marienbad wrote: » I am sure you could do a similar exercise on Limerick city in the 80's , and you would probably find that 85% of the crime was due to the inhabitants of about 4 housing estates . What do you think that tells us ?
demfad wrote: » What is your view on the fact that the population there is over 99% white? Pretty conclusive I would have thought.....
red ears wrote: » That would be a good point demfad of the same problem wasn't replicated right throughout America. There is obviously a problem with African Americans in terms of crime and poverty, gang membership, single parenthood etc. Whose responsibility is it to sort it out.
Zubeneschamali wrote: » Yet here in Ireland, there is obviously a problem with white people in terms of crime and poverty, gang membership, single parenthood etc. Perhaps the colour of people's skin is not that root cause in either case?
red ears wrote: » Perhaps so, above my pay-grade though i'm afraid. There is a problem though and it doesn't seem to be getting better. I hope someone can find a solution. America will be the better for it if they do.
demfad wrote: » If its above youre paygrade and you basically haven't got a clue what you are talking about then then why have you reached the conclusion that Crime is correlated to skin colour in the US? As its not based on reason it must be based on prejudice by definition: and prejudice based on skin colour is called racism. Again, please clear this up for us. I would encourage anyone who encounters racism to call it out. An excreble human being like Donald Trump cannot suceed in normalising it.
red ears wrote: » How is Trump normalising it?
marienbad wrote: » So what makes limerick different ?
Walter H Price wrote: » Similar stuff , Poverty , replace the large African American community with a large Traveler Community (both Minority with similar cultural issues) ... But honestly Limerick is Micky Mouse stuff compare to the ghetto districts in the US , not sure if you've ever been to places like Baltimore or the ghettoized parts of DC and LA but Limerick is no comparison at all to those places. Liberal views or not its undeniable that there is huge crime , drug abuse and other social issues in minority ghettos in the US be they African American or Latino .... Once upon a time it was the Irish and the Italians it was south Boston instead of Chicago , but i see no issue with Trump looking to address this issue you cant have heavily armed gangs controlling and battling it out for areas of urban centres
Brian? wrote: » So we're agreed, the problem is not to do with race, it's to do with the socio economic problems in the areas effected.
Brian? wrote: » Perhaps if we stopped thinking in terms of race and focused on the socio economic causes of crime it may help.
Brian? wrote: » So we're agreed, the problem is not to do with race, it's to do with the socio economic problems in the areas effected. Trump isn't looking to address the problems, he's tweeting nonsense about the problems. He can't "send in the Feds".
Walter H Price wrote: I more so however relate to Ron Paul , Gary Johnson and the libertarian stance that it is unlikely anything can change until the war on drugs is ended , i don't see the Republicans or Democrats supporting this idea, so in the meantime until we can all mature a bit i suppose a crack down in terms of s of heavier policing , maybe sending in the national guard is all he or anyone else can realistically do ... or take the Obama approach support further racial division (BLM) and bury your head the sand, not sure that can be seen as doing anything though to be honest.
El_Duderino 09 wrote: » Sending in the national guard would be similar to trying to secure Baghdad. There would be armed uniformed targets walking the streets. Your talking major engagements between national guard and drug gangs Unless you want to clear the ghetto and send the inhabitants elsewhere but I don't think anyone is suggesting that. Trump mused that he might send troops to Mexico to sort out the drug trafficking problem. Daft as that sounds, there's probably a better argument for it than sending troop to Yemen. Drugs cause real deaths and social problems in America. Terrorists just frighten americans, for the most part. How many deaths caused by drugs from south America vs terrorists from the middle East in the last 20 years (to cover 9/11 and ME wars). In the last year there were probably only a handful of deaths by Terrorism but tens of thousands of drug/drug gang related deaths. Not to mention the social problems.
