Posted on 08/10/2006 2:02:17 PM PDT by Diana in Wisconsin
The Democratic Party of Dane County wasted no time in joining the political fray over the prospect of resurrecting an anti-loitering law in Madison.
The party on Wednesday approved a resolution opposing such an ordinance and calling on members of the Madison City Council to drop their support for it.
In stating a rationale against such a law, the party resolution says that an anti-loitering ordinance in effect in 1997-2002 "was applied in a grotesquely disparate manner that targeted African-American residents."
The Common Sense Coalition, a local public policy group, is pressing for consideration of an anti-loitering ordinance in response to a season of downtown muggings and street fights and brawls in the Allied Drive neighborhood.
Mayor Dave Cieslewicz termed a call to resurrect an anti-loitering law divisive and politically motivated.
Mayoral candidate Ray Allen today said through a spokesman that he is "philosophically supportive" of such an ordinance if it can be written so it is not discriminatory.
"We are advocating a community dialogue on it," said Semmi Pasha, Allen's campaign manager.
Allen led the Common Sense Coalition before announcing his candidacy for mayor this spring.
The previous anti-loitering law, which made it illegal to loiter for the purpose of illegal drug activity, was taken off the books after it became apparent it was being enforced disproportionately against African-Americans.
The Common Sense Coalition on Wednesday identified 11 City Council members - a majority of the body - as in favor of an anti-loitering ordinance.
The Democratic Party in the last election endorsed five of them: Larry Palm, District 15; Zach Brandon, District 7; Noel Radomski, District 19; Isadore Knox, District 13; and Lauren Cnare, District 3.
East side alderman Palm said today he supported looking at a new version of the ordinance to see if it would be useful. "I think that's where we're all at," he said.
Under the previous law, 89 percent of citations in 2000 were issued to African-Americans, who made up only 6.7 percent of the city population, a factor cited by the Democratic Party in its current resolution.
Police supported that law. Current Chief Noble Wray said he is not opposed to a loitering ordinance if it does not have a sunset clause and if reporting loitering is not mandatory.
The previous law was vetoed by then-mayor Sue Bauman after the City Council voted to make it permanent when its sunset provision came up.
Wray said he was concerned that mandatory reporting would interfere with community police efforts. "We have found the most success in problem-solving when there are multiple resources from the community working together," he said in a statement.
Ald. Palm said looking at such an ordinance now "doesn't mean we'll take off the shelves what we have now."
He said that at a meeting Monday on recent bar-time violence on King Street, people spoke of crowds hanging around "waiting for something to happen."
"Let's see if we can craft an ordinance to successfully reduce the number of individuals loitering," Palm said.
He criticized the local Democratic Party for taking a position on the issue without first sponsoring a membership forum.
"There's no democratic process in the Democratic Party," Palm said.
Ald. Austin King, District 8, is an adamant opponent of efforts to reinstate an anti-loitering law.
"It's clearly a political maneuver designed to capitalize on people's fears," King said.
"Anybody who claims an anti-loitering law is going to protect people from muggings needs to have their head checked," he said.
King pointed to opposition to the previous ordinance by the American Civil Liberties Union, the NAACP and the Urban League.
"We're going to talk to the people about this," he said. "History is on our side."
Other City Council members supporting consideration of a new anti-loitering ordinance are Jed Sanborn, District 1; Paul Skidmore, District 9; Tim Bruer, District 14; Judy Compton, District 16; Paul Van Rooy, District 18 and Cindy Thomas, District 20.
Madison, Wisconsin, the Berkley of the Midwest.
The Dems are just playing to their large African American voting bloc in the inner city.
Any concern at all about the First Amendment right of Free Assembly?
Hmmmmmm. Methinks you might be comparing apples and oranges. There is a difference between "loitering" and Free Assembly. There are laws against "loitering".
I guess 4 or 5 prostitutes on the same street corner would be "Free" Assembly until "money" is exchanged.
There are easy solutions - most people are too weak to accept them.
(Sorry I had to go last night. D@mn family; always wanting meals and clean socks & undies on a regular basis, the ingrates! Don't they realize that I have Crime Fighting Duties to attend to?) ;)
"That still doesn't make it a good law or a good idea."
Well, where do you draw the line then between the "rights" of roving gangs of thugs and the regular citizenry?
Step back and zoom out and see the Bigger Picture. If crime isn't stomped out when it first raises it's head, it all goes downhill from there. Broken Window Theory, Anyone?
I stated in an earlier post that gang activity is moving into the surrounding Red areas, seeping in from the Blue area of Madistan.
Madison and Milwaukee (Dane & Milwaukee counties) have our highest crime rates in the state. The ('rat) Governor constantly shifts money from the red areas of our state to the blue areas trying to combat these problems, with little success becuase he thinks like a 'rat.
In the long run, I may not have the State Highway that I live on repaired in a timely manner because funds are directed to either of those crime-ridden cities. Say I'm on the Interstate and I hit a deer and there's no State Trooper around to come to my aid because there are less Troopers out there because funds had been directed to the cities again?
See what I mean? I'm not disagreeing that people have rights, but why is it always that the Bad Guys get the money that the Good Guys pay for with their tax dollars to provide city & state services? Do ya really think these gang members, who are out at 3am are getting up again at 6am to shower, shave, go to the office, earn their paycheck and pay taxes? LOL!
It's just frustrating. It's hard to watch it happen before your very eyes. I think I should go back to ignoring the cancer that's growing all around me. (Not!)
"If crime isn't stomped out when it first raises it's head, it all goes downhill from there. Broken Window Theory, Anyone?"
TOUCHDOWN.
The key is to never let the seed sprout, and when it does -pour kerosene on it, or simply squash it. Of course that defies Human Nature (which I have preached a few times here on FP regarding Corporate Thought/Attitude).
It takes decent men, specifically the Police, who know when to be laid back, and know when not to be. Very hard to do.
The Movie "Road House" had a great scene where Swayze is teaching the Bouncers how he wants the Security of the Bar to be run.
Anyone remember his Rules?
Anyone remember his Rules?..."
I think it went something like
"Be nice, until it's time to be not nice."
Although I might be thinking of the movie "Red Dawn", which also has some applicable lines.
Yup, pretty much exactly as he said. That's how a cop should act.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.