Jackson Free Press

Last night, as we toiled to get this issue out, Stephen interrupted some people breaking into one of our interns' cars. Fortunately, they didn't get away with much—they threw his backpack filled with school notes only useful to him into the bushes. But his window did get smashed, the police came, took fingerprints, and a bit of drama ensued. And he has a hassle to deal with today, and the emotions that go with being a victim of crime, any crime.

I learned this morning that Que Sera Sera, one of our favorite hang-outs, was robbed around the same time. I haven't heard all the details on it, but suffice it to say, it wasn't the best night in Fondren.

So we've decided to blow this cookie stand, to pack up all our belongings and to hightail it out somewhere to the suburbs and start the Rankin Free Press. We can set up our offices in a gated community, where only people we know can come by and see us. We've decided it's just not worth it to live in such a place like Jackson, where you can't walk outside out of fear of getting robbed. We now believe that Orley Hood was right in his recent column when he said that you can't rebuild a city, and make it cooler and more vibrant, until you take care of all the crime, and all these people running all over us. And, hell, we sure can't live and work somewhere where we can't leave all our coolest stuff on the seat of the car anytime we want. We give up.

I'm joshin' you, of course. Had you going, though, didn't I?

We love Jackson to pieces. To coin a phrase of someone out there with a slightly different take on crime than we have: We ain't packin'; we're stayin'.

That doesn't mean we like crime, or believe that it isn't real. We just don't believe that it's an either-or world. That either you believe that crime exists or that it doesn't (that it's a "perception"); either a city has no crime whatsoever or it's overrun; that you want to put all criminals, of whatever age, behind bar for life or you're some pandy-butt, pinko liberal who loves to be a victim of crime. That either the police are sitting on the end of your block (or cul-de-sac) all the time, or they're completely ineffective. Or that, as Hood argued in his column, you have to take care of all the crime before you can rebuild a city.

This is exactly wrong. Urban renaissances happen despite crime, and they help to lessen crime because more people are out on the streets, communicating, shopping, looking out for each other. The best thing that can happen for city crime is for neighborhoods to be brought back, as right here in Fondren. I know this well from my expatriate days living in places like downtown Manhattan. It took more than police to clean up tough drug areas; it took whole communities. It took businesses. It took determination. And it took the police.

Remember, bar none, the coolest artistic communities always grow up in areas that were poor and tended to be hot spots for criminal activity.

My friend Knol—whose car was broken into recently—called me this morning to tell me about Que Sera. I told him about our break-in. He told me about the McRae's Meadowbrook closing (which is just tragic, in my view). "So, what do we do?" he asked. Note that he didn't say he was leaving the damned city, or that the police sucked (although they can, as when we were trying to get good crime statistics for our Poindexter feature this issue. There's a woman who answers the phone at the Second Precinct who needs to be paroled from that duty, and fast).

Knol had exactly the right response to crime (and other community maladies): "So, what do we do?" And the answer is not to flee, or to fire the police chief, who is doing a pretty fine job here over all. The statistical crime drops under Police Chief Robert Moore have been impressive—but they're not all his doing. Or the mayor's. Just as it isn't all their doing when crime spikes. We're not on a roller coaster here, or shouldn't be—it's not healthy, or realistic, to be so all-or-nothing when it comes to anything, including crime, not to mention other issues of community safety and well-being.

Building healthy communities is a multi-pronged process—that goes from the top of the political process (electing folks who care about public education, fiscal responsibility and attacking the roots of crime) to the criminal-justice system (watchdogging, but not unfairly sensationalizing, court and police activities) to the bottom, where you and I sit.

We have incredible power if we realize it. Knol said that he plans to get involved with his neighborhood watch group. These are all over the city, and a great place to start (and a good place to meet folks). He wants to help find a good tenant for the McRae's spot since it's close to his home. He already heavily participates in the city's renaissance in all sorts of ways and in community activities. He means it.

Next time I talk to him, I think I'll suggest that he mentor a young person in Web design or photography. Or, go volunteer somewhere to teach those skills to young people who have too much time in their hands, and too little money in their pockets.

It may sound hokey, but so much of fighting crime involves building hope in a community. Now, don't take me out of context (as folks who work for our competitors tell you to) and say that I believe crime is only a perception. That would be a bald-faced lie. Crime is real, and I've been a victim: here in Jackson (car break-in), in Manhattan (mugged), in D.C. (an insurance company refused to pay for damage a contractor did to my car) and back in Neshoba County (a sexual crime).

I know the pain of being a victim, but I also refuse to live as a victim. I have that choice. I can get up every day and work to make my city safer and more exciting by doing the things that I love: connecting with people and supporting local business.

