|
Although this thread does not function under the same strict guidelines as the USPMT, it is still a general practice on TL to provide a source with an explanation on why it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion. Failure to do so will result in a mod action. |
On May 30 2018 11:18 GoTuNk! wrote:Show nested quote +On May 30 2018 11:10 Plansix wrote:On May 30 2018 11:04 GoTuNk! wrote:On May 30 2018 10:58 Plansix wrote:
Promiscuity rules. Why would anyone want less of it? Sex is a dangerous activies and has consecuenses. Especially for woman and homosexual man. I personally don't like promiscuity and consider it a turn off, but it's everyones right to sleep with whoever they like. However society should stop pretending it's care free fun. It's not. Dangerous? Like while sky diving maybe? But fucking isn’t dangerous. It’s serious and people should know what they are getting into, but it’s not dangerous. Riding a motorcycle without a helmet is dangerous. There are like 200 forms of birth control out there, it can be all the care free fun you want. Yeah sex is perfectly safe. That's why no one has STD's and unwanted pregnacies are a thing of the past. Drugs are also perfectly safe, it's not like there are drugs addicts pretty much everywhere.
Fire can burn you, but I still used it to stir fry my dinner. I just avoided touching the open flame. I have also hit the point in my life where I’ve been having sex for the majority of it, no problems to date.
Education is the key. But sex education is a touchy subject in the US, because some groups promote an abstinence program. A program proven to fail in almost ever way. And the traditional values groups are the ones pushing the failing program to more schools.
|
On May 30 2018 11:32 GoTuNk! wrote:Show nested quote +On May 30 2018 11:21 WolfintheSheep wrote:On May 30 2018 11:18 GoTuNk! wrote:On May 30 2018 11:10 Plansix wrote:On May 30 2018 11:04 GoTuNk! wrote:On May 30 2018 10:58 Plansix wrote:
Promiscuity rules. Why would anyone want less of it? Sex is a dangerous activies and has consecuenses. Especially for woman and homosexual man. I personally don't like promiscuity and consider it a turn off, but it's everyones right to sleep with whoever they like. However society should stop pretending it's care free fun. It's not. Dangerous? Like while sky diving maybe? But fucking isn’t dangerous. It’s serious and people should know what they are getting into, but it’s not dangerous. Riding a motorcycle without a helmet is dangerous. There are like 200 forms of birth control out there, it can be all the care free fun you want. Yeah sex is perfectly safe. That's why no one has STD's and unwanted pregnacies are a thing of the past. Drugs are also perfectly safe, it's not like there are drugs addicts pretty much everywhere. This is why birth control. Which the US doesn't believe in either, but it does exist That's just disingenous reasoning and bad intended generalizations. All countries in the world have STDs and unwanted pregnacies by the way. You simply cannot pretend sex is a free-risk activity because birth control exists. It is not. Cars are dangerous, it is a fact of life. Tens of thousands of people (hundreds?) die every year in car accidents. Just like birth control we have traffic laws but people are humans. People don't always follow rules, make mistakes, and chance exists. That does not mean we will stop driving cars or having sex. It just means recognizing it's dangerous activity and be responsible about it.
I mean if you consider food and eating 'dangerous' too I can understand the use even if it seems silly.
I'm not convinced that single family homes aren't still a symptom of a larger more pervasive underlying problem as far as your main point goes, or that reducing policy based influence is always the right direction.
|
On May 30 2018 11:37 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On May 30 2018 11:32 GoTuNk! wrote:On May 30 2018 11:21 WolfintheSheep wrote:On May 30 2018 11:18 GoTuNk! wrote:On May 30 2018 11:10 Plansix wrote:On May 30 2018 11:04 GoTuNk! wrote:On May 30 2018 10:58 Plansix wrote:
Promiscuity rules. Why would anyone want less of it? Sex is a dangerous activies and has consecuenses. Especially for woman and homosexual man. I personally don't like promiscuity and consider it a turn off, but it's everyones right to sleep with whoever they like. However society should stop pretending it's care free fun. It's not. Dangerous? Like while sky diving maybe? But fucking isn’t dangerous. It’s serious and people should know what they are getting into, but it’s not dangerous. Riding a motorcycle without a helmet is dangerous. There are like 200 forms of birth control out there, it can be all the care free fun you want. Yeah sex is perfectly safe. That's why no one has STD's and unwanted pregnacies are a thing of the past. Drugs are also perfectly safe, it's not like there are drugs addicts pretty much everywhere. This is why birth control. Which the US doesn't believe in either, but it does exist That's just disingenous reasoning and bad intended generalizations. All countries in the world have STDs and unwanted pregnacies by the way. You simply cannot pretend sex is a free-risk activity because birth control exists. It is not. Cars are dangerous, it is a fact of life. Tens of thousands of people (hundreds?) die every year in car accidents. Just like birth control we have traffic laws but people are humans. People don't always follow rules, make mistakes, and chance exists. That does not mean we will stop driving cars or having sex. It just means recognizing it's dangerous activity and be responsible about it. I mean if you consider food and eating 'dangerous' too I can understand the use even if it seems silly. I'm not convinced that single family homes aren't still a symptom of a larger more pervasive underlying problem as far as your main point goes, or that reducing policy based influence is always the right direction.
Yes complex issues are always inter-related. Are single family homes the cause of crimes? Or is it poverty that causes single households that result in crime? Maybe it's racism that causes single house holds which causes crimes?
Truth is you will find very and subtly biased sources supporting all of this positions.
My opinion from what I've read is that single family homes seems to be the current best predictor. It is quite obvious racism now is lower than in 1960, however single parent houses among black population is highest now than ever. On the same margin, it is more likely for a white kid in a single parent home to drop out of school (or commit a crime, I honestly can't remember the stats were very similar) than a black kid with two parents.
That's the anecdotal evidence I can recall on what I've read about it, but it's a topic on if it's own with tons of nuances that warrants full research if you really want to be informed.
|
It’s amazing how the traditional values argument always dove tails right into the black single parent houses argument. It’s like driving down a familiar road. The next stop will be black on black violence.
|
On May 30 2018 11:45 GoTuNk! wrote:Show nested quote +On May 30 2018 11:37 GreenHorizons wrote:On May 30 2018 11:32 GoTuNk! wrote:On May 30 2018 11:21 WolfintheSheep wrote:On May 30 2018 11:18 GoTuNk! wrote:On May 30 2018 11:10 Plansix wrote:On May 30 2018 11:04 GoTuNk! wrote:On May 30 2018 10:58 Plansix wrote:
Promiscuity rules. Why would anyone want less of it? Sex is a dangerous activies and has consecuenses. Especially for woman and homosexual man. I personally don't like promiscuity and consider it a turn off, but it's everyones right to sleep with whoever they like. However society should stop pretending it's care free fun. It's not. Dangerous? Like while sky diving maybe? But fucking isn’t dangerous. It’s serious and people should know what they are getting into, but it’s not dangerous. Riding a motorcycle without a helmet is dangerous. There are like 200 forms of birth control out there, it can be all the care free fun you want. Yeah sex is perfectly safe. That's why no one has STD's and unwanted pregnacies are a thing of the past. Drugs are also perfectly safe, it's not like there are drugs addicts pretty much everywhere. This is why birth control. Which the US doesn't believe in either, but it does exist That's just disingenous reasoning and bad intended generalizations. All countries in the world have STDs and unwanted pregnacies by the way. You simply cannot pretend sex is a free-risk activity because birth control exists. It is not. Cars are dangerous, it is a fact of life. Tens of thousands of people (hundreds?) die every year in car accidents. Just like birth control we have traffic laws but people are humans. People don't always follow rules, make mistakes, and chance exists. That does not mean we will stop driving cars or having sex. It just means recognizing it's dangerous activity and be responsible about it. I mean if you consider food and eating 'dangerous' too I can understand the use even if it seems silly. I'm not convinced that single family homes aren't still a symptom of a larger more pervasive underlying problem as far as your main point goes, or that reducing policy based influence is always the right direction. Yes complex issues are always inter-related. Are single family homes the cause of crimes? Or is it poverty that causes single households that result in crime? Maybe it's racism that causes single house holds which causes crimes? Truth is you will find very and subtly biased sources supporting all of this positions. My opinion from what I've read is that single family homes seems to be the current best predictor. It is quite obvious racism now is lower than in 1960, however single parent houses among black population is highest now than ever. On the same margin, it is more likely for a white kid in a single parent home to drop out of school (or commit a crime, I honestly can't remember the stats were very similar) than a black kid with two parents. That's the anecdotal evidence I can recall on what I've read about it, but it's a topic on if it's own with tons of nuances that warrants full research if you really want to be informed.
I suspect I've more thoroughly researched this stuff than you have. I'm not sure I find the difference in racism as obviously 'less' as you do (me being a black man in the US, you not being one).
That mostly aside we know that the war on drugs was a deliberate effort to criminalize, incarcerate, and silence black people (and hippies) in the US. Which just so happens to coincide with the increase in homes without fathers (as the US government intentionally removed them from families [again]).
In a sexist society removing the primary breadwinner (as an effort to silence their political dissent stemming from their economic and social oppression) inevitably leads to poverty (as does having wealthy people)
So in this country's short history we have at least 2 times where the federal government promoted and actively contributed to the systematic destruction of Black families (several more times for Black wealth).
So it's not really a question whether the increased rates of poverty, crime, or single family homes in Black communities are a symptom of racism, we know they are (at least in any proportion we find them greater than white communities). Maybe some of those symptoms manifest in self-perpetuating ways, but it's unquestionable they come from systemic issues revolving around racism, poverty, and oppression imo.
All that considered, Black kids aren't going into churches and schools and shooting bunches of people, the shooters are almost all white/Asian and come from typically 'traditional' families.
|
On May 30 2018 12:07 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On May 30 2018 11:45 GoTuNk! wrote:On May 30 2018 11:37 GreenHorizons wrote:On May 30 2018 11:32 GoTuNk! wrote:On May 30 2018 11:21 WolfintheSheep wrote:On May 30 2018 11:18 GoTuNk! wrote:On May 30 2018 11:10 Plansix wrote:On May 30 2018 11:04 GoTuNk! wrote:On May 30 2018 10:58 Plansix wrote:
Promiscuity rules. Why would anyone want less of it? Sex is a dangerous activies and has consecuenses. Especially for woman and homosexual man. I personally don't like promiscuity and consider it a turn off, but it's everyones right to sleep with whoever they like. However society should stop pretending it's care free fun. It's not. Dangerous? Like while sky diving maybe? But fucking isn’t dangerous. It’s serious and people should know what they are getting into, but it’s not dangerous. Riding a motorcycle without a helmet is dangerous. There are like 200 forms of birth control out there, it can be all the care free fun you want. Yeah sex is perfectly safe. That's why no one has STD's and unwanted pregnacies are a thing of the past. Drugs are also perfectly safe, it's not like there are drugs addicts pretty much everywhere. This is why birth control. Which the US doesn't believe in either, but it does exist That's just disingenous reasoning and bad intended generalizations. All countries in the world have STDs and unwanted pregnacies by the way. You simply cannot pretend sex is a free-risk activity because birth control exists. It is not. Cars are dangerous, it is a fact of life. Tens of thousands of people (hundreds?) die every year in car accidents. Just like birth control we have traffic laws but people are humans. People don't always follow rules, make mistakes, and chance exists. That does not mean we will stop driving cars or having sex. It just means recognizing it's dangerous activity and be responsible about it. I mean if you consider food and eating 'dangerous' too I can understand the use even if it seems silly. I'm not convinced that single family homes aren't still a symptom of a larger more pervasive underlying problem as far as your main point goes, or that reducing policy based influence is always the right direction. Yes complex issues are always inter-related. Are single family homes the cause of crimes? Or is it poverty that causes single households that result in crime? Maybe it's racism that causes single house holds which causes crimes? Truth is you will find very and subtly biased sources supporting all of this positions. My opinion from what I've read is that single family homes seems to be the current best predictor. It is quite obvious racism now is lower than in 1960, however single parent houses among black population is highest now than ever. On the same margin, it is more likely for a white kid in a single parent home to drop out of school (or commit a crime, I honestly can't remember the stats were very similar) than a black kid with two parents. That's the anecdotal evidence I can recall on what I've read about it, but it's a topic on if it's own with tons of nuances that warrants full research if you really want to be informed. I suspect I've more thoroughly researched this stuff than you have. I'm not sure I find the difference in racism as obviously 'less' as you do (me being a black man in the US, you not being one). That mostly aside we know that the war on drugs was a deliberate effort to criminalize, incarcerate, and silence black people (and hippies) in the US. Which just so happens to coincide with the increase in homes without fathers (as the US government intentionally removed them from families [again]). In a sexist society removing the primary breadwinner (as an effort to silence their political dissent stemming from their economic and social oppression) inevitably leads to poverty (as does having wealthy people) So in this country's short history we have at least 2 times where the federal government promoted and actively contributed to the systematic destruction of Black families (several more times for Black wealth). So it's not really a question whether the increased rates of poverty, crime, or single family homes in Black communities are a symptom of racism, we know they are (at least in any proportion we find them greater than white communities). Maybe some of those symptoms manifest in self-perpetuating ways, but it's unquestionable they come from systemic issues revolving around racism, poverty, and oppression imo. All that considered, Black kids aren't going into churches and schools and shooting bunches of people, the shooters are almost all white/Asian and come from typically 'traditional' families.
