I'll admit to being quite guilty of this, but I think that most kids growing up in middle to upper class families are told that ghetto neighborhoods in inner cities are essentially akin to mini-war zones and that if a white middle class kid walks into those neighborhoods that its almost inevitable that you will be robbed, mugged, or even shot/stabbed by somebody. While there's no question about it that these neighborhoods are more dangerous than a standard middle class suburb. I'm curious as to whether our perception of danger is exaggerated? What really are the chances that somebody would be shot just for walking around those neighborhoods? I'm certainly not eager to do a real experiment to see if this is the case, but I am still curious. Almost everybody here is probably middle to upper class themselves so we probably don't have the best answers for this but I'm curious to see what people think.
Regional crime statistics are published and available on-line. I personally would not walk around Washington Park or Brooklyn Illinois at night under any circumstance. There are neighborhoods that cab drivers won't go to and that is for valid reasons.
Shot? Extremely low. Violent muggings are way down, although were more of an issue in the 80s. I do have friends who have been mugged in the less savory parts of Oakland or LA, but it's usually more "give me your wallet or I'll cut you" thing.
Most of my friends lived in "hip" neighborhoods in our 20s, which often are butting up against and pushing out "worse" neighborhoods.
Some cities have a lot more racial tension than others. So there's probably a little danger even in the nicest neighborhood and a little more danger in the worst ones. But a lot of "bad" neighborhoods the gangs want upper class white people to be able to buy drugs.
I was thinking that myself that the gangs wouldn't want the neighborhoods to be too dangerous because rich kids are a huge drug consuming customer base that you don't want to scare away. If they're afraid setting foot in your neighborhood might get them shot you lose out on some of your best customers.
Over exaggerated NO. I frequently go into Washington Park and Brooklyn IL and will not be out just walking around. Even Worse is North St Louis MO. I have been approached numerous times by “beggars” while scoping the scene to see their buddies around the corner. My confident walk and the pistol on my belt usually is all I have to do to keep them walking. However, the danger of being shot probably comes more from stray bullets that are shot by those who don’t know how to hit what they are aiming at. A 22 bullet can travel a good mile if it misses its target. Do not take the chance. If you look like an easy mark, you will be approached. I’m older and that is why I look like a mark, but I confront head on and pay attention to surroundings if I have to (or want to) be in those areas. The gang bangers are real. Shit happens and it happens often.
There are 2 types of bad areas, one that are hip, have history, people want to see get better and then the places the cities dont care about. When I younger I worked in just a bad area (8 or so years ago) I was robbed at gun point, almost got in a fist fight over 50 cents, the gas station nearby got robbed at gun point every other month, a couple people were killed, the section 8 housing near by changed its name every 6 months in Hope's people wouldn't realize it was the same place on the news every few weeks. I also worked in a up and coming area, I never had any problems other than homeless people. So in my opinion if there are reasons to visit the bad area, ie history, restaurants and stuff it's usually fine. But areas were all the stores have knock off names, no restaurants or reason to visit, they are places you dont want to be ever.
I've been to some of the 1 type of area you mention, where it has restaurants and history and stuff like that in Petersburg. Petersburg is a pretty rough town, especially at night even in the nicer areas. Its kind of that feeling where the restaurant itself feels safe, I would be very surprised to see anything happen inside, but the parking lot can be pretty damn sketchy. I'm guessing in the latter part though, the parts the city doesn't care about, that everywhere is dangerous.
"Bad Neighborhoods" may have a higher crime rate, but I have never found them to be particularly dangerous. Mostly it is just an emotional reaction.
They have long done surveys. The people who show the most fear of crime are always those who live in neighborhoods with the lowest crime rates. Whereas those who live in high crime rate neighborhoods, they never cite crime as a major concern of theirs.
A lot of it is always race and class prejudice, coming from people who do not interact with a very diverse segment of our population.
By "hip" you mean a neighborhood that's being gentrified.... Basically a low rent area where developers force residents out to make room for incoming upwardly mobile white people.
As for perceptions of danger, a lot goes into it. I don't think anything happens for no reason. There's always a reason behind it. And cities are different... In my experience these kinds of neighborhoods are more sad than they are dangerous. If you live in the neighborhood or are known there, when shit goes down there's usually someone there to help try to de-escalate it so that it doesn't come down to too much violence. Then its all about how intimidating you can be, its not even respect... that's a thing of the past. Hoods are pretty self regulated. It used to be that gangs wouldn't prey on the people in their hoods, but thats changing now too.
Even if you obviously don't fit in, you'll be fine during the day. At night it just depends on your luck and the dynamics of the neighborhood.
From what I've seen in LA, you're more likely to be attacked by homeless tweakers and wannabe gang members than by actual gang members. A lot of gang violence is about drug turfs and bitches.
But the prevalent vibe is just sadness, the places are depressing...
I have many friends whose parents are struggling & otherwise can only afford to live in the not so goo neighborhoods. I visited them Neighborhood several times & have never been mugged nor shot...
Often as long as you mind you business, you will be safe...
On numerous occasions, I have had young boys walk up to & ask if I wanted to buy some weed...
I usually tell them “I’m Good Bro” and they leave
On numerous occasions, I have also had homeless people approach me & ask for money...
I usually tell them “I don’t have any cash on me” and they leave...
I’m Black so that might play a role...
But I seriously think White people particularly are just so scared...
I have now known a lot of people within such neighborhoods & they usually wave at me whenever I walk across them...
Most times, I stop & have a chitchat & other times I’m in a hurry I usually keep it moving...
I think the crimes in this communities tend to be overblown sometimes by the media...
I think age has alot to do with it. There was a game called the knock out game, literally it was just walking up to a random person and trying to knock them out in 1 punch. It lost some steam when a kid accidentally killed someone, recorded it and put it on Facebook without knowing the guy died.
I don't know about that. He'd be fine during the day and at night they'd think he's there to buy something. at worst he'd get robbed, beaten up a little
Lol @Flagooner I thought you might have a little fun with Eva's response.
I am the definition of somebody who should not be going into bad neighborhoods. At the same time though, I think I could find a way to not look quite so much like a sheltered white boy from the suburbs. I tend to dress very casual, not "street" but I do wear hoodies a lot and joggers, sweatpants, or cargo pants. If I wore one of my hoodies, put my hood up, kept my head down, put my hands in my pockets and walked fast I probably would actually blend in a lot better than you'd expect.
As for him being safer because he is black, its a well known fact that high crime neighborhoods are hotbeds of racial tensions. If you don't belong to the race of the majority of the neighborhood, that's just one reason why they might target you. A white person going into a high crime area that's majority black has more to worry about than a black person doing the same even if they are both from middle class backgrounds just like a white person is safer walking into a trailer park than a black person is even if they're both from middle class backgrounds. Its a basic matter of anything that might draw attention to you would be a problem.
If you're a skinny guy, one thing you have to watch out for are ghetto booty bandits. This shit is getting more common, at least here anyways. These guys who have been in prison a while and get out, kinda stay bi. If you're smaller than them, they'll want to fuck you. If you're bigger they'll want to suck your dick.
SJG, that's good. I actually like to walk. Drive only when I have to. I'd ride a bike but I'm too scared of the drivers here! You made a brave decision!
My dad used to get in fights daily for being white in Los Angeles. My grandparents moved because of it. Admittedly, i believe my dad has been an incredible dick since birth...
If we're talking about the whole city of Tijuana and not just Hong Kong, then I think there's a huge difference between a US ghetto, even one in Chicago, and the city with the highest rate of homicide in the entire world where drug cartels have pitched gun battles on the streets with the police. Where in the United States would anything like this ever happen.
In the first video, three completely innocent, normal people with no affiliations with drug gangs whatsoever were intentionally killed by the cartel gunmen for no reason other than they happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time. Its not just a matter of "not being an idiot." That guy was just trying to put some gas in his car and the cashier was just trying to have an ordinary job.
^^^^ @eva and @Icey quotes And no, they aren't being used out of context.
"I’m Black so that might play a role..."
Me: why?
@eva: "@flagooner
Because I look & dress as a gangster "
@eva: "@Iceycoco
Maybe you can explain to Flagooner why CC99 would get robbed & beaten up a little at Night but not you..."
I'm guessing he is asking @Icey to explain because he is black too.
@Icey: "I can come across as intimidating enough to not get fucked with."
