English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

This has ref. to print & e media news.

2007-09-21 03:30:42 · 5 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government Law & Ethics

5 answers

I wasn't aware of any increase in crime. What media source did you get the increase of sex from? About the only way that could happen is if there are more people, so I suppose that'd be the answer, more people.

2007-09-21 03:47:01 · answer #1 · answered by fangtaiyang 7 · 0 0

It's a generational thing. Although the media is in part to blame for the amount of fornication (for lack of a better term) within American society. The media makes sex out to be this great, mature, independent from parents, type of thing. We're also a generation that lacks self esteem and constantly seeks approval, especially from our peers. But that comes from our parents, the boomers and baby boomers who ran into a lot of trouble during their adolcesents and therefore tries so hard to ensure we, their children, don't end up making simillar mistakes. But nonetheless, we have the media and our peers telling us something else, that it is cool to be having premature sex and that you become a better you through it. Almost like a right of passage.

The crime is also a generational thing, and its a generational failure. But that resides on the failure of our parents, they did not push their children or they simply could not give them the oppertunities to suceede, and therefore they end up resorting to gangs and crime. People always do something with their lives, but its not always good they end up doing.

So you can definatley point a finger at the media and accuse it of destorying the generation. That's true to a certain extent, but the media has also brought along world wide communcation, and that has never happened before the way it has come across in our generation, thanks to the media. People make mistakes, the tools only make the mistakes their user makes.

2007-09-21 10:46:34 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 1 0

The government doesn't have incentives to protect you from crime. In fact, it doesn't have the means and the competence to do that. However, it's charging you for that.
The police is there to enforce the government policies with your hard earned money.
If you want an example, take a look at the resource distribution for the last year. How much money was wasted... I mean spent in the war against terror? How much would you say was used for your protection against crime? From the government, what you spend for your own protection doesn't count. The terrorism killed three thousands in one event, maybe four (and I'm really pushing the number high here) in the last 10 years. Violent crime killed almost one million the last year (check the statistics) and that number is pretty much steady for the last 6 years.
That's socialist distribution of resources. And resources mean wealth created by real workers. Those who produce goods and services that the market wants. Government workers don't count and people living in socialist nirvana don't either. For the real workers, this resources in the hands of the government mean 60% of their paychecks (in average).

Meanwhile, the government regulations (meant to "improve" your life) are pushing investment away because people can make better business somewhere else where governments are not micromanaging private companies nor plundering their pockets with taxation. Less business, less jobs, more people looking for other ways to get what they need and what they want. You're the way, you're the one producing wealth, you're the only one who can provide them what they want. You can give it to them through taxes, so they can live from social support, or you can get robbed. It's not always your choice (never is).

Add to that the constant war on non-crimes. Crime is damage to persons and their properties. Nothing else should be considered crime. Drugs use is not crime. I don't like it, I don't approve it, I don't want it close to me. But I don't want to pay to fight it nor I want to pay to save the druggies. Let them take whatever they want, smoke, drink, inject. And let them face the consequences. Today, huge amounts of money are being wasted... I mean spent in the war on drugs, the rehabilitation of drug addicts and the lodging of drug criminals. It would have been a lot more productive to invest that money in the fight to real crime.
Plus, prosecution of dissenters (even those protected by the first amendment), socially inadequates (old ladies who don't water their front lawns, kids with low riding pants, skaters, little kids playing with their uncles parked motorcycle, etc) and common citizens who couldn't find the time to read ALL the laws that our representatives so happily write every single day.

I guess that pretty much answers your first question.

About the second... I didn't see much increase in sex lately...
You mean me or overall?

2007-09-21 13:25:53 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Sex and crime get attention, and the media wants attention, so they will continue to push the envelope and so devolve society as they do. What I am curious is if there's a limit to how far it can go, or if society will one day take a step back, look at what its done, and reverse course.

2007-09-21 10:52:55 · answer #4 · answered by Pfo 7 · 0 0

I started a reply to this twice and it really turned into a "rant" both times. I think we know why crime is up, and sex isn't up according to the last census. Unless of course this is a Viagra chimerical!!


VIVA VIAGRA !!!!!!!!!!

2007-09-21 10:50:21 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1 0

fedest.com, questions and answers