Question:
=>Richard, => =>It’s amazing how circular the arguments become when the "cohort" reuses =>the same tired tactics over and over agin in a lame attempt to bolster =>their position. Fortunately the anti-spank lobby has tactics which are largely supported by the weight of clinical research evidence. Did you catch the last threats greg makes. You accuse me of making threats, then don’t name the threat. How can I possibly respond? Typical of our =>journalist and just one of the many problems that the media helped create =>in their lust for sales. Perhaps the same lust that drives authors like Dobson to write books like "Dare To Discipline", that advocate things like the use of the neckpinch or "Spock hold" to force children into "submission". He doesn’t write this stuff for the good of humankind, you know. If he was so altruistic, he would give the books away rather than turning a profit on them. If greg would go back and check the old posts he =>would even be embarrassed to find older "cohort" members using the same =>claims he is now posting for the first time. I love the way he uses their =>tired old credibility threat. He still claims that if C.P. laws are =>changed practitioners and families (yes, and children) won’t suffer. Yep, I still claim that. And the evidence supports it.
Response:
Richard, It’s amazing how circular the arguments become when the "cohort" reuses the same tired tactics over and over agin in a lame attempt to bolster their position. Did you catch the last threats greg makes. Typical of our journalist and just one of the many problems that the media helped create in their lust for sales. If greg would go back and check the old posts he would even be embarrassed to find older "cohort" members using the same claims he is now posting for the first time. I love the way he uses their tired old credibility threat. He still claims that if C.P. laws are changed practitioners and families (yes, and children) won’t suffer. Keep giving him hell Richard! Non-spanker by choice, Chris C. Austin, TX – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – > Oh, you mean like self-defense. Or keeping kids from hurting each other. > Then use whatever force is "reasonably necessary" not to resort to > spanking/swatting/hurting/paddlng/ice-water/"Spock holds" in the first > instance. keep a child from hurting themselves? Yes, take them by the > hand, away from the danger so they do not get hurt. You would advocate > spanking/swatting/hurting/paddlng/ice-water/"Spock holds" against a child > to keep them from hurting themselves. What a glowing contradiction in > terms, my friend! > =>He’ll distort the truth to reach his goal!
Response:
=>Richard, => =>I think we have a new "Ivan" on this N.G. it’s funny that whenever they =>can’t refute in true debate style they revert to name calling (of course =>I’m talking about our new "Ivan"-Greg). As for the name-callin, Chris, my name is Greg, stop calling me Ivan (though I have nothing against the name itself, it’s not mine). Stop namecalling! He keeps posting to me and I =>haven’t even responded to him lately. I only reply to posts and email. If you had a problem with me answering your email, why not talk to me directly. He acts as if he understands =>correlational data, but continues to claim that there is a direct =>relationship (which any first year grad student knows that, in Fox, Borg =>and other expert works, correlation does not imply causation). Further if =>he knew anything about Qualitative research he would not dismiss case =>studies so easily. He could read the classic Qualitative texts to get a =>better idea like Denzin & Lincoln, Guba or look up experts like Lyman, =>Hamilton, Michele Fine, etc..who use this format quite often, but he =>prefers to keep his blinders on. I took the blinders off – that’s why I accept ALL the data. It just so happens that the preponderance of data supports the non-spanking position. BTW, I never pretended to be something I’m not. I’m a parent, and have extensive background in *pure* research, not clinical research. I also have a healthy scepticism of *all* sources, based on 16 years as a journalist. Chris, what are your credentials? You bandy a lot of big words, bu tell me who you are and what your experience is in clinical research. It could help your credibility dramatically, because it’s suffering now. As for the Strauss studies (and the =>others) he assumes we haven’t already debated the data and posted the =>critics responses (Richard-I believe you did an excellent job with this in =>an earlier post which he discounts in his rhetoric). The rhetoric you speak of came from Richard, not I. He quoted a study done by doctors emplyed by a pro-spanking outfit that we all know very well. When these reviewers of data (not researchers of evidence) leave their current employer, I’ll give their work more credibility. When Greg can’t come =>up with a legitimate response he reverts to name calling and threats like =>"you should be glad your far away" (oh I’m so scared-what a hypocrite =>pretending to be non-violent and then posting such garbage-typical of the =>"cohort" and wannabees). ***Chris, I believe you crossed the legal line on libel here. What I said was, I am *glad to live so far away from that person* since I believed his ideas to be dangerous. If this was an intentional misunderstanding on your part, be prepard for a libel suit. I won’t accept lies about my character being published on a worldwide forum. If he chooses to ignore Dilulio (Brookings Inst. =>& Princeton Univ.) as well as the others that is his choice, but he =>shouldn’ try to pass himself off as a pseudo-expert on anything. I’m *not* a pseudo-anything. In fact, I’m a 100-percent decent human being (well, 99.99) who has sen the evidence and it supports a non-spanking position. This is why I take this position with a clear conscience. Please post your credentials here. => =>He, like many on this N.G. would like to see any form of Corporal =>Punishment outlawed (standard "cohort" propaganda). Yes. Re: "cohort", I have no idea what you mean by this. This would put anyone =>at risk who has ever had to work with children (breaking up fights, =>keeping a child from hurting themselves-through a restraint or any other =>number of no-violent means). Oh, you mean like self-defense. Or keeping kids from hurting each other. Then use whatever force is "reasonably necessary" not to resort to spanking/swatting/hurting/paddlng/ice-water/"Spock holds" in the first instance. keep a child from hurting themselves? Yes, take them by the hand, away from the danger so they do not get hurt. You would advocate spanking/swatting/hurting/paddlng/ice-water/"Spock holds" against a child to keep them from hurting themselves. What a glowing contradiction in terms, my friend! =>He’ll distort the truth to reach his goal! No, I uphold truth. What evidence can you show here that I have lied? You say I lie without posting an example? If I did I will retract what was said. But post it so I can see. If you cant, then stop the personal attacks. =>Yes positive, non-violent parenting should be everyones goal but if they =>fall short should they be punished? No, they should be disciplined in a non-violent way. If they’re falling short, there’s a reason.
