Bricktown Shooter: parents arrested dozens of times

[NoOkie]

This simply isn't possible. Until we start telling the truth we can't implement a solution. Children need a loving mother AND father. Anything short of that isn't a great environment, no matter how great the mother is at her half of the equation.

I think this is false. My sister and I were raised by our mother. My dad paid his child support, and we went to stay with him on vacation, but he's a complicated, emotionally distant person. He never related to well to kids including the ones from his second marriage. My mother is a fantastic woman who did a lot for us. My sister and I reasonably successful(My sister much more so than I), reasonably well adjusted happy people.

What children need for emotional development are good role models who care about them, not a male parent and a female parent in the same home. Certainly being a single mother is hard, and coupling that with poverty reduces the chances for a good outcome, but many single mothers provide great environments for their children every day, in every part of the country.

The problem with this kid and the thousands(millions?) like him is a socio-economic problem that has more to do with education and income than anything else.

Also, marriage isn't always the indicator of a two parent household. It's super common in Quebec(Something like 60% according to an article I read) for couples, even with children, to not get married. It's not real common in the US, but it does occur.

[Pete]

The problem with this kid and the thousands(millions?) like him is a socio-economic problem that has more to do with education and income than anything else.

I agree with most of your post but I'm not sure about this part.

Both the shooter and the other kid that was initially arrested were in the Putnam City school system. I know PC schools are not what they used to be but still, their API scores are pretty decent. There are tons of kids that come out of those schools and go on to great colleges and beyond. I have several nieces and nephews that have graduated from PC and PCW recently.

However, this kid stopped going to school at age 15. That is completely on the parents. In fact, the schools had the mother served with a misdemeanor for not having him in school. What else could the school system have done here?

By far his biggest issue was his home life and his parents. I'm sure they are low income but he had the opportunity to get a good education and threw it away, and there was no adult in his life to kick him in the tail and keep him going, much less stress the importance of school.

[RadicalModerate]

The problem with this kid and the thousands(millions?) like him is a socio-economic problem that has more to do with education and income than anything else.

Actually, isn't the problem with THIS kid (as compared with the other thousands(millions?) like him) that he "thought" it would be a good idea to open up on a crowd of people with a gun?

I know . . . I know . . . "personal accountability for one's actions" . . . dinosaur thinking.
Of COURSE this mindless anomaly is Society's Child . . . and "Society" needs to accept the blame.
Too bad that Janis Ian or Joan Baez aren't around to write a song about him . . .
Maybe they could get the victims to join hands and sing the chorus in the background . . .

[Pete]

The problem with this kid and the thousands(millions?) like him is a socio-economic problem that has more to do with education and income than anything else.

Actually, isn't the problem with THIS kid (as compared with the other thousands(millions?) like him) that he "thought" it would be a good idea to open up on a crowd of people with a gun?

I know . . . I know . . . "personal accountability for one's actions" . . . dinosaur thinking.
Of COURSE this mindless anomaly is Society's Child . . . and "Society" needs to accept the blame.
Too bad that Janis Ian or Joan Baez aren't around to write a song about him . . .
Maybe they could get the victims to join hands and sing the chorus in the background . . .

This kid is going to get dealt with through the correctional system. He's been arrested, supposedly confessed and we have plenty of infrastructure to deal with convicted criminals.

But that is all after the fact. 8 people have already been shot and one of the coolest, most unique experiences ever in OKC is forever ruined along with the city's reputation. AND, there are still seven other kids growing up in the exact same environment that produced this result; not to mention the thousands more in the area in pretty much the same circumstances.


The issue is: What does the broader society do about the underlying issues that led to all of this?

We can sit by and just wait for more crime and then hope to catch the responsible parties and lock them up... But this one incident graphically illustrates the consequences of that approach.

If anyone had really had their eye on this kid they would have seen this coming a mile away.

[NoOkie]

I agree with most of your post but I'm not sure about this part.