So, we'll see you at Fondren Unwrapped this Thursday night as we all Think Global, Shop Local just in time for the holiday season—and fight crime at the same time. Please come by our table in Fondren Corner and say hello.

Previous Comments

ID

69456

Comment

We were discussing the McRaes tragedy last night. I thought it might be interesting if they were to convert it to a call center or some form of business office. Why? Well, frankly, there aren't many large-scale employers in the area... When I say large-scale I mean a business that has over 100+ employees. Why do I think this is a good idea? Well, it could theoretically create a "walk to work" environment and bring more employed, middle class residents to the neighborhood. Further, it would feed all the surrounding businesses as the 100+ employees buy breakfast, lunch, and stroll the shops and boutiques before, during and after work. As well, there's no real "loss" issue which seems to be a problem McRaes faced (due to poor security coverage including lack of surveillance). Having bodies moving to and fro would help stimulate the area. That's just one idea. I'd love to see a Virgin Megastore or Borders there also... But, frankly, I think the traffic increase would be harmful to the neighborhood and could have harmful side-effects especially during the holidays. Anyone else have suggestions or ideas for the building? I'd love to see it occupied and be a benefit to the entire 'hood.

Author

kaust

Date

2004-11-17T10:16:22-06:00

ID

69457

Comment

As for being a victim of crime... My car was broken into recently. I was a victim of my own naive behavior. I actually became so comfotable I left my bag in my car over night (not being aware). In my 8 years in the city, this is the first time I've actually had something like this occur to me. I have had credit card fraud (due to a lost card) but never burglary. So, I actually consider myself lucky and realize my vigilance and awareness kept me from being a victim sooner. I've learned my lesson thanks to this rude reminder. ;-) A tip I'd like to pass on... Keep your car clean. Clutter, jackets, bags, and cds all appear valuable to a crook and they WILL bash your window to remove them.

Author

kaust

Date

2004-11-17T10:23:41-06:00

ID

69458

Comment

Regarding new uses for the Old McRaes, check out these links: Wal-Mart has an entire division to find new tenants for its big boxes- http://www.walmartrealty.com/ECD/RealtyPage1.html A vacant 80,000 square foot K-Mart is typically seen as a liabilty. But this guy sees the potential: 16-foot ceilings and killer HVAC (heating, ventilation, and air conditioning). Then he or she realizes you can get them for nothing from the Resolution Trust Corporation - and the first edge-city bohemian district is born. First the artists break the space into lavish 5,000-square-foot sculptors studios. Then they punch skylights into the roof to let natural light into the interior. Then they do the sensible thing and start living there illegally. They place sculptures and anything else they can think of on the roof, although the windmills quickly become clichÈ. When all the really great space in the Kmart is full, other people start filling the former drugstores and dry cleaners of the abandoned shopping center with funky bars, savory restaurants, computer-arts master printers, and the shady dens of CD-ROM pressers. The exteriors of the buildings are painted in intriguing ways. Think Berkeley, California - or better yet, its neighbor, Emeryville.

Author

Justin

Date

2004-11-17T11:26:38-06:00

ID

69459

Comment

Speaking of Wal-Mart, did y'all see that Frontline special last night about Wal-Mart's close, cozy relationship with China -- and what it's doing to American companies and jobs? Wow! http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/walmart/

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2004-11-17T11:33:00-06:00

ID

69460

Comment

Justin, we discussed that lofts or studios as an option as well... I'm curious if there's a demand large enough.

Author

kaust

Date

2004-11-17T11:33:47-06:00

ID

69461

Comment

Another victim here, speaking on behalf of a truck I borrowed which was also damaged due to a burglary. Parked in my driveway, on the corner of Meadowbrook Road, my mother's unassuming GMC was molested in ways for all traffic to witness. Other GMC's within my neighborhood spoke up, and were also violated in the same way. Although nothing was taken, other than a half-smoked Doral in the ashtray, everything was rifled through. You can imagine the truck was returned quite quickly, but without any drama. What do you do? You stay and work that much harder for your neighborhood. I, too, will become involved with my neighborhood watch. Report burned out streetlights. Introduce myself to my neighbors. There are so many little things that I can do myself. As for the McRae's building, that is a shame. But I believe it can be made into almost anything at this point. I love both ideas, the call center and Border's, but since living here for almost 2 years, it's extremely easy to notice an already existing traffic problem. Speeding plus heavy, constant traffic could only be fueled by the addition of 100+ new cars every day. So true that new neighbors would actually feed local businesses, but I already have to wait 22 minutes at Burger King for one chicken combo. The addition of new hungry people, could make getting something for myself much more difficult. I believe a call center needs to be in a lighter traffic area. Though Border's and Virgin are both excellent, excellent entities, it's easy to fear the developement of another "Dogwood" type of environment over time; simply taking away from the small neighborhood, ma and pa's pawn shop feel. Strangely enough, I like my dollar stores, and the Wiggly. Would hate to see the big G, or some such demon, invade my neighborhood in the form some huge strip mall. It's just not what I think this area needs. We need to become a community first and foremost. I would like to suggest a community center of sorts. Surely there's enough space to provide for ample banquet rooms, galleries for art shows, private movies screenings, and possibly classrooms of sorts. At this point, the opportunities are boundless, and there needs to be careful discrimination and community awareness about what will happen with this space. Being almost the heart of this area, it is an integral part of the development of our space. Let's find something good for it.

