More news on the Camrose Cat Cookers

[shadowshiv]

Oh I know that Mikey. It's a godsend in a weird way... probably one of the fastest ways a teen could think to torture and kill a cat.

They are saying that it could have taken up to five minutes for the cat to perish. It wasn't fast enough for that poor cat(if it had been quicker, at least it wouldn't have suffered as much as it surely did).:--(

And this being Canada, nothing will happen to the punks that did it.:angryfire:

 

[karrie]

They are saying that it could have taken up to five minutes for the cat to perish. It wasn't fast enough for that poor cat(if it had been quicker, at least it wouldn't have suffered as much as it surely did).:--(

And this being Canada, nothing will happen to the punks that did it.:angryfire:

Well, I know it sounds morbid, but they had the cat for days. Five minutes is a blessing considering the time they had. I've heard of animals being kept and tortured repeatedly for days and days on end.

Don't get me wrong, it's never okay. And the severity, well.... geez... I just can't even imagine shadow.

 

[#juan]

And gets get their wires crossed if their parents get involved as well. Lots of serial killers have loving parents.

Lets go back to your example. Although they are probably good an decent children, you really don't know that. Every parent thinks they know their children, but then their child turns out to be something merely secret (like gay, a transgender), or have a problem (Drugs, drinking, an abusive relationship) or dark (sexual predatations, serial killer).

No matter how well you raise your kid, you aren't programming them like machines. People don't work that way. Not only does their free will matter more than your teaching, but unless you lock them in a basement their friends will influence their life far more than you will in their formative years.

Thats part of the human condition. You can only do so much as a parent.

No doubt the kid's mother is 100% sure she is just as right as you are about your children, and this her kid is 100% decent.

My "kids" are 39, and 40 years old and have children of their own. I think I can be reasonably confident that they won't turn out badly.
There is an obvious pattern here. Bad parenting and abuse when the children are young usually has a profound negative affect on later life. Granted, all abused children don't turn out to be abusers and serial killers but almost all abusers and serial killers have been abused as children.

 

[MikeyDB]

Yeah....Yeah

Charles Manson was somone's child....and so was Lizzy Borden for that matter.

Yeah we can forego any further examination of this event, cause after all kids will be kids and as Zzarchov has pointed out, it's all a crap shoot anyway. Why just look back seventy years and you'll find exactly the same thing...... right?

 

[#juan]

Yeah....Yeah

Charles Manson was somone's child....and so was Lizzy Borden for that matter.

Yeah we can forego any further examination of this event, cause after all kids will be kids and as Zzarchov has pointed out, it's all a crap shoot anyway. Why just look back seventy years and you'll find exactly the same thing...... right?

I don't agree. I'm proud of how my children have turned out and I like to think the way we raised them had something to do with it. It is not a "crap shoot". There are exceptions obviously, but generally speaking, if you raise your kids right, they will turn out fine.

 

[MikeyDB]

Sorry Juan I was attempting to inject a note of sarcasm. How do the crime rates of today compare do you suppose with crime rates of older times? Have we become a society of people who have embraced the idea that 'anything goes' as far as our children are concerned and what we're seeing is more evidence of the results of that attitude? I certainly remember hooligans when I was a youngster and the caliber of "acting-out" was if I remember correctly far less violent and far less brutal than it seems to be today....

Am I lost in a rosy fog of denial here or are events like the cat incident something from our much more prosperous today than our dire bleak spartan days of long-past times?

 

[Praxius]

This isn't new. I remember hearing about microwaving cats when I was in school. The issue though was it was moronic kids doing it to their own pets, not breaking into someone else's house, microwaving their cat and leaving a note stating "It's in the Microwave" which I heard from a report last night about this.

I knew an idiot who bragged he poured gas all over a dog while it was chained up and burned it alive because it barked at his grandmother. Last I heard before I left town, that many were plotting their own justice.

Apparently many are doing so in Facebook in regards to this crime and the kids involved.

One thing I don't get, is that it's illegal to give out their names because they're minors.... Why?

Because it puts them in a bad position for a fair trial? Then why do we release adults' names? If you commit a crime or charged of a crime, then expect the law to be equal and fair.

Frig when I was growing up, from as far back as I remember, I was continually told no matter how old I was, if I did something wrong the cops would take me to jail and my parents would let them.

