Felon here. Like the article describes, my father was arrested and jailed, and his father before him. Many of my family have spent time in prison. When I turned 18, I also shared the same experience. Less than a year in min security prison.
Now I'm 35, moved away from my troubled youth, and have made millions of dollars building startups.
A few points:
- To this day, I am terrified to speak to police or any authority figures. I sweat every time I pass through passport control when my wife and I go to Europe every summer.
- I can't break my "guarded" way of thinking, that everyone is out to get me, that I need to take what I can when I have the chance because the chance won't come around again. I am never relaxed.
- I have a 4 year old and not a day goes by that I don't spend working with him to provide things I never had. The fact that I can afford to send him to piano lessons or that we can afford to live in the "rich" part of town makes me emotional.
- I lost every part of my childhood. My parents are ghosts and my friends from then are long sense forgotten. Some people go back to their home town to feel nostalgic, but all I do is feel anger. I am angry every day.
- Many people are afraid to take risks for their careers, but as an ex-convict who spent over a year as a homeless person, I feel no fear. Moving across the country when I have no money, sleeping at my desk to launch a product due the next day, giving a speech in front of 1000 people, or aggressively gunning for a better company is nothing compared to begging someone for their half eaten sandwich. That's true fear.
Even the ones who escape a criminal family never really escape.
I am a black person and I have similar feelings even though I grew up middle class and privileged.
I am very afraid of police, become anxious in any federal building, and I am nervous at airports and their security setups.
My brother and I were forced to grow up early, given we could be accosted by police at any time for any reason.
The first time I had a rear headlight out and was stopped by the police, I was put in handcuffs and placed in the back seat of the police car. There was absolutely no reason whatsoever for this precaution.
When I go to my hometown, I go back to feelings of isolation and loneliness, and where I was never invited to parties, and spent entire summers alone at the library.
My father is a felon, and his father before him, and most of my uncles (one is even a convicted murderer). I didn't follow in their footsteps -- never even gotten so much as a speeding ticket.
The funny thing is I can completely relate. I had to cut off my father's family from my life to escape; all police make me nervous as I think they will arrest me; every interaction I have with non-best-of-friends is "fuck you, I'm getting mine".
I'm not sure how many generations it takes to escape the mentality, but I'm hoping my sons aren't the same way.
Maybe I'm the exception then - I'm probably the first person in my family to get in trouble (felon, did 5 years). What you say about taking risks is so true. Once you've taken big risks, the thought of these relatively small risks is a joke.
How much do you think your troubles come from bad cultural influence from family, and how much due to genetic legacy ? Open and serious question. Had you been raised somewhere else, do you think you'd still be attracted to bad/illegal/criminal acts (in the general sense) ?
It's funny someone with a long legal history still sweat near authority. Personal anecdote, I lifted some school furnitures (laughably sad project) with a friend and got busted. Couldn't get into any store that had detectors without going full paranoia (what if someone drops an item in my pocket before I leave..). Lasted 3 years.
> a possible biological or genetic basis for crime could be misconstrued as racism.
But what if it is isn't and it is something like impulsivity? I know someone who worked for a large state prison system for many years. They've observed one common trait of the majority of people incarcerated is that they are very impulsive. They react rather than think things through. Often they regret the crime, but could be too late by then [+].
However the same impulsivity is also a trait of someone we might consider a "hero". Say someone jumping into the river or a fire to rescue a person, a salesperson quickly responding to a customer need and so on. Someone quickly responding and standing up to a bully to defend someone being abused.
At the genetic level it could be the same low level drive, but family, society and culture have a chance of molding that into either something good or destructive.
[+] There is a lot to be said there for the society and the correctional system being punitive and not much correctional per se, and mental illness playing large role as well but that's for a different post perhaps.
Yeah, I found that strange. One of the things that stuck with me from reading "How Children Succeed"[0] was that violence/ crises in the household tend to make kids impulsive and short-sighted in decision making. The idea kids who grow up around criminal parents would wind up doing the same because of modeling and the likelihood of violence or other frightening events like being put in foster care makes sense to me and doesn't have to have a biological underpinning to be true.
Lead exposure in children can cause ADHD and developmental delays. Other things can probably permanently affect your neurology as you're growing up and appear heritable because a family stays in the same place with the same economic conditions over generations.
The article traces the Bogle's family start in crime back to the Prohibition era. While there are, of course, a host of reasons why people become criminals, ridiculous laws are a contributing factor. The War on (some) Drugs is repeating the same behavior and expecting different results. It's well past time to end it, along with the human devastation it causes.
