| WIKI | FAQ | Tech FAQ | |
 http://csua.com/feed/ | |
| ||||||
| 4/6 |
| 2005/9/30-10/1 [Politics/Domestic/Crime] UID:39936 Activity:kinda low |
9/30 "If you wanted to reduce crime, you could -- if that were your sole
purpose -- you could abort every black baby in this country and your
crime rate would go down. That would be an impossibly ridiculous and
morally reprehensible thing to do, but your crime rate would go down."
-Former Education Secretary William Bennett, GOP member, and now
radio host (Sep 28 2005) (full quote)
\_ Despite his whining, the problem is not that he was taken out of
context (people are clued enough to realize that he was not
calling for the forced abortion of black fetuses). It's the
disgusting insinuation that blacks are inherently predisposed
to crime. He was playing this hand off the cuff when he said
it. I wouldn't fault him the misspeak. But he doesn't realize
what he said _was_ offensive and that he should apologize (if
he did, it would all go away).
\_ "Asked if he owed people an apology, Bennett replied, 'I don't
think I do. I think people who misrepresented my view owe me an
apology.'"
\_ Considering that the context was a discussion of 'freakonomics'
and the fact the very next sentence (not quoted above) was:
"So these far-out, these far-reaching, extensive extrapolations
are, I think, tricky."
There is no reason for Bennett to apologize.
\_ Yes, there is. If you miss that then you are also
a bigot without realizing it.
\_ Finally, 10 yrs of voting republikkan have yielded
fruit.
\_ You're making the same error though. It's a disgusting but
accurate insinuation. You can attach whatever reasons to it you
want (poverty, history of cultural abuse, etc.), that doesn't
make it inaccurate.
\_ You're putting a lot of words in Mr. Bennett's mouth.
\_ To make it completely accurate, aborting all babies of any
race would reduce the crime rate. Singling out blacks implies
a bias.
\_ did you mean "reduce the crime rate" or "reduce crime"?
\_ http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/homicide/race.htm
Blacks 7x more likely than whites to commit homicide.
\_ if it's a "disgusting but accurate insinuation", do you
apologize?
E.g., I casually mention to you in front of an audience,
"If I could have sexual relations with your wife, she would
be thrilled. That would be a morally reprehensible thing to
do, but she would be quite satisfied."
\_ Blacks commit crimes higher than their proportion in the general
population. As a simple numbers game, it would have been more
correct to say that if all blacks were removed from the
population, the crime rate would go down. Of course, that's
still not necessarily correct because of secondary effects. But
no one is seriously considering it.
\_ White males between 25 and 35 make up a higher proportion
of serial killers than their proportion to the general
population would suggest. Statistics without context are
meaningless and, in this case, merely provocative. Get into
Paul Harvey mode, or STFU.
\_ not the poster above, but if we remove white males
25 to 35, then that would decrease serial killer crime.
\_ http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1494395/posts
\_ You could also give every black baby $100,000 at birth and in
a couple generations it would probably be whites committing all of
the crimes.
\_ It probably wouldn't take a couple of generations.
\_ Why do you think handouts will end crime?
\_ People tend to commit crime out of desperation. There are
exceptions, but in general criminals are products of
their environment. If slums became suburbs then crime
rates would fall.
\_ Why would a single big handout to a baby turn slums into
suburbs, reduce or eliminate desperation or do anything
else positive? Counter example: lottery winners. How many
big money lottery winners are any better off a few years
after their pay out than they were before? Handouts do
not improve lives. They create dependency. Another
example: Africa. Pouring money into Africa has done
nothing to eliminate crushing poverty or starvation.
Free food, clothing, money, etc, from the EU and USA
only destroys the local economy. How can a native
African farmer make any money when the West is giving
out free food (for a limited period of time)? They can't
so they stop farming, then surprise! there's a famine.
Handouts do not improve lives in the way you seem to
believe. Opportunity *combined* with personal drive to
succeed and excel through hard work, education and self-
improvement improves lives.