------------------
1. Why would someone need to appear "thuggish" or "intimidating" just to not get beat up in certain neighborhoods?
2. Am I the only one who gets confused when AAs accuse cops of racial profiling when they apparently intentionally portray a "thuggish" and "intimidating" persona?
Great advice Eva lol. I will kick my own fucking ass before I say wassup bro. I speak to everyone the same way, maybe using different words. Nothing makes you a target more than pretending to be something you're not. The only concession I make when going to a club in a horrible neighborhood in Philadelphia or Bridgeport is talking the wife's impreza instead of the WRX to make sure my ride is still there when I'm done.
We either have some very bad ass members or I've been overly cautious. Apparently, gang members can't tell posers from authentic and Huffy bikes create bullet proof force fields.
Next time I find my 60 year old white ass in Washington Park Illinois after midnight, I will just wear a Duke Blue Devils jersey, call everyone Bro Bro, and ride around on a bicycle. As long as I don't have any race or class prejudices, I should be fine. .
I grew up in Brooklyn in the 1960s & 70s, was a city kid, knew how to spot trouble and avoid it, the same rules still apply, they haven’t changed. I also know how to take care of myself and anyone I’m with, I very rarely if ever have a problem anyplace. For all of you tough guys out there if you seek trouble it’s always there, doesn’t matter who you are, remember there’s always someone tougher than you, don’t be surprised if that polite humble guy you start in with is strapped or a trained combat veteran, I find that being polite, speaking nicely and ignoring those wassup bros is usually the best strategy BTW if y’all need to defend yourself bring as much violence as quickly as possible and get the fuck out of dodge as quickly as you can.
Evafaggot, if I was in North Carolina I would fuck with your pussy fake gangsta ass any day of the week. You're not even a US citizen so how fucking bad ass can you be? Just a pussy little bitch that couldn't make it in your own country so you had to come here and life off of us until you got your shitty fucking job, and you butch constantly how your some badass hard worker but you're never going to amount to anything because you have no marketable skills, you got some skank methhead girlfriend thsy you think is hot, but definitely fucks other guys for drugs, and deep down all you really are is just a little bitch with an accent that talks shit about the country that let you stay here and about everyone that doesnt think you're awesome. You've been on this site less than a week and your only "friends" here are the people universally hated by the community. If you seriously think you're a badass, that's even funnier when you get your ass handed to you. Because you're the type that would blame the sun being in your eyes or some other shit as the reason you got owned. You're a mental midget, who let's guys like me life rent free in your head, you get mad at people who tell you the truth, that your a faggy little pussy bitch. You'll die of cancer or from your lifeless drugged out body getting gangbanged by 20 dudes long before you ever get the right to vote.
These days it depends on the neighborhood. In NYC, the worst neighborhoods are in Brownsville (brooklyn) and most of the Bronx. HOWEVER, they don't go out of their way randomly starting trouble with a passerby. Even gang initiations pick on freshly minted gangsters from rivaling sets.
Police also NEVER help perception in that since they police themselves, they HAVE been caught lying about their numbers and what they do, sometimes a neighborhood looks worse than it is.
Your local news station is a blessing and a curse all for the sake of ratings (which are dying thanks to the internet) as they sometimes overhype and sometimes downplay severities of a neighborhood.
the majority race and those not black or Hispanic are too easily swayed and frightened by what they think is true, never do enough of their own research and since they don't bother to leave their bubble are content with information, misconstrued or otherwise. Kind of makes you question the whole stereotypes of "asians being smart".
Then racism is your biggest contributor to overblowing perception of demographic and geographic.
If I needed a gun to feel safe I don't go there. Further, as a drinker who loves to drink, I drink much less if I am in a rougher neighborhood, compared to what I would drink at Club Desire, the Inner Room, etc.
"Next time I find my 60 year old white ass in Washington Park Illinois after midnight, I will just wear a Duke Blue Devils jersey, call everyone Bro Bro, and ride around on a bicycle. As long as I don't have any race or class prejudices, I should be fine. ."
Lol, I think this is my favorite comment in this thread.
Eva does strike me as somebody who is trying too hard to put on a tough guy image. He sounds exactly like a wannabe gangster to me.
As for SJG, San Jose doesn't have any real ghettos. The city is incredibly safe. I looked up the crime statistics and the city of San Jose is a really safe city. With a population of nearly a million people they only have 20-30 homicides per year which is about half the national average. SJG can ride on a bicycle because his city is a very sheltered city. I've seen some people similar attitudes where I've grown up, where some kids don't think ghettos are that bad or people just have classist prejudice because the "bad neighborhoods" where I live are a complete joke.
^ one thing I can tell you for sure is that most of the wanna be gangsters posting here with their big brass balls and stupid remarks, if they acted like that IRL they’d be wearing toe tags.
All Evasparkling said was that you have to act like you're not out of place, act confident and not out of place and you should be fine. If you're a white person who looks like he doesn't fit in, and are in a poor minority neighborhood yeah you'll stick out and unless you're assertive and confident about your presence there, someone may very well fuck with you.
The East Side San Jose is pretty much a ghetto, although not as bad as ghettos in many other cities.
I live in a senior citizen community of 155 homes. The regulations state that 95% of the homes must have at least 1 person age 55 or over and further that all homes must be owner occupied. I'm guessing that the racial make up is 85% white and 15% black.
A few months ago a black family moved in down the street that doesn't have any one 55 or older living there but does have elementary school kids. That is legal by the regulations. They are the only family with school aged kids. The bus even picks them up and drops them off right at their house.
My question is why would a family want to move into a neighborhood full of old people and no other kids? I keep getting the same answer. That family feels more secure. At least I never have to tell them to get off my lawn.
Lots of people criticize East San Jose. It does not look like suburbs. But it doesn't bother me.
True, one community activist was killed recently, but it was a stray bullet. He had nothing to do with it.
San Jose, for its size, has a fairly low crime rate.
And besides, bicycle riding is incredibly fun.
I think most people are over reacting about the perception of danger. Survey after survey shows that those who worry the most about crime live in what are statistically the safest neighborhoods. And most of their crime fear is cross racial.
People who live in inner cities which do have high crime rates never list crime as a thing they are very concerned about.
East side San Jose is fine. The whole city has a pretty low crime rate.
People living in high crime areas just get used to it. People in safe neighborhoods are scared of crime because we wouldn't know how to handle a situation like that if it was to arise. People who grow up in high crime areas kind of just learn how to avoid trouble or be intimidating enough that they can get out of trouble when it is forced on you, as TwentyFive said. That doesn't mean a sheltered kid from the suburbs is safe walking through a ghetto though.
Not really. There are black families in upper class neighborhoods too and they are treated exactly the same as white families. Its more about the fact that certain neighborhoods are objectively more dangerous.
Most people that live in bad-hoods are not criminals, they just have extenuating circumstances - but there is def a level of crime and violence present in the bad-hoods that is not present in the avg working-class and middle-class hoods - if one is in a bad-hood occasionally or just passes thru, doesn't mean one will be a victim of crime - but if one is in the bad-hoods all the time or lives there, likely they will see a fair-share of drama that the occasional visitor will likely not experience.
There are crime statistics, but then there are people's subjective feelings. Usually when people feel fear of crime in a neighborhood, then they are also under appreciating the sorts of dangers they could be subjected to other places.
With most rapes the two parties know each other and are of the same race.
But most fear of rape is cross racial stranger rape.
I recall a couple of years back leaving a black club in the hood (Liberty City area of Miami where the Pork- and-Beans projects are featured in the show 'The First 48"; I think those projects are no longer) - anyway I was leaving the club around 2 am - I merge onto a 4 lane street (2 lanes in each direction) - I was driving slow and in the right-most lane as I had just merged onto the street, and it was late (there were no cars on the road) - all of a sudden a late-model sedan blows by me doing like 120 on the city street, never saw him coming and if I would have happened to pull out in front of him a few seconds earlier good-chance I would have been killed receiving the blunt of that impact - anyway it was an upscale sedan (couldn't tell what model) so it was quiet and smooth so I didn't see nor hear him coming as he blew past me at ~120 (nor was I expecting it being late and no other cars around).
Just after he blows by me there is a set of train-tracks where the road elevates by a couple of degrees and then de-elevates by a couple of degrees where the tracks are - dude didn't know about the train-tracks and hits them at 120 and goes airborne - he lands two lanes over to the right (he was on the left-lane of two-lanes, but after the train tracks there was a 3rd lane to make a right into a some kinda building) - anyway he goes airborne lands two lanes over with sparks flying everywhere as he bottoms out and the car-bottom hits the pavement about 3-times - somehow me managed to keep control (I'm guessing it being a high-end sedan it had good suspension and handling which aided in him somewhat keeping control of the car).
