Jamiel's Law Deadline For Gathering Signatures & New Information on Zine's Motion
December 5, 2008, is the new deadline to put Jamiel's Law on the May 19, 2009, General Municipal Election. We do not want to lose any previously signed signatures due to the new date! Therefore, if you signed the Petition during June 28, 2008 - July 31, 2008, we will need you to sign the Petition again. You can download the petition at http://www.jamielslaw.com/ and sign it and mail it in. We will also post several events where we'll be gathering signatures.
Just in: The location for Councilmember Zine's Motion has been changed. It will now be heard in the Formal Council Chamber located on the 3rd floor! Brian Perry from Councilman Zine's office confirmed the hearing date, time and the new location. It has been confirmed for Monday, October 27, 2008 at 9:00am. This is a very important hearing! Zine's Motion, Special Order 40 and Jamiel's Law will all be discussed! The Public Safety Committee can move Zine's Motion foward. I'm hoping that everyone supporting Jamiel's Law will also support Zine's Motion!
Let's pack the Room!
Just in: The location for Councilmember Zine's Motion has been changed. It will now be heard in the Formal Council Chamber located on the 3rd floor! Brian Perry from Councilman Zine's office confirmed the hearing date, time and the new location. It has been confirmed for Monday, October 27, 2008 at 9:00am. This is a very important hearing! Zine's Motion, Special Order 40 and Jamiel's Law will all be discussed! The Public Safety Committee can move Zine's Motion foward. I'm hoping that everyone supporting Jamiel's Law will also support Zine's Motion!
Let's pack the Room!
Posted by Jamiel's Law @ 10/24/2008 11:14:00 AM
15 Comments:
DEADLINE - DEAD ISSUE
(Racist-issue)
I completely agree that LA should not be a "Sanctuary City" (notice they never say Sanctuary from what (the answer is Federal Law).
My question is this: My understanding is this is intended to deport illegal gang members (why the hell is this even a discussion?) BEFORE they commit a crime. I also understand there is already a program to deport them AFTER they commit a crime - so why was this hump out on the street and how would this law directly have prevented it?
I go back to this, I can't believe the deportation of illegal gang members is even a discussion we are having. The City Council needs to get off of their collective asses and stop this insanity.
That said, I am curious as to the particulars of THIS specific law proposal.
This is such good news. I am one of the ones who left my own signature gathering efforts to the last minute. Before hearing this news of the little more time available, I thought of how easy it would have been to start on the smaller, personal scale and get those signatures for certain, instead of looking to only some big scale uncertain collection effort.
Using this thought as a basic goal might be useful for others, too. If each existing signer just collected 1 or 2 more signatures, the total collected would double or triple.
You can figure out the various combinations that increased collection activity could produce, but the point is that we should be able to at least inquire with our personal circle of contacts in the remaining month and reach the needed numbers.
We all don’t have to jump into big scale style signature gathering to be effective. The more people trying this approach might make it more satisfying and significant to the goal of getting “Jamiel’s Law” on the ballot.
The requirement that the signers be L.A. city registered voters is the only limiting element, since many people want to sign but live outside of the city, thus ineligible. I will have to add my own signature again, having signed in July.
We don't need to rely on only our feeble city council's spineless efforts to reduce gang violence with their feigned interest in Zine's motion on "Jamiel's Law."
In Eagle Rock
The fact is LAPD ALREADY DEPORTS AND STOPS ILLEGAL GANG BANGERS. WHAT THE HELL DOES THAT MORON ZINE WANT TO DO NOW?
IF SPECIAL ISSUE 40 IS REPEALED THEN THE BAD GUYS WIN. WHY??? BECAUSE PEOPLE WILL BE AFRAID TO CALL IN TO THE POLICE AND REPORT CRIME. YOU DON'T THINK GANG BANGERS ARE WAITING TO HOPE THAT THERE IS NO MORE SPECIAL ISSUE 40 SO THEY CAN PREY ON VICTIMS?? YOU ARE ALL SO VERY NAIVE
Zine's staffers are idiots!!! They don't have a clue and in fact give out the wrong information. Read the damn newspapers and you'll see that there are tons of illegal gang bangers that are deported but come back to commit crime. Zine will grandstand and make an ass out of himself as always and pretend he knows what he's talking about.
Zine promised on talk radio to recruit a major "surprise guest" to attend the meeting, and isn't even telling his Council colleagues who it is. Just to grandstand and try to use this issue as a centerpiece for something to do with himself.
