Huckabee: "I have no fear to go to Israel ... I felt more fear in American cities"

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Crime is often pinned on "deviant cultures" - I certainly don't think there is no truth to this, but I find it hard to believe that a group of people started out thinking that robbing and killing was somehow acceptable behaviour.

Again I think the point is that culture is shaped and influence by the prevailing circumstances. If your available options are limited - your outlook becomes similarly limited.

[HAL 9000 96]

Crime is often pinned on "deviant cultures" - I certainly don't think there is no truth to this, but I find it hard to believe that a group of people started out thinking that robbing and killing was somehow acceptable behaviour.

Again I think the point is that culture is shaped and influence by the prevailing circumstances. If your available options are limited - your outlook becomes similarly limited.

Yes. And that ain't culture- its socioeconomics and psychology rolled into one.

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

And this is why the 'ghetto' serves a purpose. It keeps the criminal element contained. Those who do well get out anyway, and tend to not be crime-prone. The rest should be allowed to stay and not be induced by social engineering projects to 'resettle' in nice suburbs and ruin them.

Simultaneously, the University of Louisville criminologist Geetha Suresh was tracking local patterns of violent crime ... In her research, Suresh noticed a recurring pattern, one that emerged first in the late 1990s, then again around 2002. A particularly violent neighborhood would suddenly go cold, and crime would heat up in several new neighborhoods. In each case, Suresh has now confirmed, the first hot spots were the neighborhoods around huge housing projects, and the later ones were places where people had moved when the projects were torn down. From that, she drew the obvious conclusion: “Crime is going along with them.” Except for being hand-drawn, Suresh’s map matching housing patterns with crime looks exactly like Janikowski and Betts’s.

http://www.visajourney.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=134990

[HAL 9000 96]

And this is why the 'ghetto' serves a purpose. It keeps the criminal element contained. Those who do well get out anyway, and tend to not be crime-prone. The rest should be allowed to stay and not be induced by social engineering projects to 'resettle' in nice suburbs and ruin them.

Simultaneously, the University of Louisville criminologist Geetha Suresh was tracking local patterns of violent crime ... In her research, Suresh noticed a recurring pattern, one that emerged first in the late 1990s, then again around 2002. A particularly violent neighborhood would suddenly go cold, and crime would heat up in several new neighborhoods. In each case, Suresh has now confirmed, the first hot spots were the neighborhoods around huge housing projects, and the later ones were places where people had moved when the projects were torn down. From that, she drew the obvious conclusion: "Crime is going along with them." Except for being hand-drawn, Suresh's map matching housing patterns with crime looks exactly like Janikowski and Betts's.

http://www.visajourney.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=134990

I've heard that once you are ghetto while living in the ghetto, its easy to get you out of the ghetto but not easy to get the ghetto out of you.

Chicago is taking an interesting approach to this... tearing down the huge, racially-segregated public housing complexes and making way for more diverse neighborhood projects where mixed incomes can 'leech' some of that ghetto out of some people while getting the people out of the ghetto. Its been a mixed result thus far. You can't expect all people to react the same way. Unless you are into broad generalizations, of course.

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

And this is why the 'ghetto' serves a purpose. It keeps the criminal element contained. Those who do well get out anyway, and tend to not be crime-prone. The rest should be allowed to stay and not be induced by social engineering projects to 'resettle' in nice suburbs and ruin them.

Simultaneously, the University of Louisville criminologist Geetha Suresh was tracking local patterns of violent crime ... In her research, Suresh noticed a recurring pattern, one that emerged first in the late 1990s, then again around 2002. A particularly violent neighborhood would suddenly go cold, and crime would heat up in several new neighborhoods. In each case, Suresh has now confirmed, the first hot spots were the neighborhoods around huge housing projects, and the later ones were places where people had moved when the projects were torn down. From that, she drew the obvious conclusion: "Crime is going along with them." Except for being hand-drawn, Suresh's map matching housing patterns with crime looks exactly like Janikowski and Betts's.

http://www.visajourney.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=134990

I've heard that once you are ghetto while living in the ghetto, its easy to get you out of the ghetto but not easy to get the ghetto out of you.

