It's easy to blame police cuts on crime. Let's start getting to the real cause

Watch
This discussion is closed.
qwertyK
Badges: 14
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#1
Report Thread starter 3 years ago
#1
I'm sick of people blaming police cuts on crime. Yes, undoubtedly they are lesser equipped to deal with this crime.

Let's face it: we all know the real issue but society has become too liberal and too offended to talk about it.

The breakdown of the traditional nuclear family and fear of being called racist for calling out certain ethnicities for harbouring crime.

I would be interested in finding out the correlation between lone parent families and their children committing crime. Because there clearly is a link: lone parent family = child more likely to commit crime

I've seen it first hand at my school, and maybe its not an accurate example, but it's in a relatively middle class part of the country as a whole, with a majority of white, British pupils.

The secularisation of society and loss of traditional socio-conservative values such as a nuclear family has caused instability, the lack of a dominant male in the family.

The black community in the past has been labelled as glorifying crime - now this is also the case with whites. Building community centre's wont stop this. Nor will more police officers.

We need to start taking a serious look at crime. Just look at the faces of the murder victims in London. All black. All with relatively young, single parents. You never see the dads, only the mums. You find out they were kicked out from school but were involved in crime. There IS a correlation!
3
Criminalis
Badges: 13
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#2
Report 3 years ago
#2
Correlation doesn't necessarily imply causation.
6
ilem
Badges: 17
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#3
Report 3 years ago
#3
Perhaps, but I really don't see a way of fixing this without scaling back freedoms, which will never get any popular support.
0
Dez
Badges: 20
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#4
Report 3 years ago
#4
(Original post by Criminalis)
Correlation doesn't necessarily imply causation.
Especially when there isn't a correlation to begin with. The number of single-parent families has barely changed over the last decade, and crime levels were falling up until a couple years ago. OP is bunk.
5
fallen_acorns
Badges: 20
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#5
Report 3 years ago
#5
(Original post by Dez)
Especially when there isn't a correlation to begin with. The number of single-parent families has barely changed over the last decade, and crime levels were falling up until a couple years ago. OP is bunk.
stats 101 - would fail you.

The statement by the OP:
lone parent family = child more likely to commit crime

Your reply:
single parent families are static in number
Crime has been falling

Reason you would fail statistics class:
If you have a multiple group population - you can only draw conclusions with information from all groups, and analysis of each separately. For all we know (from your evidence and reasoning) actually crime in single parent families may be rising, but crime in 2 parent families may be falling. Given the larger number of 2 parent families, overall the population would experience a fall in crime, even though the single parent families are experiencing a rise in crime.

---

There are plenty of studies that actually look in detail at this area, and the consensus is clear - the absence of a father in particular, leads to a statistically significant increase in the chance of the child participating in criminal activity. how much of that is causation or correlation? you can only conclude based on your view of the methodology of each study. But answers like the poster above 'correlation doesn't mean causation' are about as useful as pointing out that apples are not oranges. In any decent academically literate debate - people know that correlation does not 100% equal causation. But dependent on the study in question is indicative of such to some degree.
5
Andrew97
Badges: 20
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#6
Report 3 years ago
#6
Thought this would be a serious discussion. Doesn’t seem the case.
0
Carolina K.
Badges: 13
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#7
Report 3 years ago
#7
(Original post by qwertyK)
I'm sick of people blaming police cuts on crime. Yes, undoubtedly they are lesser equipped to deal with this crime.

Let's face it: we all know the real issue but society has become too liberal and too offended to talk about it.

The breakdown of the traditional nuclear family and fear of being called racist for calling out certain ethnicities for harbouring crime.

I would be interested in finding out the correlation between lone parent families and their children committing crime. Because there clearly is a link: lone parent family = child more likely to commit crime

I've seen it first hand at my school, and maybe its not an accurate example, but it's in a relatively middle class part of the country as a whole, with a majority of white, British pupils.

The secularisation of society and loss of traditional socio-conservative values such as a nuclear family has caused instability, the lack of a dominant male in the family.

The black community in the past has been labelled as glorifying crime - now this is also the case with whites. Building community centre's wont stop this. Nor will more police officers.

