Adachi responds on gang injunctions

Reader E.F. Sullivan’s letter (“Kudos to Herrera for gang crackdown,” July 17) lauds gang injunctions as a convenient solution to San Francisco’s crime problem. I would suggest that he review two research studies, one each in Los Angeles and Long Beach (available at www.sfgov.org/pd), which question the effectiveness of these injunctions in eradicating crime and instead show that crime was merely displaced to nearby neighborhoods. Some neighborhoods “protected” by the injunction even experienced an increase in crime. Bayview-Hunters Point is no less of a war zone than it was last year when the gang injunction was imposed. Only three arrests for violating the gang injunction there have been made, one involving a man who was attending a job fair in the “gang zone.” The other two men reportedly lost their jobs when they were arrested and jailed for violating the injunction.

Sullivan writes off objections as “a nonsensical mantra that injunctions violate civil liberties.” He should meet some of the people affected by the gang injunctions. The injunctions name several pairs of brothers who will be prohibited from leaving the house together or being in each other’s company in public. The injunction imposes a 10:00 p.m. curfew and allows police to arrest persons who wear red or are found to possess felt-tip markers. More than a few of these people have no current gang affiliations, and some even work as anti-gang counselors. At least two counselors will lose their jobs, since they work in the area and will be unable to associate with former gang members.

Of course, none of these people have been adjudged gang members by the court, and have simply been identified by law enforcement as gang members. However, because there is no right to a lawyer, and they cannot afford to hire one, these individuals have no choice but to submit to the injunction. If this is the America that Sullivan longs for, perhaps he should move to North Korea.

Jeff Adachi, Public Defender

The City

Important groundbreaking

The groundbreaking at the Portola Branch was significant for both its clear indication of a construction start, but as well for the extraordinary participation of the community in this event. This was, by far, the largest attendance by the community at a groundbreaking. It is indicative of the public’s affection for the library and their expectation that an authentic, properly sized library will soon be open for all. In the coming months, it will be abundantly apparent to everyone in The City that the branch library program is progressing apace and with great positive impact to each neighborhood where projects will be inaugurated. We will, when complete, have installed a reinvigorated civic infrastructure where community is informed and formed. The ballot measure this fall will do two things — continue a reliable funding stream that will keep our libraries open and functioning to an even higher level than today, and provide us with a mechanism to generate the supplementary funding for the completion of our branch library improvement program; these two elements will be properly reconciled to provide library users the best possible services, materials and facilities. This is a wise and necessary investment that will benefit residents of San Francisco for generations.

Charles A. Higueras, AIA

President, Public Library Commission

The City

Simulations unreliable

In “It could be hot and dry for decades” (July 17), Glen MacDonald prophesies doom and gloom by combining arguments that exploit almost the full spectrum of environmental holocaust scenarios. He hijacks strong arguments provided by such leading climate scientists as S. Fred Singer (“Unstoppable Global Warming, Every 1,500 Years”) and combines them with the current mythology, provided by computer simulation, which alleges, without real data, that global warming is caused by man and will destroy civilization as we know it. Computer simulation or modeling is probably the weakest of the human-caused global warming arguments, since such simulations are based on sets of unverifiable assumptions; that is, they are not real data.

MacDonald cannot have it both ways. Either global warming is natural and happens no matter what we do, or man really is the culprit, for which there is no scientific evidence at all.

Tim La Farge

The City

Understanding Ed Jew

What’s so hard to understand here? Some people are out-of-house 18 hours a day. Six hours sleeping doesn’t generate a lot of consumption, and so what if Supervisor Ed Jew decamps in Burlingame with his family? That’s his life and his campaign.

And why did Ken Garcia have this to say about Ed Jew’s wife: “She should know as well as anyone the potential danger of making false statements and filing false documents”? Is this something he learned at the Chronicle? Did they deconstruct his proper Lowell upbringing?

Paul Burton

The City

To add your voice-

By e-mail: letters@examiner.com

By mail:

Editorial Page Editor

The Examiner, 450 Mission St.

San Francisco, CA 94105

By fax: (415) 359-2766