Gang Prevention Effort Off to Slow Start

The gangs are the revolutionary shock-troops of the Progressive Democrats. As long as we keep electing Progressive Democrats to office gang violence will only worsen. Remember that Das Williams criticized Frank Hotchkiss' hard-line stance against gangs, claiming Hotchkiss would be powerless to intimidate a hard core gang member into leaving Santa Barbara. Gang violence is the constant threat that Progressives use to intimidate the electorate into accepting higher taxes, racial preferences and amnesty.

revisionist said, "Gang violence is the constant threat that Progressives use to intimidate the electorate into accepting higher taxes, racial preferences and amnesty."

Gee, I thought those things were what 'right-wingers' used to scare the public into accepting a police state.

This is coming, by the way, from someone (me) who wants to abolish the federal income tax.

"Gee, I thought those things were what 'right-wingers' used to scare the public into accepting a police state."

I thought it was Communism, Socialism, and Terrorism, with the downtimes carried by fear of taxation, drugs, and "deviant" sexual practices.

Can we all agree that gang violence sucks? Maybe that'd be a start :) henry

Gangs are the outgrowth of the policies of *both* major parties.

Taser that gang boy....
the "comments by Sgt. McGrew about the teen escapee he tasered again.....And we’ll probably arrest him next week, too" are proof positive that the suppression approach to gang violence is not working at all... It is not working- at all. It is not working......

Another way of seeing this kids life:

We had a chance to help this kid-
then we had another chance to help this kid-
then we had one last chance to help this kid-
now it is too late, he is dead.

We should taser everyone who has not taken action to intervene into this kids life.. Including the parents. We should also give an extra zapp to the cop who thinks these kids are animals and not people.

Speak, you hit on a truthful aspect of the youth problem in general: PARENTING!
Even in the UCSB community I see the effects of parents who just shuffle their kids out the door into the real world. In the case I mention, it's usually a bunch of kids from well-to-do families trying to protray the "thug life" in their 1st time away from home & the dorms.
In the case of gang members, there's no portrayal, it's the reality.
Here's a sticky part of the parenting problem: In many cases, the parents (or parent) have had, or still have gang ties, as well as siblings & other relatives, so you could call a family dinner a gang meeting.
You can give these guys all the jobs, appeasement, tender loving care you want, they'll always be thugs because it's engrained in their life. Sad, yet true.
Many gang offenders have been picked up for criminal acts @ their place of employment, so jobs don't seem to work.
Many gang offenders have also been picked up for criminal acts in school, so education doesn't seem to work.
Many gang offenders have victimized people who have tried to help them, so tender loving care doesn't seem to work.
I hate to sound negative, but that's the only tone I can take on the gang matter: LOCK EM' UP! Regardless of race, ethnicity, religion, WHATEVER! They only understand brute force :) henry

Locking them up is not a solution: its a reaction. Can we start to focus on prevention. I am so tired of everybody reacting and over reacting every time something happens. Let us focus on preventing those things from occuring. I do NOT want to hear that it is the parents fault and we should just deport them all. (Should we deport your cleaning lady and your landscaper, too) They are here to stay and we need to pick up the slack. So.. quit whining and do something proactive. If it doesnt work, go ahead and go back to whining. People, these are young people with no direction. Cant we get down off our horse and offer some direction. No, you cant, because those brown kids are not like your white kids. I know, thats why you pulled them from your local school, rather than work to help everyone. Stop pulling your head out of the sand every now and then to repeat the old Told ya so. Keep your head out and see what you can do to make this a better place for all of us. These kids need our help and guidance. Not our ridicule.

How much of this is the attitude of the parents vs. parents not being in the home to raise the kids because they are working so many hours per day that they simply cannot be there to keep track on the kids? (The latter is something I suspect may play a big role, but I'd appreciate it if someone could provide some firsthand information)

Another thing--politically incorrect as it is--is that schools haven't been able to discipline kids for decades and if these kids have parents who are working 16 hours per day, who *will* correct them when they get out of line as *all* kids do?

"No, you cant, because those brown kids are not like your white kids. I know, thats why you pulled them from your local school, rather than work to help everyone."

"They are here to stay and we need to pick up the slack."

I don't know what more we can do for "brown" kids. Many get free breakfast and free lunch at school, paid for whether you like it or not by higher-earning white and Asian taxpayers. If the kids in question are at a NCLB sanctioned school, they get free private tutoring after class, paid for by Federal tax dollars. We maintain public libraries where they can study if home is too crowded with books that can be checked out for free. The teachers tell them how wonderful their culture and language is. At the Caesar Chavez school the kids don't even have to learn to read in English until 3rd grade. The police chief "looks like them" and protects their parents (if illegal) from ICE.