Both the shooter and the other kid that was initially arrested were in the Putnam City school system. I know PC schools are not what they used to be but still, their API scores are pretty decent. There are tons of kids that come out of those schools and go on to great colleges and beyond. I have several nieces and nephews that have graduated from PC and PCW recently.

However, this kid stopped going to school at age 15. That is completely on the parents. In fact, the schools had the mother served with a misdemeanor for not having him in school. What else could have the school system done here?

By far his biggest issue was his home life and his parents. I'm sure they are low income but he had the opportunity to get a good education and threw it away, and there was no adult in his life to kick him in the tail and keep him going, much less stress the importance of school.

I think it's a bigger problem than one person deciding to not take the opportunity of education. I hate to bring up race again, but my understanding is that there's a lot of social pressure in black, urban societies to NOT get an education or at least to highly undervalue one. I suspect the same problem existed with his parents. It's a complex issue that I don't really understand, though I think it shows up in other subcultures as well. Probably a contributing factor.

Actually, isn't the problem with THIS kid (as compared with the other thousands(millions?) like him) that he "thought" it would be a good idea to open up on a crowd of people with a gun?

I know . . . I know . . . "personal accountability for one's actions" . . . dinosaur thinking.
Of COURSE this mindless anomaly is Society's Child . . . and "Society" needs to accept the blame.
Too bad that Janis Ian or Joan Baez aren't around to write a song about him . . .
Maybe they could get the victims to join hands and sing the chorus in the background . . .

Or, you know, we could be taking a look at the factors that led to this kid and the thousands of other ones that are currently incarcerated for a variety of crimes, to lack that personal accountability. Personal Accountability isn't a switch in someone's head that they turn off because they feel like it. Ethics and morals are something taught by the family and the community a child develops in. I think it's obvious that this child didn't have many teachers. His family and environment basically set him up to fail. If it wasn't this shooting, it would certainly be something else. Believe it or not, it is possible to examine the societal causes of something without absolving someone of responsibility for their actions.

[NoOkie]

This kid is going to get dealt with through the correctional system. He's been arrested, supposedly confessed and we have plenty of infrastructure to deal with convicted criminals.

But that is all after the fact. 8 people have already been shot and one of the coolest, most unique experiences ever in OKC is forever ruined along with the city's reputation. AND, there are still seven other kids growing up in the exact same environment that produced this result; not to mention the thousands more in the area in pretty much the same circumstances.


The issue is: What does the broader society do about the underlying issues that led to all of this?

We can sit by and just wait for more crime and then hope to catch the responsible parties and lock them up... But this one incident graphically illustrates the consequences of that approach.

If anyone had really had their eye on this kid they would have seen this coming a mile away.

No Pete, we're supposed to sit on the porch in a rocking chair with a piece of straw in our mouths yelling "BOOTSTRAPS" at everything.

[Pete]

I think it's a bigger problem than one person deciding to not take the opportunity of education. I hate to bring up race again, but my understanding is that there's a lot of social pressure in black, urban societies to NOT get an education or at least to highly undervalue one. I suspect the same problem existed with his parents. It's a complex issue that I don't really understand, though I think it shows up in other subcultures as well. Probably a contributing factor.

Fair and important point.

For those that don't know, for years I ran a nonprofit for at-risk teenagers in a very rough area of Los Angeles. We primarily worked in local high schools and provided mentoring and counseling in a variety of after-school programs.

The problems these kids face are extremely complex and there are no easy answers. I could write books on what I experienced and learned, most of which was shocking and different than I had expected.

However, the peer-pressure thing is very real when it comes to both the black and Hispanic communities. A common put-down in those schools is to call someone a "school boy", which basically means they are good in school and take it too seriously. There is also the common thought that buying into school and conforming to social protocol when it comes to dress of behavior is "acting white", and again routinely discouraged by their peers. The effect of these influences are incredibly strong.

At the same time, most Asian and Eastern European cultures (big Armenian & Ukrainian communities out here) have the exact opposite attitude about education. We rarely saw any of those kids because they were focused on school.


