[AKS]

Absentee fathers aren't the sole reason; but that plays a large role. There are definitely few positive black role models; at least ones that people are aware of. Unfortunately a lot of young black people look up to hip hop artists. They'd be better taking advice from Raymond Babbitt. White kids that come from single parent homes also have the advantage of having a wider range of wise, caucasian people to emulate. It's up to black adults to set a better precedent for their own people.

Don't blame the fathers. Blame the crowed they hang out with and the culture they surround themselves with. In the Eaton Centre shooting, was the father a bad father? His son took the wrong route and got himself into trouble with the law. He moved out of the house even. He hung out with the wrong crowd. It could happen to any race.
Parents can only do so much if their kids don't listen to them. Children rebel against parents and rather listen to people they hang out with. Don't blame all parents. Not all are bad. If the kids come from a broken family with drug abuse or gang affiliated parents, then you can blame the parents for influencing their children.

 

[AKS]

I'm not blaming all parents. Where did you get that from? Sometimes parents are to blame, though. If a mother or father walk out on their child, who is there to guide them and prevent them from acting on their negative impulses? Yes, this can happen to any race, and it does, but why are most gun related crimes largely related to black individuals? As was mentioned above, divorce rates are at about 50%; so why is it that whites, Asians, etc. aren't blowing each other away, remotely as frequently as the smallest racial group in our society?

It's the crowd they hang out with. If people hang out with the wrong crowd, they will get themselves into trouble. It often happens to stars who also hang out with the wrong crowd and get into substance abuse. If you hang out with gangsters, you end up holding guns, if you hang out with drug dealers, you end up drug trafficking.

 

[TheKingEast]

Yup. The common-sensers are back. Thomas Paine is rolling in his grave.

Look everyone: at least I hope we can all agree to only talk about race and statistics when we can use the discussion to demonize black people. I certainly don't want to see any mention of statistics that suggest blacks are underrepresented on the judicial bench, for example. Raising issues like that is, apparently, "reverse racism" (although don't you dare try to label its opposite as "racism").

Pretty much. I'll respectfully bow out of this discussion. I know exactly how it will go.

 

[TheKingEast]

It's always funny to see people who clearly have an agenda try to simplify something as complex as race and the role it plays in our society.

 

[Marko]

Pretty much. I'll respectfully bow out of this discussion. I know exactly how it will go.

Ahh, the old "I know I have no chance of winning this debate because I have no cogent arguments to make, so I will instead claim to take the high road while taking swipes at the characters of others who are willing and able to make a point and take stand on this issue, which I clearly am not" reply. Golf clap for you.

 

[AKS]

That's true; but if parents did a better job teaching their children between right and wrong, they'd have the knowledge to distinguish between the good and the bad kids. If they don't have that wisdom, then they'll gravitate towards whoever accepts them. Why do kids join gangs? I guess they make them feel as though they're part of a family?

It's easier said than done. Just because you tell a child it's wrong doesn't mean they'll listen. Children can be rebellious. You tell them to go south, they go north. Also, just because people have kids doesn't make them good parents. Otherwise you wouldn't have shot gun weddings or people trying to get abortions because they got into trouble. People have sex freely and some act irresponsibly. You can educate them, but people will still get into trouble. If every parent was responsible and planned ahead, there wouldn't be so many social issues. That's why some choose to marry late. But some go by their hormones. You can't instill your values on others. They just won't listen. There's people who go to church and they listen to the priest preach to them, doesn't mean they're pure and follow the acts of the bible.

 

[TheKingEast]

Ahh, the old "I know I have no chance of winning this debate because I have no cogent arguments to make, so I will instead claim to take the high road while taking swipes at the characters of others who are willing and able to make a point and take stand on this issue, which I clearly am not" reply. Golf clap for you.

You had an agenda the minute you stepped in this thread. I mean, we were having a discussion about "white on white" crime and in you and Four Rivers came with your race baiting agenda....and now all of a sudden we're talking about black thugs and absentee fathers in the black community. Not to mention the good ole propping up of caucasians and asians at the same time.

Again, how did we go from a "mob" hit to a discussion on black "plight"?

What's equally funny is how you condoned the racially charged comments around the Eaton Center Shooting because.....here's the good part....blacks make up most of the homicides in the city. Bravo! Bravo!

Why would I even entertain a discussion with such a person? Waste of time.

 

[voxpopulicosmicum]

You had an agenda the minute you stepped in this thread. I mean, we were having a discussion about "white on white" crime and in you and Four Rivers came with your race baiting agenda....and now all of a sudden we're talking about black thugs and absentee fathers in the black community. Not to mention the good ole propping up of caucasians and asians at the same time.

Again, how did we go from a "mob" hit to a discussion on black "plight"?

What's equally funny is how you condoned the racially charged comments around the Eaton Center Shooting because.....here's the good part....blacks make up most of the homicides in the city. Bravo! Bravo!

Why would I even entertain a discussion with such a person? Waste of time.

Your initial instinct was correct; they're called trolls for a reason.

 

[Tewder]

The only people here with an agenda are Vox and Kingeast, quite frankly, who both came charging into this thread with an agenda:

I wonder: where are all of those people who wanted to draw causal inferences based on the alleged shooter's racial background after the Eaton Centre shooting? Their silence is curious; it's almost as if they feel lost without an agenda to push.

If that isn't gratuitously stirring a pot I don't know what is!

Calling Marko a troll is beyond hypocritical as they were the ones who set the tone for this discussion. All Marko did was respond to the prejudice of Vox's comment... what is it they say about not feeding a troll?

Anyhow, onwards with the discussion...

