VH asked what we can do about gang violence & I think her question warranted an article to do justice to the question. Piers Morgan, President Obama and much of the media want to talk about gun violence. Why is it not allowed to talk about violent crime instead? Sandy Hook is tragic, but are those parents who lost children grieving any more than the parents who have lost children in the big cities such as Chicago? Piers & Obama claim more gun laws are the answer. I find that hard to believe. Picture a map of the continental United States. Liberals claim restricting guns to this area will stop gun violence. Now picture Rhode Island. Imagine if we were to take the high crime areas in the US and stack them side-by-side. I think that is a close scale for where the violence is and where it is not. Most of our violence is in high crime neighborhoods. Most cities are “safe”, even Chicago, if you stay in the right neighborhoods.
So what can be done to stop the violence? I think an honest assessment of the issue will help. Most of the violence today is committed by young, black men. In some area’s it’s young, hispanic men. This statement is borne out by simple prison statistics. The overwhelming number of people imprisoned in the US are black males, starting their criminal career while young. Frequently the violence is clashes between different groups (gangs) of young men fighting each other. Black on black violence can be compared to domestic violence where the abused enables their tormenters. There is a code of conduct where no one of a minority race seems willing to speak out against a member of their race. Part of this may also be simple fear, that reporting a crime could cost you your life. Witness a murder and agree to testify, only to be killed by his gang “brother” who wasn’t part of the first killing. Maybe you survive against a small gang, but the “Cripps” “& “Bloods” number in the thousands. So not any easy solution to be found there.
But why are they there? Much in life can be explained by simple economic reasons. Food, water & shelter are required by all for life. Where/why do all these young men spring from these inner city neighborhoods? I think government provided, low-income housing explains much of the source. This is not to say the governments housing projects cause urban violence, government actions are enabling this violence in multiple ways. LBJ’s “Greater Society” was supposed to provide a safety net for the poor and needy. It is difficult for a single mother to raise a child on her own. Who can blame a government for helping that single mother more than a poor family with a husband and wife? Now we see the unintended consequence of mothers not marrying or even having children just to obtain government support. Getting “paid” to make babies, as long as there is no “father” present. Add to this, what government provides may keep the alive, but does not mean they are “happy”. Look at today’s youth culture, cell phones & Air Jordan”s are required even in elementary school. Jr high & high school brings peer pressure to a head so drop-outs increase as these poor young men seek to better themselves. Gangs offer status, money, drugs, girls, (not that teenage boys think about sex) and a sense of belonging. The real mystery may be why so few join inner city gangs… Others have similar thoughts…
In My Bondage and My Freedom, Douglass laments that “Slavery does away with fathers, as it does with families.” (pg. 51) To beget more wealth, women were raped by their masters who, without remorse, sold their kin. Destruction of the family continues today, and has been expanded to the whole people, regardless of their origins. State overseers reward single women with welfare benefits for every child they bear, so long as no father is in the home. Douglass warned, “Make a man a slave, and you rob him of moral responsibility. Freedom of choice is the essence of all accountability.” (Frederick Douglass, My Bondage and My Freedom: Part I — Life as a Slave, pg. 149)
In the old days, slave babies were separated from their mothers shortly after birth and placed in the care of others until they were old enough to be sold or rented out. Asking questions about parentage was evidence of impudent curiosity that resulted in lashings. Today, children face a different hazard. Women with unwanted pregnancies can abort their babies, and overseers pay the clinic. Planned Parenthood sucks the babies from their mother’s wombs, and dumps their bodies into the trash. Those babies will never show impudent curiosity.
In the nineteenth century slaves slept on the floor without blankets in unheated hovels. Rising at dawn, they worked until dark. They were expected to survive on meager rations, and nurse their own wounds. Today’s slaves live in cookie-cutter government housing. They receive food stamps, health benefits, and free cell phones. Even if jobs were available, they are not required to work. Obesity is a growing problem. Bored youths kill each other for trivial reasons.
President Obama, in his SOTU speech called on action to be taken on our education system.
You know, study after study shows that the sooner a child begins learning, the better he or she does down the road. But today, fewer than three in ten 4-year-olds are enrolled in a high-quality preschool program. Most middle-class parents can’t afford a few hundred bucks a week for private preschool. And for poor kids who need help the most, this lack of access to preschool education can shadow them for the rest of their lives.