Kids born in wedlock was higher during actual slavery time and jim crow than it is now. I'm sure you can at least make the concession that racism is lower now than back then.
I don't think "war on drugs" started to target black people, though it might be an inadverted consequence. Do not atribute to malice what can be atributed to stupidity.
I don't fully get your second point.
Kids shooting schools and churches are usually white, but they do not come from "traditional family values", roughly 90% of them were raised in single parent house holds.
Broken homes have been steadily rising, and while higher among black population it is a transversal problem in the U.S. and I think in most of the first world. A quick google search delivered some pretty harsh statistics about it:
+ Show Spoiler +43% of US children live without their father [US Department of Census]
90% of homeless and runaway children are from fatherless homes. [US D.H.H.S., Bureau of the Census]
80% of rapists motivated with displaced anger come from fatherless homes. [Criminal Justice & Behavior, Vol 14, pp. 403-26, 1978]
71% of pregnant teenagers lack a father. [U.S. Department of Health and Human Services press release, Friday, March 26, 1999]
63% of youth suicides are from fatherless homes. [US D.H.H.S., Bureau of the Census]
85% of children who exhibit behavioral disorders come from fatherless homes. [Center for Disease Control]
90% of adolescent repeat arsonists live with only their mother. [Wray Herbert, “Dousing the Kindlers,” Psychology Today, January, 1985, p. 28]
71% of high school dropouts come from fatherless homes. [National Principals Association Report on the State of High Schools]
75% of adolescent patients in chemical abuse centers come from fatherless homes. [Rainbows f for all God’s Children]
70% of juveniles in state operated institutions have no father. [US Department of Justice, Special Report, Sept. 1988]
85% of youths in prisons grew up in a fatherless home. [Fulton County Georgia jail populations, Texas Department of Corrections, 1992]
Fatherless boys and girls are: twice as likely to drop out of high school; twice as likely to end up in jail; four times more likely to need help for emotional or behavioral problems. [US D.H.H.S. news release, March 26, 1999]
|
United States42017 Posts
On May 30 2018 12:31 GoTuNk! wrote:
Kids shooting schools and churches are usually white, but they do not come from "traditional family values", roughly 90% of them were raised in single parent house holds.
There haven't been so many mass shootings that you can't just cite the last 20 and whether the shooter was in a single parent household. They're on wikipedia. I can wait.
It's not 90% though. Nothing like it.
|
|
|
United States42017 Posts
Your source cites one, Adam Lanza. That's not a big sample.
We've had 6 so far this year.
Dimitrios Pagourtzis, 2 parents.
Nikolas Jacob Cruz, 2 parents until father died of old age.
Travis Jeffrey Reinking, 2 parents.
Albert Wong, 2 parents until father died. This one was a PTSD vet thing.
Gabe Parker, 2 parents.
Timothy O’Brien Smith, couldn't find info on him.
As I said, it really doesn't take that long to look these people up on wikipedia. The claim that they're 90% single parents is very easy to check.
2017 mass shootings
Dr. Henry Michael Bello, couldn't find info on him. Was a middle aged doctor shooting up his workplace after he was fired though, not a troubled kid.
Emanuel Kidega Samson, 2 parents.
Nathaniel Jouett, 2 parents.
James Hodgkinson, 66 at the time of the shooting, no info on parents.
Esteban Santiago-Ruiz, father died of natural causes but not when he was a kid. Was a PTSD thing.
Stopping for now but it's pretty clear that the 90% number doesn't stand up.
|
On May 30 2018 12:31 GoTuNk! wrote:Show nested quote +On May 30 2018 12:07 GreenHorizons wrote:On May 30 2018 11:45 GoTuNk! wrote:On May 30 2018 11:37 GreenHorizons wrote:On May 30 2018 11:32 GoTuNk! wrote:On May 30 2018 11:21 WolfintheSheep wrote:On May 30 2018 11:18 GoTuNk! wrote:On May 30 2018 11:10 Plansix wrote:On May 30 2018 11:04 GoTuNk! wrote:On May 30 2018 10:58 Plansix wrote:
Promiscuity rules. Why would anyone want less of it? Sex is a dangerous activies and has consecuenses. Especially for woman and homosexual man. I personally don't like promiscuity and consider it a turn off, but it's everyones right to sleep with whoever they like. However society should stop pretending it's care free fun. It's not. Dangerous? Like while sky diving maybe? But fucking isn’t dangerous. It’s serious and people should know what they are getting into, but it’s not dangerous. Riding a motorcycle without a helmet is dangerous. There are like 200 forms of birth control out there, it can be all the care free fun you want. Yeah sex is perfectly safe. That's why no one has STD's and unwanted pregnacies are a thing of the past. Drugs are also perfectly safe, it's not like there are drugs addicts pretty much everywhere. This is why birth control. Which the US doesn't believe in either, but it does exist That's just disingenous reasoning and bad intended generalizations. All countries in the world have STDs and unwanted pregnacies by the way. You simply cannot pretend sex is a free-risk activity because birth control exists. It is not. Cars are dangerous, it is a fact of life. Tens of thousands of people (hundreds?) die every year in car accidents. Just like birth control we have traffic laws but people are humans. People don't always follow rules, make mistakes, and chance exists. That does not mean we will stop driving cars or having sex. It just means recognizing it's dangerous activity and be responsible about it. I mean if you consider food and eating 'dangerous' too I can understand the use even if it seems silly. I'm not convinced that single family homes aren't still a symptom of a larger more pervasive underlying problem as far as your main point goes, or that reducing policy based influence is always the right direction. Yes complex issues are always inter-related. Are single family homes the cause of crimes? Or is it poverty that causes single households that result in crime? Maybe it's racism that causes single house holds which causes crimes? Truth is you will find very and subtly biased sources supporting all of this positions. My opinion from what I've read is that single family homes seems to be the current best predictor. It is quite obvious racism now is lower than in 1960, however single parent houses among black population is highest now than ever. On the same margin, it is more likely for a white kid in a single parent home to drop out of school (or commit a crime, I honestly can't remember the stats were very similar) than a black kid with two parents. That's the anecdotal evidence I can recall on what I've read about it, but it's a topic on if it's own with tons of nuances that warrants full research if you really want to be informed. I suspect I've more thoroughly researched this stuff than you have. I'm not sure I find the difference in racism as obviously 'less' as you do (me being a black man in the US, you not being one). That mostly aside we know that the war on drugs was a deliberate effort to criminalize, incarcerate, and silence black people (and hippies) in the US. Which just so happens to coincide with the increase in homes without fathers (as the US government intentionally removed them from families [again]). In a sexist society removing the primary breadwinner (as an effort to silence their political dissent stemming from their economic and social oppression) inevitably leads to poverty (as does having wealthy people) So in this country's short history we have at least 2 times where the federal government promoted and actively contributed to the systematic destruction of Black families (several more times for Black wealth). So it's not really a question whether the increased rates of poverty, crime, or single family homes in Black communities are a symptom of racism, we know they are (at least in any proportion we find them greater than white communities). Maybe some of those symptoms manifest in self-perpetuating ways, but it's unquestionable they come from systemic issues revolving around racism, poverty, and oppression imo. All that considered, Black kids aren't going into churches and schools and shooting bunches of people, the shooters are almost all white/Asian and come from typically 'traditional' families. Kids born in wedlock was higher during actual slavery time and jim crow than it is now. I'm sure you can at least make the concession that racism is lower now than back then. I don't think "war on drugs" started to target black people, though it might be an inadverted consequence. Do not atribute to malice what can be atributed to stupidity. I don't fully get your second point. Kids shooting schools and churches are usually white, but they do not come from "traditional family values", roughly 90% of them were raised in single parent house holds. Broken homes have been steadily rising, and while higher among black population it is a transversal problem in the U.S. and I think in most of the first world. A quick google search delivered some pretty harsh statistics about it: + Show Spoiler +43% of US children live without their father [US Department of Census]
90% of homeless and runaway children are from fatherless homes. [US D.H.H.S., Bureau of the Census]
80% of rapists motivated with displaced anger come from fatherless homes. [Criminal Justice & Behavior, Vol 14, pp. 403-26, 1978]
71% of pregnant teenagers lack a father. [U.S. Department of Health and Human Services press release, Friday, March 26, 1999]
63% of youth suicides are from fatherless homes. [US D.H.H.S., Bureau of the Census]
85% of children who exhibit behavioral disorders come from fatherless homes. [Center for Disease Control]
90% of adolescent repeat arsonists live with only their mother. [Wray Herbert, “Dousing the Kindlers,” Psychology Today, January, 1985, p. 28]
71% of high school dropouts come from fatherless homes. [National Principals Association Report on the State of High Schools]
75% of adolescent patients in chemical abuse centers come from fatherless homes. [Rainbows f for all God’s Children]
70% of juveniles in state operated institutions have no father. [US Department of Justice, Special Report, Sept. 1988]
85% of youths in prisons grew up in a fatherless home. [Fulton County Georgia jail populations, Texas Department of Corrections, 1992]
Fatherless boys and girls are: twice as likely to drop out of high school; twice as likely to end up in jail; four times more likely to need help for emotional or behavioral problems. [US D.H.H.S. news release, March 26, 1999]
I wasn't sure, but now I am that you're approaching this from a place of gross ignorance.
It's hard to imagine you're comparing 'wedlock' births during slavery or what you're basing those numbers off of but no I don't concede the point or the implication.
The drug war was explicitly started to criminalize black people (and hippies, but was less effective there for what I hope are obvious reasons)
It seems you pulled the shooters 'broken home' state out of thin air and you'll note that prison populations have gone up ~500% since the 60's.
Fatherless homes aren't generally ideal but they also rather certainly aren't the root issue, nor do you seem remotely familiar with some of the causes of fatherless homes, and as Kwark/P6 alluded to you seem to be putting forth arguments in the interest of furthering a rather bad perspective even if you assure us they aren't and the similarities are merely coincidental.
|
On May 30 2018 12:47 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On May 30 2018 12:31 GoTuNk! wrote:On May 30 2018 12:07 GreenHorizons wrote:On May 30 2018 11:45 GoTuNk! wrote:On May 30 2018 11:37 GreenHorizons wrote:On May 30 2018 11:32 GoTuNk! wrote:On May 30 2018 11:21 WolfintheSheep wrote:On May 30 2018 11:18 GoTuNk! wrote:On May 30 2018 11:10 Plansix wrote:On May 30 2018 11:04 GoTuNk! wrote:
[quote]
Sex is a dangerous activies and has consecuenses. Especially for woman and homosexual man.
