“No King” But Plenty of Fools? Civil Disobedience Then and Now

 

Growing up in the 1960’s and 70’s, I remember watching major historical social events such as Hispanic civil rights activist and labor leader Cesar Chavez leading his migrant field worker’s  on a “1000 Mile March” (or "Peregrination") from the farm fields of Southern California up along the coast educating farm laborers about their newly won rights, including the right to organize.

Then there was no looting or defacement of the Lincoln and Washington monuments. No one peed in the Lincoln Memorial Reflecting Pool while listening to Rev. Martin Luther King Jr’s stirring “I have a Dream” speech (aka “March for Jobs and Freedom" speech, 1963).  

There were the famous protests for civil rights led by likes of Rev. King,  A. Phillip Randolph, Rev. Ralph Abernathy, such as the Montgomery Bus Protest (1965/66), the Birmingham campaign (1963), the Selma march (1965), or the Chicago Peace March (1967) or the March against the Vietnam War (1967). Then there was the “Poor Peoples Campaign in 1968 which was aimed at alleviating the economic poor and improving housing for all races, but where was the violence? There wasn't any.

 Chavez, King, Abernathy, and all the others never intentionally blocked traffic. They never looted or defaced property. They didn’t try and keep people from going to their jobs to earn money in order to put food on their table or keep a roof over their head. They didn’t try to keep ambulances from helping individuals in crisis.

No one blocked the fire department from trying to save someone’s home and their possessions, not to mention their lives? They didn’t loot, commit arson, deface public and private property, throw trash cans everywhere or set bonfires in the middle of road? None of that happened? They didn’t intentionally assault anyone? They didn’t even spit on anybody or scream in their ear? Once again, the answer is no. Leaders repeatedly reminded their followers to avoid violence at all costs. They were also encouraged to respect people’s personal space.

Vehicles weren’t attacked with rocks, bricks, chairs, or pummeled with boards and hammers.  Protest signs weapons. They simply conveyed a message.  What about protesters randomly attacking police officers or federal agents? That rarely happened, and when it came to assaults and law enforcement, protestors were just as often on the receiving end.

Didn’t  “social justice warriors” like King, Chavez, Wilkins, and Abernathy modelled their protests after the anarchist, Mahatma Gandhi? Afterall, aren’t you supposed to substitute yourself in place of the message?  Isn't ending dialogue the goal right?

Well, no. While they did model their protests on Gandhi, he was all about non-violence, passive resistance, and trying to create dialogue. Gandhi wasn't an anarchist although some try to portray him as such today. So, today’s protests and protestors (aka “social justice warriors”) are nothing like their Civil Rights movement counterparts. So, if not the Civil Rights Movement, what about other protests? Incidentally, while Caser Chavez was a major proponent of migrant rights and founder of the United Farm Workers, he opposed illegal immigration, believing it harmed those here legally and gave the impression that all Hispanics were criminals. 

There were the anti-war protests, often led by individuals like Tom Hayden, Jerry Rubin, and Abbe Hoffman.  in Lafayette Park, the National Mall, and the campuses at universities like Berkeley, Kent State, Chicago, and throughout the U.S., as well as the 1971 Mayday Protest. There was the protests by Native Americans, led by individuals like Dennis Means, Russell Means, and Clyde Bellecourt. They led a series of non-violent protests (known as the “Trail of Broken Treaties), including occupying the offices of the Bureau of Indian Affairs, but that too was non-violent.

Following a notoriously violent police raid in 1969 on a gay nightclub in New York’s Greenwich Village, gays, fronted by leaders like Phyllis Lyons and Frank Kameny, began openly (yet peacefully) protesting for a change in laws to decriminalize homosexuality. The “Women’s Liberation Movement” , whose leadership included Bella Abzug, Democratic presidential candidate, Shirley Chisholm, and Gloria Steinem, also started in the 1970’s over a number of issues ranging from equal pay and treatment at work, abortion, separate credit and financial rights, etc. None of these protests involved spitting on people, arson, or looting (although a few innocent bras were burned).

In Chicago, in 1968, there was the infamous “police riot”, ordered by Chicago political boss Mayor Richard Daley during the Democratic Party National Convention, on anti-war demonstrators.  The result was 11 deaths and nearly 800 injuries, which include 152 officers. The officers used nearly everything at their disposal. They were wildly swinging their batons and deploying voluminous amounts of tear gas, causing confusion and panic among the protestors and innocent bystanders. Many of the injuries were head and neck related or the result of being trampled.  

The following year, in 1970, on the relatively quiet campus of Kent State University in Ohio, just over 300 or so students had gathered to protest the expansion of the war in Vietnam into Laos and Cambodia. The Ohio National Guard was called in to maintain “control” over loud but otherwise well behaved students. For reasons still unclear, 28 members of the National Guard opened fire on the peaceful crowd.

By the time the shooting stopped some 13 seconds later, 67 rounds had been fired and four students lay dead. Two were 19 and two were 20. Nine students were badly injured. Although there was a hearing, not one of the 28 members of the National Guard or their officers, were found guilty. As a result, over four million students across the country staged a mass walk out and there was no looting. No arson. A friend of mine, who was a student journalist at Kent State at the time, told me that despite the anguish and anger, there was no talk of revenge on the National Guard members or the judge.

None of this is intended to imply that the 1960’s and ‘70’s lacked violence from the Left. They did, and lots of it, such as the Watts Riots in LA which spread across the nation or the riots following the murder of MLK in 1968. However, the majority of violence, as it pertains to protests, didn’t come from the protestors themselves. It came for the “Establishment” and those on the Far Right. So, what happened? What changed?

By the mid-1970’s, protesting was becoming organized and financed. There were individuals called "coordinators" who were considered “experts” at organizing a protest (Saul Alinsky is considered to be the "father" of modern protests). They would train or bring in certain individuals to be “squad leaders” to lead the direction of the protests, who continuously reported to the coordinators.

They would also work with coordinators and others to create local specific slogans for signs and banners which were produced out of state and shipped in to avoid being traced by law enforcement with other signs, more generic, were homemade. 

Seminars would be formed to help participants learn how to deal with police tactics, passive resistance, how to non-aggressively provoke the other side and law enforcement, and deescalate any anxiety participants might have. They would also practice ways to non-aggressively resist, rehearse their message, and gain the media’s attention in a way to make it appear that they have the moral high ground.

Links would be established with like-minded groups, organizations and legal aid societies, including a bail fund.  Key individuals would be given an 800 phone number which will connect them to a lawyer  on standby who will help with the bail and obtain their quick release from jail.

By the early 2000’s, tactics changed again. Protests became almost indistinguishable from riots. Violence, once shunned by earlier organizers (including Alinsky), became virtually “de rigueur”. The actions of the individuals took the forefront, often obscuring the message of the protest. 

Actions could include trying to block vehicles with your body (especially if the media was present), ignoring the other person’s personal space while over emphasizing yours, shouting (or screaming) the opposition down, spitting on someone to provoke a reaction,  exaggerated acting to an action, using certain words, phrases, or sounds to rally and surround a perceived “threat”, as well as protesting without a permit or illegally blocking traffic (even King obtained a permit).

Physical violence, with the aim to intimidate and demoralize the other side, has also found its way into modern “protests” in a way that would have appalled Dr. King, Cesar Chavez, or Shirley Chisolm. As an aside, some use protests today as a cover for looting, theft, arson, disfiguring or destroying public and private property (which is solely intended to create an added strain on local first responders).  If these wannabe “social justice warriors” truly want to change the system, they need broad public support across social, racial, and economic lines. What they are doing is not how you get it. Mayhem, rather than the message, seems more and more to be the objective. That only weakens the message and prevents the change you want. 

