Friday, January 19, 2007

HERE COMES THE BIG HAMMER.
Oh boy, here it comes. In case you missed it, the suits and uniforms made their appearance on 204 yesterday after the "Truce" was signed by people who weren't fighting. The attendees included Mayor Tony V., Chief Bratton, Sheriff Baca, Janice Hahn and FBI Director Robert S. Mueller among others. When the head Fed shows up, you know the heat's on. The thrust of the press op was to announce a "campaign for the 'strategic dismantling' of two street gangs" according to the LA TIMES. In addition to the usual law enforcement presence, the Federal authorities will also send in the DEA and ATF. Yikes! One interesting approach is to put LASD and LAPD in the same radio car. It looks like the LAPD and LASD have also signed a truce because those two agencies have never gotten along all that well. The Feds will provide electronic surveillance (wiretaps) and obversation posts (eyeballs on the street). The Mayor offered carrots and sticks in the form of "services and suppression" to put, "you [204] out of business."

Throwing a kink in the works was Aqeela Sherrills who doesn't seem to know what he wants. He wanted after-school and youth programs but then criticized spending money. The Times quoted him saying, "They are going to spend millions of dollars even though Najee Ali already brought about a peace treaty." On the subject of the "peace treaty" Chief Bratton said on TV last night, "I don't believe in fairy tales." From all the indicators, the "truce" sure looked like a fairy tale because the shooters on both sides were no shows. And for sure there are shooters on both sides. Sherrils and Ali are probably a little pissed off they weren't invited to the press op party. In the game of power brokering, those two are more like gate crashers than mediators.

Why all this attention to a conflict that's been going on for years? For one, it's because the cat's out of the bag. The media, politicians and activists could only keep a lid on it for so long. Now it's getting national attention and while all the parties involved are genuinely disgusted with street violence, there's probably the feeling that they don't want this happening on their watch. If you're a politician with aspirations to higher office, you don't want a future political opponent pointing a finger and saying your record as a civic leader sucks. This is what happened to Mayor Jerry Brown in Oakland. Of course, he failed up. He was such a dismal failure riding herd on the street killings in Oakland, that he was rewarded by being elected the State's top cop. Go figure that one out.

Also, regardless of snow in Malibu, summer's coming and that means the kids will be taking the guns out of the gym lockers and bringing them home for the holidays. Is that too cynical? Maybe. But we've got all the ingredients brewing right now for major 415s, a.k.a riots. And riots don't just kill people, they kill political careers.

While the media totally ignored this, one of the flash points of the current race violence was when Demian Williams and his homies dragged Hispanics out of their cars, beat them, robbed them and then spray painted them. These were civilians, not soldados. The Big Homies put a major green light on Football and the Mara was only too happy to pick that up. It was lucky for him the LAPD got to Football first.

So 204 right now is the most recent participant in the whack-a-mole game. Welcome to Gaza.

37 comments:

Anonymous said...

what a waste of $$ that could of been spent on a rec center/parks/jobs/prevention! damn! oh well bratton and the feds gotta justify gettin paid damn politics...................

Anonymous said...

See D.Q. the surge of troops is coming to Los Angeles. I wonder why the IRS did not show up, they have to follow the drug money trail. I would like to see lots of drug money seized to help pay for some of this. Hit these pendejos where it really hurts, seize all money and assets. But I always wonder if people are really making so much money why so many still are living in the ghetto?

Does anybody know any good web sites which have accurate figures about how much drugs USA consumes. I pretty sure USA is the biggest drug consumer in the world. If so many people are using drugs how do they find jobs, with so many companies doing drug test for new employees? Or does everybody carry around "clean" urine.

Que Locuras

archie bunker said...

Why isn't Rocky Delgadillo busting hot dog vendors or weed dispensaries? ...That no good mama's boy.

archie bunker said...

Que Loco, why don't you stop your yapping and go back to el mexico. Your whinning is getting to me. You guys just keep brining your dam drugs over here and selling it to our little kids. Will the last mexican going back please turn off the lights so I can get some snooze, geeezz.

Anonymous said...

If you just built a recreation center it would be another place local gang members could hang out and control. Got to get rid of the roaches first.

How do you expect the goverment to buy jobs?? I want to learn this.

Anonymous said...

The USA is the biggest consumer of drugs in the world. And there is a shit load of money to be made. Just look at how many tons of stuff gets confiscated everyday and mutiply that by 500 or 1000 and that pretty much gives you an idea. Or better yet look at the quarterly figures that the pharmaceutical companies release to their stockholders and multiply that figure by at least 25 and you'll get an idea. Weed is a billion dollar crop in Califas alone. There are maybe 1.5 million regular Meth users all over the US and that number keeps growing. Check this site out.....

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/meth/faqs/

I can see that you don't give any homies credit. I mean you actually think that bacause a person is in a Barrio that he is probably stupid. Don't underestimate Locuras.

SV VBS

Anonymous said...

Que Locura,

I work in the Substance Abuse field. To find the stats for drug consumption, go to: http://www.whitehousedrugpolicy.gov/hidta/index.html

you can find pretty much all the info you want right there. Tallboy Modelos and Jack's Links all around, ey Gava!

Jose619

Anonymous said...

As well, I left out, drug consumption, gambling, and prostitution factually account for 10% of the Gross National Product (the total final value of goods produced/consumed)in this country.

Meaning, illegal activites, any way you put it, selling, buying, fornicating, black market, it all keeps our economy afloat. Without the darkside of economics, the Country wouldn't be able to sustain itself. Pretty much, the pack a day smoking (gov't tax) alcoholic (gov't tax) husband with a cocaine habit and a fetish for prostitutes keeps our economy going.

Jose619

Anonymous said...

Sorry for the long post, but here goes.

The City of Los Angeles deserves some credit for at least attempting to look at its prior failure in their attempts to control the turf gang problem (although at 500K just for a report one is reminded of $900 toilet seats for the DoD).

Unfortunately, the problem is much larger than just those factors that the city has control over from the policy perspective. There are three interrelated issues here. The first and foremost is the war on drugs. Illicit drug sales are the funding source for each and every single turf or race based gang of note in this country as well as narcotics trafficking organizations from Mexico to Afghanistan to Southeast Asia to Eastern Europe. The simplest approach to defunding these gangs, international drug trafficking rings and terrorist organizations would be to decriminalize illicit drugs. Not only would the primary means of funding be removed from the gangs (thus removing the lure of "easy" money and the ability to purchase firearms or run a criminal enterprise) but the underlying financial incentive for turf based (we all hear about defending your neighborhood, etc. but the reality is defending the market in which the gang sells drugs)warfare would also be removed. In a decriminalized market, the quality of the product could be controlled and the sale of the product could be taxed at a reasonable rate (setting the rate too high makes the illegal production and sale cheaper and thus drives the consumer to the black market; the tax basis would be lower than the value of the current product sold as making the product legal would reduce its value as the risk associated with the manufacture/sale of the product would not be present). This would also eliminate prosecutions for crimes such as possession (removing a large number of non-violent offenders from the prison and jail systems). In this vein, there is an option to consider. The State of California, as a half measure, could decriminalize drugs that are currently illicit. I say that this is a half-measure because there would still be the Federal drug laws (it was the Feds and not local LE that busted the pot clinics). In doing this, the state would basically be telling the Feds that it is up to the Feds to enforce their laws and the state will not spend any further resources on the failed war on drugs. Finally, from the Federal perspective (outside of the control of the City of LA), should they choose to continue their failed policies of the war on drugs, is to actually take measures to effect the supply of product coming into this country. The measures to effect demand are a failure given the nature of the product(s) in question and the breathtakingly stupid manner in which the government posits its position (pot = gateway drug; Reefer madness; cartoon chick running off with a space alien because it didn't want to smoke pot). Going after the suppliers in their foreign bases of operation has also been a failure and more often than not has embroiled the Federal government in regional/tribal disputes and foreign wars. For the Federal government to control the supply, the most effective method is by having actual control of the borders (both land routes and both sea routes). The Feds pay lip service to this idea, but their actions are severely lacking. Both land borders are effectively wide open and port and coastal security are a joke. Given the surrounding politics (e.g. illegal immigration) there is little to no chance of this happening.

