Controversy over "Stop Snitching" T-shirt doesn't fade

NorthJersey.com ^ | November 18, 2005 | TOM MEAGHER

[Coleus]

The teenagers all know what the "stop-snitching" T-shirts mean - even if their parents don't.

Waiting outside John F. Kennedy High School after class Thursday, 10th grader Victor Arellano said that even though he doesn't own one, his classmates are still wearing the shirts that were a hot summertime fad.

"That means stop telling on other people what goes on the streets - hustling," Arellano said.

Some adults, including 1st Ward Councilman Anthony Davis, have voiced concern about the fashion that they say promotes drug dealing and discourages people from cooperating with the police.

"It's not a positive thing to see them walking around with negative shirts with negative sayings on their backs," Davis said Thursday. "Gang members or people who are involved with negative activities came up with the idea."

The fad began last year in Baltimore, another city that has struggled with crime, drugs and poverty. An entrepreneur there made a DVD that depicted local drug dealers complaining about their former colleagues who, when arrested, informed the police about the criminal activities of others.

The movie, titled "Stop Snitching," became an underground hit and provoked a quick and heated response from politicians and police. T-shirts soon followed. Hip-hop artists began to wear them.

In response, the Baltimore Police Department made a shorter video that also featured a hip-hop soundtrack and images of gun-toting thugs - those who had been arrested. The department called the video "Keep Talking."

"Living a life of violence and guns/there's numerous ways you can choose to earn funds," a rapper says in the video.

Paterson police Lt. Anthony Traina said although the fashion arrived in North Jersey this year, he doesn't believe the shirts have had any effect on the police.

At Come Up Fashions, a downtown clothing store on Broadway, manager Tremaine Thomas said the stop-snitching fad has mostly passed. Still, his store sells three different designs with the same slogan. One shirt features a man holding a rat in one hand and a knife in the other. He said the shirts, and other gangster-themed clothes, only feed into a need for urban fashions that reflect the teens' own communities.

Despite the popularity of the stop-snitching design, Thomas and store owner David Lemus maintain it's only one of many they stock, including shirts that read "The family that prays together, stays together." Ultimately, Thomas said, the responsibility for making sure children get the right message is up to their parents.

"The parents have got to tell their kids what's good and what's bad," he said. "If you see someone getting mugged, that's not the time to not snitch."

Davis said he has found some teenagers who don't understand the message behind the shirts or similar ones that feature a picture of a snowman - slang for a cocaine dealer. He would like to see the school district take measures to remove the shirts from the classroom, as some districts elsewhere in the country have done.

Also outside Kennedy High School on Thursday, 16-year-old Javon Jackson said he has seen the shirts on his peers and hopes to get one himself. He knows what the shirts mean, but he interprets the slogan more loosely. For him, it simply means mind your own business. He concedes that despite the shirt's connection to the drug trade, most teenagers wear it simply for fashion.

That's why he would want one.

"I don't do no drugs. All I think about is basketball. I try to stay out of trouble," Jackson said.

[Know your rights]

Is drunk driving a sufficient reason to ban the drug alcohol?

Yes, it can be argued that way in a legislative body or court.. Are you now happy I answered your question?

You didn't ... an answer would be "yes" or "no" not a Clintonesque "it can be argued that way." Will you ever actually answer the question?

There is no right to get high or to get drunk,

There is a natural right to do anything that violates nobody else's natural rights. Getting high or drunk does not in and of itself violate anybody else's natural rights.

nor is there a right to arrive to work drunk or high increasing the rates of injury and high insurance costs for the company owner who has to pay increased costs for workmen's comp.

I agree with that; employers should be free to hire and fire at will.