|
| Author
|
Post |
 
|
|
Adam Ford
F L I N T O I D
|
quote:
Ted Jankowski schreef:
Woody is looking better and better all the time.
Just to clarify under Woody's leadership we might have a 100% drop in your precious crime stats because currently it takes police officers to take them and with the "lights out" strategy we are currently pursuing it's only a matter of time before we have trouble even counting up the bodies to put them on the stat board. With no officers to take reports we would have no crime reporting.
In other words Ted your definately right! With less officers Flint will have less crime. If we can eliminate the police department we would possibly only have those pesky county officers to report on dead body counts. |
|
|
Fri Aug 22, 2008 8:43 pm |
|
|
Ted Jankowski
F L I N T O I D
|
Adam, As usual, you argue results and evidences of other factors instead of the discussion we are having. All those programs helped unemployment. I am not downing any of those programs for that. What I'm saying. And Said, and SHOWED, AND PROVED is that they did nothing to slow or change crime rates! Crime was already on the decline.
quote:
In other words Ted your definately right! With less officers Flint will have less crime. If we can eliminate the police department we would possibly only have those pesky county officers to report on dead body counts.
See there again. I never said that nor implied it! Had you actually took the time to read what i wrote. You'd should have been able to figure out. That an over abundance of police officers has little to do with crime rates. It's how effectively they are used. It's whether, you focus on crime or focus on chasing eric mayes around town.
I could have sworn you were around and privy to all this information as it was happening.
Adam, if you're going to make these outradgeous statements. I would think you would want to use an alias. tHAT WAY NO ONE SAW THAT YOU WERE ENDORSING YOUR OPPONENT! |
|
|
|
Sat Aug 23, 2008 6:55 am |
|
|
Ted Jankowski
F L I N T O I D
|
| Hey Adam, Did you read the Paper today. Unemployment went up. I guess that means crime will go up too by your theory! All those teachers that were laid off are now going to run out and start committing crime because they don't have a job! |
|
|
|
Sat Aug 23, 2008 8:06 am |
|
|
Marko Rollo
F L I N T O I D
|
Careful...what I think you meant to say is that black folks commit a higher percentage of some crimes than the percentage of blacks in the overall population. I'm pretty sure white folks commit most crimes. 
quote:
Abortion kills black people at a much higher rate than white babies. Blacks generally commit more crimes so it would make sense the more abortions you have the more impact on crime. I think things like improving schools bringing in jobs and worst case scenario new deal programs would be a much better and more effective route than trying to kill of potential criminals before they are born.
|
|
|
|
Sat Aug 23, 2008 11:47 am |
|
|
Adam
F L I N T O I D
|
quote:
Ted Jankowski schreef:
Hey Adam, Did you read the Paper today. Unemployment went up. I guess that means crime will go up too by your theory! All those teachers that were laid off are now going to run out and start committing crime because they don't have a job!
No you're right Ted! Crime will go down! Didn't you get the news drug crimes should be going down county wide thanks to our unemployment and falling tax dollars so we won't have to worry about drug crimes showing up in your precious stats as much because we won't have the county sherrif going around and making drug arrests.
http://www.mlive.com/flintjournal/index.ssf/2008/08/budget_proposal_would_cut_40_g.html
"GENESEE COUNTY, Michigan -- Forty county employee positions would be eliminated, including all of Sheriff Robert Pickell's drug team, if a budget-cutting proposal from the county's top financial officer is approved."
With government crime stats the more unemployment and depravity the less ability the government has to report crimes which so more poverty and unemployment can = less crime in the eyes of government stats.
As we lay off more and more officers in Flint crime stats whould also go down. Although some peopel are currently willing to wait a day to file their police report if you up that to a week or just never even send out an officer that could reduce crime statistics as well. |
|
|
|
Sat Aug 23, 2008 12:29 pm |
|
|
Adam
F L I N T O I D
|
quote:
Marko Rollo schreef:
Careful...what I think you meant to say is that black folks commit a higher percentage of some crimes than the percentage of blacks in the overall population. I'm pretty sure white folks commit most crimes.
quote:
Abortion kills black people at a much higher rate than white babies. Blacks generally commit more crimes so it would make sense the more abortions you have the more impact on crime. I think things like improving schools bringing in jobs and worst case scenario new deal programs would be a much better and more effective route than trying to kill of potential criminals before they are born.
