default avatar
Welcome to the site! Login or Signup below.
Logout|My Dashboard

Preventing youth violence, crime and gang involvement

Rules of Conduct

  • 1 Use your real name. You must register with your full first and last name before you can comment. (And don’t pretend you’re someone else.)
  • 2 Keep it clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually oriented language.
  • 3 Don’t threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
  • 4 Be truthful. Don't lie about anyone or anything. Don't post unsubstantiated allegations, rumors or gossip that could harm the reputation of a person, company or organization.
  • 5 Be nice. No racism, sexism or any sort of -ism that is degrading to another person.
  • 6 Stay on topic. Make sure your comments are about the story. Don’t insult each other.
  • 7 Tell us if the discussion is getting out of hand. Use the ‘Report’ link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
  • 8 Share what you know, and ask about what you don't.
  • 9 Don’t be a troll.
  • 10 Don’t reveal personal information about other commenters. You may reveal your own personal information, but we advise you not to do so.
  • 11 We reserve the right, at our discretion, to monitor, delete or choose not to post any comment. This may include removing or monitoring posts that we believe violate the spirit or letter of these rules, or that we otherwise determine at our discretion needs to be monitored, not posted, or deleted.

Welcome to the discussion.


  • Doug Chaney posted at 9:27 pm on Tue, May 17, 2011.

    Doug Chaney Posts: 1232

    DUI checkpoints are nothing but racial profiling judging from the names of those actually arrested for DUI and those with nearly all Hispanic last names of those being towed for minor traffic violations. Can I be any simpler withg my explanation, Kevin? Check the name database of those documented gang mebers and you'll see there is no racial profiling when most are from the eastside, poor, Hispanic and uneducated. The DUI checkpoints don't target the bars nor downtown, as Jay says, but out of the way places where3 Anglos don't dare go at night in Lodi. Why don't they target the white wine drinking community with their monthly alcohol and driving events, instead utilizing some so-called "saturation" patrol around the downtown area when the wine event was at Lodi Lake? Maybe you should work with some of these ex-gang members, and those who still are involved, or at least walk the eastside and get some real street smarts from the real deals, some even third graders? Thank you Jay for your expertise and encouragement and maybe the new incoming police chief from outside the Lodi area will give us a chance to begin our journey once again into the real world of gang intervention with the help of LPD.

  • Darrell Baumbach posted at 5:08 pm on Tue, May 17, 2011.

    Darrell Baumbach Posts: 9405

    I thought that check points were supposed to be posted ahead of time so that people could avoid going to the area for constituional reasons. If that is the case... if a checkpoint was established in the area of the drinking establishment, the establishment and surrounding businesses might suffer economically. I wonder if there is some type of restriction as to where the checkpoints can be to avoid hardships on business? Anybody?

  • Jay Samone posted at 3:26 pm on Tue, May 17, 2011.

    Jay Samone Posts: 359

    Kevin - I can't speak for Doug, so I will answer as best I can as to why I feel he isn't inconsistent in his views. Who says the drunks are on the eastside? The DUI checkpoints are consistently conducted in areas where there aren't any bars, clubs, known drinking spots, etc and they are far enough away from them so that if someone was drinking, they could avoid it altogether. If they put up a checkpoint on Vine Street (or any other) downtown, nearly every driver would end up with a DUI any day of the week. But the individuals that frequent the downtown area (for the most part) are successful or affluent members of our city. Even though Kettleman is a highway and is travelled more often than the downtown streets, the number of drunks in that area decreases sharply while those that are unlicensed and live on that part of town increases. Having been unemployed and homeless several lifetimes ago, I know how hard it can be for someone to pay $25 to get a picture license, much less the $100 to get insurance or the $250 to pay for the tags. When you get popped for any of these infractions, that money you didn't have to get the issue remedied in the first place just quadrupled in one flick of an officer's -more than happy to write the ticket - pen. You can get so far behind, you don't know how to get out of it. While I don't agree with driving without a license or insurance or expired tags, I understand that it happens far too often because people living paycheck to paycheck can't afford to pay the enormous fees. You are going to find plenty of under or uninsured drivers in a poverty stricken area. I believe the east side qualifies as such.

    Wanting the LPD to work with the eastside families in order to curb gang violance and activities is not profiling because the majority of gang members reside there.

  • Kevin Paglia posted at 1:51 pm on Tue, May 17, 2011.

    Kevin Paglia Posts: 2110

    BTW, thanks for the clarification on some of the laws currently in existence.

    As for the fourth amendment. My limited understanding is that it is in regards to arrests and trial. I am talking just after that. There is precedent using civil suits to claim property from a lawbreaker. What was suggesting was to simply streamline this process and the proceeds of the civil go to the community of the lawbreaker.