Response:
=>Actually this is perfectly acceptable as a qualitative case study and if =>enough of them are used a trend can be interpreted (by using programs like =>N.U.D.I.S.T.)-CDC =>> I’m dubious of your statistical ananlysis here, Lynn, since you provide no =>> actual figures to back it up.How many indictments were laid, and how many =>> succeeded? Were there any malicious prosecution suits after the ones that =>> failed? How many of these succeeded? As for the last part of your =>> paragraph, I worked 16 years in the electronic media – I know that the =>> successful ones would NOT be big news, but of course, the ones that failed =>> would. But I’d be interested in seeing your figures. =>> Well Chris, perhaps a trend could be interpreted if the figures were presented. You’re trying the oldest one in the book again – the bull-poop baffles brains line. Doesn’t cut it here,Chris, because most of us are more sophisticated than that. Good Luck with the Parenting thing. . . Greg Lubianetzky Father to the world’s 2 Greatest Kids!
Response:
Richard, I think we have a new "Ivan" on this N.G. it’s funny that whenever they can’t refute in true debate style they revert to name calling (of course I’m talking about our new "Ivan"-Greg). He keeps posting to me and I haven’t even responded to him lately. He acts as if he understands correlational data, but continues to claim that there is a direct relationship (which any first year grad student knows that, in Fox, Borg and other expert works, correlation does not imply causation). Further if he knew anything about Qualitative research he would not dismiss case studies so easily. He could read the classic Qualitative texts to get a better idea like Denzin & Lincoln, Guba or look up experts like Lyman, Hamilton, Michele Fine, etc..who use this format quite often, but he prefers to keep his blinders on. As for the Strauss studies (and the others) he assumes we haven’t already debated the data and posted the critics responses (Richard-I believe you did an excellent job with this in an earlier post which he discounts in his rhetoric). When Greg can’t come up with a legitimate response he reverts to name calling and threats like "you should be glad your far away" (oh I’m so scared-what a hypocrite pretending to be non-violent and then posting such garbage-typical of the "cohort" and wannabees). If he chooses to ignore Dilulio (Brookings Inst. & Princeton Univ.) as well as the others that is his choice, but he shouldn’ try to pass himself off as a pseudo-expert on anything. He, like many on this N.G. would like to see any form of Corporal Punishment outlawed (standard "cohort" propaganda). This would put anyone at risk who has ever had to work with children (breaking up fights, keeping a child from hurting themselves-through a restraint or any other number of no-violent means). He’ll distort the truth to reach his goal! Yes positive, non-violent parenting should be everyones goal but if they fall short should they be punished? Non-spanker, Chris C. Austin, TX
Response:
This is the danger of using =>> > statistics to shore up your argument, especially when people unfamiliar =>> > with the methodology can be coerced to follow something that seems to make =>> > sense but doesn’t cut it mathematically. => =>A good reason to cast a dubious eye on *all* statistics, particularly if they are =>published to support some sort of public policy change or other agenda. I could not agree more, Lynn, with the first part of your statement. Frankly, the reason they’re published does not change my scepticism one way or the other. =>> > =>> > You’re right. But I’ve seen prospankers take figures like this (and I =>> > don’t embrace the 165% figure for a minute) and say it’s the new =>> > liberalism and families who don’t spank as responsible for any perceived =>> > crime increase. What a huge leap of faith to that conclusion. => =>It hasn’t been a standard line on this forum. I have heard it too, but that is not what =>most of those of us here are saying. Do a search back, Lynn. DejaNews will show you the history of this standard line, and it has been pretty standard. =>And as those laws go into effect, they look ever more dubious. So far, most of such =>indictments here have failed, except to further disrupt families who are trying to deal =>with some problem; in most of those which have been publicized here the parent has been =>found, ultimately, not to have been at fault. I’m dubious of your statistical ananlysis here, Lynn, since you provide no actual figures to back it up.How many indictments were laid, and how many succeeded? Were there any malicious prosecution suits after the ones that failed? How many of these succeeded? As for the last part of your paragraph, I worked 16 years in the electronic media – I know that the successful ones would NOT be big news, but of course, the ones that failed would. But I’d be interested in seeing your figures. => =>The most recent is of a woman indicted for non-supervision of her 8th grade child, who =>has been absent from school for 25 days. The woman was divorced about a year ago, works =>full time, and stated that her daughter had become depressed after the divorce, and that =>the depression had become noticeably worse on the traffic death of a close friend on the =>first day of school. Sounds like tha fmily had a really bad go of it. See why this kind of story makes good press? She has begun counseling, and her mother (whose "record" is =>otherwise defined as "spotless") said that this indictment has compounded her daughter’s =>distress. She also said that she had more than enough to deal with without this – which =>seems an understatement to me. So if, for example, her husband was indicted for wife battering, should he be immune from prosecution because the indictment might compound her daughter’s distress? This I’m afraid is a non-argument. Family interference is often taken into account in sentencing, but not when laying charges or levelling convictions. => =>Well, maybe not, but is it constructive? Is this already distressed child now trying to =>cope with guilt stemming from her mother’s arrest? Has this family been helped? Heck, if Mommy breaks the law, she must be charged, and if guilty convicted. Do we simply give her immunity to prosecution just in case we might upset the child? What message does that then give to the kid? => =>Given that the child is already in counseling, I would guess that the mother will not be =>convicted. But surely this sort of indictment can not by the wildest stretch of =>imagination be described as "family support". Quite the contrary. The law was put in place to be implemented when there was some detriment being suffered by the child. This is in support of the child. The mother initiated non-support of the family be her blatant disregard for the law designed to protect her daughter. Do we forego that support for one of the youngest member of our society just so Mommy won’t be upset by the process? Good Luck with the Parenting thing. . . Greg Lubianetzky Father to the world’s 2 Greatest Kids!
