aftermath

one of the luxuries that i grant myself when coming home is to spend a leisurely morning reading the bakersfield californian.

of course, there has been ample news coverage of the mall shooting death earlier this week. a front page story today revealed that sixteen of the thirty-two murders in town this year have been gang related. the mayor frustrated with all of the gang violence, not wanting to have to attend another of of these funerals. she wants to adopt a zero tolerance policy. she announced a community meeting for concerned citizens on saturday morning.

the letters to the editor of late have, of course, been about the mall shooting earlier this week. there have been some particularly disturbing letters, one woman in particular wrote that if the boy who was killed was a gang member, he deserved what he got. one less gang member for the rest of the community to worry about.

more common (and mild) opions reflected were from people who asserted that they would no longer be frequenting the mall.

i was telling my parents this afternoon that i think it's sad that nobody in the community wants to take responsibility for this incident. the gang members can kill each other off? is anyone the least bit curious why these kids are joining gangs in the first place? or the conditions under which they live? or what has led them to this point in their young lives?

why is it so easy to dehumanize gang members?

and then people who will "solve" the problem by ceasing their mall excursions. as long as they don't have to see the problem, as long as the violence does not personally affect them, it can continue.

i don't know what the solution to the problem is. i don't know if there is a solution. but i do think that a good first step would be to see that we can't ignore these kids. we can't wish them away. like it or not, they are part of our community.

@>-->>--