Study finds minorities more likely to be paddled

I explicitly signed a document allowing my daughter to be spanked if she misbehaves. Regardless if they are 3 or 17, they must be taught the proper way to behave! For example: the child that was playing with the thermostat; That could have easily been a propane gas valve just as well!

I FIRMLY believe in spanking, when done in a professional and justifiable manner. I also firmly believe in rewards for excellent behavior as well.

Either you spank the child or you probably will visit them in jail when they grow up, a simple fact based on our current percentage of violence and improper behavior in the school systems here.

If you even consider this not to be true, tell me please... why are there 3+ million people
incarcerated in the United States alone? (Many of which are juveniles.)

why are there 3+ million people
incarcerated in the United States alone? (Many of which are juveniles.)

....aaaaaand...how many of these kids were "spanked" as a child? I think it is ridiculous to state that all juveniles currently incarcerated were due to lack of "spankings" as a child. That is a blanket generalization.

There are plenty of families who do not spank their children who have gone on to do wonders.
I firmly believe that if you take the time to spend time with your family and teach them the different between right and wrong they will make the "right" decision of their own accord. It is certainly not unheard of.

Jiub,
I totally agree with you.
My sister has 2 kids.
She has never spanked her kids.
But yet my neice and nephew are 2 of the most well behaved kids I have ever seen.
Great grades in school.
Very responsible for their young age.
My sister and her husband spend alot of time with their kids when they are not at work and I think that is the reason they are so well behaved.

JimboBillyBob Justice

Thank you! Your story just proves that you DO NOT need to hit your kids to get them to listen to you, nor to behave.

Spanking and hitting are to different meanings. Some children need a good spanking, and some need time out. Life without pain, is a life without gain.

And some need medication and some need counseling and some, well actually probably a lot in this case, need better parents. Maybe we should be focusing on how we could help the child, and their parents, get the help they need without hitting (I'm sorry, spanking) them. Obviously something isn't going right at home if a child is acting out at school. And I've been teaching for enough years to know that there are always resources and different interventions, never ones that involve hitting, that can help a troubled/acting out child get what he/she needs.

without hitting (I'm sorry, spanking) them.

:-)

Obviously something isn't going right at home if a child is acting out at school.

And I've been teaching for enough years to know that there are always resources and different interventions, never ones that involve hitting, that can help a troubled/acting out child get what he/she needs.

I received my fair share of spankings / hits growing up. My mother would use whatever she found that would do the job: a belt, her hand, a fly swatter, a hair brush, etc. You name it. (Dad appeared to be the mediator if she got "out of hand".: :-\) For a very, VERY long time I viewed it as abuse and not discipline. My parents and I now have a strained relationship as a result.

I agree with you LAlaLA when you state:

there are always resources and different interventions, never ones that involve hitting, that can help a troubled/acting out child get what he/she needs.

I have had several talks with my mother about it and she feels remorse, stating she was not aware of the consequences her actions would have.

Now as an adult, I am trying to make amends and not hold a grudge against her for it, but boy is it hard!

The "need" to beat a child ('cause that's what paddling is; beating them with a paddle) is never necessary. It's barbaric, and indicative of problems in the adults in the child's life.

Seriously, are you saying that the 3 year old had it coming?

I do believe spankings are beneficial. Here is a study that I found somewhat interesting.

http://faculty.biola.edu/paulp/mappvalsum.pdf

Consistent with this, Swedish criminal records indicate that
physical child abuse and criminal assaults by minors against minors both increased
about 6-fold during the 15 years after Sweden banned all spanking in 1979.9

However, I would not authorize the school to punish on my behalf. Behaviors are not going to be modified by teachers, parents would need to take that responsibility.

Justin that sort of information is what I'd call "secondhand". So many other things can happen during the 15 years from 1979, in Sweden. How would you react to the many careful studies of individual children cited in the study I reference? Or is it that you want to find a certain answer?

I realise it's a culturally sanctioned practice, but I think cultures are "works in progress", and this is something the US should examine with a critical eye.

I wouldn't go jumping to conclusions. I honestly had not looked at your references yet. I kinda take a little bit of offense in the insinuation that right off the bat I'm disregarding information. As I stated, it's my opinion in the bottom part.

Furthermore, if you have read the link I had posted, you would have seen that this person had come to this conclusion.

Reviewing fifty years of research on child
discipline, they identified 26 relevant studies on child outcomes of physical
punishment. Their conclusion: Child outcomes of physical discipline depend on how
it is applied.