Now a days kids know about the youth justice and how it doesn't work. Oh and that their criminal record is wiped when they hit 18, as if nothing ever happened. What a great way to show consequence to these kids. So what do they do now a days? Why they use it for popularity. They know they won't get any serious punishment for their crimes and it'll all be gone when they hit 18, so they don't care.

Commiting crimes these days is a way to earn rep in school. It's a main explination for the swammings which have been occuring over the last few years here in the Halifax RM. It's all about being "Cool" and "Badass"

If they want to be bad ass, then they should be known to the public like adults for the crimes they commit, and they should face the same type of jail time adults do.... that'll set the little bastards straight.

Oh but Prax, they're so young, that can't fully understand what their actions may unfold.

Don't give me that crap.... I was a kid too.... so were you all. I grew up knowing from day one that if I did something bad or wrong, I could either goto jail for a long time, or at the very least, get a good smack around from my dad. Those we're the good old days. But now you can't even do that.

So what's left?

"Go to the corner Billy and think about what you did!"

"Go to hell mom... eat Sh*t and Die! You can't tell me what to do.... I'll Fu*king kill you B*tch!!!"

"Ok then dear, here's $50, go play with your friends"

Wow.... they sure do learn a lot.

 

[MikeyDB]

When I was a kid.... The town sherrif showed up at our house to talk to my parents about a report that I'd been identified by a local throwing stones at a stop sign....

My spiral into infamy was fixed.....

Yes I do rip the "do not remove" tags from my mattress and have on occaision crossed against a red light ....very late at night and only after making sure nothing was around....

Juveniles who commit crimes should be identified if for no other reason than it would provide a pathway to intervention that wouldn't otherwise be available....

 

[#juan]

Good post Praxius

Bad parenting is not the only cause of this kind of insane behavior but I believe it is a major contributing factor. What I don't believe is that a kid who has tortured and nuked a cat to death has any redeeming qualities worth keeping him/her around. Shoot the little sh-t.

 

[Zzarchov]

Sorry Juan I was attempting to inject a note of sarcasm. How do the crime rates of today compare do you suppose with crime rates of older times? Have we become a society of people who have embraced the idea that 'anything goes' as far as our children are concerned and what we're seeing is more evidence of the results of that attitude? I certainly remember hooligans when I was a youngster and the caliber of "acting-out" was if I remember correctly far less violent and far less brutal than it seems to be today....

Am I lost in a rosy fog of denial here or are events like the cat incident something from our much more prosperous today than our dire bleak spartan days of long-past times?

Actually violent crime rates among youth have been dropping like a stone over the last 30 years. This is even when you factor in that alot of things are now considered violent crimes that were not even crimes before (hate crimes against racial and sexual minorities for one, against women for another).

Harming small animals is also not on the rise from "ye olde days", people used to kill and injure strays just for fun (especially children) in days past.

Just because something is reported more, doesn't mean its happening more.


to Juan: Again, you really don't KNOW, you just assume you know your kids. Sit down and really ask yourself how you would know alot of things.

Picture its not your kid (emotional clouding), say its the neighbour kid who always seemed nice and well adjusted and is now 40 with their own kids.

How would you really know they didn't say, date rape someone 20 years ago in college and just never got caught? Never had a hit and run and got away? Would they ever tell even their own parents?

Or on the just embarassed front: How do you know they aren't a cross dresser? or secretly a WAAAY to into it trekkie, would they even tell their parents that?

The answer is probably no, nor would your kids have ever told you anything horrible and unlikely would they have told you something they consider embarassing.

Quite frankly blaming the parents is a scapegoat. Whether or not you had good parents is irrelevant, you still have free will and can be responsible for your own life choices.

Its not the parents fault the psycho nuked a cat, while they may not have helped its HIS fault HE nuked a cat.

 

[#juan]

to Juan: Again, you really don't KNOW, you just assume you know your kids. Sit down and really ask yourself how you would know alot of things.

Picture its not your kid (emotional clouding), say its the neighbour kid who always seemed nice and well adjusted and is now 40 with their own kids.

How would you really know they didn't say, date rape someone 20 years ago in college and just never got caught? Never had a hit and run and got away? Would they ever tell even their own parents?

Or on the just embarassed front: How do you know they aren't a cross dresser? or secretly a WAAAY to into it trekkie, would they even tell their parents that?

The answer is probably no, nor would your kids have ever told you anything horrible and unlikely would they have told you something they consider embarassing.

Quite frankly blaming the parents is a scapegoat. Whether or not you had good parents is irrelevant, you still have free will and can be responsible for your own life choices.