I personally don't like promiscuity and consider it a turn off, but it's everyones right to sleep with whoever they like. However society should stop pretending it's care free fun. It's not.
Dangerous? Like while sky diving maybe? But fucking isn’t dangerous. It’s serious and people should know what they are getting into, but it’s not dangerous. Riding a motorcycle without a helmet is dangerous. There are like 200 forms of birth control out there, it can be all the care free fun you want. Yeah sex is perfectly safe. That's why no one has STD's and unwanted pregnacies are a thing of the past. Drugs are also perfectly safe, it's not like there are drugs addicts pretty much everywhere. This is why birth control. Which the US doesn't believe in either, but it does exist That's just disingenous reasoning and bad intended generalizations. All countries in the world have STDs and unwanted pregnacies by the way. You simply cannot pretend sex is a free-risk activity because birth control exists. It is not. Cars are dangerous, it is a fact of life. Tens of thousands of people (hundreds?) die every year in car accidents. Just like birth control we have traffic laws but people are humans. People don't always follow rules, make mistakes, and chance exists. That does not mean we will stop driving cars or having sex. It just means recognizing it's dangerous activity and be responsible about it. I mean if you consider food and eating 'dangerous' too I can understand the use even if it seems silly. I'm not convinced that single family homes aren't still a symptom of a larger more pervasive underlying problem as far as your main point goes, or that reducing policy based influence is always the right direction. Yes complex issues are always inter-related. Are single family homes the cause of crimes? Or is it poverty that causes single households that result in crime? Maybe it's racism that causes single house holds which causes crimes? Truth is you will find very and subtly biased sources supporting all of this positions. My opinion from what I've read is that single family homes seems to be the current best predictor. It is quite obvious racism now is lower than in 1960, however single parent houses among black population is highest now than ever. On the same margin, it is more likely for a white kid in a single parent home to drop out of school (or commit a crime, I honestly can't remember the stats were very similar) than a black kid with two parents. That's the anecdotal evidence I can recall on what I've read about it, but it's a topic on if it's own with tons of nuances that warrants full research if you really want to be informed. I suspect I've more thoroughly researched this stuff than you have. I'm not sure I find the difference in racism as obviously 'less' as you do (me being a black man in the US, you not being one). That mostly aside we know that the war on drugs was a deliberate effort to criminalize, incarcerate, and silence black people (and hippies) in the US. Which just so happens to coincide with the increase in homes without fathers (as the US government intentionally removed them from families [again]). In a sexist society removing the primary breadwinner (as an effort to silence their political dissent stemming from their economic and social oppression) inevitably leads to poverty (as does having wealthy people) So in this country's short history we have at least 2 times where the federal government promoted and actively contributed to the systematic destruction of Black families (several more times for Black wealth). So it's not really a question whether the increased rates of poverty, crime, or single family homes in Black communities are a symptom of racism, we know they are (at least in any proportion we find them greater than white communities). Maybe some of those symptoms manifest in self-perpetuating ways, but it's unquestionable they come from systemic issues revolving around racism, poverty, and oppression imo. All that considered, Black kids aren't going into churches and schools and shooting bunches of people, the shooters are almost all white/Asian and come from typically 'traditional' families. Kids born in wedlock was higher during actual slavery time and jim crow than it is now. I'm sure you can at least make the concession that racism is lower now than back then. I don't think "war on drugs" started to target black people, though it might be an inadverted consequence. Do not atribute to malice what can be atributed to stupidity. I don't fully get your second point. Kids shooting schools and churches are usually white, but they do not come from "traditional family values", roughly 90% of them were raised in single parent house holds. Broken homes have been steadily rising, and while higher among black population it is a transversal problem in the U.S. and I think in most of the first world. A quick google search delivered some pretty harsh statistics about it: + Show Spoiler +43% of US children live without their father [US Department of Census]
90% of homeless and runaway children are from fatherless homes. [US D.H.H.S., Bureau of the Census]
80% of rapists motivated with displaced anger come from fatherless homes. [Criminal Justice & Behavior, Vol 14, pp. 403-26, 1978]
71% of pregnant teenagers lack a father. [U.S. Department of Health and Human Services press release, Friday, March 26, 1999]
63% of youth suicides are from fatherless homes. [US D.H.H.S., Bureau of the Census]
85% of children who exhibit behavioral disorders come from fatherless homes. [Center for Disease Control]
90% of adolescent repeat arsonists live with only their mother. [Wray Herbert, “Dousing the Kindlers,” Psychology Today, January, 1985, p. 28]
71% of high school dropouts come from fatherless homes. [National Principals Association Report on the State of High Schools]
75% of adolescent patients in chemical abuse centers come from fatherless homes. [Rainbows f for all God’s Children]
70% of juveniles in state operated institutions have no father. [US Department of Justice, Special Report, Sept. 1988]
85% of youths in prisons grew up in a fatherless home. [Fulton County Georgia jail populations, Texas Department of Corrections, 1992]
Fatherless boys and girls are: twice as likely to drop out of high school; twice as likely to end up in jail; four times more likely to need help for emotional or behavioral problems. [US D.H.H.S. news release, March 26, 1999] I wasn't sure, but now I am that you're approaching this from a place of gross ignorance. It's hard to imagine you're comparing 'wedlock' births during slavery or what you're basing those numbers off of but no I don't concede the point or the implication. The drug war was explicitly started to criminalize black people (and hippies, but was less effective there for what I hope are obvious reasons) It seems you pulled the shooters 'broken home' state out of thin air and you'll note that prison populations have gone up ~500% since the 60's. Fatherless homes aren't generally ideal but they also rather certainly aren't the root issue, nor do you seem remotely familiar with some of the causes of fatherless homes, and as Kwark/P6 alluded to you seem to be putting forth arguments in the interest of furthering a rather bad perspective even if you assure us they aren't and the similarities are merely coincidental.
I honestly do not have time to read it now, but I will. Still it is a moot point as I'm against the "war on drugs".
The only point I want to come across is that the best for a kid is to be raised in a house with 2 parents, and that evidence is pretty conclusive on that. This is true for all races. I've posted many sources about it already.
Kwark picked literally 6 dudes and came with his own stats what the fuck is that. The data seems conflicting depending on the time length and how you define mass shooter. I'm open that this point is debatable, hopefully someone can post some real stats on the issue and not Kwark's made up ones.
|
United States42017 Posts
On May 30 2018 13:06 GoTuNk! wrote:Show nested quote +On May 30 2018 12:47 GreenHorizons wrote:On May 30 2018 12:31 GoTuNk! wrote:On May 30 2018 12:07 GreenHorizons wrote:On May 30 2018 11:45 GoTuNk! wrote:On May 30 2018 11:37 GreenHorizons wrote:On May 30 2018 11:32 GoTuNk! wrote:On May 30 2018 11:21 WolfintheSheep wrote:On May 30 2018 11:18 GoTuNk! wrote:On May 30 2018 11:10 Plansix wrote:
[quote]
Dangerous? Like while sky diving maybe? But fucking isn’t dangerous. It’s serious and people should know what they are getting into, but it’s not dangerous. Riding a motorcycle without a helmet is dangerous.
There are like 200 forms of birth control out there, it can be all the care free fun you want. Yeah sex is perfectly safe. That's why no one has STD's and unwanted pregnacies are a thing of the past. Drugs are also perfectly safe, it's not like there are drugs addicts pretty much everywhere. This is why birth control. Which the US doesn't believe in either, but it does exist That's just disingenous reasoning and bad intended generalizations. All countries in the world have STDs and unwanted pregnacies by the way. You simply cannot pretend sex is a free-risk activity because birth control exists. It is not. Cars are dangerous, it is a fact of life. Tens of thousands of people (hundreds?) die every year in car accidents. Just like birth control we have traffic laws but people are humans. People don't always follow rules, make mistakes, and chance exists. That does not mean we will stop driving cars or having sex. It just means recognizing it's dangerous activity and be responsible about it. I mean if you consider food and eating 'dangerous' too I can understand the use even if it seems silly. I'm not convinced that single family homes aren't still a symptom of a larger more pervasive underlying problem as far as your main point goes, or that reducing policy based influence is always the right direction. Yes complex issues are always inter-related. Are single family homes the cause of crimes? Or is it poverty that causes single households that result in crime? Maybe it's racism that causes single house holds which causes crimes? Truth is you will find very and subtly biased sources supporting all of this positions. My opinion from what I've read is that single family homes seems to be the current best predictor. It is quite obvious racism now is lower than in 1960, however single parent houses among black population is highest now than ever. On the same margin, it is more likely for a white kid in a single parent home to drop out of school (or commit a crime, I honestly can't remember the stats were very similar) than a black kid with two parents. That's the anecdotal evidence I can recall on what I've read about it, but it's a topic on if it's own with tons of nuances that warrants full research if you really want to be informed. I suspect I've more thoroughly researched this stuff than you have. I'm not sure I find the difference in racism as obviously 'less' as you do (me being a black man in the US, you not being one). That mostly aside we know that the war on drugs was a deliberate effort to criminalize, incarcerate, and silence black people (and hippies) in the US. Which just so happens to coincide with the increase in homes without fathers (as the US government intentionally removed them from families [again]). In a sexist society removing the primary breadwinner (as an effort to silence their political dissent stemming from their economic and social oppression) inevitably leads to poverty (as does having wealthy people) So in this country's short history we have at least 2 times where the federal government promoted and actively contributed to the systematic destruction of Black families (several more times for Black wealth). So it's not really a question whether the increased rates of poverty, crime, or single family homes in Black communities are a symptom of racism, we know they are (at least in any proportion we find them greater than white communities). Maybe some of those symptoms manifest in self-perpetuating ways, but it's unquestionable they come from systemic issues revolving around racism, poverty, and oppression imo. All that considered, Black kids aren't going into churches and schools and shooting bunches of people, the shooters are almost all white/Asian and come from typically 'traditional' families. Kids born in wedlock was higher during actual slavery time and jim crow than it is now. I'm sure you can at least make the concession that racism is lower now than back then. I don't think "war on drugs" started to target black people, though it might be an inadverted consequence. Do not atribute to malice what can be atributed to stupidity. I don't fully get your second point. Kids shooting schools and churches are usually white, but they do not come from "traditional family values", roughly 90% of them were raised in single parent house holds. Broken homes have been steadily rising, and while higher among black population it is a transversal problem in the U.S. and I think in most of the first world. A quick google search delivered some pretty harsh statistics about it: + Show Spoiler +43% of US children live without their father [US Department of Census]
90% of homeless and runaway children are from fatherless homes. [US D.H.H.S., Bureau of the Census]
80% of rapists motivated with displaced anger come from fatherless homes. [Criminal Justice & Behavior, Vol 14, pp. 403-26, 1978]
71% of pregnant teenagers lack a father. [U.S. Department of Health and Human Services press release, Friday, March 26, 1999]
63% of youth suicides are from fatherless homes. [US D.H.H.S., Bureau of the Census]
85% of children who exhibit behavioral disorders come from fatherless homes. [Center for Disease Control]
90% of adolescent repeat arsonists live with only their mother. [Wray Herbert, “Dousing the Kindlers,” Psychology Today, January, 1985, p. 28]
71% of high school dropouts come from fatherless homes. [National Principals Association Report on the State of High Schools]
75% of adolescent patients in chemical abuse centers come from fatherless homes. [Rainbows f for all God’s Children]
70% of juveniles in state operated institutions have no father. [US Department of Justice, Special Report, Sept. 1988]
85% of youths in prisons grew up in a fatherless home. [Fulton County Georgia jail populations, Texas Department of Corrections, 1992]
Fatherless boys and girls are: twice as likely to drop out of high school; twice as likely to end up in jail; four times more likely to need help for emotional or behavioral problems. [US D.H.H.S. news release, March 26, 1999] I wasn't sure, but now I am that you're approaching this from a place of gross ignorance. It's hard to imagine you're comparing 'wedlock' births during slavery or what you're basing those numbers off of but no I don't concede the point or the implication. The drug war was explicitly started to criminalize black people (and hippies, but was less effective there for what I hope are obvious reasons) It seems you pulled the shooters 'broken home' state out of thin air and you'll note that prison populations have gone up ~500% since the 60's. Fatherless homes aren't generally ideal but they also rather certainly aren't the root issue, nor do you seem remotely familiar with some of the causes of fatherless homes, and as Kwark/P6 alluded to you seem to be putting forth arguments in the interest of furthering a rather bad perspective even if you assure us they aren't and the similarities are merely coincidental. I honestly do not have time to read it now, but I will. Still it is a moot point as I'm against the "war on drugs". The only point I want to come across is that the best for a kid is to be raised in a house with 2 parents, and that evidence is pretty conclusive on that. This is true for all races. I've posted many sources about it already. Kwark picked literally 6 dudes and came with his own stats what the fuck is that. The data seems conflicting depending on the time length and how you define mass shooter. I'm open that this point is debatable, hopefully someone can post some real stats on the issue and not Kwark's made up ones.