\_ This is why it would take a few generations. A
lottery winner is already the product of his
environment. A millionaire athlete is already a
product of his environment. However, if every
child's life was some incremental amount better
(and it would be with $100K) eventually there would
be a parity between the races. You and I both know
that hard work is just hard work. Lots of people
work hard and they are usually not the CEOs making
life miserable for everyone else. Europe takes care
of their poor and their crime rate is much better
than ours. I actually do not believe in 'handouts'
but there is no doubt they would reduce crime and
help those who received them if you give them time
to work.
\_ You still fail to demonstrate how giving a huge
handout at birth will change the environment the
new-born is born into. Once we cover that the next
concept we'll go over is this nasty thing called
"inflation" and how "money doesn't grow on trees"
but we still need to finish the "handouts don't
help people" part. We've had generations of handouts
and all we got were slums and high crime rates. Why
do you think that is? Why have generations of
hand out ridden people ended up worse off than their
grand parents? You seem to think $100k is a lot.
It isn't. Someone in section 8 housing, getting
welfare, social security, medical/caid/care/etc, and
various other government handouts is easily getting
way more than $100k over a few short years. Are
you saying that if they got a lesser amount ($100k)
at birth all at once instead of the greater amount
over time everything would just be roses? Or there
should be continued handouts on top of the $100k at
birth? What exactly do you think that $100k is
goign to do for a child? How many more children
will be born just to nab an extra $100k/kid? Where
do you get the idea that tossing raw cash at a
problem for long enough will make it go away?
\_ I am going to guess that you have no real idea
what life as a poor black family is like. Did
you ever see the movie 'Hoop Dreams'? If not,
watch it. If so, how do you think Arthur's
family life would've been different if his
parents had $100K for each of their kids.
\_ Ok, thank you. We're done. You've completely
ignored everything I've had to say and instead
gave me a movie reference and your sister's
anecodtal life story in return. And I was so
looking forward to the next bit about how
inflation works and money-growing-on-trees,
but you're clearly just looking for $400k
for your sister, not a rational discussion of
why a) this makes no sense, b) won't help end
poverty, c) can't be paid for anyway, and
d) has already gone on for generations to the
detriment of poor people who are now more
dependent than ever on government handouts,
not less so. If you'd like to actually read
and respond to anything I've brought up, we
can continue but you haven't shown any real
interest thus far.
\_ You're clearly the asshole I thought
you were and I'm glad I didn't my waste
time addressing your points.
\_ No, really what happened is you had
nothing to say so you fell back on
"soft" anecdotal arguments about your
sister and a movie in an attempt to
avoid serious discussion. If "asshole =
out debated you" or "asshole = unwilling
to take an anecdote and a movie reference
seriously from someone consistently
unwilling to respond" then so be it.
It isn't a case of you somehow having
not "wasted your time addressing my
points". You thought you were but
simply failed and got called on it. Why
do you feel the need to fall back on
grade school personal attack? Because
you lack the ability to think clearly
and express yourself rationally?
\_ Dude, you're an asshole and I
thought that from the beginning.
Now you've erased any doubt I
had. You're also egotistical
and, clearly, a neocon with
little understanding of the
plight of blacks in this country,
and are possibly a bigot. Just admit
as much.
\_ This isn't helping or proving that
you're any less of a "raving
lunatic". If you play his game,
you've basically conceded the
moral highground. He may not be
especially polite in his
presentation, but he has made a
a couple of good points. -mice
\_ Maybe you can find them in
there somewhere. He's setting
up strawmen and knocking them
down. "Inflation" and
affordability (money growing on
trees) are not really relevant
to the discussion, which is not
to debate the feasibility, but
whether such an endeavor could
be successful if feasible and
the reasons it would or would
not. It is to understand
the nature of crime, especially
crime as committed by blacks.
Why blacks? It's what Bennett
(way up there!) was addressing.