While the War on (Americans who use (some)) Drugs is a decades-long tragedy whose human costs dwarf most natural disasters, it's pretty clear the goals of US drug policy aren't to reduce criminal activity, but instead explicitly criminalize what may consider a personal choice.
Given that minimizing criminal activity isn't a concern isn't a goal, what incentive is there to change the policy? Saying that the war on drugs causes more harm than drugs is obvious, but repeatedly pointing that out and expecting policy to change hasn't worked for a long time.
I support legalizing — or at least decriminalizing — most drugs and treating it as a public health issue rather than a crime. But after talking with some police officers I can also understand their perspective on keeping drug laws in place. They often know who the local gang members and other violent criminals are, but don't necessarily have enough evidence to convict in court. Most of those serious criminals also use and/or deal drugs. So when the police catch them holding it's easy to get a conviction and take a bad guy off the street for a while.
> “We need another solution,” [Judge Norblad] told me, “something to separate Bogle family members so they will not keep reinfecting themselves.” Norblad, who died in 2014, did not know how to do that.
Once upon a time judges could kick offenders out of their jurisdiction or a state entirely. I think this was eventually deemed unconstitutional, though I can't find any on-point caselaw and suspect it simply fell out of favor and assumed unconstitutional. IIRC the closest scholarly analysis I could find at the time (~10 years ago) discussed a governor's right to impose conditions on a pardon, and in particular the condition that one leave the state, which concluded that it was probably still constitutional because of how extensive is the pardon power.
In the 1960s or 1970s a relative of mine was kicked out of Wisconsin by an exasperated judge after drunkly shooting up a yacht in search of rumored hidden money; receiving a suspended sentence as long as he never set foot in Wisconsin again. He was happy to leave and both he and Wisconsin were probably the better for it. He was only in Wisconsin temporarily so it's not like Wisconsin exported its problems, either.
"Yet, despite the abundance of evidence showing the role of family in crime, criminologists and policymakers have largely neglected this factor—as the University of Maryland criminologist John Laub told me, it’s because any suggestion of a possible biological or genetic basis for crime could be misconstrued as racism."
How exactly does a family connection imply a biological basis? Did nature defeat nurture when I wasn't looking? or is this just a poorly written sentence implying that connecting the two could then result in ascribing the trait to biology, and so was avoided?
> How exactly does a family connection imply a biological basis?
...because most families have a biological connection?
I don't believe it's poorly written, but the truth is closer to your third question.
Race is a very touchy subject, especially when it comes to crime, and making it known that you're looking into something that could lead to biological/genetic assertions about criminality is a good way to draw unpleasant attention.
Such people are why we can't have adult conversations without an exhaustive, preambulatory ritual re-establishing baseline assumptions. And even then people (of all stripes) will willfully misconstrue you, especially if you don't pepper your assertions with limiting and contextualizing language.
> as the University of Maryland criminologist John Laub told me, it’s because any suggestion of a possible biological or genetic basis for crime could be misconstrued as racism.
Or, it is because biological and genetic factors aren't as powerful at predicting crime as other factors. The idea that crime runs in families indicates a biological factor in crime is nonsense. Families and children that start in lower deciles of wealth are likely to stay there. Social mobility is awful.
We have numbers on this sort of thing. Here are some Swedish adoption studies (they track everyone) which, from a first glance, support the usual rule of half-half:
I can't now find the (also Swedish I think) study I remember, which managed to look at families who'd got suddenly rich between the 1st son & the 2nd son.
The idea that crime runs in families indicates a biological factor in crime is nonsense.
Yes, but it does suggest it is a possibility. I thought it was a common belief that genetics play a part in addiction, and mental illness. I do agree that socioeconomic factors are most likely the biggest contributor, the movie Trading Places convinced me of that at a young age. I just think it would be foolish to dismiss genetics completely.
Surely it's not just wealth though - if kids grow up in a family environment where breaking the law is normal, I'd very much expect that to affect their attitudes differently than if they grow up in a law-abiding family.
Seriously. I would say that also applies over to the author's claim that "doctors produce doctors, lawyers produce lawyers", etc. Sure, kids whose parents/relatives have forged a career in a particular industry have a much easier time making their way in, I would seriously doubt that genetics are a major factor other than general cognitive ability.
Trying to say that crime is biological is just a classic example of misunderstanding correlation and causation at best, and an attempt to justify hate speech at worst.
You're 100% spot on that it's not biological, but more than likely just a result of the other factors associated with class and access to wealth.
This is kind of a flippant dismissal based on the multiple findings backed up by numbers. Yours may be an anecdotal story (and not my place to comment on) but there's no evidence that welfare dependence causes crime. It seems to be more of a political talking point. There may very well be a correlation, but it doesn't imply causation.