Many of today’s faux revolutionaries think they’re recreating the “social revolution” of their grandparents from the 1960’s and 70’s, when, in fact, they’re acting like spoiled or coddled children not getting their way in a toy store. They spend to much time in the world of make believe instead of reality. In the words of their ideological model, Vladimir Lenin, they are little more than “useful idiots”.  How can you be  an “anarchist” while living in mom and dad’s basement and off their parent's credit cards? The closest many will get to Marx is watching Harpo, Groucho, and Chico on late night TV. 

Personally, I’m not sure I’d even give them that. I prefer to think of them as cannon fodder and eventual statistics. Their ‘60’s and 70’s predecessors were mostly successful with their goals when based on non-violence. The actions of the current generation  will likely result in failure because of choice to use violence. Regardless, if they continue with their present strategy, the end result will be that they accomplish nothing with the exception of alienating people to their cause and enhancing the power of the surveillance state and the empire.  

 

Thank you for reading "Another Opinion", the Op/Ed blog page for the "militant middle".  Here at "A/O" we truly value our readers. At A/O we seek the facts as they exist, not partisan talking points.  We hope you find our articles informative and engaging. Comments are welcome, provided they are not vulgar, insulting or demeaning.  Another Opinion is offered without charge and is directed toward all independent and free-thinking individuals. We ask, however, that you "like" us on whatever platform you found us on in order to keep our articles available for free to others. Lastly, in order to keep costs down, we depend on passive marketing, and therefore, depend on our readers to please forward our posts along. Below you will find links to the sources we used in writing this article. Thank you. 

 An Organizers Guide To Protests and Political Change

How to Organize a Protest

APWU: Our Labor History: Cesar Chavez Leads “1000 Miles March”for Farm-Worker Rights in California

Cesar Chavez

Cesar’s Thousand Mile March: A 59 Day Trek

Martin Luther King Jr.: 8 peaceful protests that bolsteredcivil rights

Malcolm and the Civil Rights Movement

Speaking and Protesting In America: Protesting in the 1960’sand 1970’s

Leaders in the Struggle for Civil Rights

 

Anti-War Protests of the 1960-70’s

1968 Democratic National Convention Protests

The Whole World Was Watching…

Kent State Shootings

Watts Riots

 

 

Has America's Republic Faded Away?

 

As most everyone knows, much of our freedoms are actively under attack these days, especially our freedom of speech and expression. Ironically, most of those doing the attacking are individuals and groups who publicly claim to be "protecting" those very same freedoms. (it reminds me of when the police haul you in for "protective custody" when typically they are the ones you need protection from!).

 Nevertheless, apparently the freedom of speech or expression these groups and individuals are actually interested in is protecting theirs while the rest of us face censorship, which include gag warnings  for violating their "community standards" (which means they can say or imply what they want, but you can't even post the truth), suspension, being blocked, or wind up on some "government list".  

It's almost "as if" speaking out or having a different opinion is now somehow "un-American". It kind of reminds me of the McCarty Era when everyone was afraid of being accused of being a "Red" (that is, a communist). Thousands of lives, mostly innocent, were ruined by the atmosphere created by that U.S. Senator from Wisconsin who, albeit misguidedly, thought he was doing America a great service.  

Many will tell you that today's censorship is coming from the Left this time, which is true, at least to a point. Most of the groups and individuals (particularly those on college campuses) tend to lean not just Left, but Far Left, the money behind them and organization it takes doesn't come from Left wing organizations.

Instead, much of the money, especially the big money, comes from shell corporations created under such civic sounding euphemisms as "Society for Intellectual Enlightenment, the "so and so" foundation, and so on.  These philanthropic organizations are often fronts for very powerful Wall Street corporations and extremely rich individuals and families.

Ironically, this is the opposite of what most of us would expect. After all, the majority of these people are highly conservative and corporations only active out of self interest. So what gives? Well, America is no longer a Republic. It's a neo-fascist corporatocracy, not to mention a surveillance state.  Being fascist is typically thought of as being Far Right Wing, which to an extent it is.

However, fascism, especially the American version, isn't what we'd expect it to be. Fascism, historically speaking, involved close cooperation between the state and Big Business with the state often serving as the "senior partner". In fact, the so called "founder" of modern fascism, Italian dictator Benito Mussolini once said the fascism should more properly be called "Corporatism", which reflects its true character.

As a quick aside, claims of "socialism" or "Communism", which you often see online promoting some group or cause, are false. First off, fascism is different from most ideologies in that it borrows from both sides of the political spectrum, depending on the history and traditions of a given country (it should be noted that a theocracy, while a rule under some form of religion such as in medieval Europe or modern Iran, are considered fascist as well).

That's why the fascism of Italy differed from that of Germany, which differed from that of Spain or Argentina, Hungary or Romania. Typically fascists will adopt or kept some aspect of the Left in order to keep the people pacified. The more content the people are (at least in the beginning), the easier it is to consolidate control.

Secondly, under Communism, there is no independent ownership of private property. The government owns literally everything. That includes your home, the bank or grocery store down the corner. There would be no Wall Street. The company you work for would be owned by the state and you would be assigned where to work by the state.  

Under "socialism", the masses own and control everything. It would be a nation of worker owned  businesses, worker based committees, co-ops, credit unions, etc.  I'm sure you get the picture. As an aside, it bears mentioning that there has never been an actual "socialist" nation despite several countries calling themselves "socialist". It's like North Korea  or East Germany calling themselves a "democratic republic" or China proclaiming that it's a "People's Republic. The only things Communism has in common with fascism are that both are totalitarian forms of government and neither are big on freedom.

Modern fascism differs in that Big Business is the senior partner. It greatly influences legislation through aggressive lobbying, underwriting political campaigns and funding "leadership PACS" (which some consider to be a form of indirect bribery), run their own independent campaigns in the form of mailings and media spots through benign sounding non-profit shell political action committees (PACs). They often work to help head off or defeat any challengers. In exchange, all the politician has to do is play along, which can be extremely profitable privately.

Big Business, through its PACs and lobbyists, work to dilute or kill  any pending bills which could affect their ability to operate without government interference (at least of consequence) or impacts their bottom line (you didn't think those "loopholes" in all those laws were accidental did you?).

In fact, most people don't realize that corporate lobbyists either write or help write legislation and work to get it through the various committees and ultimately passed into law.   In addition, Big Business quietly works to undo previous laws which were aimed at protecting employees, especially those pertaining to organized labor.

Some freedoms will disappear rather quickly under the pretext of "national security" and often with the assurance by the government of being "temporary".  You know, it's funny how  permanent "temporary" can become if the public isn't paying attention.   

So, the next time you hear or read that we're on our way to Communism or socialism, you'll know better and be able to properly respond. Nevertheless, that doesn't change the fact that our Republic has all but faded away just as the Rome's Republic did, and like the Roman Republic, the more it faded into memory the more the dictatorship of the Empire took hold. Before long it was all but impossible to restore the Republic. Don't let our Republic become just a memory.

 

If you enjoyed the article, please consider passing it along to others and don't forget to subscribe. It's free! Lastly please be sure to "like" us on whatever platform you use to read anotheropinionblog.com. It helps beat the algorithms and keeps our articles in circulation. Thank you!