Bringing a million tangential
points up and making a couple
of them doesn't score any
points.
moral highground. -mice
\_ That really has very little to do with how
much 'value' $100k really has within the US
economy. It's also extrapolating a debatable
example into a much larger population, which
isn't necessarily valid when you take various
regional differences into account. It also
doesn't necessarily represent the general
cultural attitude of the people -- this can
greatly affect how the money is used and how
the people in question choose to participate
in society. I see what you're getting at, but
your argument is basically flawed. -!ppp
\_ So choose a number you think is more
realistic. Attack the concept, not the
number. That's a waste of time. As for
cultural attitudes, I assure you that
black people wish to succeed and *do*
succeed when given the opportunity.
\_ Hm, well, I would debate the concept,
but the other guy that did that seems
to have been labelled a possible bigot
and a neocon, and a couple of other
things besides without any real dialogue.
I think I'll pass on your invitation
and save my time.
\_ Do I really need to explain to
someone how money can 'change the
environment a new-born is born
into'? That is someone being
difficult or an idiot - possibly
both. Isn't that obvious to everyone
other than a neocon bigot? To say that
I just want money for my sister is
offensive and uncalled for. He left
all attempt at rational discourse
behind with that. My evidence may
be anecdotal, but I haven't seen
him present any at all other than
some bullshit about lottery
winners.
\_ ie, "I saw this movie once about poor black
people so I'm an expert."
\_ ie, "I have no rebuttal". As someone
from a working class family whose
half-sister is a black single mother of
4, I can attest to the accuracy of
the movie in question. If, say, my
sister had had the money to stay at
home instead of 'working hard' and
'going to school' then the lives of my
nieces and nephew would've been much
better. As it is, they did well with
what they had, but that's beside the
point, which is that they could've done
even better with aid. Maybe her kids
would be less afraid of going to
college (debt), for instance.
\_ You do realize there are at least 3
people in this 'conversation', right?
\_ Why don't you answer his questions?
\_ He's a ranting lunatic.
\_ No, he provided a list of points as
to why your "give $100k to all blacks"
idea is stupid. You didn't address a
single one of them.
\_ He's a ranting lunatic. His
latest response proves that. He's
not interested in rational
discourse. His portrayal of me
and my family is offensive and
so is he. I don't waste my time
with bullshitters like that.
\_ Yeah, seriously. God forbid that
you'd actually be required to
try and rationally debate. Name
calling and application of the
race card is SOO much easier!
\_ There's nothing rational
about that guy. He's a
blowhard who has already
made up his mind that
blacks commit crimes
because they don't work hard
and have no personal drive
to succeed and money won't
change anything for people
like that. He already said
as much. That is bigoted
and beyond comprehension.
\_ As far as I can tell,
you made most of that
up. Sorry man, you
might as well give up.
Pretty much everyone
seems to agree you lose.
\_ Just read the first
response:
"Opportunity
*combined* with
personal drive to
succeed and excel
through hard work,
education and self-
improvement improves
lives."
The implication is
that money won't help
poor blacks because they
don't have those
other qualities. Right?
\_ Wrong. You're the
only one here harping
on race. See what you
want to see. Play the
race card. Launch
personal attack. Do
anything but respond
to the opposing points
raised. And then
claim to be offended.
If you bring up your
sister as evidence
of something, you have
no right to be
"offended" when someone
attacks that "evidence"
that *you* brought into
this. Go re-read all
the other comments and
make a count of how
many times someone
other than you refers
to race. Then count
your own references to
race. After that go
figure out what might
happen to the value
of money if you hand
it out in big chunks
to people. It will
become nearly
worthless. This is
called 'inflation'.
Handing out money for
nothing helps no one.
Nor does resorting to
unfounded personal
attack help you make
any points.
\_ The whole thread is
about race, bozo.
The person who
quoted Bennett
made it so!
It's not about
about inflation.
Can you think
in the abstract?
And attacking
my motives is
certainly beyond
ridiculous.
\_ See above. And after this I'll
add "oops, nothing else to say,
got called on it so let's fall
back on the old 'i'm offended'
thing".
with bullshitters like that. Do
you really think that if you gave,
say, $100K to every black child
born that crime levels would
remain the same? How did you get
into Cal?
\_ Giving someone a fish vs. teaching someone how to fish.
\_ A starving man doesn't have time to learn. You
have to give him a fish and then show him how.
\_ it is not just about money. There are rich people who
are criminals. There are poor people who are very good.
