Crime Free Zones declared in Calif City.

I know the idea of a crime free zone seems silly at first blush, but there might be some merit to the idea of having zones where some crimes are allowed.

By no means am I suggesting that there should be zones where any crime is allowed. For example, it is ridiculous for there to be zone where murder or rape is acceptable. However, it would be beneficial to move certain victimless crimes like drug dealing and prostitution to areas where people who commit these crimes would not bother anybody.

While you're in my place, please refrain from criminal activity?

I prefer the sign outside Las Vegas "Marijuana Laws Strictly Enforced".

Both have about the same effect however.

On a serious note I recently came across some statistics while researching firearms laws. As you may know, California has very strict gun laws. It is a "no-issue" state (effectively) as far as Concealed Carry Permits are concerned. It has banned "assault rifles" basically because they look mean, but operate exactly like a semi-automatic hunting rifle. Clips must hold no more than ten rounds. You can't buy ammunition mail order. The list goes on and on. California also has 5,444 NIC (National Instant Criminal Background Check systems run by the FBI) checks per 100,000 population, a rough measure of the number of people purchasimg weapons.

Contrast that to Washington State, which is a "shall-issue" state as far as CCLs go. The local PD MUST give you one unless there's a reason not to. It has not banned "assault" rifles. There are no limits on clips. You CAN buy ammo mail order, etc. It's not perfect. Class III weapons require a special license, for example. And Washington has 12,508 NIC checks per 100,000, more than twice that of California. We don't have actual ownership numbers, but it certainly looks like Washington has far more firearms than California on a per capita basis.

OK, so that must mean that California is a far safer state to live in than Washington, right? If the hoplophobes are right, then these California laws have made California safer than middle of the road states like Washington, right?

Well, no. California's violent crime rate is 2.4 times higher than Washington. The one area where Washington is a bit higher than California, but not by much, is physical assault and battery. Washington beats up more people than California by a slight margin.

Originally posted by hotpinkurinalmint
I know the idea of a crime free zone seems silly at first blush, but there might be some merit to the idea of having zones where some crimes are allowed.

By no means am I suggesting that there should be zones where any crime is allowed. For example, it is ridiculous for there to be zone where murder or rape is acceptable. However, it would be beneficial to move certain victimless crimes like drug dealing and prostitution to areas where people who commit these crimes would not bother anybody.

"Victimless crimes" is a misnomer and if we are to take seriously the abrogations and derogation's of real crime, I would suggest that repealing all these laws that invent "victimless crimes" would be the smarter route to go, and wouldn't seem nearly as silly. Not at first blush, or any subsequent blushes.

These signs are about as stupid as when a vendor puts up a sign saying "absolutely no returns" or "store is not responsible for XXXXX".

While they do fool some poor ignorant people, it's common knowledge (or it should be anyways) that you can't just put up a sign to fix a problem or resolve yourself from liability.

This is what I see happening:

Someone is enjoying a nice picnic, star gazing, whatever, a criminal robs, beats or rapes someone in this so called "Crime Free Zone".

The victim sues the pants off the city because he or she really thought they were afforded protection from crime in that area.

The city will yank those signs so fast....

Litigation it's the American way.... (does not mean I condone it)

Not much get's done in this country until a price tag is put on it and it hurts someones bottom line or wallet, and then it may not really change much if their wallets are deep enough.



[edit on 1-7-2010 by lucentenigma]

reply to post by FortAnthem

Who knows, with the economy in the tank and towns forced to fire their police forces, maybe these signs are the solution to California's crime AND budget problems. We've seen how well those No Place for Hate signs have wiped out hatred in the world, right?

I think we should post these signs outside of the 1) US Congress, 2) The "White" house, 3) The Supreme Court, 4) All Federal Reserve Branches, 5) The offices of all bureaucrats who are out of control including CIA, FBI, DEA, BATFE, ad nauseum.... edit: forgot the IRS!!!!!!

[edit on 1-7-2010 by 1SawSomeThings]

some of us already live in "free crime zone", it's called "your contry". Crime will alway be crime. We already have a "sign" saying "free crime zone" and this "sign" has a couple of thunsand of pages .... it's called the law. ( sorry dont know the name you give to the book of the law in usa). Then you get the constitution(usa,canada) which say "you are safe with in this country because we try to make-it a "free crime zone". Then again is it as safe as everybody would like-it to be ? No ! Security and fealing secure is two thing.

Crime is still here, there and every where. Some will say you committed a crime agains god, other will say again nature and other will simply say the law forbit-it so it's a crime. You can't prevent crime, only slow-it down. I stongly believe that every "system" can be cheated, only getting caught make-it a crime. I know to many people who never question there action or never doubt there way of thinking. There the ones that really scare me.

Better education, more love and less greed is maybe a better direction then mirco-zoning. Ok I sound like a hippy now !

I can't imaging all the restrictions in a REAL "free crime zone". My guess would be that this model would be pretty close to dictature or communist society... in disky

It's just my uninstitualize oppinion.

Here a really good example of a sign that stop crime every day... (sarcasame) Just replace Warning by "free crime zone" and there you go ! The Arizona problem is solve !



Seriously, it make a diffence other then "We told you so" ?

[edit on 1-7-2010 by truthy-bird]

Originally posted by hotpinkurinalmint
I know the idea of a crime free zone seems silly at first blush, but there might be some merit to the idea of having zones where some crimes are allowed.