 

America Is Eerily Retracing Rome's Steps To A Fall. Will It Turn Around Before It's Too Late?

The State of Democracy in the United States 2022

 

The Strange Decline of Pax America

American dream far from reality for most Americans: Poll

German politician convicted over gang rape warning

 

 

 

 

 

Making Crime Pay Through Legislation: California's Senate Bill 553

There's an old expression which says that crime doesn't pay. Well, tell that to the hundreds of individuals brazenly walking into retail establishments throughout California and helping themselves to whatever they want while store employees either stare helplessly or run to another part of the store and hide.

Some bring large garbage bags with them while others just bring large garbage cans. Even little kids as young as 8 or 9 are getting into the act! Security cameras and cell photo phone camera doesn't faze these criminals. Some even stop to pose in front of them.  

The result has been the loss of millions of dollars worth of merchandise and the closure of numerous businesses throughout the state, with some choosing to pull up stakes and move. The result is the loss of billions in tax revenue for city, county and state's coffers plus the loss of jobs and the cascading effect that brings.  Crime apparently does indeed pay, particularly if you have the help of inept politicians. What is happening to California?

The answer is Senate Bill 553, otherwise known as the "Occupational Safety: workplace violence: restraining orders and workplace violence prevention plan" which was introduced in February 2023 by State Senator Dave Cortese of San Jose. The bill was intended, at least in principal, to reduce violence in the workplace, particularly mass shootings, murders, and assaults.

However, the bill has a unintended effect. It prohibits employees from taking any action in the event of a robbery, be it petty shoplifting or armed robbery. Specifically, the bill makes it illegal for employees or managers to confront or defend themselves against looters, shoplifters, burglars,  or run-of-the-mill thieves or face a fine up to $18,000 dollars.  

While the bill calls for employers to provide "active shooter" training for all employees and maintaining a log of all violent incidents on store property, it still prevents anyone from physically confronting thieves.  As a result, an event such as shoplifting for example, employees may not to interfere in anyway (referred to as the "hospital standard").  All they can do is watch as their merchandize and profits go out the door, and for many of the employees, their jobs are going out the door too.

Case in point is Nordstrom, a high end department store which has been located in the heart of San Francisco for 35 years. Due to a dramatic increase in crime (especially violent crime), runaway homelessness, the ramifications of being a "sanctuary city", and all the problems that brings, are only partly to blame.  The chief cause for the closures is the dramatic increase in shoplifting, costing millions in stolen merchandise, since the introduction of Bill 553 this past January (thanks to the passage of Proposition 47 in 2014, shoplifting merchandise with a value up to $950 dollars is now treated as a misdemeanor. Such thefts are longer investigated or actively prosecuted).    

Along with Nordstrom, 37 other major retailers in downtown San Francisco such as Whole Foods, Home Depot, and Anthropologie are calling it quits too. Target reported  a "organized retail crime" network for costing the retail store some $400 million dollars worth of stolen merchandize in 2022.  Drug stores, liquor outlets, high dollar boutiques and jewelry stores, as well as gun shops have also become popular targets for these cheap wannabe "Dillingers".  

To make matters worse, California is facing a serious shortage of law enforcement officers. The number of sworn officers is down by over 13.2%, which is the lowest level since 1991, with nearly every major county facing shortages in double digit percentages.  Los Angeles County is down 12%, which represents 9000 officers while Riverside County, which includes the upscale community of Palm Springs, is down by 25%.  Sacramento County, which takes in the state's capital, has lost 21% of its police force.

The effects of the "peaceful" riots by Antifa and BLM have also played a role too. Demands to "defund" the police has had a serious negative effect on police moral. Polls reflect a new lows in confidence for the police, especially among Democrats and the black community.  Police budgets have been reduced, resulting in fewer promotions or pay raises and more mandatory overtime (which often leads to increased on-the-job stress and burnout). In many instances, police departments have become more dependent on federal grants to cover budgetary short falls.  

The result has been large numbers of police officers are taking early retirement, switching career paths within law enforcement, with a significant number seeking law enforcement careers outside of California, or simply quitting. 

As an aside, the stress and strain of being an "good cop" has resulted in increase cases of alcohol abuse, divorces, psychological issues involving professional counseling and increased suicide rates by officers (officers have a 54% higher rate of suicide than civilians according to 2022 McAward report. In fact, more police officers die by their own hand than are killed in the line of duty).

Senate Bill 553 is one of those instances where good intentions went astray. It was an attempt to reduce violent crime in the workplace, but due to a failure to fully grasp the problem and poor wording only made it worse, which has triggered a serious crime wave effecting the entire state.

While the bill has passed several key hurls, it's still has a ways to go before it reaches Democratic Governor Gavin Newsom's desk. The bill has already faced one amendment by its author, Senator Dave Cortese, the changes simply weren't adequate. As it exists, Bill 553 is like punching a hole in the hull of the Titanic for the water to drain back out.  

Senate Bill 553 is in need of a serious rewrite before becoming law if it is to prevent store owners from being forced into handing over the keys to the business to the criminals. In a state plagued by "feel good" intentions gone amuck, one can only hope common sense at some point intervenes before then.  

In researching this article, I came across literally dozens of videos showing the thieves brazenly walking into stores, sometimes alone or in pairs, and in other cases, in packs, and stealing everything they can get their hands on. I've included several links below (most are five minutes or less in length).

As an aside, some of links mention that this type of behavior has started to spread to other cities such as New York, Detroit, Philadelphia, Atlanta, and Chicago. Apparently a bill isn't always required, but it sure doesn't hurt.

 

Video: California bill aims to prevent retail theft,business groups oppose

Video: SF stores install exit gates, chain locks to stop shoplifters

Video: Thieves target Oakland 7-Eleven stores

Video: Police say shoplifted merchandize beingsold at Bay Area flea markets

Video: Raw video captures dozens of thieves swarming Nordstrom  department store in Los Angeles

Video: Warnings about surge in 'organized retail crime": GMA

 

If you enjoyed the article, please consider passing it along to others and don't forget to subscribe. It's free! Lastly please be sure to "like" us on whatever platform you use to read anotheropinionblog.com. It helps with the algorithms and keeps our articles in circulation. Thank you! 

 

What crime? Calif. advances bill barring retailers fromconfronting thieves

Calif. Senate passes bill to stop employees confrontingshoplifters

California's Notable Declines In Law Enforcement Staffing

Commentary: Stop retail thief? Store owners say this billwill promote it

 

Gun Control and Race: Taking Responsibility

 Former President Barack Obama recently said, in a interview with "CBS Mornings" on May 16, 2023, that the debate about gun control “has become sort of a proxy for arguments about our culture wars. You know, urban versus rural. Race is always an element in these issues.” He added that the debate over gun control has become an "ideological issue and partisan issue in ways it shouldn't".

Well, in a sense, the former President is correct. It has become an ideological and partisan issue in that the solution for Democrats and those on the Left is circumvent the 2nd Amendment in every way possible. They would like to make it illegal to own certain types of rifles simply because their stock has a military design such as the AR 15.

The media would have you believe that this is some sort of military grade firearm that somehow magically made its way into the hands of the public. For the record, an AR 15 doesn't stand for "Assault Rifle"  or "Automatic Rifle". It stands for "ArmaLite Rifle", the name of the original manufacturer, which is modeled after a military M-14 rifle.

