The first sentence already occurs, so not much tearing apart to do, except to point out that an HPD sergeant that I know who is part of the 'hot spot' squad that swarms areas with high crime told me that there were so many cops out in Gulfton that they were running into each other. He told me this anecdote about a year and a half ago, so I do not know if they are still there. From time to time I read about them in other parts of town. They are deployed in conjunction with HPD's computer analysis of crime trends. I have no idea what the last sentence means. EVERY person who is arrested for a crime is prosecuted, not just the 'serious criminals'. If your suggestion is that those with a long rap sheet should be arrested without having committed a crime first, but merely because they have a criminal record, I would question why you even live in the US. There are numerous countries that have the draconian laws that you espouse. It would be much easier for you to move to one of them than for us to get rid of the US and Texas Constitutions and institute a crime of being a 'person of poor character'. If your suggestion is more along the lines of setting higher bonds and bigger sentences to those who commit crimes in Gulfton than elsewhere, that is much easier said than done. However, there is no reason that the DA's office could not assign a task force to creating a coordinated prosecution of Gulfton's most wanted, though I would submit that they have too many task forces already. And there are many policies in place to handle 'revolving door' criminals, such as no bond for a person who commits a new felony while on bond for another felony. That is already done countywide. Much of the Gulfton apartment problem comes from the design of the apartments, allowing crime to occur in the courtyards, out of sight of the police. It is very labor intensive to inspect each of these courtyards, and drug dealers not being as stupid as one might think, post sentries at the gates to warn of approaching officers. Perhaps, rather than spend tax money to fix all of these problems, we should fine the architects who designed these crime traps for engaging in negligent design. That way, we could force architects to consider the societal costs of their ill-thought out designs. The fines collected could go toward salaries for the extra police required to patrol poorly designed apartments, and for razing of bad apartments and building of schools in their place.