Could we see UK-style riots in the US?

I will be totally honest in saying that I have not been able to follow news of the riots in the United Kingdom as closely as I would like. Part of that is due to time constraints and part is due to the fact that most of the news I see is merely that the riots are happening with little elaboration beyond that fact.

Despite all of that, what little I do know of the riots has lead me to question whether we could see this type of mayhem spark in the US.

A brief look at history tells me that chances are good that the US could face the same troubles from the UK and several other parts of the world. As a matter of fact, if the unrest of the 1960's is any indicator, I would say it is surprising that we have not seen more widespread problems.

But what is the cause of the riots in the UK? Interestingly enough, candid interviews with the rioters themselves does not reveal a clear motive.

Some talk about anger over the recent cuts in government funds for youth programs and tuition assistance. Some talk about class inequality and how the riots are a way to balance the economic playing field. Some say that the riots are a result of pent up frustration and teenage angst spilling over. However, I think that one answer is the most telling.

When pressed for a deeper explanation for their violent actions, many of the youth rioters default to answering that it is simply something to do. Which brings me to my own opinion on what is happening in the UK.

In my opinion the main issue at hand is the socialization of children.

What I mean by this is the change from the historical role of the parent raising and disciplining the child to a system where the "state" is responsible for raising and correcting children.

In 1986, a program that became known as ChildLine. While this program started out with the best of intentions, as a 24/7 confidential call line for abused children, it gradually became a means for children to report exaggerated or non-existent claims of abuse against their parents or guardians as retribution for being punished. This allowed the children to exercise control over their parents rather than the other way around.

In my opinion, this program was not the cause but rather the symptom of an "enlightened" view of child rearing. Another symptom of this new progressive style of raising children was the "Hug the Hoodie" program that the now Prime Minster of Great Britain started.

The idea that was dubbed the "Hug the Hoodie" campaign was all about a soft approach to juvenile law breakers and trouble makers. Problem youth were given a slap on the wrist, given an Anti-Social Behavior Order (which became a sort of badge of honor among the young criminals), or placed in detention centers that offered amenities like Play Station consoles.

The problem is that young people need boundaries.

They NEED someone to tell them "No!"

They need someone to who will set consequences for certain actions and carry through when the line is crossed.

They don't need their parents to be their friend.

I am sure most of these kids have friends, and we see that has done them absolutely no good at all.

The really scary thing is that from what I see, not only could we see UK style riots in the US, I think they have already started.

In case you missed it, last week there were mobs of young people attacking innocent fair-goers at the Wisconsin State Fair.

When societal taboos lead to mob violence: the case of Casey Anthony

For the record: I am totally sick of all this irrational hate for Casey Anthony that everyone keeps spewing all over the place.

I get it. Despite the fact that there was absolutely no evidence that Anthony murdered her daughter you still think she is guilty; so guilty that jurors are going into hiding and innocent women are being violently attacked for the "horrendous" crime of looking a little too much like Casey Anthony.

But where does all this hate come from?

Unless there was some proverbial smoking gun evidence that I didn't see come out in the court case there is nothing at all, whatsoever, that proves Casey Anthony did anything more than cover up the death of her daughter.

Don't get me wrong. I am not condoning the cover-up of a child's death; but even something as horrible as covering up a death by disposing of your daughter's body in a trash bag is not first degree, premeditated murder.

Is that where all the hate comes from? From the fact that a mother could callously dispose of the body of her dead daughter?

I would agree that a mother is expected to protect her child and that it SHOULD be unacceptable behavior for a mother to throw out her child like so much household trash; but should there be at least as much contempt for a father that ACTUALLY murders his family?

That is a bit of a rhetorical question.

Earlier this year a man named Chris Coleman was convicted of the premeditated (and meticulously planned) murder of his wife and two young sons. Yet, despite the fact that there was ample evidence to soundly convict this man of such a horrendous crime the verdict was barely a blip on the national news scene.

Coleman devised an elaborate scheme that involved an imaginary woman that he created to send threats to his own wife for months to set up the night that he strangled his wife and sons in their sleep... all so he could start over with a new woman without having to get a divorce.

So how is it that our society has judged Casey Anthony guilty and yet passed right over the crime of this man?

I honestly do not understand and welcome any theories on the subject.