As I stated in my comment, I just found that quote interesting. I didn't know that Sweden had banned spankings.

In your reference:

The meta-analysis also demonstrates that the frequency and severity of the corporal punishment matters. The more often or more harshly a child was hit, the more likely they are to be aggressive or to have mental health problems.

In my reference:

Their conclusion: Child outcomes of physical discipline depend on how
it is applied. The outcomes of physical discipline compared unfavorably with
alternative disciplinary tactics only when it was the primary disciplinary method or
was too severe (such as beating up a child or striking the face or head).

Ok Justin I don't want to have a fight with you. I jumped to the conclusion that you'd disregarded my evidence, but now you've looked at it so we'll leave it at that.

Sorry, sometimes I do some things spur of the moment and then have to deal with the consequences later. Something that I'm trying to work on.

It's ok, no harm no foul :)

You were perfectly civil and you presented evidence. I wish everyone on NV would do the same - including me, since I've slipped up now and then.

Djehuty:

Let me start by saying I don't necessarily believe in spanking for everything, but there are times when you must get their attention when other discussions fail. Not every child responds perfectly to conversation because they do not have the ability to understand as an adult does. However, when you look at where society is today, the amount of serious violence, the number of metal detectors at schools, in many cases the total disregard for any authority, the lack of respect for human life, etc. it is hard to justify the Dr. Spock approach. And when you make the statement "America beats its children. Wonderful" it tells me that you, like many others feel America is to blame for all that is wrong with this world. Why in the world would you interject some stupid comment like that to imply that this is an "America" exclusive issue. You lose all credibility by that stupid comment.

I happen to agree with some of the studies regarding some of the potential behavioral problems associated with spanking, but there are many that speak to the opposite as well. If you really want to add value to a discussion like this look at both sides.

And when you make the statement "America beats its children. Wonderful" it tells me that you, like many others feel America is to blame for all that is wrong with this world.

That's a bit of a leap, is it not? If it was about any other country I'd fully expect the response to have been "France/Estonia/China/New Zealand/India/the home of Ulrich von Lichtenstein beats its children. Wonderful."

KyanaBelle. good for you standing up for your kids. I only wish that many other parents would follow your lead.

I wonder why nobody else has so much as alluded to the racial disparities and disproportionate beating of the disabled.

Paddling is an outdated, barbaric practice. It's a good thing my schools didn't have paddling, otherwise a few teachers would have found pencils embedded in their face. I was not a very violent child, but that would have pushed me over the edge.

And frankly, getting the @!$%# beat out of me routinely as a child by my father didn't exactly do me much in the way of wonders.

I'll grant you this, I turned 36 today... I've been a grown man since I was 14... ex navy, wrestled and powerlifted through college and have been a cop for 15 years now, but if one of my parents called me right now and told me I had a whipping coming I'd go take it. It's called respect. Very damn few kids have any of it now days because parents try to be friends to their kids instead of parents. People let their kids talk to them (and any other adult) however they please and don't require any accountability for their own actions. These are the kids that wind up in custody. I've seen too much of it to ever be convinced otherwise.

There's a vast amount of difference in discipline and abuse. If a child is tiger striped from his neck to his ankles for spilling a glass of milk... THAT'S abuse. If he gets his butt busted for throwing a tantrum... that's discipline. It's not rocket science, it's common sense. BTW... a bruise is NOT abuse. Some people bruise so easily they never know when they acquire one. black eyes, strangulation, burns, knocked out teeth, broken bones... THAT'S abuse.

Sarge,

I agree 100% but I don't want anyone who is not emotionally attached to my child paddling him. If a neighbor did it, they would no doubt find themselves standing in front of a judge. My parents always said the old saw "this hurts me more than it does you" line before I got it. I didn't believe them until I gave the first of one of the very few spankings my boys got. He stopped crying before I did, for pity sakes. One of those incidences where your outrage at something your parents said to you later comes back to haunt you - they knew what they were talking about after all.

On the other hand, I won't stand for hypocrisy, if for no other reason that the d@mned principle of the thing. When the state authorities say, essentially, "If you put your child over your knee to swat his bare bottom with your hand, then you have 'beat' or 'abused' him. If our teacher swats him a few times on the butt with a 2x6 board, that's discipline" - No, that's a load of B.S. Not only is it a load of B.S., but I doubt that teacher will honestly be able to say "this hurts me more than it does you." That is why I do not want someone who is not emotionally tied to my child giving his a spanking, a whipping, a paddling...whatever you want to call it. In most normal child-parent or child-adult loved one relationships, that emotional bond is the protection, the safety switch, against a corporal punishment turning into a "beating."

