Why do many posts involve race? (renting, crime, day care)

[mvgordie]

Unfortunately it would appear a good section of my post didn't appear, that section preceded the portion that did, that stated its to late now and I frankly forgot what I stated (go figure).
As per my question number one it was aimed at a white defendant would not draw a group of his race to stand beside him and excuse is crime based on his racial and social upbringing, no excuses would be offered and no civil rights groups set up to advance white issues would descend on the town calling for protests with the so called peaceful chants of "NO JUSTICE NO PEACE".
The opinion that because more whites make up the congress and senate there is no need for a special caucus for whites, but that there is a need for minorities so that they would not be somehow silenced fails as an argument, for the majority would still be on the side of whites and the minority voice could still be silenced if the whites so chose to do so, however it would seem the don't chose to do so. It is just the opposite, it was a white majority which made sure the minorities were given equal rights along with special perks such as government set asides for minority owned businesses, required that the government contract with X amount of minority owned business, created special funds for minority enrolment to schools of higher education, and set up standards to advance the employment of minorities into PRIVATE business without regard the desires of that PRIVATE business. The notion that such caucuses are needed tends to say don't trust whitey.
Whites are more middle class then their minority counterparts?.... There is more poor whites in this Nation then minorities, and more whites are on some form of social welfare program then are minorities (As attested by all minority civil rights groups, when the issues of welfare arise).
As for Johnny, he would most likely join a gang with or without the opportunity for a better education. He wanted to be the "bad ass" the "cool guy", you know the nobody messes with me because I'm a homeboy attitude. Gangs have been a part of not only this nation but the world in general for hundreds of years, through good times and bad, eras of good educational levels and poor, it is just now we seem to chose the use of better education as just another excuse for bad behavior.
Legalize marijuana?, if that doesn't work whats next coke?. We legalized alcohol yet if your one for crime stats and such the majority of violent crime and domestic violence involve the use of alcohol and those number far surpass the numbers involving all drugs in general. Marijuana is only second to the use of coke and meth for crimes of theft among adults and is first in the same crimes of theft among the youth in this county. This again is just another way of an excuse for behavior by giving it a an approach of if you can't beat em join em attitude.
Police resources are set up to address issues, if a given area tends to have I higher rate of crime then does another, you will most likely see an increase of patrols in that area regardless of the so called social economic makeup of such area. You also need to understand that what happens in my area will directly or indirectly effect yours. Take drug sales for an example, drugs sold in my area are ending up in your area of Sunnymead Ranch (I live in the area of JFK and Perris Blvd) and trust me we have a large amount of drug sales in and around my area, therefore an increase in patrols in my area will have a direct effect on yours as well (and lets not forget Moreno Valley has had its largest drug bust in two separate areas of this city, one id Sunnymead Ranch the other is the now known Ranch Belago and not Edgemont, that said Edgemont has a separate issue...GANGS).
If my prior post wasn't missing the first section you would have seen that I don't feel race should fit into the discussion of crime, but nor should it be used as some form of excuse for it, crime is crime.
however when it comes to race no one looks at the facts of mathematical probability, that is to say that by the sure numbers one group is always going to look better or worse, or more advantaged then another but it is just sure numbers ( I will explain a little experiment to try a little later).
thatguy1, you and I have commented on a few post in the past regarding an eviction, and I quite frankly have read most your posts and response and enjoy them all, but this is by far the best because it brings to the table a most needed debate in this country and a applaud you for your bringing the issue up, thumbs up dude .
Now this is a good experiment for everyone to try (good for schools as well):
Take a piece of plywood say 2'x2' put some 1" boarders on all four sides, drill a hole just larger then the size of a marble in the center.
Take the amount of marbles of a set color to represent each race within the United States based on the most current census.
Below the hole you drilled place a container tightly against the bottom of the plywood in the area of the hole.
Now add the marbles all at one time, once the container is full remove it and count the marbles by color, do this several times then average it out, you will find its not so much race but math, plain ol mathmatical probability.
All other racial issues will never be totally solved as I stated in my prior missing post its like two football fans each devoted to his or her team of choice, this is an issue which can bring good friends into heated arguments and even plain old violent acts born out of the pride one holds for their team against the pride the other holds for theirs. This is a psychology issue that is borne in man and is most likely never going to be defeated, the best we can do is admit or differences except them and find a way to work around them short of the blame game game for this does nothing more than increase the heat, that is why I do feel such discussions should be held here.