This then brings us to the second issue. Prison reform. Firstly, our prison and jail systems are packed with non-violent drug offenders that would not be there on possession charges (they might on other charges). Secondly, the ideal of "rehabilitation" in prison is one that only lip service is paid to. Outside of power obtained through the drug trade is the power inside the walls of the prison system held by the prison gangs. The prison system is run in such a manner that extrajudicial punishment is a real and justifiable fear as the asylum is really being run by the inmates. Judges do not have the power to sentence an inmate to being raped by prison homothugs (if you poke some vato in the butt you are a homo), beaten by other inmates or shaken down under the threat of violence. Yet, this is the defacto sentence handed down to some prisoners by the nature of the system. Prison overcrowding, dormitory style housing, multiple prisoners per cell, holding tanks and a disinterested and/or undermanned prison guard staff all contribute to this problem. Why affiliate with a gang even if you aren't selling drugs? Because you might end up in prison (particularly if you are poor and of color and harassed by the cops) and god help you if you have to go it alone.

Finally, you have the third issue. This is a combination of both state and federal laws, that while well meaning, have resulted in the destruction of the family unit. The disintegration of the urban family unit (particularly for poor whites and blacks and more recently for Latinos) can be traced back to the well-meaning but poorly implemented social welfare reforms of the 1960s. The intent of these reforms was to help people that were temporarily in bad straits and needed some help to overcome their hard times. Instead of being a safety net, the policies enacted in this regard were more of a spider web that ensnared the urban and rural poor in the glue of government dependency. Most importantly, the role of the father as the breadwinner was marginalized as the government took over that roll by providing handouts. This system rewarded illegitimacy and unemployment. By removing the father from the equation, we now have "my baby's daddy" and generations of male children that have grown up with no male role models outside of thugs and celebritards. There are two factors that have worsened this problem. The first is the lack of implementation of any mechanism to judge the effectiveness of these programs (i.e. throwing money down the rathole and solving the problem) and the second is the development of a political constituency that either survives off of the system or profits handsomely from it. The government further exacerbates the problem by punishing people that attempt to break away from the government dependency.

Until all of these issues are addressed in a cohesive and simultaneous manner, enforcement alone or city level actions alone will never reduce the gang "problem."

StillNoScript said...

Anonymous said...

"If you just built a recreation center it would be another place local gang members could hang out and control. Got to get rid of the roaches first."

...

But what's the point of getting rid of the roaches when the kitchen is still a mess? Roaches don't show up in clean kitchens. For some reason, we love to get those roaches off of the floor and the counter. We keep putting up the roach motels, and keep catching them and putting them away. But we never want to get the roaches up in the higher cupboards and above the fridge, where they are most rampant and where they do the most damage.

So, I agree, let's get rid of the roaches, both up high and down low, and the recreation centers might work. Unfortunately, there's no exterminators that get rid of the roaches on high ground. So, those roaches up high will continue to make their way to the counter.

Anonymous said...

Vae Victus (or Woe to the Conquered), you do make clear what millions in this country agree upon. However, the reason, like most, why the Federal Government will not implement this approach is because it flexes it's power, shows you who is in of charge of running things, and there are too many jobs within these federal agencies at stake. What the hell are we going to do with all these ATF, and DEA agents that keep going in circles chasing and helping out with the "War on Drugs"? What the hell are prosecutors and incumbents who built their entire political career on the platform of "No to Drugs/tough on crime"? And the endless, endless sea of other agencies, strike forces, task forces, etc. that recieve funding from the Feds to keep programs running? What about Wackenhut Enterprises and Security America that contract to run prisons? You think they are going to be happy that their population, that accounts for 80% of individuals incarcerated for NON-Violent Drug Offenses, leaves their prisons all but empty? What about my boss, who has to travel to Sacramento once a month to lobby for a bill that makes possession of "so and said" components a felony? And the low-level gumshoe officer at LAPD who dreams and aspires of joing the Narcotics division to get his foot in the FBI door? I have no quarrels with your comments, in fact Vae Victus, I applaud them. We all know common sense is not prevalent, let alone soemthing our Government practices. We as citizens all have a simple answer for many problems, but the "G" will not implement it for one reason...it will disrupt the foundation and strength of it as well as FUCK UP THE FLOW OF MONEY. MONEY IS THE GOVERNMENTS' MOTIVE AS WELL. This "war on drugs" is just one of the reasons to keep the cogs greased on the machine.

So in a nut shell, there is too much at stake INTERNALLY to try a new effective sytematic approach to the "War on Drugs".

-Jose619

StillNoScript said...

N, well said.

But I think the real problem is that the people that really run this country like the war on drugs for more political reasons than one. We can go on all day, but Oliver North is just the first name that pops up.

I also think there's social reasons for it. A lot of the higher ups don't like the idea of Americans smoking marijuana the way they would casually drink. Marijuana tends to make people more imaginative, albeit lazy, but more imaginative and more cynical of everday truths that alcoholics seem to just roll with no matter how angry they are about it.

In short, alcoholics still show up to work, and keep their heads down and their mouths shut, for the most part.

Marijuana smokers, the educated adults that smoke marijuana, and there are plenty, tend to be more active in regards to workplace issues, rights, what have you, and also tend to take action. In other words, they're a bosses nightmare.

There's a reason booze and cigarettes are legal, and it obviously isn't because they're safer than pot. They're far more dangerous. It's because the side effects of these drugs in working adults is something that the corporate class can deal with. The side effects of marijuana in working adults, or, should I say, virtues, involve trends that corporate America does not want to see.

That's just my theory as to why they at least want pot illegal, along with many other political reasons and reasons having to do with the black market being beneficial to some of our overseas allies who's only real export is drugs.

Anonymous said...

I have come to the simple conclusion that none of this will EVER change. NEVER. There is NOTHING we can do to stop it. NOTHING.

don quixote said...