The AR 15 is a semi-automatic rifle, the kind of which that have been around for decades and commonly for hunting or target shooting. Pretty much every manufacturer produces some sort of semi-automatic rifle. The only real difference here is the design of the stock which is intended to give it more of a "wow" factor.

The Left is also wanting to make it much more difficult to purchase handguns of all makes and models, if not outlaw them altogether.  There has even been some discussion by Democrats in Congress to require active duty and former military as well as law enforcement members to undergo special psychiatric exams  before being allowing to purchase any firearms, especially handguns.

Conservatives, as expected, deeply oppose any additional restrictions to gun ownership. They see it as an attempt to do away with gun ownership in piecemeal fashion until the average citizen is no longer able to own any firearms. They believe that the 2nd Amendment guarantees the right of all citizens to own a firearm, whether it be for hunting, target shooting, self-protection or no particular reason at all. But more so, as a bulwark against a tyrannical government as expressly stated by the Founding Fathers.

To paraphrase the likes of George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, and James Madison on the subject, a unarmed and unprepared populace is no longer a nation of citizens. It is a nation of subjects. They feared that any government, including the one they just created, could become despotic just as they feared the creation of political parties.  As Benjamin Franklin said, "Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well armed lamb contesting the vote".

However, what this actually comes down to is, as Obama suggests, a matter of urban versus rural and ultimately, one of race.  The truth is that Black youth are five times more likely than any other racial group to be murdered. They are also more likely to be murdered by another Black person than they are a white, Hispanic, or Asian. Whites and Hispanic youths are killed at a rate of 2.3 per 100,000. The percentage for Asian deaths is .90 per 100,000, while for black youth it's 11.8 per 100,000.

Statistics from a 2018 FBI report shows that 16% of white victims were killed by Black attackers while 8% of Black victims had white attackers. However, in crimes in general, in 80% of the cases where the victim was white, the perpetrator was also white. When it came to Black victims, the perpetrator was Black in 89% of the cases. Among Black youth, 8 out of 10 deaths by gun were homicides. The majority of which were committed by another Black individual.

A 2016 study conducted by the American Journal of Preventive Medicine examined 812 deaths in 17 states from 2009 through 2012 which involved law enforcement. The study showed that white individuals were more likely to be the victim of a police shooting than not. In fact, whites represented 52% of the deaths. Black deaths by a law enforcement officer represented just 32.4%, making white deaths 2.8% higher than that of blacks.

It should be pointed out that in 83% of the time, the victim was armed when shot by law enforcement. Black victims, however, were most often reported to be unarmed---18.4%---of the time compared to white victims, who were unarmed just 9.4% of the time. In addition, the report mentioned that black males were killed by law enforcement 2.5 times more often than their white counterparts. Black females were killed at a rate of 1.4 times more often than white females.

Could this be part of the cultural issue Obama spoke of? There is no question that Hispanics tend to avoid law enforcement. Many come from countries that have a long history of brutal and corrupt law enforcement officials where rape, extortion, bribery, and even murder are not unknown. Asians too have a fear and distrust of law enforcement for much the same reasons. Of course, in both cases, language differences add another layer of mistrust.

For whites, it's different. Most police officers and law enforcement officials are white. In fact, 60% of police officers are white. Historically, that number has been much higher. Hispanics make up about 18.2% while 12.9% of  police officers are Black and just 3.3% are Asian. Native Americans make up only 1%.

 As an aside, the number of white officers has declined since roughly 2019 while Hispanic officers have increased slightly since 2020, which also marks the same point where the number of Black police officers started to decline. The number of Asian and Native American officers has remained consistent.  

It's worth pointing out that males comprise 83.2% of all police officers while females make up 16.8%. Also, female officers earn, on average, just 94 cents for every dollar her male counterpart earns. The average salary for a male officer is $54,340 and $51,038 for female officers.

But what about Black culture? Why do blacks have higher percentage of arrests and fatalities when it comes to their dealings with law enforcement? Are they just unlucky and get caught more readily? The short answer is "no". While Asians and Hispanics have keenly developed distrust of law enforcement, both cultures have a strong appreciation for authority and authority figures in general. The same can be said of whites.

All three groups were historically taught from a young age to respect and follow authority figures, which was often reinforced at home. It was common when I was growing up to seek out a police officer or fireman if you were lost or in trouble. Neighbors would watch out for trouble and thought nothing of calling your parents to rat you out if you did something wrong. Churches and other religious institutions were another source of reinforcing the concept of authority. Schools too practiced strong discipline and misbehavior of any sort wasn't tolerated. 

However, this same level of compliance toward authority seems to be missing within the Black community. What happened? Part of the reason is due to the fact that typically white, Asian, and Hispanic households included two parents, and often grandparents, aunts, uncles, and lots of kids! It wasn't uncommon for extended family to live nearby and often visited. So, there was at least a stable family life. 

In Black households, this wasn't always the case. In 2011, 72% of Black households consisted of single mothers. In 2016, 48% of all non-Black households were married while just 28% of Black households were. According to one telling statistic, in 1925 Harlem New York, 85% of Black households had two parents. By 1965, following the introduce of various welfare programs, out-of-wedlock births had increased 25% among Blacks.  

By 1991, that figure was 68%.  As of 2017, it was 77.3%, the most of any racial demographic. This meant that Black children were disproportionately growing up without a father figure in their lives. It also means that most had little adult supervision during critical stages in their lives. While schools and other institutions attempted to fill the gap, they are no substitute for the traditional two parent family.

39% of Black children do not live with their biological father. 28% have no male role model in their lives, compared to 15% of white children. 32% of Black fathers have never visited their biological children as opposed to 11% of white fathers. As a result, black children lack a key stabilizing factor in their lives.

As an aside, 50% of Blacks have never been married compared to 33% of all other racial groups. Black males, interestingly, were also more likely--15%---to marry non-black women compared to just 7% of Black women who married outside their race. 

It's also worth nothing that single parent households are quickly on the rise among Hispanic women in the United States despite a history where out-of-wedlock births carried a strong religious and societal stigma. In Latin America for instance, the trend is spreading in spite of its strong Catholic traditions. 84% of births in Columbia are out-of-wedlock. Mexico, Chile, and Argentina have similar percentages. However, this doesn't mean the absence of a father figure, which remains a key element in Hispanic culture. Meanwhile, this trend has yet to appear in the Asian community.

Another key factor contributing to gun violence among the Black community, especially as it relates to the police, is a toxic culture toward institutional authority in general, and toward law enforcement in particular. It can even be found in some of the music Black youth and young adults tend to listen to (mainly "gangsta rap") which often glorifies guns, drugs, rape, and murder, especially of police officers.

Certain rap performers also promotes what is termed as "savage" or extreme rude behavior toward authority figures. This is often reinforced through peer pressure, which can be quite powerful among teenagers. It can be seen in schools, in malls, neighborhoods and reinforced in movies and video games, while the media (mainstream and Black oriented) has been persistently promoting a subculture of entitlement or victimhood coupled with the creation of "identity politics", a term which developed out of a 1977 statement made by the Combahee River Collective, a black feminist lesbian socialist group.

Identity politics creates false sense of separateness as if one particular group stands uniquely alone with its problems and thus develops a "us vs. them" mentality which pits them against everyone else.  At the same time, the media has sought to create a corresponding culture of subservience, manufactured "guilt", willfully ignoring or excusing the "savage" behavior by other racial groups. The media also tends to underreport or downplay certain acts of violence or inappropriate behavior in order to create a false sense of normalcy. 

