Personal rants aside, Cyrus is correct in writing that disproportionate arrests in any population group do not NECESSARILY indicate selective enforcement or profiling.

Some believe that homeless people (or black and Latino people) are more likely to commit crimes. Hey, who wants them dirty furtive drug addicts in our neighborhood? Unless they're well-dressed, paying rent, and out of sight, of course.

Why do Becky and I get Cyrus so riled? I think it's cause he (or she...who knows when someone won't give their real name?) has no good arguments other than personal attacks. There just aren't good arguments for the absurd and unfair laws that target poor and homeless people.

Sleeping, camping, blanket, sparechanging, and sitting bans are all designed to give police broad selective enforcement powers.

In Santa Cruz these ordinances are particularly hypocritical because they expose the fraudulent "progressive" image of City Council and the town.

Thanks again, and once more, if Cyrus, "Huh", "P. Davidson", or anyone else--using whatever names they choose--are welcome to discuss issues (and even to rant a bit) on Free Radio at 427-3772 on Thursdays 6-8 PM and Sundays 9:30 AM to 1 PM. The more facts you bring, the further we'll get.

Much thanks to Tom B, for making available the General Police Orders. It's a valuable document-since it provides us with some of the supposed police guidelines.

Tom, did you ever dig up any specifics on how police are supposed to react to copwatchers?

Or under what circumstances they can legitimately arrest for an infraction offense?

Or what their guidelines are for taking citizen arrests (merchants, yes; homeless,no?)?