Ben Travis 
Member since Aug 19, 2012


Stats

Favorite Places

  • None.
Find places »

Saved Events

  • Nada.
Find events »

Saved Stories

  • Nope.
Find stories »

Custom Lists

  • Zip.

Friends

  • No friends yet.
Become My Friend Find friends »

Recent Comments

Re: “Ignacio De La Fuente's Big Fib

"Indeed, if you believe that the spike in violent crime this year in Oakland is the result of the city having too few police officers, then De La Fuente’s portrayal of himself as a law-and-order candidate doesn’t stand up to scrutiny."

I was looking for evidence, in your article, of a relationship between the history of violent crime, in Oakland, and the number of police officers on the street. It appears to be an opinion. If that's the case, it is wrong to accuse De La Fuente of lying about something when you have no evidence. I was also looking for multiple instances to support your claim that he lied about being a "law and order" candidate.

As a candidate, I would expect De La Fuente to portray himself in the most favorable light and I would expect the people to vote for or against him based upon how they choose to see him.

What is most upsetting about this article is that it does not address the concerns that arose out of the police pension fiasco. It suggests that the violence is somehow related to the number of officers on the street without offering any hard evidence. It suggests that anyone voting against the idea of a group of civil employees not contributing to their pension funds is lying if they say they support "law and order". When businesses lay off people, the remaining staff must find ways of becoming more efficient. Apparently, when police officers are laid off, we're just supposed to call people names until they are reinstated.

Posted by Ben Travis on 08/19/2012 at 1:12 PM

Re: “Why a Curfew in Oakland Is Still a Bad Idea

First of all, youth curfews are not designed only to protect adults from youths, they are also designed to protect youths from youths and adults. If the arguments regarding the commission of crimes by youths are false, it is still relevant to look at the number of youths being killed at those periods of time covered by the curfew. We owe it to our children to protect them from violence.

That said, my problem with the curfew is related to law enforcement. Since the 70s, there has been a shift towards law enforcement and away from community protection. This has resulted in more laws, more incarcerations, more violent felons and more terrorism in the community. Cash strapped cities such as Oakland rely upon officers more for revenue generation (through fines and tickets) than for service and protection. We balk at an officer spending an hour taking a kid to a detention center but have no problems with an officer pulling over an unregistered vehicle with undocumented occupants and spending an hour waiting for a tow truck so that the city can collect additional revenue through the sale of the vehicle. We have no problems with the quotas associated with speed traps and warrant checks. When the city was going through yet another violent summer a few years ago, we got help from the CHP. How did we utilize the help? We implemented roadblocks in poor communities and checked for vehicle violations. Granted, the city received additional revenue and the officers did not risk serious injury (which is a good thing) but the crime continued unabated. Surprised?

3 likes, 0 dislikes
Posted by Ben Travis on 08/19/2012 at 12:44 PM

Readers' Favorites

Most Popular Stories


© 2016 East Bay Express    All Rights Reserved
Powered by Foundation