It could have been much worse b/c in that hood there are a few people on the street at all hours of the night and crossing that street - him losing control of the car was not my worst fear in that at that speed anyone crossing the street would not have had a chance and it being nighttime he may also not see them - it was kinda surreal.
It is true that you're more likely to die from a car accident than homicide. But somebody growing up in a rough neighborhood is probably more likely to die from homicide.
The greatest fear of crime is found among those who live in places such that they will more likely die of a car accident.
And the greatest fear of cross racial stranger rape is found among those who will most likely experience same race date or acquainted rape.
And when it comes to women it was Dr. Ruth who found out that their sexual fantasies and their sexual horrors are basically the same, just with minor changes to some of the details.
It's also important to note that poverty exists coz wealth exists. These neighborhoods aren't poor or dangerous coz of minorities. It's government neglect, developer neglect, police neglect and the exploitation of underclasses
It's also important to note that poverty exists coz wealth exists. These neighborhoods aren't poor or dangerous coz of minorities. It's government neglect, developer neglect, police neglect and the exploitation of underclasses
Poverty doesn't necessarily exist because wealth exists. While yes there is a limited amount of resources to go around, a society in general can become more resource rich and "wealthy." Consider the fact that the average American actually has a much higher standard of living than kings did in the 19th century. Not more space necessarily or a bigger household, but better healthcare, more variety of entertainment options, as well as the comfort of heating and air conditioning. You're better off being poor in America during the 21st century than middle class in Medieval Times.
Resources richness occurs because of the advance of technology. The more technology advances, the more we are able to produce more resources with less effort. The percentage of people who lived in poverty during the 18th and 19th centuries was around 60%. Poverty wasn't even weird, it was the norm. Most people were poor. The middle class would've been seen as being lowkey rich whereas middle class today is the norm.
So theoretically, poverty can actually be eliminated if society became resource rich enough. That can only occur through technological progress though, otherwise, its up to us to figure out how best to distribute the resources we do have.
Karl Marx for example railed against the bourgeois even more than he did against the aristocracy. He did this because what we now define as middle class was more so seen as kind of rich back then.
I wouldn't say where I grew up was a high crime area, but, Brooklyn being a part of NYC with 24 hour busses and subways, it's very easy for thugs to be mobile, and out of their own hood, but most folks, that live in cities all over the world develop a radar, sort of a spidey sense, and are adept at avoiding trouble, and capable of taking care of themselves, in most situations that arise. More often the perpetrators of crime in NYC, and other metro areas with good access to public transportation, are not acting in their own hood, but with the ease of hopping down the subway, crime is more of the pop up variety, where the perps, go somewhere they won't be recognized.
The kind of poverty we have today is entirely the product of Industrial Capitalism. There is no resource scarcity in play, just resource control and economic harvesting.
Bourgeoisie and Middle-Class, as used today, mean mostly the same thing. It would be better to say, 'middle-classes', as it is highly stratified.
What makes someone part of the middle-classes is not a level of income, it is a way of thinking, a reactionary system of identification.
So as Deleuze and Guattari drive home, there is no other class besides the bourgeoisie, but there are still those who support the interests of the bourgeoisie and those who oppose such interests.
Marx and Engels talk about the bourgeoisie, because with the French Revolution, the bourgeoisie took over. Marx and Engels want the bourgeoisie to be replaced by the Proletariat. This is not really poor versus rich, it's more two different ways of thinking.
The property owners invest next to nothing in low income areas.... hence poor housing conditions. Property owners pay low property taxes there, so you get poor schools, and a local gov that couldn't care less about community development, crime and infrastructure problems coz they don't see the area as profitable to their self interests. This marginalizes the communities and leads to social decay ie gangs, crime, a sense of lawlessness, mistrust for any authorities...
Race then becomes a euphemism for social class in the US, and white America can justify hating and fearing poor brown people.
Some of it also is just a Rent vs Buy issue. In rental areas, as we have no rent control, tenants eventually figure out that letting the place look bad is the only form of rent control they have.
I for one made life real hell for some new owners. :) :) :)
Statistics exaggerate things. The university I attended had the highest violent crime rate in the nation the first year I attended. The school won a national championship the year before and some people celebrated too much. Some students were a bit out of control. Bonus, I got into a fun snow ball fight with about 5000 students at one time. It was about 3000 versus 2400 and I helped lead a charge as volleys of ice balls mixed with snow pelted everyone. I also heard half the states drunk driving arrests were on the campus roads.
Another example, the current place where I work I heard you don't want to live there. Don't stay at the hotel where there were 4 murders. I checked crime statistics , the city has higher violent crime than 90% of the country. Then I checked my safe city where I live. Higher than 95% of the country.
Reliable statistics can be difficult to find I will agree with that. Sometimes even statistics that look reliable are not.
That's why I've now thought that its important to gain personal experience and then see if it lines up with what statistical data supports. In high school I used to trust statistics and research data over everything. But there have been so many cases in my life where I've seen the results of a "research study" that made absolutely no sense at all which made me lose faith in the information gathering methods. A really recent example of this actually just came up...
I'm taking a course right now that's teaching us how to use technology and different programs to create podcasts and animated videos and stuff like that. Well, during the readings of one of those courses, they said the average college student spends most of their time on the computer studying instead of playing videos games or going on social media. It then goes on to say the average college student studies 2-4 hours per day as opposed to 1-2 hours of recreational online time.
I'm sorry but, I have been around enough college students to be well aware of what our study habits actually look like. And I know for a fact that the majority of college students have atrocious studying habits. I have a 3.3 GPA and I also have atrocious studying habits. 2-4 hours per day? The reality is more like 2-5 hours per week. I've seen scores of students who basically do absolutely nothing. The only people who work hard in college are the overachievers who feel like they have to get straight As and are terrified of disappointing their parents. And even then, I know some kids who can get straight As with almost no effort. I also know for a fact that a lot of students have told me they lie on those very same surveys about their studying habits because they don't want the school or their professors to know how little they study. I hate to say it, but I've lied on those surveys too. I even commented on this "study" to several other students and they called it fake news because we all know that's not true.
Another thing is that despite researchers thinking their studies show a lot of underage drinking in college. They actually underestimate it. Studies often say that 80% of college students under 21 drink, I've even seen some studies claiming only 60% of college students do but that's just laughable. My professor however, did an unofficial survey of our sociology class one time and asked how many students regularly drink alcohol and 95% of the class said yes. And this is a required gen-ed class of primarily freshmen and sophomore students that everybody has to take with over 100 students taking that course. Almost nobody in there claimed to be a sociology major so you can't just say sociology majors drink a lot. Furthermore, my professor said he does this survey every year and that the answer is always about the same. If you were to look up the official statistics for how many students at my school drink though, it claims that its 85%.
There are many other examples which has caused me to lose faith but this post would be even longer than it already is.
Statistics don't mean much when used in laymen's arguments. You can find stats for anything and use them outside of their intended contexts.
The reality is, safety and danger are relative to one's sense of deprivation of one or the other.
The reality is though that there are plenty of neighborhoods where if you go out, your mom is gonna worry about you coming home. Or where you risk being attacked if you're perceived weak ie the elderly or disabled, homeless, etc.
Perceptions about the risks associated with locations are often way off base.
Studies show that people usually believe that locations with which they are less familiar are more dangerous than their own neighborhoods. This perception often persists even when the person’s local neighborhood has a high crime rate.
Perceptions are also strongly influenced by what risks are considered normal or customary. I grew up in Texas. I was never worried about crime in Texas until I went to live in London, England. Then, upon returning to Texas, I realized how high the crime rate (especially the murder rate) is in Texas compared to where I had been living the last few years. Texas felt much less safe to me than it had before I had a safer place to compare it to.
reverend, people in the ghetto think their own hoods are dangerous coz they see violence and crime on a daily basis. statistics don't matter.... a number may feel small to someone not affected by it, but its something else to those who witness and or experience it.
There's also the fact that the most extreme forms of violence are present because smaller, more frequent forms of violence in unsafe areas are very common. Wherever you see more homicide you will also see more fighting in schools, more bar fights, more abusive parenting. Violence exists as a culture and it starts small. 100% of violent inmates surveyed at San Quentin suffered from extreme levels of violence in their home life growing up from their parents. 100%. That's an astonishing number. 69% of juvenile delinquints experienced extreme violence growing up and 31% experienced severe violence at the hands of their parents. A violent criminal who did not have a violent home life is extremely rare.
