This site is closed to new comments and posts.

Notice: This site uses cookies to function.
If you are not comfortable with cookies then please don't browse this website.

SOS Shooting Response: 8/18, New York Ave St. Johns — Brooklynian

SOS Shooting Response: 8/18, New York Ave St. Johns

Comments

  • Community activism may be the most effective tool.

    Good luck!
  • Bump.

    It's time to for those who want to make a difference to meet each other.

    for those that need more info than the above flyer provides....

    http://www.courtinnovation.org/index.cfm?fuseaction=Page.ViewPage&PageID=601&currentTopTier2=true

    See you Wednesday?
  • Thanks to Eric Adams and all those who came out tonight!

    We can stop the shootings and killings if we work together!
  • ITWASSUMKINDADOPE.

    big ups to ken bogan and the mediation center folks. papertiger whut up!! :)
  • I am troubled by this kind of emoting. I don't think it accomplishes anything. This energy would be better spent by getting brothers who are under-skilled into trade schools. The violence that exists is a result of young Black men fighing over decreasing turf as the hipsters move in and reject pesticide-laden 'hydro' for the organic high of kombucha and kava kava -- with a little L-theanine thrown in between... These brothers are getting desperate over the lack of customers, increased police presence -- and it's made them very mean...

    When S.O.S. steps in with a prayer here, a pinch of 'we shall overcome there' and a little finger wagging, what good does that do? Seriously. 'Shootings and killings aren't acceptable in our community'? Really? How about stabbings, are a few stabbings okay?

    Not to say that taking a moral stance isn't laudable, but what does it do? I think it was Jean-Paul Sartre or Frantz Fanon who said that protestors are much like barking dogs in that dogs that bark tend not to bite. There's no bite.
  • I'd like to think that the events give people who are concerned the chance to meet each other.

    ...I agree, any REAL change, depends upon giving the stabbers/shooters something else to do with their time.

    Divine intervention is not where it is at.

    ....without human intervention this cycle will continue.

    (Prison just seems to make people older. ....new under skilled folks just fill their ranks while they are away)
  • More info on S.O.S. Crown Heights

    S.O.S. is modeled after CeaseFire (www.ceasefirechicago.org), a Chicago-based project that uses a public health approach to violence prevention.

    S.O.S. uses highly trained outreach staff, public education campaigns and community mobilization.

    The outreach workers are streetwise individuals. Many of them are former gang members and have spent time in prison, but they are now “on this side of the line” and eager to give back and help young people in their neighborhoods.

    Outreach workers have a client base and focus on changing the behaviors and thinking of high-risk youth. They keep in touch with the community and seek to intervene in conflicts before they escalate to violence and also prevent retaliation. They attempt to steer individuals away from violence to more positive endeavors, such as education and employment opportunities.
  • Seems possible the S.O.S. tactics are fighting the nihilism found in poor, black neighborhoods through a highly-visible resistance to violence, that is by saying out loud "We will not put up with shootings, our community is too important to us for that."
  • My sister lives on Chicago's southside (a place where Ceasefire is very active and needed).

    While she perceives the effort as being largely unsuccessful at stemming the tide of violence (the southside remains far more violent than any neighborhood in NYC, and perhaps the nation), she feels it:

    * Provides support to family members of the murdered.

    * Allows people who are concerned about such issues to meet and develop strategies on how to remain safe and understand that THEIR risk of being murdered is actually low.

    ....perhaps the only thing worse than violent crime is the fear of violent crime. Fear causes one to stay inside, and leave the streets to criminals. Fear causes a sense of isolation that no one cares about your community, or understands you. Fear just causes the problem to get worse, which (of course) causes .....wait for it..... MORE FEAR.

    ---->Chicago is the city wherein researchers studied a specific inner city ER. They found that more than half of the 20 - 30 year old males who were murdered by a gunshots had been shot previously and lived. <-----

    A mind blowing statistic.

    We are in vicious cycle of violence that leaves no one unaffected. Some families have endured this cycle for literally generations.

    SOS has the potential to help those affected, and perhaps slow the cycle down.

    If we actually knew how to break the cycle and it was easy, we'd wouldn't be standing on a corner stating "Please don't shoot. I want to grow up".

    If we knew somethng more effective to say, we -um- would.

    (and I wouldn't somberly and somewhat sarcastically think to myself, "I can't attend tonight's shooting response. I'll try to make the next one")

    See you at the next one?

    [please note I am merely an occasional attendee. I do not speak on behalf of SOS]
  • whynot_31 wrote:
    ....perhaps the only thing worse than violent crime is the fear of violent crime.
    Nah, catching a stray bullet through the chest and bleeding out on the sidewalk before the ambulance comes is worse than fear.
  • For that individual, yes.