Chicago is taking an interesting approach to this... tearing down the huge, racially-segregated public housing complexes and making way for more diverse neighborhood projects where mixed incomes can 'leech' some of that ghetto out of some people while getting the people out of the ghetto. Its been a mixed result thus far. You can't expect all people to react the same way. Unless you are into broad generalizations, of course.

Check out the study referenced in my post. Crime rates travel with them. Obviously not everyones a crook but enough are to drive rates up.

[HAL 9000 96]

And this is why the 'ghetto' serves a purpose. It keeps the criminal element contained. Those who do well get out anyway, and tend to not be crime-prone. The rest should be allowed to stay and not be induced by social engineering projects to 'resettle' in nice suburbs and ruin them.

Simultaneously, the University of Louisville criminologist Geetha Suresh was tracking local patterns of violent crime ... In her research, Suresh noticed a recurring pattern, one that emerged first in the late 1990s, then again around 2002. A particularly violent neighborhood would suddenly go cold, and crime would heat up in several new neighborhoods. In each case, Suresh has now confirmed, the first hot spots were the neighborhoods around huge housing projects, and the later ones were places where people had moved when the projects were torn down. From that, she drew the obvious conclusion: "Crime is going along with them." Except for being hand-drawn, Suresh's map matching housing patterns with crime looks exactly like Janikowski and Betts's.

http://www.visajourney.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=134990

I've heard that once you are ghetto while living in the ghetto, its easy to get you out of the ghetto but not easy to get the ghetto out of you.

Chicago is taking an interesting approach to this... tearing down the huge, racially-segregated public housing complexes and making way for more diverse neighborhood projects where mixed incomes can 'leech' some of that ghetto out of some people while getting the people out of the ghetto. Its been a mixed result thus far. You can't expect all people to react the same way. Unless you are into broad generalizations, of course.

Check out the study referenced in my post. Crime rates travel with them. Obviously not everyones a crook but enough are to drive rates up.

Sure... difference is that the city is investing in alternatives on top of just relocation to get some of that ghetto out of people. Ghetto = crime in this particular logic loop.

Obviously I don't think many folks around here don't want to have to put up with certain kinds of neighbors and everyone has their reasons and right to think as they please...

Within the population density argument- if you spread out the criminal elements, the crime rate actually decreases when combined with increasing economic opportunity. Commonplace 'empowerment' zones that work and that are coupled with actual opportunities to live under better conditions in a better environment.

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

Economic opportunity is ####### without better schools. I suspect this is one thing we'd agree on. Economic opportunity without a population base that has the education to embrace said opportunity is wasted. It'll only mean people from the outside will have to come in and take the jobs. More resentment. Vicious cycle. America 1960, 1970, 1980, 1990, 2000, 2010, ad infinitum?

[Peikko 1,575]

I think the point is, unless they have more opportunities, it doesn't matter where they live, they aren't going to 'reform'. Social programs that help people out of intrenched poverty situations will change the outlook if similtaneously the economy is robust enough to provide the jobs.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Crime is often pinned on "deviant cultures" - I certainly don't think there is no truth to this, but I find it hard to believe that a group of people started out thinking that robbing and killing was somehow acceptable behaviour.

Again I think the point is that culture is shaped and influence by the prevailing circumstances. If your available options are limited - your outlook becomes similarly limited.

Yes. And that ain't culture- its socioeconomics and psychology rolled into one.

Aye. A common misconception.

There's nothing "cultural" about any of this - its not like they hold a farmers market or folk dancing on a friday night. Nor does Fodors have a "rough guide" about the best places to hang out to see the street racing and corner slinging.

[bhajishah 4]

I feel more safer in Pindi and Islammabad than the south side of chicago , Philly and brooklyn , queens etc. doesnt mean im going to go to any of those places any time soon again and Im sure as heck not heading baci to PK for awhile.. Jeesh huckabee wot a tardbait.

