Criminal Activities of Gangs and other Dangerous Groups - Research Paper Example

Criminal Activities of Gangs and other Dangerous Groups Introduction The criminal activities of gangs and other dangerous groups impact the lives of all Americans either directly or indirectly (Cozic 1996, 65). The criminal activities of gangs and other dangerous groups are typically regarded as very serious and commands appropriate responses by any criminal justice system. The seriousness of gang-related/group-related criminal activities are derived from studies that distinguish patterned conduct by gangs and other groups to the criminal conduct of non-group, non-gang crime (Spergel 1993, 24). This essay examines the criminal activities of gangs and other dangerous groups and evaluates why and how these activities propel criminal justice responses. I. Nature of Gangs and Other Dangerous Groups Gang violence and the violence of organized criminal groups is particularly problematic worldwide. These organized groups have a major role to play in violence of all kinds and range in scope and rage from ethnic uprising to narcotics and may even infiltrate “law and order” (Hagedorn 2008, xxiii). Some of the criminal activities attributed to gangs and other dangerous are prostitution rings, profiteering, armed robbery, murder, drug smuggling among others (Miyazawa et al 1995, 142). Gangs have always impacted societies, however, in the current urbanized character of most of the world, gangs and other groups of organized criminal are emerging at a faster rate with greater intensity than at any other time in criminal justice history (Hagedorn 2008, xxiii). What distinguishes the criminal activities of gangs and other organized groups from other kinds of criminal activities is the brazenness of gang and group criminal activities. Gangs and other dangerous groups typically conduct their criminal activities out in the open. As Siegel (2009) explains: Brazen criminal activity undermines community solidarity because it signals that the police must be either corrupt or inept (171). This openness of gangs and other dangerous groups’ criminal activities also demonstrates the degree of confidence that these criminal groups have that they have either “silenced” or “intimidated law-abiding people in their midst” (Siegel 2009, 171). Research studies indicate that criminal gangs and other criminal groups are more prevalent in cities with big populations and with large business activities. In this regard, group and gang violence and other criminal activities develop with greater intensity and frequency in cities where community unity is lacking, there is active commerce and there are a number of entertainment businesses (Miyazawa et al 1995, 142). Violence committed by gangs and other dangerous groups is also problematic because it can be and is quite often characterized as instrumental and expressive (Levinson 2002, 1121). Levinson (2002) explains that “expressive violence is an end in itself” (1121). It is characterized by the objective of relieving tension and conflict. Instrumental violence aims at achieving an objective and is typically “motivated by market demands” (Levinson 2002, 1121). In this regard, gangs and other criminal groups engage in instrumental violence for the perpetuation of dealing with goods and services outside of the law. This brings in the dealing in narcotics, prostitution and trafficking/smuggling of goods and services. These activities are typically carried out under threat or fear of violence to achieve these ends. Expressive violence is more likely associated with gang-to-gang violence, hate crimes, violence, political crimes such as terrorism (Levinson 2002, 1121). Gangs and other criminal groups are particularly dangerous because they take control both figuratively and literally of specific areas and this generate gang/group wars that threatens stability and increases community fear and helplessness (Kaplan 2000, 552). These groups are continuously growing in size and number so that the facilitation of crime is more efficient and successful. In other words, gangs and other groups typically have the human and capital resources to purchase guns and to carry out crimes effectively. The criminal acting alone does not come as close to the gang or criminal group in terms of matching the resources of the criminal justice system in combating crime. To this end, criminal gangs and other organized criminal groups are formidable challenges for law enforcement agencies and their partners. Criminal justice systems are particularly concerned about the appeal of gangs and organized criminal groups to young people (Siegel et al 2008, 133). Siegel (2009) argues that the theory of differential opportunity is illustrated in the propensity of youth to join or form gangs and other dangerous groups in disorganized or unstable areas “where youths lack the opportunity to gain success through conventional means (186). Essentially, the differential opportunity theory proposes that people ultimately have the same goals but lack the same means to achieve those goals. Those lacking the means are more likely to seek alternative and unconventional methods for achieving those goals (Siegel 2009, 186). This also ties in with the true to strain theory that youth who have the desire to adhere to the values of the middle classes in inner cities will perceive gangs as a viable alternative (Siegel 2009, 186). Regardless of the criminal activities of gangs and other dangerous groups, violence is typically associated with these activities. For instance, studies conducted demonstrate that street gang violence accounts for most the more serious violence the US’s larger cities. Moreover, studies conducted in major US cities indicate that at least one-third of the murders committed in Chicago are gang/group-related, so are one half of all