I'm glad they don't allow citizens to be armed in SanFran!
 

:rolleyes:




'Sit/lie' law needed to stop bullies on Haight


C.W. Nevius
Thursday, December 17, 2009

<!--/.articleheadings --><!-- types/article/articletools.tmpl --> <hr>
<table> <tbody> <tr> <td class="comments">
</td><td class="height">
</td><td class="font">
</td><td class="size">
</td><td class="sponsor">
</td></tr></tbody></table>
There's big trouble on Haight Street.
"It's High Noon out here," said Arthur Evans, who has lived at the corner of Haight and Ashbury for 35 years. "We don't want to live in the Wild West. We need a sheriff to come in and straighten it out."


<!-- end: types/widgets/pages/common/autocols/dropin.tmpl --><!-- /dropins --><!-- defaultbox --><!-- /defaultbox --><!-- related links --><!-- /related links --> <hr>

<!--/articlebox --> Actually the sheriff is already in place, San Francisco police Capt. Teresa Barrett. She's getting good reviews from neighbors, merchants, and residents while her officers are on patrol, issuing citations and confronting belligerent street people.


But it's not working.


The problem is that in the last year or so, the Haight has gone through an unpleasant transformation. Instead of the usual drowsy drunks and affable stoners, a new group has taken over the sidewalks. They're young, aggressive bullies who confront residents, sit on the sidewalks with pit bulls, and even prey on small-time marijuana dealers.


"They're street thugs is what they are," said Ted Loewenberg, president of the Haight Ashbury Improvement Association. "They have their own rules, and they'll be damned if anybody is going to get in their way."


Barrett hopes a public outcry will mobilize the courts, the neighborhood and City Hall. She's wants the city to look at a "sit/lie" law, which would prohibit lounging on the sidewalk for hours at a time. That's an idea that has been proposed and debated before, but this is such an egregious situation that she's hoping the idea will gain political momentum.



She's also encouraging merchants to invest in storefront video cameras on their own, something that has worked well in the Tenderloin.
"Anything caught on tape is almost an automatic charge by the district attorney's office," Barrett said.



This new group is both intimidating and savvy. They know average citizens don't want a confrontation, so they cluster in groups and dare residents to complain. When police arrive, they invoke their rights, aware that there's no law against congregating on the sidewalk.


"They are not the homeless because I am sure these guys have a place to go," Barrett said. "These are people committing criminal offenses."
Barrett says this isn't a turf war between the police and the punks, but that's how it looks.


Two weeks ago, a Haight Street resident got into a confrontation in front of his house which degenerated into a nasty fistfight on the sidewalk. When people rushed to help, one of them says she was warned, "Call the police, and I'll kill you."


The resident ended up suffering severe bite wounds and a gouged eye. The street punk was arrested, but no charges were filed.


But it didn't stop there. The dog owner brought his friends back, sat on the steps of the house, called out the name of the man who lived there and threatened people who went into the house. The resident is moving.
"We cannot tolerate this," Barrett said. "We've told these guys, 'We're going to make your life miserable until you move.' "



But nothing will happen if citations are dismissed, merchants don't step up with video cameras and support, and the city doesn't give officers like Barrett the tools to stop this bullying.



"If you keep thinking you can do something, and there are no consequences, you'll keep doing it," Barrett said.
A "sit/lie" law has been a tough sell in liberal San Francisco, but other communities - including Berkeley, which has a provision on troubled Telegraph Avenue that "no person shall lie on a commercial sidewalk" - have decided they've had enough.


"If the People's Republic of Berkeley can pass a sit/lie law, why can't we?" Loewenberg asked.


This article appeared on page C - 1 of the San Francisco Chronicle


<script type="text/javascript"> sfgate_get_fprefs(); </script>


Read more: 'Sit/lie' law needed to stop bullies on Haight

Get the gay people from a few blocks over to come and patrol the neighbourhod. The bad guys will flee.

Kalifornia...