[cwcivicgrl]

Thats why this is forum. It gives everyone the right to say what they want. There are people who are out to fight racist, then there are people like me who realize that sometimes comments are said either out of anger or because what was typed wasn't well thought out, meaning the typing party didn't realize someone would take it in a different way then they meant to come across. Thats the whole problem with targeting a racist, if you can stop and not jump to conclusions ask a few more questions and you might find a different perspective as to where an individual is coming from. People who make comments that put neighborhoods in xyz categories are probably because too many things from a particular race happened to them and they didn't see it as a coincidence. There are neighborhoods who have a dominate race in them check out your cities website, like Lake Elsinore's website there are surveys/charts that show the primary race of a neighborhood. There are facts to support comments that there is a dominant race in your neighborhood.

[Collideascope]

Originally Posted by cwcivicgrl

Freedom of Speech, hello that is an amendement.

Actually, it's just one of several clauses of Amendment I.

And what that amendment states is that the government may not abridge speech. However, your free speech (and my free speech) stops at the property lines of others. And this website is a private website. The owners of this website enjoy free speech here. The rest of us only post here at their pleasure.

[amc760]

Originally Posted by ConsideringLA

The problem is more complex than that. If you look by socio-economic status over time, there is more crime for downtrodden today than even at the worst parts of the great depression. We're talking even before the civil rights era.

this is a values issue more than anything else, IMO. Let's start with fatherless-ness.

Times have changed.

In the times of the great depression, you didn't have crack and guns flooding the streets.

People tend to make remarks about Latinos and Blacks being more violent than the criminals of the past(Italians, Irish, whatever), but its not the people and their values that have changed, its the times.

The rise of cheap, potent drugs has created a business worth a lot of money, and theres a lot of conflict over that money.


Thats why you look at the Latino gangs of the 30s-40s, and they were a lot more innocent back then than they are now.
The people didnt change, the streets did.


Think about it, really: how much violent crime these days is drug related?

[that1guy]

Bonnie and Clyde, Al Capone, Bugsy Siegel...the list goes on. All from the 1930s. Crime was very VERY high during the Great Depression. Guns were floodding the streets during the Great Depression. Alcohol Runners? Same thing. The details are different, but the premise remains the same...poor economic situations result in high crime. The reason why the stats are lower is because there was no FBI and police forces were not as sophisticated as they are today. Our modern police force is a direct result of the crime wave of the 1930s.

In the past (even as late as the 1970s), minority companies were not favored. Hence the need for caucuses. Now, there is more equality (not complete, but this inequality is fast becoming socio-economic) and maybe there is little need for minority caucuses. I do not agree with racial affirmative action, however, I see the benefits of socio-economic affirmative action. Poverty rates are per percentage. Minorities have higher poverty rates this means that while Whites have a higher numeric value of poor people, the actual percentage is of Whites in poverty is lower.

It has been proven time and time again that better education leads to more productive members of society. If you challenge and provide resources instead of giving up or assuming that since a person is poor or what not, you will notice a huge difference. There was a recent study at a major university that showed that perceptions of students affected the outcome. Two similar groups of students (same average GPA, same college, same percentage male/female) were given two different conditions and compared to each other. Condition one was positive prompting (This is an easy test, You are smart, You got this thing, etc) and a negative prompt (Hardest test ever, You are dumb, Give up). The first condition did better on average. Another similar study illustrated that teachers were more likely to practice negative reinforcement to male students. They found that the negatively reinforcement males were more likely to have behavior problems and also have worse test scores. There was a third study that placed inner city kids in a middle class suburban high school. On average the inner city kids did better at the middle class school than at their previous school. The number one reason cited in the study was that the suburban teachers were more likely to provide help and create a stimulating environment. All these studies support the idea of challenging and engaging students. Crime is not innate to a person most of the time. Crime is a product of environment (unless psychological issues are a factor). It goes to prove the socio-economic conditions of a community affect larger issues.

Plus marijuana legalization would also address the issue of money. Marijuana is taught in major universities as being benign. Most pre-med classes will say that there is no serious risks with marijuana use. The only impairment is memory and this is with serious long term use (like alcohol and Korsakoff syndrome...a memory deficit affecting the medial temporal lobe). Coke is dangerous since it affects MAOs. It blocks re-uptake of dopamine and can lead to cell death due to increase depletion of dopamine. Meth is the same thing, except it also accelerates the amount and rate of dopamine entering into the next neuron. Marijuana affects cannabinoid receptors...not related to what is now known to be the addiction receptors (dopamine...since dopamine is the reward signal). Science side out of the way. Alcohol and marijuana do not create the same affects in terms of domestic abuse. Drunks are more apt to be abusive, whereas stoners aren't. Again...more apt to be abusive. Thus there are drunks that are not abusive and stoners who are, but the majority follow this trend. Stats put that in the general population those people who are apt to get caught for possession are those at the lower economic end. Under California's three strikes law, there are more people in prison for possession than murder, rape, and kidnapping combined (study from Center on Juvenile and Criminal Justice in San Francisco). It creates a jam that taxpayers can't afford. Seeing how it is our state's largest crop, shouldn't it be taxed in order to better provide services? The number one cash crop in California is untaxed?! Wouldn't legalization not only create a system of taxation, but also potentially help the inner city with the increased revenue to the state? Hence helping poor people and help weather the current economic storm.

