am |
|
|
JBToolFist
F L I N T O I D
|
I'm not going to do the simple research for you.
Google: "unemployment and crime" and you'll get dozens of abstracts of research studies that show No or a Weak correlation between unemployment and violent crime.
Interestingly: when a weak correlation was shown between unemployment and violent crime it was only evident in uneducated males. i.e. an unemployed college graduate (and there are many of them) don't typically go out killing and assaulting people.
So it goes back to BAD parenting. Bad parents don't stress the importance and value of education. Bad parents don't teach a respect and value for the lives of others.
All the social programs in the world and the best educational programs in the world can't compensate for bad parenting.
Andrew Heller (like him or hate him - sometimes I like him, sometimes I hate him) made a great point in one of his articles a few weeks ago. We need a return of "shame" in our society. There needs to be shame associated with getting pregnant before a man has committed himself to the relationship. There needs to be shame associated with impregnating a young lady and not commiting to being a father. There needs to be shame associated with not doing well in school. There needs to be shame associated with not being a contributing member to society.
This sense of "shame" of course can not come from people like me and you. It has to come from within the population in which the bad parents exist. "Shame" from me and you is simply disregarded and attributed to "elitism."
Talk to senior citizen African Americans who grew up during the peak of the civil rights movement. They're disgusted by what they see happening with their grandchildren and great grand children. They see all the opportunity they never had and it's being thrown all away by today's youth.
(before you point the racism finger at me - let me state emphatically that this is not just a black issue. It's an issue of trash - white and black) |
_________________
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=07pLGIgyfjw
"If you ain't from Flint, then it's like straight up F*&^ You!" - The Dayton Family
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RiV_ue-PbL4 |
|
|
Mon Jul 09, 2007 8:11 am |
|
|
andi03
F L I N T O I D
|
You are the one that brought up the opinion......the onus falls back on you to support your reasoning.
I don't "play the racism card" you are the one that brought it up, not me. |
_________________
Build a bridge and get over it! |
|
|
Mon Jul 09, 2007 8:22 am |
|
|
Dave Starr
F L I N T O I D
|
| Has anyone looked for a correlation between crime rates and unemployment the other way around? With small businesses, at least, a high level of robberies and shoplifting could cause them to close or move out of the city. |
_________________
I used to care, but I take a pill for that now.
Pushing buttons sure can be fun.
When a lion wants to go somewhere, he doesn’t worry about how many hyenas are in the way.
Paddle faster, I hear banjos. |
|
|
Mon Jul 09, 2007 10:06 am |
|
|
00SL2
F L I N T O I D
|
Try googling "cause of crime" and "root of crime." You'll find many opinions, including (jumbled together here): "poverty; drugs, followed closely by alcohol; breakdown of the moral order; lack of moral character. You know, we saw a good example of that in the New Orleans situation in the inner cities. The root cause of crime is the decision to commit it; and the decision to commit it is profoundly influenced first by the chances of being caught; something bigger--poverty, lack of education, lack of community support, etc.; family breakdown . . ."
I often get a grin when reading Andrew Heller. His advocating a return of "shame" in our society is a good point, but one cannot feel shame unless one first knows right from wrong and has a sense of "self" and "conscience." That may start at home with "parenting" but it doesn't end there. Children are often more vulnerable and adapting to peer pressure and influences outside the home than they are to the teachings or wishes of parents. They have a need for approval, for feeling a sense of belonging to part of a greater whole. But more important than "shame" is "respect."
In an interview shown on booktv.org this past weekend, author E.R. Braithwaite said "No one person is more deserving of dignity and respect than another." He wrote the 1959 novel "To Sir With Love," made into a movie in 1967 starring Sidney Poitier. In the book and movie miscreant teenage behavior is changed as a result of the teacher who treats them with respect and expects the same in return. If you believe crime is the result of bad parenting this story is one good illustration of how non-parents may be able to contribute to change, that is, if you're involved in the life of young children or teens. The book and reviews can be found at amazon.com
When it comes to adults committing crimes, the root goes deeper, it's been there longer, and it would be harder to change the behavior. First, the adult would need to want to change. It may be easy for them to say they want change when they're in trouble, but given the freedom of choice an alcoholic or a drug addict won't likely won't change for an extended period of time. Those who know them personally will want to avoid them rather than be victimized by their behavior repeatedly. They'll wear out their welcome when they continue to violate rules of programs and housing shelters. Then they'll be right back where they started--in trouble again--and alone. |
|
|
|
Mon Jul 09, 2007 9:38 pm |
|
|
Biggie9
F L I N T O I D
|
right on.
