I've some problems with details in your post:
1. The "criminal element" isn't stripping any rights away. (Rights can't be taken away, either, only infringed upon; if they can be taken away, they're called privileges.) If anyone, it's law enforcement that is infringing upon rights. Now, if you were referring to law enforcement agents as criminals, then I stand corrected. :)
2. The crime problem in America is not due to a flaw in law enforcement, but due to the ignorance and laxness of the population in general. Through court cases such as Warren vs DC and Gonzales vs Castle Rock, the government has explicitly disavowed any responsibility for any particular person's wellbeing. Whose responsibility is it then? The individual's. After decades of work, laws are finally starting to reflect reality, particularly in places like Alaska, Arizona, and Wyoming.
3. Yes, the parents have shirked responsibility. However, the enabler here is often government, in that through "free" housing, schooling, food, such irresponsible behavior is encouraged. All else being equal, whatever is taxed is discouraged, while whatever is subsidized becomes more commonplace. Aside from welfare in Section 8, another example of "bad parenting" that was only possible due to government subsidation was the Yearning for Zion Ranch, where many of the young mothers were receiving government money to make up for the shortfall the of the polygamous husbands. Take away the subsidation and the situation would largely go away all by itself.
Lastly, as pertains to the article, collective punishment is a slap in the face at best to any free person. If someone is found to have committed a crime, after due process is followed, PUNISH THAT PERSON.