Gang Violence in Milwaukee
This is why we have to find a way to keep gang bangers in jail.
Two of the four people killed early Friday in the shooting on N. 28th St. between W. Clarke and W. Wright streets — Kendrick L. Jackson, 34, and Jacoby E. Claybrooks, 28 — were known members of the Murda Mobb, said Flynn, who called the group “the most organized, most vicious and most aggressive gang on the north side of the City of Milwaukee.”
“This was not a random act,” Flynn said during a news conference in front of the District 3 station at 2333 N. 49th St. “What we have learned is that the self-styled Murda Mobb is back and aggressively trying to take over the drug trade in that area.”
The return of the Murda Mobb, prompted in part by the release of one of the group’s founders from prison, has sparked a turf war with gangs that tried to take its place, Flynn said.
This is why we need to end the drug war.
Posted by scott on July 07, 2008 at 0857 hrs
This is why we have to find a way to keep gang bangers in jail.
Don’t see that working, considering that you can’t keep them in jail forever & it sounds like the leaders recruited new members in prison. Other “solutions” that will be suggested, but not have any impact will be: gun control, allow concealed carry, more jobs, more social programs, more education, more “concern/empathy” from those outside of MKE, more police, more church, more respect, decriminalize drugs, more etc, more etc, more etc.
If the solution is “end the drug war”, I guess maybe we need to look to Iraq to see what impact the “surge” has had. I guess maybe a heavy duty investment in a police surge to fight the war on drugs in Milwaukee might have a positive effect - I don’t pretend to know.
I do like the approach that Chief Flynn has taken - being in a standard police uniform and basically his message is “look, you muthas, we are going to be up your asses big time”. That isn’t what he said literally, but that was my take away on that when I saw him on TV. Hopefully his message will spread rampantly through the community, like the word spread about free food vouchers.
Now Mayor Barrett kind of comes across as the father trying to discipline his kids without raising his voice too loud that the neighbors might hear. I mean, his message seems to be “for crying out loud, you guys, just cut it out and make nice”. And I don’t think the “perps” were sitting by their TVs hanging on his every word.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on July 07, 2008 at 1004 hrs
You must understnad that according to the governor’s task force there are far more minorities in jail than from the white population so that in the future there will be quotas. If there are not enough whites convicted and put into jail then we will have to keep the minorities out till the correrct quotas are filled.
I don’t know yet if we are going to have to break everyone down by nationalities, you know: so many Swedes, so many from Central America, so many from Russia, so many from Africa. The governor hasn’t told us yet.Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on July 07, 2008 at 1019 hrs
This is why we need to end the drug war.
Scott beat me to it.
We could pull the rug right out from under drug dealers and thugs by ending this silly war on drugs.
You know… That big government program that throws billions if not trillions of our tax dollars at a problem, creating agency after agency of bureaucracy all to protect people from themselves.
I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again.
We can’t keep cocaine out of lindsay lohans fucking nose… How can we keep it out of the country?
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on July 07, 2008 at 1056 hrs
While I agree that the drug war should be ended, let’s also remember that such an action would not eliminate gangs or gang violence. Violent crooks will be violent crooks irrespective of the commodity. If it wasn’t drugs, it would be gambling, prostitution, rare animal trafficking, protection rackets, illegal immigrant trafficking, cigarettes, booze, loan sharking, and on and on and on. The history of gang warfare is a long and storied one.
Posted by Owen on July 07, 2008 at 1113 hrs
Reading these stories about this gang and our police chief’s reaction to it is like reading a plot synopsis of an episode of “The Wire”.
If you want to see some high quality television and a well informed comment on the drug trade of inner city America rent a few episodes of that show.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on July 07, 2008 at 1122 hrs
While I agree that the drug war should be ended, let’s also remember that such an action would not eliminate gangs or gang violence. Violent crooks will be violent crooks irrespective of the commodity. If it wasn’t drugs, it would be gambling, prostitution, rare animal trafficking, protection rackets, illegal immigrant trafficking, cigarettes, booze, loan sharking, and on and on and on. The history of gang warfare is a long and storied one.