Sounds like some street justice is in order. That will get city halls attention.

Pathetic.

sounds like the residents need to start carrying these.
http://pi.b5z.net/i/u/424807/i/Perso...ll_Bat_300.jpg

Someone needs to send Clint Eastwood over there with a .45 and an M1 rifle.

Too impersonal. When a bully gets a whoopin', it needs to be more personal, humiliating. So unless Clint's just going to pistol whip them.

if the law abiding citizens had concealed carrys..those thugs would disperse. then again, that neighborhood is a bit "kumbaya".

come to think of it...that area is 4-5 blocks long...very few cops could cover the entire area.

And if the Queen had balls, she would be King. You and I both have a better chance at winning the Lotto (on the moon) than the city of SanFran or the State of California allowing the citizens to carry concealed weapons.

Not to worry. The police will take care of everything...LOL.

I guess the poor little guys are just "misunderstood" and all they need is a hug. It seems like the liberal anti-gunners are now reaping what they sowed (e.g. no guns = no crime).

:rolleyes:

They've created their own utopian cesspool; it's oddly satisfying to see thm beginning to drown in it.

California does have concealed carry.

I'm sure that very few are granted in San Fran.

solution?.........bernie goetz.

Stink bombs? Old seafood? Lazer artwork? Mabye Barry Mannilo can be played at 11.

"The street punk was arrested, but no charges were filed." Hmmm.....pitchforks and torches.

Try ZERO.

California is a "may issue" state. You'd have better luck with Vash & I at the Lotto.


In 39 concealed-carry states, issuing officials may not arbitrarily deny a concealed-carry application, a practice known as Florida-style "shall issue". It is so named because Florida gained national attention for adopting this policy in 1987, leading to citizens of other states advocating similar measures, even though this practice had been adopted in Washington state in 1961.<sup class="reference" id="cite_ref-i2i-shall-issue_15-0"></sup>

<sup class="reference" id="cite_ref-i2i-shall-issue_15-0"></sup>
Nine states have "may issue" or "discretionary issue" laws requiring the applicant to demonstrate specific "need".<sup class="reference" id="cite_ref-nra-rtc-2007_4-1">[5]</sup> These "may issue" states range from "shall issue" in practice, such as Alabama, Connecticut and Iowa<sup class="reference" id="cite_ref-nra-rtc-2007_4-2">[5]</sup> to "at the whim of local officials", such as New York, Massachusetts, and California, (where rural officials more liberally issue permits but urban officials seldom do) to "almost non-issue" in states such as Maryland, New Jersey and Hawaii where, though state law allows for the issuance of permits, officials rarely or never choose to issue them under any circumstances. <sup class="reference" id="cite_ref-16"></sup>

Correction: FIVE.

Licensed to kill

San Francisco is the toughest city in California, if not America, in which to be granted a CCW permit. Currently there are only five permits issued to non-law enforcement personnel in the city.

"This is an antigun city, and I'm proud to say that our District Attorney's Office has the highest gun-prosecution rate of any county in the state," District Attorney Terence Hallinan said. "San Franciscans don't like guns; they know [guns] are trouble and anytime there is one around, someone is going to get hurt."

Now substitute "free speech" or "right to speedy trial" or "be protected against unreasonable search and seizure" or "twice be put in jeopary of life or limb for the same crime" for the term "guns" and see the liberals go nuts.

Not down here, up there in commie-ville.

I think you guys have been watching too many Dirty Harry movies.

Whether you have a CCW or not, live in CA or not, there is no way you can haul out your carry gun and shoot a punk because he and his fellow punks are sitting on your stairs swearing at you. In your fantasies, maybe.

This is a policing problem. As vash points out, the Haight is a relatively small area. You don't need cameras or a sit/lie ordinance (although both would be a good idea). A couple of plainclothes officers positioned to witness the harassment, and SFPD could be hauling the lowlifes away by the carload. For whatever reason, SFPD hasn't taken the necessary action.