Gang Enhancement Laws (for or against?)

[Jack Handy jr]

I'm not sure what your point is. It seems like you are saying that because a crime is more common and/or it causes more fear, it deserves a harsher punishment.

IDK, I would rather someone steal my car then clear out my retirement accounts.

If we are talking about physical violence, that is a totally different thing. I am not comparing white collar crimes to rape, assault, etc..

I am simply saying that it would make sense to me that the punishment for stealing $50 million in retirement funds would do more jail time then a guy who stole a $10k car.

My other point is that our society focuses on poor minority areas. True, there is more crime there. But for example, whites use drugs at about the same clip as minorities, yet minorities make up a much larger portion of convicted drug dealers. We crack down on drug dealers in poor neighborhoods but no so much in the suburbs even though kids use/deal drugs there too.

the reason why the Mafia is perversely successful is that they limit violence to each other. the reason why urban minority communities get so much media, and police scrutiny is because of the violence associated with their criminal pursuits. the kids out in the safe white suburbs doing heroin, and sniffing glue don't shoot up their neighborhood's kill little girls riding bikes then say incredulous things like "charge it to the game". Even impoverished white areas like parts of Appalachia esp WV, and your stereotypical trailer park, though these areas are rife with guns, and meth, and oxy codone, weed you name it. you just don't see the same level of gun violence.

 

[oldshadow]

Before everyone that supports this law talks they need to read this list of what the FBI calls gangs. I know some bike clubs on the list that are family clubs and not 1%ers.


http://www.fbi.gov/stats-services/publications/2011-national-gang-threat-assessment


This law can and will be misused.

 

[Kevin Rudd]

gangs exist for a single reason imo and it isn't to go around fucking people up, it is simply for profit.

The shotcallers use underage kids as tools for violence, extortion etc because they know they won't serve much time if charged and convicted.

If these laws can help prevent that them I am all for it. Perhaps we could add on sentence reduction for renouncing their gang and completing some sort of gang rehab program.

 

[Bay Area]

"Will you succumb to the Darkness, or will you stand and shine your divine inner Light?
Only you can make that decision for yourself."

At what age exactly should your signature begin to be applied? 18? 21?

You keep missing the point. Kids should be held responsible. They should go to jail for crimes.

What they shouldn't get is 15 years on top of a 10 year bid, because the judge didn't get laid last night

 

[Kevin Rudd]

You keep missing the point. Kids should be held responsible. They should go to jail for crimes.

What they shouldn't get is 15 years on top of a 10 year bid, because the judge didn't get laid last night

Then make the 15 conditional. You renounce your gang and complete certain gang rehab and education programs whilst doing your 10 and you don't have to serve the 15.

I think that would be fair.

 

[Bay Area]

It's more complicated then that, though, when it comes to inner city gangs. Some kids grow up in neighborhoods so bad that joining a gang, which obviously carries the risk of jail time or being killed, is (or at least seems like) a legitimate option.

I really have no sympathy for the kid who grew up in a nice middle/upper class home and deals drugs. But I can't help but feel that the kid who grew up in a very poor area to crackhead parents didn't really get a fair shake at life.

I'm not saying they get a free pass, but I also don't think they deserve EXTRA jail time. Plus "a gang" can be defined very loosely, can't it?

In many instances, kids join gangs for protection...not to get victimized. Then you have kids whose cousins are alll in gangs, brothers in gangs, neighborhood kids in gangs, dad a gang member in jail...so what chance does the kid have? And I say kid because many join gangs as early as 10.

 

[o'dubhlaoich]

I think its bullshit.

 

[Bay Area]

gangs exist for a single reason imo and it isn't to go around fucking people up, it is simply for profit.

The shotcallers use underage kids as tools for violence, extortion etc because they know they won't serve much time if charged and convicted.

If these laws can help prevent that them I am all for it. Perhaps we could add on sentence reduction for renouncing their gang and completing some sort of gang rehab program.

Alot of times yes, but definitely not all. For example, in New York, there was a time where blood gang members, would just slash innocent pedestrians in the face with razors...for no other reason than to do it. It was a fad. Just walk up to a guy on the subway, slash his face with a razor, then run

Then you have the MS 13 gang members that stomped that middle eastern kid and paralyzed him, after asking him "where he was from". Or the MS 13 member that murdered that entire family in San Francisco for blocking in his car with theirs.

 

[Bay Area]

Then make the 15 conditional. You renounce your gang and complete certain gang rehab and education programs whilst doing your 10 and you don't have to serve the 15.

I think that would be fair.

agree with this.


They made the law to keep kids in jail for as long as possible, plain an simple. Its a business. If 90% of the juves in prison are there for gang activities already, then it tells you the system is trying to capture more kids. Get them at a young age, then keep them there until they are in their forties.

 

[panamaican]

Then make the 15 conditional. You renounce your gang and complete certain gang rehab and education programs whilst doing your 10 and you don't have to serve the 15.

I think that would be fair.

It's not.

Until they criminalize being a gang member, you're punishing people for something that's not a crime.

It's like enhancing a drunk driving sentence because the driver was using the car to cheat on their spouse. Cheating isn't a crime so people shouldn't be penalized extra for doing it.

 

[Kevin Rudd]

It's not.

Until they criminalize being a gang member, you're punishing people for something that's not a crime.

No actually you are not. You aren't punishing them for anything other than the crime they committed initially. They go to prison for 10 initially for they crime they have been convicted of committing, not for being a gang member.