Moral values plays a good role in this, not just money.
\_ Of course there are rich criminals. It's not *just* money
but it plays a *big* part in it. Think of all the black
fathers in jail for drugs. How many could've had better
representation? How many could've bought the drugs like
rich Cal students do instead of stealing for the money?
Would the mom have been home more often to instill morals
and watch the kids? Could they have gone to private
schools outside of the slums? Money changes a *LOT*. The
idiot above thinks that $500/month in WICK or Section 8
housing is somehow proof that money won't really help
anything. Shit, man. Does anyone have a fucking clue here?
\_ It's a lot more complicated than money. There are lots
of examples of poor immigrant groups who work their
butts off and get ahead, while the slum population
gets worse. It has to do with the culture of the
people involved and after all those generations it's
not clear how that should be changed. The slum parents
who are themselves unmarried drug users are not going
to be of any use straightening out their kids, and
never would be.
\_ It's more complicated and yet money would solve a
lot of problems. Black immigrants tend to do well
here also. That's not the same as the descendants
of the slaves, who have a whole different set of
circumstances to contend with. To think that
somehow a Vietnamese boat person immigrating here
and succeeding is comparable misses the point. That
person has a culture and an identity. Blacks in
this country acquired that only recently. It's not
the whole story, of course, since Mexicans in this
country are also prone to crime and they do have
a cultural identity, but it's part of the issue. Even
by saying that 'unmarried drug users are not going
to be of any use straightening out their kids' you
are being borderline offensive. Those are the
people who can and will straighten out their kids
when they are given an opportunity to. It's hard
when so much of the population is in jail because
of a mixture of stereotypes and bad circumstances.
The cycle self-perpetuates. At some point it needs
to be broken and money is one way (not the only
way) to do that. You would be surprised at how well
kids who enter programs like 'Big Brothers' perform
when given the opportunities many white kids are
born with.
\_ It's not a very interesting or useful point when
taken out of a real-world context. Sure, if you
give $100,000 or $1M or $1Kabajillion dollars to
all poor newborn babes and stipulate that the
value of the dollar stays constant you might have a
point. But it's a completely empty point devoid
of any real meaning with those assumptions.
\_ Not any empty point at all. It proves that
there is an economic component to all of
this. Is that a point the raving lunatic is
willing to concede? No one was arguing about
feasibility, just like Bennett wasn't. He is
not advocating killing all blacks and likewise
I am not advocating that we give them all
millions of dollars. However, to fail to see
how giving them money would help solve the
problem of crime is to also misunderstand why
Bennett's solution is so bigoted and offensive.
\_ See, what I would do, if I were king, is to give a 4 year
full scholarship to any child who can prove that they
are descended from slaves. This is "worth" about $100k,
but would probably be a much more effective anti-poverty
program. It is certainly affordable, too, no matter how
much you claim it is not. There are certainly no more
than 4M blacks of college age in this country. At $25k/yr
that works out to $10B, a pittance by Federal spending
standards.
much you claim it is not. There are no more than 4M blacks
of college age in this country. At $25k/yr that works
out to $10B, a pittance by Federal spending standards.
\_ Why only "descended from slaves"? Would you give a free
ride to a "dfs" kid who has multi millionaire parents?
Middle class parents? What about the poor kid of some
other race? The kid born in the house next door gets
screwed out of a $100k education because his skin is
the wrong color? Why would you have a hand out program
based solely on race when what you claim to be trying to
do is fix economic injustice? Would that cause not be
better served by giving grants based on economic status
instead of skin color? And what about the kids who are
descended from slaves but lost their "descended from
slaves" membership card? Those kids get screwed too?
I'm in favor of making education affordable for everyone,
but strongly opposed to your picking a "pet" group to
benefit based solely on skin color and unprovable
membership in the "descended from slave" set.
\_ I'm not the person who suggested that, but I
think it is reasonable to extend such an offer to
anyone descended from slaves, no matter their
current economic status. Poor kids of some other
race are another issue entirely and how to (or
whether to) address that is divorced from this
issue. Skin color is not relevant. If there's a
white person descended from slaves that's fine,
too (and there are some descended even from black
slaves). From a practical standpoint a certain
percentage of heritage would have to be decided,
like with Native Americans. The people who
couldn't prove it - well, that's a problem.