Its not the parents fault the psycho nuked a cat, while they may not have helped its HIS fault HE nuked a cat.

Zzarchov

You have a really bent view of the world in general and people in particular. It is a known fact that a majority of child abusers and serial killers have some history of themselves being abused. I also know that all abused children don't grow up to be molesters and criminals but there is enough correlation to see that being abused and abusing are related. I would also admit that a few kids are going to turn out badly regardless of their parents, but the general rule is that good parents turn out good children

Meanwhile I am one hundred percent confident that my children are good people because I know them, and have known them since they were born and you sir are full of sh-t!

 

[Praxius]

Actually violent crime rates among youth have been dropping like a stone over the last 30 years. This is even when you factor in that alot of things are now considered violent crimes that were not even crimes before (hate crimes against racial and sexual minorities for one, against women for another).

That depends on how you look at things and where you get your statistics, not to mention what limited details those statistics focus on.

Violent crime rates among youths might technically be dropping, but what about the level of the known violent crimes.

A good example would be that nutty drama queen who got her 20 something year old boyfriend to help her kill her parents and little brother and then headed out to a party afterwards..... sure... things are certainly getting better :-?

What about the dramatic spike in swarmings and random assaults in the last number of years here in the Halifax area? I don't suppose you heard about the two girls who beat an old lady with a metal table leg a few months ago? I don't suppose you heard my little story of 5 punk ass pricksters trying to jump me a little over a year ago here?

Maybe the reason why you think violent crime has dropped from youths continually, is because they're literally not being charged or getting away with deals and other legal loop holes that make sure they don't get charged with the crimes they commit.

Perhaps the reason why crimes have been steadily dropping is because since the youth justice system was put into play, it's been letting way too many kids get off the hook compared to before it was invented. Oh, and we all know the system not only sucks and doesn't work, but pretty much the entire country wants the system revamped.

And don't forget, 83.45% of all statistics are made up on the spot anyways.

Or on the just embarassed front: How do you know they aren't a cross dresser? or secretly a WAAAY to into it trekkie, would they even tell their parents that?

The answer is probably no, nor would your kids have ever told you anything horrible and unlikely would they have told you something they consider embarassing.

Sorry, but that's not much of a case, and only explains your own upbringing. If you can't talk to your parents about such things, then once again, it's an issue of parenting. I told my parents plenty to get their advice and input on things I was going through at the time, because quite frankly, my friends were not really friends.

I watched Star Trek, my parents knew.... whoopie.

Quite frankly blaming the parents is a scapegoat. Whether or not you had good parents is irrelevant, you still have free will and can be responsible for your own life choices.

Its not the parents fault the psycho nuked a cat, while they may not have helped its HIS fault HE nuked a cat.

Blaming the parents is a scapegoat? Tell me something: If you can't blame the kids since they're minors and the youth in-justice act basically protects them so you can't, and you can't blame the parents, and you can't blame their friends because they're youths as well.... then who the hell do you blame?

And you can't say society is the answer, because all of the above is society and then you just fall back into your circle of not being able to blame anybody....

Why must we find someone to blame? Because if nobody takes responsibility for such actions in the world, then they'll just continue on, more people will do it, and nothing will get done.

The tool I knew who set the dog on fire had a piss poor childhood when it related to his parents... they didn't give a rats ass. In fact I know about 7 people through my life who were of the same mentality as these tools who nuked the cat and the thing they all had in common were weak ass parents when it came to authority and teaching their kids right from wrong.

Oh, and what happens when you have a kid? Oh yeah, that's right, you take on the responsibility of raising a new life in the world, to fill their minds with knowlege, to teach them right from wrong. If these parents are continually going out all night, getting smashed, not giving two pebble craps about what their kid does, and then they go and do something like this.... you claim it's not the parents fault?

Come on... use some common sense.

Oh and by the way, your comment about free will and having the ability to make your own decisions:

Minors do not have this right. They are under guardianship of their parents, foster parents, grandparents, whoever, until they reach adulthood @ 18 years of age. Apparently kids do not have the proper life experience to make sound decisions in their lives, which is apparently why we have this stupid Youth Justice system to begin with. They can not drink alcohol, they are not permitted to be buying porn magazines, drive a car until a certain age, goto bars and strip clubs etc.

Why?

Because they require time to develop their own decision making beforehand so these sorts of things don't end up consuming their lives and/or killing them due to their own lack of understanding. Therefore they are under their parent's responsibility until that time, therefore the parents are partially to blame for anything these idiots do criminally.

