Gang injunction debated as a cure

Last week, Out There explored a gang injunction in Sylmar and San Fernando -- the largest yet of the 37 such injunctions in Los Angeles. The injunction has divided the community.

Some argue that it is a vital law enforcement tool to combat the San Fer gang and that aggressive law enforcement is needed.

Others argue it has criminalized an entire community, sweeping up people who are not hard-core criminals while doing little to blunt the overall problem.

Readers were similarly divided. A sample of response from latimes.com/outthere:

“Anything that makes criminals uncomfortable is good. Gang injunctions work. Liberal feel-good programs only foster more of the same lame behavior. Gangs are predators/partyers and bullies who laugh at working stiffs like you and me.”

-- Buz

“Stand up to gangs by giving them an education that equals a Beverly Hills school. . . . Stand up to gangs by eliminating our social and economic problems. . . . It is less costly and more effective than the gang injunction and or prison.”

-- Keep our Daniels safe

“Gang injunctions [are] the best tool LAPD has at this time to go after gang members. Ask anyone who has lived in a neighborhood where only 3 gang members have kept a block held hostage because of their intimidation, threats, etc. . . . Parents should be held accountable for the criminal acts of these kids.”

-- Monica

“It is the responsibility of our elected officials to protect the citizens of our city. HOWEVER, this injunction gives too much authority to a police department that has been, in the past, accused of abusing their directives and damaging innocent families. It is important that these gangs be eradicated but at what cost?”

-- Rigo