Author

dsmith

Date

2004-11-17T11:34:53-06:00

ID

69462

Comment

Oooo, I like community center. Who owns that building, by the way? One thing about Border's: It would be awful for Lemuria. I actually had one thought that is a chain, but wouldn't hurt much local business (I don't think; thoughts?): an Old Navy. There is one on 125th Street in Harlem (part of Magic Johnson's line-up, I think), and it's a roaring success. Yes, I know they probably import clothes from China, but, hell.

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2004-11-17T11:40:16-06:00

ID

69463

Comment

ladd- Some group called Meadowbrook Mart Assn. currently owns it, c/o realtor Maurice Joseph. I hear, though, that Mike Peters is interested in buying it (Fondren corner guy).

Author

Justin

Date

2004-11-17T11:44:17-06:00

ID

69464

Comment

Mike Peters? Hmmm, that could be good. He also has bought the old Jitney 14. So far, it seems that Mike has the right ideas and knows whose advice to get. (Like Camp Best.) That could be encouraging. BTW, just for the record, I've never once felt unsafe in that area. And I'm over there all the time. That is literally the only McRae's I've been to in two years. And The Piggly Wiggly is one of our busiest distribution spots.

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2004-11-17T11:50:26-06:00

ID

69465

Comment

Donna, I actually said that last night [Old Navy] but it was lost in the flood of ideas I was having. I think it would definitely fit the market... Young singles, young families, etc. Not to mention it's close to Milsaps, JSU, etc. There are plenty of children in the area! As for Borders harming Lemuria... I really don't see that it would hurt their business too much (if at all). Lemuria has a devout clientelle and those customers are hardcore. If they haven't lost them to Books-a-Million, Barnes & Noble, or the existing Borders, I don't think they would because of another one. Lemuria is tradition! I just like the idea of a Borders -- events for kids, book signings, quick coffee and snacks, music and dvds.... It's unbelievably convenient for an info freak like myself. Regardless, a big store of any sort turns me off. We watch traffic every day speed through our community and it's disgusting. There's little that can be done but to create a bottleneck (much like State St. and Old Canton) by converting to a two-lane. I've literally seen people going 60 down Meadowbrook without concern for people or pets. I feel a big store like Borders or Old Navy would increase traffic down Meadowbrook dramatically and would harm that wing of the 'hood because of outsider traffic rather than the community's traffic. They'd be convenient and employ many in the neighborhood which is one perk but the potential increase in traffic would be a major turn off for me. I agree a community center would be great and is needed but am curious if the space is too large and the rent too much. What about a gym??? Like a large, full-scale gym?

Author

kaust

Date

2004-11-17T11:53:52-06:00

ID

69466

Comment

From the C-L: However, Jackson real estate developer Mike Peters said the closing could open up new opportunities for the area. Peters said the shopping center owners, a group of investors based in Miami, have approached him. "I'm working with them to revitalize Meadowbrook Mart," Peters said. "I don't have anything to report right now, and it will be after the first of the year before anything is official." Peters, who was involved in the renovation of Fondren Corner on North State Street, said city officials are also involved in the revitalization talks. "The things that are going on could be very positive, but they're still speculative at this point," he said. Full Story Doesn't give the owner's info.

Author

kaust

Date

2004-11-17T12:01:06-06:00

ID

69467

Comment

As for Borders harming Lemuria... I really don't see that it would hurt their business too much (if at all). Lemuria has a devout clientelle and those customers are hardcore. If they haven't lost them to Books-a-Million, Barnes & Noble, or the existing Borders, I don't think they would because of another one. Lemuria is tradition! I think they would argue differently. The big-box bookstores wreak hell on local bookstores that can't afford to discount like they do.