    And as a final note, I have no problem with targeting law enforcement where the laws are being broken. If most of the drunks are on the Eastside that is where the emphasis of enforcement needs to be, if there are gangs on the eastside then that is where the enforcement needs to be. If speeding is a problem on Kettleman then emphasis needs to be there. If car theft is a problem around Walmart then focus there. It is not profiling, it is going where the problem is. My question to Doug is simply why it is wrong to go to one problem area but ok to go to another problem area. Why the inconsistency?

  • Kevin Paglia posted at 1:42 pm on Tue, May 17, 2011.

    Kevin Paglia Posts: 2110

    Jay, don't get me wrong, I am absolutely for strong and definitive gang enforcement. My point was solely aimed at why Doug felt it was profiling to put DUI check points where most of the bars are, the eastside. But apparently does not think it is profiling to think gang enforcement on the eastside falls under the same profiling standard.

    In other words why is it wrong to go where the drunks are to get them off the road but ok to go where the gangs are to enforce gang laws.

    This is not a shout out against gang enforcement but rather a commentary on his stance on DUI checkpoints.

  • Jay Samone posted at 10:33 am on Tue, May 17, 2011.

    Jay Samone Posts: 359

    Darrell - I think you meant me in your post, not Kim. I responded to the first post by Kevin since the other two were not there when I responded. I drew my conclusion because in the original post - he was more concerned with doug's concern of DUI profiling than the actual gang problem that exists in this town. His intent to "out" Doug as inconsistent bothered me because I know exactly where Doug is coming from since I worked with him on trying to get the intervention and prevention program up and running. Because the eastside is poor, it stands to reason that the majority do not have insurance or even drivers' licenses. I think Doug has a point on the profiling. But just as the city pays attention to towing unlicensed and uninsured drivers' cars on the eastside, they need to be working more efficiently on the gang problem that riddles the eastside.

    I still think Kevin has no clue because rich white kids from Parkwest AREN'T at risk of joining a gang and the comparison is actually laughable. They may buy their drugs from them, but they ain't gonna join them.......they'd lose their college scholarships or that brand new bmw daddy just bought.

  • Darrell Baumbach posted at 10:07 am on Tue, May 17, 2011.

    Darrell Baumbach Posts: 9405

    Kim stated...However, given your comments towards Doug - you clearly have no idea what goes on in this town...

    odd conclusion to draw ... Kevin's point was not about what is going on in this town as much as inconsistencies he perceives...

    I think it is a positive intent on Doug's part in wanting to do something about a problem he perceives... and Kevin sees an alternate solution to address the same problem.

  • Jay Samone posted at 9:55 am on Tue, May 17, 2011.

    Jay Samone Posts: 359

    Kevin, having worked in the criminal justice field for MANY years - I'm gonna let you in on a few little secrets. All gang members are in a database, more than likely limited to the departments in the area and corrections. Being in a gang, as a known gang member, IS considered terrorism. If someone is convicted of street terrorism, it is an enhanced charge and adds to their sentence. They are convicted on these charges because the crimes they commit benefit the operations of the gang. You cannot attach this to someone's credit report - and I really think if you could - they wouldn't care. Most of the stuff they get is stolen or bought in cash anyways. Employers can tell they are hiring a gang member - all they have to do is look at their ink and they will know who they are hiring. The laws limit search and seizure, so unless you know of a way to change the Constitution and the Fourth Amendment, then you can't do that either.

  • Jay Samone posted at 9:30 am on Tue, May 17, 2011.

    Jay Samone Posts: 359

    Kevin - I'm going to back Doug up on this one. I had originally refrained from commenting on this article because it ires me to no end. However, given your comments towards Doug - you clearly have no idea what goes on in this town. The eastside is riddled with gangs and their rivals. Juveniles are approached and jumped into gangs as early as age 8 (some are conditioned from birth) in primarily poor Hispanic and Black families - no profiling there Kevin. The fact is, the demographic of the eastside is primarily Hispanic and in most areas - poverty stricken. This is where a gang intervention and prevention program is desperately needed and yet the LPD continues to target not only an older age group, but children that aren't especially at risk of becoming gang members. Beckman, Lakewood? Really? These two schools' students are the least at risk for this, yet the GREAT program is taught there. Woodbridge and Leroy Nichols students have the potentials for being at-risk, however, EVERY school on the east side and in this town should be participating in this program AT THE 3RD GRADE LEVEL.

    I dont' believe Doug is inconsistent, I believe he has a greater knowledge of the issues on the eastside of Lodi and wants to see this town address them.

  • Kevin Paglia posted at 9:24 am on Tue, May 17, 2011.

    Kevin Paglia Posts: 2110

    But all that is aimed at negative re-enforcement for after someone joins a gang. The best way to keep kids out of gangs from the beginning is to give them identity, pride and self-confidence. Sports is a proven way to achieve this. Rather than cutting programs that keep kids out of gangs, more money should be funneled into these. Whether it is school programs, city leagues or even something like a local church league, give the kids something else to do from a young age other than hang out with gang members and the kids will never learn to be gang members.