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

I think the point is, unless they have more opportunities, it doesn't matter where they live, they aren't going to 'reform'. Social programs that help people out of intrenched poverty situations will change the outlook if similtaneously the economy is robust enough to provide the jobs.

No, not social programs. Educational programs.

Under-educated adults will never have jobs that can sustain them in a meaningful way.

I feel more safer in Pindi and Islammabad than the south side of chicago , Philly and brooklyn , queens etc. doesnt mean im going to go to any of those places any time soon again and Im sure as heck not heading baci to PK for awhile.. Jeesh huckabee wot a tardbait.

Queens? The Queens really isn't that bad.

[HAL 9000 96]

Economic opportunity is ####### without better schools. I suspect this is one thing we'd agree on. Economic opportunity without a population base that has the education to embrace said opportunity is wasted. It'll only mean people from the outside will have to come in and take the jobs. More resentment. Vicious cycle. America 1960, 1970, 1980, 1990, 2000, 2010, ad infinitum?

Yep.

I did forget that new, better equipped schools are opening up in these newer 'opportunity zones'... but that particular is a nasty one here in Chicago since the funding crunch is hitting public education REALLY hard while suburban schools are doing much better off. The cycle continues in that sense.

Crime is often pinned on "deviant cultures" - I certainly don't think there is no truth to this, but I find it hard to believe that a group of people started out thinking that robbing and killing was somehow acceptable behaviour.

Again I think the point is that culture is shaped and influence by the prevailing circumstances. If your available options are limited - your outlook becomes similarly limited.

Yes. And that ain't culture- its socioeconomics and psychology rolled into one.

Aye. A common misconception.

There's nothing "cultural" about any of this - its not like they hold a farmers market or folk dancing on a friday night. Nor does Fodors have a "rough guide" about the best places to hang out to see the street racing and corner slinging.

We's got the burbs for that.

I think the point is, unless they have more opportunities, it doesn't matter where they live, they aren't going to 'reform'. Social programs that help people out of intrenched poverty situations will change the outlook if similtaneously the economy is robust enough to provide the jobs.

No, not social programs. Educational programs.

Under-educated adults will never have jobs that can sustain them in a meaningful way.

I feel more safer in Pindi and Islammabad than the south side of chicago , Philly and brooklyn , queens etc. doesnt mean im going to go to any of those places any time soon again and Im sure as heck not heading baci to PK for awhile.. Jeesh huckabee wot a tardbait.

Queens? The Queens really isn't that bad.

Edumacation! Yay!

And the South Side of Chicago is a heck of a lot more courteous than the North Side (scoff scoff at a certain North Sider I know!). There are obvious exceptions.

[Peikko 1,575]

Social progams run the gamut, from education to support in housing and health etc while the person gets on their feet. I know some people don't want 'help people who don't help themselves' because everyone can pull themselves up by the bootstraps if they have enough motivation blah blah blah. Those people don't feel safe in America and would prefer to live in Israel, apparantly.

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

Social progams run the gamut, from education to support in housing and health etc while the person gets on their feet. I know some people don't want 'help people who don't help themselves' because everyone can pull themselves up by the bootstraps if they have enough motivation blah blah blah. Those people don't feel safe in America and would prefer to live in Israel, apparantly.

Ok. I tend to think of handouts and entitlements programs when you say 'social'.

Giving under-educated adults money for rent and jobs at Wal Mart won't do a damn thing towards reducing crime IMO.

Educating their kids so they can exit the ghetto and get well paying jobs will. Long term.

[Peikko 1,575]

I agree that their needs to be some incentive because if all you think your life ammounts to is the opportunity to work 40 years in a low paying job and the alteranative is a lucrative if dangerous career in the drugs trade...

Anyway, the point is that it is no co-incidence that high crime rates occurr in ghettos and it's not the culture that is to blame. It may be true that there are more people of certain ethnicities in ghettos though, of course.