Response:
Actually this is perfectly acceptable as a qualitative case study and if enough of them are used a trend can be interpreted (by using programs like N.U.D.I.S.T.)-CDC – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> I’m dubious of your statistical ananlysis here, Lynn, since you provide no > actual figures to back it up.How many indictments were laid, and how many > succeeded? Were there any malicious prosecution suits after the ones that > failed? How many of these succeeded? As for the last part of your > paragraph, I worked 16 years in the electronic media – I know that the > successful ones would NOT be big news, but of course, the ones that failed > would. But I’d be interested in seeing your figures. > Greg Lubianetzky
Response:
=>> The numbers of violent crimes among some groups of adolescents seems to be =>> on the increase. But violent behaviour among kids is *not* growing, =>> generally speaking. =>> =>Richard, => =>This is yet another good example of a "cohort" wannabee understating the =>real problem (165% increase in violence ages 13-17). Yup, and if you carry these numbers to the *general* youth population as I indicated, the increase is hardly noticable. These continued =>distortions are of more concern to me than the issue they are advancing. =>This attitude is pervasive throughout our country and is certainly one of =>the biggest problems that society faces (I believe we should call it =>denial) As in the denial of the evidence that spanking/swatting/hurting/"Spock holds" produces detrimental effects in childhood emotional development? Check out these sources, Chris. Corporal punishment of adolescents by parents: a risk factor in the epidemiology of depression, suicide, alcohol abuse, child abuse, and wife beating. Straus MA; Kantor GK. Family Research Laboratory, University of New Hampshire, 126 Horton Social Science Center, Durham 03824. Adolescence, 29: 115, 1994 Fall, 543-61 Self-reports of corporal punishment by Xhosa children from broken and intact families and their academic achievement. Author Cherian VI. Department of Educational Research, University of Transkei, South Africa. Psychol Rep, 74: 3 Pt 1, 1994 Jun, 867-74 Corporal and capital punishment of juveniles. Author Frazier HC Department of Criminal Justice, Central State University, Warrensburg, MO 64093. Med Law, 9: 3, 1990, 996-1004 Spare the rod and spoil the child. Is this a sensible justification for the use of punishment in child rearing? Carey TA. Anglican Church Grammar School, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia. Child Abuse Negl, 18: 12, 1994 Dec, 1005-10 Exposure to violence and victimization and depression, hopelessness, and purpose in life among adolescents living in and around public housing. DuRant RH; Getts A; Cadenhead C; Emans SJ; Woods ER Division of Adolescent/Young Adult Medicine, Children’s Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts 02115, USA. J Dev Behav Pediatr, 16: 4, 1995 Aug, 233-7 I found these in a matter of a few hours. I’ll do better in the future, too. . To continue to shut our eyes and to manipulate the data the way =>Greg has should be the real crime, punishable (in his words) by jailing. Chris, you are a scary person. I’m glad you live far, far away from me. =>The breach is far more serious than parents who have spanked once or twice =>in their lifetime (at least they are trying to stop an undesirable =>behavior). There are better ways to stop undesirable behaviours. The research above shows how bad spanking/swatting/hurting/"Spock holds" is in relation to emotional development of children. =>Keep up the good work Richard. The truth is important keep getting it out =>(before it’s to late for families/society. Yes, maybe Richard will be prompted by my post to post some "truth" of his own in the form of research supporting the positive aspects of corporal punishment or spanking/swatting/hurting/"Spock holds". Good Luck with the Parenting thing. . . Greg Lubianetzky Father to the world’s 2 Greatest Kids!
Response:
Chris C said: > =>Greg, > => > =>Why do you intentionally understate the problem and distort Richards > =>concerns. I believe the author (who is quite well published and recognized > =>as a top expert) stated that the crime rate is under reported and he > =>provides proof. Where is yours? Greg said: > Hold on here. I saw no proof in that post. I’m sceptical of all analyses > of crime statistics unless I see the stats themselves. Statistical > methodology can vary greatly – my methods could result in a totally > different conclusion than someone else’s. This is the danger of using > statistics to shore up your argument, especially when people unfamiliar > with the methodology can be coerced to follow something that seems to make > sense but doesn’t cut it mathematically.
A good reason to cast a dubious eye on *all* statistics, particularly if they are published to support some sort of public policy change or other agenda. > Richard in his post was referring to the > =>lifers comment on other criminals not having any caring disciplinarians in > =>their lives not that they had or hadn’t been paddled. And I also believe > =>the author stated that crime in the 13-17 age group had increased not just > =>a little but 165% (check the article). Does this endorse a correlation > =>between the lack of spanking and increased crime? No more or less than > =>some of the other posts I’ve read here. > You’re right. But I’ve seen prospankers take figures like this (and I > don’t embrace the 165% figure for a minute) and say it’s the new > liberalism and families who don’t spank as responsible for any perceived > crime increase. What a huge leap of faith to that conclusion.
It hasn’t been a standard line on this forum. I have heard it too, but that is not what most of those of us here are saying. Chris C: > While spanking shouldn’t be used > =>to discipline children further laws to restrict parental authority are not > =>needed especially as long as we are prosecuting parents for their teens > =>crimes.
And as those laws go into effect, they look ever more dubious. So far, most of such indictments here have failed, except to further disrupt families who are trying to deal with some problem; in most of those which have been publicized here the parent has been found, ultimately, not to have been at fault. The most recent is of a woman indicted for non-supervision of her 8th grade child, who has been absent from school for 25 days. The woman was divorced about a year ago, works full time, and stated that her daughter had become depressed after the divorce, and that the depression had become noticeably worse on the traffic death of a close friend on the first day of school. She has begun counseling, and her mother (whose "record" is otherwise defined as "spotless") said that this indictment has compounded her daughter’s distress. She also said that she had more than enough to deal with without this – which seems an understatement to me. If convicted, she will receive only a warning. However, a second conviction could lead to parenting classes or a fine of $1000. A police representative is quoted as saying "Obviously this is not a rape; this is not a murder, but it’s a violation. We didn’t want to cite anybody. We just want the child in school. We don’t think it’s overkill". Well, maybe not, but is it constructive? Is this already distressed child now trying to cope with guilt stemming from her mother’s arrest? Has this family been helped? Given that the child is already in counseling, I would guess that the mother will not be convicted. But surely this sort of indictment can not by the wildest stretch of imagination be described as "family support". I wish them luck. I suspect they will need it. Lynn Aun Aprendo ***** Team OS/2
Response:
> The numbers of violent crimes among some groups of adolescents seems to be > on the increase. But violent behaviour among kids is *not* growing, > generally speaking.
Richard, This is yet another good example of a "cohort" wannabee understating the real problem (165% increase in violence ages 13-17). These continued distortions are of more concern to me than the issue they are advancing. This attitude is pervasive throughout our country and is certainly one of the biggest problems that society faces (I believe we should call it denial). To continue to shut our eyes and to manipulate the data the way Greg has should be the real crime, punishable (in his words) by jailing. The breach is far more serious than parents who have spanked once or twice in their lifetime (at least they are trying to stop an undesirable behavior). Keep up the good work Richard. The truth is important keep getting it out (before it’s to late for families/society. Non-spanker, Chris C. Austin, TX – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> Good Luck with the Parenting thing. . . > Greg Lubianetzky > Father to the world’s 2 Greatest Kids!