I'm not cherrypicking, I went through all the mass shootings listed on wikipedia in the US in 2018 and the first half of the ones listed on wikipedia in 2017. I didn't exclude any from my sample because they didn't match my hypothesis or whatever.
If 90% of mass shooters come from single parent households then it's extremely unlikely that you'll have find just one single parent mass shooter in 10 randomly picked shootings.
Your 90% number sounded like it was wrong the moment you said it, which is why I immediately called it out. As I said when you first made the unsupported and ridiculous claim, the Columbine shooters were from normal homes, as was Rodgers. I told you to make a basic attempt to verify your number because you should have known that it sounded wrong, you refused. So I did it for you.
The data simply doesn't support your claim. Feel free to take your own sample and see for yourself. I looked at the ones listed here.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Mass_shootings_in_the_United_States_by_year
|
On May 30 2018 13:06 GoTuNk! wrote:Show nested quote +On May 30 2018 12:47 GreenHorizons wrote:On May 30 2018 12:31 GoTuNk! wrote:On May 30 2018 12:07 GreenHorizons wrote:On May 30 2018 11:45 GoTuNk! wrote:On May 30 2018 11:37 GreenHorizons wrote:On May 30 2018 11:32 GoTuNk! wrote:On May 30 2018 11:21 WolfintheSheep wrote:On May 30 2018 11:18 GoTuNk! wrote:On May 30 2018 11:10 Plansix wrote:
[quote]
Dangerous? Like while sky diving maybe? But fucking isn’t dangerous. It’s serious and people should know what they are getting into, but it’s not dangerous. Riding a motorcycle without a helmet is dangerous.
There are like 200 forms of birth control out there, it can be all the care free fun you want. Yeah sex is perfectly safe. That's why no one has STD's and unwanted pregnacies are a thing of the past. Drugs are also perfectly safe, it's not like there are drugs addicts pretty much everywhere. This is why birth control. Which the US doesn't believe in either, but it does exist That's just disingenous reasoning and bad intended generalizations. All countries in the world have STDs and unwanted pregnacies by the way. You simply cannot pretend sex is a free-risk activity because birth control exists. It is not. Cars are dangerous, it is a fact of life. Tens of thousands of people (hundreds?) die every year in car accidents. Just like birth control we have traffic laws but people are humans. People don't always follow rules, make mistakes, and chance exists. That does not mean we will stop driving cars or having sex. It just means recognizing it's dangerous activity and be responsible about it. I mean if you consider food and eating 'dangerous' too I can understand the use even if it seems silly. I'm not convinced that single family homes aren't still a symptom of a larger more pervasive underlying problem as far as your main point goes, or that reducing policy based influence is always the right direction. Yes complex issues are always inter-related. Are single family homes the cause of crimes? Or is it poverty that causes single households that result in crime? Maybe it's racism that causes single house holds which causes crimes? Truth is you will find very and subtly biased sources supporting all of this positions. My opinion from what I've read is that single family homes seems to be the current best predictor. It is quite obvious racism now is lower than in 1960, however single parent houses among black population is highest now than ever. On the same margin, it is more likely for a white kid in a single parent home to drop out of school (or commit a crime, I honestly can't remember the stats were very similar) than a black kid with two parents. That's the anecdotal evidence I can recall on what I've read about it, but it's a topic on if it's own with tons of nuances that warrants full research if you really want to be informed. I suspect I've more thoroughly researched this stuff than you have. I'm not sure I find the difference in racism as obviously 'less' as you do (me being a black man in the US, you not being one). That mostly aside we know that the war on drugs was a deliberate effort to criminalize, incarcerate, and silence black people (and hippies) in the US. Which just so happens to coincide with the increase in homes without fathers (as the US government intentionally removed them from families [again]). In a sexist society removing the primary breadwinner (as an effort to silence their political dissent stemming from their economic and social oppression) inevitably leads to poverty (as does having wealthy people) So in this country's short history we have at least 2 times where the federal government promoted and actively contributed to the systematic destruction of Black families (several more times for Black wealth). So it's not really a question whether the increased rates of poverty, crime, or single family homes in Black communities are a symptom of racism, we know they are (at least in any proportion we find them greater than white communities). Maybe some of those symptoms manifest in self-perpetuating ways, but it's unquestionable they come from systemic issues revolving around racism, poverty, and oppression imo. All that considered, Black kids aren't going into churches and schools and shooting bunches of people, the shooters are almost all white/Asian and come from typically 'traditional' families. Kids born in wedlock was higher during actual slavery time and jim crow than it is now. I'm sure you can at least make the concession that racism is lower now than back then. I don't think "war on drugs" started to target black people, though it might be an inadverted consequence. Do not atribute to malice what can be atributed to stupidity. I don't fully get your second point. Kids shooting schools and churches are usually white, but they do not come from "traditional family values", roughly 90% of them were raised in single parent house holds. Broken homes have been steadily rising, and while higher among black population it is a transversal problem in the U.S. and I think in most of the first world. A quick google search delivered some pretty harsh statistics about it: + Show Spoiler +43% of US children live without their father [US Department of Census]
90% of homeless and runaway children are from fatherless homes. [US D.H.H.S., Bureau of the Census]
80% of rapists motivated with displaced anger come from fatherless homes. [Criminal Justice & Behavior, Vol 14, pp. 403-26, 1978]
71% of pregnant teenagers lack a father. [U.S. Department of Health and Human Services press release, Friday, March 26, 1999]
63% of youth suicides are from fatherless homes. [US D.H.H.S., Bureau of the Census]
85% of children who exhibit behavioral disorders come from fatherless homes. [Center for Disease Control]
90% of adolescent repeat arsonists live with only their mother. [Wray Herbert, “Dousing the Kindlers,” Psychology Today, January, 1985, p. 28]
71% of high school dropouts come from fatherless homes. [National Principals Association Report on the State of High Schools]
75% of adolescent patients in chemical abuse centers come from fatherless homes. [Rainbows f for all God’s Children]
70% of juveniles in state operated institutions have no father. [US Department of Justice, Special Report, Sept. 1988]
85% of youths in prisons grew up in a fatherless home. [Fulton County Georgia jail populations, Texas Department of Corrections, 1992]
Fatherless boys and girls are: twice as likely to drop out of high school; twice as likely to end up in jail; four times more likely to need help for emotional or behavioral problems. [US D.H.H.S. news release, March 26, 1999] I wasn't sure, but now I am that you're approaching this from a place of gross ignorance. It's hard to imagine you're comparing 'wedlock' births during slavery or what you're basing those numbers off of but no I don't concede the point or the implication. The drug war was explicitly started to criminalize black people (and hippies, but was less effective there for what I hope are obvious reasons) It seems you pulled the shooters 'broken home' state out of thin air and you'll note that prison populations have gone up ~500% since the 60's. Fatherless homes aren't generally ideal but they also rather certainly aren't the root issue, nor do you seem remotely familiar with some of the causes of fatherless homes, and as Kwark/P6 alluded to you seem to be putting forth arguments in the interest of furthering a rather bad perspective even if you assure us they aren't and the similarities are merely coincidental. I honestly do not have time to read it now, but I will. Still it is a moot point as I'm against the "war on drugs". The only point I want to come across is that the best for a kid is to be raised in a house with 2 parents, and that evidence is pretty conclusive on that. This is true for all races. I've posted many sources about it already. Kwark picked literally 6 dudes and came with his own stats what the fuck is that. The data seems conflicting depending on the time length and how you define mass shooter. I'm open that this point is debatable, hopefully someone can post some real stats on the issue and not Kwark's made up ones.
It's not moot in that my point was that the fatherless homes is a symptom not a root cause and that the disproportionate representation of Black families in those numbers (besides having causes you are clearly unaware of) is not reflected at all in the mass school/church/theater shootings so the two are only correlated at best anyway.
Which is one big reason it seems like you're mentioning this tertiary fact about the negative impact of homes without fathers, not to dig deeper at the underlying issues, but to push a trashy perspective that usually follows shortly after this part of the rhetorical dance.
|
On May 30 2018 13:18 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On May 30 2018 13:06 GoTuNk! wrote:On May 30 2018 12:47 GreenHorizons wrote:On May 30 2018 12:31 GoTuNk! wrote:On May 30 2018 12:07 GreenHorizons wrote:On May 30 2018 11:45 GoTuNk! wrote:On May 30 2018 11:37 GreenHorizons wrote:On May 30 2018 11:32 GoTuNk! wrote:On May 30 2018 11:21 WolfintheSheep wrote:On May 30 2018 11:18 GoTuNk! wrote:
[quote]
Yeah sex is perfectly safe. That's why no one has STD's and unwanted pregnacies are a thing of the past.