By no means am I suggesting that there should be zones where any crime is allowed. For example, it is ridiculous for there to be zone where murder or rape is acceptable. However, it would be beneficial to move certain victimless crimes like drug dealing and prostitution to areas where people who commit these crimes would not bother anybody.

there are places like this called slums and ghettos. however, it does bother people and gets many people killed. victimless crimes should not be crimes at all, and until that is changed, this will always be an issue. the social stigmas that would come with this type of segregation would be insurmountable for those born in these areas where drug dealing and prostitution were "allowed" but not "legal." its ALREADY bad enough for kids coming out of inner-city ghettos. kids would be put in harms way due to the dangerous people who would choose to live in such areas. imagine LA without cops being killed because the cops would have no reason to protect the citizens who choose to live outside the law.

its not like EVERYBODY in the crime-free zones would be living crime-free either. technically, the reason we have laws in the first place is the hope that people wont break them, creating a "crime-free" society. still, people do plenty of drugs, buy plenty of illegal guns, beat each other up, rape each other and kill each other. the people in the crime-free zones will hide their marijuana and their guns just like people do today. the only way to keep this from happening would be to enforce a total police state on the people living in the crime-free zones.

i say legalize all drugs. i say legalize prostitution. we already have ambien and pornography, so whats the real difference? that a marijuana dealer or a prostitute doesnt have the same right of protections as a pharmaceutical company or an "actress"(lol)? the only way these restrictions are successful is in creating under-classes in society and hypocrisy in law enforcement.

oh ya, and the creation of stupid signs like these that uphold the illusion of safety. i call bull crap.

Originally posted by IntelRetard
Most towns need the unwritten laws such as South Boston has. Didn't see nutton don't know nutton. The citizens will take care of the business and the Police will make their best effort on the standard xeroxed generic crime report.....

Maybe 20 years ago; before everyone in "Southie" moved to the South Shore and the Yuppies moved in. I think the turning point was when GLAAD marched for the first time in the St Patrick's Day Parade and no one showed up except out-of-towners and the Police.

Originally posted by Cyprex
Just to add, I spent my teen years in Landcaster in the mid 90's. I remember it as a horriable desert town, with nothing to do. Glad I got out!

I was in Lancaster in the 50's and 60's.
I have two nieces and a nephew that was born in Lancaster in the 60's.
Talk about a horrible desert town in the 90's, TRY being a teenager there in the 60's there was nothing to do, one stop light, a Macy's and a Sears and A& W Root Bear. Yes you could go to Palmdale, That was a hang out for the Hells Angels.

Not trying to derail the thread, sorry. BUT, Signs in Lancaster California to Stop Crime, Just Go There, We're talking California, What do they have left that any one wants?

More Crime, Less Police Protection

Originally posted by Cyprex
Just to add, I spent my teen years in Landcaster in the mid 90's. I remember it as a horriable desert town, with nothing to do. Glad I got out!

Dont want to derail too ... In canada we have a stu... light headed joke about small village.

This village is so small that it uses the same sign for Welcome and Aurevoir

Originally posted by dbloch7986
I have no idea what to think here. I mean on one hand bit seems good, but on the other hand it almost seems to imply that you're allowed to commit crimes elsewhere. I guess I would have to see the statistics. OP do you have any info on the efficacy of the signs? I mean rather than just poking fun, shouldn't we see if it works? It might be hard to believe but one of the safest cities in the nation is closer to LA than Lancaster is: Irvine, CA.

I provided a link to the crime stats in the OP. They came off as slightly better than Philly but with a higher burglary rating. Their comparison with the national average wasn't pretty though.


Crime rate comparison: Lancaster, Calif. vs Philly, Pa.

It's a pretty cool link, you can compare the crime stats from any two places by changing the settings at the top of the page.

Try it out.

This is a CRIME FREE ZONE!

You are free to carry out any crime you like in this zone for free. Thank you and have a nice day.

California has been running around like a chicken with it's head cut off for quite a long time. Seriously, what a ridiculous state they've made for themselves.

I can see how the idea sounds pretty silly, and that "nuke-free" zone in Vancouver (was that BC or WA btw?) is hands-down hilarious (a clever real estate agent could become quite successful, I imagine), however I believe some of you are missing the point a little. We have "drug-free zones" which as far as I know, surround any school with a 200 or something foot layer of "protection" by doubling the fine and punishment of anyone caught committing certain crimes. So... technically, its not just for the "gullible"... someone might really not want to be punished doubly! And I`m not sure but if you read the rest of this law, it`s most likely something similiar: a harsher punishment and also from the definition of "disperse" I would gather that there is a harsher punishment if your caught doin the same crime or another crime in a "zone". Drug dealers often rely on their clientele having a way to get a hold of them and a place to meet & exchange dope for dollars, so they may be tempted to want to go back to their old spots after they`ve been caught once, as long as its a "zone" they may be deterred from risking a second bust. Again, it does little to take away from the apparent silliness of such methods. But that doesn`t change the fact that, with a bit of legislation (what`s that? ink, paper, some "important" people`s time? i was going to mention the activity of a few neurons & synapses & whatnot to think up the idea, but actually I`m not going to dignify it to that degree...not while I`m in charge of this post) and a sign, they`ve managed to do...well, a number of things. Pretty cost effective. I wonder if they are trying to kind of, create a beachhead or a base and then "push outward" to sepa r ate the lower class from the higher class. eventually with a wall or armed perimeter or both. the poor being ostracized and punished for their crimes of desperation and the rich get away with their crimes of greed while "society" (a mere parody of its former self) turns a blind eye. Or maybe its just my imagination run wild.



Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com

Reply to post by JohnySeagull

Yes! You just reminded me with our drug-free zones, my friends and I would arrive to school in the mornings wondering amongst eachother "where`s the free drugs?"


Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com

Virginia Tech and Columbine High School are "Gun Free Zones." You may as well put up a sign that says "Unarmed Victims Inside." Only law abiding citizens obey signs. Putting up signs thinking they will actually deter crime is insane.

So do these free crime zones also consist of corruption in their government as well???