You said a mouthfull N and it is right on the money (no pun intended) and isn't it peculiar that besides being the "gang capital" of the nation LA is also the "drug capital" of the nation.
Decriminalization of drugs and users would certainly put a crimp in the fastest growing industrys in the USA, gangs, drug distribution and "The prison industrial complex".
Shit you travel enough around the country and you will begin to wonder how many communties are dependent on the building and use of prisons, cause in many places the new joint is the only new thing seen for miles.
This war on drugs, three strikes= life, recidivism at an all time high, no attempt at rehabilitation, Prison guards unions lobbying for more 3 strike laws and harsher penalties, Major corporations like Wackenhutt, Pinkerton, probably Halliburton/KBR all getting on the bandwagon for more privatization of Prisons, and services to them including construction, is a scary situation.
And now in LA besides the local authorities we have the FBI, ATM, and DEA (what a failed record they have on drug eradication!) all wanting a piece of the action.
It's Showtime Folks!
dq

Gava Joe said...

I'm in awe. You guys are cookin'. VV and SNS. I've watched your taunts and squablles, but here in the light you look like compatriots. Better you'd have been plugged in at that media scene today than the sock puppets. Keep at it. You rock - both a ya!

Anonymous said...

Jose619, SNS:

I am in agreement with both of your commentary. The "war on drugs" has created a huge government bureaucracy that is first and foremost filled with people that are interested in validating the existence of their jobs and expanding the scope of their own power. The "war on drugs" has never been about solving "the drug problem" but has instead been about keeping the "problem" around in order to benefit from the system. It reminds me of the medical/pharmaceutical industry that is interested in "treating" the problem (keep it around to benefit from it financially) instead of curing the problem. The vested interests are many: local LE, state LE, federal LE, criminal prosecutors, state and federal prison guards, the pharmaceutical industry, western medicine, foreign based drug trafficking rings, local gangs, etc. Even more insidious than the money issue is the use of the "war on drugs" to dismantle the Bill of Rights and from the Federal level, to foment and involve ourselves in foreign wars. The use of the fear of crime to get the people to voluntarily give up their rights is a tried and true tactic. From the historical perspective I think we can trace the outlawing of marijuana/hemp to William Randolph Hearst and the outlawing of cocaine to racism (the false claim that blacks in the South were high on coke and were raping whites en mass). From the social perspective, the problem that we have is the continuance of the puritanical mindset of those that founded this country. There is a large segment of the population that is willing to sacrifice all of our civil rights and to empower the "war on drugs" profiteers simply because they disagree with what someone else is willing to do with their own body. SNS, one question for you. Is it because intellectuals and radicals chose to use marijuana that it remains illegal (as per the powers that be) or is it because marijuana is illegal that intellectuals and radicals choose to use it?

I think that change is possible. We have to objectively assess and understand the history of why we are where we are today and understand why the actions and measures that we have taken have not solved the problem but made it worse. Unfortunately, I don't think that real change is probable given that there are too many toes of too many powerful people that would need to stepped on in order to solve the problem(s).

Anonymous said...

Here is another article from the same website that Wally gave his interview to, pretty good stuff. Muchas mentiras, but it makes for good reading. Better then all the Black/Brown politcal shit thats been posted lately.