It is my strong opinion that young people only know what they see, and that comes from their parents, extended family, their neighborhood and schoolmates. What we tried to do -- with limited success -- was provide them another perspective. Open their ideas to other ways of thinking and to provide responsible adults that were available to them. We also recognized that college is not for everyone (despite the constant mantra of their schools) and that getting them through HS then having some sort of plan for afterward was the best thing we could do for them.

[Just the facts]

This kid is going to get dealt with through the correctional system. He's been arrested, supposedly confessed and we have plenty of infrastructure to deal with convicted criminals.

This is the same correction system that so effectively dealt with his parents?

[NoOkie]

Fair and important point.

For those that don't know, for years I ran a nonprofit for at-risk teenagers in a very rough area of Los Angeles. We primarily worked in local high schools and provided mentoring and counseling in a variety of after-school programs.

The problems these kids face are extremely complex and there are no easy answers. I could write books on what I experienced and learned, most of which was shocking and different than I had expected.

However, the peer-pressure thing is very real when it comes to both the black and Hispanic communities. A common put-down in those schools is to call someone a "school boy", which basically means they are good in school and take it too seriously. There is also the common thought that buying into school and conforming to social protocol when it comes to dress of behavior is "acting white", and again routinely discouraged by their peers. The effect of these influences are incredibly strong.

At the same time, most Asian and Eastern European cultures (big Armenian & Ukrainian communities out here) have the exact opposite attitude about education. We rarely saw any of those kids because they were focused on school.


It is my strong opinion that young people only know what they see, and that comes from their parents, extended family, their neighborhood and schoolmates. What we tried to do -- with limited success -- was provide them another perspective. Open their ideas to other ways of thinking and to provide responsible adults that were available to them. We also recognized that college is not for everyone (despite the constant mantra of their schools) and that getting them through HS then having some sort of plan for afterward was the best thing we could do for them.

How successful do you think your program and ones like it are? Could outcomes be improved with throwing more money at the programs, or do there need to be other, additional angles of attack?

[RadicalModerate]

I suspect that sitting back, wringing our collective hands and saying we need a solution to "the root problem" will probably still be going on fifty years from now . . .

Of course . . . We could throw money at the problem . . . Has anyone thought of that?
Or would that just become an incentive to produce more problem children . . .
It's, like, an enigma, wrapped in a mystery, running around a Mobius Strip . . .

Maybe we need to fund a study as to why other kids from exactly the same circumstances choose NOT to pull this sort of sh--- thing?

P.S. I worked with "at-risk youth" for nine years.
Not all "at-risk youths" are the same.

[Pete]

How successful do you think your program and ones like it are? Could outcomes be improved with throwing more money at the programs, or do there need to be other, additional angles of attack?

I was never satisfied with the impact we were able to make, but we did make a difference in some lives. Have some great success stories but the really troubled kids were too much at the mercy of their families and environment.

Also, you never know how you may have influenced a kid down the line. When I was out raising funds, I'd usually be meeting with someone like me (white, well-educated and not from these situations), I'd always ask: "How old were you when you figured out your mom and dad really knew what they were talking about?" The point being it's rarely in high school; those life lessons pounded into us by our parents usually only reveal themselves as sage wisdom when you get a little older and have already learned the hard way multiple times. And the follow up: "Do you think you would be where you are today without their guidance and expectations? Can you imagine a life where *nobody* even cares, let alone expects anything from you?"

That's where evaluating programs like this on measurable outcomes gets really tricky. We were primarily government funded through alcohol and drug programs, so we had to provide tons of data but I never felt like that was any sort of accurate measurement.

A big component of our program was a professional counseling staff and we always tried to get the family to come in for a series of professional sessions. At best, we would get the mom but even that was rare and again, any outcomes from getting that therapy were always difficult to measure. But through that process you gained an intimate knowledge of what went on in these homes and often come away thinking: Wow, it's amazing this kid isn't more screwed up.


Working with teens is tough because they are really only kids but with adult problems. They are also scary and even dangerous so the world feels better getting their photo ops giving school supplies to 2nd graders.

