Boiling Mad and Criminalizing Good Neighbors

June 23, 2004

Dear Editor,

I'm boiling mad. (“Jailing Homeless, Chronic Alcoholic Not Cruel, Court Finds, June 23, 2004)

It appears here that the District Court of Appeals in San Diego has redefined alcoholism. Although the medical community has for decades defined it as a disease, the court sees it as a crime.

I am not against transporting a drunken individual to a homeless shelter and encouraging him/her to sleep it off for a few hours. And even this should only be done with the homeless citizen's consent!

What are these jokers going to criminalize next -- diabetes or mental illness?

Justice Judith L. Haller wrote in the majority opinion, "The statute does not punish the mere condition of being a homeless, chronic alcoholic but rather punishes conduct posing a public safety risk."

Hmmm . . .

. . . I always thought that a criminal became a criminal only AFTER a crime has been committed. In this case however, a homeless citizen was declared a criminal based upon the judge's perceived "public safety risk," that is to say she believed that a crime might be committed had Vietnam veteran Thomas Kellogg not been arrested and charged. Does Judge Haller make her decisions based on what she sees in a crystal ball?

Well she'd better get rid of the crystal ball and trade it on for a statue of Blind Justice.

Her decision, my friends, is UNCONSTITUTIONAL!!!

Have you ever heard of a diabetic who is prone to fainting spells declared a "public safety risk?"

Have you ever heard of a paraplegic who takes a longer time to cross the street in a wheelchair declared a "public safety risk?"

Have you ever heard of a blind person declared a "public safety risk" because he/she cannot see where he's going?

Have you ever heard of a deaf person being declared a "public safety risk" because they are unable to hear sirens or alarm bells?

Furthermore a drinking man or woman is one of our society's most reliable tax payers. Every time that a bottle of hooch is purchased in California -- or any state -- a substantial portion of the price goes to the states' public coffers -- which, incidentally, enables the state to pay Judge Haller's salary!!!

Judge Haller needs to be off the bench, because she is obviously off her rocker.

She poses a very significant "public embarrassment risk" to those of us who are gifted with more common sense!!!

Dave Gagnon, Formerly Homeless Citizen
Boston, MA

June 22, 2004

Dear Editor,

Mr. Ries, you seem to do disservice to the Pico Neighborhood residents
"living at or around [the] 17th Street" vicinity. ("Sharing Blame," June 16, 2004) You criminalize the good neighbors in the area by depicting their residence as a war zone.

No doubt, the area you refer to in your commentary has had its share of
violence, but don't forget that violent crime has also occurred in other
sectors of the Pico Neighborhood, as well as other parts of the City.

Most of the people in the area that you refer to are law abiding citizens who in fact have been quite vocal throughout the years in condemning the violence in OUR neighborhood.

Lastly, sure we can point fingers and blame individuals for not doing more to help suppress the violence in the Pico Neighborhood. Interestingly, however, those same individuals often like to take the credit once the situation in the neighborhood settles down.

Jaime S. Cruz
Lifelong Pico Neighborhood Resident