Whether or not that sentence is elongated comes down to the individual and the personal choice they make. If you are going to argue against it then argue against sentence reduction as a whole as this is what this would be a form of.

what constitutes a crime legally and fairness are two completely separate issues and are not mutually exclusive.

 

[GearSolidMetal]

As long as it effects gangmembers in CA, I don't really give a shit.

I can see Harry Reid being in favor of a federal law with the same premise, and say The Tea Party and Koch Brother employees are gangs.

 

[nhbbear]

Misguided kids are shooting up Chicago, and almost every other city in the country. Almost all of this violence is gang related, so I have no qualms about adding on to a sentence to keep violent gang members off of the streets. I think the criminal history and seriousness of the crime should factor in to the sentencing.

As for the emotional "free josh" story, I am not moved. I am glad he is locked up and will not be a fireman, because that is a job where people's lives are at stake. I would not want some little burglar gang member to be driving a fire engine or hold any sort of responsibility. Obviously, he was not that attached to idea of that job, or he would not have participated in a violent felony mislabeled a "mistake" by the woman in the video. Prison will likely cement his life of crime and ties to the gang, but he won't be out for a long time. Too often, judges are moved by the "good kid trying to turn his life around" garbage and they go light on sentencing, only to regret it the next time the person is in court for a more serious offense.

 

[kpt018]

the reason why the Mafia is perversely successful is that they limit violence to each other. the reason why urban minority communities get so much media, and police scrutiny is because of the violence associated with their criminal pursuits. the kids out in the safe white suburbs doing heroin, and sniffing glue don't shoot up their neighborhood's kill little girls riding bikes then say incredulous things like "charge it to the game". Even impoverished white areas like parts of Appalachia esp WV, and your stereotypical trailer park, though these areas are rife with guns, and meth, and oxy codone, weed you name it. you just don't see the same level of gun violence.

Yes, but the violence is a different crime. I agree that should be punished more harshly.

 

[panamaican]

No actually you are not. You aren't punishing them for anything other than the crime they committed initially. They go to prison for 10 initially for they crime they have been convicted of committing, not for being a gang member.

Whether or not that sentence is elongated comes down to the individual and the personal choice they make. If you are going to argue against it then argue against sentence reduction as a whole as this is what this would be a form of.

what constitutes a crime legally and fairness are two completely separate issues and are not mutually exclusive.

What is the legal basis for anything beyond the 10 years? Is that anything actually something criminal?

I don't think you can legally extend a sentence for something that isn't a crime. If the max for Crime X is 10 years then that's the max. It doesn't get elongated unless there's another crime involved and AFAIK being a gang member isn't a crime.

Doing anything else would be denying them due process.

 

[Bay Area]

What is the legal basis for anything beyond the 10 years? Is that anything actually something criminal?

I don't think you can legally extend a sentence for something that isn't a crime. If the max for Crime X is 10 years then that's the max. It doesn't get elongated unless there's another crime involved and AFAIK being a gang member isn't a crime.

Doing anything else would be denying them due process.

You are a lawyer of some sort.

Do hate crimes work the same way? For example I beat up an Asian kid, so I get 10 years for assault, but then it is proven I was wearing an "I hate Asians" shirt, so the judge tacks on another 15?

 

[panamaican]

You are a lawyer of some sort.

Do hate crimes work the same way? For example I beat up an Asian kid, so I get 10 years for assault, but then it is proven I was wearing an "I hate Asians" shirt, so the judge tacks on another 15?

As far as I can figure, it's basically an extension of discrimination law. You committed a criminal act (beating someone up) plus you applied discriminatory/racist practices in selecting your victim.

Since you can be penalized already for discriminatory practices, it's not the same thing as a gang enhancement since joining and associating with groups of people who call themselves a gang isn't penalized elsewhere.

Another example is felony murder where you get murder charges if someone dies while you're committing a crime. Since someone dying while you're doing something you shouldn't do is already penalized via wrongful death statutes or involuntary manslaughter, making it part of the criminal sentence isn't really penalizing them for something that wasn't already a penalized action.

 

[7437]

Before everyone that supports this law talks they need to read this list of what the FBI calls gangs. I know some bike clubs on the list that are family clubs and not 1%ers.


http://www.fbi.gov/stats-services/publications/2011-national-gang-threat-assessment


This law can and will be misused.

juggalos are on that list, so now i support this law.

 

[Bay Area]

As far as I can figure, it's basically an extension of discrimination law. You committed a criminal act (beating someone up) plus you applied discriminatory/racist practices in selecting your victim.

Since you can be penalized already for discriminatory practices, it's not the same thing as a gang enhancement since joining and associating with groups of people who call themselves a gang isn't penalized elsewhere.

Another example is felony murder where you get murder charges if someone dies while you're committing a crime. Since someone dying while you're doing something you shouldn't do is already penalized via wrongful death statutes or involuntary manslaughter, making it part of the criminal sentence isn't really penalizing them for something that wasn't already a penalized action.

Gotcha.

 

[Bay Area]

As for the emotional "free josh" story, I am not moved. I am glad he is locked up and will not be a fireman, because that is a job where people's lives are at stake. I would not want some little burglar gang member to be driving a fire engine or hold any sort of responsibility. Obviously, he was not that attached to idea of that job, or he would not have participated in a violent felony mislabeled a "mistake" by the woman in the video. Prison will likely cement his life of crime and ties to the gang, but he won't be out for a long time. Too often, judges are moved by the "good kid trying to turn his life around" garbage and they go light on sentencing, only to regret it the next time the person is in court for a more serious offense.

So Josh (24) should get "life" for driving a get away car in a robery where no one was killed? What's wrong with you?