Monday, 17 September 2012

[WardFive] Re: [ward5] SIMMONS: Anesthetized to random D.C. violence, By Deborah Simmons - The Washington Times Sunday, September 16, 2012

Hello Sam,
 
Not pushing the point - yes "random" was not the word I would have chosen but nevertheless, Mrs. Simmons has the option of  assuming that the crimes listed are random if she was using the word random to refer to the distinction of the "crimes" until such time as they are identified differently.  On the other hand, the fact that Mrs. Simmons had just finished talking about Chicago and crimes even in a high end neighborhood could mean that Random her statement "These are the very random acts of violence that should leave us soul-searching" is moreso referencing a larger Geographical picture than just DC - lacking "a particular pattern" --- happening all over - non-predictable - RANDOM TO THE various parts of our COUNTRY and economic communities!!! So, this was not about sloppy writing by Mrs. Simmons but in my opinion and intuitiveness, the response could very well go to the reader's inner core of association/dis-association from these crimes by their "non-illegal" activity. To her point - "Have we become anesthetized to such violence"?  The fact is that we still don't know if these particular crimes that Mrs. Simmons referred to were "random" as focused on by Matt and yourself. So the author Mrs. Simmons didn't have an incorrect "assumption" and sure didn't dismiss the "violence as "Random" as Matt stated.
 
Now, as to Matt's focus - I still wonder why he didn't address the issue of an Overall Anesthetized attitude that we have to these crimes randomly occurring all over. I also wonder why you didn't addressed that but chose to defend Matt's position. Even if they are not random, a focus on it being "not random" vs. our society being "anesthetized" to this type of crime occurring lends to the almost entire gist of Mrs. Simmons  article.  
 
By focussing in on the clarification as Matt did, shows that same lack of EMPATHY that Mrs. Simmons addressed as to say that because they the assailants and the victims are involved in some "less-than-legal" activity, then in itself, it somehow is not worth addressing - in other words - "let's be real Mrs. Simmons, those people are involved in illegal activity so it is what it is.  Why couldn't Matt and you focus on the "anesthetized" angle/aspect of the article?  Since I don't have enough to understand your approach, I am going to assume the innocence of it. 
 
To Further Zero in more on your comment that you didn't take Matt's comment as a "slight on the "nature of the Crime""-- Please allow me to clarify.  Matt's focus in his response addressed his PERSONAL "Why" in Mrs. Simmons Question - explaining "Why" HE was "Anesthetized" to these types crimes. We are not idiots who need to be spoonfed that crimes occurring often surround some type of personal involvement with illegal activity and/or passion.  We all know that the written word allows others to see the intent core of the viewpoint - and as you can see in Matt's focus of identifying that the crimes weren't random - which he has no proof of.  Historically, Matt's consistent single focus has been one of offsetting liabiality/culpabality of the larger community and the affects of its/their decisions/lack thereof and insensitive prioritizing of wants over our kids/community's needs; ie. the Bus Parking situation and his insensitive toxic fumes comment regarding IVY CITY and the residents there - Which broght to mind the two questions and the previous sentence just written as nothing that I have heard from him on this listserv has ever dealt with him "actually wanting to get to the root of the problems".  So you know - People with Matt's selfish and Privileged mindset are the root of the problem.
 
Now in saying this - Maybe others should take a look at their viewpoint and see how reflective this discussion is.  Anyways,
 
I think that I would like to also add Environment issues to Education and income inequality - and the 3 are intrinsically interconnected.
 
So:
 
1.  How do we go about creating educational opportunities, changing income-inequality and providing a better enviroment. 
 
a. Do we make kids travel across town to go to a school and tie up their time, their parents time, expose our kids to harm during travel and place added expense on the family or do we utilize the schools in their neighborhoods and make them better learning environments.  
 
b.  Do we spend 1/4 billion dollars on 2.5 miles of Street Cars and destroy the Campus of our School to satisify The Dying Needs of Whites to ride in style or do we buy some Electric buses and use that Capital Money to provide better environments for our kids - or even just focus on other more important infrastructure.
 
c.  Do we sell off our Schools to Charter Schools developers?
 
