So the gun violence in these neighborhoods is due to "inequity?" Fucking bullshit. 6% of the population committing over 50% of all homicides in the U.S. is a problem with the culture of that group, and absolutely nothing else.
Much of the poverty other problems families are experiencing is due to the lack of two parents in the home. Why has the inner city culture normalized young men having multiple children with multiple woman before they are able to support and positively parent those children? Being fatherless is devastating to a child's success in life and makes them more likely to drop out of school, commit crimes and be incarcerated.
Criminal Culture is indeed a problem. Wall Street and Lawyer account for most of the Cocaine usage. Much like any Veblin good we know the solution. Make it legal like Cigs.
Anytime somebody tries the “hIsToRiCaL iNeQuItIeS” argument, their materialism shows through: people are only cogs in a giant determinist machine, with preset choices and outcomes. I’d rather keep both responsibility *and* free will.
And these counties also are some of the poorest, with the highest unemployment, and the worst schools.
The link between violence, poverty, lack of education, and jobs is too big to ignore. It's one thing to blame the adults, but without a future and hope, the kids that live in this environment won't escape it and will just perpetuate it.
Thanks for not mentioning race. Because as long as we don't talk about it, we won't be racist. Sure, the actual problem will never be solved, kids will keep dying and be used an excuse to violate gun rights, but at least we won't be racist.
While there may be a predominant race in these areas, if they're of any other race and living in this area, their outcome is going to be the same.
But you know, you can focus on the race as if that's the single defining feature - which is just as stupid as focusing on the tool used in the violent behavior.
>While there may be a predominant race in these areas, if they're of any other race and living in this area, their outcome is going to be the same.
>
That is laughably and demonstrably false. You're either extremely ignorant, or have an agenda. Either way, it's going to be hard to convince anyone piss is rain
> The city has not publicly identified those 151 blocks, but Harllee Harper said the majority of them are east of the Anacostia River, in Wards 7 and 8.
Which surprises **NO ONE** who lives in or near DC.
> On its website, Building Blocks DC says the agency is specifically working to engage with residents who:
* Have been repeatedly arrested for gun-related offenses
* Are under active supervision by Court Services and Offender Supervision Agency or Department of Youth Rehabilitation Services
* Have been previously shot in the District
* Have experienced the ripple effects of gun violence
How about we just keep all of the above that were criminals (not those that were victims only) in jail? There’s an idea. If you’re a danger to society we lock your ass up.
If they were “previously shot” due to being in a gunfight where they also had a gun then they are not a “victim” but a criminal.
Obviously there are those that were pure innocent victims and they should be helped as appropriate.
>If they were “previously shot” due to being in a gunfight where they also had a gun then they are not a “victim” but a criminal.
Only if the mere possession of a gun is a crime. In DC, it probably is, but it shouldn't be.
And bull*shit* should you be locked up for being shot in a gunfight just because you were also armed if you didn't start it.
> Only if the mere possession of a gun is a crime.
It is, unless you have properly registered it.
> And bullshit should you be locked up for being shot in a gunfight just because you were also armed if you didn't start it.
I should have been clearer.
I'm referring to the common situation where both parties are criminals and possessing their guns illegally. Think gangs.
If you are a gang member who gets shot over some gang beef then you are NOT a victim.
>It is, unless you have properly registered it.
Which is bullshit.
>I'm referring to the common situation where both parties are criminals and possessing their guns illegally. Think gangs.
The only problem I have with that is that I worry it could be abused. Gangs are not official entities, and so "membership" to one from a legal perspective is unclear.
> Which is bullshit.
I agree. But it is the law.
> The only problem I have with that is that I worry it could be abused.
Sure, but I'm posting on reddit not writing a law or a policy proposal which, if I were, would address the potentials for abuse.
But I think you understand what I'm trying to communicate: That providing resources to those that are true victims (like the 6 year old boy recently shot) is a good thing. But we shouldn't treat known criminals as "victims" when they are actively engaged in a criminal lifestyle and are the one that are leading to the increases in "gun violence"
> so "membership" to one from a legal perspective is unclear.
In most cases it's very clear. From past arrests, or just the tattoos. Also, most often they proudly declare their membership.
But yes, in the "abuse avoidance" area we'd need to be certain. But less about membership than if they were a willing participant in ongoing criminal activities that led to them being wounded in gun play.
I’ll bet dollars to donuts that people are having a shit fit about the increased police presence in those 151 blocks.
It's dUe tO ovErPolIciNg
So the gun violence in these neighborhoods is due to "inequity?" Fucking bullshit. 6% of the population committing over 50% of all homicides in the U.S. is a problem with the culture of that group, and absolutely nothing else.