Response:
=>> =>> Why not lets wipe off some of the really useless laws from the books so =>> there’s room to enforce really necessary ones, like anti-abuse laws that =>> would include spanking/swatting/hurting/"Spock holds" for punishment. =>> =>> Good Luck with the Parenting thing. . . =>> Greg Lubianetzky =>> Father to the world’s 2 Greatest Kids! => =>Greg, => =>You’d be locking up 90% of the parents in America today Greg, and in my =>opinion you’d be locking up the first line of defense against undisciplined =>children growing into undisciplined adults. Give adults some credit. If fines/jail were an option for prosecution of spanking/swatting/hurting/"Spock holds" users, adults would find other ways to discipline. Just like us non-spankers have, with great success I might add. I believe that Chris is anti-spank =>and I respect that fact. I would not wish to lock him up if I disagreed with his =>stance. So if Jeffrey Dahmer took up a position in favour of murder, you would defer. You wouldn’t want to lock him up just because you disagreed with his stance, after all. For one thing, I believe it is possible for SOME children, to be effectively =>disciplined without spanking. Crime among our youths is increasing, and its policies =>like the one you espouse, which either blames the parents, or sets childrens hearts =>and attitudes against their parents that is contributing. You are telling 90% of the =>children that their parents are wrong, and that they are doing something evil. Many people =>with your opinion reside in responsible positions of authority with our kids. Kids are now =>figuring ways to subvert their parents authority by threatening to call Social Services on =>their own parents. You fly in the face of your own argument. You say 90-percent of families use spanking at some point in their child’s lives. I totally agree this figure has basis in good evidence. But wait. Your manipulative kids, subverting authority at every turn, who are inflating crime rates, are growing up in a world LARGELY MADE UP OF FAMILIES WHO SPANK. We say, let’s give the non-spanking thing a spin. Hell, it can’t do any worse than what *your* statistics show. What kid of sick relationships are you espousing for the 90% of families =>which don’t agree with your view? I’m espousing loveing, caring relationships that eliminate all violent spanking/swatting/hurting/"Spock holds" from the disciplinary chain. Far more damage is being done subtly to our children and =>families by attitudes and policies like yours than any abuse that might be prevented. SHOW ME, SHOW ME, SHOW ME. Come on, Richard. Put up or shut up. ONE teeny weeny little study that backs up your position. A hint of empirical data to hang your hat on. Please. Pretty please. I would =>never try to tell your children, GREG, that what you were doing in rearing them was wrong. Even =>though I may disagree with it. You just did. You said non-spanking attitudes contribute to increasing crime rates (with no data of course). Couple other places in this post as well. Crime stats are up, and they are not going to go down by arresting =>parents who use spanking/swatting/hurting/"Spock holds" for punishment. Says who? Good Luck with the Parenting thing. . . Greg Lubianetzky Father to the world’s 2 Greatest Kids!
Response:
=> =>Greg, do you not find the growing violence among adolescents to be greatly =>disturbing? Lynn, what I find disturbing is the incessant media misreporting of the figures. It’s one of the reasons I left the popular media after 16 years as a police reporter. The facts show that, generally speaking, some * violent* crime rates are up. These violent crimes are largely gang-related, ie gang-on-gang hits, drive-bys, rumbles. Also, the great preponderance of the vionelt crimes are comitted by re-offenders, 2nd and 3rd and 4th-time convicts. I’m not saying I like this anymore than anyone else. But the picture painted by the media is one of good kids every second door on every block turning into carjacking, housebreaking thugs. It’s just *not* true. Petty crimes in many areas are down dramatically, like break and enters and robberies. Do some honest checking of the facts. =>Rather than wrestling over whose statistics are bent which way, surely it would be =>more productive to address the problem. If you look at *all* the statistics, or at =>least a broad selection of the offerings, the one thing which no one seems to dispute =>is that *violent* behaviour among these kids really is growing, even when the figures =>show reduction in the adolescent crime rate. The numbers of violent crimes among some groups of adolescents seems to be on the increase. But violent behaviour among kids is *not* growing, generally speaking. Is this not an issue which warrants =>*everyone’s* concern? It’s not an issue that warrants my support of spanking/swatting/hurting/"Spock holds" as punitive measures. In fact, as Richard has just pointed out in another post today, 90-percent of all families use spanking on their kids some time in their lives. I submit this relates to the increase in violent crime, given the studies that show a relationship between corporal punishment in the home to low self-esteem, violent tendencies later in life. So let’s all try non-spanking, shall we? Good Luck with the Parenting thing. . . Greg Lubianetzky Father to the world’s 2 Greatest Kids!
Response:
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – > =>> I spent 16 years in a position where I was analyzing all kinds of crime > =>> statistics (from police in Southern Ontario including Toronto area). The > =>> reality is, while violent crime in teens has seen some increases, overall > =>> crime stats especially when related to population totals are down. > => > =>Greg, > => > =>Why do you intentionally understate the problem and distort Richards > =>concerns. I believe the author (who is quite well published and recognized > =>as a top expert) stated that the crime rate is under reported and he > =>provides proof. Where is yours? > Hold on here. I saw no proof in that post. I’m sceptical of all analyses > of crime statistics unless I see the stats themselves. Statistical > methodology can vary greatly – my methods could result in a totally > different conclusion than someone else’s. This is the danger of using > statistics to shore up your argument, especially when people unfamiliar > with the methodology can be coerced to follow something that seems to make > sense but doesn’t cut it mathematically. > Richard in his post was referring to the > =>lifers comment on other criminals not having any caring disciplinarians in > =>their lives not that they had or hadn’t been paddled. And I also believe > =>the author stated that crime in the 13-17 age group had increased not just > =>a little but 165% (check the article). Does this endorse a correlation > =>between the lack of spanking and increased crime? No more or less than > =>some of the other posts I’ve read here. > You’re right. But I’ve seen prospankers take figures like this (and I > don’t embrace the 165% figure for a minute) and say it’s the new > liberalism and families who don’t spank as responsible for any perceived > crime increase. What a huge leap of faith to that conclusion. > While spanking shouldn’t be used > =>to discipline children further laws to restrict parental authority are not > =>needed especially as long as we are prosecuting parents for their teens > =>crimes. > Why not lets wipe off some of the really useless laws from the books so > there’s room to enforce really necessary ones, like anti-abuse laws that > would include spanking/swatting/hurting/"Spock holds" for punishment. > Good Luck with the Parenting thing. . . > Greg Lubianetzky > Father to the world’s 2 Greatest Kids!