L.A. Blackout
Acting on orders from the Mexican Mafia, Latino gang members in Southern California are terrorizing and killing blacks.
by Brentin Mock
LOS ANGELES, Calif. -- Ascending the steep steps that lead from the street to the scene of her son's murder, 47-year-old Louisa Prudhomme is charged by a Doberman Pinscher.
Prudhomme reaches over a gate and gives the guard dog a rough pat on the head.
"Sam doesn't seem to remember me," she says.
What Prudhomme will never forget is that just past the snarling Doberman is the apartment on a hill where six years ago her 21-year-old son Anthony was shot in the face with a .25-caliber semi-automatic while lying on a futon she had purchased for him from IKEA. He died wearing a shirt that read, "Keep the Peace."
Anthony Prudhomme was slain by members of the Avenues, a Latino street gang. But he was not a rival gang member, or a police informant, or a drug dealer. The Avenues did not target him for the content of his character, or even the contents of his apartment.
They targeted him for the color of his skin.
Prudhomme was murdered because he identified himself as black (he was in fact mixed-race) in a neighborhood occupied by one of the many Latino street gangs in Los Angeles County. Incredibly, even though these gangs are fundamentally criminal enterprises interested mainly in money, gang experts inside and outside the government say that they are now engaged in a campaign of "ethnic cleansing" -- racial terror that is directed solely at African Americans.
"The way I hear these knuckleheads tell it, they don't want their neighborhoods infested with blacks, as if it's an infestation," says respected Los Angeles gang expert Tony Rafael, who interviewed several Latino street gang leaders for an upcoming book on the Mexican Mafia, the dominant Latino gang in Southern California. "It's pure racial animosity that manifests itself in a policy of a major criminal organization."
"There's absolutely no motive absent the color of their skin," adds former Los Angeles County Deputy District Attorney Michael Camacho. Before he became a judge, in 2003, Camacho successfully prosecuted a Latino gang member for the random shootings of three black men in Pomona, Calif.
"They generally don't like African Americans," Pomona gang unit officer Marcus Perez testified in that case. "If an African American enters their neighborhood, they're likely to be injured or killed."
A comprehensive study of hate crimes in Los Angeles County released by the University of Hawaii in 2000 concluded that while the vast majority of hate crimes nationwide are not committed by members of organized groups, Los Angeles County is a different story. Researchers found that in areas with high concentrations, or "clusters," of hate crimes, the perpetrators were typically members of Latino street gangs who were purposely targeting blacks.
Furthermore, the study found, "There is strong evidence of race-bias hate crimes among gangs in which the major motive is not the defense of territorial boundaries against other gangs, but hatred toward a group defined by racial identification, regardless of any gang-related territorial threat."
Six years later, the racist terror campaign continues.
A Pervasive Attitude
Anthony Prudhomme presented no threat to the Avenues. Even so, he was murdered two months after he moved into Highland Park, a neighborhood in northeastern Los Angeles that is home to many gang members. "He didn't have anything [to steal]," his mother says. "He had nothing when they broke in. So to shoot him, I'm sure it was a stripe. They get stripes for killing black people."
"Stripes" are a gang-soldier's badges of honor. Latino gang members in Southern California earn them by doing the bidding of their godfathers in the Mexican Mafia, a powerful criminal syndicate based in the California state prison system that controls most Latino street gangs south of Bakersfield.
According to gang experts and law enforcement agents, a longstanding race war between the Mexican Mafia and the Black Guerilla family, a rival African-American prison gang, has generated such intense racial hatred among Mexican Mafia leaders, or shot callers, that they have issued a "green light" on all blacks. A sort of gang-life fatwah, this amounts to a standing authorization for Latino gang members to prove their mettle by terrorizing or even murdering any blacks sighted in a neighborhood claimed by a gang loyal to the Mexican Mafia.
"This attitude is pretty pervasive throughout all the [Latino] gangs," says Tim Brown, a Los Angeles County probation supervisor. "As long as [street] gangs are heavily influenced by the prison gangs, particularly the Mexican Mafia, racism is just part and parcel of why they come into being and why they continue to exist."
Last fall, four members of the Avenues were convicted of federal charges for conspiring to deprive blacks of their civil rights in Highland Park. Three of them were sentenced to life in prison, without the possibility of parole, in late November; a fourth was to be sentenced the following month.
But the problem is far more widespread than a single gang in a single neighborhood.
Random, racially motivated crimes have been committed across the 88 cities of Los Angeles County by the members of Latino gangs, including the Pomona 12 in the city of Pomona, the 18th Street Gang in southwest Los Angeles, the Toonerville gang in northeast L.A., and the Varrio Tortilla Flats in Compton.
In one typical case, three members of the Pomona 12 attacked an African-American teenager, Kareem Williams, in his front yard in 2002. When his uncle, Roy Williams, ran to help his nephew, gang member Richard Diaz told him, "Niggers have no business living in Pomona because this is 12th Street territory." According to witnesses, Diaz then told the other gang members, "Pull out the gun! Shoot the niggers! Shoot the niggers!" No shots were fired.
The violence is not even limited to Los Angeles County. This November, six members of a Latino gang in Carlsbad, Calif., were arrested and charged with hate crimes for allegedly hurling racial slurs at a black teenager — who police said was not a gang member — while kicking and punching him. The same month, two members of the Fresno Bulldogs, a Latino gang in Fresno, Calif., were convicted of attempted murder in what police described as the random hate-crime shooting of a 41-year-old black man. According to police, the shooters used racial epithets and told the victim, "We don't like your kind of people on our street."
Ten Years of Terror
Anti-black violence conducted by Latino gangs in Los Angeles has been ongoing for more than a decade. A 1995 Los Angeles Police Department (LAPD) report about Latino gang activity in the Normandale Park neighborhood declared, "This gang has been involved in an ongoing program to eradicate Black citizens from the gang neighborhood." A 1996 LAPD report on gangs in east Los Angeles stated, "Local gangs will attack any Black person that comes into the city."
But while the Latino gangs' racial terror campaign is not new, gang experts and law enforcement authorities say the intensity and frequency of anti-black terrorism is now escalating, as the amount of turf in Los Angeles claimed by Latino gangs continues to increase rapidly. And, as more and more blacks leave inner-city L.A. for safer neighborhoods, those who remain are more vulnerable.
"I don't see much history left for blacks in Los Angeles," says LAPD probation officer James Lewis, who is himself black and deals specifically with Latino gang members in northeast Los Angeles, including the Avenues. "It plays out not just with the gang members, but also the way things are going [for blacks] throughout Los Angeles."
Since 1990, the African-American population of Los Angeles has dropped by half as blacks relocated to suburbs, and Latinos have moved into historically black neighborhoods. Traversing South Central L.A. today, it's obvious that the urban landscape has changed radically since the Bloods-versus-Crips era depicted in movies like Colors, Boyz N The Hood, and Menace II Society. Not only are there vastly fewer black people walking the streets, there are vastly fewer obvious black gang members. Beige skin and baggy khakis have displaced the red and blue bandannas of the Bloods and the Crips. The LAPD estimates there are now 22,000 Latino gang members in the city of Los Angeles alone. That's not only more than all the Crips and the Bloods; it's more than all black, Asian, and white gang members combined. Almost all of those Latino gang members in L.A. — let alone those in other California cities — are loyal to the Mexican Mafia. Most have been thoroughly indoctrinated with the Mexican Mafia's violent racism during stints in prison, where most gangs are racially based.
"When I first started working the gangs, they would be mixed. You could be black and Latino and be in the same gang," says Lewis, the LAPD probation officer. "But when they went to prison, they had to be Latino instead of from the gang, so their enemies became African Americans."
A Landmark Case
In Highland Park, located just north of downtown and one of oldest settled areas in Los Angeles, there have been at least three racially motivated "green light" murders committed by members of the Avenues since 1999.
Besides Anthony Prudhomme, the victims included Christopher Bowser, a black man who was bullied and sporadically assaulted for years by Avenues members, then gunned down in broad daylight at a bus stop, and Kenneth Kurry Wilson, who didn't even live in the vicinity. Wilson was simply parking his car to drop off his nephew after a late night at a bar when he crossed paths with Avenues gang members riding in a stolen van. According to later court testimony, one of the gang members in the van spotted Wilson and said, "Hey, wanna kill a nigger?" The group opened fire on Wilson, killing him instantly.
The murders of Bowser and Wilson resulted in a groundbreaking criminal case brought by the U.S. Department of Justice, in which Alejandro "Bird" Martínez, Fernando "Sneaky" Cázares, Gilbert "Lucky" Saldana, and Porfirio "Dreamer" Avila were convicted last August of violating federal hate crime laws, and later sentenced to life in federal prison. (Avila was already serving life in prison after being prosecuted by the state of California for his role in the killings, while Saldana was incarcerated for his role in another murder). In the past, federal prosecutors have typically used civil rights violation conspiracy laws against members of white supremacist groups, such as the Ku Klux Klan. The federal case against the Avenues gang marked the first time the Department of Justice used such laws against members of a non-white criminal organization, officials said.
"In a diverse community such as Los Angeles, no one should face race-based threats and acts of violence, such as those committed by [the Avenues]," U.S. Attorney Debra Wong Yang said in a statement released after the verdicts were rendered.
The victims, Yang added, "were killed by the defendants simply because they were African Americans who chose to live in a particular neighborhood." During the trial, federal prosecutors also detailed a series of less-than-lethal hate crimes committed by Avenues members in recent years to establish a pattern of violent racial harassment.
The evidence showed that Avenues members pistol-whipped a black jogger in Highland Park; used a metal club to beat a black man who had stopped to make a call at a pay phone; shot a 15-year-old black youth riding a bicycle; and drew outlines of human bodies in chalk in the driveway of a black family that had moved into the neighborhood.
Prosecutors brought the federal hate-crimes case against the Avenues to send all Latino gangs in Los Angeles County a message that ethnic cleaning will not be tolerated. (Federal prison time is a greater threat to gang leaders than California state prison time, both because there is no parole in the federal system and because the federal government routinely transfers gang leaders to penitentiaries far from home, where they are cut off from the support and protection of their gang.)
"We were concerned about the violation of people's civil rights," U.S. Attorney's Office spokesman Thom Mrozek told the Intelligence Report. "Being shot at a bus stop just for being black, obviously that should not be taking place."
The government's message may have been received, but it's not being obeyed. Shortly after the federal hate crimes trial ended this fall, Avenues member James "Drifter" Campbell, 47, was charged with criminal threats for pointing a gun at a 17-year-old African-American high school student in Highland Park, the second such incident that month.
Mrozek said there are currently no plans to bring more federal hate crimes charges against other Latino gang members, though he acknowledges that similar crimes "are probably still going on."
Lawless Avenues
Despite all the highly publicized gang activity, Highland Park is no ghetto. It's a hilly area with beautiful, historic homes, where the painted-lady color schemes on fully restored Queen Anne Victorians compete for attention with the vibrant murals found on nearby food markets. "El Alisal," the famed hand-built, stone home of Charles Lummis, the first city editor of the Los Angeles Times, is tucked just off the Pasadena Freeway, on Avenue 43.
Because Avenue 43 is one of the main roads in Highland Park, "43" is the signifier of the Avenues, also known as "Avenues 43." The gang goes back at least to World War II, when Highland Park was populated with a mixture of European and Latino immigrants. Now, about 75% of Highland Park residents are Latinos. Only 2% are black. The rest are white and Asian. Highland Park has long had a reputation for gang problems that community boosters argue is undeserved. Their cause wasn't helped in 1986, when one of Highland Park's most famous residents, songwriter Jackson Browne, released the song, "Lawless Avenues," about the neighborhood's multi-generational gang: "Fathers' and sons' lives repeat/And something there turns them/Down those lawless avenues."
Although the Avenues gang goes back a half century, it only fell heavily under the control of the Mexican Mafia in the 1980s, eventually becoming fundamentally racist as a result. (Police point out that, ironically, the Avenues now sling dope for the Mexican Mafia, which the gang's leaders in decades past looked down upon as a "black thing.")
Still, at least some of the relatively few black Highland Park residents who've lived in the area for more than a decade don't report the same level of fear as others. "We love our neighbors. We love living in Highland Park," says Vernita Strange, who moved to Highland Park with her husband Al in the mid-1970s. "We've been treated warmly. We've been here 30 years, and that's all I have to say."
But Angel Brown, an African American, didn't experience that same kind of neighborly love when she and her teenaged son Christopher Bowser moved to Highland Park in 1998, in large part to get away from the black gangs in the Hoover Street area where he grew up. There, he caught a bullet in the leg in a drive-by and was beaten up and harassed by the Hoover Crips, who pressured him to join their set. "He knew early on that [gangbanging] was something he did not want to do," says Brown.
The pair was hoping to leave gang trouble behind, but soon after they relocated to Highland Park the Avenues targeted Bowser. "My son had problems because he's a young black man. The Avenues up there called him 'nigger' and stuff and chased him," Brown says. "He didn't bother nobody out there, all he did was walk around with his radio, singing and rapping. They didn't want him in their territory."
Testifying in the federal hate crimes trial against his former gang brethren, ex-Avenues member Jesse Diaz confirmed the Latino gangbangers were infuriated by the way Bowser bopped down the street, blasting rap music on his boom box.
He acted, Diaz testified, "like it was his neighborhood."
Murderous Prejudice
Until Anthony Prudhomme's murderers went on trial, it never dawned on his mother, Louisa, and his stepfather Lavalle, that the killing was racially motivated. "It wasn't until we went to the trial that we really began to understand that [race] was the reason," he says, "which seemed totally, for lack of a better word, stupid."
Since the trial, Louisa has become obsessed with the Avenues gang. She routinely drives Highland Park, looking for signs of the gang, talking to anyone willing to talk. She has homicide detectives, lawyers, and parole officers on her cell phone's speed dial. She's made numerous visits to the site of her son's murder, as well as the spots where Bowser and Wilson were shot down. Believing the gang member who actually pulled the trigger on her son has yet to be brought to justice, she posts reward signs throughout the neighborhood, usually right next to Avenues gang graffiti.
Unlike the mothers of other victims like Bowser and Wilson, Louisa Prudhomme feels relatively safe on streets claimed by the Avenues. That's because she's white. Her son Anthony had long, wavy hair and an auburn complexion. "As he grew up people thought that" he might have been some race other than black, says his stepfather Lavelle. "But you could tell by the way he dressed that he leaned more toward his African-American side."
That preference may well have cost him his life, something that infuriates his mother. "A friend of mine asked me do I hate Mexicans now," says Louisa. "I said, 'I hate murderers.' I am prejudiced … against murderers."
Driving through Highland Park one afternoon last October, Louisa headed up Avenue 43 toward Montecito Heights Community Center, a known Avenues congregation spot. She pulled up alongside a man loading lawnmowers into a huge shed. The man grabbed the left door, which was decorated with a full-length, spray-painted "4," and joined it with the right door, which was tagged with a matching "3." When the doors were closed, they created the "43" emblem of the Avenues.
Louisa asked the man, who was Latino, if he spoke English. He did, and they chatted for about five minutes about the infamous "Avenues 43" and the tattoos they leave all over the area he landscapes. Louisa walked away from him, laughing, before turning to say, "I hope they get them all. We want to get all of them off the streets."
But with the Mexican Mafia's shadow looming over Los Angeles, it may be a long time before the rapidly growing number of streets claimed by Latino gangs are safe for blacks, if ever.
"It's not just Highland Park. It's almost anywhere in L.A. that you could find yourself in a difficult position [as a black person]," says Lewis, the LAPD probation officer. "All blacks are on green light no matter where."