Former President Obama is correct in his assessment. The rise in deaths among Black youth, and indeed, the increase in Black related crime and violence, is indeed as cultural as it is racial or ideological. We essentially have two competing cultures which are, at their core, the product of fractured families, the result of the unintended failure of various government programs, and a taught sense of distrust of authority figures, which is reinforced through misguided media, plus a glorification of anti-social behavior and "political correctness". Even in public schools, academic achieving black students are often harassed verbally or physically for "acting white".

So, what does all this mean? It means that Blacks experience a higher rate of gun related deaths any other racial group. It also means they are more likely to be the victim of a crime where the perpetrator also happens to be Black as well. They are also more likely to be the victim of law enforcement related deaths than not, particularly if they're male. Percentage wise, they have highest number of individuals behind bars, largely based on drug or felony. The media has perpetuated a sense of persecution and entitlement while excusing anti-social behavior.

 Nevertheless, the issue of gun control is, at its heart, aimed at controlling the spread of gun related violence. On one hand, gun control advocates believe that by taking guns out of the hands of all citizens, criminals would also voluntarily surrender their guns or obtaining guns would be more difficult to acquire. The end result would be a reduction crime in general. They believe that the 2nd Amendment is outdated and/or misconstrued. By forgoing this unnecessary freedom, it would be a small price to pay in order to create a less violent society. A case of sacrificing one freedom for the greater good of all.

Those who are pro 2nd Amendment, however, believes that the greater good is best served by creating as few potential victims as possible. They argue that if more people are armed or has access to guns, criminals would go elsewhere. After all they point out, criminals are, at their core, cowards. They seek out the opportunities where they're most unlikely to get caught or get hurt. By equaling the odds, gun related violence would decline. They also believe, like the Founding Fathers, that government is not to be trusted.

There a substantial distrust of government on both sides of the political spectrum. In a 2022 Pew Report, only 22% of those polled said they trusted the government. When broken down by race, Asians trusted the government most with 37% as did 29% of Hispanics. Just 24% of Blacks had confidence in the government compared to only 16% of whites. Democrats and Liberals in general expressed the greatest amount of trust with 26% while only 7% Republicans and Conservatives did! Independents also polled at 29%.

Another indicator of the divide is a survey conducted by Quinnipiac University and published in the February 16, 2023 edition of The Hill. According to the poll, 62% of respondents said trusted the police in most or all cases to do the right thing, which may sound good until you look as the responses by race.

72% of whites surveyed said that had confidence in law enforcement to do what was right at least most of the time. 49% of Hispanics agreed (Hispanics are the second largest demographic in the U.S.). However, 66% of Blacks expressed little or no trust in the police to do what was right! Asian responses were too small to tabulate.

That 66% represents 40.1 million people or about 12.1% of our total population. That is a substantial amount, especially when we member that they are affected more by gun related deaths than any other group. They also make up 38.5% of the total prison population. Whites and Hispanics comprise 57.5%. Native Americans are 2.6% and Asians are 1.4%. Nevertheless, Blacks incarceration rates are statistically higher given the percentage of their total population.  

We have to find a balance between reducing gun related violence and protecting ourselves. We require gun registration, age requirements, and waiting periods. Certain types of ammunition and gun modification kits (such as "bump stocks") are already banned. Schools used to offer gun safety classes which have long been discontinued. Law enforcements provide gun safety locks free of charge for anyone who asks.

What else can we do? We can reintroduce gun safety classes for first time purchasers of firearms or require periodic gun safety recertification for all gun owners. This can readily be done through the NRA and Gun Owners of America. In many states, certification classes are required to obtain carry and conceal permits. However, some states have done away with those, citing an infringement of their 2nd Amendment rights.

Currently, there is no registration requirements, background checks, or licenses required to purchase used firearms. Obviously creating a perfect venue for criminals. Perhaps extending the same requirements to buy new firearms should be applied to purchasing used firearms.

Efforts are underway to allow individuals to sue gun manufacturers for a gun related death. That makes as much sense as suing a car manufacturer in death of someone killed or injured in a automobile accident or suing a knife maker for cutting your finger. It's a complete abrogation of personal responsibility in my opinion.

Meanwhile, respect for law enforcement and authority figures such as teachers needs to be reintroduce. It means removing the graphic violence seen in video games which conditions young minds to devalue life. It means moving away the focus on anti-social behavior by reintroducing a sense of respect and responsibility of one's own actions and ending the sense of entitlement.

Guns are essentially a tool. They can be used for a multitude of purposes, most are good but some aren't. Either way it's the intention of the user not the tool that is at fault regardless of their race, religion, or ethnic background. We can reduce accidental shootings by using common sense such as gun safety training and keeping them away from children. But removing guns from law abiding citizens will have no affect on those who intend on harming others. Criminals don't care a whit about laws or restrictions. In fact, I dare say that criminals are the biggest supporters of gun control.

 

If you want to know more about this article's topic, please check out the links below. If you enjoyed the article, please consider passing it along to others and don't forget to subscribe. It's free! Lastly please be sure to "like" us on whatever platform you use to read anotheropinionblog.com. It helps with the algorithms and keeps our articles in circulation. Thank you! 

 

Alarming rise in youth gun deaths breaksdown differently by race

Gun Quotes From 20 of America's Founding Fathers --- 2nd Amendment

Fact Check: Rates of white-on-white and black-on-black crimeare similar

Police Officer Demographics and Statistics In The U.S.

All Across Latin America, Unwed Mothers Are Now The Norm

Hispanic Family Values?

 

African-American Family Structure

The Origins of the 'Acting White' Charge

Public Trust in Government 1958 - 2022

Bureau of Prisons: Inmate Race

62 percent in new survey trust police to do what is right all or most of the time

Crime, Race and Ethnicity in the United States: Where Are We Headed?

Since the beginning of 2023 there has been 15 mass shootings. As of April 10th, there has been 11,500 deaths due to gun violence and dozens of acts of mass violence ranging from the "takeover" of streets and intersections to the swarming and looting of local businesses.  In many cases, the police are simply outnumbered and outgunned. Meanwhile, police officers are either quitting or taking early retirement in droves, leaving cities severely shorthanded.

 As of March 7, 2023, there have been 63 police officers shot in the line of duty.That's up by 33% from 2021. Of those shot, 8 were killed by gunfire. 323 were shot in 2022. Also since the beginning of 2023, there have been 18 ambush-style attacks on police officers. Many were by individuals who had committed by a "bait" crime and waited not just for police officers to show up, but EMS or firefighters to arrive on the scene. There ambush-style attacks have resulted in 21 officers being shot, of which 3 were fatal. In 2022 there were 124 such attacks. The majority of these attacks occurred in Texas, Arizona, California, and Georgia.

According to a October 2022 Pew Research Report, 61% of registered voters said that violent crime was serious issue. 73% of Republicans said the violent crime was serious which needed to be address by Congress.  On the other side of the aisle, just 49% of Democrats saw violent crime as a serious issue. 34% of liberals in general considered violent crime was an issue which needed to be addressed by Congress. Bearing that mind, when we look at violent crime and race, we see an different picture.

According to the Pew survey, 81% of blacks, the majority of whom vote Democrat, saw violent crime as an issue which needs to be immediately addressed while 65% of Hispanics, who also tend to vote Democrat, also saw violent crime as a serious issue. Among whites, 56% also agreed. It's worth noting that just 33% of white Democrats agree with their fellow Hispanic and black Democrats.