    But for the residents of the Polo Grounds in Harlem, and Howard Houses in Brooklyn I stick to my view. A bunch of murders over a bunch of years has resulted in thousands of people afraid to go to the playground or sit outside. They have become prisoners as a result of the crimes committed by others.

    I assign more damage to the living then I do the lost lives.

    In your example, one person died and their family members no doubt grieved.

    In my example, people fear it could happen to them and never get thier lives back to normal as a result of the crime. To reference Kant, it is all a matter of how one assigns utility. I feel the macro damages outweight the micro ones.

    But I'll agree, it does sorta suck to be the actual victim of a crime too.
  • Speaking of:

    http://www.nydailynews.com/ny_local/2010/09/02/2010-09-02_condition_of_brooklyn_boy_shot_in_neck_by_stray_bullet_upgraded.html

    A ten year old sitting inside watching Blues Clues almost died after catching a stray bullet in East NY.

    (I'd put it in the East NY section, but there isn't one.)
  • whynot_31 wrote:
    But for the residents of the Polo Grounds in Harlem, and Howard Houses in Brooklyn I stick to my view. A bunch of murders over a bunch of years has resulted in thousands of people afraid to go to the playground or sit outside. They have become prisoners as a result of the crimes committed by others.
    Well, there's a good reason why they're afraid. I think we should focus on eradicating the root cause of the fear: gun violence in their streets.
  • Sure, we both agree that crime is bad.

    You were just assigning a value to which is worse: the actual crime vs the fear of crime.

    I continue to believe "fear of" is worse.

    The beauty of Kant is you can assign as much utility to that dead guy as you want and be "right".

    I choose the macro view.

    see you at the next shooting response?
  • krowonhill wrote: Speaking of:

    http://www.nydailynews.com/ny_local/2010/09/02/2010-09-02_condition_of_brooklyn_boy_shot_in_neck_by_stray_bullet_upgraded.html

    A ten year old sitting inside watching Blues Clues almost died after catching a stray bullet in East NY.

    (I'd put it in the East NY section, but there isn't one.)
    Now people can be even more afraid sitting in their own homes.
  • Kant, smahnt - not everybody has the luxury to be assigning utility to things. Especially dead ten year olds from East NY.

    Which reminds me of Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs (whynot, I'm sure you know about this): first off, people focus on survival (before comfort, love, or anything else).

    It's because without that, you don't have nothing.
  • You also have to realize that many people will read a story in the papers and go "wow that really sucks or how sad" then we turn the page and forget it. Seeing the parents or neighbors who are affected by these terrible acts somehow personalize it so that it stays with you. Some kids who are on the cusp of being caught up in the bad life just might think twice before doing something stupid.
  • True, we have to assign value to a dead 10 year old. [It's a little mean sounding, but the 10 year now has no value except in people's memories].

    We then have to assign a value to those grieving as a result of the crime.

    We can also include police, EMTs and ER staff that attempted to save him.

    I also assign a value to the things the ways in which their lives will change as a result of this crime happening.

    [I assign no value to the folks that Stacey mentions, because I argue their "that sucks" reaction is equally the result of the actual crime and the fear of future crime, and isn't very intense in either instance]

    I argue that those ^^^ elements compose the damages incurred as a result of the actual crime. Krow has assigned their total damages to be a value that I will call "a"

    Meanwhile, I argue that the following groups incur some level of damage as a result of fearing such a crime will happen to them or someone they care about:

    fretters who read this silly time-killing message board
    fretters who read the newspaper and consumers of TV news
    frettrs who live on his block that did not know him

    I also assign a value to the things they will miss in life as a result of the likelihood of being afraid, and its possible impacts. For example, their kids won't be able to hang out by the window, go to the playground, they may have exaggerated responses to large noises, and/or they may decide the world is just scary all around.

    I have assigned the combained damages incurred by these fretters damages I will call "b".

    In my value system b > a.

    (Overall, I think Maslow provides a lousy frame work to have this discussion, but I'll give it a shot.

    In Maslow's terms, their sense of safety --a primary need--has been violated, and they act accordingly until they are able to feel it is restored.

    To my knowledge, Maslow doesn't address the real or perceived needs of dead people. I also do not believe that Maslow would define grief --incurred by those directly affected by the crime- - as being something that impacts upon what he defines as primary needs.

    I instead believe, that he would argue that it affects secondary desires, like well-being. Hence, I think Maslow would agree with me: [u]The impact of fear of crime is worse than the crime itself[/u. However, as always, it is related to how you interpret Maslow's writings. I'm more of a Durkheim guy myself])


    ....you, of course, are free to assign your values differently.


    See you at the next shooting response?
  • whynot_31 wrote:
    ....you, of course, are free to assign your values differently.
    The difference is that a person can outlive fear.
  • Sure.

    But I assign more negative utility to the sum of that fear and those that wrestle with it, than I do the immediate effects of the crime itself.
Sign In or Register to comment.