We need to start taking a serious look at crime. Just look at the faces of the murder victims in London. All black. All with relatively young, single parents. You never see the dads, only the mums. You find out they were kicked out from school but were involved in crime. There IS a correlation!
As a single parents white child I have to disagree. I know a lot of one-parent-family's children. I know people in social care etc. None of the people I know have committed any crime. The worst thing that i know happened to a single parent child was failing college but they did start university (where they are doing quiet well) soon after.

At the moment I am involved with the police. Before you assume anything I will spell it out; I am not in trouble. Its like I'm getting help from them but I can't say what with at the moment. So far I have been waiting a month to write a report. This included me contacting them multiple times and seeing them in person. However due to the fact that they are understaffed I have been waiting more than a month. Its an urgent case and they know that but they are having issues due to understaffing and thus can't just get this done.

There is some correlation between single parent families and crime. Single parent families are typically poorer than families with both parents. Ses has a huge impact on crime stats.

What needs to be done is us taking a look at the amount of crimes committed and the types. Seeing which are the biggest issues and allocating police based on that. That makes a lot of sense, doesn't it? Well its what the police is doing. But guess what, they have an issue with founding. The lack of founding means that some crimes go unreported, the criminals can't get caught. More people loose faith in the police so they are less likely to report a crime. This is a par to the circle and reason as to why the crime is such a problem.

The other is that prisons and rehabilitation institutions are not doing their goddamned job. The criminals go back to the life of crime and reoffend.
0
Dez
Badges: 20
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#8
Report 3 years ago
#8
(Original post by fallen_acorns)
stats 101 - would fail you.

The statement by the OP:
lone parent family = child more likely to commit crime

Your reply:
single parent families are static in number
Crime has been falling

Reason you would fail statistics class:
If you have a multiple group population - you can only draw conclusions with information from all groups, and analysis of each separately. For all we know (from your evidence and reasoning) actually crime in single parent families may be rising, but crime in 2 parent families may be falling. Given the larger number of 2 parent families, overall the population would experience a fall in crime, even though the single parent families are experiencing a rise in crime.

---

There are plenty of studies that actually look in detail at this area, and the consensus is clear - the absence of a father in particular, leads to a statistically significant increase in the chance of the child participating in criminal activity. how much of that is causation or correlation? you can only conclude based on your view of the methodology of each study. But answers like the poster above 'correlation doesn't mean causation' are about as useful as pointing out that apples are not oranges. In any decent academically literate debate - people know that correlation does not 100% equal causation. But dependent on the study in question is indicative of such to some degree.
OP used the wording "breakdown of the traditional nuclear family", implying that the cause they were blaming is fewer cohabiting/married couples, when in fact the number of cohabs has increased. I did not make any claim about single parenthood's effects on crime rates, OP did.
0
Drewski
Badges: 19
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#9
Report 3 years ago
#9
(Original post by Andrew97)
Thought this would be a serious discussion. Doesn’t seem the case.
On TSR? You should know better.

OP is a serial troll, responses quickly resort to "I know more than you, ner ner", and then descend into *****iness.

Waste of time to engage either side of the drivel.
2
Axiomasher
Badges: 16
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#10
Report 3 years ago
#10
DailyMailiosis, it seems to be some kind of bacterial infection.
0
fallen_acorns
Badges: 20
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#11
Report 3 years ago
#11
(Original post by Dez)
OP used the wording "breakdown of the traditional nuclear family", implying that the cause they were blaming is fewer cohabiting/married couples, when in fact the number of cohabs has increased. I did not make any claim about single parenthood's effects on crime rates, OP did.
your reply to the OP, broken down in bold

---

"Especially when there isn't a correlation to begin with.

your claim - there is no correlation between:

The number of single-parent families has barely changed over the last decade,

variable - the number of single parent families.

and crime levels were falling up until a couple years ago. OP is bunk

variable - the crime levels for the country as a whole
"

---

Reverse the three parts and you get:


A, "crime levels were falling up until a couple years ago"
B, "The number of single-parent families has barely changed"
=
C, "there isn't a correlation"

my point has nothing to do with the OP - its that you can't draw your conclusion from the two pieces of data that you referenced. Its statistically not possible to conclude C, from only A+B, meaning your reply to the OP, is flawed.