It is all about raising and lowering the stakes Owen. Ending the drug war won’t stop all crime, but certainly will have a far reaching impact. The residual crime that is generated by illegal drug trafficking is a lot higher than those other criminal activities you mention.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on July 07, 2008 at 1252 hrs
I’m not disagreeing, Lefty. What I am saying is that while eliminating the drug war would definitely have a positive impact on violent crime, there are other things that must be done too - like lock up the bad guys.
It would be a bad thing for people to sit back, do nothing, and wait for our elected leaders to end the war on drugs.
As a side note, if there was a serious push in Congress to legalize drugs, do you think that the gangs would lobby Congress against it?
Posted by Owen on July 07, 2008 at 1305 hrs
“While I agree that the drug war should be ended, let’s also remember that such an action would not eliminate gangs or gang violence. Violent crooks will be violent crooks irrespective of the commodity. If it wasn’t drugs, it would be gambling…”
Legalize it.
“prostitution…”
Legalize it.
“Rare animal trafficking…”
Legalize it…
“protection rackets…”
Yeah, bring back the Pinkertons!
“illegal immigrant trafficking…”
Let ‘em be citizens.
“cigarettes…”
Legal and unrelated to crime.
“booze…”
Legal and unrelated to crime.
“loan sharking…”
Buyer beware
“and on and on and on…”
Dooon’t stop. Bee lee vin.
Posted by jesusisjustalrightwithme on July 07, 2008 at 1331 hrs
I love the standard issue Dohnal stuff; he’s too busy spewing to note he expressly uses “minority” and “gang-banger” interchangeably.
More racist than stupid or vice versa?
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on July 07, 2008 at 1342 hrs
It would be a bad thing for people to sit back, do nothing, and wait for our elected leaders to end the war on drugs.
Definitely. What I want is for people to call their representatives and actively tell them to cut this nonsense out.
if there was a serious push in Congress to legalize drugs, do you think that the gangs would lobby Congress against it?
Well, i doubt street criminals have the sense to do so, but it wouldn’t surprise me a bit if drug trade kingpins exerted behind-the-scenes pressure to influence the process.
It’s a crime organization’s dream come true: Inelastic demand and no legal way to supply it. it’s an endless money stream.
Posted by scott on July 07, 2008 at 1439 hrs
Scott is right. No gang in this country could win a turf war against Wal-Mart.
Posted by jesusisjustalrightwithme on July 07, 2008 at 1503 hrs
So much to agree with here. The drug war is silly. It works about as well as Prohibition did. And while Owen is correct that some of these guys will just move on to other things, at least it takes one of the items off the table. Though perhaps if our government was a little less preachy and a little more hands-off, there wouldn’t be black markets for gambling or prostitution or other things either because government would just butt the hell out and leave consenting adults alone.
It’s a shame that we can’t tell the future, because perhaps then we could lock people up in advance for the things they are about to do. But for now, we can only lock them up for what they’ve already done.
The other thing always worth mentioning in this discussion is something many Republican politicians hate to ponder: locking people up is exorbitantly expensive. This is why the Assembly Republicans have for sessions kept the Joint Committee on Review of Criminal Penalties from meeting. A big part of that committee’s job is to hang a price tag on all these “tough on crime” bills that the GOP so loves to trot out. And none of those fiscally conservative posers want to see a nine-digit price tag hanging on their bill. Locking someone up, even when it’s the right thing to do, is the least fiscally conservative approach to corrections that one can take.
If someone wants to spend another, say, $300 million to lock people up, they should find the money to pay for it first.
Posted by Recess Supervisor on July 07, 2008 at 1514 hrs
While I agree that the drug war should be ended, let’s also remember that such an action would not eliminate gangs or gang violence.
