The Rock doing well

[Mike Brown]

And a left winger pointing fingers while adding nothing. Shocking

Neither the time nor the place.

[NewarkDevil5]

So you're supporting or advocating a socio-economic system that's supported by selling/running illegal drugs because someone doesn't have a "choice"  or they are somehow "disadvantaged" even when working and earning some kind of legit income? I mean it's one thing to be on the left (and far left) but it's another thing to advocate or defend a illegal activity that leads to prison time, death and poisoning of people all in the name of being poor. Besides, that's not an alternative, that's a choice and as i said people are responsible for their actions/free will and the courts aren't going to hear that it's a poverty problem as a defense. It's bad enough to politicians buy into it.

 

Whether they hear it as a defense or not is irrelevant. If the incentive to break the law is greater than the incentive to observe it the law will be broken. If the penalty for being caught isn't much worse than the life being led while free, people will not fear being caught. Because of hard-wired mentalities like yours we now have a massive population of incarcerated people that we pay to feed, clothe and house. For someone who claims to be against public welfare, your views have created quite the public housing system.

 

Let me try to break this down for you one last time:

 

Poverty leads to desperation

Desperation leads to crime

Crime either leads to money or jail

Either one will afford the poor guy a roof over his head and three hot meals a day.

 

This is not a new thing. It is the same reason why no matter how tall a fence or how much you try to crack down on illegal immigrants when they're here, as long as getting across the Rio Grande promises a way to feed Juan's family, Juan will find a way across.

[ATLL765]

So you're supporting or advocating a socio-economic system that's supported by selling/running illegal drugs because someone doesn't have a "choice"  or they are somehow "disadvantaged" even when working and earning some kind of legit income? I mean it's one thing to be on the left (and far left) but it's another thing to advocate or defend a illegal activity that leads to prison time, death and poisoning of people all in the name of being poor. Besides, that's not an alternative, that's a choice and as i said people are responsible for their actions/free will and the courts aren't going to hear that it's a poverty problem as a defense. It's bad enough politicians buy into it.

 

BTW...if a kid knows he has this is a route, then it begs the question why throw money at inner city education? It's bad enough you can throw all the money at schools you want and you cant make kids who don't want to learn, learn. But, this scenario makes it a complete waste.

I guess your lacking English skills come into play again. got a handle on sarcasm now, so try reading comprehension.

Secondly, everything you learned in DARE class was grade A bullsh!t. Drugs are not scary, they don't turn you into a bad person. You will not become a crackhead or heroin addict upon first encounter and forever steal from your family to support your habit. Though all of these things can happen, they are not matters of fact.

The reason why drug addicts are seen in a bad light is because it's been turned from a public health issue into a criminal issue, which is ridiculous. IF drugs are legalized and legitimate companies manufacture the drugs and it's sold legitimately, the violence will pretty much end over drugs. At least for us. Also, to ignore the disparity seen between poor and wealthy communities in terms of numbers of arrests and sentences for possession is insane. I've never heard of one of my friends going to jail for getting arrested with pot, that isn't the case if you live in a city. Even when I think about those that went for using "hard" drugs, which I think is a stupid designation, are few and far between. I can think of a couple, but not tons. Again, not the case in a city. Especially given that illicit drugs kill nearly no one compared to alcohol and tobacco(not including traffic deaths linked to alcohol).

To get to my point, it's that the "drug war" has been nothing but a useless money pit and a war on poverty since those are the most likely persons to sell drugs and get hefty prison sentences for it. Add in for profit prisons and we see sh!t like what goes down in AZ with that gaping a$$hole Sheriff Joe Arpaio or the PA judge selling kids to prisons. Prison stops being a place for rehabilitation, instead becoming somewhere to hide society's problems and make a few bucks suckling the government's teet.

You want to arrest drug addicts because they commit crimes, do it when they commit crimes that involve actual victims, not the absolutely victimless crime of selling drugs. And no matter what anyone thinks about that, no one ever decided to use drugs based on a dealer's sales pitch....if it wasn't that guy, it'd have been another, so why is it so wrong for these people to try to make a quick buck?

