Note the last quoted sentence:
Googling suggests it came from someone named Dan Sullivan.
I wish it was but I’ve read this years ago (not about Obama)
Sounds pretty factual to me. Lots of violent crime is being perpetrated by young guys with violent histories who’ve been let out of jail prematurely. That plays a significant role in the fact that people don’t feel the justice system is adequately protecting them from crime, thus they feel a hightened threat. People don’t know or care what the crime rate was 20 years ago; they just know what it is now and they don’t see any justifiable reason for it.
When you say that “people” feel this way, are you speaking of everyone in America, or just the “real Americans” that get their crime stats from Fox news only? Or is it some other undefined subset of all Americans? Can you be more specific about what “people” it is that you claim believe this? Are you certain that you aren’t subconsciously replacing the term “I think” with “people think” in your posts? It sounds like you’re assuming how widespread your personal beliefs may be.
Because I honestly don’t know a single person that thinks remotely like you that doesn’t also watch Fox news almost all day long. Hardly a representative sample of the generic term “people”.
This is pretty brilliant actually. I didn’t really see how to squirm out of this one, but your position that “down” is not referring to any relative trend but instead describing some absolute benchmark does so quite nicely.
Here you’ve nicely avoided the previous trap you’ve set for yourself by describing the phenomenon as “systemic”–an utterly meaningless adjective in this context.
Oh, I don’t know. (I don’t watch Fox at all, btw. Another stereotype shot to hell, eh?) Let’s say people you happen upon as you drive through the average American neighborhood (I know, I know, define “average” :rolleyes:) and ask their opinion of crime in America, early release of violent criminals, perception of safety compared with previous eras, etc., and I think you’ll find most are in agreement with what I’ve described. Or to narrow it down a little more, I don’t know anyone of at least middle-age who hasn’t been touched in some way by crime in their own life. Didn’t used to be that way, and they know it.
Those are remarkably impressive contortions and gyrations SA is going through just to try to wedge himself into a tiny target, but it’s just not kosher. You cannot start out by making an assertion of fact, and then when called on it, come back with, “Well, it may not be fact, but I assert that is what everyone believes.”
It’s a bit like on the show “Psych”, when Shawn is called out for saying something false, and he responds “I’ve heard it both ways.”
It’s either true or not true. Even if the original assertion was relevant to addressing the point (a dubious position to take up) the kabuki dance to try to hit the point by claiming that others believe it is the case has to be rejected outright.
What is the fact you allege I tried to assert?
So now that you know that violent crime is in fact down, will you take it upon yourself to educate all of these people you encounter who think otherwise? In the spirit of fighting ignorance, and all.
Or are you content to sneer “well, you guys might be right but everyone I know is wrong!”
So, in other words, you have nothing to back up your assertion about what “people” believe, and the only way I can disprove you is to drive around and do man on the street interviews? Are you being serious here? What kind of debating is this? You claim that “people” feel a certain way, and I’m still not certain what you mean by “people”, and this should just stand as fact unless these street interviews yield different opinions? How many different opinions must we find? 10? 100? What will it take to show you that “people” don’t necessarily feel the same way that you do?
Can you try to take this discussion a little more seriously please? This is just ridiculous.
It may be down from its peak, but for those of us who lived in this country during a more civilized time - you know, a time when running in the halls and chewing gum in class were the serious offenses at school, almost nobody’s kid was a drug addict, and crime was something most people only read about in the newspapers - I’m afraid the fact that crime isn’t as bad now as it was at its zenith is scant consolation.
Your back must be sore, because you just carried those goalposts a really, really long way.
SA, when you saw Star Wars, were you concerned about all those spaceship fights happening in the inner cities?
What year or years would you consider to be " a more civilized time" for America?
It isn’t. I should have also quoted this line about your “illustration:”
So were you saying 48 Hours reflects reality, or how people feel about reality? Because you said my comment about crime rates “doesn’t stand up to reality,” which sounds a lot like saying it is not true.
So is your claim actually that people are running on outrage and are badly misinformed about the crime rate, and believe that stuff like this is commonplace?
Because at this point it’s no longer clear what 48 Hours is supposed to illustrate.
You know what? Scratch that request. I get that you think because your childhood was idellic and peaceful, you can extrapolate that to everyone, like you’ve done time and time again in thread after thread including this one. And I get that if it weren’t for those goddamned hippies with their long hippie hair and goddamned hippie music all liberalling up the place, we’d still be living in a black and white Leave it to Beaver world and it would be perfect, thankyouverymuch.
You want to live in your little bubble? Go ahead. The rest of adults will be making informed decisions using facts.
How about the FBI? Do they count?
Because they’re the ones who published those stats I posted a day or two ago.
As Ender implies, you use examples to illustrate data. OK, maybe not if ‘you’ is Starving Artist, but that’s how it’s supposed to work. Because otherwise, it’s “here’s an example of something whose actual incidence rate is something I don’t care about.”
The risk you run if you see television as actually descriptive of reality is that you end up with a very skewed, distorted, myopic worldview that is at odds with the reality that most everyone else is familiar with. The First 48 is not reality. It only depicts homicide investigation and only for entertainment purposes. It does not tell anything about the nationwide prevalence of homicide.
Did you think that the crime rate went down because Law and Order was cancelled?
But yeah, I like to think back on those halcyon days when my pa and I went down to the fishing hole every week, him whistling that same old tune he always whistled for 23 seconds. I had these two old favorite rocks that I liked to pick up and throw into the water. We didn’t have any drug problem to worry about, and no black people causing us problems. Heck, even the drunks were more endearing than problematic.
(For some reason, thinking about SA and this new information about how he gauges reality, I’m reminded of the original premise of the HBO show “Dream On”.)
There is a host of assumptions in that post that have nothing to do with what I think or the points I’m trying to make. Plus there’s quite a bit of textual sleight-of-hand that attempts to set up points I’m not trying to make in order to shoot them down. The First 48 most certainly is reality. It isn’t all of reality, but no one thing is. But the perps are real, their crimes are real, their rap sheets for violent crimes including previous convictions for rape and murder are real, and the fact that they are not the only ones that have been turned loose prematurely upon society is real. To the extent that The First 48 casts light on a particular problem, it does so accurately.
Why don’t I hear this kind of equivocation when 60 Minutes does an expose on some evangelist or corporation, or when only one Tea Partier out of hundreds is filmed carrying a sign with a racist message, or when Republican politician says his goal is to block Obama and suddenly that applies to every Republican in the country?
It’s disingenuous at the very least to try to dodge the very real circumstances illuminated by shows such as The First 48 by claiming they don’t encompass all aspects of life. The important thing is that it shows that a very real problem that a lot of people are unhappy about does indeed exist. And, having watched Robert Blake interviewed on TV last night, that’s the name of that tune!