If we stopped spending the money we do on the drug war, stopped throwing people in jail who don’t violate anyone elses rights, I think we’d free up some dollars to lock up people who commit crimes against others.
And while we are at it, we should totally re-invent the prison system too. Its time criminals work for their keep and to repay their ‘debt’ to society. But thats a whole different topic.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on July 07, 2008 at 1617 hrs
Locking someone up, even when it’s the right thing to do, is the least fiscally conservative approach to corrections that one can take.
So true - in the 60’s we had all these “liberal”, feel-good, Great Society entitlement programs that were supposed to solve all of society’s ills. I have always felt that the ramping up of prisons/jails in Wisconsin was just a Republican, conservative “feel-good” initiative that makes about as much sense as the Great Society programs.
Just the other day I was coming into West Bend from the west (on Park Avenue) and could see this tall crane to the east. I asked someone what that was about, and I was told it was another expansion of the Washington County Jail. It seems least once a decade there has been a jail expansion. Obviously the previous expansions did nothing to stem the increase in crime in Washington County.
As they say, “the beat goes on”.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on July 07, 2008 at 1626 hrs
Capper tells us that because Thugs carry guns the average citizen should not be allowed to.
http://cognidissidence.blogspot.com/2008/07/shooting-hole-in-self-defense-talking.html
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on July 07, 2008 at 1953 hrs
Facetious is the key word here.
In my first year in pharmacy school the drug war and drug use was just starting heavily, spurred on by the VietNam war in the late 60’s it really blew up. Bill Buckley wanted to legalize it, the sebate has been long and unfrutiful. to put it bluntly nothing has worked. countries that have legalized drugs regretted it and now have really stiff penalties for use.
The brightest people in the country have attacked it from all angles with no luck. Everything has been debated and the answer is that there is no answer. Some people are doomed to become addicts or alcoholics of one kind or another. Others use for recreation and then move away.
But it was all summed up in the movie “American Gangster” at the end when Denzel tried to buy off the good guy wioth a cool million and said to him” you might as well take it cause my going to jail changes nothing. The druggees will still be out there and so will the pimps and hookers somewhere cause there is a market” the sellers will sell cause there is so much money”. It is a fateful problem that may never go away.Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on July 07, 2008 at 2008 hrs
That’s nothing but defeatist bullshit. Things can be significantly improved. If we dry up the illegal drug market by legalizing the sale and use of these things, crime will go down. Do you have any idea how much property and even violent crime is related to the sale and use of illegal drugs?
Owen sounds like he’s for ending the drug war on principle—people should just be able to do what they want—but doesn’t see the eminent practicality of it in terms of reducing crime, saving money, and strengthening families and neighborhoods. Dohnal sounds like he’s saying there’s just no improvement to be had, that the world is shit and it’s going to remain shit and there’s nothing you can do to help. Both of these views are wrong.
Posted by scott on July 07, 2008 at 2036 hrs
Owen sounds like he’s for ending the drug war on principle—people should just be able to do what they want—but doesn’t see the eminent practicality of it in terms of reducing crime, saving money, and strengthening families and neighborhoods.
No, Scott. I am saying that support for ending the drug war should not be used as an excuse to not do anything else. We can increase police presence, strengthen penalties for gang bangers, etc. AND end the war on drugs. I think that some people use the excuse “we should end the war on drugs” as an excuse not to do anything.
Posted by Owen on July 07, 2008 at 2056 hrs
What people are saying we shouldn’t bust criminals?
Posted by scott on July 07, 2008 at 2108 hrs
Total Entries: 19998
Total Comments: 134035
Most Recent Entry: 05/24/2012 05:43 pm
Most Recent Comment on: 05/24/2012 08:52 pm
Total Members: 9751
Total Logged in members: 0
Total guests: 89
Total anonymous users: 0
Most Recent Visitor on: 05/24/2012 10:32 pm
The most visitors ever was 538 on 12/01/2007 02:11 pm
Protected and licensed under a Creative Commons License (some rights reserved).