It seems he and a few old, fat white conservative guys from the outer limits like Cooley, candidate Nuch, Antonovich, along with bitter Hahn, are fantasizing about a takeover of the City, "a return to the good old days." They want Caruso and his developer friends to lead them to victory.
Zine figures if he throws his hat in with them he'll get some plum job when he's termed out, like maybe next Police Chief?
Maybe you Jamiel's Shaw people would love it, but ain't gonna happen. And do you really want a bunch of old, out-of-touch fat white guys who don't even like urban L.A. running everything?
Heard this from an insider who knows Zine.
1:04, jim alger: You are absolutely right, that SO40 already allows for the LAPD to cooperate with ICE and other law enforcement agencies when they have an illegal suspect they've stopped for a violation, or breaking an injunction. Only thing they can't do now is stop people for no reason, creating a true police state.
The barrios and even wealthy Latino figures like Cheech Marin, the artists profiled at LACMA's current (closing soon, Nov. 1) "Chicano Art from the Cheech Marin Collection" already see them and depict them that way. There's even a painting devoted to the May Day Melee, showing cops on horseback as menacing thugs, whose blurb reads that the police broke up "a completely peaceful" demonstration.
The LAPD has to balance this bias against them with protecting the public, and that's Bratton's job, and he's doing it well. What the Jamiel's Law people want will give those who already hate or resent LAPD and non-Latinos ammo for their own propaganda, and I for one don't want cops stopping me for no reason, just to prove they're not "profiling" Latinos.
Zine, Wacko Walter and the rest who see SO40 as the problem haven't thought any of this out.
And as you say, jim, the reason Espinoza was able to kill Jamiel, was that he was let out of prison BY THE SHERIFF'S DEPT. AND COOLEY'S DA'S OFFICE despite being an illegal gangbanger with a long rap sheet, was that he just claimed like Cheech does in that movie, "I was born in East L A!" No ID check, nada. Now Baca has authority (from the County Supes, to whom he reports) to run ID checks on prisoners when they're taken into custody, to allow time for the reports to come back. It had been the Supes, mainly Molina and Burke, who had prevented him from doing that in the first place. AND D A Cooley's office has always found it easier to just plea bargain these criminals OUT.
So none of that had anything to do with LAPD or the City. Dropping SO40 would have done nothing, and Zine's motion has the consequences above which he's not capable of thinking through.
(Any more than he is of forumulating a coherent plan regarding paparazzi -- he's offered to have a separate hotline for celebrities only, who they are to be determined by him and a committee. In other words, to create a separate, special class of people serviced by our LAPD.)
Keep in mind that the biggest problem in LA and the state in general is that when illegal criminals are deported, THEY COME RIGHT BACK INTO THE COUNTRY.
Even dumb Rocky figured that one out and wrote about it in an LA Times Op Ed, about how in the last 5 years (under HIS terms) the illegal gangs like MS13 have become so much worse, morphing into international criminals who've branched out into ID theft and computer crimes as well as the usual murder and mayhem.
So if you let them out of prison and they just go "home" and come right back, what have you accomplished, but given them a free pass? It's the feds and ICE that also need to step upto the plate and compile and share with all law enforcement a national database of illegals who are deported, and maybe even put microchips into those being deported. Returning illegally is supposed to ad 20 years to a sentence, but DA Cooley never pursues that. Felons are HIS job.
The many levels on which this Jamiel's Law hasn't been thought through and is bad policy makes it extremely dangerous. We can't have our laws decided by simple- minded talk show wackos like KFI's pair, Kevin James and Doug McIntyre. These ratings hounds are also using you Shaws to stir up agitation among simple listeners and score ratings.
Because you can't get every violator doesn't mean that there should not be a law addressing the issue.
If there was such a clear policy on Special Order 40, Chief Bratton would have had no reason to state that he was going to issue his "clarification" of the policy.
He still hasn't done that. How clear is Special Order 40 if he has had over six months to come through with that?
If some people did not notice, "Jamiel's Law" is NOT repealing "Special Order 40". It's not even part of the penal or any other code. It's a policy created in 1979 when there were less than 3 million illegal aliens in the country.
"Jamiel's Law" is a modification of the policy addressing specific enforcement to be applied to gang bangers who are also illegal aliens.
