There's plenty of theories around the knife crime epidemic. I think that when you look at the wider context its clear that economic poverty and lack of opportunities for these young men are an important factor, but that doesn't necessarily explain what the motivation is in any one individual tragic case which happen. Often, the actual stabbings are caused by many factors, some of which include - petty disputes over postcode/territory and drugs - but the idea that the middle class cocaine trade fuels all this violence is debunked and is often used to hide the lack of economic opportunity - and therefore the governments responsibility. Also, a big factor, comes down to the need to have respect, and as there's no way to get that through work, violence is an easy alternative. This need for respect and for using violence to resolve conflict or perceived disrespect then is often the touch paper which lights the fuse. It isn't much of a stretch to see that the "example" set by Will Smith - using violence in the face of disrespect could easily feed into this, so is this absolute *********? Well, no not really. As for the Putin Slur, as I have said on previous posts, if you can point to the post where I supported Putin or his invasion of Ukraine then I will happily apologise. The closest I've come is to point out that if Ukraine had remained neutral and not tried to join NATO/EU then Putin wouldn't have invaded. Thats just simply pointing out the motivation behind the invasion and is not an endorsement of it. In a similar way you can make an argument as to why Japan attacked Pearl Harbour - rather then the usual, borderline racist narrative about the Japanese psyche you usually hear. It doesn't mean it was ok for the Japanese to do what they did, just a theory about why they did it - same with Russia. If you can't tell the difference then that sounds like a you problem to be honest.