I wouldn't work for that kind of pay at my job...

Everything that you've mentioned is either so far in the future as to be meaningless for a primary school student, or a negative/threat item.

There is ample evidence that people are motivated by rewards that are immediate and meaningful, and unmotivated/less motivated by rewards that are delayed or irrelevant to their present context.

If the educational establishment wishes to continue doing what isn't working, that is entirely out of my control. All I can do is suggest that if something doesn't work, it's worthwhile to consider changing it.

Winding up in some lame ass career that does little more than make other people rich is not exactly a very good motivation.

jimbobobbilljohnwilliespankytherabbit

lmao

They have typically a maximum of 15 to 30 students in a class.

I believe the important disparity is that one, not the spanking one.

Mike,
If ya gonna slam my name at least come up with something funny.
Now as for your statement.
Hell Yes if the kid is excessively disruptive..get rid of em.
The faster the disruptive student is removed from the classroom the better off all the other 29+ students will be in their education.
Now possibly your right about the disruptive student..they will suffer with a lower education.
Another option is to send all the disruptive students to one class and find a teacher who has a strong will to attend those students
(and send those teachers to a Pshrink.. cause they'll need it if kids are as disruptive as I was in school. =) )
But if the student is being disruptive the "chances are" the student is not too interested in an education.
But I think ...in the 21st Century..and the politically correct environment we live in now..anyone outside the Immediate Family Unit hitting a kid is wrong.
And if someone spanks my niece and nephew in school...they better not let me see em on the street...or I'll put the same whooping on them they put on the kid.
But again like everyting I post on NV..it just my .02 on it

Amen!

Excellent. You are my kind of woman!

The most important part of "gently" spanking a child is usually left out. And that is that you never, ever, spank a child in anger. A spanking must always be preceded with an explanation of why the spanking is to occur, along with the assurance that the child is loved, but not the behavior. So the child always knows that it is the behavior that is being censored, not the child. Equally important is that about 10 minutes after spanking a child, the parent reassures the child that he/she is loved, but the behavior is not going to be tolerated. That's what is missing from most corporal disciplinary measures.

You Go Girl! This is exactly the way my parents handled it. It is what I did on the rare occasion that I did spank. But again, I doubt this process is followed by a teacher with a 2x6. I've said it before and I'll say it again: The "Greatest Generation" was typically raised this way and what a noble generation they turned out to be. Someone was doing something right.

Thank you. I was beginning to think I was the only person that wasn't an @!$%#.

I really think the way to teach a child (I'm 19, so take this at face value) isn't to whop them in the ass. You give them limited and increasing responsibility. You model the behavior you want them to imitate because--guess what!--they will imitate it. You treat them as an adult (kind of) because, in my experience, kids tend to act how you expect them to, by which I mean if you treat them like a child they'll act like a child, and if you deal with them maturely they'll be more likely to become more mature. That means better decisions.

When you have children, you will understand the maturation process a little better. I have two children and modeling works some of the time, but not all of the time. Behaviors are part of their total life experience, not just what the parents choose. If your small child is around a child who obviously is allowed by their parents to "cross the line" without consequences, it creates confusion and questions in your child's mind. This is where many problems originate. In a nutshell, there isn't a template that you can make available to every parent for every situation. But ---- if you happent to find one, please post this information so everyone can obtain it.

If your small child is around a child who obviously is allowed by their parents to "cross the line" without consequences, it creates confusion and questions in your child's mind. This is where many problems originate.

See there? Didn't even think about that situation. Open discourse is wonderful. But, to my knowledge, the idea of "children respond best to rewards for good behavior and punishments for bad behavior" has been debunked, and at least at face value it oversimplifies the situation. Children aren't dogs. That's really all I was trying to say.

What it all really boils down to is finding what works best in the given situation, like you mentioned. Almost no question has a black-and-white answer.

Yeah. It works for me, what else can I say? Thanks for that Joseph.

I am on the data train, and there is huge data (start with BHF Skinner) to support positive reinforcement as a teaching method.

Use what works folks, if you yell at the kids all year for misbehaving and they are still misbehaving at the end of the year, don't you think you may want to change the method to something that hasn't proven itself a failure?

If you beat and threaten to beat kids all year for misbehaving and they are still misbehaving at the end of the year, don't you think you may want to change the method to something that hasn't proven itself a failure?

The kids are still misbehaving = the method has failed - it's not working, try something DIFFERENT!!!!!!