I am not making excuses for them, but who is worse, the criminal or the person who made the criminal who he is?
^ ROFLMAO CC posts this but less than 16 hrs ago he posts this:
"Reliable statistics can be difficult to find I will agree with that. Sometimes even statistics that look reliable are not.
That's why I've now thought that its important to gain personal experience and then see if it lines up with what statistical data supports. In high school I used to trust statistics and research data over everything. But there have been so many cases in my life where I've seen the results of a "research study" that made absolutely no sense at all which made me lose faith in the information gathering methods..."
Yeah I saw the contradiction while I was writing it, but it does make logical sense, and its something that has been confirmed by many people who have worked closely with violent criminals.
I have lost faith in research studies even though I love using them. I naturally want to use them because it provides me an easy answer to everything I wonder about. But at the same time, some are so far off base that I realized I can't trust all of them.
Basically, I look at research studies now and use them as a starting point. After that I try to think about whether it makes logical sense and then look up personal anecdotes. If both confirm the same story. I think its probably true. If there are major differentiations between what is reported in the study vs what people on the ground are saying is true, however, I feel I have reason to be suspicious of it.
No I have just noticed that often times, things get doctored. Let's look at another example... Almost all the information regarding number of casualties and troop numbers in this article is false...
I want to direct your attention specifically to the information saying that 1,200-1,400 Iraqi soldiers were killed in the entire battle of Mosul. This is not only false, it is way way off base. In December, the UN reported that 2,000 Iraqi soldiers had been killed just in the month of November. The battle of Mosul went on for 9 months and caused massive casualties to the invading Iraqi forces. However, the Iraqi government was infuriated at the UN for publishing these statistics and told them they were "bolstering the spirit of the enemy." So the UN rescinded their statistics and stopped reporting on the dead completely per the government's request.
"Iraqi forces have sustained heavy casualties from ISIS VBIED and ambushes when they pushed forward without properly clearing and securing areas.34 More than 2,000 Iraqi special forces were killed in November 2016.35 The Iraqi military command has ordered that no casualty figures be disclosed until the offensive is finished." This report was later made from an independent source.
In addition, if you go back to the Wikipedia article. The Iraqi commanders are claiming to have killed anywhere from 7,000 ISIS militants to 25,000. This is despite reports from US and Iraqi sources before the battle even begun that there were only 5,000 ISIS militants in the city to begin with. How could they have killed more militants than were even inside the city? Furthermore, how the hell did the Iraqi soldiers, assuming their reports on their own casualties were in-fact, true, manage to kill 5-15 militants for every one of their own soldiers getting killed, while attacking a massive city riddled with mines, suicide bombers, and car bombs? Almost every general thoroughout history has noticed that if a besieging force almost always needs a minimum of outnumbering the enemy 3 to 1 in order to launch a successful assault against a fortified city but often times the attackers need to outnumber the defenders 5 to 1 because of the prediction that an assault on a fortified settlement will result in major casualties for the attackers. If an attacking general manages to conquer a fortified settlement with numbers of soldiers less than that, it is purely a result of tactical brilliance because that rarely works. The advantage that being in a fortified settlement gives you over an attacking army is enormous.
^ What does statistical data compiled from a war zone have to do with the perception of dangerous neighborhoods. Of course information from a war zone is going to be unreliable. I think you’re just reaching looking for a way to justify your own confirmation bias.
No I think the stats compiled by the FBI from dangerous neighborhoods are probably accurate. The police investigate every case of homicide and determine what it is. The only thing is that some homicides may be doctored afterward to look like suicides or accidents in which case it won't be considered a homicide. My guess is actually that the stats make it look less dangerous than it really is instead of more.
The stats aren't accurate. They only included reported incidents that were investigated. Most occurrences aren't reported and cops don't show up to a ghetto for things like gun shots, fights, etc.
I used the example of the Iraqi police/military casualties in Mosul to illustrate the kind of the things that caused me to lose faith in certain things. But yes, I'm obviously aware that some statistics are more reliable than others and that information from a warzone is less likely to be reliable. And there's logical reasons why I believed one statistic over the other.
For the first time in my history as a user of TUSCL, I've had to put someone on ignore because he has proven himself time and time again that he is incapable of contributing in a thoughtful way to discussions and is just trying to aggravate people.
Wikipedia is actually a pretty good source contrary to what a lot of people think. Everything published to Wikipedia is coming from somewhere as they are required to source their material which is then approved by other writers who check those sources and decide if they are accurate. I don't think Wikipedia is anymore likely to get something wrong than any other source.
I'd take 25 over SirLDK any day. SirLDK's posts are absolutely brainless, there's no substance to them whatever. Not even substance in a goofy way like txtittyfag is, its just idiotic.
I would never bank accuracy on any Wikipedia article. If it is used for anything of true importance, those “references” will be Checked. Anybody can add to and/or change data without good peer review. I have done it myself just to check. Nope, this dude will never reference that site as an accurate source for anything. It is a fun writing of some good stuff, but I look at it as “fun and interesting” reading at best.
FBI crime statistics about a neighborhood probably are accurate. But crime is not a random thing. Even in a high crime neighborhood, the chances that you will become a victim of random stranger crime is probably still far less than the chances of becoming a crime victim in connection with your own actions, or with you closest associates.
Fear of stranger danger is deliberately marketed in order to create fear and to drive the electorate to the Right.
Your best chances of being a victim of a crime is in a tourist corridor when it comes to stranger on stranger crime.
Flagooner, its not about an instinct for aggression. Its about living in an economically depressed area with no real hope or options and wanting a slice of what white America's consumerism is trying to sell.
Hey fat boy want a slice of what white america’s consumerism’s trying to sell, get a job then you can make some money and buy it knucklehead, try preaching that to the members of your ignorant jealous hate group.
25, go to an economically depressed area with shit schools, no job opportunities, no career training options, where people can't afford to commute to other parts of the city, where they're victimized by the police, taken advantage of by real estate developers and price gouged by business owners, and just tell them to find jobs, start saving money and get off their lazy asses.... I'm sure you'll be welcomed as a savior.
Flagooner, your whole presence in these kinds of threads revolves around you passively aggressively making racist comments.
Big difference between you and me fat boy I’ve actually accomplished a few things in my life, I doubt you’ve ever accomplished anything, I have built a successful business, have good long term relationships with many people, I do some mentoring for at risk young people, I actually provide real jobs to real people. All you ever do is speak out of your ignorance and attack every single thing from a standpoint of jealousy and hatred, I’m sure no one that matters holds you in very high regard.
So basically, you're saying that if you can accomplish financial stability with your privileged backgrounds, the under privileged should be able to do the same. What an argument.
So fat boy focuses on the money, yet he misses the forest for the trees, the gist of my statement was never about financial stability, not only are you stupid, you’re boring and petty.
I'm saying you could put your time towards more productive activities than making excuses. Making excuses is for losers, and it's cyclical. A kind of self-fulfilling prophesy.
People worry about neighborhood, stranger danger. But most crime comes from one's own circle of acquaintances. People underestimate the types of problems which can develop.
Fat boy misses the fact that poverty is absolutely a personal choice, you can strive to do well or you can quit, that jackass is just looking to justify quitting.
Flagooner, the capitalistic racist causes of urban ghettos are not non human. White America's perception of the urban poor is inhumane.
20fag, so all those starving people in concentration camps or the Warsaw Ghetto chose to be there. Starving orphans with AIDS in Africa just need to man up and work hard. Homeless vets and disabled people chose their lives. So social problems don't exist, its just that these "losers" are too lazy to man up and be "successful" like you.
We were talking about this country, but you just can’t keep on a topic can you, first off the folks living so called in ghettos,or bad neighborhoods in the USA are most probably better off than those in better neighborhoods in Biafra, the Warsaw ghetto was sealed by an oppressive army and there was an intensifying genocide perpetrated on its inhabitants. You are just being an idiot, SMH
25, you said poverty is a choice. You didn't say that poverty is only a choice in the US. So you mean the Warsaw Ghetto was kinda like Native American Reservations in this country? Are American ghettos better than the ones in Calcutta coz poor Americans make better choices? They chose a lesser form of abject poverty???