Walter H Price wrote: Completely agree regards troops being better used to tackle drugs then terrorism , realistically that can be achieved through discontinuing military action abroad and restrictions on immigration from the middle east and north Africa , either boots on the ground in the ghettos an taking on the gangs directly or in mexico taking on the traffickers directly are better solutions then doing nothing ... legalization , regulation and control will eventually be recognized as the only workable solution but until that time taking on the gangs and traffickers directly is the best alternative.
jooksavage wrote: » This x 10000. Trump is not a conservative, either socially or fiscally. Plenty of self-proclaiming conservatives hitched their wagon to him because he wasn't Clinton. We'll get to see how true they are to their ideals when the prospect of trade tarriffs becomes a reality and the bill for the Wall arrives in the post.
El_Duderino 09 wrote: » Agreed. The war on drugs is a big industry and provides a lot of jobs in enforcement, imprisonment and layers. The war on terrorism is a vote winer through national security etc. I can't see anyone changing much in either area. Trump has found a way to capatalise on the drug problem by pointing to black lads being the problem (pleasing his base) while not committing to actually do anything about it (not disrupting the war on drugs industry). Having his cake and eating it. And people call him stupid.
Walter H Price wrote: US has a war economy has done since WW2 they cant afford to not be fighting someone or some thing
El_Duderino 09 wrote: » It's grand to fight the war on drugs but it would be disastrous to actually win it. Collateral damage from drugs us mostly poor people who are mostly black. That's acceptable, and he gets to tut at the dreadful minorities and their drug/social problems. Collateral damage from winning the war on drugs would be mostly white, middle class professional being made redundant. Can't have that.
OleRodrigo wrote: » There is the prison industrial complex. 2.5 million incarcerated in 2015. Much of the prison functions including parole are run by private corporations, who also benefit from prison labor at 25 c an hour (and if you call in sick, its solitary confinement ) Since the abolition of slavery, there has been some mechanism to oppress minorities and people of colour. Since then a variety of measures—from Jim Crow laws to President Richard Nixon's "war on drugs" and President Bill Clinton's "three-strikes-you're-out" legislation—have served to send increasingly large numbers of black men in prison. Corporations have reaped profits off the privatization of prisons and prison labor; some prisoners have gotten paid as little as 12 cents an hour, doing work for corporations, like Victoria's Secret and Walmart. It doesn't matter what ' side' you take - not being tough on crime is political suicide. Hillary Clinton supported the 1990s crime bill that led to a jump in the prison population from 1/2 a million to the amounts today. Trump supported the death penalty in the case of 5 innocent youths imprisoned for a murder. If you're a an African American, you have a one in three chance of going to prison over the course of your life. ( Source - 13th https://www.theguardian.com/film/2016/oct/09/13th-review-bracing-fiercely-intelligent-prison-documentary-ava-duvernay )
Walter H Price wrote: » I don't necessarily think its a racist system though , there are huge social issues in the black community's , had the system been as it is today from the 1900 - 1950's it would have been disproportionately full of Irish and Italian , it just so happens that since the 1960's the community with the biggest social issues has been the African American community , i feel part of this actually stemmed from the civil rights movement (the racial divisions of some the more hardline groups like the black panthers etc... ) where groups segregate themselves social issues become more pervasive as has happened with the african american community and is currently happening with the latino community , poverty and crime breed more poverty and more crime in a repetitious cycle that can only be broken be greater social integration. even here in a far more liberal prison system , in state control , not for profit we have a disproportionate amount of Travelers among the Irish prison population for the exact same reasons as the African Americans in the states
vetinari wrote: » A good comparison is between enforcement for drink driving and say a black drug like crack cocaine. I think most people would agree that drink driving should be a bigger offence than possessing 28 grams of crack cocaine. Drink driving though is rampant in the States. At least in Boston, there are no checkpoints. You're only at risk of arrest if you have an accident. If you somehow manage to get caught, you'll probably escape jail time. Drink driving is a majority white crime in the states, possessing crack cocaine is a majority black crime. Before recent federal reforms, you'd have gotten a minimum of 5 years in prison without parole for the crack cocaine.
Walter H Price wrote: » US has a war economy has done since WW2 they cant afford to not be fighting someone or some thing
