Hollywood gang injunction seems to be working
- Gang-Related Crime Down
May 12, 2004 1:55 pm US/Pacific
Officials said a gang injunction in Hollywood has street thugs on the run.
City Attorney Rocky Delgadillo and police Chief William Bratton said Tuesday that gang-related crime in the area was cut in half so far this year because of the aggressive injunction targeting the city’s largest gang.
“We have them on the run, and we’re going to keep them on the run,” Delgadillo said. “I’m not declaring victory today, but, referring back to my old football days, I like our field position.”
A court-ordered injunction that went into effect in November against the 18th Street gang was credited with the Hollywood crime slide. The injunction bars them from associating with other gang members in public in the Hollywood area, recruiting anyone under the age of 18, intimidating other people for any reason, and other restrictions.
Gang-related crimes in the Hollywood area dropped 49.5 percent in the first four months of 2004, compared to the same period last year. The figures include a 60 percent reduction in robberies, a 58 percent drop in attempted homicides and a 47 percent decrease in felony assaults.
Citywide, gang-related crime has fallen 17 percent in the first four months of 2004.
I hate to labour the point, but give me one sneacrio where changing the order of the elimination of the minor parties will change the ultimate result. The AEC can fluff around all they want, you can talk about quotas and distributing preferences through candidates, but in the end it comes down to where people place the Libs and Labor on the ballot.Sometimes we get exciting three corner contests Will the Libs nudge out the Nats in Farrer? News at 11 . Maybe, one day, Will the Greens nudge out the ALP? Sometimes we have to make do with Will the LDP candidate ever break the 4% mark? Theoretically it could be different and all, but actually it isn’t.So going back to the original post again. It is irrelevant in terms of ultimate result whether people preference the Greens first and Labor second, rather then Labor first. Likewise, for the smaller percentage that preference the Greens first and the Libs second, rather then the Libs first. The mistake you seem to be making is thinking that the people who make this second action are somehow confused by the preference system and really meant to vote Labor or smomething, and maybe if you shake their preferences hard enough, it might fall out right.I don’t think so.