Native Americans face it as well. It's not a
reason to deny the people who can. It is, after
all, still based on academic achievement (i.e.
they still have to get into college). I personally
would support such an idea. I think extending it
based on economics isn't necessary, since there
are already scholarships and grants to cover
those cases.
much you claim it is not.
\_ Ob Lotto Lout. http://csua.org/u/dkv
\_ what would happen if we removed all Asians from Berkeley
Engineering?
\_ the virgin rate would go down, duh |
| 4/6 |
|
| www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/homicide/race.htm Next Homicide trends in the US Trends by race Racial differences exist, with blacks disproportionately represented among homicide victims and offenders Blacks were 6 times more likely than whites to be murdered in 2002 To view data, click on the chart. The race distribution of homicide victims and offenders differs by type of homicide For the years 1976-2002 combined - * Black victims are greatly over represented in homicides involving dru gs. Compared with the overall involvement of blacks as victims, blacks are less often the victims of sex-related homicides, workplace killings, and homicide by poison. Stranger homicides are more likely to cross racial lines than those that involve friends or acquaintances For homicides committed by -- * a friend or acquaintance of the victim, 1 in 10 is interracial * a stranger to the victim, almost 3 in 10 are interracial To view data, click on the chart. |
| www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1494395/posts Kaslin WASHINGTON - The White House on Friday criticized former Education Secret ary William Bennett for remarks linking the crime rate and the abortion of black babies. "The president believes the comments were not appropriate," White House p ress secretary Scott McClellan said. Bennett, on his radio show, "Morning in America," was answering a caller' s question when he took issue with the hypothesis put forth in a recent book that one reason crime is down is that abortion is up. "But I do know that it's true that if you wanted to reduce crime, you cou ld, if that were your sole purpose, you could abort every black baby in this country, and your crime rate would go down," said Bennett, author o f "The Book of Virtues." He went on to call that "an impossible, ridiculous and morally reprehensi ble thing to do, but your crime rate would go down. So these far-out, th ese far-reaching, extensive extrapolations are, I think, tricky." Responding later to criticism, Bennett said his comments had been mischar acterized and that his point was that the idea of supporting abortion to reduce crime was "morally reprehensible." Bennett was education secretary under President Reagan and director of dr ug control policy when Bush's father was president. View Replies To: Kaslin To bad we know longer have free and frank exchanges where the president c an be called a black ape, and his chief opponent can be called a slave m aster. I guess the lesson is that you cannot speak certain things regardless of fact. Just because the crime rate among blacks is higher than among othe r groups does not translate into a statement about race. It's about cult ure, but the gutless occupants of the WH are too scared to recognize tha t fact. So once again, the innocent pay for the excesses of the guilty r ace-baiters. View Replies To: pangaea6 Wolf Blitzer just got smacked down by Bill Bennett's brother for ambushin g him with a question about the comments I saw the tail end of that, please tell me a little more about what happe ned? View Replies To: Kaslin You know, I'm starting to get a little miffed. We complain about how Bush is "too nice" and "won't fight back" against Dem'Rats. Makes me wonder if B ush even knows what he is talking about, or where is loyalties really ar e Grrrrrrr .... View Replies To: Kaslin "'The president believes the comments were not appropriate,' White House press secretary Scott McClellan said." In today's heated rhetoric climate, that seems mild, but for W, it is pre tty strong. View Replies To: The Ghost of FReepers Past The irony being that those comments were anti-eugenics. When you have 43% of abortions being African American, I dont understand why there is not more outrage among the appropriate parties. View Replies To: manwiththehands Yep - sends out his wimpy lapdog McLellan, who is by far the most ineffec tive WH spokesperson in modern American history, to criticize a loyal Re publican. View Replies To: nina0113 Dammit, George, will you STOP already pandering to the liberals? i concur, we run and hide when we should stand up and declare that THEY a pologize. View Replies To: Kaslin I remember how groups and various studies indicated that