How about giving them meaningful educational activities (hands on group activities and hands on individual activities) to complete...keep them busy learning and interested???

No one is advocating beating children. There's a vast difference between spanking and beating.

This study, like so many conducted by Human Rights Watch and the ACLU, is typically anti-family and the goal is to involve the government in the raising of children. I have no desire for my children to be raised in any village controlled by HRW, the ACLU or, for that matter, the Clintons.

How the hell can something be "anti-family"?

Hana32: Don't talk to me. I find it very difficult to not say the sort of things that decrease vinacity, and I'd rather not contribute to that sort of discourse on the Vine.

SteveHouse: That's the kind of absurd propaganda that the right wing uses when reality doesn't agree with their beliefs.

You see it every election cycle. I live in the buckle of the bible belt so it's exaggerated... You can't run for office here without mentioning "Family Values". They don't tell you what those family values are, just that they will support them. Just like "Homosexuality is a threat to the American family," where no one explains how. Seems like it boils down to "ZOMG THEY GON' GAY UP YOUR CHILLINS!!"

I digress. I hate the "family values" empty phrase.

It's because many of those women are being abused, beaten, killed, mutilated by the followers of Muhammad which is, by the way, the favorite religion of leftists.

Hana32: That is not only absolutely absurd, but inflammatory and of no pertinence to the conversation at hand. It's been flagged appropriately.

Flag away, however, I posted the truth. I'm continually amazed at all the handwringing of leftists when it comes to abuse of women but they never attack the one religion where abuse of women is prevelant.

The point made by poster, to whom I responded, is that basically the article is nothing more than leftist nonsense and was the study was intended to one thing and one thing only, namely inflame racial tensions.

If Human Rights Watch and the ACLU are so concerned with abuse why not focus on a religion that promotes violence against women.

So, what you're saying is, because another culture half a world away that hates us for meddling in their affairs is misogynistic, we shouldn't bother with anything else? In what world does that make sense, and how does anything ever get done in that world if groups of people can only ever do one thing?

My point is the focus of Human Rights Watch and the ACLU is misdirected. If these groups are interested in fighting abuse against children and women, shouldn't they be focused on a group that seriously abuses women and children. Of course, the agenda here has nothing to do with spankinig children, and I seriously doubt either group is all that concerned about corporal punishment. The agenda is very clear. It's another way for both groups to trash the U.S., trash individual states and, in the process, engage is some race bating. It's disgusting.

Uh huh. They report on a geographical distribution of paddling--something that's not even controversial everywhere--because they hate America.

Hana32: I'm going to go out on a limb here and assume that you're not only white, but have never taken a sociology class.

I'm going to go out on a limb and assume you're a leftist. I believe I gave a good reason for the social disintegration of the black community. It's the leftist policies of the 1960s and 1970s that completely destroyed the black family, removed any concept of personal responsibility from young blacks -- they could simply cry racism every time life wasn't perfect -- and morality became a dirty word. In other words, one of the strongest social factors holding together a country or community, the family, was destroyed by leftist social engineering policies. White leftists, suffering from white guilt syndrome, should be ashamed for what they did to the black community but, never fear, black leftists are there to defend these insane policies. Why? It's simple. Black racists like Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton enriched themselves at the expense of the black community.

Racism is power + prejudice. Anybody can be prejudiced, but it's impossible to be racist against the majority, because they ultimately hold the power in society.

I could poke holes in every racist thing you just said, but I'll be simple: you're white. You enjoy all of the privileges of being a white person in this society. As such, you're not qualified to dismiss the claims of people of color regarding racism. You hear about it from rich white douchebags like Bill O'Reilly, they live it every day. No matter what your opinion, it is absolutely absurd to presume to know more about something that you can't experience than millions of people whose lives are characterized by it every day. I would be a sexist to presume that I knew more about what it was to be a woman in our society than a woman. I would also be an idiot.

And seriously, take a sociology class. Read a book. Open your mind. Think. Listen.

Racism is power + prejudice. Anybody can be prejudiced, but it's impossible to be racist against the majority, because they ultimately hold the power in society.

I'd disagree with that, because I adhere to the definition of racism that reads "thinking your race is better" while prejudice is basically holding stereotypes. Anyone, of any race, can be a supremacist.

Disagree with it all you like, but you're wrong. Nothing personal. I'd like to think all kinds of things, I'd prefer different definitions for plenty of words, but that doesn't really matter.

As the parent of a special needs kid there is NO WAY I will put my kid in a special school, outside of the visibility of the main stream.