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2004-11-17T12:12:50-06:00

ID

69468

Comment

You do have a point... That was one of the problems while discussing the topic last night -- trying not to step on the toes of other local businesses. I'd even like to see something like a CompUSA there or even a smaller dept. store... Unfortunately, Saks has bought up the majority of dept stores. ;-)

Author

kaust

Date

2004-11-17T12:20:22-06:00

ID

69469

Comment

Yeah, Todd would like the CompUSA there, too, I bet. He whines everytime he has to shlep to County Line to those strip malls.

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2004-11-17T12:22:03-06:00

ID

69470

Comment

Well, it would definitely add that element to Jackson's taxes... Currently, our city does not have a computer store of that caliber or even half that caliber within its limits. I'd certainly shop there! ;-)

Author

kaust

Date

2004-11-17T12:24:39-06:00

ID

69471

Comment

Yeah, you'd love it if you could walk to CompUSA, wouldn't you? ;-) I hate that store about as much as I do Wal-Mart -- just because I'm bored in it. I like the results of technology (and to complain about the result of technology, as it were), but I'll leave it to you True Geeks to sniff about computer stores. Argh. But I agree that it would be great to have one in the city.

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2004-11-17T12:31:28-06:00

ID

69472

Comment

All of them are good ideas. Why not wall off the interior of the McRae's into 4 or 6 different parts and set aside each section for all of your proposals (preferably neighborhood-focused?) The store is undoubtedly too big to devote it to only one purpose. Jackson's population population size, IMO, couldn't support merely ONE of the proposed uses.

Author

Philip

Date

2004-11-17T22:00:46-06:00

ID

69473

Comment

I just want to contribute my two cents worth. I live at most five minutes from McRaes off of Northside Drive. I'd LOVE to see a CompUSA there, or even a Best Buy. I'd walk there in a heartbeat on a pretty day. :-) I also want to say that it's nice to hear from folks who ask what they can do and make intelligent and thoughtful suggestions. I've lived hear most of my 40+ years (but who's counting? ;-) and it's nice to know there's a generation or two committed to staying and improving the situation rather than just getting the h*** out of Dodge. My hat's off to you all!

Author

CodeCutter

Date

2004-11-18T06:48:10-06:00

ID

69474

Comment

Gym with one of those cool climbing walls. Or a Circus school, like they have in San Francisco, with trapezes and tightrope walking and such. We did an afternoon of trapeze school when we lived out there - it was awesome. Probably not feasible, but very fun.

Author

kate

Date

2004-11-18T09:40:15-06:00

ID

69475

Comment

Climbing wall: cool. Code, thanks for your comments. My favoriate part of this Web site is how often bloggers come here to talk about potential positive change for Jackson and to knock around ideas. The really cool part is: people who can make those ideas happen also read the site. For instance, recently a man who is behind one of the biggest developments in the cityóI won't kiss and tell without his permissionówrote me several times to discuss some of the suggestions that were posted on the site and said he plans to incorporate them into the strategy. So, all, don't feel like you're wasting your time posting your ideas about what Jackson needs. The folks with the power and the money to do it want to hear what you guys think: many of them are smart enough to know that you (and your desires and your money) are the future of Jackson. So keep the ideas coming. Also important to remember: Because we're here and have this blog and forum in the early stages of Jackson's redevelopment, we have a real opportunity to be heard. This is fairly rare. In many cities, they've already made dumb development mistakes that turn off locals and creatives (which they desperately need to make it fly) and have gotten too far in to change things. We can help them do it right as they go.

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2004-11-18T11:37:02-06:00

ID

69476

Comment

Would you guys feel different about not wanting to flee to the suburbs if you had kids ? I'm sure there are people who might actually prefer to live in Jackson, but if the suburbs elimanate any percentage of risk to their children, and offer a less chaotic school, they would consider moving more than a single person or a couple. The trendy/hip factor (downtown loft, and knowing you are amongst the more liberal set) is overwritten by a greater need to maximize ones children's safety. It's good that people try to fight to keep the city strong though, to slow the segregation. Westland Plaza, Jackson Mall, Meadowbrook Cinema 6, Super K-Mart, Meadowbrook McRae's, Metrocenter............ The city government with their efforts like the Jackson Medical Mall, need to work closer with the artistic community to find ways to help smaller groups and individuals renovate the older abandoned places. Have working art studios like the Art of State or a gay disco or whatever. If the bohemians dont take over the abandoned spaces then they tend to rot.