I'm nearly blind but no one else in my family is. So obviously eyesight isn't heriditary...
A single counterexample doesn't negate a discussion about probabilities and populations. I can find plenty of women taller than me, but I'm still taller than the average women (I'm a perfectly average height man). But my 6'4" female friend is not a counterexample to the claim that men tend to be taller than women, nor is my 5'2" male friend a counterexample from the opposite end.
You'll need more examples to go from anecdote to data and to show a countertrend.
[+] [-] felonthrowaway1|7 years ago|reply
Now I'm 35, moved away from my troubled youth, and have made millions of dollars building startups.
A few points:
- To this day, I am terrified to speak to police or any authority figures. I sweat every time I pass through passport control when my wife and I go to Europe every summer.
- I can't break my "guarded" way of thinking, that everyone is out to get me, that I need to take what I can when I have the chance because the chance won't come around again. I am never relaxed.
- I have a 4 year old and not a day goes by that I don't spend working with him to provide things I never had. The fact that I can afford to send him to piano lessons or that we can afford to live in the "rich" part of town makes me emotional.
- I lost every part of my childhood. My parents are ghosts and my friends from then are long sense forgotten. Some people go back to their home town to feel nostalgic, but all I do is feel anger. I am angry every day.
- Many people are afraid to take risks for their careers, but as an ex-convict who spent over a year as a homeless person, I feel no fear. Moving across the country when I have no money, sleeping at my desk to launch a product due the next day, giving a speech in front of 1000 people, or aggressively gunning for a better company is nothing compared to begging someone for their half eaten sandwich. That's true fear.
Even the ones who escape a criminal family never really escape.
[+] [-] blackgirldev|7 years ago|reply
I am very afraid of police, become anxious in any federal building, and I am nervous at airports and their security setups.
My brother and I were forced to grow up early, given we could be accosted by police at any time for any reason.
The first time I had a rear headlight out and was stopped by the police, I was put in handcuffs and placed in the back seat of the police car. There was absolutely no reason whatsoever for this precaution.
When I go to my hometown, I go back to feelings of isolation and loneliness, and where I was never invited to parties, and spent entire summers alone at the library.
[+] [-] notafelonthrow|7 years ago|reply
The funny thing is I can completely relate. I had to cut off my father's family from my life to escape; all police make me nervous as I think they will arrest me; every interaction I have with non-best-of-friends is "fuck you, I'm getting mine".
I'm not sure how many generations it takes to escape the mentality, but I'm hoping my sons aren't the same way.
[+] [-] madeuptempacct|7 years ago|reply
[+] [-] clamprecht|7 years ago|reply
Congrats on beating the system.
[+] [-] nostromo|7 years ago|reply
https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal...
[+] [-] nickthemagicman|7 years ago|reply
My parents abandoned me at a young age and I feel a lot of the same feelings.
Congrats on your success and best of luck to you in the future.
[+] [-] agumonkey|7 years ago|reply
It's funny someone with a long legal history still sweat near authority. Personal anecdote, I lifted some school furnitures (laughably sad project) with a friend and got busted. Couldn't get into any store that had detectors without going full paranoia (what if someone drops an item in my pocket before I leave..). Lasted 3 years.
[+] [-] hi41|7 years ago|reply
[+] [-] unknown|7 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] rdtsc|7 years ago|reply
But what if it is isn't and it is something like impulsivity? I know someone who worked for a large state prison system for many years. They've observed one common trait of the majority of people incarcerated is that they are very impulsive. They react rather than think things through. Often they regret the crime, but could be too late by then [+].
However the same impulsivity is also a trait of someone we might consider a "hero". Say someone jumping into the river or a fire to rescue a person, a salesperson quickly responding to a customer need and so on. Someone quickly responding and standing up to a bully to defend someone being abused.
At the genetic level it could be the same low level drive, but family, society and culture have a chance of molding that into either something good or destructive.
[+] There is a lot to be said there for the society and the correctional system being punitive and not much correctional per se, and mental illness playing large role as well but that's for a different post perhaps.
[+] [-] tclancy|7 years ago|reply
[0] http://www.paultough.com/the-books/how-children-succeed/
[+] [-] roywiggins|7 years ago|reply
https://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/csem/csem.asp?csem=34&po=10
[+] [-] canjobear|7 years ago|reply
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Five_personality_traits#He...
[+] [-] opwieurposiu|7 years ago|reply
[+] [-] rectang|7 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] patrickmay|7 years ago|reply
[+] [-] random023987|7 years ago|reply
Given that minimizing criminal activity isn't a concern isn't a goal, what incentive is there to change the policy? Saying that the war on drugs causes more harm than drugs is obvious, but repeatedly pointing that out and expecting policy to change hasn't worked for a long time.
