The Chainlink

Police sit down with gang leaders "over snacks and beverages"-- this made my skin crawl

Actually, the part that made my skin crawl is not in this article . . . on the TV news the last thing they said was "the gang leaders are planning their own news conference on Thursday."

WTF?


===
Cop brass sit down with gang leaders, deliver warning


| 24 Comments



| UPDATED STORY


Chicago police and other law enforcement agencies have embarked on a pilot effort to stem the gang-related violence rattling through city
neighborhoods by applying direct pressure on top gang leaders, officials
said today.

Earlier this month, police Supt. Jody Weis and federal prosecutors secretly met with a group of West Side gang leaders at the Garfield Park Conservatory, informing them over snacks and beverages that they would be held directly accountable for
shootings and other violent crimes committed by their gangs.



If a crime gets traced back to a member of a particular gang, Weis said during a Saturday press conference, investigators will "come down with every bit of firepower we
have, every prosecutive trick we know."

Investigators tried to make it "a very congenial meeting" with the gang leaders, who were mainly from the Traveling Vice Lords, Weis said. But "they got up and walked out."

Before that happened, he said, federal prosecutors told the gang members that they will use federal racketeering statutes to go after houses and other assets owned by them, other members or their families.

Parolees could also be checked for violations; cars could be towed if there are outstanding violations; and law enforcement agencies in general will keep a close eye on the gang leaders, police said.

"They did not like the idea at all, because they realized something one of their colleagues may do could lead to a lot of pressure on them," Weis said. "That's what we tried to emphasize: This is group
responsibility, group accountability. So you're a leader, you'd better
influence your guys to behave."

Weis, who appeared with Mayor Richard Daley at a Saturday back-to-school rally in Pilsen, said investigators asked several gang leaders to meet them "and some of them did."

He insisted the meeting did not constitute an effort to negotiate with street gangs.

"It's not like 'If you don't kill someone we'll give you a pass to your drug-dealing activities,'" Weis said. The program is modeled on initiatives that have had success in Boston and other cities, he said.

People whose family members were killed because of gang violence also attended, to urge the gangs to stop the shootings.

Daley said giving the criminals the victims' perspective is important, because gang members live in the neighborhoods where shootings occur.

"It's the idea that you have to show from the victims' side, that's what they were showing," Daley said. "It's the families who come up and say 'That's my son or daughter. Remember? They lived down the block. You
know our families. You know our children.'"

--John Byrne and Liam Ford



Views: 77

Replies are closed for this discussion.

Replies to This Discussion

I get it....I understand the argument...but...

Make crack legal ?

Make prostitution legal ?

Make handguns and assult weapons legal ? (well this one for law abiding people I agree with, but...)

If we make crack (or any other dope) legal what do we do with the junkies? More welfare? I guess the junkies can be prostitutes and pay for the habbit with out theft...untill they get old looking (fast) and cant sell their body anymore, of course they would never think of breaking into my home, because I can then mow them down with my (now legal) full auto AK-47

There is no one answer to this...but if doing what they are doing become financially UN rewarding (getting their car towed, thier home impounded...) changes would come.

Why they are being told "OK, NOW we will start doing the job we have been paid to do" is beyond me.
It should have been done long ago....

Pablo said:
Michael Perz said:
That said, I find this debacle disturbing on a couple of levels. By holding this meeting Weis single handed legitimized every single gang in the city regardless of what was discussed. Also, I find RICO laws to be flagrantly unconstitutional and in total conflict with freedom of association. If law enforcement wants to take down organized crime (that's exactly what gangs are) they should probably start by reexamining which existing public policies make it a highly profitable institution in the first place.

DING DING DING! We have a winner! Our laws create these problems. The sooner we accept it the better we can react to the situation. Organized crime is simply a supply company delivering wanted goods and services to the community. The fact that they supply illegal goods does not matter to the fundamentals. Simple supply and demand tells us that if there is a demand for a good or service, legal or not someone is willing to supply that good in exchange for a price. The more dangerous and risky the delivery of the merchandise the fewer suppliers willing to supply the merchandise. This leads to a increase in price and compensation. If you remove one supplier, supply deminishes, price increases or another supplier is drawn to the market to replace the reduced supply. Violence is just the suppliers way to restrict competition and supply. If the illegal goods were made legal many more suppliers enter the market protected by the criminal justice system. The result is less violence, cheaper goods and increased demand.
Oh, I don't know. What are we doing with them now?