Author

herman

Date

2004-11-22T11:01:09-06:00

ID

69477

Comment

Answering this thoroughly, Herman, would require much more time than I have today. But I will give a quick drive-by response. No, I wouldn't feel differently. I say that because I know many, many people who are raising kids in the city (whether this one or a place like NYC), even as other people flee to the suburbs. And those kids tend to be some of the most interesting, educated, open-minded and well-rounded young people I know, including (or led by) the ones who go to public schools right here in Jackson. (Put all the kids of the Parents for Public Schools parents in one room, and you will be amazed by the intelligence and compassion.) The truth is, children are not sheltered from "harm" in the suburbs. Crime happens there, too; bored kids do drugs and OD on violent video games; too many are abused (physically and sexually) by family members; and they are at much greater risk of harm or death from all the driving that is required to get to and fro their "safe" neighborhoods than they are from city crime (unless they take it upon themselves to go hang out in drug dens). Much academic study of the "safety" of suburban neighborhoods was done after the Columbine shootings. Kids are growing up in suburban areas without even sidewalks where they have to drive somewhere to hang out. They often don't have good community meeting places. They're not getting enough exercise and they're eating too much fast food bought on the way home to the 'burbs. (A problem in urban areas, too, of course: you've seen all the studies about kids getting HARDENED ARTERIES by the time they're 18, right?). Of course, this doesn't mean you can't raise great, interesting, open-minded, healthy kids in the 'burbs. Good parenting goes a long way in balancing suburban pitfalls, as it does urban problems. However, what it does mean -- and there are piles of study to support that -- is that the argument that kids (or anyone) are safer in the 'burbs is a red herring.

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2004-11-22T11:45:37-06:00

ID

69478

Comment

It is also an important point to note that most (all?) of the notorious school shootings of the 1990s occurred in suburban areas.

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2004-11-22T11:47:32-06:00

ID

69479

Comment

ladd - I was thinking the same thing, not to mention that one of the first major headline-getters was from Pearl High School.

Author

jroper

Date

2004-11-24T02:49:56-06:00

ID

69480

Comment

jroper, it's very true. If nothing else, the 1990s school shootings showed that the suburbs are not always "the safe place to raise kids they're cracked up to be." Of course, to the suburbs' credit (and urban areas), school anywhere in the U.S. is the *safest* place for young people. Statistically, they're at much higher risk of danger at home or on the highways. The numbers are something like 1 in 3 million risk of being killed at school; 1 in 200,000 at home. But the school shootings were framed by the media in such a way that they vastly overblew the risk of young people getting killed or hurt at school, rather than focusing on the real issues, which indeed include the types of closed neighborhoods they're growing up in and whether that contributes to the risk of crime. (Lots of study on this.) And then couple that with violent video games. But the two big risk factors that most of the cases had in common were: kids on (legal) psychotropic drugs and, obviously, easy access to guns. I watched a re-run of an West Wing last night (post-press day exhaustion) and they were talking about the logical fallacy that people use other weapons in addition to guns; therefore, perhaps we should have "ax control." It's very simple that a whole lot of kids at Columbine could be alive today had those kids (both on psychotropic drugs) had been using axes or other weapons that take longer to kill with. Anyway, I digress.

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2004-11-24T10:35:56-06:00

ID

69481

Comment

Donna, this time I beg to differ. I don't think video games are as much of an issue as you make it out to be. I've watched plenty of violent movies and TV shows in my youth (slasher films and violent action films). Yet I am far from a crude, unstable person. Ditto for my brothers. As for psychotrophic drugs, that might well be confusing correlation with cause. It may well be that those who are on psychotrophic drugs are more likely to cause school shootings, but I find it more likely that there is an underlying cause that increases the probabilities of both. In other words "Could the same thing that causes the need for psychotrophic drugs also be what causes school shootings?". I think the answer is yes. Someone brought up Pearl, and I agree wholeheartedly. Wasn't Luke Woodham a harrassed outcast before the shooting there? The same thing with Columbine - the two gunmen were harrassed by "jocks" and other popular types for a long time before Columbine. In fact, one Secret Service study concluded that 2/3 of the school shooting perpetrators were bullied and harrassed before committing their crimes. This explanation seems very true to life to me - if a kid is humiliated and harassed for entertainment's sake (or for reasons of personal distaste on the part of the bullies), then eventually some of them are going to strike back -- with deadly and tragic results. Stronger anti-bullying measures and ordinances will go a long way to making our kids safer in school.