On a related note, according to the most recent statistics regarding "hate crime" compiled by the FBI, since 2021 indicated that were 7,074 incidents of a hate crime reported. Of those, the majority---64.8%---were based on race or ethnicity. 15.6% were due to sexual orientation, and 13.3% were the result of the victim's religion.  3.6% were based on gender identity, 1.7% on disability, and 1% was solely on gender.

The report also indicted that 66.7% of the attacks were against individuals while 30% was on property and 3.3% of the attacks were generic. Just over 32% of the attacks were in or near the victim's home or place of work. 16.9% took place on a road, highway, street, sidewalk or alley. 8.1% happened at a school or on a college campus.

7% occurred in a parking lot or garage while 2.8% of the reported hate crimes were at restaurant or diner. 2.7%  took place in a park or public outdoor setting. Finally, 26.1% of the reported hate crimes happened at multiple locations.

When we look at the offenders, the FBI reported that 56.1% were white. 21.3% were black and 13.5% were unknown. When it came to the ethnicity of the offender rather than race, 7.6% were Hispanic or Latino. 8.9% were of multiple ethnicities, while the largest segment---28.1%---were simply unknown. Lastly 82.3% of the offenders were 18 years of age or older.

Using data from the 2021 FBI Uniform Crime Report, the Feds pointed out that while blacks make up just 13% of the U.S. population, they make up 33% of those arrested for non-fatal crimes which include robbery, aggravated assault, rape, and robbery. For more serious non-fatal violent crimes in which violence was used, they made up 36% of those arrested.

Hispanics comprise 18% of the U.S. population and yet are 21% of those arrested for serious non-fatal violent crimes. Whites make of 60% of the overall population and represent 46% of those arrested for non-fatal violent crimes and 39% of the more serious non-fatal violent crimes.  They also are perpetrators of 52% of the violent crimes. Victims were able to identify the race of their assailant in 85% of the cases.

When it came to multiple assailants, the average number of attackers were two, in which 43% of the assailants were black, 38% were white, and 16% were Hispanic. When there was a single attacker, 59% were white compared to 22% who were black and 14% who were Hispanic. As for Asians, they consistently had the lowest percentages of any group with an average of about 5% of crimes committed, which is in proportion to their 5.7% of the U.S. population. 

As most of you already know, the United States has the dubious honor of having the highest percentage of individuals behind bars of any industrialized nation with an average of 505 individuals per 100,000. However, among countries in general, the U.S. is sixth.

El Salvador is ranked first with 605 individuals per 100,000 behind bars. This followed by Rwanda with 580 per 100,000, Turkmenistan with 576, American Samoa with 538, and Cuba with 510. After the U.S., we have Panama's 478 per 100,000. By comparison, Turkey's infamous prison system has 374 while Russia has "only" 304 and Costa Rica, with 301, is among the lowest in the world.

When we examine the latest available information (2021) regarding the prison composition of U.S. prisons, the Prison Policy Initiative reports that the largest racial segment behind bars are blacks. As stated above, blacks make up roughly 13% of the total U.S. population. However, according to the report they comprise 38% of the total number of inmates.

The arrest rate of blacks compared to whites is 6,109 to 2,795 per 100,000 while the conviction and incarceration rate is an astonishing 2,306 to 450 per 100,000. They also make up 30% of those on parole. Hispanics are 30.2% of the prison population. Whites make up the majority of the inmate population with 57.5%. Asians are 1.4% of those behind bars while Native Americans make up 2.6%.

In terms of age, the largest segment are those between ages 36 and 40 at 17.7% of all inmates. This is followed closely by those ages 31 to 35 with 16.9% and those 41 to 45 at 16.7% of the prison population. Next in line are those between 46 and 50 who make up 11.8% of those behind bars. Ages 26 through 30 comprise 11.7% of those incarcerated.

When it comes to the crime, almost half of all federal prisoners---44.7%---got busted on drug charges. Weapons, arson, and explosives charges make up 21.7%. This is followed with 12% charged for sexual offense. Next are those busted on immigration violations. They make up 5.2% of inmates.

Extortion, bribery, and fraud make up 4.3%. Murder and other non-sexual violent crimes comprise 3.2% of federal inmates. 4.8% of inmates were convicted of burglary, larceny, and property offences charges. Robbery is 2.7% of prison population. The balance is made up of those serving time for wide range of charges such as bank robbery, embezzlement, criminal enterprises, and insurance fraud.

The majority of those sentenced to federal prison are slated to do 5 to 10 years (25.5%). 22.6% are sentenced to 10 to 15 years. Those incarcerated for 15 years but less that life make up 15.1%. Those doing up to 20 years make up 12.6% of the inmates. 9.8% are doing 1 to 3 years behind bars with 2.2% doing less than 2 years. Lifers make 2.5% of prisoners.

When it comes to gender, while women are 51% of the total U.S. population, they are only 6.8% of those serving time in a federal prison. Males are by far the largest group, making up 93.2%. The federal prison system doesn't keep track of those who identify of  a gender different from their birth certificate.

So, what does all this mean? The media, as well as those on the Far Left, claim that the majority of people shot and killed by police are those of color, and therefore, call for the total disarming of everyone.  In truth, whites are more likely than any other racial group of being shot by law enforcement.

In 2022 there was 1,097 individuals killed by the police. Of those, 225 were black while 125 were Hispanic. 22 were classified as "other", meaning Asian, Native American, or mixed race. 329 of those killed were white while the race of 321 were unrecorded or undetermined.  We have similar racial numbers going back to 2017. The only number of any real significance  is that the number of those shot and killed by police have continued to increase, from 981 in 2017 to 1097 as noted above.  

Using the FBI's most recent report of crimes committed by race and ethnicity, the "2019 Crime in the United States", there were over 6.8 million crimes committed in 2019. Of those, whites committed 69.4% of all crimes. However, the report also indicates that minorities, particularly blacks, were more likely than not to be stopped and ultimately arrested for a violent crime.  Is that due to institutional racism and "profiling"?

Not according to the report. It stated that blacks were responsible for 55.9% of all murders while whites made up 41.1%. The reminder were categorized as of "unknown" race/ethnicity. In looking at the victims, the report stated that 54.7% were black. Whites made up 32.3% and the victim's race of 3.1% of was undetermined or not listed.

When it came to violent assaults, non-Hispanic whites were likely to be the victim in half of the reported cases that didn't include a weapon. Black and Hispanic victims accounted to the majority of non-fatal firearm injuries.

Concerning robberies, whites victims and black offenders were 12 times more likely than not according to a National Crime Victimization Survey conducted in 2002. When it came to carjacking, blacks were the victim 56% of the time, followed by 21% of whites. Asians and Native Americans were carjacked 16% of the time.

It's worth noting that a 2009 Pew Hispanic Center report mentioned that Hispanics accounted for 40% of all sentenced federal offenders, while is triple their share of the population. Of this, 48% related to immigration issues, 37% for drug violations, and 15% for other crimes.

The 2019 FBI report added that while black youths made up 16% of the under 18 population, they were responsible for 52% of violent juvenile crime. Could this be a symptom of growing up in a single parent household? Perhaps. 64% of black juveniles live in a single parent household compared to 24% of white children and 15% of Asians. 40% of Hispanic kids also fell into this category.

Hispanic juveniles also made up 46.2% of all gang activity. Blacks comprised 35.3% while whites made up just 11.5%. 7% were of other or mixed racial groups. As indicated earlier, the reports stated that larger cities, suburban areas, as well as some smaller cities and towns were where the majority of these gangs were found.

