- Sep 23, 2005
- 31,991
- 5,854
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Christian
- Marital Status
- Married
No, sometimes it can help increase safety in a very chaotic environment.
I pastor a church in an area that is filled with extreme poverty, drugs, human trafficking, violence, homelessness, etc. In the school district almost 100 percent of the families need food assistance to survive from a group of local churches. In one year our city had a rate of 1 person trafficked for every thousand population.
I have seen one of my members, a former law enforcement officer, carry and deploy a weapon in that setting to stop an attack. That was not "feeling" safer. That was actually safer than being at the mercy of criminals who are common there.
Now I understand that has to be balanced against people who don't store weapons safely, those who shoot family members accidentally, people who are prone to committing suicide not having guns around, etc. I think there are steps to look into those issues. But sometimes there is a benefit to carrying. I personally do not carry or want a gun. But I understand those who do in that situation.
Even the government conducted National Crime Victim survey notes defensive gun uses, and weeds out those that are illegal brandishing incidents.
IF you are in an area that is run by gangs or cartels, even if you could remove all the guns it would not make things safe. The gang hitmen, human traffickers, drug pushers, etc. would still carry on their business, and would still find ways to control through violence. Those who commit domestic violence would still carry on doing so, though with perhaps diminished lethality. We have to deal with those who are intent on violence.
The areas where crime and despair are worst are those with almost no jobs, no prospects, which have been taken over by drugs. And many of these are in areas where there was previously manufacturing jobs that have moved out of the country. The remaining abandoned buildings wind up being taken over by illegal elements. And those who can afford to leave do so. But those who can't afford to leave are stuck in that terrible situation. That is not an easy situation to fix, because it involves complex factors, and finding ways to incentivize local manufacturing. You need jobs that people can do that pay a wage people can live on.
This is where I think some of the recent issues with supply lines, etc. have pointed out how different things were when manufacturing jobs were available that would pay a living wage. Workers could make a living, products were made locally. You couldn't get the cheap goods we do now, but you made enough to buy the necessities. We may need to bring this manufacturing back for other reasons now, as we are at the mercy of China for computer chips, medicine, etc. and that will only be worse if they take over Taiwan. But the problem now is it may be largely automated, leaving even more despair if we don't think through those issues.
I think the health care model in other countries means that you have a better chance of helping those who have serious mental health issues. Many of the homeless in our area, and statistically in other places, are those who are struggling with mental health. And some who do not have mental health issues have often wound up homeless through medical bills during a crisis.
The reason I think that doesn't happen, though it tends to be popular even in some (but certainly not all) conservative circles, is that it doesn't really benefit either big party. There are indications it would save total money spent on health care over time, and result in more access. However, it would also mean taxes. I think the trade off is worth it, but congressional figures and politicians in general are reluctant to raise taxes because of re-election optics. And you have insurance lobbyists, etc. involved. Many Americans also are happy with their work provided insurance, so they don't see the issue. But if they get sick enough to lose their job, and their associated insurance, then they might get it.
The addiction is another huge driver. At one point I thought that legalizing drugs might help with that, as it would take a revenue stream from the gangs. However, I am no longer sure that would work. Even in states with legalized marijuana the drug gangs are producing it cheaper and undercutting the legal trade. And since Marijuana can be grown they are doing it with slave labor, driven by human trafficking. They especially target immigrants who have less social support. And in some cases those crossing the border have to pay off the gangs who brought them in. The deaths of despair from drugs, suicide, etc. are taking a huge toll. We need to break that cycle.
So things that might help are:
a. Incentivizing manufacturing businesses returning. Not sure how likely that is, but it seems like something we need to figure out either way.
b. Offer more treatment programs to get people off of the drugs, not legalizing drug trade, but decriminalizing use. Locking people up who are caught in addiction is hurting families, and making it hard to get jobs or housing when they get out. We have to find ways to get people out with some kind of life still intact. The prisoner population also is a group that can be exploited. Some industries know they can pay them low wages, and treat them poorly because they have few other options.
c. We do still need to crack down on those doing the gun, human and drug trafficking. Even if some still think that total drug legalization would help, which I no longer do, you certainly cannot legalize the human trafficking. And we won't stop that without cracking down on these gangs. We have groups that capture young men for farm labor, and young women for prostitution. That revenue further fuels the other activities of the gangs. It has to be dealt with.
d. Related to that, I also think it is going to be important to get the border under control. My proposal for that would be to use drones, patrols, etc. to eliminate the trafficking of people and drugs, and leave only a few places where people can cross, where they could then be processed.
Along with that we could ramp up lawyers to handle legitimate asylum claims. Our birth rates are below replacement level. So we don't need to turn away all those coming to the border. However, we really do need to turn away gang traffic. It is taking over some places completely. And we need to make sure that those immigrants coming in are legally recognized, and are not beholden to traffickers as is now happening, so that they force them into servitude. Both parties seem content to allow people to come in illegally but to then have them exploited as an underclass, rather than allow them to have a real life. This hurts them and hurts American wages as well. And if the cartels force them into slave labor to pay off their trip through the border it strengthens the other illegal activities of the cartels and gangs.
Now you reference spiritual sexual issues, or what have you, but I do think that we need to find a way to change messaging around what leads to prosperous outcomes. Usually if you wait until marriage to have sex and get married, and get a job that correlates with less poverty, and better outcomes. We lead the world in single parent families, with the vast majority having no father in the home. While data shows that some fathers are still active in their children's life, that is still an issue that correlates with criminality, promiscuity, drug use, poverty and a host of other negative outcomes.
The U.S. Has the Highest Share of Single Parenting
According to Pew Research Center, the U.S. has the highest share of single parenting in the world. In 2018, almost a quarter of U.S. children under the age of 18 lived in a household with a single parent and no other adults present other than adult children. Being a single parent predominantly affects mothers around the world. In the U.S., around 20 percent of children live with just their mother while around 5 percent live with just their father.
In 2019, 49 percent of Black children in the U.S. lived with one parent, as did 28 percent of Hispanic kids and 21 percent of white kids.
The UK has the second-highest rate of single parenting, followed by island nation Sao Tome and Principe, Russia and Denmark.
Now obviously this is not the only factor, and the UK being second and having a lower rate of violence shows that is the case. But I do think it is somewhat of a factor
Development of empathy is a complicated subject in its own right. I am not sure I have a good handle on all the factors and time frames of its development, but it is certainly an issue. I have not figured out why it is not mentioned as something to look into, other than it too is tied at least in some way to mental health.
Finding ways to have more in-person social networks are also important. I am not sure how that can be addressed at a government level, but could be emphasized at a cultural level.
Upvote
0