[+] [-] nradov|7 years ago|reply
[+] [-] panzagl|7 years ago|reply
Yeah, he'd be a saint if drugs were legal.
[+] [-] wahern|7 years ago|reply
Once upon a time judges could kick offenders out of their jurisdiction or a state entirely. I think this was eventually deemed unconstitutional, though I can't find any on-point caselaw and suspect it simply fell out of favor and assumed unconstitutional. IIRC the closest scholarly analysis I could find at the time (~10 years ago) discussed a governor's right to impose conditions on a pardon, and in particular the condition that one leave the state, which concluded that it was probably still constitutional because of how extensive is the pardon power.
In the 1960s or 1970s a relative of mine was kicked out of Wisconsin by an exasperated judge after drunkly shooting up a yacht in search of rumored hidden money; receiving a suspended sentence as long as he never set foot in Wisconsin again. He was happy to leave and both he and Wisconsin were probably the better for it. He was only in Wisconsin temporarily so it's not like Wisconsin exported its problems, either.
EDIT: 2013 Slate article on banishment and exile: https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2013/01/banishment-as-pu...
[+] [-] barrow-rider|7 years ago|reply
Anecdotally it worked, and he's now quite a successful programmer, married, kids, decent house, etc.
[+] [-] cat199|7 years ago|reply
How exactly does a family connection imply a biological basis? Did nature defeat nurture when I wasn't looking? or is this just a poorly written sentence implying that connecting the two could then result in ascribing the trait to biology, and so was avoided?
[+] [-] macintux|7 years ago|reply
...because most families have a biological connection?
I don't believe it's poorly written, but the truth is closer to your third question.
Race is a very touchy subject, especially when it comes to crime, and making it known that you're looking into something that could lead to biological/genetic assertions about criminality is a good way to draw unpleasant attention.
[+] [-] wahern|7 years ago|reply
Yes, some people are convinced nature trumps nurture:
Such people are why we can't have adult conversations without an exhaustive, preambulatory ritual re-establishing baseline assumptions. And even then people (of all stripes) will willfully misconstrue you, especially if you don't pepper your assertions with limiting and contextualizing language.[+] [-] unknown|7 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] slv77|7 years ago|reply
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jukes_family
[+] [-] tomlock|7 years ago|reply
Or, it is because biological and genetic factors aren't as powerful at predicting crime as other factors. The idea that crime runs in families indicates a biological factor in crime is nonsense. Families and children that start in lower deciles of wealth are likely to stay there. Social mobility is awful.
[+] [-] iguy|7 years ago|reply
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4009388/
http://sci-hub.tw/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.labeco.2012.11.0...
I can't now find the (also Swedish I think) study I remember, which managed to look at families who'd got suddenly rich between the 1st son & the 2nd son.
[+] [-] dec0dedab0de|7 years ago|reply
Yes, but it does suggest it is a possibility. I thought it was a common belief that genetics play a part in addiction, and mental illness. I do agree that socioeconomic factors are most likely the biggest contributor, the movie Trading Places convinced me of that at a young age. I just think it would be foolish to dismiss genetics completely.
[+] [-] pmjordan|7 years ago|reply
[+] [-] frank_nitti|7 years ago|reply
[+] [-] Loughla|7 years ago|reply
You're 100% spot on that it's not biological, but more than likely just a result of the other factors associated with class and access to wealth.
[+] [-] lmaximus1983|7 years ago|reply
My Grandfather was a sex offender and my Uncle is a convicted Armed Bank Robber.
The rest of the family has their problems like all families do. Mostly recovering from abuse of the previous two guys.
What is a bigger problem (especially in the UK) is welfare dependence which does become a family thing.
[+] [-] abhchand|7 years ago|reply
This is kind of a flippant dismissal based on the multiple findings backed up by numbers. Yours may be an anecdotal story (and not my place to comment on) but there's no evidence that welfare dependence causes crime. It seems to be more of a political talking point. There may very well be a correlation, but it doesn't imply causation.
[+] [-] Jtsummers|7 years ago|reply
A single counterexample doesn't negate a discussion about probabilities and populations. I can find plenty of women taller than me, but I'm still taller than the average women (I'm a perfectly average height man). But my 6'4" female friend is not a counterexample to the claim that men tend to be taller than women, nor is my 5'2" male friend a counterexample from the opposite end.
You'll need more examples to go from anecdote to data and to show a countertrend.
[+] [-] i_feel_great|7 years ago|reply
Being on welfare closes a vast amount of opportunities to people, which causes many to turn to crime.
Bring a criminal closes a vast amount of opportunities to people, which causes people to turn to welfare.