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.

Pastimes : Let's Talk About Our Feelings!!! -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Grainne who wrote (21937)	5/23/1998 8:16:00 AM
From: KMT	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 108807

Christine: Here are my thoughts on the subject... Message 4570968 In addition, although I don't think it's guns that kill people (people kill people), I certainly think they're far too accessible. The incredible amount of violence we see (with little/no consequences), the devaluation of human life, and the easy access to weapons sure does not mix well in a test tube. The results are quite obvious. Regards, KMT

To: Grainne who wrote (21937)	5/26/1998 12:59:00 PM
From: Jacques Chitte	Respond to of 108807

When did I say anything about executing children? As far as saying if there's more going on than laxity of punishment - sure, but what we don't know. The one thing I do believe is that we aren't punishing our convicts. As for having a large jail population - imho this is because we're jailing the wrong people (small-time druggies) and the violent ones go free so soon that they get to breed more violence. For a time, barring new drug legislation, the jail population will have to get bigger. Until the message goes out that American society means it about crime. Then the jail population will drop, because a good deal of violent crime will be deterred.

To: Grainne who wrote (21937)	5/26/1998 6:05:00 PM
From: Jacques Chitte	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 108807

I think the "breakdown of the family", like the poor, is a thing that has always been with us and will always be with us. While it's a real problem, I'm not sure it's amenable to solution by legislation. The only way to address family problems is at the family level (imho), and the problem with broken families is a bit of a Catch-22. The one thing I share with FT is an abiding faith in a person's self-interest. Most broken families, I imagine, are not deliberately started as such. Typically they'll happen as a result of mischance (a divorce, or a latent abusive situation) or stupidity (extramarital pregnancy by someone who's not rich). So the avg. person seeks to build or hold a working family. Compared to a hundred and fifty years ago - how many per cent of children are raised in two-parent families? Where do I find numbers? Has the family really "broken down", or are we just being made more aware of an ageless problem? Our fiction from Homer on sure is full of broken families. What I don't know is if that's a fair generalization, or if broken families just make for better literature! So - looking at broken families as a Broad Category, we're tempted to discuss Sweeping Solutions. In this land that means social programs. On this thread we have a wide range of opinions as to what constitutes the right level of gov't support. All the way from "Starve'm and let Darwin sort'em out" to "Welfare would work fine if only we sent'em enough money!" Am I advocating discussing this? Naaahhh. I'm not sure any of us woud do a lot more than reiterate our respective credos. Maybe I;m just tired.