Bloods on Their Hands

Like many other areas of the country and the world, Long Island has its share of gang problems. If rival gangs only killed one another, then that would be one thing. But violence between rival gangs is seldom confined to members of the rival gangs.

One such rivalry up here involves two separate factions of the Bloods gang. There is a certain geographic territory which is contested turf between the Braveheart Bloods and the Wyandanch Bloods. Richard Dormer, the Suffolk County Police Commissioner, is now attempting to obtain a civil injunction which would prohibit 37 particular members of the Bloods gangs from congregating in that defined geographic territory.

The New York Civil Liberties Union (which, as the name implies, is the ACLU's New York franchise), now seeks to intervene with an amicus brief in the case. But because each of the 37 gangsters is, at this time, going pro se (i.e., without an attorney), the NYCLU is effectively their attorney.

I understand where the NYCLU/ACLU is coming from on this one. I really do. It is, after all, a significant imposition on one's freedom if one is restricted from associating with one's associates.

But I also understand that the gang members such as the Bloods have zero respect for the law and for the Constitution which the NYCLU/ACLU invokes to protect the so-called "rights" of the Bloods. It was that very disconnect which, many moons ago, caused me sufficient agita and disgust to allow my ACLU membership to lapse, never to be re-upped again, when the ACLU evinced a greater concern for the Nazis in Skokie than for the integrity of American values.

The NYCLU doesn't seem to get it that the Bloods and similar gangs are, in fact, actually dangerous, not only to one another, but to the public at large. Law-abiding citizens cannot safely walk down the street when the Bloods congregate together. The drugs the Bloods purvey corrupt the neighborhoods, and induce formerly law-abiding youngsters to enter into a pattern of crime, violence, and, in too many cases, death. That great abstract notion of individual rights is all well and good, but when the Bloods congregate in Wyandanch, then nobody, least of all the law-abiding citizenry, has any individual rights.

It is ironic that the NYCLU officials are so quick to carry signs reading "Safe Schools," but are doing everything in their power to prevent Commissioner Dormer from making the streets of Wyandanch safe (if such is possible anymore).

And it is certainly not lost on this observer that the lead defendant (because he leads in the alphabetical order if not the pecking order) in the case, Dormer v. Alexander, is a Blood named Jihad Alexander. That given name tells me about 85% of what I need to know about the type of thugs the Suffolk County Police are dealing with.

And so, I'm with Commissioner Dormer 100% on this one. My only misgiving is that the relief sought from the court is to enjoin Jihad Alexander and his fellow Blood thugs from congregating in a particular area of the Town of Babylon. In my own mind, they should be excluded from the entire State of New York (with the possible exceptions of Dannemora, Attica, Rikers Island or Sing-Sing).

First Amendment, Second Class Education

When I was in senior high school (let alone junior high), it was well understood that students were expected to attend classes for the duration of the class session, until dismissed by the teacher. We were not allowed to cut classes, and we were not allowed to leave the classes before dismissal.

And if, by whatever circumstance, we deigned to walk out of class (or, more commonly, were ordered out by the teacher on account of our suboptimal decorum), we were required to report directly to the Vice Principal's office for such action as he deemed appropriate. All else being equal, the consequences would be a one day after-school detention for the first offense, a two day after-school detention for the second offense, and a one-day suspension for the third offense (a level I was skillful enough to personally achieve).

But now, the New York Civil Liberties Union takes the position that students should be allowed to walk out of classes with impunity if the action is for political purposes! Some students at the Ralph J. Reed Middle School in Central Islip, NY, walked out of classes in protest against some proposed budget cuts by the school district.

Hey, aren't the students allowed to exercise their First Amendment free speech rights by talking about whatever the wish during travel time between classes, during lunch, before and after school, et cetera? Shouldn't the teachers have the right to demand the undivided attention of the students during classes? Apparently, the NYCLU (and by extension, its parent organization, the ACLU, from whose policies the NYCLU would never deviate) thinks that freely walking out of classes in the name of free expression and the First Amendment is more important than a first-rate education.

I can see reasons for prioritizing free expression over education. But if students seek to walk in and out of classes, willy-nilly, and thereby subvert the educational process and the teachers' lesson plans, then they should exercise their First Amendment rights on their parents' dimes, and not the taxpayers'. Because if the teachers are not allowed to teach, then they are relegated to being babysitters, and should be paid babysitter wages with our tax money and not teacher wages.

Better still -- Get the students who do not want to learn out of the classrooms, so that those dedicated professionals in the classrooms can get their smaller class sizes, and those students who do wish to learn can do so without the distraction of the other pantywaist.

There is a time and place for political protest. But there also is a time and place for the education of our children.

To Central Islip School District Superintendent Craig Carr, I say stand by the suspensions and tell the NYCLU to go take a hike!