The take away here is that all racial groups are affected by the rise in violent crime, but not equally. Whites are more likely than other groups to commit a crime, most being non-violent, in terms of raw numbers, but this owing to the size of the white population.  Blacks are overrepresented by percentage of population when it comes to offenders. They are also 3 times more likely to be arrested than not. However, blacks are also more likely than not to be the victim, especially if the offender is also black.

Hispanics, especially under the age of 18, are more likely than not to belong to gang. That's particularly so if they're male, come from a single parent home, and live in a urban environment. Next would be black youth (again applying the same criteria), followed by whites and Asians.

However, none of the data indicated that taking guns out of the hands of law abiding citizens would do little to reduce crime, especially violent crimes, but it would likely lead to an increase in potential victims. There's nothing criminals like better than easy pickings.

While tighter restrictions pertaining to gun ownership may slow the sale of certain types of guns, most offenders---85.8%--- acknowledged that they acquired their weapon either from a family member, friend, or the weapon had been stolen at the time it was acquired according to the U.S. Sentencing Commission. In addition, 95.6% of those arrested are given the recommended minimum sentence for the use of a firearm in carrying out a crime.

It should be noted that according to the DOJ, 79.1% of all weapons used in carrying out a crime were handguns. Rifles (including semiautomatics like the AR-15) comprised just 11.1%. Of those stolen, 20.5% were .38 caliber revolvers followed by .22 and .357 caliber revolvers  11.7% and 11.6% of the time respectively. 9mm semiautomatic handguns such as a Glock were next with 8%.

Instead of taking guns away from law abiding citizens, the emphasis needs to be on better gun security to reduce their access by criminals and out of the hands of children as well as mandatory firearms training to reduce accidental shootings.

Schools need to adopt better discipline standards in the classroom as well as implement additional programs for pre and after school activities. Curriculums need to include developing critical thinking skills and civics.  Adding community based volunteer programs would also help.

The Justice System needs to reevaluate how it treats juveniles arrested for crimes including shoplifting or bullying. Instead of slapping them on the wrist and letting the go, juveniles need to bear responsibility for their actions. There needs to be expanded rehabilitation programs for non-violent first offenders and tax credits for potential employers. In addition to more and better trained law enforcement,  there needs to be a regular presence in not just high crime areas, but in schools and government housing.

There needs to be an emphasis on keeping adult male parents in the household of their children. However, in the absence of a proper male role model, there needs to be more community based programs aimed at high risk children such as Big Brother/Sister programs. More job based programs also need to be introduced, including trade schools.

The approach we've been using since the 1970's obviously doesn't work anymore, if indeed it ever really worked. Only by instilling a sense of responsibility in youth of all races and ethnicity, better discipline in schools, and providing access to opportunities can we ever hope to reduce the current trend in violent crimes and produce more productive adults.  

 

If you want to know more about this article's topic, please check out the links below. If you enjoyed the article, please consider passing it along to others and don't forget to subscribe. It's free! Lastly please be sure to "like" us on whatever platform you use to read anotheropinionblog.com. It helps with the algorithms and keeps our articles in circulation. Thank you! 

 

FBI 2021 Hate Crime Statistics

U.S. DOJ Statistics on Race and Ethnicity of Violent CrimePerpetrators

Countries with the largest number of prisoners per 100,000of the national population as of January 2023

Prison Policy Initiative: Race and Ethnicity

Federal Bureau of Prisons: Inmate Age

Federal Bureau of Prisons: Inmate Statistics

Number of people shot to death by the police in the UnitedStates from 2017 to 2023 by race

Race and crime in the United States

DOJ: Guns Used in Crimes

National Institute of Justice: Preventing Crime: What Works, What Doesn't, What's Promising

 

Racism, Youth, and Distortions by the "Woke" Left

What's the first thing that comes into your mind when you see young kids shoplifting? It is "just one of those things" ? Is it "where are their parents" or something more akin to "if someone doesn't straighten that kid out they're going to wind up in jail"?

For most of us, we're not concerned about their gender, race or anything else. It's just the fact that they're are brazen enough to steal, usually right under the noses of management. In many locations, store management and security are hamstrung in what they can and can't do when it comes to shoplifting, particularly when it involves juveniles.  

Sadly, shoplifters tend to know this better than anyone. Not only do they know the best and easiest ways to steal from stores, they also know how each store responds along with what items will likely get them in serious trouble the quickest.

This knowledge is not just something adults or professional thieves know, but it's also something that younger kids seem to pick up on quickly too. They also know that if caught, it's unlikely much of anything is going to happen to them because they're minors. That's one reason professional thieves often employ minors for riskier crimes like breaking and entry, drug dealing, and, of course, shoplifting.

As a result, stores lose millions annually, at least on paper. In reality, they simply raise prices to offset the cost of the stolen merchandise, leaving customers to pick up the tab.  According to a Forbes article from November of 2022, shoplifting has become nearly a $100 billion dollar "industry" that we, the ordinary consumer, have to pay for.

The magazine, "Loss Prevention", wrote in January 2018 that nearly 55% of adult shoplifters and criminals got their start as juveniles. An article published by the National Association for Shoplifting Prevention, stated that nearly 1 in 4 adults started shoplifting between the ages of 12 and 14. Stores lose on average some $45 million dollars a day to shoplifters while law enforcement authorities estimate that approximately 550,000 shoplifting incidents occur daily.

The report goes on to say shoplifters are caught just once out of 49 times they steal, yet less than half are turned over to the police. Chronic shoplifters are arrested just once out of 100 attempts to steal. Lastly, 75%  of criminal justice professionals acknowledge that shoplifting, often starting out while a young juvenile, go on to more violent crimes which often includes some form gang activity. It's also worth noting that most juvenile shoplifters are white; some 70% according an FBI report. 

The Office of Justice Programs reported that between 14% and 30% of juveniles join gangs.  Their age range when they join is between 12 and 14, which is about the same age range that youngsters start shoplifting as noted above.

Approximately 39% of black youth living in large cities join gangs compared to 32.7% in the suburbs.  45% of Hispanic or Latino juveniles from large cities tend to join gangs with 51% of those living in suburbs do so.

As for whites, just 9.7% living in big cities are likely to join a gang compared to 9.1% living in the suburbs. Meanwhile, 5.8% of other racial groups such as Asians living in larger cities are likely to join a gang. Just 7.2% of those living in the suburbs will probably join a gang. As an aside, males are far more likely to join gangs than females. However, females gang members are more common in suburban and rural areas, 45.3% and 49.5% respectively.

In 2022, more than 1,300 juveniles between ages 12 and 17 were killed by gun violence with another 3,800 injured. In 2021, the number juveniles killed or wounded by guns topped 6,000.  In 2022, 300 kids age 11 and under were killed by gun violence. 700 were wounded.

Most violent crimes committed by juveniles (64%) typically occur on school days in the hours after the end of the school day through early evening (that is, between the hours of 2:00 pm and 7:00 pm).  On non-school days, violent crimes committed by juveniles tend to happen between 6:00 pm and 9:00 pm.

67% of black families are single parent, meaning that the majority of children lack the guidance of a father figure. 8.6% of black adults are unemployed according to the National Bureau of Labor Statistics latest report of 2021, followed by 8.2% for Native Americans. Meanwhile, the unemployment rate for Hispanics is 6.8% and 5.0% for whites.

