This is beyond parody
For the first couple of seasons Star Trek - The Next Generation was quite lame because of Gene Roddenberry's absurd decision that by the 24th century we had moved beyond violence and he wanted no violence on the show. Mad Magazine had a lot of fun with that in their satire Star Blech -- The Next Degradation. First off a member of the crew was being killed by aliens and "Captain Retard" refused to do anything to save him because they respected the religious beliefs of other cultures. Then a crew member was being assaulted on the bridge of the ship and the captain threatened him with "We'll have our ship's lawyer write them a strong letter."
Fortunately Star Trek TNG managed to shake itself a little bit and after about 3 Seasons started producing some very good stuff.
The writers of that show learned their lesson but it seems some civil servants never do.
Some cities have found a new way to deal with Gangs: SUE THEM!
Bet that works out very well.
It's common sense. A gang that has no respect for the law is not going to be concerned with a lawsuit. You need to get tough with them and you need to get violent with them. Sure a preacher can go on his own and attempt to convert and change them but the city must be uninvolved with that (separation of Church and state remember!)
I don't know why the ACLU is concerned about this. It seems to be the way they would handle it.
It has supposedly worked but to be honest, I am very skeptical of its long term results.
Fortunately Star Trek TNG managed to shake itself a little bit and after about 3 Seasons started producing some very good stuff.
The writers of that show learned their lesson but it seems some civil servants never do.
Some cities have found a new way to deal with Gangs: SUE THEM!
Bet that works out very well.
It's common sense. A gang that has no respect for the law is not going to be concerned with a lawsuit. You need to get tough with them and you need to get violent with them. Sure a preacher can go on his own and attempt to convert and change them but the city must be uninvolved with that (separation of Church and state remember!)
I don't know why the ACLU is concerned about this. It seems to be the way they would handle it.
It has supposedly worked but to be honest, I am very skeptical of its long term results.
posted by shoprat at 8:51 PM
8 Comments:
This lawsuit BS might work out with lightweight neighborhood gangs, but where the drug gangs are concerned, forget it.
It's a joke that there will be civil penalties, based on these lawsuits, for possession of drugs or firearms, because gangs possessing either as a matter of course will most likely shoot it out with the police rather than submit to easy, surrender-based arrests.
I doubt it will work on the lightweight neighborhood gangs either, Shoprat, as you can't sue someone who doesn't have anything. You can't get water out of a rock, and you're right... they could care less. I agree with Seth that most gangs would shoot it out rather than submit. Violence is how they deal with everything!
BTW: You and Abouna (Rev. Gregori) are the only two visitors who answered my question correctly on Sunday's post. :)
The ACLU says it will lead to racial profiling and "innocent" people discussing things on the sidewalk will be harassed. Yeah right like we all stand around talking politics outside liquor stores in bad neighborhoods.
So, let me get this straight. The city of Fort Worth is "fed up with deadly drive-by shootings, incessant drug dealing and graffiti." Now, I'm not a lawyer, but aren't two of the three crimes listed felonies?
And the best they can do is sue?
somehow it seems to send a message to the gangs that they win - - the states can't seem to eradicate them so their going to legitimize them by giving them a day in court........not good.....
I don't understand how injunctions work when nothing else does, but if they do, go for it.
If they can get their hands on tangible assets they could take away some of the drug dealing profits, so I wouldn't laugh. "The pen is mightier than the sword". Don't forget that Al Capone was finally put away on tax evasion. Sometimes, a convoluted, legalistic approach may yield fruit where a sledgehammer show of force is ineffective. There's more than one way to get tough on crime. Maybe not as satisfying as a frontal assault, but it may work!
Somehow I doubt Tyrone D Crackhead gives a damn about what the city's mouthpiece has to say. Wanna fix it? allow all citizens to carry a concealed weapon. Tyrone ain't so brave when he doesn't know from where the bullet comes that kills his a##.
Post a Comment
<< Home