Drugs are also perfectly safe, it's not like there are drugs addicts pretty much everywhere. This is why birth control. Which the US doesn't believe in either, but it does exist That's just disingenous reasoning and bad intended generalizations. All countries in the world have STDs and unwanted pregnacies by the way. You simply cannot pretend sex is a free-risk activity because birth control exists. It is not. Cars are dangerous, it is a fact of life. Tens of thousands of people (hundreds?) die every year in car accidents. Just like birth control we have traffic laws but people are humans. People don't always follow rules, make mistakes, and chance exists. That does not mean we will stop driving cars or having sex. It just means recognizing it's dangerous activity and be responsible about it. I mean if you consider food and eating 'dangerous' too I can understand the use even if it seems silly. I'm not convinced that single family homes aren't still a symptom of a larger more pervasive underlying problem as far as your main point goes, or that reducing policy based influence is always the right direction. Yes complex issues are always inter-related. Are single family homes the cause of crimes? Or is it poverty that causes single households that result in crime? Maybe it's racism that causes single house holds which causes crimes? Truth is you will find very and subtly biased sources supporting all of this positions. My opinion from what I've read is that single family homes seems to be the current best predictor. It is quite obvious racism now is lower than in 1960, however single parent houses among black population is highest now than ever. On the same margin, it is more likely for a white kid in a single parent home to drop out of school (or commit a crime, I honestly can't remember the stats were very similar) than a black kid with two parents. That's the anecdotal evidence I can recall on what I've read about it, but it's a topic on if it's own with tons of nuances that warrants full research if you really want to be informed. I suspect I've more thoroughly researched this stuff than you have. I'm not sure I find the difference in racism as obviously 'less' as you do (me being a black man in the US, you not being one). That mostly aside we know that the war on drugs was a deliberate effort to criminalize, incarcerate, and silence black people (and hippies) in the US. Which just so happens to coincide with the increase in homes without fathers (as the US government intentionally removed them from families [again]). In a sexist society removing the primary breadwinner (as an effort to silence their political dissent stemming from their economic and social oppression) inevitably leads to poverty (as does having wealthy people) So in this country's short history we have at least 2 times where the federal government promoted and actively contributed to the systematic destruction of Black families (several more times for Black wealth). So it's not really a question whether the increased rates of poverty, crime, or single family homes in Black communities are a symptom of racism, we know they are (at least in any proportion we find them greater than white communities). Maybe some of those symptoms manifest in self-perpetuating ways, but it's unquestionable they come from systemic issues revolving around racism, poverty, and oppression imo. All that considered, Black kids aren't going into churches and schools and shooting bunches of people, the shooters are almost all white/Asian and come from typically 'traditional' families. Kids born in wedlock was higher during actual slavery time and jim crow than it is now. I'm sure you can at least make the concession that racism is lower now than back then. I don't think "war on drugs" started to target black people, though it might be an inadverted consequence. Do not atribute to malice what can be atributed to stupidity. I don't fully get your second point. Kids shooting schools and churches are usually white, but they do not come from "traditional family values", roughly 90% of them were raised in single parent house holds. Broken homes have been steadily rising, and while higher among black population it is a transversal problem in the U.S. and I think in most of the first world. A quick google search delivered some pretty harsh statistics about it: + Show Spoiler +43% of US children live without their father [US Department of Census]
90% of homeless and runaway children are from fatherless homes. [US D.H.H.S., Bureau of the Census]
80% of rapists motivated with displaced anger come from fatherless homes. [Criminal Justice & Behavior, Vol 14, pp. 403-26, 1978]
71% of pregnant teenagers lack a father. [U.S. Department of Health and Human Services press release, Friday, March 26, 1999]
63% of youth suicides are from fatherless homes. [US D.H.H.S., Bureau of the Census]
85% of children who exhibit behavioral disorders come from fatherless homes. [Center for Disease Control]
90% of adolescent repeat arsonists live with only their mother. [Wray Herbert, “Dousing the Kindlers,” Psychology Today, January, 1985, p. 28]
71% of high school dropouts come from fatherless homes. [National Principals Association Report on the State of High Schools]
75% of adolescent patients in chemical abuse centers come from fatherless homes. [Rainbows f for all God’s Children]
70% of juveniles in state operated institutions have no father. [US Department of Justice, Special Report, Sept. 1988]
85% of youths in prisons grew up in a fatherless home. [Fulton County Georgia jail populations, Texas Department of Corrections, 1992]
Fatherless boys and girls are: twice as likely to drop out of high school; twice as likely to end up in jail; four times more likely to need help for emotional or behavioral problems. [US D.H.H.S. news release, March 26, 1999] I wasn't sure, but now I am that you're approaching this from a place of gross ignorance. It's hard to imagine you're comparing 'wedlock' births during slavery or what you're basing those numbers off of but no I don't concede the point or the implication. The drug war was explicitly started to criminalize black people (and hippies, but was less effective there for what I hope are obvious reasons) It seems you pulled the shooters 'broken home' state out of thin air and you'll note that prison populations have gone up ~500% since the 60's. Fatherless homes aren't generally ideal but they also rather certainly aren't the root issue, nor do you seem remotely familiar with some of the causes of fatherless homes, and as Kwark/P6 alluded to you seem to be putting forth arguments in the interest of furthering a rather bad perspective even if you assure us they aren't and the similarities are merely coincidental. I honestly do not have time to read it now, but I will. Still it is a moot point as I'm against the "war on drugs". The only point I want to come across is that the best for a kid is to be raised in a house with 2 parents, and that evidence is pretty conclusive on that. This is true for all races. I've posted many sources about it already. Kwark picked literally 6 dudes and came with his own stats what the fuck is that. The data seems conflicting depending on the time length and how you define mass shooter. I'm open that this point is debatable, hopefully someone can post some real stats on the issue and not Kwark's made up ones. It's not moot in that my point was that the fatherless homes is a symptom not a root cause and that the disproportionate representation of Black families in those numbers (besides having causes you are clearly unaware of) is not reflected at all in the mass school/church/theater shootings so the two are only correlated at best anyway. Which is one big reason it seems like you're mentioning this tertiary fact about the negative impact of homes without fathers, not to dig deeper at the underlying issues, but to push a trashy perspective that usually follows shortly after this part of the rhetorical dance.
Well the problem with the" racism" interpretation is that I'm talking about something that affects all races. Single parents homes exist more in black communities, but also seem to explain the phenomena of crime in families of all races so you can't just attribute it to racism.
Again, the following data applies to the general population:
+ Show Spoiler +43% of US children live without their father [US Department of Census]
90% of homeless and runaway children are from fatherless homes. [US D.H.H.S., Bureau of the Census]
80% of rapists motivated with displaced anger come from fatherless homes. [Criminal Justice & Behavior, Vol 14, pp. 403-26, 1978]
71% of pregnant teenagers lack a father. [U.S. Department of Health and Human Services press release, Friday, March 26, 1999]
63% of youth suicides are from fatherless homes. [US D.H.H.S., Bureau of the Census]
85% of children who exhibit behavioral disorders come from fatherless homes. [Center for Disease Control]
90% of adolescent repeat arsonists live with only their mother. [Wray Herbert, “Dousing the Kindlers,” Psychology Today, January, 1985, p. 28]
71% of high school dropouts come from fatherless homes. [National Principals Association Report on the State of High Schools]
75% of adolescent patients in chemical abuse centers come from fatherless homes. [Rainbows f for all God’s Children]
70% of juveniles in state operated institutions have no father. [US Department of Justice, Special Report, Sept. 1988]
85% of youths in prisons grew up in a fatherless home. [Fulton County Georgia jail populations, Texas Department of Corrections, 1992]
Fatherless boys and girls are: twice as likely to drop out of high school; twice as likely to end up in jail; four times more likely to need help for emotional or behavioral problems. [US D.H.H.S. news release, March 26, 1999]
I don't think I can convince you of much, I've presented the evidence of what I wanted to come across. Again: It's best for kids, regardless off race, to be raised in a house with 2 parents. Seems to affect crime, teenage pregnancy, school dropout, etc etc.
On the mass shooting and father homes, I'm open to being corrected. However Ideally someone posts some actual third party stats instead of Kwarks made up one (he eddited and added more info and guess my number was wrong, wish someone would find actual stats though)
|
On May 30 2018 13:38 GoTuNk! wrote:Show nested quote +On May 30 2018 13:18 GreenHorizons wrote:On May 30 2018 13:06 GoTuNk! wrote:On May 30 2018 12:47 GreenHorizons wrote:On May 30 2018 12:31 GoTuNk! wrote:On May 30 2018 12:07 GreenHorizons wrote:On May 30 2018 11:45 GoTuNk! wrote:On May 30 2018 11:37 GreenHorizons wrote:On May 30 2018 11:32 GoTuNk! wrote:On May 30 2018 11:21 WolfintheSheep wrote:
[quote]
This is why birth control.
Which the US doesn't believe in either, but it does exist That's just disingenous reasoning and bad intended generalizations. All countries in the world have STDs and unwanted pregnacies by the way. You simply cannot pretend sex is a free-risk activity because birth control exists. It is not. Cars are dangerous, it is a fact of life. Tens of thousands of people (hundreds?) die every year in car accidents. Just like birth control we have traffic laws but people are humans. People don't always follow rules, make mistakes, and chance exists. That does not mean we will stop driving cars or having sex. It just means recognizing it's dangerous activity and be responsible about it. I mean if you consider food and eating 'dangerous' too I can understand the use even if it seems silly. I'm not convinced that single family homes aren't still a symptom of a larger more pervasive underlying problem as far as your main point goes, or that reducing policy based influence is always the right direction. Yes complex issues are always inter-related. Are single family homes the cause of crimes? Or is it poverty that causes single households that result in crime? Maybe it's racism that causes single house holds which causes crimes? Truth is you will find very and subtly biased sources supporting all of this positions. My opinion from what I've read is that single family homes seems to be the current best predictor. It is quite obvious racism now is lower than in 1960, however single parent houses among black population is highest now than ever. On the same margin, it is more likely for a white kid in a single parent home to drop out of school (or commit a crime, I honestly can't remember the stats were very similar) than a black kid with two parents. That's the anecdotal evidence I can recall on what I've read about it, but it's a topic on if it's own with tons of nuances that warrants full research if you really want to be informed. I suspect I've more thoroughly researched this stuff than you have. I'm not sure I find the difference in racism as obviously 'less' as you do (me being a black man in the US, you not being one). That mostly aside we know that the war on drugs was a deliberate effort to criminalize, incarcerate, and silence black people (and hippies) in the US. Which just so happens to coincide with the increase in homes without fathers (as the US government intentionally removed them from families [again]). In a sexist society removing the primary breadwinner (as an effort to silence their political dissent stemming from their economic and social oppression) inevitably leads to poverty (as does having wealthy people) So in this country's short history we have at least 2 times where the federal government promoted and actively contributed to the systematic destruction of Black families (several more times for Black wealth). So it's not really a question whether the increased rates of poverty, crime, or single family homes in Black communities are a symptom of racism, we know they are (at least in any proportion we find them greater than white communities). Maybe some of those symptoms manifest in self-perpetuating ways, but it's unquestionable they come from systemic issues revolving around racism, poverty, and oppression imo. All that considered, Black kids aren't going into churches and schools and shooting bunches of people, the shooters are almost all white/Asian and come from typically 'traditional' families. Kids born in wedlock was higher during actual slavery time and jim crow than it is now. I'm sure you can at least make the concession that racism is lower now than back then. I don't think "war on drugs" started to target black people, though it might be an inadverted consequence. Do not atribute to malice what can be atributed to stupidity. I don't fully get your second point. Kids shooting schools and churches are usually white, but they do not come from "traditional family values", roughly 90% of them were raised in single parent house holds. Broken homes have been steadily rising, and while higher among black population it is a transversal problem in the U.S. and I think in most of the first world. A quick google search delivered some pretty harsh statistics about it: + Show Spoiler +43% of US children live without their father [US Department of Census]
90% of homeless and runaway children are from fatherless homes. [US D.H.H.S., Bureau of the Census]
80% of rapists motivated with displaced anger come from fatherless homes. [Criminal Justice & Behavior, Vol 14, pp. 403-26, 1978]
71% of pregnant teenagers lack a father. [U.S. Department of Health and Human Services press release, Friday, March 26, 1999]
63% of youth suicides are from fatherless homes. [US D.H.H.S., Bureau of the Census]
85% of children who exhibit behavioral disorders come from fatherless homes. [Center for Disease Control]
90% of adolescent repeat arsonists live with only their mother. [Wray Herbert, “Dousing the Kindlers,” Psychology Today, January, 1985, p. 28]
71% of high school dropouts come from fatherless homes. [National Principals Association Report on the State of High Schools]
75% of adolescent patients in chemical abuse centers come from fatherless homes. [Rainbows f for all God’s Children]
70% of juveniles in state operated institutions have no father. [US Department of Justice, Special Report, Sept. 1988]
85% of youths in prisons grew up in a fatherless home. [Fulton County Georgia jail populations, Texas Department of Corrections, 1992]
Fatherless boys and girls are: twice as likely to drop out of high school; twice as likely to end up in jail; four times more likely to need help for emotional or behavioral problems. [US D.H.H.S. news release, March 26, 1999] I wasn't sure, but now I am that you're approaching this from a place of gross ignorance. It's hard to imagine you're comparing 'wedlock' births during slavery or what you're basing those numbers off of but no I don't concede the point or the implication. The drug war was explicitly started to criminalize black people (and hippies, but was less effective there for what I hope are obvious reasons) It seems you pulled the shooters 'broken home' state out of thin air and you'll note that prison populations have gone up ~500% since the 60's. Fatherless homes aren't generally ideal but they also rather certainly aren't the root issue, nor do you seem remotely familiar with some of the causes of fatherless homes, and as Kwark/P6 alluded to you seem to be putting forth arguments in the interest of furthering a rather bad perspective even if you assure us they aren't and the similarities are merely coincidental. I honestly do not have time to read it now, but I will. Still it is a moot point as I'm against the "war on drugs". The only point I want to come across is that the best for a kid is to be raised in a house with 2 parents, and that evidence is pretty conclusive on that. This is true for all races. I've posted many sources about it already. Kwark picked literally 6 dudes and came with his own stats what the fuck is that. The data seems conflicting depending on the time length and how you define mass shooter. I'm open that this point is debatable, hopefully someone can post some real stats on the issue and not Kwark's made up ones. It's not moot in that my point was that the fatherless homes is a symptom not a root cause and that the disproportionate representation of Black families in those numbers (besides having causes you are clearly unaware of) is not reflected at all in the mass school/church/theater shootings so the two are only correlated at best anyway. Which is one big reason it seems like you're mentioning this tertiary fact about the negative impact of homes without fathers, not to dig deeper at the underlying issues, but to push a trashy perspective that usually follows shortly after this part of the rhetorical dance. Well the problem with the" racism" interpretation is that I'm talking about something that affects all races. Single parents homes exist more in black communities, but also seem to explain the phenomena of crime in families of all races so you can't just attribute it to racism. Again, the following data applies to the general population: + Show Spoiler +43% of US children live without their father [US Department of Census]
90% of homeless and runaway children are from fatherless homes. [US D.H.H.S., Bureau of the Census]
80% of rapists motivated with displaced anger come from fatherless homes. [Criminal Justice & Behavior, Vol 14, pp. 403-26, 1978]
71% of pregnant teenagers lack a father. [U.S. Department of Health and Human Services press release, Friday, March 26, 1999]
63% of youth suicides are from fatherless homes. [US D.H.H.S., Bureau of the Census]
85% of children who exhibit behavioral disorders come from fatherless homes. [Center for Disease Control]
90% of adolescent repeat arsonists live with only their mother. [Wray Herbert, “Dousing the Kindlers,” Psychology Today, January, 1985, p. 28]
71% of high school dropouts come from fatherless homes. [National Principals Association Report on the State of High Schools]
75% of adolescent patients in chemical abuse centers come from fatherless homes. [Rainbows f for all God’s Children]
70% of juveniles in state operated institutions have no father. [US Department of Justice, Special Report, Sept. 1988]
85% of youths in prisons grew up in a fatherless home. [Fulton County Georgia jail populations, Texas Department of Corrections, 1992]
Fatherless boys and girls are: twice as likely to drop out of high school; twice as likely to end up in jail; four times more likely to need help for emotional or behavioral problems. [US D.H.H.S. news release, March 26, 1999] I don't think I can convince you of much, I've presented the evidence of what I wanted to come across. Again: It's best for kids, regardless off race, to be raised in a house with 2 parents. Seems to affect crime, teenage pregnancy, school dropout, etc etc. On the mass shooting and father homes, I'm open to being corrected. However Ideally someone posts some actual third party stats instead of Kwarks made up one (he eddited and added more info and guess my number was wrong, wish someone would find actual stats though)
I think you misunderstand why I was mentioning racism. That was to address the disparity of fatherless homes/poverty. As to the statistics of people in fatherless homes (various statistics are using that phrase to describe rather different situations) as they relate to criminality or other less desirable outcomes the lack of fathers isn't the cause. It may be frequently found (the frequency doesn't matter much if the intention is to remain at this shallow level of analysis) mass shooters emerge from 'fatherless' homes, but it's not the cause of the shooting, and most obviously not the cause of itself.