Greg, You’d be locking up 90% of the parents in America today Greg, and in my opinion you’d be locking up the first line of defense against undisciplined children growing into undisciplined adults. I believe that Chris is anti-spank and I respect that fact. I would not wish to lock him up if I disagreed with his stance. For one thing, I believe it is possible for SOME children, to be effectively disciplined without spanking. Crime among our youths is increasing, and its policies like the one you espouse, which either blames the parents, or sets childrens hearts and attitudes against their parents that is contributing. You are telling 90% of the children that their parents are wrong, and that they are doing something evil. Many people with your opinion reside in responsible positions of authority with our kids. Kids are now figuring ways to subvert their parents authority by threatening to call Social Services on their own parents. What kid of sick relationships are you espousing for the 90% of families which don’t agree with your view? Far more damage is being done subtly to our children and families by attitudes and policies like yours than any abuse that might be prevented. I would never try to tell your children, GREG, that what you were doing in rearing them was wrong. Even though I may disagree with it. Crime stats are up, and they are not going to go down by arresting parents who use spanking/swatting/hurting/"Spock holds" for punishment. Richard
Response:
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text ->=Greg, >= >=You may want to look at the article again. It certainly criticizes the >=current direction our country is headed especially with "revolving door >=justice" the author refers to. I’ve worked in centers that demonstrate >=this point well and it is very scary thinking that the teens we worked >=with may be out there hunting you and yours as their next victims! > Chris; > I agree with this point wholeheartedly, and he did make it in the article. > What I meant by the last post was that often, pro-spankers attempt to use > rapidly escalating crime statistics as a reason to hit. In fact, there is > no overall, sweeping crime explosion; it’s a media hype. Don’t read the > stories or watch the TV reports for this conclusion. Read the statistics. > I spent 16 years in a position where I was analyzing all kinds of crime > statistics (from police in Southern Ontario including Toronto area). The > reality is, while violent crime in teens has seen some increases, overall > crime stats especially when related to population totals are down. > Good Luck with the Parenting thing. . .
Greg, do you not find the growing violence among adolescents to be greatly disturbing? This has been said before, that in general crime is down, and the implication seems to be that the increase in violence among adolescents is not terribly relevant. I find both things *very* disturbing, first that this particular sort of violence does seem to be growing, and that the violent behaviour is beginning with younger and younger children, and second that it appears that no one cares to address the problem. Rather than wrestling over whose statistics are bent which way, surely it would be more productive to address the problem. If you look at *all* the statistics, or at least a broad selection of the offerings, the one thing which no one seems to dispute is that *violent* behaviour among these kids really is growing, even when the figures show reduction in the adolescent crime rate. Is this not an issue which warrants *everyone’s* concern? Lynn Aun Aprendo ***** Team OS/2
Response:
Greg, Richard puts it well and I would like to add that current laws have been misused against many practitioners (teachers, therapist, etc..). I’ve posted several on this NG in the past. Last year there were over 200 reported assaults on teachers in Tennessee (these are reported cases not the cases oppressed by the administration, which has become a common practice in many schools). Without Corporal Punishment laws in effect these teachers and other practitioners couldn’t even defend themselves or other children from predators. I posted a case last month (in West’s Ed. Law Review) whereby an instructor broke up a fight between two students and was sued by the mother of the student who started the fight for temporarily putting her hand on the student when she refused to stop physically abusing the other student. I believe Greg that we agree that positive parenting should be used but we need to agree to disagree on the practical issues such as a law to ban C.P. Non-spanker, Chris C. Austin, TX > =>> I spent 16 years in a position where I was analyzing all kinds of crime > =>> statistics (from police in Southern Ontario including Toronto area). The > =>> reality is, while violent crime in teens has seen some increases,
overall-Greg – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> Greg, > You’d be locking up 90% of the parents in America today Greg, and in my > opinion you’d be locking up the first line of defense against undisciplined > children growing into undisciplined adults. I believe that Chris is anti-spank > and I respect that fact. I would not wish to lock him up if I disagreed with his > stance. For one thing, I believe it is possible for SOME children, to be effectively > disciplined without spanking. Crime among our youths is increasing, and its policies > like the one you espouse, which either blames the parents, or sets childrens hearts > and attitudes against their parents that is contributing. You are telling 90% of the > children that their parents are wrong, and that they are doing something evil. Many people > with your opinion reside in responsible positions of authority with our kids. Kids are now > figuring ways to subvert their parents authority by threatening to call Social Services on > their own parents. What kid of sick relationships are you espousing for the 90% of families > which don’t agree with your view? Far more damage is being done subtly
to our children and > families by attitudes and policies like yours than any abuse that might
be prevented. I would > never try to tell your children, GREG, that what you were doing in
rearing them was wrong. Even > though I may disagree with it. Crime stats are up, and they are not
going to go down by arresting – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> parents who use spanking/swatting/hurting/"Spock holds" for punishment. > Richard
Response:
=>> I spent 16 years in a position where I was analyzing all kinds of crime =>> statistics (from police in Southern Ontario including Toronto area). The =>> reality is, while violent crime in teens has seen some increases, overall =>> crime stats especially when related to population totals are down. => =>Greg, => =>Why do you intentionally understate the problem and distort Richards =>concerns. I believe the author (who is quite well published and recognized =>as a top expert) stated that the crime rate is under reported and he =>provides proof. Where is yours? Hold on here. I saw no proof in that post. I’m sceptical of all analyses of crime statistics unless I see the stats themselves. Statistical methodology can vary greatly – my methods could result in a totally different conclusion than someone else’s. This is the danger of using statistics to shore up your argument, especially when people unfamiliar with the methodology can be coerced to follow something that seems to make sense but doesn’t cut it mathematically. Richard in his post was referring to the =>lifers comment on other criminals not having any caring disciplinarians in =>their lives not that they had or hadn’t been paddled. And I also believe =>the author stated that crime in the 13-17 age group had increased not just =>a little but 165% (check the article). Does this endorse a correlation =>between the lack of spanking and increased crime? No more or less than =>some of the other posts I’ve read here. You’re right. But I’ve seen prospankers take figures like this (and I don’t embrace the 165% figure for a minute) and say it’s the new liberalism and families who don’t spank as responsible for any perceived crime increase. What a huge leap of faith to that conclusion. While spanking shouldn’t be used =>to discipline children further laws to restrict parental authority are not =>needed especially as long as we are prosecuting parents for their teens =>crimes. Why not lets wipe off some of the really useless laws from the books so there’s room to enforce really necessary ones, like anti-abuse laws that would include spanking/swatting/hurting/"Spock holds" for punishment. Good Luck with the Parenting thing. . . Greg Lubianetzky Father to the world’s 2 Greatest Kids!
