3 Black Teens Beat Homeless Man To Death For Fun

[The Nature Boy 4,224]

The lack of dad isn't the issue. It's the lack of money in the home.

If they had enough money, they could afford stuff for their kids to be doing other than thugging around with friends. Piano lessons, soccer, karate, whatever. The issue is that when kids don't have a good outlet for their energy and a positive cure for their boredom, they'll result to less desirable behavior to have something to do.

One of the things my volunteering in Mongolia has taught me is just that. You give the kids something good to do, they'll spend their time doing it as opposed to something bad they might otherwise be doing.

Yes more money that will fix it

more funding

Gezzzh

[Penny Lane 8,159]

Absolutely, research shows the only trait more common in the prison system than kids growing up with out there father in the home is....Tattoo's

Tattoos are very popular. In and out of prison.

[duraaraa 203]

Yes more money that will fix it

more funding

Gezzzh

Actually, I mentioned money as the cause of the lack of acceptable activities for the kids to be involved in to use up their free time. I didn't say money would fix it.

I think we need free sports, art, etc. programs that kids can attend, and other constructive social outlets.

[We Keep Receipts 9,238]

No because I do not make excuses for the things most likely to create such anti social people.

Twenty five years ago we could say..... "we just didn't know" how devastating the results would be, but now the social science has confirmed with the starkest of evidence what nurtures kids into healthy people and citizens and what doesn't yet you folks carry on encouraging or minimizing the beast of social destruction.

What excuses? I pointed out the game is rigged against minorities(you admitted to this yesterday) so which is it? Is it excuses or an unfair playing field?

[lostinblue 1,989]

In the depression everyone worked. My grand mother worked in a knitting mill when she was 9 years old before and after school. He mother was a SOB who took all her wages. Not really it was needed to survive. My father and uncle had an acre of strawberries they put in themselves. This was about 12-13 years of age. It took so much to survive back then, If you could sweep a floor at the local store you did that at age 8 or 9. Once you were 18 the CCC camps were a godsend. Perhaps we could bring them back.

[Peikko 1,575]

Just for entertainment purposes...... why don't you re buttress your speculation with facts?

For instance you could pull up crime stats from the Great depression and show how these incidents were a regular occurrence when (real) poverty abounded.

Surely when teens were deprived of food and even a roof, they did this sort of thing all the more?

Do you really, honestly think that during periods of extreme poverty like the great depression crime isn't always rife? However, one thing is different, we have given people a chance now, they do not starve to death quite so often.

[The Nature Boy 4,224]

Tattoos are very popular. In and out of prison.

I think it's been posted but

http://boston.cbslocal.com/2013/09/25/daily-talker-army-to-ban-visible-tattoos-on-soldiers/

Daily Talker: Army To Ban Visible Tattoos On Soldiers

You can sign up to die while defending your country. As long at your “tatts” aren’t showing.

The US Army is about to announce strict new grooming rules that include banning recruits who have visible tattoos. According to Stars and Stripes, new recruits will not be allowed to have tattoos that show below the elbows and knees or about the neckline.

Current soldiers will be grandfathered in but all soldiers will still be barred from certain tattoos like ones considered to be racist, sexist or extremist. Soldiers will be called in to “self identify” their tattoos and if they are in violation, they must pay to have those tattoos removed.

The Marines already have a similar policy in place.

Do you agree with this new policy? Should someone be banned from the Army just because they have tattoos that show?

[Darnell 8,478]

Justice for Trayvon

Violence and young black males

The epidemic the media does not want to touch

Wait - are you predicting a season of new violence ?

[duraaraa 203]

I think it's been posted but

http://boston.cbslocal.com/2013/09/25/daily-talker-army-to-ban-visible-tattoos-on-soldiers/

Daily Talker: Army To Ban Visible Tattoos On Soldiers

You can sign up to die while defending your country. As long at your “tatts” aren’t showing.

The US Army is about to announce strict new grooming rules that include banning recruits who have visible tattoos. According to Stars and Stripes, new recruits will not be allowed to have tattoos that show below the elbows and knees or about the neckline.