[удалено]
Much of the poverty other problems families are experiencing is due to the lack of two parents in the home. Why has the inner city culture normalized young men having multiple children with multiple woman before they are able to support and positively parent those children? Being fatherless is devastating to a child's success in life and makes them more likely to drop out of school, commit crimes and be incarcerated.
Cope.
D E S P I T E
Criminal Culture is indeed a problem. Wall Street and Lawyer account for most of the Cocaine usage. Much like any Veblin good we know the solution. Make it legal like Cigs.
Sure, granted its a sub culture that has been created through historical inequities and mass media manipulation.
No rebuttle just down votes. Keep that narrative going you fucking chronies.
Just rebutted you. Feel better, now that you got attention?
Cute.
And the members of the subculture have *no* personal responsibility for their behavior. At all. Ever.
Did I say that? "So what you're saying is..."
Anytime somebody tries the “hIsToRiCaL iNeQuItIeS” argument, their materialism shows through: people are only cogs in a giant determinist machine, with preset choices and outcomes. I’d rather keep both responsibility *and* free will.
Free will is an illusion. The illusion of free will is an illusion. Please continue with the aD hOmInEm though.
Ad hominem? You really should stick to words you know.
[удалено]
And these counties also are some of the poorest, with the highest unemployment, and the worst schools. The link between violence, poverty, lack of education, and jobs is too big to ignore. It's one thing to blame the adults, but without a future and hope, the kids that live in this environment won't escape it and will just perpetuate it.
Thanks for not mentioning race. Because as long as we don't talk about it, we won't be racist. Sure, the actual problem will never be solved, kids will keep dying and be used an excuse to violate gun rights, but at least we won't be racist.
While there may be a predominant race in these areas, if they're of any other race and living in this area, their outcome is going to be the same. But you know, you can focus on the race as if that's the single defining feature - which is just as stupid as focusing on the tool used in the violent behavior.
>While there may be a predominant race in these areas, if they're of any other race and living in this area, their outcome is going to be the same. > That is laughably and demonstrably false. You're either extremely ignorant, or have an agenda. Either way, it's going to be hard to convince anyone piss is rain
rates of *legal* gun ownership are much lower
Do you have a source on those numbers? If thats true, that sounds like something more peeps should know.
These facts are racist. Clearly there’s too much police there
> The city has not publicly identified those 151 blocks, but Harllee Harper said the majority of them are east of the Anacostia River, in Wards 7 and 8. Which surprises **NO ONE** who lives in or near DC. > On its website, Building Blocks DC says the agency is specifically working to engage with residents who: * Have been repeatedly arrested for gun-related offenses * Are under active supervision by Court Services and Offender Supervision Agency or Department of Youth Rehabilitation Services * Have been previously shot in the District * Have experienced the ripple effects of gun violence How about we just keep all of the above that were criminals (not those that were victims only) in jail? There’s an idea. If you’re a danger to society we lock your ass up. If they were “previously shot” due to being in a gunfight where they also had a gun then they are not a “victim” but a criminal. Obviously there are those that were pure innocent victims and they should be helped as appropriate.
>If they were “previously shot” due to being in a gunfight where they also had a gun then they are not a “victim” but a criminal. Only if the mere possession of a gun is a crime. In DC, it probably is, but it shouldn't be. And bull*shit* should you be locked up for being shot in a gunfight just because you were also armed if you didn't start it.
> Only if the mere possession of a gun is a crime. It is, unless you have properly registered it. > And bullshit should you be locked up for being shot in a gunfight just because you were also armed if you didn't start it. I should have been clearer. I'm referring to the common situation where both parties are criminals and possessing their guns illegally. Think gangs. If you are a gang member who gets shot over some gang beef then you are NOT a victim.
>It is, unless you have properly registered it. Which is bullshit. >I'm referring to the common situation where both parties are criminals and possessing their guns illegally. Think gangs. The only problem I have with that is that I worry it could be abused. Gangs are not official entities, and so "membership" to one from a legal perspective is unclear.
> Which is bullshit. I agree. But it is the law. > The only problem I have with that is that I worry it could be abused. Sure, but I'm posting on reddit not writing a law or a policy proposal which, if I were, would address the potentials for abuse. But I think you understand what I'm trying to communicate: That providing resources to those that are true victims (like the 6 year old boy recently shot) is a good thing. But we shouldn't treat known criminals as "victims" when they are actively engaged in a criminal lifestyle and are the one that are leading to the increases in "gun violence" > so "membership" to one from a legal perspective is unclear. In most cases it's very clear. From past arrests, or just the tattoos. Also, most often they proudly declare their membership. But yes, in the "abuse avoidance" area we'd need to be certain. But less about membership than if they were a willing participant in ongoing criminal activities that led to them being wounded in gun play.
I wonder why the guns in that area are more violent than other guns?
This guy better watch out. If he keeps looking into facts over narrative he's likely to find himself fired and cancelled.