Abolish is really extreme. Crime is too rampant to do that. You should really make calls for defunding the police, I could support something like that.
I want multiple independent studies into lowering crime in relation to lowering lead exposure in American society.
Boomers would claim it's being tougher on crime. Well, that's obviously not true on the face otherwise we'd be crime free with our bloated ass cop budgets.
Maybe some especially Nazi-like boomers would claim it was the war on drugs which reduced "undesirables" out roaming around.
I'm saying this partially sarcastically, but I would also like to know what happened to drive crime down. Violent crimes especially. Material conditions didn't improve during the 1980s to now, so that seems ruled out. Cops haven't become less violent. Cops numbers are the same. Guns were never banned. Media is just as violent.
I dunno, it is interesting to consider. Was it really fucking lead exposure?! Maybe someone has a better answer. Preferably from a Marxist (ie correct) viewpoint. All the libs sources say "mass imprisonment! Better economy!" The first is just dog-ass wrong. The second is also not true for the entirety of America, but also true for basically no one since mid 1990s-2001 and from 2008-now it's been on a plummeting path down.
America legalized abortion and banned leaded gas around the same time. Both were credited with lower crime and violence rates in the following decades. Looking at other countries that did not do both so close together it becomes a lot clearer that both made us safer.
I'd also argue that being further removed from WW2 vets and cold warriors with severe PTSD and government mandated drug addictions generally help. Last bit it decidedly my opinion.
It took someone pointing it out for me to consider reproductive choice being related societal violence even though I knew choice was better for societal economic outcomes.
Given the shift to confront, stop, and treat all forms of childhood abuse rather than ignore it also had to help. During the satanic panic the administrations stance was to blame mothers for failing to take care of their husbands as the root cause of childhood abuse. They had the data that showed abuse was linked to poverty more than anything else but it was cheaper to blame women. We're still not in a great place when dealing with childhood abuse but we're better than that and it has to have done something.
Well lead already has a known correlation with violence (I forget why exactly, but it's a thing). So reduced exposure would logically make sense to see a reduction in violence.
I dunno if microplastics are correlated with violence. From what I remember (and I'm too lazy to look) it causes a bunch of issues like "peepee no work" and maybe cancer and other genetic damage. Not sure about making people more prone to violence though.
Maybe the mixture of no "rage fuel" from lead plus all the males' testes collectively shriveling like prunes due to microplastics created generations of soyboys 🤔 (the Heritage foundation can DM me for payment info if they wanna run this conspiracy theory.)
I read that there were attempts to test the effects of microplastics on humans, but we cannot truly do any research on this, because we cannot find a control group.
The group of American boomers I have in my vicinity is just the worst example of every American stereotype. They're scared of crime which is rampant, xenophobic, racist, and unwilling to listen to people younger then them. Double down when confronted.
Abolish is really extreme. Crime is too rampant to do that. You should really make calls for defunding the police, I could support something like that.
Gives more money to the police
I want multiple independent studies into lowering crime in relation to lowering lead exposure in American society.
Boomers would claim it's being tougher on crime. Well, that's obviously not true on the face otherwise we'd be crime free with our bloated ass cop budgets.
Maybe some especially Nazi-like boomers would claim it was the war on drugs which reduced "undesirables" out roaming around.
I'm saying this partially sarcastically, but I would also like to know what happened to drive crime down. Violent crimes especially. Material conditions didn't improve during the 1980s to now, so that seems ruled out. Cops haven't become less violent. Cops numbers are the same. Guns were never banned. Media is just as violent.
I dunno, it is interesting to consider. Was it really fucking lead exposure?! Maybe someone has a better answer. Preferably from a Marxist (ie correct) viewpoint. All the libs sources say "mass imprisonment! Better economy!" The first is just dog-ass wrong. The second is also not true for the entirety of America, but also true for basically no one since mid 1990s-2001 and from 2008-now it's been on a plummeting path down.
I blame lead-huffing boomers.
America legalized abortion and banned leaded gas around the same time. Both were credited with lower crime and violence rates in the following decades. Looking at other countries that did not do both so close together it becomes a lot clearer that both made us safer.
I'd also argue that being further removed from WW2 vets and cold warriors with severe PTSD and government mandated drug addictions generally help. Last bit it decidedly my opinion.
Abortion and by extension or related to it birth control pill (and later methods) is an interesting thing I hadn't considered.
It took someone pointing it out for me to consider reproductive choice being related societal violence even though I knew choice was better for societal economic outcomes.
Given the shift to confront, stop, and treat all forms of childhood abuse rather than ignore it also had to help. During the satanic panic the administrations stance was to blame mothers for failing to take care of their husbands as the root cause of childhood abuse. They had the data that showed abuse was linked to poverty more than anything else but it was cheaper to blame women. We're still not in a great place when dealing with childhood abuse but we're better than that and it has to have done something.
deleted by creator
If something is ever done to reduce microplastic exposure, will the crime rate go down even further?
Well lead already has a known correlation with violence (I forget why exactly, but it's a thing). So reduced exposure would logically make sense to see a reduction in violence.
I dunno if microplastics are correlated with violence. From what I remember (and I'm too lazy to look) it causes a bunch of issues like "peepee no work" and maybe cancer and other genetic damage. Not sure about making people more prone to violence though.
Maybe the mixture of no "rage fuel" from lead plus all the males' testes collectively shriveling like prunes due to microplastics created generations of soyboys 🤔 (the Heritage foundation can DM me for payment info if they wanna run this conspiracy theory.)
I read that there were attempts to test the effects of microplastics on humans, but we cannot truly do any research on this, because we cannot find a control group.
Congratulations on somehow being one of the most depressing things I've thought of today
The group of American boomers I have in my vicinity is just the worst example of every American stereotype. They're scared of crime which is rampant, xenophobic, racist, and unwilling to listen to people younger then them. Double down when confronted.
Its all like,
The TV is real.