Is it because they are black or because they live in systemic poverty? I would say it's the systemic poverty and hopelessness. Unfortunately all our money is tied up in policing the world otherwise we might be able to help them in the meantime they can visit their local eugenics clinic.  |
|
|
|
Sat Aug 23, 2008 1:10 pm |
|
|
Adam
F L I N T O I D
|
quote:
Ted Jankowski schreef:
Adam, As usual, you argue results and evidences of other factors instead of the discussion we are having. All those programs helped unemployment. I am not downing any of those programs for that. What I'm saying. And Said, and SHOWED, AND PROVED is that they did nothing to slow or change crime rates! Crime was already on the decline.
quote:
In other words Ted your definately right! With less officers Flint will have less crime. If we can eliminate the police department we would possibly only have those pesky county officers to report on dead body counts.
See there again. I never said that nor implied it! Had you actually took the time to read what i wrote. You'd should have been able to figure out. That an over abundance of police officers has little to do with crime rates. It's how effectively they are used. It's whether, you focus on crime or focus on chasing eric mayes around town.
I could have sworn you were around and privy to all this information as it was happening.
Adam, if you're going to make these outradgeous statements. I would think you would want to use an alias. tHAT WAY NO ONE SAW THAT YOU WERE ENDORSING YOUR OPPONENT!
If poverty is correlated to crime intervention programs should help reduce crime. I'm not an expert on policing and crime at the beginning of the depression and although you may be an expert on stats stats can be manipulated or wrong.
You have stated things like Flint had less crime and less officers. You have stated unemployment often equals less crime. I was explaining that you can be correct. Unemployment can equal less crime in the eyes of government stats with less officers to report crimes.
Well if people are only concerned with crime stats like you seem to be I think they would want to go with Woodrow. If they wanted to really reduce crime even though stats might go up because increased officers + lower response times could very well = more crimes reported to police due to increased citizen expectations even though crime is going down.
For someone who is so o.c.d. about crime stats you really should realize how incorrect those stats you so often are quoting can be. If we had real accurate crime stats surroinding cities might not be too far off but Flint would probably be much higher especially with things like larceny.
I'm not saying poverty necessarily causes crime but it appears there's a very strong correlation between poverty right here, right now in america and even if you look at current misleading numbers which are probably too low poverty stricken cities have much, much higher crime than wealthy ones. In not arguing cause and effect I am arguing there is a clear correlation. |
|
|
|
Sat Aug 23, 2008 1:47 pm |
|
|
Ted Jankowski
F L I N T O I D
|
Yes and if you go back and look. I said the only real correlation between Poverty and Crime is that is you commit crime and are a criminal (in so many words) that you will probably live in poverty!
Direct result. |
|
|
|
Sat Aug 23, 2008 3:46 pm |
|
|
Adam
F L I N T O I D
|
|
|
Sat Aug 23, 2008 6:19 pm |
|
|
Public D
F L I N T O I D
|
|
|
Sun Aug 24, 2008 12:31 am |
|
|
Ted Jankowski
F L I N T O I D
|
[Adam, I wanted to spend some time actually reading what you sent me. Even though it is completely obvious you've not read a thing I've posted. And you continue to hold to this silly idea.
THere were some very good points made. But, they didn't prove the idea that Crime is a direct result of Poverty. Or even remotely related. Today, we attempt explain away high crime with poverty stats. You're trying to make this into a Chicken and the Egg arguement. It's not. POverty will always follow crime. NOt Crime follow poverty.
99 percent of the criminals in Flint.
Unemployed WHY?? Ecomony, sure some of it is. But, the VAST majority fo the reason is NO EDUCATION! THey dropped out of school. Or thrown out of school becuase of their behaviour! Or lack of good behaviour.
