LAPD vs. Gangs

[mczerone]

Anyone seen this story from the LATimes (cross posted at Drudge)?:

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2009/09/huge-la-police-raid-targets-notorious-avenues-gang--2.html (http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2009/09/huge-la-police-raid-targets-notorious-avenues-gang--2.html)

Some thoughts, after reading the article and the horrible bigoted comments:

(1) Why are these gangs perpetuated? Its one thing to get together with friends and go on a crime spree, but these are societal institutions that maintain a hegemonic control over 'turf'. It seems that there is a systemic problem, and not a problem with any particular gang or its members.

(2) How are people so bigoted as to blame this on 'illegal immigration'? Even if we assume that the only causal factor to these gangs were specifically Mexican immigrants - why is the fact that they had to sneak over a border (or "boarder" as one irate commenter typed) or lie about their visa at all relevant to the formation of a gang? And if what we have now are 'open' borders, what does one who wants 'closed' borders suggest we do? Line up in a giant game of Red Rover at all land and river borders?

(3) More than a few commentators suggested that more State, more Police, martial Law, and less freedoms are the answer (and even the article itself seemed sympathetic to the idea), but what is that going to do apart from create a docile, subservient, tax-feeding population loaded with gov't promises and entitlements that can never be taken away, lest the State then be accused of racism or not caring about the poor, or whatever.

(4) How does an LAPD officer not see that he is just a foot soldier for a competing gang? The Avenues control the economics and security and property of one area of the city, the LAPD is seeking to conquer them. How horrible would it be to just let them alone, only to intervene when they initiate aggression against someone bound to the LAPD, and then to remain a restrained actor, only redressing specific harms?


I'm a world away from this fighting, but it saddens me to see so many people being locked away in a cage for having been born into a system created by the city itself.

[erowe1]

#4 is a great question. And to be honest, I see it as much tougher than you do. The LAPD officer is not alone in thinking he's different than a gangster. 99% of all Americans probably also probably think he's different and that the state has some legitimate authority that sets it apart from gangs. I waver on this myself.

[Dreamofunity]

After having watched numerous Ganglands and other programs like it I've always wondered why all the gangs fight eachother. If even just a few of the big ones worked together against the mainstream government gang, they'd probably come close to victory - I'm not sure I'd like that more, even if I'm not the biggest fan of the government gang, but if I were some hardcore gangster leader I'd definitly strive for that goal instead of numerous rivalries over a few blocks, as well as constant infighting.

[dannno]

I agree with the OP, this is a systemic problem.. it is caused by the Fed..

[amy31416]

After having watched numerous Ganglands and other programs like it I've always wondered why all the gangs fight eachother. If even just a few of the big ones worked together against the mainstream government gang, they'd probably come close to victory - I'm not sure I'd like that more, even if I'm not the biggest fan of the government gang, but if I were some hardcore gangster leader I'd definitly strive for that goal instead of numerous rivalries over a few blocks, as well as constant infighting.

I think it's partially human nature. Look at everything from the government to the mob to tribes in the Americas and Africa.

Where you, as the pragmatic gangsta leader would run into trouble, is that the other gangsta leader would only agree if you give up your "power" and if you're seen as a threat to the power that guy just gained, you get a cap in your behind.

We're not dealing with philosophers and scholars here--and that goes for both the cops and the gangsters.

[Dreamofunity]

We're not dealing with philosophers and scholars here--and that goes for both the cops and the gangsters.

:D

[Todd]

Here's one of the moronic comments


Posted by: SonoranSteve | September 23, 2009 at 07:12 AM


Simple solution, Bulls to Steers.
I'm a 65 year old Oregonian who in my youth spent several years working on a large cattle ranch.
Every year we would round-up the yearling bulls and castrate them, a process referred to as nutting.

There are two reasons for this practice;
(1) a steer yields more and better meat.
(2) more importantly a steer is far less aggressive or even docile.

This procedure is common by all cattle ranches worldwide, as it would be imposable to manage multiple un-castrated bulls due to the aggressive nature of the animal, the bull thereafter is referred to as a steer.

If this practice could be applied to habitual violent offenders the results would be;
(1) Greater deterrent to violent crime for fear of punishment.
(2) Lower jail and prison population.
(3) Fewer unwed mothers (less welfare)

Wow. I once thought that way....but I was 19

[mczerone]

Here's one of the moronic comments



Wow. I once thought that way....but I was 19

Thanks for posting that here - out of the hundreds of comments that go from bad to worse - this one was in the top 5.

If this guy wants forced castration, he should get out his pruning shears and go to LA to try it.

Domineering a bull is easier than subduing an angry teen with an AK.

[Todd]

Thanks for posting that here - out of the hundreds of comments that go from bad to worse - this one was in the top 5.

If this guy wants forced castration, he should get out his pruning shears and go to LA to try it.

Domineering a bull is easier than subduing an angry teen with an AK.

How many people in positions of making policy already think this way.