That is the precursor condition for creating a One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest scenario, where institutionalized populations are kept out of public view and institutionalized abuse becomes part of the routine.

Screw that sh#t.

Speaking as a man that doesn't have children and as a person that was in a special education program, but not a school, I have to ask if you have visited any of these said schools, or are you projecting Kesey's book on toady's reality? It was a work of fiction, not a commentary on education. I am assuming you read it. I am not trying to offend you, I am sure that you have looked into every aspect of raising your child. I have no doubt of that.
However, that book was written about adults in an asylum in the 1960s and was a commentary about rebellion and matriarchy, not how to help children with special needs. You also must consider that psychology and education have changed quite a bit since then as has social understanding. This article was written from a PC view to stir up racial debate. PC, as stupid as it may be most of the time, would dictate that special needs children are given as much help as they can or Lefty would bring down the hammer. (I am a liberal)
So, that said, let me ask you this: Is your child enrolled in the normal school curriculum, or are they in a program in a regular school but engineered to educate him/her with respect to their condition? If they are in a regular school program, are they disruptive? If so, to the point where other children's education is impacted? I hope that the answer is no to both questions, but if not, than that is not fair to your child, or the other children that may be trying to learn.
And, for the record, I think that kids with special needs should, like adults, have that taken into consideration before discipline/punishment is taken.

voteobama: That's not only absurd, it's ignorant and racist. There are roughly five times as many white people in this country, and they commit crimes / use drugs at a higher rate than black people.

Well, to go even further off-topic, my son is no more disruptive than the kids around him. That is, he is occasionally disruptive, and is told to sit down, etc., just like all the other kids. He works with a 1:1 aide on special curriculum that is probably about 2 years behind what every other kid in the class is working on, but his purpose for being there is purely social.

Come to think of it, teachers and staff are pretty darned disruptive, yelling at kids in front of him, demanding that they spend countless hours practicing marching in straight single file lines everywhere for no obvious reason, that they not talk to each other (stifling exchange of ideas) and generally inhibiting their education. Maybe they should be put in a special program...Constantly yelling, hitting kids with paddles, all kinds of shenanigans. Makes it so the regular kids can't learn!

Yes, I read the book. The reason for my analogy is based on the report of an observer who went into my son's school when he was in a segregated special education program - also run by the district. The interactions between staff and students that she documented painted a bleak picture of isolation and institutionalized abusiveness that reminds me of the scenes from the movie based on Ken Kesey's book. My son was five at the time.

I have met one of his former classmates since then, whose parents chose to keep him in the segregated program. That boy never learned to speak, and is now on antipsychotic medications. A chemical straitjacket. Meanwhile my son has starred in class performances, participated in the science fair the last two years, and is an advanced Lego builder and avid video gamer. I had to fight tooth and nail to get him dragged out of the apartheid special education classroom, and I'll burn in hell before he ever steps foot in a segregated program of any kind again.

As for racism, PC, etc., I have no doubt that corporal punishment is administered as disproportionately to minorities as are execution and prison. Judging from the degree of idiocy expressed on both this thread and several others I've seen in the last few days, I wonder at myself to even waste time here trying to be reasonable with anyone.

A better way to state it would be blacks are about 12% of the population but commit crimes at a rate disproportionate to their percentage of the population. Black men, an even smaller percentage of the population, commit a high number of rapes.

No a better way to state is would be that sentencing laws have targeted black men, specifically mandatory Federal sentencing laws for drug posession of crack cocaine vs powdered cocaine. This has been discussed extensively on NV before, so I won't get into it here.

On your rapes claim I have no data. Where's yours?

You are very naive in saying anyone who does not agree that minorities commit more crimes and therefore are probably more likely to deserve spankings in school are liars. You allude to a belief that they receive no home training like the good white people of America. First of all you sound like you graduated from Benton Harbor High School, no disrespect to Benton Harbor Public Schools. I must be one of those liars because when any race is put in similar circumstances i.e. minorities in the Burbs and suburbanites in the barrios and ghettos you see a reversal in roles. Its not race as much as it is expectations, opportunities and resources that make the difference. As far as minorities being criminally inclined. Its simply the justice department is full of your sort. those of means to hire top lawyers to keep them out of prison like O.J. Simpson. He has never gone to prison due to the fact he has what most minorities don't have i.e. money, power, and influence.

I appreciate having the opportunity to enlighten this fool stumbling around in his mental darkness.

I appreciate having the opportunity to enlighten this fool stumbling around in his mental darkness.