^ It is a choice here, you have no clue what real poverty is, you just can’t deny self gratification long enough to get to a reasonable level of comfort. Unless there is genuine oppression ala the Venezuelan government or what’s happened in Somalia people all over the world Attain a level that they are able to live in reasonable comfort. That’s not to say reasonable comfort is the same all over the world but for the purpose of this discussion I am referring to the USA, you always have a choice, if you choose to buy those new kicks instead of the food your children need don’t blame me for your children’s predatory behavior nor complain when I shoot them in self defense.
I will leave it at this. There are many examples of people coming here with nothing but the clothes on their back and making a good honest living.
My in laws are a prime example. He came here from Cuba in his 50s without a formal education, unable to speak English. Through hard work and sacrifice within 3 years they moved to a better neighborhood. He put his only daughter through an inexpensive private school. And she worked her way through college and a Masters program.
This BS of there being no hope is a choice, and in these neighborhoods it is often a cultural choice. Stop feeling sorry for yourself and accomplish something.
Somalia is a libertarian paradise. Why did you mention foreign countries when you claim to be talking solely about the US though? So now you're getting into racist stereotypes and assuming someone buys new sneakers instead of feeding their kids? Where did that assumption come from? Now you're saying that its justified to shoot poor minority children because of their predatory behavior? Is your racism a choice? Your classicism? Your desire to kill someone who you vilify for being poor??? You need to take a look in the mirror. People like you are the biggest problem in this country. The person you choose to be.
Flagooner, so now you're saying white Cubans are superior to brown immigrants from other countries. Yeah it must have been a lot easier 50 years ago, being white and benefiting from segregation.
Now I’m a racist because you can’t deny self gratification, son you have an awful lot to learn, but you’ll never learn it, instead of finding a way to improve your conditions you’d rather tear everyone down to your level. Still SMH
^ unlike you I offer them legitimate solutions to break the cycle of poverty, get what they need and want, through their own efforts, which in turn builds their self esteem, which people like you try to destroy, and never offer justification for taking what rightly belongs to another person.
Feeling good about yourself ends poverty? Its all about choosing to feel good and not be poor or you'll shoot them coz people want to rob you, right? Coz sustainable development isn't the answer, its all just a personal choice.
Do you cross the street when you see a black guy at night? Or do you "have black friends"?
Nothing racial about my posts unless you are twisting things to suit your narrative. I'm talking about bad neighborhoods. That typically means economically disadvantaged to me, regardless of race. I wouldn't have brought up my in laws if I was referring to race, but then you bring it up.
I don't see anything constructive about blaming the poor for their own poverty. People attack people for "quitting" and stuff like that but people only give up after they've been trying hard for a long time and continue failing. I really have no idea what its like to grow up poor and don't have any right to tell them that this is what they should do and that that's somehow going to magically work. I think its more constructive to just listen to them and ask what they think the problem is. Most say that its because there are not enough jobs and that the jobs that are available do not pay a wage that somebody can live on.
For this, I think that fixing our infrastructure could go a long way towards solving both of those issues. Construction work does not require a college degree and tends to pay pretty decently.
^ no one is blaming the poor for their problems, what I am doing is pointing out the fact that making good decisions can and will help to get an American on a track to become middle class which is as much a state of mind as it is about finances. Middle class folks have certain values which your buddy doesn’t care about, he’d rather focus on ways to get something for nothing, which is what happens with poor folks, he doesn’t attempt to hold anyone to a standard, that is reasonable, all he does is makes excuses and cry racism. Smart hardworking folks don’t pay a whole lot of attention to his stupidity.
^ And drug use/abuse (including cigarettes and alcohol) is common in low income areas. Not a productive use of the limited funds they do have. Nor is it something that leads to gainful employment.
And I'm going to try to resist responding to @IceyLamo because he's just too close-minded to consider that not everything has a racial component and that there isn't a vast governmental conspiracy to undermine the efforts of the downtrodden.
twentyfive Stay ladies stay 7 Hours Ago Fat boy misses the fact that poverty is absolutely a personal choice, you can strive to do well or you can quit, that jackass is just looking to justify quitting.
and you are blaming them for their poverty
twentyfive Stay ladies stay 6 Hours Ago ^ It is a choice here, you have no clue what real poverty is, you just can’t deny self gratification long enough to get to a reasonable level of comfort. Unless there is genuine oppression ala the Venezuelan government or what’s happened in Somalia people all over the world Attain a level that they are able to live in reasonable comfort. That’s not to say reasonable comfort is the same all over the world but for the purpose of this discussion I am referring to the USA, you always have a choice, if you choose to buy those new kicks instead of the food your children need don’t blame me for your children’s predatory behavior nor complain when I shoot them in self defense.
You associate poverty with poor choices and vilify the poor...position them as your class enemies and potential threats.... you're sick in the head and delusional.
You don't know how to read, I stated poverty is a choice, HERE, and I also stated that there is no real poverty here in this country. Go argue with someone else, you are nothing but a troll, looking for an argument. BYE Felicia
I do agree that poverty in the United States is nothing like what poverty in a lot of other countries is like. Nobody in the United States lacks a functioning toilet or literally starves to death.
20fag make your mind up. It can't be a choice if it doesn't exist. You're all over the place. But those were your statements. Don't attack me for reposting them.
Cc99. Poverty in the US is worse than in any other developed nation. Compare being poor here to being poor to being poor in say Luxembourg. You can't compare us to Zambia or India just so we feel better about ourselves
It might not be, depends on what we're calling the developed world. I usually think of all of Europe as being the developed world but poverty in Ukraine is worse than it is in the US. Even so, however, developed countries are not where the majority of the world's population lives.
I guess when it comes to quality of life, you can consider each of the different kind of countries to be in different leagues.
Countries with highly developed, advanced economies are in the A league (France, UK, New Zealand, US, Japan, Argentina, Germany, Sweden ect).
Countries that are mostly doing pretty well but don't quite qualify as advanced economies are in the B league (Ukraine, Russia, Romania, China).
Countries that are highly unequal and contain serious poverty levels but also a very wealthy upper class would be C league (Mexico, Saudi Arabia Pakistan, India, and South Africa).
Countries that overall are very undeveloped are in D league (Zambia, Zimbabwe, Nigeria, Chad, the vast majority of Africa).
So basically, the US is in dead last when it comes to the league we're competing in but we're also competing in the highest league in the world so that counts for a lot.
One thing I find interesting though is that the quality of life overall in what we're calling "C league nations" tends to be worse than that of D league nations. In D league nations, almost everybody lives humbly but because the upper class isn't necessarily super loaded either it gives the sense of a more equal society so people are happier and don't commit nearly as many crimes as people in C league nations do. Also, wars that break out in D league nations tend to be small insurgencies involving militia groups that don't have very large numbers of combatants. So this means deaths during conflicts are only in the thousands usually, maybe tens of thousands if its particularly bad. Wars that occur in C league nations, however, are absolute disasters that end up killing hundreds of thousands of people like in Syria, and Iraq. Also, all the countries with the highest levels of homicide are C league nations.
There's no logic in comparing our poverty to countries not in the same developmental category other than to try to make us look better.
Look reality isn't about statistics. It's about people and real life situations. Tell an American homeless person it's okay coz they're better off than if they were homeless in South Africa. See how that changes their plight.
20fag you're a second rate sirlapdancealot type troll on this site.
The reality of bad neighborhoods for those that live in it - sure some may want to "romanticize it" and say people are mischaracterizing bad hoods; but a few days the well-known rapper Nipsey Hussle was shot in the head and killed in broad daylight in South Central LA - guy was rich and could have left the hood completely behind but he wanted to help out his neighborhood by opening businesses and investing in the community - and look how the community he was trying to help paid him back (not to say that the community itself did not appreciate all he did b/c it's evident it did) - according to the report that was the 11th homicide in South Central that week - no matter how some want to romanticize it, bad neighborhoods *are* f'ing dangerous (the statistic about it being the 11th murder in the area in a week is stated at the 7:07 mark in the video):
There were about 30 people shot in South LA that weekend... violence is on the rise. Plus you have places like Panorama City in the San Fernando Valley...
I wasn't aware there are still neighborhoods where residency is specifically designated by race. I think you missed out on the Civil Rights Movement.... But again, more passive aggressive racism from you as per usual.
Spoken like real alt right members..... any discussion of institutionalized racism and sociohistoric currents is viewed as denying minorities their agency.... straight out of the David Duke play book
193 comments
Latest
Most of my friends lived in "hip" neighborhoods in our 20s, which often are butting up against and pushing out "worse" neighborhoods.