well put. |
_________________
Biggie |
|
|
Tue Jul 10, 2007 10:43 am |
|
|
laryholland
F L I N T O I D
|
|
|
Tue Jul 10, 2007 4:06 pm |
|
|
00SL2
F L I N T O I D
|
I am curious as to how equal parenting might be applied in families where there are multiple parent families involved, i.e., mom has three kids by different daddys and she decides to marry the last one who doesn't want the other two dads around. Or those dads who have multiple kids all with different women. How to get these dads to participate in their lives?
I believe no newborn and parent should leave the hospital without DNA verification of parentage of both parents. Every child should know both parents. One young mother of three kids wouldn't name the father of her second child. She got public aid, then DHS filed paternity suit on her behalf against a guy in prison. Low and behold, he was released several days after being served, filed an answer and has demanded a DNA test. It is outrageous that he has to go to the expense and embarrassment of having to prove a negative. The mother knows he isn't the father; she knows who the real father is but doesn't want to tell. This should be a crime, but what should the punishment me. My initial thought was to deny support for the child, but that would punish the child. This child should have the opportunity to know his real father. How can he? |
|
|
|
Tue Jul 10, 2007 9:42 pm |
|
|
laryholland
F L I N T O I D
|
As far as how Equal Parenting should be applied in multiple blended families, it should always defer to biology first. A child deserves equal access to both fit, willing, and caring bioligical parents. This would only affect fit and appropriate parents. Additionally, the children should be taught and understand that half-brothers and sisters are just that and that is why a child's real parent should have primary access to their own children and not someone else's. (actually have seen judges erroneously force someone else's kids onto another father during his own parenting time with his child.)
The reason that the woman wants to jump through the hoops is because it is a requirement to show attempts to establish paternity as a prequisite to receiving continuous welfare bennies. Plus she wants to make sure that her current meal ticket isn't compromised with the new man as well. Anyone caught taking advantage of the system like that should have to pay it all back to the system and the taxpayers.
As far as someone else not wanting a bioligical dad to have access to their child, that is simply appalling.
Lary Holland
http://www.laryholland.com/serendipity
|
|
|
|
Wed Jul 11, 2007 12:16 am |
|
|
Ted Jankowski
F L I N T O I D
|
http://www.cityofflint.net/crime_rate_comparison.htm
You'll find all the data you need to figure that out here!
If you went strickly by the data of Unemployment and Crime. Looking soley at Flint. You would have to conclude that High Unemployment equates to LOW crime! That's what the Stats show.
WHat needs to be brought into the picture is the education stats. Those show a markedable increase in the percentage of students not graduating that looks almost just like the graph of Crime going up! Hmmm Ya think?
[/url] |
|
|
|
Thu Jul 12, 2007 9:51 am |
|
|
Ted Jankowski
F L I N T O I D
|
| Also, a little study of stats show that in New York City. Poverty and Unemployment sky rocketted. And Crime was slashed by 50 percent during the same period. Shortly after the crime decrease. Both poverty and Unemployment hit record lows. Hmmm Do you think that if we lower crime that we can affect unemployment and poverty in Flint? Just Maybe?? |
|
|
|
Thu Jul 12, 2007 9:55 am |
|
|
insider
F L I N T O I D
|
I did not come up with this myself, but it sums up why I believe we are in the mess we are in.