Rick norris said:
I get it....I understand the argument...but...If we make crack (or any other dope) legal what do we do with the junkies?
This is a departure from the OP but...

"Make prostitution legal?" Yes. http://www.fff.org/freedom/1293e.asp

"Make crack legal?" Yes, well sort of. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drug_policy_of_the_Netherlands

"Make handguns and assault weapons legal?" Yes. http://gunowners.org/fs9403.htm
M.A.R.K.....

Name a place that has legalized hard drugs....crack, herion, or meth..And I'm sorry but morphine addiction is the hardest to beat, education and a little re-hab wont work for most addicts.

Your just trading one set of issues for others.

I've always said that most (succesfull) drug dealers are pretty smart, think about it...They sell something that a user knows can hurt or kill them, to a user that for the most part can't afford it. So if the profits are taken away, the dealer will find a more profitable way to make money, some may find legal ways, others not so much.

But thats all another debate...the fact is here and now what these people are doing, and have been doing is illegal, and Jody has just admitted, the laws have not been enforced. My issue with it is why haven't they been enforced? And why are they getting a warning that it will be enforced?
I suspect it's because sometimes the threat of force is more effective than the exercise of force. Once you actually exercise force, its effective limitations are revealed. (See also Iraq War II).



But thats all another debate...the fact is here and now what these people are doing, and have been doing is illegal, and Jody has just admitted, the laws have not been enforced. My issue with it is why haven't they been enforced? And why are they getting a warning that it will be enforced?
The aim is to get the crime lords to dial down what the street level guys are doing and get them to respect territorial borders. You thus don't WANT to put the bigwigs in jail, which would just create more violence in a succession crisis. The idea is rather to deputize them. It's not ideal policy but unless Daley nuts up and gives CPD over to Bill Bratton we won't have that.
Dr. Doom said:
The aim is to get the crime lords to dial down what the street level guys are doing and get them to respect territorial borders.

Why? So we could further legitimize their little states-within-a-state?
So that they'll stop warring so violently. It's not ideal but so long as CPD is used as a patronage mill, the real policing reform that would lead to a better solution isn't going to happen.
Why? So we could further legitimize their little states-within-a-state?
Michael, it's not an issue of legitimization it's an issue of real world tactic. Whether you like it or not the facts on the ground are that gangs have territorial boundaries. If you choose to ignore this when crafting a strategy for reducing violence you might as well not even bother.
Up here in Milwaukee, we hired Ed Flynn as police chief. Chief Flynn has a rether extensive resume. He also took action against the Vice Lords, the Mexican Mafia, the Latin Kings, and others with the help of the U.S. Attorney and the U.S. Marshals in several joint task forces. We've had a couple of officers injured in the line of duty, but fortunastely, none killed. So far, Chief Flynn's methods of policing have made Milwaukee a safer city.
Whether I like it or not is not at issue. The approach is completely detached from the rule of law. By acknowledging gang territory and crafting policy around it, the CPD is effectively enforcing their rules.

Spencer "Thunderball" Thayer! said:
Why? So we could further legitimize their little states-within-a-state?
Michael, it's not an issue of legitimization it's an issue of real world tactic. Whether you like it or not the facts on the ground are that gangs have territorial boundaries. If you choose to ignore this when crafting a strategy for reducing violence you might as well not even bother.
Barry Niel Stuart said:
Up here in Milwaukee, we hired Ed Flynn as police chief. Chief Flynn has a rether extensive resume. He also took action against the Vice Lords, the Mexican Mafia, the Latin Kings, and others with the help of the U.S. Attorney and the U.S. Marshals in several joint task forces. We've had a couple of officers injured in the line of duty, but fortunastely, none killed. So far, Chief Flynn's methods of policing have made Milwaukee a safer city.

How do you quantify that?

RSS

© 2008-2016   The Chainlink Community, L.L.C.   Powered by

Disclaimer  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service