An honest and open discussion about race, ethnicity, culture and demographics with respect to violent crime is not a bad thing at all, providing it is respectful and informed. I can't think of a single analytic process wherein you can hope to understand a problem, let alone work to resolve it, by actually and deliberately choosing to ignore the data, no matter how 'uncomfortable' the data may be. Just doesn't work.

It's easier said than done. Just because you tell a child it's wrong doesn't mean they'll listen. Children can be rebellious. You tell them to go south, they go north. Also, just because people have kids doesn't make them good parents. Otherwise you wouldn't have shot gun weddings or people trying to get abortions because they got into trouble. People have sex freely and some act irresponsibly. You can educate them, but people will still get into trouble. If every parent was responsible and planned ahead, there wouldn't be so many social issues. That's why some choose to marry late. But some go by their hormones. You can't instill your values on others. They just won't listen. There's people who go to church and they listen to the priest preach to them, doesn't mean they're pure and follow the acts of the bible.

We are talking about 'murder' here, right? Wow.

 

[AlvinofDiaspar]

Tewder:

This thread isn't about black on black crime though. If that's the topic one want to engage in, have it in the Eaton Centre thread - but even then, that particular instance wasn't necessarily a "black" on "black" crime (what's black? Caribbean? Somalian? - to use these generic terms is about as useful for understanding the issue as using white to understand Italian/Russian mafia or biker gangs).

AoD

 

[AKS]

We are talking about 'murder' here, right? Wow.

The argument was that "fatherless" children go on to commit crimes. I am arguing that it's the culture and groupies that kids hang out with who influences them and not totally the parents fault. If you hang out with the wrong crowd and end up joining gangs who play with guns and knives, you might end up committing a murder when you grow old because that's how they grow up learning from their gangs. You resolve conflicts with violence.

 

[Marko]

The only people here with an agenda are Vox and Kingeast, quite frankly, who both came charging into this thread with an agenda:

I wonder: where are all of those people who wanted to draw causal inferences based on the alleged shooter's racial background after the Eaton Centre shooting? Their silence is curious; it's almost as if they feel lost without an agenda to push.

If that isn't gratuitously stirring a pot I don't know what is!

Calling Marko a troll is beyond hypocritical as they were the ones who set the tone for this discussion. All Marko did was respond to the prejudice of Vox's comment... what is it they say about not feeding a troll?

Thank you. It's beyond funny that the original troll with an agenda is the one throwing around troll and agenda comments.

Anyhow, onwards with the discussion...

An honest and open discussion about race, ethnicity, culture and demographics with respect to violent crime is not a bad thing at all, providing it is respectful and informed. I can't think of a single analytic process wherein you can hope to understand a problem, let alone work to resolve it, by actually and deliberately choosing to ignore the data, no matter how 'uncomfortable' the data may be. Just doesn't work.

No, it doesn't work. Nor does it work when that same side of the debate chooses to paint anyone who disagrees as a racist for simply being willing to discuss the topic directly, rather than dancing around it. If one black man kills another black man, it is not racism to say say so. If it happens often enough that those involved in policing or social work are able to categorize it as black-on-black crime, then does it make sense for this wishing to have a dialog about it to start talking about knitting grandmothers and kittens?

Also - KingEast - you are intentionally lumping me in with Four Rivers and ascribing things he said to me. That's unfair and it's trolling as well, intentionally distorting words to get a rise out of other posters. I never mentioned the word "plight" and have never commented in the thread about the Eaton Center shootings, so don't go saying that I'm condoning things that were said in there either - I haven't even read it, to be honest. I was taking a break from UT because I was sick of all the high and mighty on here who throw around shame and guilt at anyone who dares disagree with their groupthink. In future I'll just stick to the project forums, but unlike you, however, I'm not going to claim to walk away after saying something that someone doesn't like. I'll be here to respond to your next character attack, since that's what you do instead of trying to refute the comments made with any facts of your own.

 

[Tewder]

Tewder:

This thread isn't about black on black crime though. If that's the topic one want to engage in, have it in the Eaton Centre thread - but even then, that particular instance wasn't necessarily a "black" on "black" crime (what's black? Caribbean? Somalian? - to use these generic terms is about as useful for understanding the issue as using white to understand Italian/Russian mafia or biker gangs).

AoD

... which is precisely what I alluded to in an earlier post. This isn't really about 'race' at all, no matter what some here with an agenda are insisting on. This is about socio-cultural issues among certain groups that are black... and this isn't about the 'black' community because there is no such thing (as there is no such thing as a white community). There are people playing politics here, pure and simple. It doesn't help the situation one bit.

... and again AoD, it wasn't Marko or myself that brought the race issue into this thread about a mafia hit. Look to Vox's post for that please.

 

[Woodbridge_Heights]

My recollection was that the Eaton Centre shooting was initially described by police as not related to organized crime, that is until both the shooter and the target were revealed to have criminal histories (one of which had recently been released from prison???). While the Little Italy shooting was called a mob hit virtually from the moment it was committed.

Even if the media are the one you want to blame. The Sun (the most Right wing rag in the city) was very quick to draw inferences from the backgrounds in the Little Italy shooting. The victim was Portugese (Portugese have links to the mob) and had links to the Loners bike gang which had disbanded and/or absorbed by larger biker gangs in the 90's.

Where's the racism???

 

[Tewder]

Vox/Kingeast are contrasting the reactions to these two recent shootings and judging it racism that some believe the Little Italy shooting to be a one-off (cause a white dude did it) yet believe the Eaton Centre shooting to be symptomatic of a problem with certain black men (cause a black dude did it). It's a worthwhile question to raise, just not in the obnoxious and unconstructive way it was done.