Which only leads to the vast majority people in that situation. To live in poverty!
When crime is excused because we make arguements that, they cannot help themselves because they grew up in poverty. We sell those people short. We demean them. Take away their dignity! Then we prove we don't care about them.
Back to Public D's story. The young man, didn't have a father to explain to him how his working hard making only 90 a week or month.. was worth more than him lowwering himself to turn to illegal acts to make money. NOw, poverty did not cause him to turn to drug dealing. Not having a father in the home did. Mom going out and having three kids without being married and having a dady around did. Now, having a father, doesn't mean they wou;dn't have still been living in poverty. BUt, having two caring parents goes a long way to helping.
The arguement of growing up in poverty creating a sense of hopelessness. THere is some truth to that. However, only because so many people are willing to step back and allow it too. We make excuses that because they live in poverty they had felt they had no hope. So instead of excuses their wrong behaviour we should be condeming it. Showing them that crime does have punishment and staying in School does have rewards. If they stay in schol, work hard, go on to college. THey won't fall to the same fate of others that accept that because they live in poverty they have no hope.
YOu can never get that message accross as long as your willing to accept that poverty casues crime. When you do that, the only thing you'll do is encourage more crime. Thus, when I say, Look around at Flint. We have years of blmaing poverty for our crime. And what do we get as a result. More crime. Even though, Unemplyment goes up. And not one of those people that lost their jobs ran out and started a life of crime. We blame unemployment for the high crime. Even when the EVEDENCE PROVES that when unemployment and poverty is going up. Crime is coming down. That doesn't matter to people like you. Your too busy trying to over think the problem, grasp for reasons to not blame the poor young person for their behaivour. You excuse it because it must be something about poverty that they don't have the ability to make good decsions. Thats only for those of us who can afford to not break the law. |
|
|
|
Sun Aug 24, 2008 9:49 pm |
|
|
Adam Ford
F L I N T O I D
|
quote:
Ted Jankowski schreef:
[Adam, I wanted to spend some time actually reading what you sent me. Even though it is completely obvious you've not read a thing I've posted. And you continue to hold to this silly idea.
THere were some very good points made. But, they didn't prove the idea that Crime is a direct result of Poverty. Or even remotely related. Today, we attempt explain away high crime with poverty stats. You're trying to make this into a Chicken and the Egg arguement. It's not. POverty will always follow crime. NOt Crime follow poverty.
99 percent of the criminals in Flint.
Unemployed WHY?? Ecomony, sure some of it is. But, the VAST majority fo the reason is NO EDUCATION! THey dropped out of school. Or thrown out of school becuase of their behaviour! Or lack of good behaviour.
Which only leads to the vast majority people in that situation. To live in poverty!
When crime is excused because we make arguements that, they cannot help themselves because they grew up in poverty. We sell those people short. We demean them. Take away their dignity! Then we prove we don't care about them.
The arguement of growing up in poverty creating a sense of hopelessness. THere is some truth to that. However, only because so many people are willing to step back and allow it too. We make excuses that because they live in poverty they had felt they had no hope. So instead of excuses their wrong behaviour we should be condeming it. Showing them that crime does have punishment and staying in School does have rewards. If they stay in schol, work hard, go on to college. THey won't fall to the same fate of others that accept that because they live in poverty they have no hope.
YOu can never get that message accross as long as your willing to accept that poverty casues crime. When you do that, the only thing you'll do is encourage more crime. Thus, when I say, Look around at Flint. We have years of blmaing poverty for our crime. And what do we get as a result. More crime. Even though, Unemplyment goes up. And not one of those people that lost their jobs ran out and started a life of crime. We blame unemployment for the high crime. Even when the EVEDENCE PROVES that when unemployment and poverty is going up. Crime is coming down. That doesn't matter to people like you. Your too busy trying to over think the problem, grasp for reasons to not blame the poor young person for their behaivour. You excuse it because it must be something about poverty that they don't have the ability to make good decsions. Thats only for those of us who can afford to not break the law.
