engaged in a sport that works like this: T hey walk around and find
somebody walking the street. T hen one of the teenagers is picked to
knock the person down with a single blow. If he fails to do it, the
other kids beat the kid who failed.
So they were walking along and saw this MIT student. T he
chosen kid knocked the student down with one blow. For
unexplained reasons, they also knifed and killed him. T he teenagers
didn’t see anything especially wrong with it. T hey walked off and
went to a bar somewhere. T hey were later picked up by the police
because somebody had seen them. T hey hadn’t even tried to get
away.
T hese kids are growing up in Cambridge—not in the wealthy
sections, but probably in the slums. T hose aren’t Somali slums by
any means, or even Dorchester slums, but surely kids in the more
affluent suburbs wouldn’t act like that.
Does that mean they’re different genetically? No. T here’s
something about the social conditions in which they’re growing up
that makes this acceptable behavior, even natural behavior. Anyone
who has grown up in an urban area must be aware of this.
I can remember from childhood, that there were neighborhoods
where if you went, you’d be beaten up. You weren’t supposed to be
there. T he people who were doing it—kids—felt justified and
righteous about it. T hey were defending their turf. What else did
they have to defend?
ann
(Ann)
#1