more blacks were behind bar than whites and the racial profiling issue. Now given that, "an impossible, ridiculous and morally reprehensible thing to do, but yo ur crime rate would go down" would make Bennett's statement true. View Replies To: Kaslin I'm not going to read the article, but, it was McClellan wasn't it ? If only he could stand up to the media and refuse to get dragged into the ir stuck on stupid questions. View Replies To: fooman The irony being that those comments were anti-eugenics. When you have 43% of abortions being African American, I dont understand why there is not more outrage among the appropriate parties. All WHITE HOUSE SWITCHBOARD: COMMENTS LINE Comments: 202-456-1111 I just called in my comments and first said that I was a strong supporter of the President and our troops and their mission in Iraq, and to "stay the course". Then I asked that the President and his staff take another look at Bennet t's comments in full as I believed the White House was too hasty in maki ng a judgment. The operator told me she believed Bennett's quote was "taken out of conte xt" and she "heard that Soros' money is behind the attack on Bennett." View Replies To: fooman The irony is the Left is aborting their own voters out of existence. You would think they would appreciate Bennett's comments but abortion is mor e important to the Democrats than black lives. View Replies To: goldstategop I'm just fed up with the kowtowing to PC BS. If we don't stand up for the right ma ke true and honest statements even if hurts someones feelings we are don e and will never be able to move forward, which is exactly what the PC p inko crowd is promoting whether they are smart enough to know it or not. If we as honest people can't defend a person's right to make a statisti cally true statement (which I am assuming it was) for fear of the though t police then we are every bit as bad as the hypocrites that occupy the left. The White House Needs to take a diplomatic approach but not cave o n principle. View Replies To: Eric in the Ozarks He's an idiot for trying to draw a stupid parallel (if that was what he w as trying to do). What he was doing was commenting on the subject, which is in the book Fre akonomics. View Replies To: Rodney King And we're lectured by our own posters that we mustn't look stupid. If Ben nett were a Democrat, he'd get away with saying far more offensive thing s That's just the reality of contemporary American political life. View Replies To: Kaslin A white person can't say anything about anyone other than another white p erson. Read his comments and make your own judgement, don't rely on libe ral-biased sound bites. Maybe President Bush needs to know what he is commenting on, before he co mments. View Replies To: Kaslin Look, I miss Ari as much as anybody, and am tired of our side not fightin g back. But, having said that, I just don't think that the WH could have said anything else for the consumption of the general public. We all know the truth, but when you are dealing in sound bites, and talki ng to a group of people who HATE the President, you have to keep it simp le. Rush spent about 2 hours explaining the truth today, and now Hannity is on it. But in a WH briefing, answers and explanations have to be mor e to the point, ot it would have just been labeled "spin". Unless there are more comments not posted here, the WH did not say anythi ng bad about Bennett personally. View Replies To: Kaslin I am a solid Bush supporter, I know Bush is very sensitive to any racist baggage, but I am deeply troubled by this. The democrats are inciting race hate leading u p to 2006, and how many good people have to be thrown to the wolves? IF you are going to criticize Bennett, then at least start holding the de mocrats responsible for their horrendous race baiting. View Replies To: Wild Irish Rogue I checked on the White House web page about today's press briefing by McC lellan but I could not find anything, even after I rebooted. View Replies To: Eric in the Ozarks "The president believes the comments were not appropriate,' White House p ress secretary Scott McClellan said." this one: RANGEL "George Bus h is our Bull Connor" or this one: BRAZILE "WILL NOT LET THE "WHITE BO YS" WIN" or this one: FARRAKAHN "It may have been blown up to destroy th e black part of town and keep the white part dry." Who would have thought W would take full blame for something he was innocent of(NOLA). The buttkissing and spinelessness from these g uys to pacify the left is a joke. View Replies To: Kaslin Well, Michael Medved just threw Bennett overboard, also. On one hand he's defending him, on the other hand he said that Bennett's statement yesterday was too philosophical and an apology should be forth coming. View Replies To: Siena Dreaming His brother is the attorney for Judith Miller so that's what he was broug ht on to discuss. I'm sure he knew Bill's remarks might come up but he t ook the opportunity to smack Wolf Bl... |
