OSDev.org

What's your opinion on how to deal with gang violence?

Well you can imagine some crazy torture for whatever offense, but that's been outlawed for a reason. Best way is still to give them what everybody else would do that vandalizes around (or whatever you imagine) - 2 years.

Uhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh............ no.

IIRC there have been multiple (mulllllltiple) deaths related to gang violence out here in Langley, a suburb of Vancouver. There's never more than shoplifting and the occasional stabbing out here. Enough to warrant, IMHO, a full-on assault by at least the police. I think it should be time to kick some gang @$$ using the end of a submachine gun.

Woot fifth star!!!!!

k, since it involves killing, lifetime for being accomplice to murder for each one. Just as permanent.

You might be a bit more specific since I was comparing to my college city's gangs (primary vandalizing)

I think it should be time to kick some gang @$$ using the end of a submachine gun.

Brilliant! Let's fight fire with fire!

Sadly our justice system is stupid enough to let one of the leaders of one of the major gangs out free on bail, so the only apparent alternative is to kill them all or get a new supreme court.

Sadly our justice system is stupid enough to let one of the leaders of one of the major gangs out free on bail

It needs to be...

lifetime for being accomplice to murder for each one

Take the leader out and you're going to have an escalation in violence (revenge, etc...), anyone can see that...

You don't need to regulate gangs. The activities are already illegal. People shouldn't be going to jail for being in a gang, they should be going to jail for killing, robbing, or whatever.

steveklabnik wrote:People shouldn't be going to jail for being in a gang, they should be going to jail for killing, robbing, or whatever.

In our case, it's pretty much the same thing.

Join one and become a snitch.

Troy Martin wrote:In our case, it's pretty much the same thing.

Joining a group is the same thing as killing someone?


That argument is a short ride down the slope to facism.

Gangs, up here, are vicious. Verrrrrry vicious.

Troy Martin wrote:Gangs, up here, are vicious. Verrrrrry vicious.

The thought of a bunch of Canadians in a gang makes me giggle a little inside.

Very friendly of you

Troy Martin wrote:Very friendly of you

Hey, hey. Here on the border, the Canadian stereotype is is very popular. All Canadians are peaceful, albeit possibly drunk, hockey lovers. Not that it's at all true, mind you, but Canada just seems like such a peaceable place that, really, what problems could they have? It seems like a US without the 'International Police' sticker, or the slightly rebellious tint. (ie. Considering Canada just chilled with GB and all for so long.)

Now...Gang violence, eh? Well, to be frank, you options simply suck. They all involve pointless violence and bad mojo.

From what I can gather, violent gangs were more or less started when they began selling and otherwise taking part in the drug business. Before that, they appeared to be no more than "gentleman's clubs". (I'm no historian, so do oblige my broken speak.) Now, should this be the case, as it also was during the Prohibition of the 20's when mobs rose up near the Canadian border to transport alcohol, these gangs were made 'gangs' by the criminalization of drugs, just as the criminalization of alcohol did in the past. (Although it should be noted that the aforementioned '20's gangsters also dealt in gambling and prostitution - other needlessly illegal activities.)

Once these 'gangsters' were taking part in drug dealing, or 'illegal' business, they too, were, indeed, criminals under the law. However, they did not need to be. They were made criminals, and imprisoned obscenely, as if they were murderers. (See the Rockefeller Laws of NY) Years of jail time with real murderers and other actual criminals made these individuals criminals, and, finally, violent. The gangs of today are more or less 'genetically' engineered by a failed social experiment to be criminals.

Decriminalizing drugs would be the first step, IMO, and then prostitution. One would also have to get rid of jail time for some popular nonviolent crimes. Crime would probably go up, but, it may also settle down, lower than it was before. There's no pretty way to solve social problems....