Or people who tend toward abuse and crime maybe more likely to live in poverty. That’s like saying crime doesn’t pay.

AND:
“people who receive an education are less likely to resort to crime.”

Or people who refuse to accept the education that’s offered to them freely are more likely to be stupid enough to commit crimes as well.

AND:
“People who received an education are also less likely to abuse their children.”

Or people who accept the education that’s offered to them freely are less likely to be stupid or sorry enough to commit crimes such as abuse as well.

AND:
“Maybe giving people access to higher education is the best way to solve crime/abuse.”

If we ignore the fact that nearly all the higher education courses that are taught in the world can be reached freely from the internet by way of a public library or some other source. So with a very highest education available being ignored, maybe it is the fact that they have ignored what was available that contributed to their failure to become model citizens.

David for contemplation of reasonable conclusions

That’s a fair point. Causality doesn’t imply causation.

For example, people who live in poverty are more likely to resort to crime. People who live in poverty are also more likely to abuse their children. Maybe poverty is the real causation of abuse/crime.

Or people who receive an education are less likely to resort to crime. People who received an education are also less likely to abuse their children. Maybe giving people access to higher education is the best way to solve crime/abuse.

However, by that same logic, we shouldn’t jump to the conclusion “hitting kids makes them behave” because A) even if there were a negative relationship between “hitting kids” and “rate of crime”, that correlation wouldn’t imply causation. Which is irrelevant anyways, since B) the relationship between “child abuse” and “crime” is positive, not negative.

And you have an interesting use of statistics.

Children are seldom spanked just for existing (That obviously actually WOULD be abuse.)

Children who were spanked were usually spanked for doing something wrong. There might be better ways to correct bad behavior, but this system has been known to work. This does not mean the other way is the only possible way. This by itself does not mean spankings should never be used.

An unreasonable conclusion would be to look at one and decide it must have caused the other without any consideration of which one may have actually caused the other: whipped for being bad or bad because you were whipped.

The most reasonable conclusion would be: People who actually acted badly when small and continued to act badly when grown were determined to act badly. That would be the reasonable conclusion.

More data might possibly shift the argument, but just reaching a different conclusion without supporting data would be silly.

David for better people and better statisticians

“Disciplining a child when it is warranted and abuse are two completely different things”

What’s the difference? Both are using physical pain as a punishment for the child acting in a way the parent doesn’t want.

Unrelated, the crime rate has been steadily declining over the past 30 years, so that kinda undermines your point of “hitting kids more makes them better behaved”.

Not all victims of abuse turn into criminals. Not all criminals are victims of abuse. However, statistically, people who were abused as children are *more* likely to turn to crime than those who weren’t.

What happened to the old fashioned fist fights? I’ll tell you. Boomers made it so that if you lay a finger on someone, you get prison time and your life is ruined. If Boomers loved the good old days so much, why you all get rid of them?

Disciplining a child when it is warranted and abuse are two completely different things. It truly blows my mind how people like you have the time to comment on every post these people make with your unfounded and unwarranted opinion. I would love to see what you would blame the crime on in a world where kids run their households and parents can’t do anything about it.

You think you have the solution to the problem, when in fact you are part of the problem.

Children who were abused by their parents are more likely to turn to crime, not less.