And thank you for pigeonholing me as far left.....despite you only hearing one opinion on one issue. One could certainly say I lean towards the left, but I would not say I'm far left, unless you mean for social issues, which in fact, I feel I fall more in line with a libertarian point of view of get the gov't the fvck out of my personal business. I want the ability to fvck and/or marry who I want, drive how I want(seatbeltless) and snort, shoot and otherwise ingest whatever drug I feel like, so long as it doesn't directly impact another person negatively, i.e. causes actual quantifiable emotional, physical or monetary damage. Just like everyone gets to do with their alcohol. Which btw, no one ever gets shot over anymore.

Edited December 18, 2013 by ATLL765

[TheRedStorm]

I guess your lacking English skills come into play again. got a handle on sarcasm now, so try reading comprehension.

Secondly, everything you learned in DARE class was grade A bullsh!t. Drugs are not scary, they don't turn you into a bad person. You will not become a crackhead or heroin addict upon first encounter and forever steal from your family to support your habit. Though all of these things can happen, they are not matters of fact.

The reason why drug addicts are seen in a bad light is because it's been turned from a public health issue into a criminal issue, which is ridiculous. IF drugs are legalized and legitimate companies manufacture the drugs and it's sold legitimately, the violence will pretty much end over drugs. At least for us. Also, to ignore the disparity seen between poor and wealthy communities in terms of numbers of arrests and sentences for possession is insane. I've never heard of one of my friends going to jail for getting arrested with pot, that isn't the case if you live in a city. Even when I think about those that went for using "hard" drugs, which I think is a stupid designation, are few and far between. I can think of a couple, but not tons. Again, not the case in a city. Especially given that illicit drugs kill nearly no one compared to alcohol and tobacco(not including traffic deaths linked to alcohol).

To get to my point, it's that the "drug war" has been nothing but a useless money pit and a war on poverty since those are the most likely persons to sell drugs and get hefty prison sentences for it. Add in for profit prisons and we see sh!t like what goes down in AZ with that gaping a$$hole Sheriff Joe Arpaio or the PA judge selling kids to prisons. Prison stops being a place for rehabilitation, instead becoming somewhere to hide society's problems and make a few bucks suckling the government's teet.

You want to arrest drug addicts because they commit crimes, do it when they commit crimes that involve actual victims, not the absolutely victimless crime of selling drugs. And no matter what anyone thinks about that, no one ever decided to use drugs based on a dealer's sales pitch....if it wasn't that guy, it'd have been another, so why is it so wrong for these people to try to make a quick buck?

And thank you for pigeonholing me as far left.....despite you only hearing one opinion on one issue. One could certainly say I lean towards the left, but I would not say I'm far left, unless you mean for social issues, which in fact, I feel I fall more in line with a libertarian point of view of get the gov't the fvck out of my personal business. I want the ability to fvck and/or marry who I want, drive how I want(seatbeltless) and snort, shoot and otherwise ingest whatever drug I feel like, so long as it doesn't directly impact another person negatively, i.e. causes actual quantifiable emotional, physical or monetary damage. Just like everyone gets to do with their alcohol. Which btw, no one ever gets shot over anymore.

 

LOL, typical. You can't go more then one reply at most without taking a direct shot at me, kiddo, even when i don't take one at you. As i said before, you can dish it out but you can't take it. 

 

You're such an unapologetic left wing liberal it's actually amusing. You're reading right from the handbook. I don't have to hear more then one (or two or three) replies from you to know any more then that. Just like i can tell you're a little smart mouth, i can tell you're a left winger.

 

BTW, sit in on a drug addiction class or go attend a meeting of recovering addicts. See how their first encounters went and their stories. Or heaven forbid, you actually have one in your family like i did and learn first hand everything you THINK you know. You might actually learn something past the liberal parents and professors that poisoned your mind. 