So we can concede your point about these shooters coming from these homes, even at the rates you suggest, but then so what?
|
On May 30 2018 14:05 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On May 30 2018 13:38 GoTuNk! wrote:On May 30 2018 13:18 GreenHorizons wrote:On May 30 2018 13:06 GoTuNk! wrote:On May 30 2018 12:47 GreenHorizons wrote:On May 30 2018 12:31 GoTuNk! wrote:On May 30 2018 12:07 GreenHorizons wrote:On May 30 2018 11:45 GoTuNk! wrote:On May 30 2018 11:37 GreenHorizons wrote:On May 30 2018 11:32 GoTuNk! wrote:
[quote]
That's just disingenous reasoning and bad intended generalizations. All countries in the world have STDs and unwanted pregnacies by the way. You simply cannot pretend sex is a free-risk activity because birth control exists. It is not.
Cars are dangerous, it is a fact of life. Tens of thousands of people (hundreds?) die every year in car accidents. Just like birth control we have traffic laws but people are humans. People don't always follow rules, make mistakes, and chance exists.
That does not mean we will stop driving cars or having sex. It just means recognizing it's dangerous activity and be responsible about it.
I mean if you consider food and eating 'dangerous' too I can understand the use even if it seems silly. I'm not convinced that single family homes aren't still a symptom of a larger more pervasive underlying problem as far as your main point goes, or that reducing policy based influence is always the right direction. Yes complex issues are always inter-related. Are single family homes the cause of crimes? Or is it poverty that causes single households that result in crime? Maybe it's racism that causes single house holds which causes crimes? Truth is you will find very and subtly biased sources supporting all of this positions. My opinion from what I've read is that single family homes seems to be the current best predictor. It is quite obvious racism now is lower than in 1960, however single parent houses among black population is highest now than ever. On the same margin, it is more likely for a white kid in a single parent home to drop out of school (or commit a crime, I honestly can't remember the stats were very similar) than a black kid with two parents. That's the anecdotal evidence I can recall on what I've read about it, but it's a topic on if it's own with tons of nuances that warrants full research if you really want to be informed. I suspect I've more thoroughly researched this stuff than you have. I'm not sure I find the difference in racism as obviously 'less' as you do (me being a black man in the US, you not being one). That mostly aside we know that the war on drugs was a deliberate effort to criminalize, incarcerate, and silence black people (and hippies) in the US. Which just so happens to coincide with the increase in homes without fathers (as the US government intentionally removed them from families [again]). In a sexist society removing the primary breadwinner (as an effort to silence their political dissent stemming from their economic and social oppression) inevitably leads to poverty (as does having wealthy people) So in this country's short history we have at least 2 times where the federal government promoted and actively contributed to the systematic destruction of Black families (several more times for Black wealth). So it's not really a question whether the increased rates of poverty, crime, or single family homes in Black communities are a symptom of racism, we know they are (at least in any proportion we find them greater than white communities). Maybe some of those symptoms manifest in self-perpetuating ways, but it's unquestionable they come from systemic issues revolving around racism, poverty, and oppression imo. All that considered, Black kids aren't going into churches and schools and shooting bunches of people, the shooters are almost all white/Asian and come from typically 'traditional' families. Kids born in wedlock was higher during actual slavery time and jim crow than it is now. I'm sure you can at least make the concession that racism is lower now than back then. I don't think "war on drugs" started to target black people, though it might be an inadverted consequence. Do not atribute to malice what can be atributed to stupidity. I don't fully get your second point. Kids shooting schools and churches are usually white, but they do not come from "traditional family values", roughly 90% of them were raised in single parent house holds. Broken homes have been steadily rising, and while higher among black population it is a transversal problem in the U.S. and I think in most of the first world. A quick google search delivered some pretty harsh statistics about it: + Show Spoiler +43% of US children live without their father [US Department of Census]
90% of homeless and runaway children are from fatherless homes. [US D.H.H.S., Bureau of the Census]
80% of rapists motivated with displaced anger come from fatherless homes. [Criminal Justice & Behavior, Vol 14, pp. 403-26, 1978]
71% of pregnant teenagers lack a father. [U.S. Department of Health and Human Services press release, Friday, March 26, 1999]
63% of youth suicides are from fatherless homes. [US D.H.H.S., Bureau of the Census]
85% of children who exhibit behavioral disorders come from fatherless homes. [Center for Disease Control]
90% of adolescent repeat arsonists live with only their mother. [Wray Herbert, “Dousing the Kindlers,” Psychology Today, January, 1985, p. 28]
71% of high school dropouts come from fatherless homes. [National Principals Association Report on the State of High Schools]
75% of adolescent patients in chemical abuse centers come from fatherless homes. [Rainbows f for all God’s Children]
70% of juveniles in state operated institutions have no father. [US Department of Justice, Special Report, Sept. 1988]
85% of youths in prisons grew up in a fatherless home. [Fulton County Georgia jail populations, Texas Department of Corrections, 1992]
Fatherless boys and girls are: twice as likely to drop out of high school; twice as likely to end up in jail; four times more likely to need help for emotional or behavioral problems. [US D.H.H.S. news release, March 26, 1999] I wasn't sure, but now I am that you're approaching this from a place of gross ignorance. It's hard to imagine you're comparing 'wedlock' births during slavery or what you're basing those numbers off of but no I don't concede the point or the implication. The drug war was explicitly started to criminalize black people (and hippies, but was less effective there for what I hope are obvious reasons) It seems you pulled the shooters 'broken home' state out of thin air and you'll note that prison populations have gone up ~500% since the 60's. Fatherless homes aren't generally ideal but they also rather certainly aren't the root issue, nor do you seem remotely familiar with some of the causes of fatherless homes, and as Kwark/P6 alluded to you seem to be putting forth arguments in the interest of furthering a rather bad perspective even if you assure us they aren't and the similarities are merely coincidental. I honestly do not have time to read it now, but I will. Still it is a moot point as I'm against the "war on drugs". The only point I want to come across is that the best for a kid is to be raised in a house with 2 parents, and that evidence is pretty conclusive on that. This is true for all races. I've posted many sources about it already. Kwark picked literally 6 dudes and came with his own stats what the fuck is that. The data seems conflicting depending on the time length and how you define mass shooter. I'm open that this point is debatable, hopefully someone can post some real stats on the issue and not Kwark's made up ones. It's not moot in that my point was that the fatherless homes is a symptom not a root cause and that the disproportionate representation of Black families in those numbers (besides having causes you are clearly unaware of) is not reflected at all in the mass school/church/theater shootings so the two are only correlated at best anyway. Which is one big reason it seems like you're mentioning this tertiary fact about the negative impact of homes without fathers, not to dig deeper at the underlying issues, but to push a trashy perspective that usually follows shortly after this part of the rhetorical dance. Well the problem with the" racism" interpretation is that I'm talking about something that affects all races. Single parents homes exist more in black communities, but also seem to explain the phenomena of crime in families of all races so you can't just attribute it to racism. Again, the following data applies to the general population: + Show Spoiler +43% of US children live without their father [US Department of Census]
90% of homeless and runaway children are from fatherless homes. [US D.H.H.S., Bureau of the Census]
80% of rapists motivated with displaced anger come from fatherless homes. [Criminal Justice & Behavior, Vol 14, pp. 403-26, 1978]
71% of pregnant teenagers lack a father. [U.S. Department of Health and Human Services press release, Friday, March 26, 1999]
63% of youth suicides are from fatherless homes. [US D.H.H.S., Bureau of the Census]
85% of children who exhibit behavioral disorders come from fatherless homes. [Center for Disease Control]
90% of adolescent repeat arsonists live with only their mother. [Wray Herbert, “Dousing the Kindlers,” Psychology Today, January, 1985, p. 28]
71% of high school dropouts come from fatherless homes. [National Principals Association Report on the State of High Schools]
75% of adolescent patients in chemical abuse centers come from fatherless homes. [Rainbows f for all God’s Children]
70% of juveniles in state operated institutions have no father. [US Department of Justice, Special Report, Sept. 1988]
85% of youths in prisons grew up in a fatherless home. [Fulton County Georgia jail populations, Texas Department of Corrections, 1992]
Fatherless boys and girls are: twice as likely to drop out of high school; twice as likely to end up in jail; four times more likely to need help for emotional or behavioral problems. [US D.H.H.S. news release, March 26, 1999] I don't think I can convince you of much, I've presented the evidence of what I wanted to come across. Again: It's best for kids, regardless off race, to be raised in a house with 2 parents. Seems to affect crime, teenage pregnancy, school dropout, etc etc. On the mass shooting and father homes, I'm open to being corrected. However Ideally someone posts some actual third party stats instead of Kwarks made up one (he eddited and added more info and guess my number was wrong, wish someone would find actual stats though) I think you misunderstand why I was mentioning racism. That was to address the disparity of fatherless homes/poverty. As to the statistics of people in fatherless homes (various statistics are using that phrase to describe rather different situations) as they relate to criminality or other less desirable outcomes the lack of fathers isn't the cause. It may be frequently found (the frequency doesn't matter much if the intention is to remain at this shallow level of analysis) mass shooters emerge from 'fatherless' homes, but it's not the cause of the shooting, and most obviously not the cause of itself. So we can concede your point about these shooters coming from these homes, even at the rates you suggest, but then so what?
