I understand what you're saying, and I agree with you. However, there's another issue involved here: This is the result of the Welfare State, biting NO in the butt.
The gangsters have largely been raised by other gangsters, with a totally insufficient parental influence in their lives. This happened because of the Welfare State, which bases welfare and other payments on the lack of a father in the home, and on the lack of a family income.
So, yes, the gangsters themselves are to blame, but their lawlessness is on the tail end of a State mandated cycle. Even so, they, the gangsters, should be held totally responsible for their actions, regardless of this welfare cycle. Clear?
I understand what you're saying, and I agree with you. However, there's another issue involved here: This is the result of the Welfare State, biting NO in the butt.
The gangsters have largely been raised by other gangsters,
So, yes, the gangsters themselves are to blame, but their lawlessness is on the tail end of a State mandated cycle. Even so, they, the gangsters, should be held totally responsible for their actions, regardless of this welfare cycle. Clear?
...
Oh yeah, I've been aware of this for the last fifteen years. It's been a hoot griping about it on deaf ears (NOT). I've even been ostricized by some of my own (deluded liberal) family members. I don't care what they think any more. They're on their own. A person has to decide wether they are going to sink or swim. I prefer to swim. Even while the crap floats to the top I can still swim around it.
Gangsters only survive with a willing "local" legal system within a welfare state like NO.