What do you do when you tried everything and your kid is still Satan incarnate? Send the little punk to boot camp.

 

[Zzarchov]

Zzarchov

You have a really bent view of the world in general and people in particular. It is a known fact that a majority of child abusers and serial killers have some history of themselves being abused. I also know that all abused children don't grow up to be molesters and criminals but there is enough correlation to see that being abused and abusing are related. I would also admit that a few kids are going to turn out badly regardless of their parents, but the general rule is that good parents turn out good children

Meanwhile I am one hundred percent confident that my children are good people because I know them, and have known them since they were born and you sir are full of sh-t!

You say you do. Which is my point,

You say "My little johnny is a good person and I know, I have known them since they were born"

And then have the gaul to call the parent in this case a liar for saying the same thing. Can you not see your own hypocrisy?

almost EVERY parent thinks their little boy or girl is decent up until (and usually after) their kids do something wrong.

Yet the fact of the matter is, in western nations, a majority of people are law breaking. (from paying people under the table, casual speeding, stealing office supplies and showing up late by putting in a time card as if you were on time, etc)

So Juan, you sir are full of hypocrisy if not something smellier, not I. You claim my world view is bent, but yours is full of rose coloured glasses and hubris..largely devoid of humility.

 

[Zzarchov]

@ Praxius:

Sadly your wrong, most statistics are not made up on the spot. Youth crime has been dropping over its traditional level (seriously look at a graph over the last 50-100 years).

This is (as I said) with a HIGHER conviction rate and a HIGHER report rate and more things being considered crimes.

If you think a few nutballs out of billions of people is some breaking news, pick up a history book.

Ie.

Edward Theodore Gein (pronounced /giːn/) (August 27, 1906 – July 26, 1984) was a notorious American killer. Though only two murders on his part were proven, he gained great infamy due to necrophiliac behavior (which involved the skinning of his murder victims and exhumed corpses, the decoration of his home with parts of corpses, and the creation of articles of clothing and furniture from the skin of corpses). Although he is considered to have engaged in necrophiliac behavior, there is no significant evidence to prove that he engaged in sex with the corpses. Besides the death of his brother in 1944 under mysterious circumstances, six people disappeared from the Wisconsin towns of La Crosse and Plainfield between 1947 and 1957.

 

[Praxius]

@ Praxius:

Sadly your wrong, most statistics are not made up on the spot. Youth crime has been dropping over its traditional level (seriously look at a graph over the last 50-100 years).

This is (as I said) with a HIGHER conviction rate and a HIGHER report rate and more things being considered crimes.

If you think a few nutballs out of billions of people is some breaking news, pick up a history book.

Wow, so profound, you changed my life..... since you like statistics so much, allow me to fill your noggin with a few more numbers:

http://www.hfxnews.ca/index.cfm?sid=86784&sc=89

Was this August's alleged beating of a woman by a group of girls with metal table legs part of a random wave of youth violence in HRM?

Numbers obtained recently by The Daily News from Statistics Canada suggest it wasn't. The per capita rate of HRM youth between the ages of 12 and 17 accused of violent offences rose 74 per cent from 1997 to 2006.

The province as a whole is also seeing growth in violent youth crime. The provincial rate for young people charged with violent crimes went up five per cent in 2006. Nova Scotia hasn't reached the heights of youth violence seen in Manitoba, which saw a 19 per cent increase last year. But, in comparison to Ontario and Quebec, which have had stable rates of youth violence in recent years, Nova Scotia has some work to do.

But Halifax Regional Deputy Police Chief Chris McNeil says youth violence is much more intense than it used to be.

"I started 26 years ago. You'd have what we'd call a robbery with violence if somebody grabbed someone's purse and wouldn't let go of it," says McNeil. "Today that crime seems to be when someone comes up behind that person, smashes them in the back of the head and then takes their purse."......

..... The youth crime statistics contrast with a 5.2 per cent drop in overall crime in HRM from 2005 to 2006.

Nationally, that survey showed that crime rates reached their lowest point in 25 years in 2006, dropping three per cent. But it also indicated a small increase in the national youth crime rate, which rose three per cent in 2006, the first increase in three years.

Although crime rates overall have been dropping, youth crime has been increasing... once again, that narrow view of statistics people get mixed up in where they think one thing means everything.