mvgordie, thanks for the compliments. For I have also enjoyed reading your posts. I agree that the blame game is a waste of time. Things that a person's great great grandparents did will not help the current situation. I feel that there will still be racism, but it can diminish to a small percentage of people.

cwcivicgirl. People who post issues connecting a race and crime out of anger is racist. If I was mad and said "Whites kill people" that is a racist remark...regardless of my temperament. Regardless of where they are coming from, it's still racist. If racist is basing attributes on race, and if one bases an attribute on race, then that person is racist. Had that person based it on other attributes then that person is not racist. I am not saying the person is evil and should die. Nor am I saying that they do not have a right to speak. Nor even am I saying that the rest of what they are saying is not valid. I am simply saying that the racist remark (again, basing a given attribute on race) is exactly that racist.

"People who make comments that put neighborhoods in xyz categories are probably because too many things from a particular race happened to them and they didn't see it as a coincidence." So said people will characterize millions of people because of a few bad things that happened to them? If this were the case I would be racist against everyone that is not mixed race or Asian. These are the only two races that I have had the least trouble with. But, see I don't believe that since a person is a given race, they have given attributes to harm me. I won't say that because of my bad day or a given neighborhood with a higher demographic of a certain race, that an entire group of people should be avoided. This is what people do when saying "Lake Elsinore has a lot of Hispanics and high crime. Why not Temecula?" It links that Lake Elsinore has Hispanics and crime, thus avoid Lake Elsinore since it has crime AND Hispanics. Instead of "Avoid Lakeland Village since it is a high crime area. Another city to consider is Temecula" It accurately states a neighborhood and does not link demographics and crime. It also still shows the preference of the poster. Since both examples cited Temecula as better, the information gathered is the same. However, in the first post it is racist since it correlates a race with an attribute (a quality of being racist).

Sorry it's lengthy. But I'm a pretty passionate person when it comes to this stuff.

[mvgordie]

Collideascope, yes your first amendment right is the right to freedom of expression and speech, however as for property lines your incorrect however correct as too City-Data.com and their ability and right to censer material on their site. I have the right to express myself and speak my mind on your property however you have the legal right to have me removed from your property for doing so. This right however does not come from any constitutional clause but from the rule of law (property laws).
The constitution is aimed at controlling the government and not the people, and thus I as a private citizen can't violate you constitution rights only those rights that are given to you under federal, state and local law.
The government must obtain a warrant to seek a drug test, however an employer unless barred by state law does not, for the government is barred by constitution from warrant less searches and seizures where an employer (if private) is not.
The only time an issue in the private sector would fall under a constitution issue would be base on a states constitution, such as in California where in certain situation you are protected in some privacy issues as set forth by amendments to that states constitution.
For example; An employer provides you with a locker at work to place your personal belongings in, and the method of locking it is by your placing a lock on such locker provided by you. This would provide you with a reasonable expectation of privacy and place the inside of such locker out of the reach of your employer. However if such securing method was provided by the employer, they are free to look inside at will, for you have no expectation of privacy because you are aware that they both have the knowledge of either the combo or the key to such lock (the same goes for desks etc.).
As per the use of this site or others for the purpose of constructive dialog,
I could personally see why it shouldn't be allowed, in fact as long as it has been handled and continues to be done in such a non hurtful way, it should be encouraged. I f in the event an individual seeks to miss use the privilege offered by such site, they and they alone should be sent packing.
I will apologise if for some reason or constructive dialog which seems to be quite fare, non insulting, and quite constructive has somehow offended you .

[planner]

The answer to your question is pure and simple: Racism

[eastidahomom]

Thatoneguy - I tried to give you a rep but it says I need to spread the love. Thank you for a very excellent post on a matter that I too, am very passionate about.

[that1guy]

Originally Posted by eastidahomom

Thatoneguy - I tried to give you a rep but it says I need to spread the love. Thank you for a very excellent post on a matter that I too, am very passionate about.

Hey, thanks...that means a lot actually.

[dtruthmatters]

I agree with you 1guy. Some people are just ignorant. Temecula has a bunch of racists. And I just moved here and I can already feel ignorant people around me. I see racist people in Temecula....hehehe.