Intelligence Report
Winter 2007

El Montero

Anonymous said...

The whole war on drugs is a fucking joke. Like Jose 619 I work in the addiction field i.e a Detox House and most of our customers are white 20-25 year old males or people with some money. Almost all of them score from gangsters. One is doing his thing the other is supplying him so he can do it. In the meantime if either gets busted they're sent off to jail so the government can line their pockets with more money, the whole war on drugs and prison industry is the biggest money maker in the country next to Bush's war in Iraq. My bro has to do 6 months (4 more then likely) for having weed, someone ratted him out, in the meantime you can get all the booze you want and get fucked up and have underage people over to your house and let them get fucked up and no one will give a rats ass.

OC HALF BREED

Anonymous said...

I think that the following (from Wikipedia) is worth reading.

"Many social problems have been attributed to the Prohibition era. A profitable, often violent, black market for alcohol flourished. Racketeering happened when powerful gangs corrupted law enforcement agencies. Stronger liquor surged in popularity because its potency made it more profitable to smuggle. The cost of enforcing prohibition was high, and the lack of tax revenues on alcohol (some $500 million annually nationwide) affected government coffers. When repeal of prohibition occurred in 1933, following passage of the Twenty-first Amendment, organized crime lost nearly all of its black market alcohol profits in most states (states still had the right to enforce their own laws concerning alcohol consumption), due to competition with low-priced alcohol sales at legal liquor stores."

Anonymous said...

To the Conspiracy Cooks,
First to all the conspiracy crack heads please stop it, do most people really think the cost of college went way because Latinos and blacks are now getting into college. Or could it be that in the 70’s we had more state funding, more foreign students who paid higher college tuition, lower teacher cost such as pensions, lower construction cost for new campuses and etc. You do know that the state spends a larger percentage of our money every year to operate. My taxes only go up and not down.
Do you really think drugs are being brought into Los Angels by our government or is it criminal organizations which make billions doing this? And do we just keep using drugs because we are stupid or because someone is hypnotizing us to do so.

To Vae Victus and Others,
I remember when the governor of California first wanted to adopt welfare reforms and people back then were yelling that we do not care about the poor and the MAN is to blame again. I remember when we had a welfare reward system of more babies equal more money. That motivated some welfare mothers to have an extra baby/money. I even know people who moved from Texas to California because California gives you more welfare money. (Sorry tia). But I don’t ever think the state cost to run the welfare program was ever a major percentage of the state budget. But I’m sure it made more babies born to lousy parents.
While we all know the high cost drug use has on our society and making drugs legal seems like a solution. I can only think of one city where soft- drugs are legal and that is Amsterdam, has anybody here been to Amsterdam lately. That city is a dump compared to what it used to be. I would rather look at a country like Japan and ask why is there crime extremely low compared to ours, why are their kids better educated than ours. I have worked in Japan for months and the honesty of the people is unbelievable compared to ours. You do not need to lock up thing there like we do here. The average person there does not have “theft gene” that we seem to have in this country. I would study their society and see what we can learn from them. The other thing legalizing drugs could be another large scale experiment gone wrong with a point of no return.