So, tonight, I propose working with states to make high-quality preschool available to every single child in America.
a decade-long study by the federal government concluded that Head Start provided only “only a few statistically significant differences in outcomes at the end of 1st grade.”
The study, titled “Head Start Impact Study Final Report,” tracked 5,000 white, Hispanic and African-American kids from age three or four until the end of first grade. The children — all of whom were being raised by single parents or by families earning incomes below the poverty level — were compared to others who raised by the their parents or sent to other daycare centers.
The study was released in January 2010, and was conducted by a series of research groups that are frequently hired by the federal government to weight impact of programs and policies. The groups included Westat, the Urban Institute, Abt Associates and Chesapeake Research Associates.
In the old days, slave babies were separated from their mothers shortly after birth and placed in the care of others until they were old enough to be sold or rented out.
Nowhere in our nation is the failure of the liberal, big government approach more evident than Chicago. A union dominated school system where their collective bargaining has been used to secure the highest pay & benefits along with the shortest school hours. The predictable end result is one of the highest drop out rates along with the lowest test scores. Obama’s answer to the failure of the education system is more of the same. I expect the day care workers to be invited/forced into to the teachers unions as part of the process.
Chicago also has some of the most restrictive gun laws and has for decades. How has that worked out so far? The highest murder rate in the nation and Obama/liberal want to enact more laws like this across the nation? ” People buy guns outside Chicago and bring them into the city.” Yes, that’s true. People also buy drugs outside the US and they are brought into the country. How will outlawing firearms stop criminals from smuggling them across the border? Why would anyone believe they can stop guns but can’t stop drugs or illegal aliens? Will facts ever change a liberals mind on these issues? Well, maybe one’s….
Last year, like the year before and the one before that, more people died of gunfire in Chicago than soldiers in Afghanistan. Every year more school children die from gunfire in Chicago than died in Newtown. Every year. Many of these deaths in Chicago are from semi-automatic weapons. They are illegal in Chicago. They have been for a very long time. In fact, Chicago has one of the strictest gun control laws in the country. In 1982, almost 31 years ago, Chicago became the first American city to ban handguns. And yet, the Liberals scream for more gun control. True Liberals would look at the human cause of these events, not a quick fix that makes headlines, that make it look as if politicians are accomplishing something when they are doing no more good than Chicago did in 1982 when it banned handguns. It is not a revelation that most of these shootings are gang related. It is not a revelation that if we broke up the gangs, we would drastically reduce the violence. But legislation enabling enhanced enforcement procedures against gangs is nowhere to be found. Al Sharpton says not a word about providing law enforcement agencies with extra enforcement powers to bring this travesty to an end after decades of misdirected pseudo-liberal “solutions.” Mayor Rahm Emanuel’s strategy is to tear down empty buildings, as if the gangs would dissolve because they would never figure out where to gather and store their illegal weapons if the city’s empty buildings were torn down — leaving massive scars on the Chicago landscape, empty, bottle strewn, drug gathering “parks” throughout the City rivaling Bryant Park in its “heyday.”
True Liberals understand that the most successful strategy is one that eliminates obstacles to people’s achieving their potential. That strategy would require steps to eliminate the gangs, not play games by changing their meeting places. Why is it that today’s pseudo Liberals cannot get their hands around the idea that going to war against evil people is what allows the others to achieve their potential, to thrive, to grow? Every seven year old, even in Chicago, has the right to grow up. A civilized society protects that right, even if it means taking harsh steps against those who would deprive that seven year old of his opportunity. That doesn’t mean taking guns away from good people, or tearing down abandoned buildings to create vacant eyesores. It means recognizing that there are bad people, people without empathy, people without a respect for human life. This is the case in Chicago. This was the case of the shooter in Newtown. This is the case with Islamic fundamentalists. True Liberals understand this. The pseudo Liberals who have hijacked the label “Liberal” do not.
The pseudo Liberals want to stop crime without eliminating the criminals. They want world peace without challenging those who are committed to hegemony, caliphates, and domination. They want prosperity without encouraging each and every citizen to contribute to that prosperity.
There was a time when I was a Liberal. There was a time when I was a Democrat. I have not changed my values. I have not changed my philosophies. Someday, maybe the pseudo Liberals will adopt Liberal values. Someday, maybe Democrats will not just quote Thomas Jefferson, but understand what he intended for this great nation.