http://savannahnow.com/crime/2010-03-09/carver-heights-bombarded-youth-crime
Check out the daily arrests: http://chathamsheriff.org/Corrections/Operations/Bookings/tabid/148/Default.aspx
3/16 update:
http://savannahnow.com/crime/2010-03-16/police-man-shot-dead-after-stabbing-officer
Wednesday, March 10, 2010
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
8 comments:
Why?
By which I take it you are inquiring as to the underlying social factors.
About 20 years ago, so many middle to uper class Savannahians had moved out of Savanah proper and into surrounding communities that the demographics of Savannah proper were such that Savannah's first black mayor was elected. He was a very liberal publisher of a black oriented local newspaper.
Savannah is now on its second consecutive black mayor. This one is an even more liberal fellow who is a retired professor from the historically black university, SSU. His caree was devoted to crankng out social workers. He is of the opoinion that criminals are created by an uncaring majority community unwilling to throw enough tax dollars at social programs.
Meanwhile, city council has become majority liberal black as white flight has accelerated in the face of increasing crime.
The current "acting" and likely to be named permanent chief of police is black.
Unfortunately, it would appear that
the mayor's focus on trying to cure minority criminality by throwing money into long term projects aimed at ameliorating the root causes has only served to give the criminal element encouragement to run even wilder than ever before.
On a positive note, the school board is taking very strong action to brak the strnaglehold of minority thug students on the middle and high schools. In my dialy checks of the arrestees in Savannah, I'm seeing more and more students arrested for fighting in the schools. You can tell because the arresting agency is listed as the school board's own police force.
Now, of course, the usual suspects will howl that I'm a racist for telling what all decent, law abiding, Savannahians now to be the objective truth. The arrest figures don't lie.
Ah, appreciate the explanation. However, as your own arrest history demonstrates, the arrest numbers are often unrelated to any real crime. The Bush/Cheney gang, for example, which is responsible for having more than a million people killed and their houses bombed to smithereens have not been arrested. They obviously not only know how to avoid this indignity but their disdain for the process led them to invent the new category of "detainee," for whom the restraints in the Constitution were thought not to work. Hamdan v. Rumsfeld proved them wrong. So, they had to let 500 people, on whom a lot of attention and energy had been spent, including the building of a permanent prison, go.
That said, there is no reason to think that the color of a person's skin has any relationship to their competence to hold or perform he duties of a particular office. I personally have little use for social workers for the simple reason that they presume to tell people how to behave from a secular perspective, as opposed to a religious perspective, and the result is the same. People in need don't get either the resources or skills they need to be useful to anyone else.
I actually looked at a great number of the arrestees and concluded that the photography is poor and the daily haul is a really sad lot. Most of them probably don't have the mental capacity to function in a society that expects them to be self-directed on a daily basis.
There is a category of crime that's identified as "deprivation under color of law." It applies to agents of government using the law to satisfy their own illegal intent and is not often either charged or prosecuted, unless the behavior of lawmen is really, really bad.
The reason I mention it is because there's a lot of malfeasance being perpetrated under cover of law. That is, much behavior that's essentially harmless to others has been criminalized--e.g. the whole panalopy of laws attempting to regulate what individuals inhale, ingest, inject or even excrete.
Fact is that real violent crime (not white collar) has been decreasing all over the country and law enforcement agencies are busy inventing new stuff to do so citizens won't decide that they're superfluous. Besides, they got all that fancy anti-terrorism equipment that they're just itching to use.
White flight all over the country was promoted by people who had new subdivisions they wanted to fill up. Also, white people are no more immune to acting like lemmings than colored ones. When their neighbors moved out, they didn't want the stigma of staying behind. Propaganda does work on some people. That's why it continues to be used.
Finally, if students are fighting in the schools, that's because the schedule and discipline are lax. When students are engaged in study and research, they have no opportunity for personal interaction, much less fighting. Relying on lawmen to haul them off to jail is a cop-out. But, it is something else for the police to do!
I saw a bit of a television show just last night that you would no doubt have loved: Noam Chomsky as the guest lecturer on "The Arab Hour."
Poor Hannah - you seem to think that Jay is capable of balanced discourse. He will tolerate logic until it verges upon refuting his own delusions - as it always does.
Save your time, dear...this is the blog of Rumor, Innuendo and Self-Promotion. "Rational polemics" is an unknown species here.
"Anonymous," you and "Hannah" are, of course, one-and-the same and both of you are actualy Alex Kearns. Nice try.
Oh poor, deluded Jay: how you flatter yourself! I check your blog once a week or so when I am in need of train-wreck, pseudo-reality-show nonsense (rather the same sort of compulsion that makes one curious about distant sirens, I suppose) or bored.
Whoever the erstwhile "hannah" may be, you should thank her for she's one of the few who bother to comment at length between the ads. If you were even one quarter as astute an observer of literary mode and lexicon as you profess to be, you would realize that (as you have often noted yourself) my writing style is as distinctive as yours. I also comment under my own name for I have found no reason that would compel me to do otherwise.
Having worked as an apparently useless (according to hannah) social worker for ten years I find her statement objectionable and ignorant of the facts. "I personally have little use for social workers for the simple reason that they presume to tell people how to behave from a secular perspective, as opposed to a religious perspective, and the result is the same." Do tell, hannah, what logic is there in that odd comment? If a secular perspective and a religious perspective culminate in the same results what would be your suggestion? If not A and if not B (given that, logically those are the only options), do tell us what your vision of C is.
You say that "I personally have little use for social workers for the simple reason that they presume to tell people how to behave from a secular perspective, as opposed to a religious perspective, and the result is the same. People in need don't get either the resources or skills they need to be useful to anyone else."
After my years of helping young mothers (and fathers) to deal with the daily challenges of children/finances/life I wonder why do you not feel that teaching basic care and feeding, healthcare, budgeting, helping them to sign up for student programs, connecting them with support groups and assisting them to find work is giving them "either the resources or skills they need to be useful to anyone else." Useful to whom?
"hannah", whoever you are, you could benefit from a few years of Real World experience. Your time would be far better spent working with those who are, in your estimation, "useful to anyone else" than on blogs.
A social worker, eh? Imagine my surprise.
Post a Comment