[Jerrydevil]

This was pretty overtly racist. I'm not big on PC, but I'm actually offended by this post. These urban issues are a product of their society. What, you think inherently bad people happen to all concentrate in certain urban neighborhoods, or doyou just think every black and hispanic person possesses the traits necessary to organize gangs and commit violent crimes? Gentrifying areas does nothing to fix the problems of the complete absence of middle class jobs or of institutional racism. These people will still be poor, will still have no opportunities, and problems like gangs, drugs, and violence will still exist, just somewhere else. I can't educate you on the histories of urban social problems, deindustrialization, suburbanization, white flight, basic community planning and urban form in a single post, so do yourself a favor and open a book.

 

thecoffeecake, the truth is race-related. The problem with Newark is ghetto blacks and their dysfunction. Substitute "Newark," with any other majority-black, black-governed city.  Baltimore. Detroit. Memphis. Paterson. New Haven. Cleveland. Gary. The cause is not lack of middle class jobs. It's certainly not institutional racism against blacks. It's because blacks cannot maintain cities that white people built. You may not like this. You may scream racism. But it is the plain, unadorned truth.

 

Not all blacks are dysfunctional people who can't live in a civilized city. And I don't know what percentage of blacks are good people, work hard and raise families right. It doesn't matter. There's more than enough of the bad ones to lay waste to cities, and make them unlivable to people who don't want to live in filth and violence.

 

 

 

It is you who needs an education.

[2ELIAS6]

thecoffeecake, the truth is race-related. The problem with Newark is ghetto blacks and their dysfunction. Substitute "Newark," with any other majority-black, black-governed city.  Baltimore. Detroit. Memphis. Paterson. New Haven. Cleveland. Gary. The cause is not lack of middle class jobs. It's certainly not institutional racism against blacks. It's because blacks cannot maintain cities that white people built. You may not like this. You may scream racism. But it is the plain, unadorned truth.

 

Not all blacks are dysfunctional people who can't live in a civilized city. And I don't know what percentage of blacks are good people, work hard and raise families right. It doesn't matter. There's more than enough of the bad ones to lay waste to cities, and make them unlivable to people who don't want to live in filth and violence.

 

 

 

It is you who needs an education.

while im not saying whether i agree or not.. im going to keep that to myself .. this post right here is going to start a huge war.. but all i will actually say is majority to almost every time there is major issue ... what kinds of people are the ones that are the perps and doing the crime... we all know, and its not racist its truth.. white guy shot and killed for his car while leaving the short hills mall .. shot by a couple of black fellows .. not one incident but one example. ..let me know when someone hears of this the other way around.

[DevsMan84]

while im not saying whether i agree or not.. im going to keep that to myself .. this post right here is going to start a huge war.. but all i will actually say is majority to almost every time there is major issue ... what kinds of people are the ones that are the perps and doing the crime... we all know, and its not racist its truth.. white guy shot and killed for his car while leaving the short hills mall .. shot by a couple of black fellows .. not one incident but one example. ..let me know when someone hears of this the other way around.

 

You are also forgetting that statistically, most crimes against black people are commited by.....other black people.

 

A lot of liberals as well as college professors tend to ignore this fact too when trying to brainwash their students.

[Jerrydevil]

while im not saying whether i agree or not.. im going to keep that to myself .. this post right here is going to start a huge war.. but all i will actually say is majority to almost every time there is major issue ... what kinds of people are the ones that are the perps and doing the crime... we all know, and its not racist its truth.. white guy shot and killed for his car while leaving the short hills mall .. shot by a couple of black fellows .. not one incident but one example. ..let me know when someone hears of this the other way around.

 

You are exactly right.

 

It's important that people look at this issue honestly, and without white guilt.

 

I cringed when Steve Lonegan tried to pin Newark's inability to reduce crime and murder on Cory Booker during the Senate race. It was disingenuous, because it's not Cory Booker's fault. Newark's destruction was set in motion decades ago, and pockets of the city can perhaps be improved with gentrification, but the city as a whole will not be a desirable place for families who want good, safe public schools. See Jersey City.

Edited January 9, 2014 by Jerrydevil

[mouse]

A ton going on here, so I'm not going to try to address each post, but just put some of my thoughts down.