| csua.org/u/dkv -> www.nytimes.com/2005/09/30/international/europe/30lotto.html?hp&ex=1128139200&en=b30a38fa0fb5b756&ei=5094&partner=homepage England - Except possibly for Howard Carter, who discovered Tutankhamen's tomb in 1922 (and who died a long time ago), 22-year-old Michael Carroll is by far Swaffham's most famous resident. Skip to next paragraph Chris Radburn/Press Association Michael Carroll won 97 million in the national lottery three years ago. Since then, he has appeared in court more than 30 times. Enlarge This Image Steve Forrest for The New York Times Mr Carroll has given Swaffham fits since he won the lottery. Ordered to clean up the tires and debris in his yard, he offered to buy the town Ch ristmas lights, an offer that officials have rejected. Known across Britain by his tabloid nickname, the Lotto Lout, Mr Carroll won 97 million (about $15 million at the time) in the national lotter y three years ago and showed up to collect his prize while wearing a pol ice-issued electronic ankle bracelet. The question now raging in Swaffha m is whether he deserves to throw the switch at the town's annual Christ mas lights display, as he was briefly invited to do. "I personally have nothing against him," said Terry Drake, a prominent lo cal businessman who owns a hardware store on the main street of this bus y old market town. "But a convicted criminal shouldn't be in a position to do something that children are supposed to look up to." At this point, Mr Carroll is not likely to be turning on anyone's lights except his own. After a huge public outcry, the town has rescinded the invitation and will probably have no holiday display at all this year (M r Carroll was going to pay for it). If nothing else, Mr Carroll, who did not respond to messages left at his house, has proved since winning that he is not the sort of person to le t money turn his head: he has kept having run-ins with the authorities, the only difference being that he now drives nicer cars to court. "Before he won the lottery, he was a nuisance," Charles Joyce, a local of ficial, said. Among other things, he has appeared in court more than 30 times in the la st three years. He has spent three months in jail on drugs charges, paid thousands of dollars in fines for vandalism and been evicted from sever al hotels after, for instance, ripping a chandelier from the ceiling whi le trying to swing from it. He was recently ordered to perform 240 hours of community service - later increased to 300 - after shooting ball bearings through 32 car and shop windows with a catapult as he drove around in the middle of the night. He has been issued with two antisocial behavior orders in two local juris dictions forbidding him to threaten, harass or intimidate anyone in a 40 0-mile radius. He has been told by local government authorities to stop throwing raucous late-night parties and to stop holding demolition derbi es on his land. And he has been told to clean up the yard of his house, strewn as it is w ith tires, beer cans, food wrappers, wrecked furniture and the hulks of half-smashed-up old cars. Mr Carroll is an object of national fascination in part because of his a pparently pathological criminality, and in part because he represents a kind of Briton known as a chav. Chavs, whether rich or poor, tend to fav or gaudy jewelry and expensive-but-tacky clothes with big logos and to b ehave in a way that others find coarse or obnoxious. female chavs pull their hai r tightly back in buns or ponytails, a style known as a "council house f acelift," from the term for public housing. Mr Carroll has "King of Chavs" printed on his Mercedes, a car known in t he newspapers as the Loutmobile (its license plate reads L111 OUT). The derivation of the word chav, which began to be widely used about a ye ar ago as the problem of binge drinking in Britain's towns and cities be came a huge national issue, is murky. Some say it comes from an 18th cen tury Romany word meaning "child"; others believe it may come from the to wn of Chatham in Kent, known, apparently, for its large chav population (the theory that it is an acronym for Council Housed and Violent is most likely untrue). Chav behavior - outrageous spending sprees, drunken brawls, inappropriate public displays of affection, screaming matches with loved ones in bars , destruction of property, late-night stumbling and/or vomiting - provid e celebrity magazines here with much of their material. Among British wo men, Coleen McLoughlin, the girlfriend of the soccer star Wayne Rooney, is seen as a celebrity chav. |