More On Arthur Buford and Damon Wells
I covered the Arthur Buford / Damon Wells controversy in Cleveland, so I thought I would update everyone about it. Cleveland is still buzzing from the shooting, and it seems like it has become a chance for Cleveland (and other major urban areas) to deal with the crisis of unsafe neighborhoods. Just today, Arthur Buford’s accomplice is being charged with murder because his criminal actions helped result in Buford’s death. It seems as if Clevelanders are sick and tired of living in neighborhoods controlled by thugs, and many are also tired of the things that lead to this sort of behavior.
Regina Brett wrote an article, Silence of Pain, Harsh, Deafening, that looks at the effect this incident has had on the local community, with some friends of Buford defending him, and others sick and tired of living in fear because of punk-kids just like Buford. What this case does highlight is the failure of Buford’s parents (drug-addicts), and community, to raise him and protect him. And let’s not just blame the “inner city” environment here, because suburban youth are suffering from similar broken homes, and turning to drugs, crime, and suicide. I definitely support Wells’ right to defend himself, and agree with those who want to see “thug culture” die a quick death. I think it is high time communities stand up against the criminal elements that are destroying once beautiful neighborhoods, just as Damon Wells did. However, I think this issue is not just about whether a man has the right to defend himself, but about whole communities and generations destroyed by broken homes, drugs, and the glorification of drug/gang culture that results.
Rich, white academics may have pioneered the sexual and cultural revolution that told us we don’t need two-parent families, that dad’s don’t matter, or that all is relative, but it is the poor and middle-class that bear the brunt of this hastily-proclaimed revolution. I think it is time for us to examine ourselves and look at why a generation of “liberated” persons relies so heavily on anti-depressants and feels such anger toward their own communities and families.
Kevin O’Brien of the Plain-Dealer asks similar questions in his article, How shall we answer Arthur? How is it that a boy of 15 can get to the point of practically “raising himself,” living in an abandoned house? O’Brien writes:
Too many minority neighborhoods are thugocracies. And the thugs aren’t old. They are, in many cases, the neighborhood children, recruited young and initiated into crime while they’re at their most impressionable.
Now before we cry “racism” here, I think many white neighborhoods end up this way as well. How in the world have we gotten to a point where neighborhoods can be run by teens with illegal guns? I think the social policies and assumptions that came about in the 60s and 70s have failed. Perhaps, as O’Brien suggests, we need to return to the most basic solution: strengthening the family. Again, the rich have weathered the sexual revolution pretty well, with the money and resources to treat, cover-up, and medicate the damage done by unstable families, but the poor and middle-class have not been so fortunate.
May 7th, 2007 at 1:54 pm
Rich, white academics may have pioneered the sexual and cultural revolution that told us we don’t need two-parent families, that dad’s don’t matter, or that all is relative, but it is the poor and middle-class that bear the brunt of this hastily-proclaimed revolution.
An incredibly bold - and in my opinion, accurate - statement. We often forget that socio-economic class plays a (the?) significant role, one that is much tougher to negotiate in our current polarized political environment than race. The race card is far too easily dealt in situations like the one you describe, and yet in rural areas we hear similar stories. The county I live in is a couple of counties up from metro Atlanta, and we have a growing epidemic with drugs and violence, driven by the rise of methamphetimines among the poorest citizens. And yet the county as a whole has been slow in responding.
The question we need to ask, however, is how do we best address this? Pro-family crusaders are too little too late in most situations. Social conservatives are often hestitant if not hostile to addressing the socio-economic situations unless there is a profit to be made, and local governments have neither the funds nor the resources to make a substantial impact. What little bit we have done in our county is the result of multi-agency cooperation (non-profits, churches, local government, schools, etc), but it feels like putting a band-aid on an open, flowing wound.