Recently, Jay Honeck posted:

When was that last time you spent any time in one of our major inner
cities, Jay? What do you *know* of living there? What do you *know*
of what is and isn't "rational behavior" there? From your comments,
I'd say you've spent no time in that environment; is that incorrect?

Quite incorrect. I spent seven years collecting money in hard-core
inner city areas of Racine and Kenosha, WI -- on the "drug road"
(I-94) from Chicago to Milwaukee.

Racine? Kenosha? Major inner cities... not! Still, I'd say those are good
experiences to draw on, so what would you consider to be rational behavior
for those who live there?

The only difference between these areas, and Baghdad, is the size of
the explosives used.

Well, I differ with your opinion, here, unless your comparison is that
both "these areas" and life in Baghdad are the result of our government's
involvement.

Life in those areas has been pretty much the same ever since such
areas were built, and the reason for the violence in those areas is
pretty much unchanged too.

Wrong. Inner cities grow like a fungus. What were once beautiful
parts of Milwaukee and Racine are now uninhabitable by normal
Americans. Gunshots ring out with regularity, and police are either
paid off or afraid.

Well, we agree about the corruption as a contributing factor. As for
"Inner cities grow like a fungus", well, no, they don't. They are the
result of many things, such as the lack of ownership, lack of opportunity,
extraction of wealth, and lack of enforcement of building codes and law.
Those areas where, for example, absentee landlords are held accountable
for their property do not become blighted, and a desirable side effect is
that ownership is increased. That still doesn't guarantee safety and
protection, though, and that will discourages investment and limit
opportunity.

It isn't that those areas "...can't even be patrolled
safely by law enforcement...", they certainly could be, but aren't.
So, gangs and mob rule fill the void created by the lack of law
enforcement who are spending their time and resources in more
affluent areas of the city.

That, my friend, is crap. Affluent areas generally receive miminal
law enforcement money -- why? Because there's no crime there. Cops
just don't have time to patrol a sleep, affluent suburb.

Please read more carefully. I didn't say anything about "suburbs" -- I
said "...more affluent areas of the city." Since a city has a single
budget for law enforcement, it is the same for the affluent areas as it is
for the poor areas. But, that isn't how the resources are apportioned.

Where the money goes is to the "border" areas -- the fuzzy no-man's
land between the inner city and the "nice" parts of town.

And, whose police force is in the "border areas"? We may be in agreement,
there.

Again -- you guys that expect democracy to work overnight in Iraq are
simply showing your ignorance. It won't happen -- no, it CAN'T happen
-- in a mere four years. Or ten. It hasn't happened here (in many
parts of America) yet.

Again, we may be in agreement. But, I'll go a step further; if we can't do
it, we can't help others to do it, and therefore have no business trying
to impose it on those others.

The same choice has been made by local governments for over a
hundred years in cities like New York and Chicago. And, those police
departments are well known for their "integrity", aren't they?

Many choices are made -- just not the ones you think are being made.
The reason the police departments in Chicago and New York (and others)
have grown corrupt is because our namby-pamby court system simply
refuses to take the criminal element off the streets. I've spoken to
many police officers who won't arrest or detain a known criminal,
simply because there is no point. They'll be on the street again in
hours -- and the cop will have to fill out endless paperwork, and
(perhaps) appear in court.

And, these police officers' job is to do what, exactly? What you're
describing are people who, if not criminals themselves by virtue of aiding
and abetting crime, at least lack integrity. To not arrest criminals
because they'd have to fill out paperwork is absurd.

Neil