Returning illegally after formal deportation would subject the offender to some additional time in federal prison, not just another deportation. If somebody wants to risk coming back and NOT get prison time when later discovered, that's up to them, but it's their risk. Relying on Rocky for advice is, in itself, cause to disbelieve the information.
Violent criminals should not be allowed to be free to do more crime, and this result follows from the course of action (or inaction) that the opponents of Jamiel's Law seek to adopt.
The reduction of crime, especially violent crime, should be one of the goals of a government and this is one approach to do that.
If the U.S. government does not start serious enforcement of immigration laws it won't be long before we see the same kind of violence here as is happening in Mexico.
Just last week we read about the 6 year old kid (Cole Puffinburger) from Las Vegas kidnapped my Mexican drug cartel members.
We need to worry about the mexican terrorists just across the border not just islamic terrorists.
http://borderreporter.com/
You should all do your homework. Special Issue 40 DOES GO AFTER GANG BANGERS HERE ILLEGALLY. Yes, those assholes come back and commit more violent crime. Getting rid of Special Issue 40 is not the answer cause the gang banger win. They already are extorting money from the illegal vendors. Remember the baby killed in Rampart area? Zine is an idiot and wants to pretend he actually cares. He acts like a fucking dictator in chambers and speaks down to LAPD command. He's not liked by his own constituents. He's a sleaze bag with women who have no class and dress like sluts. Yes, this is the person we should all be listening to. His sons on LAPD are crybabies who always use "my daddy is a council person." He's a shameful excuse for a man.
You should worry about the bullshit you write.
To bad jameil wasn't white.
7:08 What are you trying to say about doing “your homework”? The posted comments have missed the part about the origins of “Jamiel’s Law” and the effect on, not elimination of, Special Order 40
First, Special Order 40 is an LAPD policy that is SO clear that Chief Bratton SAID he would make a “clarification” of it. It looks like it isn’t so clear after all if it takes him 6 months and it still isn’t done. Some officers say they don’t bother with getting into anyone’s immigration status since, rightly or wrongly, their superiors say that SO-40 directs them not to do so. Regardless of that, the job is not getting done and we have criminals here who we don’t have to harbor.
You have noticed the important fact that people return illegally from outside the country, and it’s not just from Mexico. That shows that border enforcement needs a big improvement for one thing, AND that there needs to be more enforcement of the existing penalties for deportees to see the consequences of returning.
Next, the “Jamiel’s Law” motion, introduced by CM Zine, is not the same as the “Jamiel’s Law” that is proposed for a city ballot measure. Both items are designed change the way SO-40 is handled, but neither of them will be “getting rid of Special Order 40” as your comment implies.
Some of what you say conflicts with other parts of what you say. You note the examples of criminal activity of gangbangers, but you still want to leave SO-40 unchanged. Then you say nothing about what should be done, only berating Zine for your own strictly personal opinions of him. Does that mean that since it was Zine who made the motion, it should be rejected? If another CM introduced the motion, would that have made a difference as to the merit? It looks like you have a Zine problem that is not relevant to the real problem of crime.
Zine is only one person involved, and he did not originate the idea, only making the opportunity for the city council to take action on reducing violent crime, which they characteristically and historically fail to do. The fact that no other councilperson has lifted a finger to even COMMENT on the issue just confirms that observation.
My own CM, Huizar has never responded to anything sent to his office about this or anything his does, but that’s just an example of most CMs’ unresponsive behavior toward constituent inquiries. The change is SO-40 is overdue. Conditions have changed since the nearly 30-year old policy was created. It was for a different time for different conditions than we have now. There were relatively few illegal aliens at the time that it was created, 1979.
You look like you have a problem with Zine, but that’s a separate matter and has no merit on the legal options, whether action is needed for any version of Jamiel’s Law to become effective and actually remove the unnecessary dangers that continue threatening lives.
[8:38 am, “To(o) bad” any murder happens. Color-consciousness only makes it more heinous a crime. Not knowing that fact is the sad part of the posted commentary.]
From CD-14
Now this is a good set of comments. Though there is some noise and some mis-truths on both sides of the issues here, overall it's a good discussion, intense but free of pablum.
The messenger does count in this case, in Zine. When an uneducated oaf whose every attempt to meddle in the law shows how ham-fisted he is and unable to grasp nuance, and does it to beat his chest and grandstand, proposing a law with his name on it, and is opposed by every attorney and the highly educated police chief -- yes, the messenger does affect how we look at the message.
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home