Response:
>=Greg, >= >=You may want to look at the article again. It certainly criticizes the >=current direction our country is headed especially with "revolving door >=justice" the author refers to. I’ve worked in centers that demonstrate >=this point well and it is very scary thinking that the teens we worked >=with may be out there hunting you and yours as their next victims!
Chris; I agree with this point wholeheartedly, and he did make it in the article. What I meant by the last post was that often, pro-spankers attempt to use rapidly escalating crime statistics as a reason to hit. In fact, there is no overall, sweeping crime explosion; it’s a media hype. Don’t read the stories or watch the TV reports for this conclusion. Read the statistics. I spent 16 years in a position where I was analyzing all kinds of crime statistics (from police in Southern Ontario including Toronto area). The reality is, while violent crime in teens has seen some increases, overall crime stats especially when related to population totals are down. Good Luck with the Parenting thing. . . Greg Lubianetzky Father to the world’s 2 Greatest Kids!
Response:
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – ><< > ><< > Your Statistics and Mine ><< > ><< > The following recent article is from Princeton University Professor John ><< > DiIulio of the Brookings Institute. He is considered an authority on ><< > criminal justice and has published quite a bit on the subject. >>snipped<<< ><< ><< Powerful, powerful powerful. Especially about the part where criminals admit that it ><< was a lack of a disciplinarian in their lives that broght them to where they are. Of ><< course this is not a surprise to most of us, but the elitisits will be another story. ><< ><< Very good work Chris! ><< ><< Richard
Richard, how could you be so narrow-minded that you totally subverted the point of this article to believe that this actually supports a pro-spanking position? The real point of this is to show that our growing "liberal" society today (ie. non-corporal punishers) has not resulted in a rash of first-time violent offenders across the continent. Somehow your blinders got in the way of the truth here. Good Luck with the Parenting thing. . . Greg Lubianetzky Father to the world’s 2 Greatest Kids!
Response:
Greg, You may want to look at the article again. It certainly criticizes the current direction our country is headed especially with "revolving door justice" the author refers to. I’ve worked in centers that demonstrate this point well and it is very scary thinking that the teens we worked with may be out there hunting you and yours as their next victims! Non-spanker, Chris C. Austin, TX P.S.-If you don’t believe the posters here right to the author at Princeton Univ. and ask him to clarify. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -><< Powerful, powerful powerful. Especially about the part where criminals > admit that it ><< was a lack of a disciplinarian in their lives that broght them to > where they are. Of ><< course this is not a surprise to most of us, but the elitisits will be > another story. ><< ><< Very good work Chris! ><< ><< Richard > Richard, how could you be so narrow-minded that you totally subverted the > point of this article to believe that this actually supports a > pro-spanking position? > The real point of this is to show that our growing "liberal" society today > (ie. non-corporal punishers) has not resulted in a rash of first-time > violent offenders across the continent. Somehow your blinders got in the > way of the truth here. > Good Luck with the Parenting thing. . . > Greg Lubianetzky > Father to the world’s 2 Greatest Kids!
Response:
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> Your Statistics and Mine > The following recent article is from Princeton University Professor John > DiIulio of the Brookings Institute. He is considered an authority on > criminal justice and has published quite a bit on the subject. > We can easily match support for support and make our cases, but what it > really comes down to is what really works. In an age of "who’s the victim" > and the failure of this generation to teach children about personal > accountability/responsibility aren’t we all going to suffer. > Again I do not endorse paddling, but do feel it is wrong to punish those > families that may use some legally acceptable form of Corporal Punishment > (such as a simple restraint of a child throwing a tantrum). Enough of my > opinions here’s the recent article: > Crime in America > It’s Going To > Get Worse > David Shotkoski had always dreamed of becoming a Major League pitcher. > Early this year, he kissed his wife and young daughter good-bye and left > North Aurora, ILL., for spring training with the Atlanta Braves in West > Palm Beach, Fla. There the 30-year-old Shotkoski was taking an evening > walk when a gunman demanded his money. Shotkoski refused. Shot twice, he > managed to stagger some 300 ft. to a busy street before collapsing near > the curb. > Indicted for Shotkoski’s murder was Neal Douglas Evans, a career criminal > who, despite 13 previous convictions for robberies, burglaries, theft and > drug possession, had slip-slided past forgiving judges for years. Because > of a judicial order to relieve alleged overcrowding in Florida prisons, > Evans was on his fourth so-called conditional release when he was charged > with killing Shotkoski. > "I just don’t understand," Felicia Shotkoski said when she learned that a > habitual felon had been charged with her husband’s murder (my > comment-could this be you or someone you know?). > I sympathisize wholly with her. But after more than ten years studying > America’s criminal justice system, I understand all too well. My research > in crime statistics shows: > -Up to a third of those convicted of murder across the U.S. were on > parole, probation or some other form of release at the time they took > another person’s life (my comment-a grave enfringent of the victims Civil > Rights). > -Crime is getting more violent. Over the past three decades, your chances > of becoming a crime victim increased 280%. But your chances of becoming a > victim of violent crime increased 460%. > -The crime problem is bad enough, but demographic evidence indicates that > it’s going to get much worse. > Ordinary Americans feel that the criminal-justice system too often comes > down on the side of the offender (my comment-often making the criminal > appear as the victim). Yet an influential anti-incarceration > lobby-including organizations such as the National Council on Crime and > Delinquency and the American Civil Liberties Union-laments that our system > is too harsh (my comment-compared to what? Criminals in this country share > many rights denied else-where in the industrialized world). > Whose instincts are correct? My research has convinced me that the public > is right. Statistics on computer print-outs may not show the blood on the > sidewalk in West Palm Beach, but they confirm what people suspect about > crime: > -The latest stats on the crime rate are very misleading (my > comment-actually among teens it is still increasing). The media has played > up a three percent annual reduction during the past three years of crimes > reported to the police and FBI. It’s too early to celebrate victory. > **Crime rates are still many times higher today than the last three > decades.