 

First of all, I'm liberal, and unashamed, but also enough of a cynic to question everything I've been told, by my family, professors, the media, and politicians, so I don't believe I've been brainwashed, and find it a pretty poor argument that both sides make against each other anyway. My thoughts are not a result of some massive trick, and I don't believe those of my rivals are either. Let's move past that stupidly disrespectful argument, because it detracts from real issues.

 

I attended a Catholic school in Newark. The students were mostly black and hispanic, and from Newark and the surrounding area (Irvington, East Orange, etc), though there have always been some suburban white kids (including me) as well. It has a long history of successfully educating Newark students, when many Newark schools have failed, and very few alumni have been involved in criminal activity. Most of us are working to support our families, though many of my classmates, including some highly intelligent college grads, are working low paying, retail type jobs. IMO my classmates are not better people than those Newark residents who were not fortunate enough to attend my school, and are in much worse shape (criminals, jail, dead), or worse people than those who were fortunate enough to grow up in wealthy suburbs and have higher paying jobs. I believe that education is one of many factors that can contribute to people's success and morality (or lack thereof), and I believe that Newark's long history of poor education (some of the worst in the country) is one of many factors that has contributed to its problems. I believe in personal accountability. I know that we were taught to take responsibility for our actions, that doing the right thing always matters, and that our future success was our problem, and I have many close friends who chose to be "above the influence." I also know that that influence is more powerful in poor cities like Newark, where criminals become wealthy and comfortable, while hard working parents qualify for food stamps, regardless of their best efforts. I believe that, while we would like our country to be a meritocracy, it isn't, that too often, it isn't what you know, it's who you know, and if you're poor and a minority, you will struggle to get a job in a society that remains dominated by rich whites. I am a teacher, and I believe I am qualified. I got my job not because of my qualifications, but because my dad was friends with a principal. One of my black friends has been a sub for years, because he doesn't have the same connections I did. This is real, and it is serious.

 

America has a long history of institutionalized racism and classism that have created a ton of fvcked up situations. I don't deny that certain poor, black people have made them worse, but those of us who have been fortunate enough not to have been born at the bottom of the race/class totem pole need to acknowledge that 1) we are fortunate and 2) some of our good fortune is at the expense of others. It remains a whole lot easier to stay ahead than to get ahead. I don't know how to fix this problem, especially because I'm not willing to excuse certain people's behavior, but it's an issue that affects a ton of people, and it's egotistical, misinformed, and mean spirited to simply blame them for problems that go way beyond them.

 

While I believe that education matters, I do not believe in throwing money at the problem. I work for the NYC department of education, and none of the money we've spent has benefitted my classes. In fact, due to budget cuts, we have fewer teachers and bigger classes, though our school gets grant money to put in more computers, or run a couple of BS pilot programs. So when we say Newark schools have spent more money, we don't know if that money is being spent in useful ways or not. One thing I will say in Newark's defense is that a few Newark public schools are receiving national recognition, something that would have been unheard of 10 years ago. It is way too soon to see the effects of that progress. The students who graduated after said progress have not graduated college yet, so we don't know what they will do with that education, or if their positive influence will make a difference on future students. I'm willing to withhold judgment on Newark schools for a couple more years. The money they've spent recently may still be worth it. It may take a generation for this to really matter, which is obviously frustrating for everyone, but it takes time to fix years of fvck ups.

 

As for gentrification, there is a tough balance to strike. Ideally, Newark will be able to use the revenue generated by the downtown to improve education and law enforcement throughout the city without kicking out the residents. A vast majority of Newarkers are good, hardworking people who happen to be poor. They deserve to live in safe communities, to send their children to good schools, and to have the opportunity to break the cycle of poverty and violence that have plagued Newark for generations. If Newark gentrifies at their expense, and they are simply forced to move to places like Irvington, who the fvck cares that the Devils have a nice arena? Most of Newark's people deserve better than they have gotten, and the arena can help that. I agree that certain parts of the city need to be blown up. It's why I was fine with the James Street projects being knocked down, but Newark's leaders need to be careful to represent the constituents they have rather than the ones they want.