And even if the overall ratio of crimes is dropping across canada, that doesn't mean that's a balanced drop, or that everywhere is dropping.... many towns and cities could be dropping in crime considderably, while others increase gradually, therefore your statistics usually do not give you the whole picture.... but they're good for those who don't want to think for themselves.

Ie.

Edward Theodore Gein (pronounced /giːn/) (August 27, 1906 – July 26, 1984) was a notorious American killer. Though only two murders on his part were proven, he gained great infamy due to necrophiliac behavior (which involved the skinning of his murder victims and exhumed corpses, the decoration of his home with parts of corpses, and the creation of articles of clothing and furniture from the skin of corpses). Although he is considered to have engaged in necrophiliac behavior, there is no significant evidence to prove that he engaged in sex with the corpses. Besides the death of his brother in 1944 under mysterious circumstances, six people disappeared from the Wisconsin towns of La Crosse and Plainfield between 1947 and 1957.

Exactly what does this have to do with anything, let alone prove your point?

 

[Praxius]

Added:

You still never really supplied your own solution to the problem yet, just continual attempts to tell people what's not the problem and what won't work.

 

[Zzarchov]

1.) You brought up the concept of individual cases "proving" a trend. Specifically this.

A good example would be that nutty drama queen who got her 20 something year old boyfriend to help her kill her parents and little brother and then headed out to a party afterwards..... sure... things are certainly getting better :???:

I countered that sick individuals is not some new thing, and very clearly showed that insane sicko's have been throughout history including "the good ole days".

2.) You bring up the case of Halifax.

Yep, youth crime is spiking COMPARED TO 10 YEARS AGO. The implication has not been raised on this thread that "My day" included 10 years ago when many youths of today were in fact, still youths at that point as well.

Youth crime is still alot lower than it has been when looking over the last 30, 40 or even 50 years.

Im not sure if you know how percentage drops work, but a raise of 76% percent does not negate the fact that youth violent crime rates are less than half of 35 to 40 years ago.

In the late 60's and 70's youth violence rates in north america were about 50 per 1,000. At the end of the Millenium they were about 20 per 1,000. So even with a 76% increase, that would put them at 35 per 1,000.

Thus youth violence rates are still lower today then while alot of the people on this board were young (thus refering to, in their day).

If you are like 25 praxus, then I suppose your "good ole days" was 10 years and this would seem like quite a jump (of 76%), though if thats how old you are, you know the young offenders act and its ilk were in place at that point as well.

Anyone in their mid to late 40's though, this is still far below their youth violence rates.


As for a solution, solutions are for problems. you will never eliminate crime, only reduce it. Crime is being reduced already with current changes in society.

 

[Praxius]

1.) You brought up the concept of individual cases "proving" a trend. Specifically this.....

I countered that sick individuals is not some new thing, and very clearly showed that insane sicko's have been throughout history including "the good ole days".

I Know it's nothing new and there's been various extreme crimes all over the world at all kinds of different dates. But exactly how old was the character in your example? I didn't quite catch his age. Was this a youngster (Which is kinda the topic to begin with) or was this just some adult?

The other issue, is your situation could be easily related to being a little loose in the head and it seemed right. The examples I used were teenagers who either commited their crimes for pretty much popularity and rep.... there are no underlying mental issues like licking toasters when they were young, most explinations are just for the sake of being a bad ass to your friends.

It's not that these teenagers don't understand what they are doing, it's that they just don't give a rats ass, which is the main problem. They know they can get away with what they've done by just getting a warning or being sent back to their parents who didn't do a damn thing for them in the first place.... so where is the treatment for the problem?

2.) You bring up the case of Halifax.

Yep, youth crime is spiking COMPARED TO 10 YEARS AGO. The implication has not been raised on this thread that "My day" included 10 years ago when many youths of today were in fact, still youths at that point as well.

Youth crime is still alot lower than it has been when looking over the last 30, 40 or even 50 years.

Im not sure if you know how percentage drops work, but a raise of 76% percent does not negate the fact that youth violent crime rates are less than half of 35 to 40 years ago.

Oh well excuse me all to hell.... why with that logic, I could say that the crime rate 800 or 900 years ago in North America were non-existant, since we never landed here.... now there's a drastic change from today.

I seriously don't care what it was like 40 or 50 years ago.... I'm not living in that time, I'm living right now, and these are the current problems. My understanding of your logic in this seems more like you're claiming "Well it was much worse in the past, so be greatful it's not as bad today" AKA: "I see no real problems."

Get randomly jumped by some of these punks wanting to be cool and tell me otherwise. Be that old lady who got beaten up by a couple of girls with table legs.