murders in Los Angeles and 75 percent of the murders in Lowell, Masschusetts (Braga 2008, 79). II. Criminal Justice Approach to the Criminal Activities of Gangs and other Dangerous Groups The criminal justice system in the US adopted an approach to the suppression and prevention of the criminal activities of gangs and other dangerous groups by virtue of four distinctive designs. The first design was the organization and mobilization of local communities. The second design was by virtue of social intervention which included reaching out to the youth. This was followed by a modification of the design by providing social and economic opportunities particularly for the youth. The most recent approach to gang/group crime prevention was increased incarceration and suppression. Each of these approaches were marked by a strategy aimed as “organizational change and development (Spergel 1993, 81). Community organization and mobilization developed in the early 1920s and 1930s and was predicated on the concept that co-existing institutions were poorly organized to maintain social control and supervision. These institutions were typically characterized as church, schools, families and youth agencies. It was believed that the weaknesses in these institutions were not turning out productive youth, who developed into crime oriented adults with the result that gangs were formed and developed attracting members of all ages (Spergel 1993, 91). The idea was to strengthen community ties by creating a partnership where the ordinary citizen had a sense of shared responsibility with law enforcement and the criminal justice system for local community stability. This would be accomplished by focusing on appropriate supervision of the youth, fostering good leadership. It also entailed focusing on encouraging rehabilitation of ex-group/gang members and ex-convicts in general (Spergel 1993, 82). The social intervention approach developed in the 1940s and focused on the theory that gangs and group organizations provided a basis for the lower-classes to find alternative methods of success. The focus once again was on the youth and this was accomplished by setting up youth organizations that provided alternatives to unlawful gang and group membership. These alternative groups focused on group peer counseling, group “development activities” and “crisis intervention and mediation” organizations (Spergel 1993, 84). By the end of the 1980s a number of youth outreach agencies started targeting the youth with a view to preventing gang/group violence and criminal activities with an emphasis on the narcotics trade. This was accomplished by involving the ordinary citizens and ex-gang members (Spergel 1993, 85). Interspersed with the youth outreach approach was the provision of opportunities approach which developed around the late 1950s and 1960s. The idea was to modify social institutions such as schools and training facilities in the cities. Opportunities for political and economic participations were also emphasized. The idea was borne out of the concept that close ties to the government would increase a sense of social responsibilities and the provision of economic opportunities would diminish the appeal of gangs and other dangerous groups. Spergel (1993) describes these strategies as: The Ford Foundation, the President’s Committee on Juvenile Delinquency and Youth Development, the Office of Economic Opportunity, the Labor Department, and local foundations stimulated the development of new programs through the schools, neighborhood organizations, special training programs, job projects, business, and industry toward the social and economic advancement of people, including youth, in disadvantaged inner-city and rural areas (85). With the emphasis on conservatism, the approach to gang/group criminal activities began to go in a different direction in the late 1970s and 1980s. This direction was characterized by gang/group suppression. Perceptions developed that the gang itself was both evil and dangerous and could not be reached or modified by social institutions and the ongoing outreach programs. In general, perceptions were that gang members could not be rehabilitated or influenced to take conventional approaches to social and economic success. What was required was aggressive law enforcement initiatives. What developed was a greater partnership between police and prosecutors. This resulting in a greater emphasis on information exchange tactics, increased surveillance and rigorous police patrols comprised of special units. Prosecutors focused on bringing “hard-core” gang members to justice (Spergel 1993, 86). States began passing statutes that provided for longer sentences for individuals involved in serious gang-related criminal activities. Task forces emerged for the purpose of gather intelligence and the result was increased arrests, convictions and longer custodial sentences (Spregel 1993, 86). Suppression of gang/group suppression continues to be the main strategy employed by law enforcement and criminal justice objectives. In a number of US cities, aggressive arrests, prosecutions and detention strategies against gang/group members is the norm (Roberts 2003, 38). There is a prevailing culture within the criminal justice system that specific gangs and the hardcore gang member are so deeply attached to the lifestyle of gang and group criminal organization that the only satisfactory method for curbing their activities is for rigorous law enforcement strategies and aggressive incarceration. Legislators have reflected this thinking by making provision for stiffer criminal penalties for the hardcore gang members and for those who engage in gang member recruitment. In this regard law enforcement options include methods for identifying members who are active, have established territorial regimes, hierarchal structures and