Current soldiers will be grandfathered in but all soldiers will still be barred from certain tattoos like ones considered to be racist, sexist or extremist. Soldiers will be called in to “self identify” their tattoos and if they are in violation, they must pay to have those tattoos removed.

The Marines already have a similar policy in place.

Do you agree with this new policy? Should someone be banned from the Army just because they have tattoos that show?

It looks like the armies and Japanese bath houses have a lot more in common than one would think...

[Penny Lane 8,159]

I think it's been posted but

http://boston.cbslocal.com/2013/09/25/daily-talker-army-to-ban-visible-tattoos-on-soldiers/

Daily Talker: Army To Ban Visible Tattoos On Soldiers

You can sign up to die while defending your country. As long at your “tatts” aren’t showing.

The US Army is about to announce strict new grooming rules that include banning recruits who have visible tattoos. According to Stars and Stripes, new recruits will not be allowed to have tattoos that show below the elbows and knees or about the neckline.

Current soldiers will be grandfathered in but all soldiers will still be barred from certain tattoos like ones considered to be racist, sexist or extremist. Soldiers will be called in to “self identify” their tattoos and if they are in violation, they must pay to have those tattoos removed.

The Marines already have a similar policy in place.

Do you agree with this new policy? Should someone be banned from the Army just because they have tattoos that show?

Yeah, this is ridiculous.

[The Nature Boy 4,224]

Yeah, this is ridiculous.

To be honest Penny that one has me scratching me head also

I think may be because it is becoming so popular and may be it causes a problems on deployments

We had guys that were covered when I was in, I am sure it hurt their career progression however

Of course it was a big no no for officers. A guy got one on our OBC class..He was singled out

I got my first one about 6 months ago.Can't be seen. My personal choice is that life is too fluid to make that kind of choice for life

For others more power to them

Edited September 27, 2013 by The conciliator

[We Keep Receipts 9,238]

I think it's been posted but

http://boston.cbslocal.com/2013/09/25/daily-talker-army-to-ban-visible-tattoos-on-soldiers/

Daily Talker: Army To Ban Visible Tattoos On Soldiers

You can sign up to die while defending your country. As long at your “tatts” aren’t showing.

The US Army is about to announce strict new grooming rules that include banning recruits who have visible tattoos. According to Stars and Stripes, new recruits will not be allowed to have tattoos that show below the elbows and knees or about the neckline.

Current soldiers will be grandfathered in but all soldiers will still be barred from certain tattoos like ones considered to be racist, sexist or extremist. Soldiers will be called in to “self identify” their tattoos and if they are in violation, they must pay to have those tattoos removed.

The Marines already have a similar policy in place.

Do you agree with this new policy? Should someone be banned from the Army just because they have tattoos that show?

This has been in place for a while. It depends on where you are stationed and who you work for. Had a guy back in Ft. Hood in 1997 that had a flaming skull on the side of his head. SGM was like, please grow your hair out. For some assignments, that require special screening, it's not advisable to have any tats below your elbow. My 3 are on my shoulders and bicep, so unless I have a workout shirt on you can't see them.

Yeah, this is ridiculous.

Clean and neat appearance is what they are shooting for.

[The Nature Boy 4,224]

This has been in place for a while. It depends on where you are stationed and who you work for. Had a guy back in Ft. Hood in 1997 that had a flaming skull on the side of his head. SGM was like, please grow your hair out. For some assignments, that require special screening, it's not advisable to have any tats below your elbow. My 3 are on my shoulders and bicep, so unless I have a workout shirt on you can't see them.

Clean and neat appearance is what they are shooting for.

I got mine on my chest

[We Keep Receipts 9,238]

I got mine on my chest

As long as you can cover it up, no issues. I've been screened and interviewed for my last 3 jobs, and that was one of the questions on the form. If you have tattoos, where are they located. They didn't care what they were, as long as you couldn't see them you were golden.