Some cities have a lot more racial tension than others. So there's probably a little danger even in the nicest neighborhood and a little more danger in the worst ones. But a lot of "bad" neighborhoods the gangs want upper class white people to be able to buy drugs.
I was thinking that myself that the gangs wouldn't want the neighborhoods to be too dangerous because rich kids are a huge drug consuming customer base that you don't want to scare away. If they're afraid setting foot in your neighborhood might get them shot you lose out on some of your best customers.
Just sayin'.
I've been to some of the 1 type of area you mention, where it has restaurants and history and stuff like that in Petersburg. Petersburg is a pretty rough town, especially at night even in the nicer areas. Its kind of that feeling where the restaurant itself feels safe, I would be very surprised to see anything happen inside, but the parking lot can be pretty damn sketchy. I'm guessing in the latter part though, the parts the city doesn't care about, that everywhere is dangerous.
They have long done surveys. The people who show the most fear of crime are always those who live in neighborhoods with the lowest crime rates. Whereas those who live in high crime rate neighborhoods, they never cite crime as a major concern of theirs.
A lot of it is always race and class prejudice, coming from people who do not interact with a very diverse segment of our population.
SJG
As for perceptions of danger, a lot goes into it. I don't think anything happens for no reason. There's always a reason behind it. And cities are different... In my experience these kinds of neighborhoods are more sad than they are dangerous. If you live in the neighborhood or are known there, when shit goes down there's usually someone there to help try to de-escalate it so that it doesn't come down to too much violence. Then its all about how intimidating you can be, its not even respect... that's a thing of the past. Hoods are pretty self regulated. It used to be that gangs wouldn't prey on the people in their hoods, but thats changing now too.
Even if you obviously don't fit in, you'll be fine during the day. At night it just depends on your luck and the dynamics of the neighborhood.
From what I've seen in LA, you're more likely to be attacked by homeless tweakers and wannabe gang members than by actual gang members. A lot of gang violence is about drug turfs and bitches.
But the prevalent vibe is just sadness, the places are depressing...
I have many friends whose parents are struggling & otherwise can only afford to live in the not so goo neighborhoods. I visited them Neighborhood several times & have never been mugged nor shot...
Often as long as you mind you business, you will be safe...
On numerous occasions, I have had young boys walk up to & ask if I wanted to buy some weed...
I usually tell them “I’m Good Bro” and they leave
On numerous occasions, I have also had homeless people approach me & ask for money...
I usually tell them “I don’t have any cash on me” and they leave...
I’m Black so that might play a role...
But I seriously think White people particularly are just so scared...
I have now known a lot of people within such neighborhoods & they usually wave at me whenever I walk across them...
Most times, I stop & have a chitchat & other times I’m in a hurry I usually keep it moving...
I think the crimes in this communities tend to be overblown sometimes by the media...
Why?
Because I look & dress as a gangster even though I’m not a member...
Those guys definitely don’t wanna fuck with the wrong person...
Those guys only fuck with the weak & timid...
They can’t bring that shit near me...
Or else somebody going down...
They already know it...
I don’t play like that...
Also, the most respected person in the hood is the elotero.
You gotta look Thuggish & Rough when going into this neighborhood...
Also you gotta speak their slang that way those boys know you’re well verse in the street life...
You can’t going into those neighborhoods & start blowing useless grammar they can easily pick you out...
This isn’t a Movie...
This real life & real talk...
How’re you doing= wassup bro bro
Can I talk to you for a minute= Can I gala at you for a minute
You sell weed= Hey Bro Bro, you got some trees...
And so on...
That way the know you’re not new to the neighborhood...
Can I talk to you for a minute= Can I hala at you for a minute
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=pgQF71OthR…
Maybe you can explain to Flagooner why CC99 would get robbed & beaten up a little at Night but not you...
Exactly...
Simply because you look thuggish & dangerous...
They can sense the vibe once they walk across you...
So it’s in their best interest not to fuck with you...
Probably look young, innocent & timid just like other young white boys so they tend to fuck with him...
Even in High School the same thing happens most times...
People most times tend to bully Whites than Blacks...
You know why...
Because they know they will get their asses beat after class if they fuck with the wrong black guy...
They already know it...
I am the definition of somebody who should not be going into bad neighborhoods. At the same time though, I think I could find a way to not look quite so much like a sheltered white boy from the suburbs. I tend to dress very casual, not "street" but I do wear hoodies a lot and joggers, sweatpants, or cargo pants. If I wore one of my hoodies, put my hood up, kept my head down, put my hands in my pockets and walked fast I probably would actually blend in a lot better than you'd expect.
As for him being safer because he is black, its a well known fact that high crime neighborhoods are hotbeds of racial tensions. If you don't belong to the race of the majority of the neighborhood, that's just one reason why they might target you. A white person going into a high crime area that's majority black has more to worry about than a black person doing the same even if they are both from middle class backgrounds just like a white person is safer walking into a trailer park than a black person is even if they're both from middle class backgrounds. Its a basic matter of anything that might draw attention to you would be a problem.
So DC I guess the white guy in here is you?
Lol I guess sort of but not exactly. I have a lot more of a baby face than that guy does.
Nothing like going to Viet Coffee, and bringing a good book to read.
SJG
Today when I go thru bad areas of Detroit I'm driving my car and I'm armed.
East Los Angeles 1978
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RGVXzsTf…
If you don’t what I mean when I say “ act like an idiot”, then you should stay away.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8MA8jf-6…
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nu7qPQQo…
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EcjRXcVq…
In the first video, three completely innocent, normal people with no affiliations with drug gangs whatsoever were intentionally killed by the cartel gunmen for no reason other than they happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time. Its not just a matter of "not being an idiot." That guy was just trying to put some gas in his car and the cashier was just trying to have an ordinary job.
Huffy bike?
And no, they aren't being used out of context.
"I’m Black so that might play a role..."
Me: why?
@eva: "@flagooner
Because I look & dress as a gangster "
@eva: "@Iceycoco
Maybe you can explain to Flagooner why CC99 would get robbed & beaten up a little at Night but not you..."
I'm guessing he is asking @Icey to explain because he is black too.
@Icey: "I can come across as intimidating enough to not get fucked with."
------------------
1. Why would someone need to appear "thuggish" or "intimidating" just to not get beat up in certain neighborhoods?
2. Am I the only one who gets confused when AAs accuse cops of racial profiling when they apparently intentionally portray a "thuggish" and "intimidating" persona?
Next time I find my 60 year old white ass in Washington Park Illinois after midnight, I will just wear a Duke Blue Devils jersey, call everyone Bro Bro, and ride around on a bicycle. As long as I don't have any race or class prejudices, I should be fine. .
I also know how to take care of myself and anyone I’m with, I very rarely if ever have a problem anyplace. For all of you tough guys out there if you seek trouble it’s always there, doesn’t matter who you are, remember there’s always someone tougher than you, don’t be surprised if that polite humble guy you start in with is strapped or a trained combat veteran, I find that being polite, speaking nicely and ignoring those wassup bros is usually the best strategy
BTW if y’all need to defend yourself bring as much violence as quickly as possible and get the fuck out of dodge as quickly as you can.
Police also NEVER help perception in that since they police themselves, they HAVE been caught lying about their numbers and what they do, sometimes a neighborhood looks worse than it is.
Your local news station is a blessing and a curse all for the sake of ratings (which are dying thanks to the internet) as they sometimes overhype and sometimes downplay severities of a neighborhood.
the majority race and those not black or Hispanic are too easily swayed and frightened by what they think is true, never do enough of their own research and since they don't bother to leave their bubble are content with information, misconstrued or otherwise. Kind of makes you question the whole stereotypes of "asians being smart".
Then racism is your biggest contributor to overblowing perception of demographic and geographic.
Lol, I think this is my favorite comment in this thread.
Eva does strike me as somebody who is trying too hard to put on a tough guy image. He sounds exactly like a wannabe gangster to me.
As for SJG, San Jose doesn't have any real ghettos. The city is incredibly safe. I looked up the crime statistics and the city of San Jose is a really safe city. With a population of nearly a million people they only have 20-30 homicides per year which is about half the national average. SJG can ride on a bicycle because his city is a very sheltered city. I've seen some people similar attitudes where I've grown up, where some kids don't think ghettos are that bad or people just have classist prejudice because the "bad neighborhoods" where I live are a complete joke.