(also I think the OP confuses single-parent families with non-nuclear families, but that doesn't effect whether your first reply was wrong or not)
0
StriderHort
Badges: 21
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#12
Report 3 years ago
#12
*wanders off*
1
the beer
Badges: 14
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#13
Report 3 years ago
#13
Nah, the real issue is prohibition.
1
anarchism101
Badges: 17
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#14
Report 3 years ago
#14
(Original post by qwertyK)
The breakdown of the traditional nuclear family
The "traditional nuclear family" is maybe a century or two old, at least for most of the population.

Household patterns through history aren't determined by some grand ideal so much as economics. For most of history, living away from your extended family with an essentially separate microeconomic ecosystem just wasn't feasible unless you were rich. It was the affluence of the 19th and 20th Centuries that made it widespread, and even then it was still less prevalent among smaller groups.

Nowadays though, economic development has reached a point where the nuclear family is less and less a particularly necessary economic unit.
1
Axiomasher
Badges: 16
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#15
Report 3 years ago
#15
Anyone tried those bagel 'thins'? They're really nice toasted. In other news, I've not played a computer game for a few years but I'm tempted by what I've heard about Red Dead Redemption II
0
StriderHort
Badges: 21
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#16
Report 3 years ago
#16
(Original post by Axiomasher)
Anyone tried those bagel 'thins'? They're really nice toasted. In other news, I've not played a computer game for a few years but I'm tempted by what I've heard about Red Dead Redemption II
I never tried the bagel thins in Red Dead Redemption? Do you catch and skin them or win them at Poker?
1
Axiomasher
Badges: 16
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#17
Report 3 years ago
#17
(Original post by StriderHort)
I never tried the bagel thins in Red Dead Redemption? Do you catch and skin them or win them at Poker?
They are a kind of fish, you gotta go fishing in the lake, they like a slice of ham on a hook, apparently.
0
Carolina K.
Badges: 13
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#18
Report 3 years ago
#18
(Original post by Axiomasher)
Anyone tried those bagel 'thins'? They're really nice toasted. In other news, I've not played a computer game for a few years but I'm tempted by what I've heard about Red Dead Redemption II
Dude, what's that and is it tasty?
1
StriderHort
Badges: 21
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#19
Report 3 years ago
#19
(Original post by Axiomasher)
They are a kind of fish, you gotta go fishing in the lake, they like a slice of ham on a hook, apparently.
I'm a bit leery of that, the existing literature on ham fishing has revealed significant dangers of chicken contamination

"Bacon Grill and chopped pork and ham were among the first baits I ever used and both still have a constant place in my emergency bait supplies stashed in the car, thanks to their long shelf life and adaptability.

Bacon Grill remains one of my favourite brands, being quite firm and sinking well. It can be easily chopped or punched.

Do check the ingredients list on tins of luncheon meat, though, as some contain chicken instead of pork. This makes them much softer, and some brands are prone to float. All the different versions are worth experimenting with – you’ll soon find your favourite."


Anglingtimescouk. 2017. FISHING WITH MEAT TIPS. 01 Aug. Anglingtimescouk. [Online]. [6 November 2018]. Available from: https://www.anglingtimes.co.uk/advic...with-meat-tips
0
qwertyK
Badges: 14
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#20
Report Thread starter 3 years ago
#20
The breakdown of the nuclear family is so overlooked.

- Nuclear family provides general financial security, eg, if one parent is made redundant, there is still one parent to be a breadwinner
- Nuclear family provides dominant male for boys to look up to or go to for advice (most of the crime is committed by males)
- Nuclear family is more socially conservatives so Judeo-Christian values are more prevalent (not always the case but still similar seceluar values are held)

Divorce is a traumatic event. But many lone parent families start because the parent is pregnant at around fifteen etc. I've seen it firsthand. Mums in their early twenties with kids who are five or six. They clearly don't care, do they?

Young, unmarried parents are more likely to get into debt
More likely to get in trouble with police and authority due to their childhood
Highly likely to be poorly educated
Highly likely to have a drug, or smoking addiciton

Not rocket science folks.
0
X
new posts
Back
to top
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

Would you give consent for uni's to contact your parent/trusted person in a mental health crisis?

Yes - my parent/carer (67)
33.5%
Yes - a trusted person (54)
27%
No (52)
26%
I'm not sure (27)
13.5%

Watched Threads

View All