Now I remember why I don’t like the ACLU

Sometimes the ACLU remembers what it’s about and actually defends civil rights.  Most of the time, though, it’s just another hard-core Leftist organization.  Take its reaction to a Marin County Fair edict, for example.

The Marin County Fair in past years has been plagued with gangs from the Canal District, which is the large Hispanic area in San Rafael.  To try to crack down on violence, the Fair announced this year that it would ban gang-style clothing (which, incidentally, some of the “nice” boys in Marin wear too in an effort to look cool).

The ACLU has stepped in, and its theory basically says that cracking down on gang-wear is racist.  That is, it says that, since most gang members are Hispanic, banning their gang paraphernalia isn’t anti-gang, it’s racist:

Marin’s new ordinance cracking down on gang attire at the fair means that “hundreds, and probably thousands” of fairgoers will run the risk of violations, according to a lawyer for the American Civil Liberties Union, adding that as a practical matter Latino youth are the real targets of a code that in effect formalizes racial profiling.

“Given this county’s identified gang population, it is Latino youth who will be taking a risk … not white youth wearing the identical items,” declared Alan L. Schlosser of Mill Valley, legal director of the ACLU of Northern California.

Undersheriff Mike Ridgway begged to differ, saying the county law does not discriminate and was “carefully crafted by attorneys to pass constitutional muster” while providing a more transparent process that includes advance notice of the gang insignia at issue.

BTW, it’s not a hardship for these young men (they’re always young men) to avoid gang wear. It’s just that the ACLU is claiming that it is inherently racist to ban clothes that lead to open warfare if the majority of those wearing them are minorities — never mind that they’re also the same young men who engage in open warfare.  The syllogism is sick:  Gang members wear gang clothes that are triggers for violence; these gang members are a subset of the Hispanic population; therefore it’s racist to ban gang clothes that are triggers for violence.

Be Sociable, Share!
  • lee

    Let’s see…
    In NYC, people are claiming that identifying criminal suspects by anything OTHER than their clothes is “racist”:
    And in Marin, banning anything that might indicate “gang member” is racist…
    The next logical step would be that even describing criminal suspects by what they are wearing would be “racist.”

  • MacG

    “The next logical step would be that even describing criminal suspects by what they are wearing would be “racist.””
    As would be a white person, excuse me, Cracker, would be in repeating dialog heard between  two black people greeting one another “Wassup Nigga?”  
    As A commentator on the IJ website said it bans ALL gang attire such as Hell’s Angels too.  Remember when they were a common sight on Fourth Street? Oh yeah, and the Gypsies?  Glad they got old.  At any rate, the Red and the Blue Nortenos and Surrenos are Hispanic gangs that will beat the hell out of each other, and even kill and it is the naive young Hispanic ‘men’ that think that wearing gang colors is cool as it only makes them a target, witness the kids that get shot in the Canal.  It ain’t white Arians doing the shooting but red and blue wearing Hispanics.  That my friend is Scientific observation not racisim.

  • Michael Adams

    MacG, don’t you know that science is raaaaacist?

  • Ymarsakar

    I’ve never been fooled by Leftist propaganda to begin with.

  • Charles Martel

    The ACLU assumes, as do all progressives, that race predetermines almost everything about a person, including what he thinks and does. Latino youths are compelled by the power of brownness to wear certain colors. That makes it a racial trait, therefore protected.
    You may ask how brownness makes some Latino youths chose red clothing over blue. The answer is evolution. Think of the squirrel population of Grand Canyon, which over the years, thanks to the immense chasm between the North and South rims, has become two separate species. Latinos, even though they share brownness (“squirreliness”), have evolved into sub-species that express their differentiation through clothing color selection. 
    Despite their different evolutionary paths, the Nortenos and Surenos are able to reproduce with one another. The famous liberal British scientist William Shakespeare was the first to note this capability in his landmark study of rival Latino gangs, “Romeo and Juliet.”

  • Ymarsakar

    When rape becomes the gangster and Muslim creed, they will make banning rape racist as well. Just wait and watch. It’s already happened in Sweden, Norway, Britain, etc.
    And you know why they are doing it? Because slaves don’t deserve sexual protections or reproductive services (other than abortion to cleanse the race and keep the population of slaves in check). Only the Ruling Caste will have security of body, mind, and spirit. This is what people wanted when they voted in absolute human utopian dominion. And that is what they will get.
    It is too late for them to regret it. They are responsible for the evils they have supported. There is no such thing as an excuse large enough to cleanse your sins and evils from existence.

  • Queensman

    Isn’t it ageist and sexist to describe them as “young men”?  After all I remember the grannies gang from Monte Python that beat up the local young toughs.  Frankly, I think the only description that passes constitutional and politically correct muster is to describe them as “human beings”.  Or is that discriminatory by species?  Oh forget it, let’s just not describe them at all.