specified activities. These territories, activities and members are targeted by law enforcement (Arrington 2007, 123). III. Appropriate Responses to Gang/Group Criminal Activities Despite the current approach to suppression of gang/group criminal activities, beneath the surface there are a number of issues that remain unattended so that the perpetuation of gang/group-related criminal activities continues to be problematic (Roberts 200, 38). This appears to suggest that greater attention should be paid to the reasons people join gangs or any other group in the first place and making attempts to respond to those needs in a way that discourages gang and criminal group membership (Roberts 2003, 40). Roberts (40) theorizes that people join gangs for five primary reasons. Those reasons are deeply entrenched in five fundamental human inclinations. They are physiological deficiencies, tendencies to feel safe, a desire or need to feel loved or the need for belonging, low self-esteem and to acquire the feeling that specific goals are reachable (Roberts 2003, 40). It is therefore obvious, that while the suppression techniques are necessary for containing and controlling the criminal activities of gangs and other types of dangerous groups, a lot more needs to be done. In any event, it has been argued that suppression strategies only result in gang and criminal group activities to relocate and to take their activities to other areas (Roberts and Springer 2007, 193). Klien (1995) suggests that unless and until criminal justice policy makers and strategists accept that gangs are a natural consequence of society’s shortcomings, all of the strategies past and present will continue to be ineffective (3). Society must come to terms with its relationship with criminal gangs and other dangerous groups. Klein (1995) bluntly remarks that “gangs have a societal context,” and “the context is us” (3). To this end strategies should begin within societies, starting with those institutions that have the closest ties to the individual’s development and growing perceptions of the world at large. This means that schools and families should be more focused on prevention and awareness strategies. For instance Duffy and Gillig (2004) suggests that schools can play an entirely active role in prevention and awareness strategies by forbidding certain clothing, weapons, violence, unlawful conduct and other items and/or activities that are associated with unlawful group and gang membership (219). Schools should be entirely serious about punishment and enforcement of these kinds of regulatory regimes. Families should be more aware of gang related warnings and should also adopt zero tolerance to those kinds of warning signs. In all cases, families and schools should partner with the local community and police agencies for the purpose of identifying suspected gang activities (Duffy et al 2004, 219). The general idea is to ensure some element of deterrence. Past experiences demonstrate that silence and a lack of concern only enables gang and criminal group activities as they develop a sense of confidence and security in their membership and criminal activities. Other strategies require a more committed effort by government agencies and social welfare policy makers to ensure equal opportunities for all. Certainly, no criminal activities can be eradicated altogether but developing closer ties within the family and within society with those who are most at risk of seeking alternative methods of achieving a feeling or belonging or feeling safe or achieving goals, will go a long way toward curtailing gang membership. These strategies together with rigorous attention by prosecutors and police on gang activities will also minimize the risk of gang and dangerous group criminal activities. Conclusion The current and past literature of gang and dangerous group activities suggest that these groups have control of society. To this end criminal justice systems have not yet figured out how to control gangs and other dangerous groups’ criminal activities. Perhaps there are lessons to be learned from the efforts of the past and the current efforts to suppress gang and other criminal groups’ activities. While it is entirely necessary to continue with suppression strategies, reformation of gangs and other groups need to be coordinated with reform of societal attitudes. Increasing community awareness and prevention strategies offers a more comprehensive and long-term strategy for discouraging gang recruitment and curtailing gang and group criminal activities. Bibliography Arrington, R. (2007) Crime Prevention: The Law Enforcement Officer’s Practical Guide. Jones and Bartlett Publishers. Braga, A. (2008) Problem-Oriented Policing and Crime Prevention. Criminal Justice Press. Cozic, C. (1996) Gangs: Opposing Viewpoints. Greenhaven Press. Duffy, M. and Gillig, E. (2004) Teen Gangs: A Global View. Greenwood Publishing Group. Hagedorn, J. (2008) A World of Gangs: Armed Young Men and Gansta Culture. University of Minnesota Press. Kaplan, J. (2000) Encyclopedia of White Power: A Sourcebook on the Radical Racist Right. Rowman Altamira. Klien, M. (1995) The American Street Gang: Its Nature, Prevalence and Control. Oxford University Press. Levinson, D. (2002) Encyclopedia of Crime and Punishment, Vol. 1. SAGE Publications. Miyazawa, K. and Miyazawa, S. (1995) Crime Prevention in the Urban Community. Martinus Nijhoff Publishers. Roberts, A. (2003) Critical Issues in Crime and Justice. SAGE Publications. Roberts, A. and Springer, D. (2007) Social Work in Juvenile and Criminal Justice Settings. Charles D. Thomas Publishers. Siegel, L. (2009) Criminology. Cengage Learning. Siefel, L. and Welsh, B. (2008) Juvenile Delinquency: Theory, Practice, and Law. Cengage Learning. Spergel, I. (1993) Gang Suppression and Intervention: An Assessment. DIANE Publishing. Read More