Anaheim Injunction
Recently, a judge signed a preliminary injunction against some gang members in the city of Anaheim. Go here to read more of the technical stuff.
Now, some people, including the ACLU, are actually bitching about the injunction. They say they are afraid that there will be “innocent” people wrongly accused and imprisoned. That people who are simply talking to them on the street will be picked up along with the bad guys.
I want to give them the startling news that yes, sometimes innocent people are accused. That’s the way our justice system works. Then, we rely on the justice system to ensure that there is enough evidence to support the accusation. If there isn’t, then the person is let go. This type of thing happens all the time, regardless of the presence of an injunction. No one has ever claimed that our legal system is perfect.
But since when do the “rights” of gang members to harass and deal drugs on the corner start trumping the rights of citizens to feel comfortable walking to their neighbor’s house down the street? Or kids to play in their own front yards?
I am thinking that people who want nothing to do with gangs pretty much stay the hell away from them. Give the police a tiny bit of credit in knowing what fraternizing with them is, compared to stopping on the sidewalk to tell them to leave you alone.
I for one applaud the injunction and am actually thinking the district attorney’s office has been remiss in not utilizing it sooner.
There was an article recently in the LA Times about how the gangs wised up after similar efforts in Los Angeles and, to thwart enforcement efforts, began vigorously lodging citizen complaints against those officers aggressively enforcing anti-gang injunctions. This resulted in the officers being investigated, transfered and their careers tarnished - though none of the complaints against them have been substantiated. Let’s hope Anaheim is a smarter in its enforcement efforts.
(The original LA Times piece is no longer available for free, but a copy is available here.)
Okay, here is the nitty-gritty of the new injunction: “Gang members must obey a 10 p.m. curfew, not drink in public, not wear gang attire and not associate in public with members of the group.”
First let me state, I am not a gang member and I don’t approve of any violent and/or illegal gang activities. But this is indeed a wide net and possibly infringes on people’s rights. Troubled people (such as many of those targeted in this injunction) should be guaranteed the same rights as the rest of us.
I dunno, there is something about an injunction that dictates who I can speak with, when I can leave the house and what clothes I choose to wear that rubs me the wrong way.
This thing stipulates what a person can or cannot wear. Seriously? The courts are creating a dress code now? Hmmmmm.
There must be a way to make this neighborhood safer without infringing on people’s rights. Any ideas? Anyone? Bueller?