[Pete]

P.S. I worked with "at-risk youth" for nine years.
Not all "at-risk youths" are the same.

Much respect to you and I never meant to imply there was any one way to approach these situations.

[PennyQuilts]

This simply isn't possible. Until we start telling the truth we can't implement a solution. Children need a loving mother AND father. Anything short of that isn't a great environment, no matter how great the mother is at her half of the equation.

Allow me some leeway to discuss, here. I know it is going to disgust some people, especially those that don't have much of a background with zoology. I apologize in advance for offending certain sensibilities.

Domesticated animals, like dogs, tend to breed indiscriminately and rely on humans to help raise their young. Accordingly, domesticated male animals typically show no loyalty to a mate and don't stick around to raise their offspring. They don't need to for the species to survive and, in fact, it works out better for man because they can control breeding, numbers and bloodlines. Nothing controversial in that statement. It is the sort of thing that defines a domesticated animal (vs. a tamed one).

People, however, remind me of coyotes in that both are very adaptable to different environments. Unlike dogs, coyotes mate for at least the breeding season and the male sticks around to help raise the pups. They have to or the pups can't survive. They've done studies of alleged coydogs (dog/coyote crosses) and discovered that there are relatively very few of them in the wild. Male coyotes typically refuse to mate with a female dog. Female coyotes will mate with dogs but usually the pups don't survive in the wild because dogs, being domesticated, don't have any loyalty to their mate or offspring. A coyote mother in the wild usually can't raise them on her own, very successfully. She might save one or two but rarely a whole litter.

IMO, we've got a lot of people behaving more like domesticated animals than wild ones. They breed on a whim instead of as part of a long term commitment (and mind you, even male coyotes have better sense than that). As a society, we've been trying to take the place of the male but - if you will excuse the phrase - it is the tail wagging the dog. We can neuter and confine domesticated animals to control unwanted offspring but people are a different story. As long as we are content to try to domesticate people by removing any real need to mate for the duration, we are going to have this problem. And the thing is, people aren't livestock. We can't control how and when they breed and we are spending enormous sums of money to try to take the place of an intact, healthy family unit. Unsuccessfully. Anyone who thinks people aren't just another type of animal is off in some religious la la land. No, they aren't coyotes, they aren't blue birds and they aren't chimps, but it is insanity to think a single parent is equiped to raise a child without a lot of help from the rest of us. Some manage but many have no such resources and it isn't just about cash and food stamps. It is about long nights, homework, teenage angst, etc. Civilizing children is what makes them different from feral animals. Food stamps and section 8 housing is just about keeping them alive.

NoOkie, I want to say I am not impuning your mom. I am saying that for many women - perhaps most mothers, it is just too much. You described your dad paying child support and at least giving your mother a break during some holidays. Many, many poor women don't have any of that and have more chaos going on at the same time. You and your sister were from the same father and it sounds like your mother had her head on straight. It is all the more complicated to come from an environment where the mother has children by multiple men and who is willing to expose her kids to men coming in and out of their lives. Some men make great step father/role models. Some are only around for short term with no interest, or even animosity, towards existing children.

[NoOkie]

Allow me some leeway to discuss, here. I know it is going to disgust some people, especially those that don't have much of a background with zoology. I apologize in advance for offending certain sensibilities.

Domesticated animals, like dogs, tend to breed indiscriminately and rely on humans to help raise their young. Accordingly, domesticated male animals typically show no loyalty to a mate and don't stick around to raise their offspring. They don't need to for the species to survive and, in fact, it works out better for man because they can control breeding, numbers and bloodlines. Nothing controversial in that statement. It is the sort of thing that defines a domesticated animal (vs. a tamed one).

People, however, remind me of coyotes in that both are very adaptable to different environments. Unlike dogs, coyotes mate for at least the breeding season and the male sticks around to help raise the pups. They have to or the pups can't survive. They've done studies of alleged coydogs (dog/coyote crosses) and discovered that there are relatively very few of them in the wild. Male coyotes typically refuse to mate with a female dog. Female coyotes will mate with dogs but usually the pups don't survive in the wild because dogs, being domesticated, don't have any loyalty to their mate or offspring. A coyote mother in the wild usually can't raise them on her own, very successfully. She might save one or two but rarely a whole litter.