The downward trend started in the 1960's when the Supreme Court removed Bible readings from schools. Then Madeline Murray O'Hare said she didn't want prayer in our schools. Dr. Benjamin Spock said we shouldn't spank our children, then we decided that school staff shouldn't discipline our children when they act up. Then we let our daughters have abortions and kept it secret from the parents. Then we decided that we should hand out condoms at school because kids are going to do it anyway. Then someone decided to print magazines with pictures of nude women for the "appreciation for the beauty of the female body" and we had no problem with that. Then someone took that appreciation a step further and published pictures of nude children available on the internet and we say they are entitled to their free speech. Then the TV shows and movies we have that promote profanity, violence and illicit sex, the music that encourages rape, drugs, murder, and suicide and we say it's just entertainment.......
and we ask ourselves why we are in the mess we are in, why people seem to have no conscience, why they don't know right from wrong, and why it doesn't bother them to kill strangers, their classmates and themselves?
Come on, it isn't hard to figure out WHY it happened. The question remains, how do we fix it? Maybe reversing some of the things mentioned above? Exactly..... that will never happen, so don't expect it to change. |
|
|
|
Thu Jul 12, 2007 9:07 pm |
|
|
Ted Jankowski
F L I N T O I D
|
quote:
The downward trend started in the 1960's when the Supreme Court removed Bible readings from schools. Then Madeline Murray O'Hare said she didn't want prayer in our schools. Dr. Benjamin Spock said we shouldn't spank our children, then we decided that school staff shouldn't discipline our children when they act up. Then we let our daughters have abortions and kept it secret from the parents. Then we decided that we should hand out condoms at school because kids are going to do it anyway. Then someone decided to print magazines with pictures of nude women for the "appreciation for the beauty of the female body" and we had no problem with that. Then someone took that appreciation a step further and published pictures of nude children available on the internet and we say they are entitled to their free speech. Then the TV shows and movies we have that promote profanity, violence and illicit sex, the music that encourages rape, drugs, murder, and suicide and we say it's just entertainment.......
I think you hit the main points and reasons. I would want to respect free speech. As i believe parents should have complete control over the TV and what their children listen to. I know my parents did. We didn't have a color TV until late 70's. actually. My parents removed the tv for almost 5 years. We were made to read, and only allowed to listen to some radio shows.
I used to listen to mystery theatre on WFDF when I was a kid. The Mickey mouse club was reruns of the Old black and white with Annette funichello. It was actually wholesome entertainment. unlike today where we get the Britney Spears. Christina Aguilera etc, And our young girls emulate them and what they wear. They say they should be able to wear what they want, look like prostitutes and then wonder why they are treated like prostitutes.
I find it amazing that for well over 200 years in this country long before it became the USA. That Using the Bible and teaching from it was unconstitutional. Wouldn't the Founding Father have been up in arms? I mean if the bible in schools was unconstitutional. Why weren't they debating that at the time? Why did it take 180 years for it to become unconstitutional? When did having the ten commandments in the school become unconstitutional? If it was already there when the constitution was ratified. And was unchallenged for well over a hundred years? Something just seems strange about the whole argument.
I can see complusuary teaching or mandatory acceptance of Christianity, or Catholicism, Mormonism etc could be unconstitutional. But the whole idea of separation of Church and State is a relatively new theory. It was never conceived of by any of the founding fathers. (taking half a sentence out of a part of a speech, isn't a valid argument).
I also agree the ideas on abortion. how can we say in the declaration of Independence that all people have the right to Life Liberty and Pursuit of happiness. If we allow children o be killed on such a grand scale. I'd never tell a woman what she can do with her body. Yet, we have conflicting laws. A woman can kill her child, but if she does drugs and her child it born addicted to drugs. She can and is held accountable. Or if a woman is killed and she is pregnant it becomes two counts of murder. One of her and the other of her unborn child. I don't get it. How come it's murder if they are both killed yet not if she can kill the child on her own? Doesn't make sense to me.
So I believe the whole argument being made up of conflicting values only proves the point.
quote:
and we ask ourselves why we are in the mess we are in, why people seem to have no conscience, why they don't know right from wrong, and why it doesn't bother them to kill strangers, their classmates and themselves?
|
|
|
|
Thu Jul 12, 2007 11:14 pm |
|
|
|
Forum Rules:
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Register
Profile
FlintTalk.com Forum Index
> Open chat