Author

Philip

Date

2004-11-24T13:12:05-06:00

ID

69482

Comment

I also see how school bullying issue relates to the Creative Class concept. One thing that gays and many Creative types have in common is that they were were ostracized, or even victimized, for being "different" some how (like Luke Woodham and many other school shooting perpetrators). Therefore, an area accepting of gays (and especially the notion of gay marriage) is a sign the area is open to many different kinds of people and many different ways of thinking. As with gays, "nerds" would not want to live in areas where they are not appreciated. Richard Florida himself summed it up best: My message is simple. Without diversity, without weirdness, without difference, without tolerance, a city will die. Cities don't need shopping malls and convention centres to be economically successful, they need eccentric people who will attract the economically and technologically creative people upon whom economic success depends. SOURCE: http://www.buzzle.com/editorials/6-15-2002-20516.asp Furthermore, according to Dr Dan Olweus of the University of Bergen in Norway (the father of the anti-bullying movement) sixty percent those who were identified as bullies in grades 6-9 had at least one criminal conviction by age 24. Much more can be found on thsi topic at the following link: http://www.health.state.ok.us/program/cds/bullyingmanual.pdf I didn't mean to get off onto a tangent, but I thought it wise to bring in another perspective about the school violence issue.

Author

Philip

Date

2004-11-24T13:33:04-06:00

ID

69483

Comment

To try to bring this back to the subject, probably the single best thing for ALL kids...cities and suburbs...is to have an strong, coherent general anti-bullying policy properly enforced. (there are school policies for such things based on race and sexual harassment, but there is no general anti-harassment policy). The school district that recognizes this first will be the one where you see the most dramatic improvements in school performance - whether suburbs or city or countryside

Author

Philip

Date

2004-11-24T13:38:26-06:00

ID

69484

Comment

I see some elements I can agree with from both ladd and Philip, but I think it's a less complex problem than we are led to believe, yet one that nobody really wants to own up to - the breakdown of the family. I'm not a dittohead or anything, and I don't think it has to do with a high divorce rate or gay parents, despite the press we see on those issues. It's not so much a breakdown of "traditional family values," per se, as it is the result of parents (be they married, single, gay, straight, or what have you) not doing as much parenting as they used to. What we saw in Jonesboro, Paducah, Pearl, Columbine, and in every community in America quite frankly, is that parents abuse (not necessarily willingly) a teenager's natural tendency to want to be left alone. We see parents medicating their children unnecessarily for ADD/ADHD. We also see parents leaving their misguided children to their own devices, and then they act shocked when their kids retaliate against bullies with the bombs and firearms they've been training with in their basements. You get the idea. Anyway, I don't think it's the violent games, movies, or TV - as those media have been around much longer than the rash of youth violence in recent years. The same can be said with guns, which are in themselves not the issue so much as a tragic tool with which to take out anger. Of course, there is also a case to be made that although today's problem is more exaggerated than it used to be, what we see is more the reult of a less taboo-inhibited press, which reports on many stories that used to be covered up or "kept within the family" a lot more often.

Author

jroper

Date

2004-11-24T13:44:01-06:00

ID

69485

Comment

Philip, you're right about video games. They're not in and of themselves violent, or they don't necessarily lead to violence any more than any other one thing does (although some compelling evidence disagrees). But I should provide more context for my point, which wasn't made well at all. That is, a combination of hours of violent video games, closed neighborhoods like the Columbine shooters lived in and easy access to guns CAN be very lethal. The New York Times, I think, ran an aeriel photograph of their neighborhood in Littleton, showing how unfriendly it was was walking and visiting neighbors and the like (and a very good accompanying story; I don't have a link, though). So I'm not bashing video games, per se: but there is nothing wrong with examining their role when combined with other factors. There was clearly not one cause for the violence, as there seldom is. On the drug topic, however, there is some very compelling evidenceóespecially in the Columbine and Springfield casesóthat the drugs put those kids over the edgeónot "caused" the shootings, per se, but helped the kids to lose control of their senses, to put it simply. This was never played up much in the media, but much study has been done on it on the legal and psychological end. (I studied these cases as part of a fellowship, so I geek out about them a bit.) "Could the same thing that causes the need for psychotrophic drugs also be what causes school shootings?". I think the answer is yes. Logically, yes. However, what you find in many cases of this sort -- and some less dramatic -- the drugs are actually causing the kids to act out in very unpredictable ways, even thinking they're actually in a video game. Some experts are arguing that, in an attempt to calm down kids with other problems that arent' being dealt with (or sheer boredom), that the drugs are in fact causing them to lose grip with reality -- and the consequences of their actions. And what I learned in my research is that many of these drugs ARE NOT TESTED on young people, so they don't really know the effects when combined with their particular body chemistry, hormone levels, etc. Thus, your points are well-taken. I do not, however, agree that anti-bullying measures will help a whole lotóand, in fact, can contribute to further problems of some kids. Bullying, too, is only one factor in a menu of problems. But to bring it back to the original pointóthese problems are as rampant in the burbs are they are in cities, if not more so in some cases. I think we can assume one point: It is not healthy to plop a kid down in a neighborhood where it is hard to have good social interaction because he's not old enough to drive, yet, give him a wing of a huge house to play violent video games in for hours on end, allow him easy access to weapons, ignore his pleas for help and attention (including on bullying) -- even if it is in a very upstanding, Christian, "safe" suburb like Columbine. My point, although poorly made, as that a whole menu of issues contribute to these situations, and those issues are lurking in the 'burbs, in some cases in worse ways than in cities.