IMO, we've got a lot of people behaving more like domesticated animals than wild ones. They breed on a whim instead of as part of a long term commitment (and mind you, even male coyotes have better sense than that). As a society, we've been trying to take the place of the male but - if you will excuse the phrase - it is the tail wagging the dog. We can neuter and confine domesticated animals to control unwanted offspring but people are a different story. As long as we are content to try to domesticate people by removing any real need to mate for the duration, we are going to have this problem. And the thing is, people aren't livestock. We can't control how and when they breed and we are spending enormous sums of money to try to take the place of an intact, healthy family unit. Unsuccessfully. Anyone who thinks people aren't just another type of animal is off in some religious la la land. No, they aren't coyotes, they aren't blue birds and they aren't chimps, but it is insanity to think a single parent is equiped to raise a child without a lot of help from the rest of us. Some manage but many have no such resources and it isn't just about cash and food stamps. It is about long nights, homework, teenage angst, etc. Civilizing children is what makes them different from feral animals. Food stamps and section 8 housing is just about keeping them alive.

NoOkie, I want to say I am not impuning your mom. I am saying that for many women - perhaps most mothers, it is just too much. You described your dad paying child support and at least giving your mother a break during some holidays. Many, many poor women don't have any of that and have more chaos going on at the same time. You and your sister were from the same father and it sounds like your mother had her head on straight. It is all the more complicated to come from an environment where the mother has children by multiple men and who is willing to expose her kids to men coming in and out of their lives. Some men make great step father/role models. Some are only around for short term with no interest, or even animosity, towards existing children.

Lot of good points here. The anecdote about my upbringing was more to counter the "Children MUST have a mother and a father present" argument, not to say that the same outcome should be expected from vastly different circumstances than my white, middle-class, surrounded by extended family one. There were definitely outside sources helping my mother raise us(Grandparents and some extended family) both with time and money.

Personally, I think we can never completely get rid of the problem(It's not new after all, just seems to be more prevalent and noticeable these days). But we can have better sex education and contraception access. Might help in reducing the number of basically unwanted children growing up semi-feral. The ones we already have...well, people like Pete and RM take their best shot and get a few victories.

[Midtowner]

So an incompetent state child services agency will necessarily lead to feral children. Is that what you're saying Penny? I've got a little (not a lot) of experience representing children in our juvenile court system as an attorney-volunteer. That last word should strike some fear into society. That's right. Our child welfare services system is increasingly relying on volunteers, e.g., CASA or OLFC. If that doesn't just scream lack of funding at you, I don't know what will. I agree that just "throwing money" at things won't fix anything, but spending more and spending that money smart absolutely will.

Even fiscal conservatives, who only generally want to see the government spending where there's a return on investment can appreciate this.

Compare these HHS statistics between a state with relatively high child welfare spending, Massachusetts to one with a relatively low amount of per capita spending, Oklahoma.

http://cwoutcomes.acf.hhs.gov/data/d...sachusetts.pdf
http://cwoutcomes.acf.hhs.gov/data/d...s/oklahoma.pdf

You'll see that in Massachusetts, in 2010, 68% of families were reunified within one year. To get to reunification, typically, the parent must correct whatever the problem was in the household and then take a bunch of silly classes, submit to drug testing, etc. In Oklahoma, less than half are reunified within 1 year, 34.2% within the second year of being placed in foster care, and between years 2 and 3, we're still reunifying 11.8% there, which is ridiculous. A reunification case which takes that long should probably be a termination. Comparatively, Mass. is half that rate. Throwing money at a problem sometimes fixes the problem. Imagine that.