Good luck with that, maarti.

I recently finished reading a book, Richestan , which among other things describes the high rate of drug/alcohol abuse, and theft (believe it or not) among the children of the ultra-rich. The author states that these rates are comparable only to those seen in inner-city ghettos.

The ghetto-ization of the uber-riche?

Richistan, eh? Want.

Is there a source where I can verify this? Who publishes these crime statistics?

5) In only 2.4% of crimes committed by whites is the victim black; on the other hand, blacks choose whites as victims more than 50% of the time;

What are you referring to? Between 1976 and 2005:

* 86% of white victims were killed by whites * 94% of black victims were killed by blacks

With the black homicide rate at 7x greater than the white homicide rate (#1 is bunk), that just doesn't add up. If less than 14% of white homicide victims were killed by blacks, and and whites composed 50.9% of the homicide victims, while blacks were 52.2% of the offenders... That would mean, for your half-and-half assertion to be true, 25% of all murders would have to be interracial, black-on-white homicides. But in 2005, black-on-white homicides composed only 6% of all homicides.

BTW source Where's yours?.

Hana32: Your ignorance and raging racism is vile. You have no idea what you're talking about. There are no such "studies" or "statistics" published by reputable sources, unless you consider the National Socialist Party or Fox News reputable.

I thought namecalling and personal attacks were forbidden. However, you're a leftist so it's fine. The fact is women in Islam are abused on a daily basis. You are aware, I assume, that the Koran gives Muslim men the right to beat their wives. It's not my fault leftists fall all over themselves depending racist, sexist, violent Islam.

My source for the crime statistics is the United States Department of Justice.

Funny, that's where I got mine and they directly contradicted yours. Care to link us?

I didn't call you a name. I aptly described words that you said with appropriate adjectives. You said racist things. You said things that were untrue. You said things from an obviously uninformed perspective.

And that's disgusting. The misogyny of Islam is horrible. Thing is, the misogyny of Islam doesn't make what you've been saying any less racist, or your information any less incorrect. Nice attempt to derail, though.

Do you know of anything poverty does not make worse? Please think of some of the consequences of poverty of pocket book,on mind, body, educational opportunities, and the ruin of decaying inner cities, drug sales, violence, gangs, school drop outs, under achieving, child abuse of all kinds and neglect, a completely broken foster care system, children raising brothers and sisters, domestic abuse, no electricity, slum lording, hopelessness, and hatred. Some kids are in 10-15 foster homes and then may get in the group home system.

Yet, from the awful above, are such potential for trapped kids to become physicians, engineers, nurses, college proffessors, teachers, law makers, pharmacists, architects, and astronauts. But they do not know this or care sometimes. They may be the family care takers. They may face eviction after eviction with life in a shelter or on t he street. For the impoverished, whether black, white, or any ethnicity, they may be the major care taker. I am not making excuses for anyone.

Hunger in America is absolutely rampant! People go to be hungry and get up hungry. It is very difficult to sit up in a classroom and learn when the blood sugar is so low and the stomach so empty.

Sometimes these children will have witnessed the death of 4 or 5 people by the time they are 12. Can you imagine living in a neighborhood where totally innocent kids, teens, and adults to be shot to death? Sometimes families have lost two or more family members to senseless death by the use of guns or knives. Can you imagine gangs and the awful risk and persuasion they have.

This qualifies as a war zone, and the cost to society at large, the victims, the toll of drug use and selling, on everyone, the loss of parenting skills, no guidance are just tragic
consequences. I particularly love Michael Moore's Farenheit 911. You will see cities with decay similar to the horrible destruction of Iraq. If you have not seen it, please do. It is worthyour time.

There are some wonderful parents, grand-parents, children who are survivors from the worst of situations in these impoverished areas. They are too few though. I do not know the solution. Love, care, a safe and stable enviornment, healthful food, medical and dental care on a consistent basis, suitable seasonal clothing, limits and boundaries, reading to a child, interest and promotion of education and the importance of school attendance, along with respect for self and others. These are a few clues, and these apply to the needs of humanity, not Black, or white, of Asian, etc.

I also would include attendance in a loving and inclusive Church, if it were my family. I am Christian. To learn empathy, caring, love, and a respectful concer for others are such crucial aspects, no matter who we are.

People who are able to flee from impoverished cities do so as fast as they can. Who gets the school money when there are fewer tax paying citizens? And the economic situation is frightening beyond words.

When a young African American man is more likely to go to prison than to College, something is horrendously wrong.