Essay On The Blame Game

We Are All Tired of the “Blame-Game” Cyril Connolly once said, “Slums may well be breeding grounds of crime, but middle class suburbs are incubators of apathy and delirium”. This is the common attitude about crime in this day and age. There is no doubt that there has been a recent increase in crime. However, our society is constantly playing the “blame-game.” In the articles “Romanticizing ‘Broken Windows” by Charles M. Blow and “Broken Windows’ Policing Does Work” by Heather Mac Donald, both authors are tip-toeing around the real issues and solutions, and, instead, fighting about what, or who is at fault for crime on the climb. In all reality, does it really matter what the major cause is? Do we really need to know the root to fix the problem?

They bend over to grab a book out of their bag, and when they sit back up they see that their pencil is not on their desk anymore. They then get up out of the desk and start screaming and pointing fingers and saying “Did you take my pencil? Did you?” instead of just grabbing a new one out of their bag, and fixing the whole problem. This is called the “blame-game.” One of the many articles that is playing this famous game is “Romanticizing ‘Broken Windows’ policing” by Charles M. Blow. Blow places many causations in his piece. He says the reasons for the increase in crime is rebellion against police for their racial tendencies during stop-and-frisk procedures, as well as fear of police due to “police bashing,” (Blow 1) or cop’s use of the “iron fist” (Blow 1) and excessive force. Although Blow does a great job of arguing his points, the only point he derives that contests to a solution is expressed nonchalantly at the end of his rant. He believes that terminating fear of “prosecutions for run-of-the-mill policing” (Blow 1) will end the crime wave. Too much emphasis was put on the causes of the crime wave. As the reader, I felt as if the dilemma almost does not matter to Blow at all. He does not come across as actually wanting to fix the problem, rather it seems as if what he really wants is the simple affirmation from his readers. Yes, Blow, “correlation is not causation,” but arguing causation will not give you a solution.

There is absolutely no doubt that there is a serious and impactful problem at hand. This we unquestionably cannot turn our backs to. After all, none of us want our children growing up in a place where they are scared to go out and play in their own backyard because of rampant crime. It is essential to nip the growing crime in the butt before it gets any worse than it already is. The articles “Romanticizing ‘Broken Windows” by Charles M. Blow and “Broken Windows’ Policing Does Work” by Heather Mac Donald do not strive to achieve this goal. Instead, both play opposing roles in the “blame-game.” In these two articles, a proposition is made, but not explained. Any resolution mentioned in either piece is easy to miss, simply because of the amount of emphasis that is taken off the solution, and, instead, put to a cause. The question we should be asking ourselves and our communities is: How will we fix this problem? What will we do to make out communities safer, for our children? It does not matter if media, riots, or race has created such a growth in crime. What matters is resolving the problem. The solution is quite unpretentious, in order to reduce such high crime in our communities, we should increase outreach programs for first and repeat offenders of smaller crimes so they may get back on their feet and ditch their criminal pasts