I would prefer to provide better education to our kids in schools. Maybe we need to add life skills classes to our schools. These are the thing many of our young people are not learning at home. And we all know that as a nation we have become more accepting of violence in movies, music, etc. I see this gang/thug culture being another we need to change, but I do not see us doing that. Any old person remembers when the most violent movie was Bruce Lee and going home to cut your mothers broom to make a pair of num-chucks. Now kids want an ak-47 and a nickel plated 45cal. with pearl handles. And sex is every where (thank you Internet).
And who said “the continuance of the puritanical mindset” what country are you talking about we get more tolerant of more aberrant behavior all the time. I see have half naked teenage girls in the street listening to lyrics like lick my neck, lick my back, lick my pussy & my crack. How much more liberal are we supposed to be!!!!!!
Bring back "Caligula", look him up.

I know it is big business (private and government) locking-up drug users but do people really think these companies are putting the drugs into our mouths. I have even worked on a computer automated prison, but I did not sell drugs to get that contract. I have never been forced to use drugs and I was born dirt poor and lived in some real dumps. How come I did not see drug use from my migrant worker relatives (although they did drink heavily). I again think we need more education, education, education.



A funny/ironic story.
Back in the 80’s I was working for many months in Columbia on a factory construction job. A co-worker was a hippie and heavy pot smoker and coke user. He was always looking to buy drugs, but all the local Columbia construction workers were afraid to get busted with drugs and did not use drugs. My friend was amazed that he was in the drug manufacturing capital of the world and could not easily drugs. I remember asking the locals why they did not use pot and they said it was too risky, too expensive and they liked beer just fine. Columbia was a scary place back then, during the time Pablo Escobar was blowing up court buildings, police stations and anybody who got in his way.

Mad Mexican

Anonymous said...

"While the media totally ignored this, one of the flash points of the current race violence was when Demian Williams and his homies dragged Hispanics out of their cars, beat them, robbed them and then spray painted them. These were civilians, not soldados. The Big Homies put a major green light on Football and the Mara was only too happy to pick that up. It was lucky for him the LAPD got to Football first."

Wally,

Forgive me for not being up to date, but are you saying that Damian Williams, of Reginald Denny fame was green-lighted for aggressions he carried out against Raza during the 1992 riots? Thanks...

Wally said...

Correct. It was the same Football that helped beat up Denny.

Anonymous said...

The "green light" on Damain "Football" Wiliams must have been more like and "amber light" because he never got hit. They must have sent some drunk or crack-head shooters to do the job.

He got a light sentence for the Reginal Denny brick incident. I think Denny was at fault for impeding the flight of a brick.

I remember during the D. Williams trial when they were showing video taken from a helicopter to identify him and his mother saying something about skinny legs in the helicopter photo.

I also remember reading about him getting arrested after the whole televised trial. So his skinny legs were alive and kicking years after the famous riot flash point incident.

Mas Locuras

Anonymous said...

Mad Mexican:

The direct cost of social welfare programs, which in their inception were put into place to help those that were temporarily down on their luck, may not be a large part of the total fiscal budget. The direct cost of these programs would not be an issue for me if the programs actually did what they were intended to do, which is to help people that find themselves in a bad situation and need a bit of help to get back on their feet again. By any objective measure, however, this is not what these programs have done and the indirect cost of these programs have been staggering. For many families the State has effectively taken the traditional role of the father as the breadwinner for the family. This is different then providing money and shelter on a temporary basis to a woman and her children that has found herself in a horrible situation on a temporary basis. The latter is a case of providing sufficient help to someone to help themselves. The former is a recipe for the disaster that we see today. While the State can provide housing and money to help people exist by subsistence, it can not replace the role of the father in raising male children in regards to determining right from wrong, making good choices in life and the million other little things that fathers do for their boys to ensure that they are raised correctly. Instead what he have seen is illegitimacy, multi-generational poverty and young male children without the appropriate guidance from good male role models. As I stated in my prior post, the State by punishing those that attempt to move out of this cycle and by allowing the institutionalization of the lobbying efforts of those that make money from the situation, the problem is only exacerbated. The intentions of the programs may be great but if one is judging results, these programs have failed. Japan is an interesting study, but given the vast cultural differences between the USA and Japan, using the latter as a model would require a substantial change in the view of the role of the individual in regards to society. The social order in Japan was established over thousands of years and aided greatly by their isolation (at the time) from outside influence. What resulted was a very ordered but also rigid caste-like structure in which the role and importance of the individual was secondary to the ideal of the Japanese monarchy and ordered society. This system is the opposite of what we have here. Also, the "theft gene" is present in Japan. One need only look at the Yakuza and the scandal from a few years back when organized crime was extorting vast sums of money from large Japanese corporations. On the "war on drugs" issue, the first question that I ask myself is has the war, by any objective measure, succeeded? Have we reduced demand? Not really? Have we reduced the supply of drugs? No, illicit drugs are more available now than at any time in our past history. Have our foreign interdiction efforts worked? Again the answer is no and furthermore they have created conflict and strife in each and every single country where such efforts were made. What then, has the war on drugs accomplished? We have given up civil rights (1st, 2nd, 4th, etc.), we have created the financial engines that empower the gangs, we have filled the prisons with non-violent offenders that then have to turn to violence in order to survive the prison system and finally we have created a huge police-prison complex that lobbies for more money and fewer civil rights for the citizens. All of the supposed horrors tossed out about the effects that legalization would have... we already have them. Additionally, we have all the other stuff that reads directly from the history of alcohol prohibition. Neither the gangs, the police, the Feds or the people that profit from the system want to see this changed as they would all be out of a job. Also, legalization does not mean that anybody would be forced to take drugs. Neither you nor I nor the majority of those that post here (or anybody else that has chosen not to start - there certainly is enough of it around for anyone that wanted it to easily find it) are going to run out and start smoking crack just because it was legal to do so. On the issue of education, I don't think it is a matter of how much we are spending (India and China don't spend nearly as much but are churning out hundreds of thousands of top scientists and engineers) but instead is a matter of curriculum and how it is being taught. Also, this goes back to the first point - the role of the State as the father. Morality and basic life skills are things that should be taught at home by caring parents and extended family. The State is a poor teacher of these things. My comment in regards to the puritanical roots of this country (perhaps I should have stated it more clearly) dealt with telling the government and the nanny State to piss off when it comes to telling consenting adults what they can or can do with their own person or with other consenting adults (this also means living up to the responsibility that comes with the freedom and ability to make choices). Caligula was a tyrant and is more equivalent to the current nanny State telling its adult citizens what they can or can do with their person or with other consenting adults. These are some very difficult issues and require more than just a political speech or DEA agents to deal with. All in all, I am grateful that we have retained enough of our 1st Amendment rights that we can all freely exchange our ideas in this forum.