**Many cases go unreported and unpunished. > In 1993, for example, the total number of crimes recorded by the FBI was > 14,141,000. But the FBI uses a method of "hierarchical" counting in which > only the "most serious" criminal act in any one incident is reported (my > comment-this type of reporting has become common place but does distort > the data). If a woman is raped and her car stolen, for example, the FBI > records the rape but not the theft. > In contrast, the Justice Dept.’s Bureau of Justice Statistics conducts a > massive, ongoing survey. In ‘93, for example, more than 115,000 people in > nearly 60,000 households were interviewed for information on crime. Their > replies led to the estimate that the actual number of rapes, robberies, > assaults, burglaries and other crimes suffered by Americans in ‘93 was > 43,622,000-more than three times the FBI’s number. > Moreover, the impact of crime is even worse if you live or work in an > urban area. My hometown, Philadelphia, is proof that poor, minority and > inner-city Americans (like my grandmother, who was mugged three times) > suffer the most from crime (my comment-but are we doing anything about it > as we continue to take parental authority away). > In ‘94, Philadelphia experienced over 400 murders. More than 90% of the > victims were nonwhite. The city’s overall murder rate was 25.9 per 100,000 > residents. But in high crime neighborhoods the murder rate was four times > as high. > -Criminals are more violent. A new breed of felon is more "terrorist than > criminal," says a veteran bank robber who has spent most of his last 30 > years behind bars. In an alarming number of cases, routine property crimes > escalate into violent ones. > This past January in Atlanta, for instance, robbers who stole about $100 > in cash from two car rental agencies shot and killed three unarmed men. > **Violent crime has increased steadily over the past seven years. Well > over 100,000 murders have been committed since the start of 1990. From > ‘85-’93, while the murder rate by adults 25 and over dropped (my > comment-by FBI reports) about 20%, *it increased by 65% among > 18-24-year-olds, and soared a terrifying 165% among 14-17 year olds (my > comment-could this be because families are being stripped of their > authority as well as their responsibility to manage and teach their young > values)! > The current trend in birth rates makes it certain that a new violent crime > wave is just around the corner. Today there are some 7.5 million males > ages 14-17. By the year 2000 we will have an additional 500,000. **About > 6% of young males are responsible for half the serious crimes committed by > their age group, studies reveal. Thus, in a few years we can expect at > least 30,000 more murderers, rapist, robbers and muggers on the streets > than we have today. > **Not long ago, I asked a group of long and life-term prisoners what was > triggering the explosion of violence among these new young criminals. I > didn’t hear the conventional explanations such as poverty or joblessness. > *Instead, these hardened criminals cited the absence of people-family, > adults, teachers,preachers, coaches- who would care enough about young > males to discipline them (my comment-is it caring enough or fairly recent > laws that have taken this authority away from families while still holding > the parents legally acountable for out-of-control teens). In the vacuum, > drug dealers and "gangstarappers" serve as the role models. "I was a > bad-ass street gladiator," one prisoner told me, "but these kids are > stone-cold predators." > -Our criminal-justice system is not handing down sentences to fit the > crimes (my comment- I’ve seen some criminals rewarded in some "supposed" > detention centers, RTC’s with pools, tennis courts, well groomed baseball > fields). Most violent crimes go unreported , unprosecuted, and unpunished. > For example, in ‘92 over 6.6 million violent crimes were committed, but > just 3.3 million were reported to the police. About 641,000 led to > arrests, barely 165,000 to convictions, and only 100,000 or so to prison > sentences, which on average ended before the convict had served even half > his time behind bars. > How often have you heard or read some variant of the claim that the U.S. > has the highest incarceration rate in the world? We have more inmates per > capita than other nations-but the appropriate measure is the rate of > incarceration relative to the number of serious crimes. Here we are > nowhere near the leader of the pack. In fact, "hard time" for hardened > criminals is rare. > Thanks to plea bargaining, hardened criminals often are able to > "customize" their sentences. More than 90% of all defendants convicted of > felonies had not gone to trial, but pleaded guilty to lesser charges. In > Dade County, Florida, police detective Evelyn Gort was shot and killed by > Wilbur Mitchell. Consider his previous record: despite nine felony > convictions, he had been permitted to plea-bargain a sentence for auto > theft down to one year and was released in less than 4 months. Had he > served the full year, he would have been in prison the night he killed > Gort. > Failing to incarcerate hardened criminals, or letting them go free too > early, means more crimes of all kinds. Those convicted of homicide who > were released from prison in ‘92 had served, on average, only 5.9 years on > sentences of 12.4 years. > Another sobering example of how the scales are tipping: In ‘91 there were > 590,000 probationers and parolees who had been convicted of a violent > crime yet were residing in our communities. At the same time how many > persons convicted of violent crimes were in prison? Only 372,000. Nearly > half of criminals with one violent felony conviction are not sentenced to > prison. > -Our prisons are not crowded with petty criminals and first time > offenders. Again and again, the anti-incarceration lobby floats the notion > that our prisons are overflowing with "first-timers" whose records show no > history of violence.
