Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : To be a Liberal,you have to believe that..... -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: MikeH who wrote (4750)	10/30/1999 1:59:00 PM
From: Merritt	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 6418

<<As for the crime rate, how many murders were there in SF prior to the 1900's? Many, many more than in the 50's, and with a smaller population base.>> Perhaps you'd care to share with us the source for those statements? <<My point is that these things are cyclical, and it depends more on societies perception of crime and freedom than on actual acts committed.>>> I had thought your point was that crime was determined more by human nature and socio-economic conditions, and remained pretty much a constant, or is that what you meant when you wrote it depends more on societies perception of crime and freedom than on actual acts committed? Am I to read that as there would be no crime if people didn't feel that murder, etc. was a criminal act? I suppose in a schoolroom that could be a valid point of discussion, but the real world gives the lie to it. I'm aware that different societies have laws and taboos that vary from culture to culture, but the Golden Rule is common to all major religions and cultures...albeit that many would corrupt it to be interpreted as to do it to them before they do it to you,<g> that's hopefully a character aberration rather than a societal one. I would agree with you that the reporting of crimes, and sometimes the nature of crime, can be variable...but that's why I used murder for my example, it's always (except for war) been a no-no. As to our freedom, or perception of it: I'm of the opinion that we're less free today than we were in the 50s, because we don't have the freedom to even walk down the streets of all our neighborhoods without being in danger...I view that as a pretty basic element of freedom. And then there's the matter of government intrusiveness... I won't include the repressive acts of our government, because I'm not so sure but that isn't an always present danger, even if the majority of the present population of the country doesn't yet realize that the government-gone-wild acts such as Waco and Ruby Ridge, are just as dangerous to our freedom as those acts perpetrated against the Wobblies, Hooverville, Kent State, etc.