But you see, folks like Matt and others in our "community" would rather have a "Street Car" than focus on our REAL PRIORITIES. 
 
So now we know "Why" these "not so random" crimes are occurring let's figure out "HOW" to go about changing the flow of that seemingly never ending channel that our kids are being forced down because of so many of the selfish desires/wants of our community members and the decisions we are supporting downtown.
 
Rob Ramson
 


 
On Mon, Sep 17, 2012 at 10:45 AM, Sam Shipley <sas821@hotmail.com> wrote:
 

Rob,

Two great questions you pose and that's the bigger issue by far.  I would say they can be answered by a 50/50 (maybe 60/40) of 1) 'lack of educational opportunities and 2) income-inequality.  And one can maintain that those two are intrinsically tied together.

As for Matt's comment about the randomness, I didn't take it to be a slight about the nature of the crimes, but more so about the sloppy writing and reporting of Ms. Simmons (which I wholeheartedly agree with).  I remember back at a neighborhood association meeting back in 2008 a police officer telling me that if you take the crimes that are associated with drugs, gangs and/or domestic violence out of the stats you would be left with well-under 1%.  That's pretty random to me.

- Sam Shipley
Stronghold DC

To: ward5@yahoogroups.com; wardfive@googlegroups.com
From: indianrob@gmail.com
Date: Mon, 17 Sep 2012 10:25:19 -0400
Subject: Re: [ward5] SIMMONS: Anesthetized to random D.C. violence, By Deborah Simmons - The Washington Times Sunday, September 16, 2012


 

Goid morning Matt,
Fair response. However, just as Mrs. Simmons used "assumptions", you also assumed that she was assuming that "many or all of the violence we see in DC is random".  As of right now, this article did not identify whether the assailants knew the victims.  So, until that information is presented, we can assume that it is as much "random" as "not" random. Are we to assume that the crime in Mr. Obama's neighborhood is linked to "less-than-legal" activity that led to the crimes?
I wonder why your focus was to identify that "almost all shooting victims know each other" in an attempt to discredit the author when the focus of the article dealt with the seemingly "anesthetized" community response. As a matter of reminder, your friend Robby was more concerned about the floor being messed up and our Commissioner using his Govt. Email to deal with an insensitive remark by a resident in the community.
Now, to your point - a lot of violent crime does have some previous involvement - either illegal or domestic (let's not forget). Anyways, let's follow your line of thought:
1.  So how do we get to the root of the "problem".
2. Why do you think that many people in these neighborhoods turn to less-than-legal activities?
Rob
On Sep 17, 2012 8:56 AM, "Matt Ashburn" <matt@mattashburn.com> wrote:
 

One of the assumptions made by the author is that most, or all, of the violence we see in DC is random.  In fact, however, almost all of the violence is not random at all.  Almost all shooting victims know their attackers, and a good number (though, not all) are involved in some less-than-legal activity that led to the shooting.   The author's incorrect assumption that simply dismisses violence as "random" won't do anyone any good if actually wanting to get to the root of the problems.
 
Matt
 


 
On Sun, Sep 16, 2012 at 9:12 PM, KPW <WKPW3@aol.com> wrote:
 


Excerpt from article
These are the very random acts of violence that should leave us soul-searching.

Why do our communities so easily gin up sympathy and empathy for a hate-crime victim and even hold rallies for justice, but just shake our heads when the victim, left dead or alive, is from a neighborhood pockmarked by crime or happened to be out and about in the 'hood at 2 a.m.?

It's like we have given up.

It's like we decided that guns are the problem, when what we have is a people problem.

We know that much of violence in the Mideast is rooted in anti-American sentiment with them showing and telling us so.

But what or who do the nefarious American criminals hate?