Poverty does not always follow crime.
Go interview some criminals. Ask them if they were poor to begin with or commited a crime and then became poor. http://www.education.pitt.edu/ocd/publications/sr2002-03.pdf
Risk factors at home include family poverty.
While it may not be a direct cause it is a significant risk factor.
Obviously education is also a risk factor and appears even more associated with crime than poverty although poor education is also associated with poverty.
I'm not excusing crime.
There is a strong correlation between poverty and crime and education and crime. I think if we could reduce dropout rates and increase jobs for Flint crime would go down in Flint.
Just because reported crime goes down does not mean actual crime is going down because poor people are probably less likely to report crime and when cities become poor they will probably have less police.
To clarify again I am not saying poverty directly causes crime but more poverty is correlated with more crime. You can have situations were more poverty equals less crime but in general that is not the case.
You also point to Flint and if you look at the numbers long term any competent and sane person would conclude that more wealth and jobs was associated with less crime.
In addition one would expect the Depression to be a statistical anomoly due to is acute and relative temporary verses long term systemic poverty like we currently see in America.
http://capaassociation.org/newsletter_N009/Articles/PovertyCrime.htm
"Poor people make up the overwhelming majority of those behind bars as 53% of those in prison earned less than $10,000 per year
before
incarceration."
That's before incarceration not after Ted. |
|
|
|
Sun Aug 24, 2008 11:36 pm |
|
|
Marko Rollo
F L I N T O I D
|
Ok Ted, you've convinced me. So what are we going to do about it?
Thinking back over the years, I can only think of three things that seemed to lower crime in the short term:
1. Cops everywhere. Not just a few, but a LOT of cops. That's how they kick-started Greektown in the 80's. You could look in any direction at midnight on the weekend in Greektown and see a cop on horseback.
2. After school programs for at-risk teens. Golden Gloves, etc. Lots of civic support for these programs in the 30's, 40's, and 50's to keep kids off the streets, give them goals, role models, etc. This could tie into the "hopelessness issue".
3. Judges who had the flexibility to say to an 18-21 yr old involved in minor crime "the army or jail."
Thoughts? |
|
|
|
Sun Aug 24, 2008 11:48 pm |
|
|
Ted Jankowski
F L I N T O I D
|
Marko, QUite Honestly,
Number one really won't have that much of an affect. We first need to change the image of our police officers in the city. That will only happen when Flint gets good leadership. We need police in the schools building trust, being seen as Law Enforcement, not "the Man" abusing his authority. In all honesty Chief Dicks has already made some good changes that keep officers out on the streets longer. Turn around time has been a major problem in Flint. Not nessearily the number of officers.
On Number two I believe you hit it right on the head. You mentioned having the programs. But further went on to highlight that it was goals, role models that really make the difference.
Number three. That's a dream that will never happen again. However. I believe if we had a military school, say a non profit that didn't have to abide by the States rules for disicpline. Where Judges could send young people already in and out of the system (by the young person volunteering to go there inleu of jail time.) Where they can get thier high school degree. And some real job training in a trade if they want it. They would have school and classes all year around. Learn forigen languages. Intensive teaching. Many would need remedial teaching. But they would get it. The expectations would be set high. The young people would exceed them. It happens almost every time. You set the standards high and most of the time the young poeple exceed them. NO more telling them they don't have control over their destiny because they are poor. |
|
|
|
Mon Aug 25, 2008 8:09 am |
|
|
twotap
F L I N T O I D
|
| Im sure their are some who would benefit from after school programs but I doubt if the Spanish Cobras or your banging driveby punks are much interested since school isnt even on their daily schedule. Pretty hard to compare the 30s 40s 50s to whats going on nowdays not to mention their was a good deal of respect for cops back then now they are just the enemy to a whole new subculture. |
_________________
"If you like your current healthcare you can keep it, Period"!!
Barack Hussein Obama--- multiple times. |
|
|
Mon Aug 25, 2008 8:29 am |
|
|
|
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