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2004-11-24T13:45:17-06:00

ID

69486

Comment

I should also add that raising kids in the suburbs (or anywhere else) isn't necessarily a dangerous thing. But it is dangerous to allow all the factors we're talking about to be present -- and just assume that a kid is "safer" because they're living in a gated community. These are serious risk factors, just as living down the street from drug dealers in a city would be.

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2004-11-24T13:47:11-06:00

ID

69487

Comment

Two quick things, being that I just saw the rest of Philip's posts and Roper's. I simply disagree that enforcement of an anti-bullying policy is the primary component, although I think it's a fine point in a menu of solutions. I've got some great research on this, but I'll to find it before I can post it. But I'll try to do that just to add it to the discussion. And Roper, I agree with you, in large part, about the family issue. However, many people (not you) use this reason as an excuseóor a way to say "it's the family's fault; we don't take any responsibility." The truth is, the family in many ways has been broken for a long time -- but not out in public. Before the 1960s, too many kids watched their mothers (or fathers) stay too long in abusive and/or unfaithful marriages and just "take it." The 1950s and before weren't so great for many families, either, as many people will try to maintain. I do agree that strong support systems, whether traditional family or not, is very vital. Policiesófrom keeping guns away from young people to regulating testing of psychotropic drugs to public education fundingócan and do affect the safety of young people. And we all need to be involved in that component. I truly believe that "it takes a village" (although I'm not a big fan of Hillary) and think it is revisionist to say that it has only been recently that there is a family "breakdown." Truth is, there have always been bad parents and always will be; we should what we can to help that problem, but we have to tackle many issues at once. And many parents will tell you, and rightfully, that they are doing everything they can, but the culture is so out of control; they're right, too. I remember after the Columbine shootings (I was in Colorado), everyone was blaming something or someone (video games, guns, parents, bullying, lack of religion, and so on), while the truth clearly is that a number of factors that all came together at once caused that tragedy. All problems are complex, and there is never one easy solution, no matter what political candidates (or, respectfully, even police officers or preachers) tell us.

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2004-11-24T13:59:30-06:00

ID

69488

Comment

Also, Roper, I agree with your point about ADD. And the gunplay point is poignant: Which father had bought his gun-obsessive kid the guns he wanted to try to calm him down? The Spanish teachers -- right? In Paducah? I forget right now. By all accounts, those were good parents -- or parents trying to do good -- but clearly the kid was very influenced by the gun/violence culture. But I do think it was crazy that his dad then bought him the guns, knowing how messed up he was. But, by all accounts, he was trying. And we can't say enough about the culture of young people disparaging other young people for being "weird" because they're not down with the white-bread suburban culture -- this ties closely to Philip's bullying point, but I think that anti-bullying measures are only a Band-aid. That is, these attitudes start at home, and in the media -- and are worsened by either-or attitudes that are becoming so rampant right now in our political world. As in: if that kid (or adult) isn't a good Christian by my standards, they are weird, screwed up, dangerous and so on. And I certainly agree that parents (and, er, world leaders) instill this kind of division. This is why teaching that differences are OK and even greatóboth at home and at schoolóis so vital. But now I'm getting really far afield, and must work. Carry on. ;-)

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2004-11-24T14:08:03-06:00

ID

69489

Comment

I've got a whole bunch of thoughts running around in my head at once on this topic. Donna, I now have to say I essentially agree with you. It truly is a complex situation. The "whole village" comment is especially true to life. There are as many reasons for this as there are perpetrators *Psychotrophic Drugs -- certainly you are right, Donna. I stand corrected. *Culture - many of the parents seem to want to believe our children are so "precious" (in a "classy"/image-conscious sense, that is) that they don't want to believe their kids can act wrongly. -- Everyone, but especially kids and teens, don't want to admit problems because of fears their peers may call them "stupid", "weak" and so forth. Personally, I didn't start feeling this way until I was around 10 or so. Perhaps a major part of cultural change is for our socieity to see there's nothing wrong with being so-much-less-than perfect ("weak","stupid" etc. -- or more accurately, the twisted definitions thereof). Everyone has imprefections, so why not give others a break? -- More dignity and respect for those who are "different" some how (as hinted at above). Quick! What do Minorities (racial, religious, sexual orientation), women, misfits, nerds, wimps, obese people, and other "others" have in common? Do I have to say more? *All of us should do more to have challenging discussions with our children. There's a fine line to be walked here, I know. You don't want to make kids feel stupid, but you want to instill in them a desire to explore for answers. I think this will do a lot to keep some kids from being bored (how can exploring for the answers be intrinsically boring?) As Donna said, curing the school safety/child quality of life problem will require striking shifts in our overall social environment.