Actually if I wanted to and had the time, I could probably list you off every article of news and reports about youth related crimes here in just the Halifax area along in the last three years and you might see an overall trend.

Every morning I wake up to the radio before I head to work and the night before there was usually at least two assaults, or stabbings, or shoootings.... all usually relating to people under the age of 18. When I first moved here, it was all parties, universities, drinking and for the most part, no worries by anybody. There wouldn't be anything on the radios in the morning except the odd traffic accident or something foolish someone did. Now it's all high school gangs and kids trying to get in them by trying to get their crime mentioned in the news.

See that's the new trend.... they can't release their name, and if they never found who did it in the first place, so much the better. Then they goto their half-ass gangs, tell them that they did the crime on the radio, they go "Yeah right, prove it" and then they'll explain the details nobody else would know, and then they get in.

If they get caught, even better.

Oh yeah I almost forgot about the girl who got the snot beat out of her late at night by her school friends, who set her hair on fire and beat her so badly her eye socket required surgery.

Crime overall in the country has been dropping, but if you looked into your own statistics you too will see that crimes involving youths have been increasing. And the level of violence within each case has been getting worse and worse.

In the late 60's and 70's youth violence rates in north america were about 50 per 1,000. At the end of the Millenium they were about 20 per 1,000. So even with a 76% increase, that would put them at 35 per 1,000.

Thus youth violence rates are still lower today then while alot of the people on this board were young (thus refering to, in their day).

You also fogot to calculate that those times you are citing were during the baby boom generation which were also a lot more of a younger population then there is today.... yet another flaw in statistics and how they can relate to a subject.

You're spouting off %'s compared to every 1,000 or so people.... how about you look at the bigger picture of the overall population numbers of the time and the total number of youth related crimes of those times and you will see that those examples can not even come close to relating to todays issues.

If you are like 25 praxus, then I suppose your "good ole days" was 10 years and this would seem like quite a jump (of 76%), though if thats how old you are, you know the young offenders act and its ilk were in place at that point as well.

My age is irrelevent. If you took the time to even talk to the kids in schools today, the level of violence they are facing is much worse then what I went through in school.

And if things have improved since 30-40 years ago, why do you seem to give off the impression that it's alright for us to fall back some in our progress?

Anyone in their mid to late 40's though, this is still far below their youth violence rates.

As for a solution, solutions are for problems. you will never eliminate crime, only reduce it. Crime is being reduced already with current changes in society.

A general response which does not relate to a specific problem presented.

So I take it your final stance is that there is no real problem with youth related crimes or the level of those crimes, because crime overall has still been dropping? Even though I supplied sources stating otherwise?

Crime can not be completely removed from society, I never said it could be. But that doesn't mean we can turn a blind eye on big spikes in short number of years and not bother to take notice. If crime has been dropping for so long, and then all of a sudden has been spiking in the last two or so years, isn't it a tad prudent to take a look into why?

And then we all fall all the way back to the parents and the responsibility placed apon them to at least put an effort into their kids so they have some decent morals.

Do parents always know what they're kids are doing? No.... will I? No... but even growing up I knew the differences between my friends and their relationships with their parents and what they ended up doing with their lives. As mentioned before, I know of several kids I grew up with who gave their parents no respect, and their parents bent over backwards for them. Last I checked they were all on their way to jail for either theft, assault, sexual assault, or something else similar in fashion.

I don't need numbers and statistics to see what the real world is like.... I just open my eyes and ears.

 

[Zzarchov]

I say there is no problem because you can't cite sources saying otherwise.

You contradict youself. You say on the one hand that it only matters what the crime rate is now, then in anotherh and that it was better when you were going through school.

It quite frankly was not. Not only was it not for the average person, it certainly wasn't for minorities.

You also state a problem with the number of people in the baby boom generation throwing off statistics. Thats rubbish.

50 per 1000 means 50 per 1000. If there are more people, there are just more "50 per 1000" 's . It doesn't impact statistics.

You see the real world through very narrow blinders. Anecdotal evidence only shows what the world is like directly around you. You say its "Much worse", maybe you grew up in a nice neighbourhood and now live in a bad neighbourhood.

You are also no doubt looking through rose coloured glasses.

Sorry, I know its tradition,

Someone gets older and complains about the kids of today and their lack of morals their "noise" they call music, and how much better it was in my day.

But, its just part of aging and the human condition, its not based in reality.