Something caught my eye this morning while scanning my usual news feeds, half way through an article titled, "Bush Tours Katrina Damage Amid Criticism", a quote from Bush reading,

"The people of this country expect there to be law and order, and we're going to work hard to get it... In order to make sure there's less violence, we've got to get food to people."

At first I wasn't sure why those words stopped my in my tracks. But I stopped reading, and sat back in my chair for a moment. Then read it again, "In order to make sure there's less violence, we've got to get food to people".

The aftermath of hurricane katrina has left countless people with no home, no clean water, no electricity, no stability, and no security. People are now hungry, desperate and in a position where they don't have a hell of a lot to loose.

Now, none of this is news to anyone - but the fact that these people need our generosity and help, whether it be in the form of money, volunteer work, or other, is obvious. And then the reason hit me, I made the connection...

What is the difference between the crime we are seeing as a result of a massive hurricane, and the crime we see day in and day out within big-cities, say Detroit for example? Both situations are, when broken down, just people who are hungry, and need help, but aren't getting it fast enough. But look how differently we approach each circumstance:

Katrina - there is an overwhelming outpour of help, as there should be, everything from individual donations all the way up to fortune 500 companies pledging thousands & thousands in aid. There is an overwhelming understanding that if the people are feed and housed, the crime and looting will diminish. But...

Detroit - there is an overwhelming amount of money, everything from local tax-dollars to federal loans and grants worth billions, diverted from feeding, housing and educating desperate people, and instead, spent on throwing them in prison. There is an overwhelming assumption that if someone is stealing food, electronics, etc, they need to be locked up, not helped back onto their feet.

I'm not saying that criminals should be allowed to run rampid, doing whatever they feel like out of hunger or greed, but I am suggesting that if we focused not on the symptoms, but the prevention, by housing, by educating, by feeding people in need of help... we'd be a lot better off.

I just don't get the disconnect. I don't see how people can look at the same situation, the same desperate circumstances - and have a completely opposite solution.

The only difference I can see between the crime we are seeing in New Orleans vs Detroit, is that one is the concentrated aftermath of a natural disaster, and the other the aftermath of a man-made disaster.