LAPD Reduction of Misdemeanors and the South Bay GOP

According to internal reports  released by the Associated Press, the LAPD is directing law enforcement to lay off arresting Angelenos for misdemeanors, instead directing police to issue infractions. Ninety-one misdemeanor offenses will be reduced, according to internal memos. These offenses include possessing or purchasing alcohol as a minor, drinking in public, gambling, defecating in public, trespassing and not having one's dog vaccinated for rabies. Harbor-area residents in the 66th Assembly District, which includes the Harbor Gateway, West Caron, and Harbor City, should be concerned about the sudden and subtle changes in police policy.

Moreover, the diminution of criminal penalties can provide Republicans with an opportunity not only to press on the quality of life issues which affect all South Bay residents, but allow the Republican Party organizations to brandish their more libertarian credentials on crime, both prevention and control, in future elections. Republicans in the 66th district can expose a number of problems associated with state-sponsored micromanaging on one hand, yet at the same time hold Los Angeles and Sacramento lawmakers (predominantly Democratic) accountable for arbitrary budget cuts which neglect to enforce key quality of life issues. On the other hand, conservatives can reach out to libertarian elements as well as minorities alienated by excessive police force by championing a reduction in the overcriminalization of California's penal code.

The LAPD's cost-cutting measures emerge in the wake of budget crises gripping Los Angeles, reductions which are hitting the South Bay with greater severity. Over the past few years, such misdemeanors were often reduced to infractions by the Los Angeles city or district attorneys to begin with, so instructing peace officers to back off on arrests and bookings will eliminate wasted time and money. Conservatives should be leading on these issues, and Republicans in the South Bay can play up their support for efficient crime prevention as well as more effective forms of retribution and rehabilitation.

Instead of arresting a minor for alcohol use, a diversion program following an infraction would permit the youth (and his parents) to work on recovery from substance abuse. Drinking in public in and of itself -- should that even be a crime? Some libertarians have even argued for removing drunk-driving checkpoints. Instead of looking for drunk drivers, the police should focus only a stopping dangerous drivers, since they pose the greater, more manifest threat to the well-being of our communities. Other victimless crimes like gambling should not b subject to criminal penalty, anyway.

To reduce certain misdemeanors to infractions will also spare younger voters. College Students are facing crippling cuts in their education, both at the community college level and in statewide universities. Some youth have already engaged in petty crimes, like loitering or breaking curfew. Instead of police officers' impugning their record with misdemeanors, Republicans can applaud the LAPD's decision to reduce such offenses, and thus keep them off a younger person's record.

The blunt instrument of state force should never wield so many penalties in the first place, and Republicans can hammer this point, too. From Governor Jerry Brown's first two terms in Sacramento until the late 1990s, California voters, including South Bay residents, supportedtough-on-crime legislation which instituted mandatory sentencing and enhanced enhancements for criminals. The "Three Strikes" initiative culminated this drive for enforcement. Last year's Prop. Republicans can fault Democratic lawmakers for overcriminalizing and overpenalizing our state penal code, a policy move which can attract libertarians, limited government advocates in general, and even young voters

When commenting on the impact of LAPD's new police of reducing misdemeanors to infractions, Tom Bristow of the Beach Cities Republicans commented:

"[W]here I think they [LAPD] are making a huge mistake is the 'trespassing" penalty. We are dealing with personal property at that point, and if a private citizen does not have any say as to what happens on their personal property, or who is allowed on it - that is the beginning of collectivism."

Granted, police must enforce the sanctity of private property. Republicans in the South Bay should call out the Los Angeles Police Department for enacting their discretionary policies without input from the City Council or Neighborhood Councils in the Harbor region.

On a related note, Republicans campaigning in the Harbor area can also assail Sacramento for closing courthouses, making it harder for residents to enforce their property rights and maintain law and order. In the original charter following consolidation, Los Angeles City Leaders promised San Pedro residents their own courthouse, so that for future litigation they would not have to travel the twenty-two miles to Downtown Los Angeles. The journey was hard enough then, made worse with the traffic congestion which bottles up Harbor Area residents further still. The San Pedro courthouse will be closed, nevertheless.

South Bay residents should contact their legislators (Al Muratsuchi) on these issues. Crime prevention was a winning issue for Republicans in the 1970s. In 2014, following the mandated release of 10,000 prisoners from California prisons, plus the forced reduction of ninety-one misdemeanors in Los Angeles, South Bay Republicans can expose the present dangers to California residents because a tax-and-spend, regulate-frustrate, regressive-progressive Democratic government has crippled public safety.