    Here's a completely wacko thought, rather than giving college positions to illegal immigrants, how about reserving those spots for the underprivileged so they can get ahead?

  • Kevin Paglia posted at 9:17 am on Tue, May 17, 2011.

    Kevin Paglia Posts: 2110

    You still didn't address why it is profiling to put up DUi checkpoints on the Eastside but not profiling to say the eastside needs gang intervention. Don't you think rich white kids from Parkwest can join a gang?

    The only way to prevent people from joining gangs is to make it a more serious offense. Personally I think gangs should be treated much like any other terrorist organization. Known members are entered into data banks and when info is ran on them the first thing that pops up is their terror gang affiliation. This info would be tagged to their credit reports and identification so they are on do not fly lists and such. When looking for a job then employees can see they are affiliated with a gang.

    Jail time should be increased for people who are a part of ANY organized crime group. Upon arrest ALL associated assets are seized until guilt or innocence is proven. So cars, house, weapons, clothes, everything.

    Older members of a gang who influence a minor to join should be charged with aiding the delinquency of a minor and spend time in jail, lose possessions as described above. gangs target the young because of current legal standards protecting youths, but the people who guide them into breaking the law should be held responsible for the ramifications of the illegal activity.

    One more way to inhibit the power of gangs is to offer a reward system. If a citizen gives a tip that leads to a drug or weapons bust, then the citizen should receive a percentage of that bust, as well as a percentage of the value of property seized from the resulting arrests.

    Ever see the movie Ransom? When Mel says the ransom money is now a reward for whoever kills the bad guys? How many people would be lining up in the current economic situations for a chance to get $50K or so for turning in some neighborhood scum?

  • Doug Chaney posted at 8:48 pm on Mon, May 16, 2011.

    Doug Chaney Posts: 1232

    Just my opinion, being one of the board members of the group that researched and attempted to start such a gang intervention program here a couple of years back, to no avail, of course. Have you not a solution to offer other than reaching out to sixth graders, about three years too late?

  • Kevin Paglia posted at 3:26 pm on Mon, May 16, 2011.

    Kevin Paglia Posts: 2110

    Wait a minute, Doug. You scream about profiling for DUi checkpoints done on the Eastside, now you go on about how the Eastside is responsible for all the gangs. Wouldn't that be profiling as well? In order for your discrimination arguments to hold water you need to be consistent. First you complain because of DUI checkpoints targeting eastsiders, but now most gang members come from the eastside and should be targeted. If you were truly concerned with equal treatment then you would be all for GREAT being distributed equally to all schools.

  • Doug Chaney posted at 2:41 pm on Mon, May 16, 2011.

    Doug Chaney Posts: 1232

    The GREAT program funding granted to LPD would be much better invested in a gang intervention program, such as Operation Peacekeepers in Stockton. Outreach to youths, especially eastside residents, where much of the population is below the poverty level and there's nowhere to turn for the children and youths in this area other than the gang lifestyle to those who are dirt poor and want the lifestyle that's purported to offer money, drugs, vehicles and many other things they find hard to achieve personally in Lodi. The outreach should start at a much younger age, 3rd grade is most preferable to start the precautions and awareness at an earlier age than 6th grade where some are already affiliated with gangs. Parental involvement is also a major factor and the GREAT program needs to address this as well as merely going to classrooms.


Recent Comments

Posted 21 hours ago by Jien Kaur.

article: Letter: Ron Portal’s letters repeat the…

So very much the truth Mr Adams - but you forgot to make the mention of the man who spend the millions and finally discover that the Mr Oba…


Posted 21 hours ago by Michael Fiske.

article: Letter: Suggestions for committee appoi…

Ed, everybody knows JoAnne hates Bob. If you don't know that than you don't know squat! Open your eyes. She campaigned against two candidat…


Posted 21 hours ago by Jien Kaur.

article: Letter: Our leaders need to be better r…

The Mr Kindseth wrote that 'America’s attitude toward Royal Emperor Obama changed when he went from “We the People” to “Screw the People”' …


Posted 22 hours ago by Thomas Heuer.

article: Steve Hansen: Funding, researcher bias …

Skepticism is a smart way of saying "I DON'T KNOW." No more no less. It is not a lofty intellectual endeavor. It is used by the …


Posted 22 hours ago by Mike Adams.

article: Letter: Ron Portal’s letters repeat the…

A correct assumption instead: Mr. Portal, like most conservatives, utilize information that is not true and when they do use the correct …



Popular Stories



Your News

News for the community, by the community.

Mailing List

Subscribe to a mailing list to have daily news sent directly to your inbox.

  • Breaking News

    Would you like to receive breaking news alerts? Sign up now!

  • News Updates

    Would you like to receive our daily news headlines? Sign up now!

  • Sports Updates

    Would you like to receive our daily sports headlines? Sign up now!

Manage Your Lists