Author

Philip

Date

2004-11-24T14:27:27-06:00

ID

69490

Comment

There are certainly many more guns per capita in surburbs (i would think). The problem that most schools face is to how they handle supposed "problem" children. The gut reaction to every school post-Columbine was red-flagging potential bad seeds. Their decision to get fellow students to turn in kids that simple "don't fit in" for one reason or another. The schools are telling the popular kids to look for freaks, outcasts, and weirdos and put them in a special class, with counselors. All the efforts to unilaterally target potential "problems" do more harm than good, perpetuating the teenage social caste system. The jocks and christian right go looking for trouble. Be it Al Queda, or be it a social misfit. Teaching tolerance and working on self-esteem, and peer pressure are things that every student needs. They shouldn't have to admit it, and make themselves stand further out than they want to be. In my High School we also had a "family group" class every day, in addition to normal studies, where you can take a class in anything the teachers could handle, 1 hour of hobby time. We had spoken word poetry, journalism, photography, electric guitar, art, sports, band, chess, debate, hiking, archery, and anything a few people were interested in, and wanted to create. You can change classes as often as you wanted to explore whatever you might be interested in. We had some drop outs WANT to come to school, because they could learn "Iron Man" on guitar. They idea is to instill some interest and passion in every student, and give them an outlet for any energy.

Author

herman

Date

2004-11-24T17:05:13-06:00

ID

69491

Comment

It's funny, Jakob and I were just talking about this very topic. He was saying how young people need creative outlets to help them learn to think and, basically, be happy. The importance of the arts. Kids (and adults) need to learn to be absorbed by something outside themselves and their own ego -- that is one of the primary purposes of the arts. Herman, the "family group" think sounds great. Unfortunately, though, under No Child Left Behind, there is too often too few resources for such things. They're too busy trying to teach kids to pass tests. How many school newspapers do you know of in this area, for instance? If one was a conspiracy theorist, one might try to make a convincing case that the supporters of such nonsensical testing don't want kids to learn to think for themselves, but I would never assert such a thing. Not me, uh-huh. ;-)

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2004-11-24T18:46:57-06:00

ID

69492

Comment

You hit the nail on the head.

Author

herman

Date

2004-11-24T18:57:23-06:00

ID

69493

Comment

this goes with the crime party, Jackson was named the 14th most dangerous city in America in 2004. http://www.governmentguide.com/community_and_home/morganmostdangerouscities.adp

Author

patrick

Date

2004-11-25T13:07:15-06:00

ID

69494

Comment

Careful, though. It's based on Morgan Quitno rankings (based on overall FBI figures for 2003, not 2004). We've been down the Morgan Quitno road a lot here. Take it with a grain of salt and in context, and understand that the methodology is weird (whether we're up or down). Here is the last story we did on Morgan Quitno rankings. Realize that nothing could change in Jackson, or that the city's stats for 2003 could have gotten better than 2002's (which they did, I believe), and we could go up or down in the rankings -- based entirely on what happens in other cities. It's also intriguing to note the whole placement of the Jackson Metro as opposed to the city itself. On its face, it looks like the suburbs are making the city more dangerous (which I think the Ledge reported last year), but when you get into analyzing the methodology, you discover that none of it is as simple (or reliable) as it looks on the surface.

Author

DonnaLadd

Date

2004-11-26T10:59:22-06:00

ID

69495

Comment

On that note, here's the FBI's annual Uniform Crime Reports for each year from 1995 to 2003 http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/ucr.htm . These data do distinguish between violent and non-violent crime reasonably well. The data is in Excel format, so it's easy to tailor the data however you want. See how the FBI's own data compares.

Author

Philip

Date

2004-11-27T02:59:59-06:00

ID

69496

Comment

A couple of random reactions from me... Love Philip's tie in with The Creative Class. Heterogeneity makes us all smarter than homogeneity. And Donna, there was an article in Harper's a year or two ago, that talked about how the public school system was basically designed to create a stable class of workers for factories. Smart enough to work on production lines, but taught from an early age to conform and to respect authority. Plus, they would then have enough income to buy the goods they were producing. perpetuating the cycle. It was a very intriguing article, but, as I recall, there was not a lot of documentation to back up the assertions.

Author

kate

Date

2004-11-27T15:13:21-06:00