U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > California > San Francisco - Oakland
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 03-16-2011, 11:29 AM
 
Location: Piedmont, CA
35,679 posts, read 63,000,631 times
Reputation: 19744

Advertisements

Last night, Dennis Herrera(SF City Attorney) was on KGO Radio talking about how gang injunctions implemented in 4 San Francisco neighborhoods have decreased gang crimes in those areas by 60%.

Now Oakland is considering the same thing.

I wasnt quite sure what Injunctions were about until I did some research.

Here is information from Oakland's City Attorney Website:
Quote:
An injunction is similar to a restraining order. It is designed to restrict the criminal organization's ability to plan and commit more crimes within an area called a Safety Zone (Map).

http://www.oaklandcityattorney.org/i...icleshrunk.jpg

The City sought an injunction against the North Side Oakland crime organization because of the severe and increasing violence associated with its members. In 2007, there were three NSO-related incidents involving murder, shooting or gun possession. In 2008, that number rose to seven incidents. In 2009 that escalated to 18 incidents, including seven murders.

Members of this criminal enterprise have "terrorized our community, intimidated witnesses and recruited children to their criminal enterprise,” City Attorney John Russo said. “They are part of a malevolent force that has crippled our city for decades and continues to hold Oakland back today.”

The injunction will only apply to adults. It will initially apply to 15 NSO members based on their records of criminal and nuisance activity, including convictions for armed robbery, felony drunk driving, drug sales, carjacking, grand theft, domestic battery and other major crimes. One has a pending case for assault with a deadly weapon and threatening a witness not to testify. All evidence is filed with the court and open to the public.
Restrictions include:
  • Do not associate with other enjoined gang members in public (see proposed order for exceptions).
  • Do no confront, intimidate or assault witnesses.
  • Do not possess firearms or dangerous weapons.
  • Stay away from drugs.
  • No trespassing.
  • No gang recruitment.
  • Follow time restrictions.
A violation of the injunction is considered contempt of court – punishable by up to six months in jail and up to a $1,000 fine.

Facts: This injunction is narrowly tailored to protect the community's right to peace and safety, while only restricting those who are deeply involved in dangerous activity. It will not prevent anyone from attending school, work or religious activities. It will not at any time prevent anyone from seeking medical care for themselves or their children.

All individuals covered by an injunction have due process rights – anyone added to the injunction will have the opportunity to argue their case in court, and they will only be included with approval from a judge. The burden of proof is on the City to show that these individuals are in fact active gang members based on extensive evidence of criminal/nuisance conduct. This conclusively precludes profiling.

Anyone on the list who is no longer associated with the gang will be able to go through an “opt-out” process to be removed. Gang injunctions were upheld as constitutional by the CA Supreme Court in the 1997.

Gang Injunction
1. I think we all agree that gangs have reaked havoc on our city.

2. I think we all agree that its going to take more than what we are now doing to confront them.

So I wonder if anyone can suggest something besides gang injunctions that might work at this time?

For me the jury is still out on the issue of injunctions, but to be honest Im inclined to support them, even though I am deeply concerned about the possibility of police misconduct, which lately we know is a real issue in many Bay Area departments these days.

So what do we do?
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 03-16-2011, 11:48 AM
 
108 posts, read 371,049 times
Reputation: 41
the solution is a multitude of things, but a gang injunction def isn't one of them
this just gives the police more opportunity to harass people and on the back end it potentially gives the city more revenue with each arrest/fine.
it needs to begin with better all around education and more social programs to keep kids off the streets (this definitely wont help everyone, but at least it's available to help some)
some people are just going to be in gangs no matter what ( i was one of them people..i came from a decent family background and had all kinds of opportunity, but still felt the need to belong to something that i thought was big)
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-16-2011, 11:58 AM
 
108 posts, read 371,049 times
Reputation: 41
case in point
Oakland public schools budget crisis: A breakdown of what's at stake (Analysis) | Oakland Local
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-16-2011, 12:29 PM
 
Location: Piedmont, CA
35,679 posts, read 63,000,631 times
Reputation: 19744
Quote:
Originally Posted by evolve View Post
the solution is a multitude of things, but a gang injunction def isn't one of them
this just gives the police more opportunity to harass people and on the back end it potentially gives the city more revenue with each arrest/fine.
it needs to begin with better all around education and more social programs to keep kids off the streets (this definitely wont help everyone, but at least it's available to help some)
some people are just going to be in gangs no matter what ( i was one of them people..i came from a decent family background and had all kinds of opportunity, but still felt the need to belong to something that i thought was big)
Interesting. Thanks.

I agree with the need for our need to find ways to keep kids off the streets. I think sports and the arts are the best ways myself.

At the same time, as you eluded to, much of it depends on the family background. What goes on at home?

Sometimes you cant even blame the parents though because many clearly have done their part yet kids will ultimately make their own decisions and normally that would be fine, except in the case of these gangs, their personal decisions have affected everyone else in a very negative way.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-16-2011, 12:53 PM
 
Location: South Korea
5,242 posts, read 12,553,953 times
Reputation: 2954
If it's effective then go for it, Oakland needs help, but apparently the thugs have lawyered up and are challenging it and their lawyers have apparently stated that they want to "bleed Oakland's budget dry" defending it--its constitutionality does seem questionable but courts often give a lot of leeway to prosecutors and the police in constitutional issues.

In any case, Americans really like to treat the eventual symptoms of problems several years down the road rather than deal with the fact that our policies CREATE problems that we never deal with...our education system is horrible, especially for minorities, that leads to uneducated parents who don't care about their kids education, it leads to nobody in the ghetto being able to get a job or having any belief in themselves to go into higher education, and you get decades-long cycles of crime.

