Slog News & Arts

Line Out

Music & Nightlife

« Not Exactly the Love Boat | Overheard in the Office »

Friday, March 7, 2008

Members Only

posted by on March 7 at 15:41 PM

In the current issue of the Seattle Weekly, Damon Agnos has an article about the gang bill in the state legislature. Josh touched on it over here. Despite some token funding for social programs and limitations intended to protect civil liberties, the bill is broadly written. What’s interesting is who’s supporting it, who’s not, and who’s neutral.

Sen. Adam Kline, D–Seattle, co-sponsor of 2712’s Senate companion bill, and Rep. Charles Ross, R-Naches, co-sponsor of 2712, took turns thanking the legislation’s other contributors, each asserting that he was “speaking from the heart.”

The legislation’s opponents—among them the Seattle/King County NAACP and King County council member Larry Gossett—see a different picture: a bill heavy on punitive provisions, light on social programs, and ripe for abuse, particularly in the form of racial profiling. They find themselves butting heads with Kline, usually an ally, while the ACLU, which generally opposes such legislation, watches from the sidelines.

The bill is intended to be a multipronged tool to reduce the gang activity and violence that many smaller municipalities—particularly in the Yakima Valley—describe as increasingly problematic. It calls for social programs and a law-enforcement database to track suspected gang members, and would also enable prosecutors and city attorneys to issue civil injunctions against gang members, which could prohibit them from associating with one another….

Among the crimes the statute says can help establish a “pattern of criminal street gang activity” is third-degree malicious mischief, which was likely included to apply to gang graffiti, but which [the NAACP’s James] Bible notes can apply to something as small as deliberately stomping on a flower bed or scribbling a profanity on a stop sign.

I support using cops and criminal laws to put the kibosh on illegal gang activity. Fortunately, most of the activity we consider “gang related” is already illegal—we have laws to punish those who graffiti, steal, shoot, and kill. We should apply those laws. But stacking on another layer of enforcement and adding penalties seems mostly a feel-good, tough-on-crime measure, with the potential for unfair ramifications. If it passes – as appears likely – it will probably be applied in Washington with the same racial bias as jailing juvenile offenders, prosecuting pot smokers, arresting drug sellers, impounding cars, and searching drivers—poor, non-white people will bear the brunt of the criminal justice system while networks of white folks committing the same crimes are largely ignored.

RSS icon Comments

1

—we have laws to punish those who graffiti, steal, shoot, and kill. We should apply those laws. But stacking on another layer of enforcement and adding penalties seems mostly a feel-good measure, with the potential for unfair ramifications.

Like Hate Crimes laws?

Posted by JMR | March 7, 2008 3:46 PM
2

Is gang membership a racially neutral statistic? If not, even an even-handed enforcement of this law might disproportionately affect minorities.

Agnos' article is excellent and worth a read.

Posted by flamingbanjo | March 7, 2008 3:57 PM
3

Touche, JMR. But I think there's a difference. Hate crimes are committed with the primary intention of intimidating victims because they are a minority. That's not the motivation behind gang violence, which typically targets people who have chosen to engage with them, or the victim is picked at random.

Posted by Dominic Holden | March 7, 2008 4:01 PM
4

Look out, Dominic! Dan has seen that you wrote that "the Seattle Weekly ... has a terrific article" on a company computer and on company time. He is going to hunt you down and fire you.

Posted by David Wright | March 7, 2008 4:05 PM
5

Hate crimes extend beyond the immediate crime victim because they send a message to an entire community, regardless of whether the target community is in the majority or minority of whatever neighborhood/city/state/nation you choose to focus on. A hate crime can happen against a group that is a minority locally but a majority nationally, or vice versa.

Gang grimes extend beyond the immediate crime victim because they increase the entire gang's power to intimidate or control their own members, their rival gangs, and the community at large.

Both can and should be punished beyond an ordinary crime.

Posted by elenchos | March 7, 2008 4:40 PM
6

What do law-abiding, non-destructive black people think when they see the head of the local NAACP defending stomping on people's flower beds and painting profanity on stop signs?

Posted by Fnarf | March 7, 2008 4:41 PM
7

Fnarf, he's not defending those activities. What he said, and what law-abiding, non-destructive people would be right to think, is that those activities don't establish a “pattern of criminal street gang activity." All sorts of kids do that sort of shit--it doesn't mean we should throw the book at them.

Posted by Dominic Holden | March 7, 2008 5:00 PM
8

Fnarf, most don't really care. The fact that one black person should give a shit about any other black person simply because they're black is a racist attitude itself. It's like when black journalists accost successful (rich) black business people and ask them why they don't do more for "the brothers". Screw that. People can only help themselves.

Posted by Citizen Gregg | March 7, 2008 5:03 PM
9

Hate crimes are committed with the primary intention of intimidating victims because they are a minority.

Yeah. The same principle is used to justify dealing with terrorists differently than "normal" criminals. Which makes you wonder why it's so rare to find someone who supports both antiterror legislation and hate-crime laws . . .

Posted by shub-negrorath | March 7, 2008 5:08 PM
10

I had no idea anybody proposed no bid contracts for Halliburton and warrantless wiretapping to catch gay bashers.

Huh. Now I know.

Posted by elenchos | March 7, 2008 5:21 PM
11

What #5 said.

Posted by Dougsf | March 7, 2008 6:52 PM
12

It is very difficult for those not living or working in areas with gang activity to understand the need for citizens to be protected. It's so hard for our own U.S. government & citizens to understand we have a war right here in our communities, our streets, our shopping centers, schools; and we can't get protection. There are many coming around though as they are becoming victimized, have to deal with it at work, or have family members associated. Please people open your eyes and ears, educate yourselves on whats really happening in your own backyards. Coming to a neighborhood near you... If you ever have a chance to attend a gang training, please do. Peace.
http://stoptheviolencewa.tripod.com Mothers of Murdered Children Speak Up to schools and communties.

Posted by Stop The Violence In Our Communities | March 11, 2008 12:12 AM

Comments Closed

In order to combat spam, we are no longer accepting comments on this post (or any post more than 14 days old).