… read more »
Response:
Your Statistics and Mine The following recent article is from Princeton University Professor John DiIulio of the Brookings Institute. He is considered an authority on criminal justice and has published quite a bit on the subject. We can easily match support for support and make our cases, but what it really comes down to is what really works. In an age of "who’s the victim" and the failure of this generation to teach children about personal accountability/responsibility aren’t we all going to suffer. Again I do not endorse paddling, but do feel it is wrong to punish those families that may use some legally acceptable form of Corporal Punishment (such as a simple restraint of a child throwing a tantrum). Enough of my opinions here’s the recent article: Crime in America It’s Going To Get Worse David Shotkoski had always dreamed of becoming a Major League pitcher. Early this year, he kissed his wife and young daughter good-bye and left North Aurora, ILL., for spring training with the Atlanta Braves in West Palm Beach, Fla. There the 30-year-old Shotkoski was taking an evening walk when a gunman demanded his money. Shotkoski refused. Shot twice, he managed to stagger some 300 ft. to a busy street before collapsing near the curb. Indicted for Shotkoski’s murder was Neal Douglas Evans, a career criminal who, despite 13 previous convictions for robberies, burglaries, theft and drug possession, had slip-slided past forgiving judges for years. Because of a judicial order to relieve alleged overcrowding in Florida prisons, Evans was on his fourth so-called conditional release when he was charged with killing Shotkoski. "I just don’t understand," Felicia Shotkoski said when she learned that a habitual felon had been charged with her husband’s murder (my comment-could this be you or someone you know?). I sympathisize wholly with her. But after more than ten years studying America’s criminal justice system, I understand all too well. My research in crime statistics shows: -Up to a third of those convicted of murder across the U.S. were on parole, probation or some other form of release at the time they took another person’s life (my comment-a grave enfringent of the victims Civil Rights). -Crime is getting more violent. Over the past three decades, your chances of becoming a crime victim increased 280%. But your chances of becoming a victim of violent crime increased 460%. -The crime problem is bad enough, but demographic evidence indicates that it’s going to get much worse. Ordinary Americans feel that the criminal-justice system too often comes down on the side of the offender (my comment-often making the criminal appear as the victim). Yet an influential anti-incarceration lobby-including organizations such as the National Council on Crime and Delinquency and the American Civil Liberties Union-laments that our system is too harsh (my comment-compared to what? Criminals in this country share many rights denied else-where in the industrialized world). Whose instincts are correct? My research has convinced me that the public is right. Statistics on computer print-outs may not show the blood on the sidewalk in West Palm Beach, but they confirm what people suspect about crime: -The latest stats on the crime rate are very misleading (my comment-actually among teens it is still increasing). The media has played up a three percent annual reduction during the past three years of crimes reported to the police and FBI. It’s too early to celebrate victory. **Crime rates are still many times higher today than the last three decades.**Many cases go unreported and unpunished. In 1993, for example, the total number of crimes recorded by the FBI was 14,141,000. But the FBI uses a method of "hierarchical" counting in which only the "most serious" criminal act in any one incident is reported (my comment-this type of reporting has become common place but does distort the data). If a woman is raped and her car stolen, for example, the FBI records the rape but not the theft. In contrast, the Justice Dept.’s Bureau of Justice Statistics conducts a massive, ongoing survey. In ‘93, for example, more than 115,000 people in nearly 60,000 households were interviewed for information on crime. Their replies led to the estimate that the actual number of rapes, robberies, assaults, burglaries and other crimes suffered by Americans in ‘93 was 43,622,000-more than three times the FBI’s number. Moreover, the impact of crime is even worse if you live or work in an urban area. My hometown, Philadelphia, is proof that poor, minority and inner-city Americans (like my grandmother, who was mugged three times) suffer the most from crime (my comment-but are we doing anything about it as we continue to take parental authority away). In ‘94, Philadelphia experienced over 400 murders. More than 90% of the victims were nonwhite. The city’s overall murder rate was 25.9 per 100,000 residents. But in high crime neighborhoods the murder rate was four times as high. -Criminals are more violent. A new breed of felon is more "terrorist than criminal," says a veteran bank robber who has spent most of his last 30 years behind bars. In an alarming number of cases, routine property crimes escalate into violent ones. This past January in Atlanta, for instance, robbers who stole about $100 in cash from two car rental agencies shot and killed three unarmed men. **Violent crime has increased steadily over the past seven years. Well over 100,000 murders have been committed since the start of 1990. From ‘85-’93, while the murder rate by adults 25 and over dropped (my comment-by FBI reports) about 20%, *it increased by 65% among 18-24-year-olds, and soared a terrifying 165% among 14-17 year olds (my comment-could this be because families are being stripped of their authority as well as their responsibility to manage and teach their young values)! The current trend in birth rates makes it certain that a new violent crime wave is just around the corner. Today there are some 7.5 million males ages 14-17. By the year 2000 we will have an additional 500,000. **About 6% of young males are responsible for half the serious crimes committed by their age group, studies reveal. Thus, in a few years we can expect at least 30,000 more murderers, rapist, robbers and muggers on the streets than we have today. **Not long ago, I asked a group of long and life-term prisoners what was triggering the explosion of violence among these new young criminals. I didn’t hear the conventional explanations such as poverty or joblessness. *Instead, these hardened criminals cited the absence of people-family, adults, teachers,preachers, coaches- who would care enough about young males to discipline them (my comment-is it caring enough or fairly recent laws that have taken this authority away from families while still holding the parents legally acountable for out-of-control teens). In the vacuum, drug dealers and "gangstarappers" serve as the role models. "I was a bad-ass street gladiator," one prisoner told me, "but these kids are stone-cold predators." -Our criminal-justice system is not handing down sentences to fit the crimes (my comment- I’ve seen some criminals rewarded in some "supposed" detention centers, RTC’s with pools, tennis courts, well groomed baseball fields). Most violent crimes go unreported , unprosecuted, and unpunished. For example, in ‘92 over 6.6 million violent crimes were committed, but just 3.3 million were reported to the police. About 641,000 led to arrests, barely 165,000 to convictions, and only 100,000 or so to prison sentences, which on average ended before the convict had served even half his time behind bars. How often have you heard or read some variant of the claim that the U.S. has the highest incarceration rate in the world? We have more inmates per capita than other nations-but the appropriate measure is the rate of incarceration relative to the number of serious crimes. Here we are nowhere near the leader of the pack. In fact, "hard time" for hardened criminals is rare. Thanks to plea bargaining, hardened criminals often are able to "customize" their sentences. More than 90% of all defendants convicted of felonies had not gone to trial, but pleaded guilty to lesser charges. In Dade County, Florida, police detective Evelyn Gort was shot and killed by Wilbur Mitchell. Consider his previous record: despite nine felony convictions, he had been permitted to plea-bargain a sentence for auto theft down to one year and was released in less than 4 months. Had he served the full year, he would have been in prison the night he killed Gort. Failing to incarcerate hardened criminals, or letting them go free too early, means more crimes of all kinds. Those convicted of homicide who were released from prison in ‘92 had served, on average, only 5.9 years on sentences of 12.4 years. Another sobering example of how the scales are tipping: In ‘91 there were 590,000 probationers and parolees who had been convicted of a violent crime yet were residing in our communities. At the same time how many persons convicted of violent crimes were in prison? Only 372,000. Nearly half of criminals with one violent felony conviction are not sentenced to prison. -Our prisons are not crowded with petty criminals and first time offenders. Again and again, the anti-incarceration lobby floats the notion that our prisons are overflowing with "first-timers" whose records show no history of violence. Most of these felons could be released tomorrow, it is argued, with litle harm to society. What are the facts? 94% of state prisoners have been convicted of a violent crime such as murder, rape, robbery or assault, or are repeat criminal offenders, the U.S. Bureau of Justice Statistics reports (my comment-this doesn’t even address the number of crimes these … read more »
If you like this post and would like to receive updates from this blog, please subscribe our feed.