SIMMONS: Anesthetized to random D.C. violence

-
The Washington Times
Sunday, September 16, 2012
ANALYSIS/OPINION:

The loudest headlines in local news are often about shootings, stabbings and assorted mayhem, events that should routinely leave us questioning whether we even value life anymore.

Have we become anesthetized to such violence?

In the nation's capital, a half-dozen people were victims of gun violence during 18 hours' worth of ticks of the clock between Friday and Saturday.

While much violence occurs under the cover of darkness, brazen gunmen also do their dirty deeds in the daytime, and we do not seem to notice or care.

Andrea Noble, one of my colleagues, reported that two of the D.C. shootings occurred in broad daylight on Friday.

"The first occurred in the 5100 block of Fitch Street in Southeast around 12:53 p.m.," she wrote. "A man was walking through the area when a truck he did not recognize pulled up alongside him, and one man got out and came toward him. The man began firing a gun at him, striking him in the leg as he tried to run away."

Later, about 5 p.m., "a man was shot in the 500 block of Parkland Place in Southeast. Police had few details about that attack, other than that a man approached the victim and shot him in the back," her report said.

There was no mention of a religious or gender angle. No mention of any other hate crime or an angle about a tourist, veteran or military service member. There was no mention of drugs, a school, hospital, house of worship, funeral, movie theater or mall — the types of scenes that usually draw texts like "OMG."

And in Chicago, where violence has left former Obama administration guru Rahm Emanuel conceding that, as mayor, he needs the feds' help to stop the hemorrhaging, gun violence has even struck President Obama's neighborhood, which we know is always in the sight lines of various law enforcement patrols.

On Friday and Saturday in the Windy City, 10 people were shot, three fatally.

These are the very random acts of violence that should leave us soul-searching.

Why do our communities so easily gin up sympathy and empathy for a hate-crime victim and even hold rallies for justice, but just shake our heads when the victim, left dead or alive, is from a neighborhood pockmarked by crime or happened to be out and about in the 'hood at 2 a.m.?

It's like we have given up.

It's like we decided that guns are the problem, when what we have is a people problem.

We know that much of violence in the Mideast is rooted in anti-American sentiment with them showing and telling us so.

But what or who do the nefarious American criminals hate?

I think average Americans can find answers and solutions if we take a closer look at ourselves, our families, our neighbors — our villages.

Law enforcers can only do so much, and much of what they do is after the fact.

"We have to educate and re-educate ourselves. Too many young people and young adults don't know who they are and how they got here," said Ted Farris, a retired deputy sheriff in West Palm Beach, Fla. "How are they going to know where they're headed if we don't tell them?"

Ted is right, and you know it.

We have an opportunity to let John Law carry a small nightstick and use it to rule any given situation after the fact, or we can try to prevent crime the old-fashioned way by re-empowering our neighborhood Big Mamas and Big Daddies, the cultural icons who carry big sticks, preach that every life — regardless of station — is precious.

Life and death

Ted and his three children lost a wife and mother this week following her brief battle with cancer.

Jewel was a lifelong educator who inspired her students, and her students inspired her.

She didn't need a big stick; she had a steady nudge, a ready smile and a yes-you-can attitude.

RIP, Jewel.

• Deborah Simmons can be reached at dsimmons@washingtontimes.com.




__._,_.___
Reply via web post Reply to sender Reply to group Start a New Topic Messages in this topic (4)
Recent Activity:
To Post a message, send it to:   ward5@eGroups.com
To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: ward5-unsubscribe@eGroups.com
.

__,_._,___



--
R. Ramson
3744 12th Street, N.E.,
Washington D.C., 20017
202-438-5988

"We must become the change we want to see" - Mohandas Gandhi-
(Together, for a Brighter Tomorrow)




 


--
WardFive@googlegroups.com is open to WardFive residents for community discussion and information sharing.
 
To post to this group, send email to wardfive@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to wardfive+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/wardfive?hl=en
Posted by at

0 comments:

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)