Didn't everyone just call for a search for other answers than gun control? He's trying to give one, I guess. Even though, I'm not really sold on single-parent households being a real factor in this, since Europe has comparable numbers in single-parenting and no school shooting epidemic. I'd wager it is the American fascination with violence, war and defiance but that theory will probably be met with the same defensive reaction whenever someone is bringing up stricter gun control as it basically adresses the same issue. Oh, and maybe the availability of firearms and their acceptance in society, but hey, really just guessing here.
|
On May 30 2018 18:26 [DUF]MethodMan wrote:Show nested quote +On May 30 2018 14:05 GreenHorizons wrote:On May 30 2018 13:38 GoTuNk! wrote:On May 30 2018 13:18 GreenHorizons wrote:On May 30 2018 13:06 GoTuNk! wrote:On May 30 2018 12:47 GreenHorizons wrote:On May 30 2018 12:31 GoTuNk! wrote:On May 30 2018 12:07 GreenHorizons wrote:On May 30 2018 11:45 GoTuNk! wrote:On May 30 2018 11:37 GreenHorizons wrote:
[quote]
I mean if you consider food and eating 'dangerous' too I can understand the use even if it seems silly.
I'm not convinced that single family homes aren't still a symptom of a larger more pervasive underlying problem as far as your main point goes, or that reducing policy based influence is always the right direction. Yes complex issues are always inter-related. Are single family homes the cause of crimes? Or is it poverty that causes single households that result in crime? Maybe it's racism that causes single house holds which causes crimes? Truth is you will find very and subtly biased sources supporting all of this positions. My opinion from what I've read is that single family homes seems to be the current best predictor. It is quite obvious racism now is lower than in 1960, however single parent houses among black population is highest now than ever. On the same margin, it is more likely for a white kid in a single parent home to drop out of school (or commit a crime, I honestly can't remember the stats were very similar) than a black kid with two parents. That's the anecdotal evidence I can recall on what I've read about it, but it's a topic on if it's own with tons of nuances that warrants full research if you really want to be informed. I suspect I've more thoroughly researched this stuff than you have. I'm not sure I find the difference in racism as obviously 'less' as you do (me being a black man in the US, you not being one). That mostly aside we know that the war on drugs was a deliberate effort to criminalize, incarcerate, and silence black people (and hippies) in the US. Which just so happens to coincide with the increase in homes without fathers (as the US government intentionally removed them from families [again]). In a sexist society removing the primary breadwinner (as an effort to silence their political dissent stemming from their economic and social oppression) inevitably leads to poverty (as does having wealthy people) So in this country's short history we have at least 2 times where the federal government promoted and actively contributed to the systematic destruction of Black families (several more times for Black wealth). So it's not really a question whether the increased rates of poverty, crime, or single family homes in Black communities are a symptom of racism, we know they are (at least in any proportion we find them greater than white communities). Maybe some of those symptoms manifest in self-perpetuating ways, but it's unquestionable they come from systemic issues revolving around racism, poverty, and oppression imo. All that considered, Black kids aren't going into churches and schools and shooting bunches of people, the shooters are almost all white/Asian and come from typically 'traditional' families. Kids born in wedlock was higher during actual slavery time and jim crow than it is now. I'm sure you can at least make the concession that racism is lower now than back then. I don't think "war on drugs" started to target black people, though it might be an inadverted consequence. Do not atribute to malice what can be atributed to stupidity. I don't fully get your second point. Kids shooting schools and churches are usually white, but they do not come from "traditional family values", roughly 90% of them were raised in single parent house holds. Broken homes have been steadily rising, and while higher among black population it is a transversal problem in the U.S. and I think in most of the first world. A quick google search delivered some pretty harsh statistics about it: + Show Spoiler +43% of US children live without their father [US Department of Census]
90% of homeless and runaway children are from fatherless homes. [US D.H.H.S., Bureau of the Census]
80% of rapists motivated with displaced anger come from fatherless homes. [Criminal Justice & Behavior, Vol 14, pp. 403-26, 1978]
71% of pregnant teenagers lack a father. [U.S. Department of Health and Human Services press release, Friday, March 26, 1999]
63% of youth suicides are from fatherless homes. [US D.H.H.S., Bureau of the Census]
85% of children who exhibit behavioral disorders come from fatherless homes. [Center for Disease Control]
90% of adolescent repeat arsonists live with only their mother. [Wray Herbert, “Dousing the Kindlers,” Psychology Today, January, 1985, p. 28]
71% of high school dropouts come from fatherless homes. [National Principals Association Report on the State of High Schools]
75% of adolescent patients in chemical abuse centers come from fatherless homes. [Rainbows f for all God’s Children]
70% of juveniles in state operated institutions have no father. [US Department of Justice, Special Report, Sept. 1988]
85% of youths in prisons grew up in a fatherless home. [Fulton County Georgia jail populations, Texas Department of Corrections, 1992]
Fatherless boys and girls are: twice as likely to drop out of high school; twice as likely to end up in jail; four times more likely to need help for emotional or behavioral problems. [US D.H.H.S. news release, March 26, 1999] I wasn't sure, but now I am that you're approaching this from a place of gross ignorance. It's hard to imagine you're comparing 'wedlock' births during slavery or what you're basing those numbers off of but no I don't concede the point or the implication. The drug war was explicitly started to criminalize black people (and hippies, but was less effective there for what I hope are obvious reasons) It seems you pulled the shooters 'broken home' state out of thin air and you'll note that prison populations have gone up ~500% since the 60's. Fatherless homes aren't generally ideal but they also rather certainly aren't the root issue, nor do you seem remotely familiar with some of the causes of fatherless homes, and as Kwark/P6 alluded to you seem to be putting forth arguments in the interest of furthering a rather bad perspective even if you assure us they aren't and the similarities are merely coincidental. I honestly do not have time to read it now, but I will. Still it is a moot point as I'm against the "war on drugs". The only point I want to come across is that the best for a kid is to be raised in a house with 2 parents, and that evidence is pretty conclusive on that. This is true for all races. I've posted many sources about it already. Kwark picked literally 6 dudes and came with his own stats what the fuck is that. The data seems conflicting depending on the time length and how you define mass shooter. I'm open that this point is debatable, hopefully someone can post some real stats on the issue and not Kwark's made up ones. It's not moot in that my point was that the fatherless homes is a symptom not a root cause and that the disproportionate representation of Black families in those numbers (besides having causes you are clearly unaware of) is not reflected at all in the mass school/church/theater shootings so the two are only correlated at best anyway. Which is one big reason it seems like you're mentioning this tertiary fact about the negative impact of homes without fathers, not to dig deeper at the underlying issues, but to push a trashy perspective that usually follows shortly after this part of the rhetorical dance. Well the problem with the" racism" interpretation is that I'm talking about something that affects all races. Single parents homes exist more in black communities, but also seem to explain the phenomena of crime in families of all races so you can't just attribute it to racism. Again, the following data applies to the general population: + Show Spoiler +43% of US children live without their father [US Department of Census]
90% of homeless and runaway children are from fatherless homes. [US D.H.H.S., Bureau of the Census]
80% of rapists motivated with displaced anger come from fatherless homes. [Criminal Justice & Behavior, Vol 14, pp. 403-26, 1978]
71% of pregnant teenagers lack a father. [U.S. Department of Health and Human Services press release, Friday, March 26, 1999]
63% of youth suicides are from fatherless homes. [US D.H.H.S., Bureau of the Census]
85% of children who exhibit behavioral disorders come from fatherless homes. [Center for Disease Control]
90% of adolescent repeat arsonists live with only their mother. [Wray Herbert, “Dousing the Kindlers,” Psychology Today, January, 1985, p. 28]
71% of high school dropouts come from fatherless homes. [National Principals Association Report on the State of High Schools]
75% of adolescent patients in chemical abuse centers come from fatherless homes. [Rainbows f for all God’s Children]
70% of juveniles in state operated institutions have no father. [US Department of Justice, Special Report, Sept. 1988]
85% of youths in prisons grew up in a fatherless home. [Fulton County Georgia jail populations, Texas Department of Corrections, 1992]
Fatherless boys and girls are: twice as likely to drop out of high school; twice as likely to end up in jail; four times more likely to need help for emotional or behavioral problems. [US D.H.H.S. news release, March 26, 1999] I don't think I can convince you of much, I've presented the evidence of what I wanted to come across. Again: It's best for kids, regardless off race, to be raised in a house with 2 parents. Seems to affect crime, teenage pregnancy, school dropout, etc etc. On the mass shooting and father homes, I'm open to being corrected. However Ideally someone posts some actual third party stats instead of Kwarks made up one (he eddited and added more info and guess my number was wrong, wish someone would find actual stats though) I think you misunderstand why I was mentioning racism. That was to address the disparity of fatherless homes/poverty. As to the statistics of people in fatherless homes (various statistics are using that phrase to describe rather different situations) as they relate to criminality or other less desirable outcomes the lack of fathers isn't the cause. It may be frequently found (the frequency doesn't matter much if the intention is to remain at this shallow level of analysis) mass shooters emerge from 'fatherless' homes, but it's not the cause of the shooting, and most obviously not the cause of itself. So we can concede your point about these shooters coming from these homes, even at the rates you suggest, but then so what? Didn't everyone just call for a search for other answers than gun control? He's trying to give one, I guess. Even though, I'm not really sold on single-parent households being a real factor in this, since Europe has comparable numbers in single-parenting and no school shooting epidemic. I'd wager it is the American fascination with violence, war and defiance but that theory will probably be met with the same defensive reaction whenever someone is bringing up stricter gun control as it basically adresses the same issue. Oh, and maybe the availability of firearms and their acceptance in society, but hey, really just guessing here.
I'm very receptive to alternative ideas, especially new ones. This doesn't seem to be either. It seems so far that his one and only point was that single family households are less desirable than 2 parent 'happy' households, which is a pretty enigmatic/unobjectionable by itself but a usually ominous harbinger.
There are certainly some uniquely American aspects of all gun violence (prevalence of firearms being the obvious one), but there are some other more ubiquitous international ones (beyond guns) as well. There is overlap in the reasons people commit crime and kill themselves/other people around the world.
If we start there and build up I think we'll find better, more comprehensive and effective solutions rather than focus on petty bickering about negligibly effective gun regulation with 0 chance of passing.
|
Reforming the school system would be my number one priority. If you want to change the way society works, change the way we educate our kids. Everyone realistically knows that schooling in the US is a mess (its just as bad in the UK - Where there have also been some kids arrested for planning school shootings). It leaves some small minority of kids excluded and alienated, marginalized and told they will fail.
If you want to stop school shootings, look at what the shooters have said about their experience at school.
|
I've reached a point where I wish y'all would do something.
I understand that the guns/no guns debate is intractable; but I don't understand why the right - and it's definitively the right doing this bit - both shuts down the gun control debate and then proposes nothing in its place.
Even if we accept the American left is unreasonable in its gun control efforts, at least they are trying to do something about the problem. The right pantomimes care until people stop talking about it, and does nothing at all. Remember when Mental Health was to blame and needed looking at?
What happened there, again?
I mean, mental health probably isn't the cause and probably wouldn't help the situation, but mental health provision in America in general is a separate issue that does need improving, so you know what? Screw it. If the school shooters problem doesn't get fixed, but it tangentially fixes another problem, I'm all for it. Let's play whack-a-mole, blame everything for it, and fix the issues one at a time until we get to the heart of it all. But no, it's just another thing to throw out there to diffuse the argument until it fizzles out.
