"Cities Suing Gangs, Critics Cry Foul" WHAT!?

Question

A tactic where gangs are sued by the government is working and decreases in crime are being reported. Critics however feel these laws are unfair to minorities. Has America gone totally bat sht? I am a mixed guy; I grew up in the “hood”. We suffered under the tyranny of these terrorists. What in the hell is wrong with modern LIBERALS!? While I was growing up on the south side of Chicago I was surrounded by violence. We do not need some white liberals who live in earth friendly million dollar condos downtown telling us what is fair and unfair. We also do not need misguided so called black leaders. How can we fix these problems in the inner cities? What is the real answer? Liberals please respond. All you do is criticize what is being done but you never offer solutions, here is your chance.

Answer 1

Uhm........if you're not a rich, white republican man then you are part of a protected group which can not be sued under ANY cirucmstances. Remember-it is the rich, white conservative man who oppressed gang members for so long---it MUST be the conservative's fault! I think the whole idea of the government suing gangs (for illegal, dangerous criminal behavior) is a hate crime and the motivation is purely racial.

Answer 2

I first need to say IT IS ABOUT TIME these thugs got sued. All they cause is problems. These laws in my opinion are not unfair to minorities in the least : Are all thugs supposed to be minorities? The laws are supposed to be targeted at gangs no matter what color they are. If they happen to be minorities, then I guess that's too bad for them. I am not a liberal though. The problems that occur in inner cities are tough to even begin to fix but I will take a crack at it: 1) The problems start with the families I think those that are on Welfare should have mandatory parenting classes that they have to attend. I feel this way because many families in inner cities are struggling to make ends meet have the time, and sometimes there is no father present. 2) Young ladies and men need to be educated in some way about safe sex, and the value of an education and hard work. I suppose these are things that their family should teach them though. Maybe there should be more afterschool programs establish to reach these girls and boys before they become wrapped up in crime or have children too soon. I dont know where the funding from this would come from but the children need to have a place they can go so they dont get caught up with the wrong people. Tutoring could be offered and counseling. 3) I think the people of these communities need to break the code of silence they have and start doing something about whats going on in their neighborhoods. Don't let people ruin your city-stand up. If these communities started standing up for what they want, I believe these thugs and gangbangers would leave. Your question is so difficult to answer because there is no one good answer for such a growing problem. Things like things need to be fixed within the family and start with the community. Notice I didnt mention once about any black activists.

Answer 3

First, to clear up a misunderstanding: the cities are not suing for MONEY. They are filing injunctions against people. It's kind of like a restraining order - a way of creating greater limitations to avoid bigger problems down the road. And like restraining orders you usually have to show that you have a basis to impose these extra limitations.

And that is the problem. Some cities are saying things along the lines of 'no known member of this group can be seen within ten feet of each other because the group has been associated with crime in the past'. These kinds of injuctions get thrown out because they ARE unfair. It may SOUND like a good idea when we're talking about street gangs, but if we really applied it to every group associated with crime, it would be catastrophic. Are cities suing congress to prevent them from getting together because they're associated with bribery and corruption? Are they suing corporations? No. It's ridiculous to stop people associated with someone but not necessarily involved in any crime to stop hanging out.

Another objection is that even if you somehow magically got all gang members to stop seeing each other and hanging out on street corners, this wouldn't necessarily magically make them all stop performing crimes. Just like taking away someone's drivers licence doesn't stop anyone from driving. Many of the people who object to programs such as these do so because it's telling youths what NOT to do but not providing them with things TO do.

Usually critics suggest other kinds of programs instead. Youth athletics. Work training. Music. Things to get people interesting in things OTHER than gangs and crime, and to give them socially acceptable options for making money instead of socially malignant ones. There are probably hundreds of these kinds of programs around. Pick one and support and promote it instead of trying to eat peas with a knife!

Answer 4

I think anything they can do to stop gang activity is a good thing. And if suing them is helping,or making the lives of gang members more difficult then I'm all for it. Gang members are all scum anyway,they all deserve nothing more than an early death,hopefully before they reproduce.

AD

Answer 5

Actually, this tactic has received pretty much bipartisan support in many urban areas. I don't know much about Chicago's problems, but in LA they have more than 30 such injunctions against different gangs, and they are accepted by virtually every politician and citizen. The only one who seems to be complaining about this tactic is the ACLU, which is no surprise, these are the guys that defended NAMBLA.

Answer 6

I'm a liberal and I hate affirmative action and these people who whine and moan about minorities.

Is punishing someone for breaking the law unfair? It doesn't matter the color of their skin, lawbreakers should be punished.

Minorities should receive no special treatment. What we SHOULD do about these problems is try and improve the inner cities as best as we can for ALL people. The most important problem is poverty. Poverty breeds crime. All we need to do is improve education and conditions in the inner cities and i think we will see good results.

Answer 7

Cities should hire mercenaries to do special OPS to clean out the gangs. I think it is funny that the gov. will not call gangs terrorists organizations. I f you live in their "rule" you KNOW they ARE terrorists and should be dealt with in that manner

Answer 8

Those claiming it is unfair like the ACLU should have to move and live with the bangers they are trying to protect.

Answer 9

It is sort of side stepping the judicial process. By suing the gang, and forcing them from associating with each other, you are sentencing them without a conviction of a crime. If they want to add anti-association and anti-loitering sentences to people as they are convicted of a crime, that makes sense. But forcing gang members from doing seemingly legal activities, without a crime being committed is not how our judicial process works. Why not sue gay people from hanging out together because they might break anti-sodomy laws?

Answer 10

I was thinking along similarlines when I read the story this AM. I can't wait to see the responses!