Maybe if we stopped pandering to the "brown kids", and started making the same demands on them that we make of white and Asian kids they would start to appreciate what they have. If you can't make it in a paradise like Santa Barbara with beaches, mountains and a fully-paid for education then there is something wrong with your culture and attitude. Perhaps it is the "brown kids" who need to "pick up the slack" by picking up the books and putting down the knives.

Whether it's programs to help our "at risk" youth, or the hardline approach of tossing them in jail, both approaches merely are pallative ones that fail to address the underlying problem.

Nick- Great job of following up the article from earlier this spring. It's a shame we have to waste so much money on an unsolvable cultural problem. The culture is inbred poverty and the people that take advantage of it.

The problem really can't be beat because for every kid you help, 100 more are ready to take their place. There is not enough room, resources or jobs especially here.

Go to radiusgroup.com and read the SBNP article about our economic "health". If you wonder why we can't grow decent jobs, read Cushman's comment about how tourism is the only business that makes sense here. Read Scott Glenn's comments about how he sells out local biz to chain stores that "need" to be here. Thes guys are exactly why the big push to house low paid workers in high density housing. This cabal is what is infecting SB with the low growth cancer of no jobs except for the tourism servants...and government employees. We can grow real jobs in this area if we spent money on the mass transit problem allowing workers to easily commute using train and local bus/shuttle service to the Hollister corridor. But no, that area is being eaten up and rezoned for high density low income housing. Just export the problem to Goleta I guess. Look at the vacancy rates shown in Goleta for industrial properties. The cabal doesn't want competion for resources including housing and skilled workers. When's the last time you heard of anyone trying to recruit real business into town?

http://www.laweekly.com/2009-02-19/news/...

Great article. The public comments are typical. I wouldn't comment except to question the first post by 'revisionist' blaming Progressive Democrats. It is my observation that the constant in Santa Barbara for the most part and at least a few decades are Progressive Democrats. I am thankful for that. So to continue my observation I seem to recall that this gang violence follows Conservative policies at the federal level. The "trickle-down" effect of Conservative federal policies makes it's way into localities usually about the time the public tires of Conservative polices such as warmongering, scapegoating, slashing of social programs, slanted tax policies benefiting the top 1 1/2 % and creating angst and malaise across the nation.

To sum it up the constant locally is Progressive policies while the interleaving influence is federal Conservative policies. To me the logical conclusion is that it is Federal Conservative policies that need to be examined as faulty. Thankfully, "elections have consequences" and so perhaps we are now in a period of recovery. Be patient though because there is some lag time.

DonMcDermott: Now that we have a Democrat as president and Democrats dominating in the Senate and House, why is it that the war is being pushed into Afghanistan?

As for Santa Barbara being a "progressive" area, the simple fact is that is that under this nominally "progressive" leadership this place has become unaffordable but to a few. Also, look at the L.A.-like traffic jams we see at rush hour. No, you can't just pin it all on liberals or conservatives, it's a commentary on the way things are run overall.

I remember back a few decades ago the buzzwords were "rent control" and "slow growth". Funny how today those ideas are just unrealized afterthoughts.

Second thought: Sa1 hits the nail right on the head when he/she points out that for every one kid that is kept out of the gang life, many more succumb to it.

If the State paid UC system can extract a cut from it's system, why cant the city and county give the cops a 10% cut on their overly generous salaries? You think they're all going to quit? And go where?

The city costs them out at 125K ea. so that would free up $1,750,000 for 140 officers right? Now you can actually hire ten MORE officers and still have $500,000 for the gang kids or something actual useful!

billclausen: Since the U.S. has been in Afghanistan since October of 2001 I presume the "push" you are asking about is Pakistan. The first answer is Bush policies. The second answer is Conservatives, including Democratic Conservatives. I would cut the current Obama administration some slack due to the first answer, again Bush policies that destabilized the region including Pakistan a nation with nuclear weapons. BTW U.S. troops were reported to be fighting in Pakistan in the fall of 2008, a "push" during the Bush administration. Everyone seems to be in agreement that the U.S. should go after al Qaeda where ever they are. I do not.

re; your second paragraph. My simple comment is that progressive leadership is moderated by conservative values whether Republican or Democratic, Conservative or Liberal. I often find that most cross dress between all four labels resulting in inconsistent behaviors and perhaps that explains why as you say "things are run overall."