You cannot have a meaningful, productive debate when only one side wants to help. And no, the excuse 'but muh guns' doesn't work. There is no magical force stopping Conservatives from saying 'guns aren't the issue here, why don't we attend to this other problem that we think is probably to blame, and here's how we think we should do it'?
I'll even (while laughing) listen to the traditional family nonsense, if there's an actual action plan to go with it. Never mind that the traditional family died because of Capitalism first and foremost, and can't survive in the current economic environment (says person whose lived it first hand and grew up in a community that can attest to it).
|
On May 30 2018 18:52 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On May 30 2018 18:26 [DUF]MethodMan wrote:On May 30 2018 14:05 GreenHorizons wrote:On May 30 2018 13:38 GoTuNk! wrote:On May 30 2018 13:18 GreenHorizons wrote:On May 30 2018 13:06 GoTuNk! wrote:On May 30 2018 12:47 GreenHorizons wrote:On May 30 2018 12:31 GoTuNk! wrote:On May 30 2018 12:07 GreenHorizons wrote:On May 30 2018 11:45 GoTuNk! wrote:
[quote]
Yes complex issues are always inter-related. Are single family homes the cause of crimes? Or is it poverty that causes single households that result in crime? Maybe it's racism that causes single house holds which causes crimes?
Truth is you will find very and subtly biased sources supporting all of this positions.
My opinion from what I've read is that single family homes seems to be the current best predictor. It is quite obvious racism now is lower than in 1960, however single parent houses among black population is highest now than ever. On the same margin, it is more likely for a white kid in a single parent home to drop out of school (or commit a crime, I honestly can't remember the stats were very similar) than a black kid with two parents.
That's the anecdotal evidence I can recall on what I've read about it, but it's a topic on if it's own with tons of nuances that warrants full research if you really want to be informed.
I suspect I've more thoroughly researched this stuff than you have. I'm not sure I find the difference in racism as obviously 'less' as you do (me being a black man in the US, you not being one). That mostly aside we know that the war on drugs was a deliberate effort to criminalize, incarcerate, and silence black people (and hippies) in the US. Which just so happens to coincide with the increase in homes without fathers (as the US government intentionally removed them from families [again]). In a sexist society removing the primary breadwinner (as an effort to silence their political dissent stemming from their economic and social oppression) inevitably leads to poverty (as does having wealthy people) So in this country's short history we have at least 2 times where the federal government promoted and actively contributed to the systematic destruction of Black families (several more times for Black wealth). So it's not really a question whether the increased rates of poverty, crime, or single family homes in Black communities are a symptom of racism, we know they are (at least in any proportion we find them greater than white communities). Maybe some of those symptoms manifest in self-perpetuating ways, but it's unquestionable they come from systemic issues revolving around racism, poverty, and oppression imo. All that considered, Black kids aren't going into churches and schools and shooting bunches of people, the shooters are almost all white/Asian and come from typically 'traditional' families. Kids born in wedlock was higher during actual slavery time and jim crow than it is now. I'm sure you can at least make the concession that racism is lower now than back then. I don't think "war on drugs" started to target black people, though it might be an inadverted consequence. Do not atribute to malice what can be atributed to stupidity. I don't fully get your second point. Kids shooting schools and churches are usually white, but they do not come from "traditional family values", roughly 90% of them were raised in single parent house holds. Broken homes have been steadily rising, and while higher among black population it is a transversal problem in the U.S. and I think in most of the first world. A quick google search delivered some pretty harsh statistics about it: + Show Spoiler +43% of US children live without their father [US Department of Census]
90% of homeless and runaway children are from fatherless homes. [US D.H.H.S., Bureau of the Census]
80% of rapists motivated with displaced anger come from fatherless homes. [Criminal Justice & Behavior, Vol 14, pp. 403-26, 1978]
71% of pregnant teenagers lack a father. [U.S. Department of Health and Human Services press release, Friday, March 26, 1999]
63% of youth suicides are from fatherless homes. [US D.H.H.S., Bureau of the Census]
85% of children who exhibit behavioral disorders come from fatherless homes. [Center for Disease Control]
90% of adolescent repeat arsonists live with only their mother. [Wray Herbert, “Dousing the Kindlers,” Psychology Today, January, 1985, p. 28]
71% of high school dropouts come from fatherless homes. [National Principals Association Report on the State of High Schools]
75% of adolescent patients in chemical abuse centers come from fatherless homes. [Rainbows f for all God’s Children]
70% of juveniles in state operated institutions have no father. [US Department of Justice, Special Report, Sept. 1988]
85% of youths in prisons grew up in a fatherless home. [Fulton County Georgia jail populations, Texas Department of Corrections, 1992]
Fatherless boys and girls are: twice as likely to drop out of high school; twice as likely to end up in jail; four times more likely to need help for emotional or behavioral problems. [US D.H.H.S. news release, March 26, 1999] I wasn't sure, but now I am that you're approaching this from a place of gross ignorance. It's hard to imagine you're comparing 'wedlock' births during slavery or what you're basing those numbers off of but no I don't concede the point or the implication. The drug war was explicitly started to criminalize black people (and hippies, but was less effective there for what I hope are obvious reasons) It seems you pulled the shooters 'broken home' state out of thin air and you'll note that prison populations have gone up ~500% since the 60's. Fatherless homes aren't generally ideal but they also rather certainly aren't the root issue, nor do you seem remotely familiar with some of the causes of fatherless homes, and as Kwark/P6 alluded to you seem to be putting forth arguments in the interest of furthering a rather bad perspective even if you assure us they aren't and the similarities are merely coincidental. I honestly do not have time to read it now, but I will. Still it is a moot point as I'm against the "war on drugs". The only point I want to come across is that the best for a kid is to be raised in a house with 2 parents, and that evidence is pretty conclusive on that. This is true for all races. I've posted many sources about it already. Kwark picked literally 6 dudes and came with his own stats what the fuck is that. The data seems conflicting depending on the time length and how you define mass shooter. I'm open that this point is debatable, hopefully someone can post some real stats on the issue and not Kwark's made up ones. It's not moot in that my point was that the fatherless homes is a symptom not a root cause and that the disproportionate representation of Black families in those numbers (besides having causes you are clearly unaware of) is not reflected at all in the mass school/church/theater shootings so the two are only correlated at best anyway. Which is one big reason it seems like you're mentioning this tertiary fact about the negative impact of homes without fathers, not to dig deeper at the underlying issues, but to push a trashy perspective that usually follows shortly after this part of the rhetorical dance. Well the problem with the" racism" interpretation is that I'm talking about something that affects all races. Single parents homes exist more in black communities, but also seem to explain the phenomena of crime in families of all races so you can't just attribute it to racism. Again, the following data applies to the general population: + Show Spoiler +43% of US children live without their father [US Department of Census]
90% of homeless and runaway children are from fatherless homes. [US D.H.H.S., Bureau of the Census]
80% of rapists motivated with displaced anger come from fatherless homes. [Criminal Justice & Behavior, Vol 14, pp. 403-26, 1978]
71% of pregnant teenagers lack a father. [U.S. Department of Health and Human Services press release, Friday, March 26, 1999]
63% of youth suicides are from fatherless homes. [US D.H.H.S., Bureau of the Census]
85% of children who exhibit behavioral disorders come from fatherless homes. [Center for Disease Control]
90% of adolescent repeat arsonists live with only their mother. [Wray Herbert, “Dousing the Kindlers,” Psychology Today, January, 1985, p. 28]
71% of high school dropouts come from fatherless homes. [National Principals Association Report on the State of High Schools]
75% of adolescent patients in chemical abuse centers come from fatherless homes. [Rainbows f for all God’s Children]
70% of juveniles in state operated institutions have no father. [US Department of Justice, Special Report, Sept. 1988]
85% of youths in prisons grew up in a fatherless home. [Fulton County Georgia jail populations, Texas Department of Corrections, 1992]
Fatherless boys and girls are: twice as likely to drop out of high school; twice as likely to end up in jail; four times more likely to need help for emotional or behavioral problems. [US D.H.H.S. news release, March 26, 1999] I don't think I can convince you of much, I've presented the evidence of what I wanted to come across. Again: It's best for kids, regardless off race, to be raised in a house with 2 parents. Seems to affect crime, teenage pregnancy, school dropout, etc etc. On the mass shooting and father homes, I'm open to being corrected. However Ideally someone posts some actual third party stats instead of Kwarks made up one (he eddited and added more info and guess my number was wrong, wish someone would find actual stats though) I think you misunderstand why I was mentioning racism. That was to address the disparity of fatherless homes/poverty. As to the statistics of people in fatherless homes (various statistics are using that phrase to describe rather different situations) as they relate to criminality or other less desirable outcomes the lack of fathers isn't the cause. It may be frequently found (the frequency doesn't matter much if the intention is to remain at this shallow level of analysis) mass shooters emerge from 'fatherless' homes, but it's not the cause of the shooting, and most obviously not the cause of itself. So we can concede your point about these shooters coming from these homes, even at the rates you suggest, but then so what? Didn't everyone just call for a search for other answers than gun control? He's trying to give one, I guess. Even though, I'm not really sold on single-parent households being a real factor in this, since Europe has comparable numbers in single-parenting and no school shooting epidemic. I'd wager it is the American fascination with violence, war and defiance but that theory will probably be met with the same defensive reaction whenever someone is bringing up stricter gun control as it basically adresses the same issue. Oh, and maybe the availability of firearms and their acceptance in society, but hey, really just guessing here. I'm very receptive to alternative ideas, especially new ones. This doesn't seem to be either. It seems so far that his one and only point was that single family households are less desirable than 2 parent 'happy' households, which is a pretty enigmatic/unobjectionable by itself but a usually ominous harbinger. There are certainly some uniquely American aspects of all gun violence (prevalence of firearms being the obvious one), but there are some other more ubiquitous international ones (beyond guns) as well. There is overlap in the reasons people commit crime and kill themselves/other people around the world. If we start there and build up I think we'll find better, more comprehensive and effective solutions rather than focus on petty bickering about negligibly effective gun regulation with 0 chance of passing.
But peculiarly you leave out the most obvious one I gave, fascination with violence. Really, does it have to be debated whether American culture is inherently violent or not? Just take youth culture in the US for the amount of time I've been observing it, let's say 20 years. Wouldn't you say it is full of death and atrocities? I mean, coming from Germany this is really hard to grasp, when the most brutal shit we sell culturally is Rammstein. And they do wrap the dark topics they speak on in complex lyrics which are too hard to get for your average angsty teenager. Slipknot? Not so much.
On May 30 2018 19:30 iamthedave wrote:
I've reached a point where I wish y'all would do something.
I understand that the guns/no guns debate is intractable; but I don't understand why the right - and it's definitively the right doing this bit - both shuts down the gun control debate and then proposes nothing in its place.
Even if we accept the American left is unreasonable in its gun control efforts, at least they are trying to do something about the problem. The right pantomimes care until people stop talking about it, and does nothing at all. Remember when Mental Health was to blame and needed looking at?
What happened there, again?
I mean, mental health probably isn't the cause and probably wouldn't help the situation, but mental health provision in America in general is a separate issue that does need improving, so you know what? Screw it. If the school shooters problem doesn't get fixed, but it tangentially fixes another problem, I'm all for it. Let's play whack-a-mole, blame everything for it, and fix the issues one at a time until we get to the heart of it all. But no, it's just another thing to throw out there to diffuse the argument until it fizzles out.
You cannot have a meaningful, productive debate when only one side wants to help. And no, the excuse 'but muh guns' doesn't work. There is no magical force stopping Conservatives from saying 'guns aren't the issue here, why don't we attend to this other problem that we think is probably to blame, and here's how we think we should do it'?
I'll even (while laughing) listen to the traditional family nonsense, if there's an actual action plan to go with it. Never mind that the traditional family died because of Capitalism first and foremost, and can't survive in the current economic environment (says person whose lived it first hand and grew up in a community that can attest to it).
This represents my line of thought very well and I wish I was as coherent in thinking in English, so I could've put it this way myself instead of mouthing off at people.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