The East Side San Jose is pretty much a ghetto, although not as bad as ghettos in many other cities.
Why?
If that's the case, doesn't that justify whites feeling uncomfortable around blacks and serve to perpetuate a stereotype that blacks say is unfair?
;-)
A few months ago a black family moved in down the street that doesn't have any one 55 or older living there but does have elementary school kids. That is legal by the regulations. They are the only family with school aged kids. The bus even picks them up and drops them off right at their house.
My question is why would a family want to move into a neighborhood full of old people and no other kids? I keep getting the same answer. That family feels more secure. At least I never have to tell them to get off my lawn.
True, one community activist was killed recently, but it was a stray bullet. He had nothing to do with it.
San Jose, for its size, has a fairly low crime rate.
And besides, bicycle riding is incredibly fun.
I think most people are over reacting about the perception of danger. Survey after survey shows that those who worry the most about crime live in what are statistically the safest neighborhoods. And most of their crime fear is cross racial.
People who live in inner cities which do have high crime rates never list crime as a thing they are very concerned about.
SJG
Monica Lewinsky sounds off on the Mueller report
https://www.yahoo.com/news/monica-lewins…
Gordon Lightfoot Sundown
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JKYRjNAa…
Led Zeppelin: Live on TV BYEN/Danmarks Radio 1969
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k-WSbMW7…
People living in high crime areas just get used to it. People in safe neighborhoods are scared of crime because we wouldn't know how to handle a situation like that if it was to arise. People who grow up in high crime areas kind of just learn how to avoid trouble or be intimidating enough that they can get out of trouble when it is forced on you, as TwentyFive said. That doesn't mean a sheltered kid from the suburbs is safe walking through a ghetto though.
SJG
With most rapes the two parties know each other and are of the same race.
But most fear of rape is cross racial stranger rape.
SJG
Just after he blows by me there is a set of train-tracks where the road elevates by a couple of degrees and then de-elevates by a couple of degrees where the tracks are - dude didn't know about the train-tracks and hits them at 120 and goes airborne - he lands two lanes over to the right (he was on the left-lane of two-lanes, but after the train tracks there was a 3rd lane to make a right into a some kinda building) - anyway he goes airborne lands two lanes over with sparks flying everywhere as he bottoms out and the car-bottom hits the pavement about 3-times - somehow me managed to keep control (I'm guessing it being a high-end sedan it had good suspension and handling which aided in him somewhat keeping control of the car).
It could have been much worse b/c in that hood there are a few people on the street at all hours of the night and crossing that street - him losing control of the car was not my worst fear in that at that speed anyone crossing the street would not have had a chance and it being nighttime he may also not see them - it was kinda surreal.
And the greatest fear of cross racial stranger rape is found among those who will most likely experience same race date or acquainted rape.
And when it comes to women it was Dr. Ruth who found out that their sexual fantasies and their sexual horrors are basically the same, just with minor changes to some of the details.
SJG
Resources richness occurs because of the advance of technology. The more technology advances, the more we are able to produce more resources with less effort. The percentage of people who lived in poverty during the 18th and 19th centuries was around 60%. Poverty wasn't even weird, it was the norm. Most people were poor. The middle class would've been seen as being lowkey rich whereas middle class today is the norm.
So theoretically, poverty can actually be eliminated if society became resource rich enough. That can only occur through technological progress though, otherwise, its up to us to figure out how best to distribute the resources we do have.
More often the perpetrators of crime in NYC, and other metro areas with good access to public transportation, are not acting in their own hood, but with the ease of hopping down the subway, crime is more of the pop up variety, where the perps, go somewhere they won't be recognized.
Bourgeoisie and Middle-Class, as used today, mean mostly the same thing. It would be better to say, 'middle-classes', as it is highly stratified.
What makes someone part of the middle-classes is not a level of income, it is a way of thinking, a reactionary system of identification.
So as Deleuze and Guattari drive home, there is no other class besides the bourgeoisie, but there are still those who support the interests of the bourgeoisie and those who oppose such interests.
Marx and Engels talk about the bourgeoisie, because with the French Revolution, the bourgeoisie took over. Marx and Engels want the bourgeoisie to be replaced by the Proletariat. This is not really poor versus rich, it's more two different ways of thinking.
SJG
The property owners invest next to nothing in low income areas.... hence poor housing conditions.
Property owners pay low property taxes there, so you get poor schools, and a local gov that couldn't care less about community development, crime and infrastructure problems coz they don't see the area as profitable to their self interests.
This marginalizes the communities and leads to social decay ie gangs, crime, a sense of lawlessness, mistrust for any authorities...
Race then becomes a euphemism for social class in the US, and white America can justify hating and fearing poor brown people.
Some of it also is just a Rent vs Buy issue. In rental areas, as we have no rent control, tenants eventually figure out that letting the place look bad is the only form of rent control they have.
I for one made life real hell for some new owners. :) :) :)
SJG
SJG
Bonus, I got into a fun snow ball fight with about 5000 students at one time. It was about 3000 versus 2400 and I helped lead a charge as volleys of ice balls mixed with snow pelted everyone. I also heard half the states drunk driving arrests were on the campus roads.
Another example, the current place where I work I heard you don't want to live there. Don't stay at the hotel where there were 4 murders. I checked crime statistics , the city has higher violent crime than 90% of the country. Then I checked my safe city where I live. Higher than 95% of the country.
That's why I've now thought that its important to gain personal experience and then see if it lines up with what statistical data supports. In high school I used to trust statistics and research data over everything. But there have been so many cases in my life where I've seen the results of a "research study" that made absolutely no sense at all which made me lose faith in the information gathering methods. A really recent example of this actually just came up...
I'm taking a course right now that's teaching us how to use technology and different programs to create podcasts and animated videos and stuff like that. Well, during the readings of one of those courses, they said the average college student spends most of their time on the computer studying instead of playing videos games or going on social media. It then goes on to say the average college student studies 2-4 hours per day as opposed to 1-2 hours of recreational online time.
I'm sorry but, I have been around enough college students to be well aware of what our study habits actually look like. And I know for a fact that the majority of college students have atrocious studying habits. I have a 3.3 GPA and I also have atrocious studying habits. 2-4 hours per day? The reality is more like 2-5 hours per week. I've seen scores of students who basically do absolutely nothing. The only people who work hard in college are the overachievers who feel like they have to get straight As and are terrified of disappointing their parents. And even then, I know some kids who can get straight As with almost no effort. I also know for a fact that a lot of students have told me they lie on those very same surveys about their studying habits because they don't want the school or their professors to know how little they study. I hate to say it, but I've lied on those surveys too. I even commented on this "study" to several other students and they called it fake news because we all know that's not true.
Another thing is that despite researchers thinking their studies show a lot of underage drinking in college. They actually underestimate it. Studies often say that 80% of college students under 21 drink, I've even seen some studies claiming only 60% of college students do but that's just laughable. My professor however, did an unofficial survey of our sociology class one time and asked how many students regularly drink alcohol and 95% of the class said yes. And this is a required gen-ed class of primarily freshmen and sophomore students that everybody has to take with over 100 students taking that course. Almost nobody in there claimed to be a sociology major so you can't just say sociology majors drink a lot. Furthermore, my professor said he does this survey every year and that the answer is always about the same. If you were to look up the official statistics for how many students at my school drink though, it claims that its 85%.
There are many other examples which has caused me to lose faith but this post would be even longer than it already is.
The reality is, safety and danger are relative to one's sense of deprivation of one or the other.
The reality is though that there are plenty of neighborhoods where if you go out, your mom is gonna worry about you coming home. Or where you risk being attacked if you're perceived weak ie the elderly or disabled, homeless, etc.
I thought we had evolved from that type of behavior.
Studies show that people usually believe that locations with which they are less familiar are more dangerous than their own neighborhoods. This perception often persists even when the person’s local neighborhood has a high crime rate.
Perceptions are also strongly influenced by what risks are considered normal or customary. I grew up in Texas. I was never worried about crime in Texas until I went to live in London, England. Then, upon returning to Texas, I realized how high the crime rate (especially the murder rate) is in Texas compared to where I had been living the last few years. Texas felt much less safe to me than it had before I had a safer place to compare it to.
I am not making excuses for them, but who is worse, the criminal or the person who made the criminal who he is?
"Reliable statistics can be difficult to find I will agree with that. Sometimes even statistics that look reliable are not.