Now, back to the ROI. There are two major areas where states can realize a huge ROI from state investment--education and child welfare services. Both of those items invest in children to help them become productive adults. Penny's right. Without state intervention, many of these children are basically growing up feral. We can't afford to yell "bootstraps" at this problem because it is we, not the folks on welfare, who ultimately pay for the failure of society to churn out decent human beings in that we are the victims of their property crimes and often end up paying for them to be placed in prison.

We really do have a choice between higher social welfare spending now or higher corrections spending later. It sucks, but that's the choice.

[Maynard]

Gotta love The Onion!

[RadicalModerate]

Maynard . . . Maynard . . . Maynard . . .
(tsk x3) =)

So . . . Is it "Nature"? Is it "Nurture"?
Or is it just that the gene pool has been corrupted by Virtual Reality (and other stuff)?
(as compared to Real Reality)

I think that the hypothesis that IT (and by IT I mean The Root Problem, Cause of) is mostly about "education" and "income" is . . . less than . . . "all-inclusively accurate".

Thinking back a few years . . .
One of most "semi-sociopathic "at risk youths" that I had the rewarding challenge of dealing with was of non-African American heritage and had attended that "catholic" private school--St. . . . Something or other--over there just north of Crown Heights.

I, and all the rest of the caring and concerned participants in The Program, was/were able to move him . . . oh . . . i dunno . . . maybe thirty degrees off of "due south, straight to hell" over an 18 month period . . .

Yet, I still marvel at the fact that many kids from the bayou swampshacks and wards of "De' Boot" were much more responsive to "redirection" and "correction" . . .

Maybe it's because--in Louisiana--they never fell into the trap of referring to Hard Ass Hard Time Punishment Centers as "Correctional Facilities". They did, however, present a false image by the use of the phrase "Work Farms" . . .

BTW: Although the place I worked was Federally Funded, the staff prayed constantly and fervently every day.
Both individually and collectively. Nobody filed a lawsuit.

[PennyQuilts]

So an incompetent state child services agency will necessarily lead to feral children. Is that what you're saying Penny? .

No, I sure didn't say that.

I've got a little (not a lot) of experience representing children in our juvenile court system as an attorney-volunteer. That last word should strike some fear into society. That's right. Our child welfare services system is increasingly relying on volunteers, e.g., CASA or OLFC. If that doesn't just scream lack of funding at you, I don't know what will. I agree that just "throwing money" at things won't fix anything, but spending more and spending that money smart absolutely will.

I have a lot of experience with this and it is, sadly, that way all over. The problem of imploding families is growing and state resources to try to address it are plummeting. Many places rely on property tax to fund services such as counseling, and with the housing bust in many parts of the country, the money just isn't there. I went though a housing bust in Virginia and it was just awful. Kids were being kept in borderline abusive homes (or, more likely, abusive homes we didn't have the goods on) because we didn't have the money to put them elsewhere. We increasingly had to rely on medicaid but even that only goes so far. I have to put a plug in for CASA - a volunteer organization that did stellar work for nothing. They are volunteers but the groups I've worked with have been absolute angels with one horrible exception of a male CASA predator (who fortunately focused on the mother rather than the child).

When I said that we can feed them and shelter them I meant what I said - that keeps them alive but it doesn't make the civilized. It frequently just keeps them in abusive homes with parents who ignore the kids and use them as a cash cow for government benefits. It is why I have such a problem with that type of welfare, so often. I was stunned when I saw this happening because when I started GAL work, I just didn't believe parents could be so calculating. I'd have punched you in the nose if you suggested it. I was just as shocked to see parents argue over custody to get out of having to pay child support. I was quite naive when I went into the business.

Counseling and training, however, are services often provided by social services and I support that. I think it helps in many instances but, still, even with education and counseling, expecting many of these truly horrible parents to civilize their children is irrational. They are out of control, themselves. And I say that based on many years of dealing with families, often with individual families over a period of 6 - 7 years. It is a heart breaking thing to see a sweet young girl abused at, say, age six who is such a sweetheart and by the time she is 14, she is pregnant with no idea who the father is, refuses to go to school, has 2 - 3 shoplifting convictions, a drinking problem and who hates her parents and all authority with all her heart and mind. Add in mental illness, add in a gang element, add in running around at all hours with neighborhood thugs and you are liable to have something even more dangerous - like spraying a crowd with bullets.