Fix prop 13 so our schools are funded well, reduce the stupid amounts of money the voters have mandated the state to spend on our ridiculously huge state prison system, stop sending people to jail for the rest of their lives for dealing weed, make it easier for illegals to become citizens so they can pay taxes and fund the government...there's a lot of things that could be done, but Californians, especially white people, will refuse to face the fact that they might be to blame for the crime at their doorstep. You see it all across the US. Throwing people in jail is a short term solution and makes politicians look "tough on crime" but it creates long term problems due to prison spending.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-16-2011, 01:06 PM
 
2,529 posts, read 3,302,940 times
Reputation: 2045
the city attorney screwed up plain and simple .
all the other cities that have gang injunctions went after the gangs as a group.
oakland went after each gang member as an individual.


Oakland gang case proving to be a tough fight


"In Los Angeles, which has obtained 43 such injunctions, the city attorney names the gang as the defendant and individuals as representatives. Thus, if targets want to testify, they have to admit they're part of the gangIn Los Angeles, requests for preliminary gang injunctions have typically lasted less than a day, said Assistant City Attorney Anne TremblayThe same goes for San Francisco, which restricts seven gangs through four injunctions, said Jack Song, a spokesman for City Attorney Dennis Herrera"

Last edited by ssmaster; 03-16-2011 at 02:01 PM..
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-16-2011, 01:30 PM
 
Location: San Diego, California Republic
16,584 posts, read 25,607,709 times
Reputation: 8973
Quote:
Originally Posted by 18Montclair View Post
Last night, Dennis Herrera(SF City Attorney) was on KGO Radio talking about how gang injunctions implemented in 4 San Francisco neighborhoods have decreased gang crimes in those areas by 60%.

Now Oakland is considering the same thing.

I wasnt quite sure what Injunctions were about until I did some research.

Here is information from Oakland's City Attorney Website:


1. I think we all agree that gangs have reaked havoc on our city.

2. I think we all agree that its going to take more than what we are now doing to confront them.

So I wonder if anyone can suggest something besides gang injunctions that might work at this time?

For me the jury is still out on the issue of injunctions, but to be honest Im inclined to support them, even though I am deeply concerned about the possibility of police misconduct, which lately we know is a real issue in many Bay Area departments these days.

So what do we do?
I completely support it and think it's long overdue for Oakland. I've seen the results of what an active campaign against gangs can do and if the city of Oakland continues it and expand it, much of the city could end up being safe.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-16-2011, 04:49 PM
 
Location: East Bay
179 posts, read 397,542 times
Reputation: 135
  • Do not associate with other enjoined gang members in public (see proposed order for exceptions).
  • Do no confront, intimidate or assault witnesses.
  • Do not possess firearms or dangerous weapons.
  • Stay away from drugs.
  • No trespassing.
  • No gang recruitment.
  • Follow time restrictions.
Duh! Why bother with an injunction? I never needed an injunction to comply with the above.... Nor did my dad or his dad or his dad.... Kind of well. Commen sense. Like well. Not jumping off cliffs with out a safety harness or leaping out of perfectly good airplanes with out a parachute. What is needed is just more police walking the beat. And better relations between police and citizens. Plus a little more attention to parenting.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-18-2011, 07:31 AM
 
Location: OAKLAND CA
323 posts, read 674,872 times
Reputation: 194
The controversial stop and frisk rule in NYC had its plusses and minusses but for whatever reason crime is way down in that city. Something must be done to protect people from hurting themselves.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-18-2011, 04:44 PM
 
27,939 posts, read 60,159,806 times
Reputation: 22807
Quote:
Originally Posted by mayorhaggar View Post
Fix prop 13 so our schools are funded well, reduce the stupid amounts of money the voters have mandated the state to spend on our ridiculously huge state prison system, stop sending people to jail for the rest of their lives for dealing weed, make it easier for illegals to become citizens so they can pay taxes and fund the government...there's a lot of things that could be done, but Californians, especially white people, will refuse to face the fact that they might be to blame for the crime at their doorstep. You see it all across the US. Throwing people in jail is a short term solution and makes politicians look "tough on crime" but it creates long term problems due to prison spending.
The last story in the Tribune pegged the per student expenditure in Oakland around $16,000... just how much more will it take to be "Well Funded"?

Prop 13 is not broken... it is working exactly as written... except that school infrastructure isn't subject to Prop 13 limits... only 55% voter approval is needed.

I bought my home near the peak of the Market for the median price of 598k... I'm frustrated because the Assessor maintains my home is now worth $588k even though I submitted 27 comparables to support a market valuate of $473k...

I pay $9,200 property tax to Oakland/Alameda County and am unwilling to pay one cent more... thought about leaving my 1700 square foot home built in 1957 and buying one that just sold for $390k and at least the new owner and I will see lower taxes because I doubt my home would sell for $475k and even then two Realtors that recently sold homes in the area said $450k is probably too high.

Prop 13 is the only thing homeowners have left. Do you realize if Prop 13 went away... all property would be taxed based on the Assessor's opinion of Value... well I know how that will work out because the Assessor has a high opinion of the value of my home!

I thought the State Lottery was allowed to pay for school extras... didn't know a couple of basketballs is all the local school would get... what a sham... someone is making money and it is not the schools.

Last edited by Ultrarunner; 03-19-2011 at 10:23 AM..
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Settings
X
Data:
Loading data...
Based on 2000-2020 data
Loading data...

123
Hide US histogram

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > California > San Francisco - Oakland
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2022, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top