Anonymous said...

Vae Victus (N) said………………
“Even more insidious than the money issue is the use of the "war on drugs" to dismantle the Bill of Rights and from the Federal level, to foment and involve ourselves in foreign wars. The use of the fear of crime to get the people to voluntarily give up their rights is a tried and true tactic. “

What you say makes a nice sound bite but logic and actual practice does not support what you say. While I agree with some of what you said, but I see that criminals today have more rights now then they ever had in the past. Just look at recent killing of a 9 year old girl who was killed by two gang members in Los Angeles, the two gang members were released from all charges because they were acting in self-defense. I wonder if the little 9 year girls’ right to live was violated. But the average person on the streets has many more rights today then ever before. Even the EME members have the right to conduct drug activities from inside of prison and add drug money to their books. Many prisoners in jail spend all day in the law library studying how to tie up the legal system with useless appeals and motions. I wish we would violate some of their rights in jail. I like the saying the “your right to swing your arm ends where my face begins”.
From Wally’s blog
http://inthehat.blogspot.com/2003_07_20_inthehat_archive.html

Vae Victus (N) said………………
“From the social perspective, the problem that we have is the continuance of the puritanical mindset of those that founded this country.”

Well that comment is just plain crazy. Just look at our country back in the 50’s and today, and compare the difference in the behavior of our youth today. You have the most foul mouth and rude teenagers now; they sure as hell are not puritans. Have you watched any of the girls’ gone wild videos.

Let us look at the Amish and Quakers of Pennsylvania who maintain a very strict teaching and remain isolated from most of the rest of society. I do not think I would be buying drugs or worried about a drive by in their neighborhoods. And Amish teens are not freak dancing and cussing worst than a sailor.
http://www.800padutch.com/amish.shtml
http://www.quaker.org/

Keeping it Real

StillNoScript said...

N, of course most middle class Americans start smoking pot simply for it's rebellious value. But if you look at the side effects, you can clearly see why so many would continue doing it.

I don't think poor people smoke it to be rebellious, however.

Cocaine, Heroin, etc., are also a big 'no no' to the middle class, and most people steer clear of it. Weed's another story. That should answer your question.

Anonymous said...

These are some funny posts here.
I like how the Mexicans here are blaming gang problems on the government and everybody else.
And some Mexicans calling the blacks lazy and saying that blacks just know how to complain about their problems. Does anybody else see the irony in that statement? That is some funny shit.
I also like one post saying how the Mexicans are taking better care of some neighborhoods than the blacks, I think you need to drive around Los Angeles, East LA is ghetto, Central LA is ghetto and South Central L.A. is a very big ghetto. And that is where lots and lots of Mexicans live.

Man I have never heard so many excuse for why Los Angeles is the latest Mexico ghetto. Could it possibly the people living there are to blame. NO let’s blame somebody else.

Even the blacks who were slaves could not come up with as many excuses as I read here.
Why don’t you Mexicans think about these places around Southern California and ask yourself who is really at fault;
The Koreans around Korea town are NOT painting graffiti, gang banging and selling crack on every corner.
The Asian immigrants in San Gabriel are NOT painting graffiti, gang banging and selling crack on every corner.
The Arab immigrants in Glendale are NOT painting graffiti, gang banging and selling crack on every corner.
The Vietnamese immigrants in Little Saigon (Orange County) are NOT painting graffiti, gang banging and selling crack on every corner.
The Asian immigrants in Arcadia and Brea are NOT painting graffiti, gang banging and selling crack on every corner.

Los Angeles use to be a nicer city back in the 60’s before all the Mexicans moved in, so don’t tell us how you take better care of Los Angeles than the blacks. I think you all need to look in the mirror and see who just might be to blame for your kids growing up to be in gangs. No sane white person would put their kids in any of the schools in Los Angels with your delinquent children. And that is a fact not fiction like all your other posts.

So please quit blaming me for your problems, you are sounding like a bunch of Mexican Al Sharptons’.

White Bread

Anonymous said...

More food thought,

I like how the same people who tell us how stupid, disorganized and inefficient are government is, also tell us how the government can also be a sneaky genius and plot some evil conspiracy against the Mexicans. I am waiting to read here how the 911 attacks in New York, were a government plot to put more crack and gangs in the streets of Los Angeles. Our government is a big money wasting bureaucracy just like most governments.

Maybe we are creating the latest Mexican ghettos in the USA because the poor and uneducated keep coming here from Mexico. I have news for you, the doctors, lawyers and business owners of Mexico are not the ones who die crossing the hot Arizona desert to come here. And if you throw in the criminals escaping Mexico to come here well just imagine what might happen here.

Do you think Mexico keeps the immigrants from Central America who try and stay in their country or do they deport them?

I wonder how many of you Mexicans would like us to bring millions of black immigrants from Africa to Los Angeles. That could even the playing field for any future race riots. Somalia, Ethiopia and Sierra Leone, “send me you poor”, “send me your hungry” we are going to have a big show.

I am sure glad my government gave me my “gold star” for being born white. Now I will have my Harvard college degree, Malibu beach house, Mercedes Benz, Barbie wife and platinum bank card given to me. I sure am lucky !!!!!


White Bread

Anonymous said...

"What you say makes a nice sound bite but logic and actual practice does not support what you say."

This, unfortunately, is just not accurate. There have never been more restrictions on our rights then there are now. Whether it be rights that we have given up via the Patriot Act to the War on Terror or the rights that we have given up to the "War on Drugs." Now, we need to differentiate two things here. The first is the case in which people have a certain set of rights that are either blatantly violated or violated through negligence by the gamut of the law enforcement system. The second is the case in which people have legally given up their rights or the courts have determined that certain rights no longer apply or are severely curtailed. We see a lot of the first but not nearly as much as we used. LE may still violate the rights of a person by roughing them up and robbing them, but these actions are illegal. While troubling, the second is even more troubling because it gives legal sanction for the violation of civil rights. As one example, and I can give many here, let us consider the Fourth Amendment. The LE establishment has put a run around on this by charging property with crimes (that is why you see cases such as US vs. $95,000) and has shifted the burden of proof to the citizen to prove that their property was not involved in criminal activity (go to www.fear.org and look at the Federal and state asset forfeiture rules and tell me that we have more protection under the 4th Amendment than what we used to have). The shooting that you have brought up is an interesting case and I will post my thoughts on it later if you wish to know where I stand on it. Let me just ask you this. Do you think that the shooter had a right to self defense? In regards to the puritanical mindset, I never said that we are more puritanical than we used to be or that in certain sectors of life that the puritanical influence has not been chipped away (e.g. the examples that you cited). This does not mean that in other aspects of our life that our puritanical history does not still remain.

SNS -

The correlation, on both a temporal basis and a drug specific basis between class/race is complex. For example, a Rastafarian might smoke weed because of their religious beliefs while a suburban teen might smoke weed for a combination of rebellion (illegality) and calming effects. Personally, that stuff just made me feel utterly out of it and unable to form an "intellectual" thought or argument. Cocaine use, from the European historical perspective, was associated with the upper middle and upper classes (think Freud)and continues to have this association, in its powder form, with the same group (doctors, lawyers, stock traders, Hollywood).

