Summary: Forum on Violence

I often find it frustrating to get quoted in the paper. I feel like I have something clever to say, but it never quite comes out quite like I think I said it:

Tyler S. Clark, who writes the blog “Youngstown Renaissance” and was one organizer of Saturday’s forum, said the Stewart Avenue crime points to the need for citizens to take a more active role in improving their neighborhoods.

“We’re never going to be able to offer the kind of police force by geography that our community needs, so it’s necessary for us to get into the streets to let criminals know that we’re not going to allow the amount of violence to continue that has gone on in the past,” he said.

I'm not sure what "police force by geography" means; I think I tried to say that "the geography of our city demands a police presence that our tax base will never afford." At least I think that sounds better. The forum last night that (award-winning novelist) Chris Barzak and I hosted (with notable assistance from non-profit-hero attorney Deb Weaver) also was not organized in response to a specific event, nor did I realize I was making remarks in response to the Stewart Avenue murder-arson. Mr. Runyan merely asked me about the forum and said he might like to mention it in the paper. But I should know better by now about how things work in reporting.

Now, to the meat of last night's discussions. First, we'd like to thank those who attended. It was a real success, not only because gatherings like this can so easily devolve into bitch sessions. Everyone brought constructive insights and experiences to share and respectfully shared the floor with others. There were representatives of city government, law enforcement, criminal justice, public education, newspaper journalism, as well as humble rank-and-file citizens (including me).

One of our ground rules was anonymity for all comments, so I'll summarize the results of the discussions and simply attribute them to the group as a whole. Violence is not a monolithic problem. As there are many causes and sources of violence, so there must be many approaches to solving it. For example, one of our first discussions had to do with violence that arises out of disputes between individuals. One effective intervention is for older youths to help younger ones find solutions and resolve disputes. Adults, too, can be ordered by courts to submit to mediation. By defusing person-to-person or family-to-family disputes, some incidents of anger-based violence may be prevented or reduced.

Realistically, however, we recognize that some people simply can't control their anger and will lash out regardless of any attempt to rein in their savage impulses. Mental health is a serious issue in the area that must also be dealt with. We must prioritize funding for reopening sufficient facilities for the mental health needs of our communities, or we risk chronic instability. In our criminal justice system, there cannot be justice, only treatment, for mentally unstable individuals who have committed murder. These wounds do not heal. Time will tell if the Stewart Avenue incident is another such case.

Intolerance is another complicating factor. Dispute resolution will likely be insufficient in cases where the real issues are deeper than today's argument. The rich manufacturing history that built our Valley and brought all our colors and creeds together leaves us with a complex legacy of prejudice that continues to be confronted. There is no shortcut to eradicating intolerance. We must repeatedly dig deep and open our hearts to each other, seek to honestly interact in public and in private with brothers and sisters of all colors, creeds, and persuasions, and recognize that we all share, as the rather disparate likes of Thomas Jefferson and Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. have pointed out, basic rights and dreams.

Poverty and unemployment are two key issues that contribute to violence through the need they create in their victims to find alternate (read: criminal) employment. One of the ideas offered in last night's forum was to create a "New Deal on the Block" for kids as an alternative to the money they're making from drugs. There's still the problem of where we get the money for such a program. However, we can either spend funds cleaning up crime and suffer from the poor reputation that comes with it, or we can spend money innovating solutions to it and benefit from the clout that will accompany progressive action.

Now to coverage. Youngstown has twelve squad cars, as I understand it. As I was trying to express to the Vindicator, we are never again going to have the tax base that will afford us policing adequate to the city's sprawling geography. The residents of Youngstown must take back their city from the criminals, reach out to their neighbors across class and philosophical distinctions to form a citywide peace patrol. This is hardly a revolutionary idea. It's something the Alliance of Guardian Angels have done effectively for years and even did as recently as twenty or thirty years ago in downtown Youngstown. It's an approach block watches in neighborhoods across America take on an ongoing basis. We can dismiss it as pedestrian or unremarkable, but we can no longer do nothing. Nor can we continue to operate under the delusion that it is up to the police alone to root out our crime infestation.

One attendee mentioned, offhandedly as I thought I detected--though maybe I'm giving them too little credit and myself too much, that the Defend Youngstown brand seemed to be merely about T-shirts and pride and little more, meanwhile the city burns. So, my big take-away from all this was: here we have a great brand that's been developed for a few years in Defend Youngstown. It's an instantly recognizable symbol that has cachet with youth (so far as this author knows what's cool with kids any more). We should co-opt the Defend Youngstown brand into a citywide violence-prevention neighborhood-protection network that reaches all the way down, providing opportunities to aimless youths and all the way up, receiving support from the highest levels of government, while being powered at its core by the people.

There are plenty of logistical questions to be answered. It will take time to work up to the successful framework that will support this. I don't know who will support it and how. I don't know what the right size is, and that will probably vary depending on location; the size of a cell on the north side will be different than on the south side or east side. But we've got to organize, with the help of every official and unofficial body that is willing to participate.

It's going to take every block, every school, every church, every community center, every hospital, every business, every civic organization, every non-profit organization, every arts organization, every book club, every sentient individual. As part of our basic modus operandus, we must commit to opposing criminal and violent acts. We walk together at scheduled times, we own the streets, we're visible, we see each other, we talk to each other, we meet regularly, you know my name, and I know yours. You see my son knocking somebody's mailbox over, and you know I expect you to call me and let me know about that, so I can deal with it and hold him accountable for it.

If we're serious about controlling violence (note that I'm not blithely suggesting "ending," though I'll take it if it's given), we all have to stand up and say "enough." We have to each commit a bit of our lives on a regular and ongoing basis--not as a knee-jerk reaction to an individual homicide or arson or broken window. If you don't know in your heart that we've had enough forever, pick any event or series of events from recent memory and paste a picture or news clipping of it on the fridge or your front door or your computer monitor or somewhere if you need that kind of reminder so you'll see it every day, and every day you'll remember you've had enough.