In addition, as of 2021, almost a third of these families lived at or below the poverty line, meaning their mother is likely working and/or their children are being cared for by an elderly grandparent or neighbor, which in effect means little in the way of family structure.

I was recently watching a video on a Twitter site hosted by the Hodges twins, Keith and Kevin. The Hodges are conservative stand-up comics and political commentators (and for what it's worth, they also happen to be black which neither here nor there). I've been watching them for some time now and really enjoy their humor which is mixed with some really insightful social observations.

The video, which included a comment by the Hodges ("kids are being taught to do this shit..."), showed the apparent commission of crime being carried out by four or five wannabe "Jesse James" types. These wannabe gangsters were probably between 9 and 12 years old and male.  The crime was a "scoop and scoot" at what appeared to be a neighborhood drug store. The "goods" looked to be petty stuff, mostly chips, cookies, candy and so forth.

In the video you can see a store employee speaking with someone on the phone. The expression on his face is one of disbelief. Apparently the employee, aware of the crime in progress, had shut and locked the store door. Whoever he was speaking with had apparently told him that he couldn't do that and to open the door.

The employee reluctantly unlocks and opens the door as the "James Gang" make a break for it, shoving the employee aside, running across a busy intersection in triumph while other employees start picking up the mess left behind.  Finally, I feel that it's important that I should mention that everyone involved---the kids and employee---were black ( you'll understand why I mention that in a moment).

I could see the expressions on their faces of utter glee of a successful heist. I don't know if this was a spur of the moment job or if any planning had gone into it. Was this a first time "scoop and scoot" or had they or one of gang done it before? Perhaps it was a dare. With kids of that age, it could be almost anything. However, I had just started work on this article so I was already aware of the statistics.

I knew, thanks to the articles and statistics already read, that this little raid should be reason for some concern, not just for the store or its employees, but for the parents, teachers, friends and neighbors of these kids. Being male, a minority, and living in what appeared to be urban environment, the odds of staying out of trouble weren't too good. 

As it is, gangs are usually associated with all sorts of crimes (especially violent crimes and drugs), are the most prevalent in cities. Although blacks make up just 13% of the total population, the percentage of illegal drug use among blacks is 6.9% (the national average for drug use among other races is 7.4%), and young males are the most vulnerable.

So as you might expect, I had to make a comment. Here is what I said: "Thieves. Soon, perhaps in a few years, we'll be hearing about how they died. Maybe gang related. Maybe in a shootout with police. Perhaps a homeowner defending their property. And it will be their parents and neighbors bemoaning the injustice of their deaths".  

Now, you'll notice that there was no mention of race, gender, or anything else. My comment was one of empathy for their parents who, if this type of behavior goes unchecked, may find themselves crying over the body of their child and wondering "why" and "how" this could have happened. 

Based on the reports and statistics mentioned above, this is not a remote outcome . A kid laying dead somewhere, the victim of a drive by shooting, gang violence, drug overdose, or a crime gone wrong is far too common. Perhaps instead of being the victim, they got caught trying to rob someone or selling crack and now they're facing prison. Maybe they're the one who accidentally killed someone.

There's a whole myriads of bad results which started innocently enough with some petty theft. Heck, I just saw a video of a group of older teenagers randomly opening bags of chips, Cokes, cookies in a store helping themselves, and then trotting out after obviously enjoying themselves.

Well, you can well imagine the responses I received. According to the Hodge's site, my simple comment generated some 10.9 million views along with 2,452 comments. It also generated 21.6 thousands "likes" and was shared 5,140 times! The vast majority of comments were positive with most agreeing that this kind of behavior could have very serious consequences for these kids.

However, there was a minority of commentators who wasted no time in playing the racist card (which, of course, I'm far from) and making all sorts of racial slurs toward me, alleging that I was stereotyping these kids, that I was wanting these kids die while referring to me as "sick and deranged", an "old white clown", openly wishing I would die or "rot away", and so on.  

Fortunately, as I said, these were minority, but still I found it amazing how people could twist a simple remark about empathy into something barring no resemblance to the comment itself. Nothing in comment related to race (but their responses did). Nothing in my comment mentioned wishing death on anyone (but their responses did). Nothing in my comment mentioned joining a gang (although their responses did). I did, however, say they could end up being the victim of violence if this kind of behavior continued and statistics support me in that statement. 

I suppose this little exercise demonstrates how vicious and reactionary some on the "woke" Left can be. They certainly can't stand a contrarian opinion, at least on this occasion! They demand tolerance, but for them. Not you. They call you "racist" while they're on a racist rant. They claim to oppose hatred, and yet their comments are as vitriol as they can be. They claim they're wanting to avoid an argument while trying to trigger one with name calling, distortions, and not so subtle innuendos and implied threats.

In fact, several excused the shoplifting youngsters by saying they "might be hungry" while others blew the theft off all together as no big deal. Perhaps I should have condoned the theft since I'm white, "privileged", and all that just as they did. But that would be morally wrong. 

A few wanted to compared the shoplifting to "mass shootings" (which are obviously unrelated) by claiming that they are routinely carried out by whites to the relative banality of the shoplifters. They also claim that I ignore these type of crimes as well.  

To set the record straight, I do routinely condemn mass shooting along with any other form of mass murders including wars over economics in my articles as well as directly online regardless of race, gender or any other factor. Secondly, how would they know unless they regularly read my articles?

However, despite their apparent racial undertones, they are correct that whites are largely responsible for mass shootings. According to Statista, 74 mass shooting were committed by whites while 25 were committed by black individuals between 1982 and April 2023. Hispanic were responsible for 11 such shootings and Asian for 10.  Native Americans committed just 3.  

There's no question that shoplifting is a serious gateway crime which all of us eventually pay for. Although much of it is committed by adults, those under 17 years of age are responsible for a significant portion. Of those, many wind up on a path no one would wish on them.

Many come from an environment where the odds are already stacked against them---poverty, high crime neighborhoods, single parent households, little to no consistent adult supervision, underperforming schools and few opportunities in their neighborhood. Some are even taught to fear or hate police officers, disrespect teachers, and come to admire gang lifestyle. They see crime and drugs as easy money. But it's also a fast ticket to prison or to a short and tragic life.

We have to do better as a society. While pre or after school programs, especially when those programs can provide some nutritional meals are great, nothing replaces the active involvement of a parent in the daily lives of their kid  just as nothing beats a good education. There has to be a refocus of school curriculums to civics, critical thinking and business skills with an emphasis on basic math, proper English, the sciences, and history. 

After school and summer programs working in the community is another great avenue for teenagers. Perhaps too is redirecting those about to graduate from high school into the trades. College isn't for everyone and trade schools are a lot less expensive, pay well and have great benefits. It's also an opportunity to opening your own business at some point if that's what you want to do. We have to do better by our kids. What we've been doing is obviously not working.

 

If you want to know more about this article's topic, please check out the links below. If you enjoyed the article, please consider passing it along to others and don't forget to subscribe. It's free! Lastly please be sure to "like" us on whatever platform you use to read anotheropinionblog.com. It helps with the algorithms and keeps our articles in circulation. Thank you! 

 

Shoplifting Has Become a $100 Billion Problem For Retailers

The Shoplifting Problem in the Nation

 

A record number of American kid's were injured or killed in gunfire in 2022

Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency PreventionStatistical Briefing Book

BLS: Labor force characteristics by race and ethnicity, 2021

Number of mass shooting in the United States between 1982 and April 2023, by shooter's race or ethnicity.

Hodgetwins