Anonymous said...

I am not a legal expert but was just wondering about what I know happens very often to a new kid in Los Angels.

Do you think the new kid in school who is getting beat up in school by a local gang is screaming the "Patriot Act" is violating my rights? And when the new kid on the block is walking to the corner store and being asked "Que Rifas" by a group he is screaming "the 4th amendment". Or when they have him on the ground kicking him and taking his watch and change in his pocket he is screaming "illegal seizure".

Let me ask you guys this in regard to the killing of the 9 year old little girl.
Do you think the two shooters were on the street corner leading a bible study class, and another preacher showed up and was mad about the verse in the bible they were preaching? And they all pulled out their guns to settle this.

Let us say you are involved in criminal activity like robbing a bank and the cops show up with guns blazing. And the bank robber kills a person across the street sitting in his car, is the bank robber innocent because it was self-defense.

Not a Legal Expert

Anonymous said...

I am not a legal expert either but the crimes that you have described in your first paragraph generally do not meet the standards for civil rights violations. It would be interesting to see what would happen if Federal prosecutors chose to prosecute what are normally violations of the penal code using the enhancement of civil rights violations. Generally, however, the Bill of Rights was put in place to limit the abuse of the citizenry by the government. Furthermore, abuse of people by gang members should not be construed as a license for government to do the same nor should people be so quick to buy into giving up their rights under the false pretense that it will mean safety.

Anonymous said...

Vae Victus said....
Morality and basic life skills are things that should be taught at home by caring parents and extended family. The State is a poor teacher of these things. My comment in regards to the puritanical roots of this country (perhaps I should have stated it more clearly) dealt with telling the government and the nanny State to piss off when it comes to telling consenting adults what they can or can do with their own person or with other consenting adults (this also means living up to the responsibility that comes with the freedom and ability to make choices).

Well I do agree in total with your above stement. I see this as our biggest failure in our society. But the sad part is most people still expect some miracle cures from our goverment for our own personal failures. My reference to Caligula was a bit of sarcasm and in reference to comment about us being a puritanical society.

To Wally,

In your post you say that the "Harbor Gateway event" is now making National News. I have yet to see more than local news coverage. I have not seen this on any CNN, CNBC, FOX News. Just lots of local Los Angeles coverage. What national news program did you see this covered?

Mad Mexican

Anonymous said...

"whitebread:quote:Los Angeles use to be a nicer city back in the 60’s before all the Mexicans moved in"

Hey dude there have ALWAYS BEEN MEXICANS IN CALIFORNIA read your history you sound very ignorant and angry.

Anonymous said...

Vae Victus posted ...............
"The correlation, on both a temporal basis and a drug specific basis between class/race is complex. For example, a Rastafarian might smoke weed because of their religious beliefs while a suburban teen might smoke weed for a combination of rebellion (illegality) and calming effects. Personally, that stuff just made me feel utterly out of it and unable to form an "intellectual" thought or argument. Cocaine use, from the European historical perspective, was associated with the upper middle and upper classes (think Freud)and continues to have this association, in its powder form, with the same group (doctors, lawyers, stock traders, Hollywood)."

I have to tell you about my own experience with marijuana, when I first smoked pot at about 16 years old. I went to a party and a friend said "do you want some pot" I said no thanks and my friend said "don't be a pussy" so I took the joint, and smoked some pot.

I don't remember thinking;

1) Should I rebel against the corporate controlled government and smoke the joint.
2) Should I smoke this joint as a patronage to my Indian for fathers before me.
3) Should I smoke this joint for the calming affects it may have on my stressful teenage existence.
4) Should I refuse this joint because of the social degradation this joint will cause to our society?

I have got news for most of you; the majority of teenage boys are just horny kids who want to have fun. If the have easy access to drugs they will try it, so lets not make drugs to easy for them to get. Don’t any of you remember a friend breaking a leg because somebody dared him to jump, or crashing a car because you were driving fast just for the thrill.

My first experience with ecstasy was even better. I was at a party with a girl named Lisa. Lisa had legs and an ass that Jennifer Lopez would envy. Lisa said to me to “try this it will give us a greater sensation during sex” (Oh yeah). You better believe I took that ecstasy. She could have said “put this gasoline on you crotch and light this match” I would have done it. So I don’t think most teenage boys are analyzing there actions as much as you think. So please let’s not forget the age and education of the people we are discussing.

I remember watching an Oprah episode back when Dr. Phil worked with her. The show was about teenage sex and the audience was young teenagers. Well Dr. Phil was telling all the girls in the audience about the precautions and dangers of sex. Then Oprah says to Dr. Phil why don’t you talk to the boys in the audience. Dr Phil replies “the boys are just horny dogs and won’t listen to anything I tell them”. That Dr. Phil sure knows his business.

Keep it Real

Anonymous said...

The New York Times had an article on Harbor Gateway and 204th Street.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/01/19/us/19gang.html

Going back to Anonymous at 3:10 PM:

The laws protecting police officers and other LEO acting in the course and scope of their professional duties differs from that governing us citizens. In certain states, greater latitude of action is also offered to off-duty officers when it comes to engaging criminals. Now, as to the gang bangers themselves. As much as I do not like the DA not being able to charge them with the murder of the 9-year old girl... when I remove the emotion from the issue, I can understand why a murder prosecution would fail under the claim of self-defense. Apparently, these guys were out when another gang banger drew on them and had his gun jam. The gang bangers, not being in the midst of the commission of any crime at the time (that I have seen them charged with) drew and fired back on their attacker. What remains to be seen is if they can be charged with negligent discharge of a firearm, possession of stolen firearm, felon in possession of a firearm, or a whole host of ancillary crimes around the shooting.

Anonymous said...

To anonymous who said..............
"Hey dude there have ALWAYS BEEN MEXICANS IN CALIFORNIA read your history you sound very ignorant and angry"

I am not as ignorant as you think; I am not talking about California back when the Spanish missionaries built some nice missions in California. Of course there have always been Mexicans in Los Angeles and California but not in the numbers like today. You should study your history; many neighborhoods in Los Angeles were pre-dominantly white in recent history 1950-1970. And when those neighborhoods were pre-dominantly white those neighborhoods were not the gang-infested ghettos they are today. Believe it or not much of Los Angeles was a nice middle class neighborhood before the whites had to leave due to the growing violence caused by so many Mexicans moving in. So you can call me a racist if you want but that is a fact not a myth like what you posted. I have to pay higher taxes for crimes committed by illegal Mexicans, visit to county hospitals by illegal Mexicans, school attended by illegal Mexicans. And yes I am angry, that we all have all to pay consequences for the actions of so many wild Mexican gangs in California.

It looks like brown is the new black when it comes to urban blight.


White Bread

Anonymous said...

I don't know man...seems to me that the LAPD and SPLC have dug up some old shit from over decade ago. I mean if the Mexican Mafia really has green lighted the whole black community in the areas they controll...wouldn't there have been a lot more random killings?

Secondly, don't you think this is just a story pushed for the LAPD to justify a new "CRASH"? What do other fools think?