And while foster care can be a blessing, even in boom times, they don't pay foster families much of anything. Some offer their homes as a type of religious faith but there are others who just want the extra money and are willing to stack 'em like cord wood. When people talk about "unwanted children" and not having enough homes to adopt them, they usually are confusing adoption with fostering. We have enough adoptive parents, nearly all the time. But we have so few foster parents (and so many kids needing foster care) and they are so needed. People don't like to open their homes to a troubled child they aren't going to be able to keep and are understandably worried about giving their heart to a child that isn't going to stay with them. Plus, they get paid next to nothing and these kids tend to be expensive.

There is such a lack of foster homes that a lot of kids are just left with dysfunctional parents or placed in residential homes. I know I sound like a broken record but extended family members are usually the children's best chance. I am not suggesting social services has no part in that. Indeed, absent the support of social services, that is often not going to happen. I regularly worked with grandparents who desperately wanted to get custody/guardianship of their grandchildren but just didn't know how until the child somehow got into the system and the social workers and I encouraged them to take that step.

Tell a child that she is going into foster care to escape a bad homelife and if you think you are going to get a hug and big thanks, think again. You just ripped her from everything she ever knew - good and bad - and is afraid her family hates her for telling what was going on. So she goes to a strange family, a new school, she doesn't see her parents for several weeks, much of the time, she might be separated from her pets, siblings, friends, etc. From their perspective, it is often out of the skillet and into the fire. That is just one of the reasons I support extended family stepping in. They might still have to change schools but they are at least with their family who love them.

[Lindsay Architect]

How much welfare $$ have we sent to his parents over the years? If they've had that many felonies, obviously they have too much time on their hands, so I'm assuming they don't work. I say 1 felony = no welfare, get a job. And I'm not heartless so take their money and give it to a single parent working to make ends meet.

[Midtowner]

How much welfare $$ have we sent to his parents over the years? If they've had that many felonies, obviously they have too much time on their hands, so I'm assuming they don't work. I say 1 felony = no welfare, get a job. And I'm not heartless so take their money and give it to a single parent working to make ends meet.

When the welfare is the only thing keeping them from committing even more felonies and ending up (much more expensively) in the pokey, the country where Lindsay Architect is dictator for a day doesn't last very long.

[Achilleslastand]

Welfare keeps people from commiting more felonys........coulda fooled me.

[Midtowner]

Welfare keeps people from commiting more felonys........coulda fooled me.

Since ancient times, bread and circuses have been used to pacify the masses. Welfare = bread. Maybe daytime TV is the other part. Consider what happens when you actually put someone in a position where they have no skill set to get a job, no life skills of note and have two real choices--steal or starve. That's not a viable scenario for domestic tranquility and such. Also, consider that felons don't exactly have an easy time finding work.

We're always going to have a criminal element. You can't deal with it in a kneejerk/irrational manner. The real key is to identify issues with problem families and to get in there and either remove the kids or solve those families' problems.

[Lindsay Architect]

Well their record isn't helping me understand your point. I'd say after the felony #1 they would be cleaning the county jail 8-5 or painting government buildings, mowing grass, cleaning up graffiti or something if they are still on welfare. I don't see how getting free money to smoke pot, drink all day etc. should be rewarded with our money in hopes that they don't commute felony #21.

[Lindsay Architect]

Commit rather

[PennyQuilts]

When the welfare is the only thing keeping them from committing even more felonies and ending up (much more expensively) in the pokey, the country where Lindsay Architect is dictator for a day doesn't last very long.

At that point, the kids can be rescued a lot easier. They are pretty much all I care about at that point. If giving them money is to keep the parents from committing felonies I don't see that as a good reason to give it to them.

ETA: http://www.thefreemanonline.org/feat...-ancient-rome/

I found an article Mid may have been referencing. It didn't' sound like it worked out that well, actually.