That's why I've now thought that its important to gain personal experience and then see if it lines up with what statistical data supports. In high school I used to trust statistics and research data over everything. But there have been so many cases in my life where I've seen the results of a "research study" that made absolutely no sense at all which made me lose faith in the information gathering methods..."
LMAO!
I have lost faith in research studies even though I love using them. I naturally want to use them because it provides me an easy answer to everything I wonder about. But at the same time, some are so far off base that I realized I can't trust all of them.
ROFLMAO!
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_…
I want to direct your attention specifically to the information saying that 1,200-1,400 Iraqi soldiers were killed in the entire battle of Mosul. This is not only false, it is way way off base. In December, the UN reported that 2,000 Iraqi soldiers had been killed just in the month of November. The battle of Mosul went on for 9 months and caused massive casualties to the invading Iraqi forces. However, the Iraqi government was infuriated at the UN for publishing these statistics and told them they were "bolstering the spirit of the enemy." So the UN rescinded their statistics and stopped reporting on the dead completely per the government's request.
https://www.cnn.com/2016/12/02/middleeas…
https://civiliansinconflict.org/publicat…
"Iraqi forces have sustained heavy casualties from ISIS VBIED and ambushes when they pushed forward without properly clearing and securing areas.34 More than 2,000 Iraqi special forces were killed in November 2016.35 The Iraqi military command has ordered that no casualty figures be disclosed until the offensive is finished." This report was later made from an independent source.
https://www.middleeastmonitor.com/201702…
In addition, if you go back to the Wikipedia article. The Iraqi commanders are claiming to have killed anywhere from 7,000 ISIS militants to 25,000. This is despite reports from US and Iraqi sources before the battle even begun that there were only 5,000 ISIS militants in the city to begin with. How could they have killed more militants than were even inside the city? Furthermore, how the hell did the Iraqi soldiers, assuming their reports on their own casualties were in-fact, true, manage to kill 5-15 militants for every one of their own soldiers getting killed, while attacking a massive city riddled with mines, suicide bombers, and car bombs? Almost every general thoroughout history has noticed that if a besieging force almost always needs a minimum of outnumbering the enemy 3 to 1 in order to launch a successful assault against a fortified city but often times the attackers need to outnumber the defenders 5 to 1 because of the prediction that an assault on a fortified settlement will result in major casualties for the attackers. If an attacking general manages to conquer a fortified settlement with numbers of soldiers less than that, it is purely a result of tactical brilliance because that rarely works. The advantage that being in a fortified settlement gives you over an attacking army is enormous.
ROFLMAO!
LMAO!!!
I think you’re just reaching looking for a way to justify your own confirmation bias.
Once again, SirLDK is just trolling.
ROFLMAO!
ROFLMAO!
Fear of stranger danger is deliberately marketed in order to create fear and to drive the electorate to the Right.
SJG
"Coz its easier for a 5 ft 6 teenager to attack and rob an old woman carrying a grocery bad at night than a 6ft guy who lifts weights."
Why do they feel the need to attack and rob anyone at all? I thought that animal aggression instinct had been eradicated.
SJG
Flagooner, its not about an instinct for aggression. Its about living in an economically depressed area with no real hope or options and wanting a slice of what white America's consumerism is trying to sell.
SJG
While I do like high end steakhouses, I prefer ethnic foods.
Mamisan will be there any minute now:
https://www.walmart.com/ip/Boudreaux-s-B…
SJG
Flagooner, your whole presence in these kinds of threads revolves around you passively aggressively making racist comments.
All you ever do is speak out of your ignorance and attack every single thing from a standpoint of jealousy and hatred, I’m sure no one that matters holds you in very high regard.
SJG
https://www.youtube.com/user/TheHoodRuss…
20fag, so all those starving people in concentration camps or the Warsaw Ghetto chose to be there. Starving orphans with AIDS in Africa just need to man up and work hard. Homeless vets and disabled people chose their lives. So social problems don't exist, its just that these "losers" are too lazy to man up and be "successful" like you.
Unless there is genuine oppression ala the Venezuelan government or what’s happened in Somalia people all over the world Attain a level that they are able to live in reasonable comfort. That’s not to say reasonable comfort is the same all over the world but for the purpose of this discussion I am referring to the USA, you always have a choice, if you choose to buy those new kicks instead of the food your children need don’t blame me for your children’s predatory behavior nor complain when I shoot them in self defense.
My in laws are a prime example. He came here from Cuba in his 50s without a formal education, unable to speak English. Through hard work and sacrifice within 3 years they moved to a better neighborhood. He put his only daughter through an inexpensive private school. And she worked her way through college and a Masters program.
This BS of there being no hope is a choice, and in these neighborhoods it is often a cultural choice. Stop feeling sorry for yourself and accomplish something.
No, you are apparently saying that.
They came in 1980, well after segregation.
What does race have to do with it. I just provided an example that hard work instead of giving up provides a chance.
Being lazy and making excuses is the road to loserville.
Flagooner, 1980 isn't 50 years ago.Your passive aggressive posts are all racially tinged.
Do you cross the street when you see a black guy at night? Or do you "have black friends"?
For this, I think that fixing our infrastructure could go a long way towards solving both of those issues. Construction work does not require a college degree and tends to pay pretty decently.
twentyfive
Stay ladies stay
7 Hours Ago
Fat boy misses the fact that poverty is absolutely a personal choice, you can strive to do well or you can quit, that jackass is just looking to justify quitting.
and you are blaming them for their poverty
twentyfive
Stay ladies stay
6 Hours Ago
^ It is a choice here, you have no clue what real poverty is, you just can’t deny self gratification long enough to get to a reasonable level of comfort.
Unless there is genuine oppression ala the Venezuelan government or what’s happened in Somalia people all over the world Attain a level that they are able to live in reasonable comfort. That’s not to say reasonable comfort is the same all over the world but for the purpose of this discussion I am referring to the USA, you always have a choice, if you choose to buy those new kicks instead of the food your children need don’t blame me for your children’s predatory behavior nor complain when I shoot them in self defense.
You associate poverty with poor choices and vilify the poor...position them as your class enemies and potential threats.... you're sick in the head and delusional.
Go argue with someone else, you are nothing but a troll, looking for an argument.
BYE Felicia
Actually drug and alcohol use is correlated with higher income. The more money people have the more likely they are to drink a lot and do drugs.
Cc99. Poverty in the US is worse than in any other developed nation. Compare being poor here to being poor to being poor in say Luxembourg. You can't compare us to Zambia or India just so we feel better about ourselves
Countries with highly developed, advanced economies are in the A league (France, UK, New Zealand, US, Japan, Argentina, Germany, Sweden ect).
Countries that are mostly doing pretty well but don't quite qualify as advanced economies are in the B league (Ukraine, Russia, Romania, China).
Countries that are highly unequal and contain serious poverty levels but also a very wealthy upper class would be C league (Mexico, Saudi Arabia Pakistan, India, and South Africa).
Countries that overall are very undeveloped are in D league (Zambia, Zimbabwe, Nigeria, Chad, the vast majority of Africa).
So basically, the US is in dead last when it comes to the league we're competing in but we're also competing in the highest league in the world so that counts for a lot.
One thing I find interesting though is that the quality of life overall in what we're calling "C league nations" tends to be worse than that of D league nations. In D league nations, almost everybody lives humbly but because the upper class isn't necessarily super loaded either it gives the sense of a more equal society so people are happier and don't commit nearly as many crimes as people in C league nations do. Also, wars that break out in D league nations tend to be small insurgencies involving militia groups that don't have very large numbers of combatants. So this means deaths during conflicts are only in the thousands usually, maybe tens of thousands if its particularly bad. Wars that occur in C league nations, however, are absolute disasters that end up killing hundreds of thousands of people like in Syria, and Iraq. Also, all the countries with the highest levels of homicide are C league nations.
Look reality isn't about statistics. It's about people and real life situations. Tell an American homeless person it's okay coz they're better off than if they were homeless in South Africa. See how that changes their plight.
20fag you're a second rate sirlapdancealot type troll on this site.
Yeah, you got a point there.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hR_RvgRJ…
And yes, i miswrote. I should have written " predominantly non-white"
But only a racist would make the distinction.
should be what is phat boi ?
A hypothetical trick bitch pretending to be a pimp but actually a female.
Why must you resort to stereotypes about minorities being drug traffickers? Get a life?
Calling me a woman coz you think it makes me look like a lesser person reflects on you, not me