GANG CRIMINALITY

    Defining what constitutes a gang is often a long and rancorous process in criminology. Concept formation has not developed much beyond ordinary meaning. Webster's dictionary gives three definitions: a company of criminals; an elementary and close-knit group of antisocial adolescents; and a group of persons engaged in improper acts (Source date). Thrasher, a criminologist, gave us the notions of spontaneous origin, behavior ranging from conventional to wild, and integration through conflict (Thrasher 1927). Miller, another criminologist, stated that gangs are self-formed peer associations bound by mutual interests, with identifiable leadership and well-developed lines of authority, who achieve specific purposes which generally include the conduct of illegal activity and control over a particular territory (Miller 1970). While breadth has characterized how definitions have evolved in criminology, the assumption of criminality has remained.

    Few studies have pointed out that gang behavior, not gangs themselves, are considered criminal. Labeling theorists (Taylor 1989) were the last to do this, emphasizing that a group becomes a gang from the recognition it receives from the community or another gang. Labeling occurs because group activities are recognized as antisocial or deviant, and cohesiveness evolves the group into a gang. Others have argued that gang formation is a product of community disorganization and family dysfunction (Source date). Prior to 1946, legislation and policies were not directed so much toward gangs but toward their delinquent activities. Modem juvenile laws and courts, by contrast, seem designed to deal with gangs as a crime problem in themselves.

   Female gangs, in particular, are seen as a serious problem, but problem awareness still depends upon the level of criminal activity and the types of offenses committed. Getting exact information about female gangs is difficult. Arrest reports have been compiled for several large cities, but only offer information about involvement with the justice system. Female gang crime may perhaps be underreported since we know little about female gang life.

   Most accounts of female gang activity do not raise any issues of criminality. Several studies are confined to one time and place, making it difficult to generalize from their findings. Not all female gangs are involved in some kind of delinquency or criminality. Youth surveys consistently show that delinquency rates of female gang members are lower than those of male gang members, but higher than those of non-gang females and non-gang males (Fagan 1990; Esbensen and Huizinga 1993; Bjerregard and Smith 1993). For example, in Rochester, New York, sixty-six percent of female gang members and eighty-two percent of male gang members reported involvement in at least one serious delinquent act, compared with only seven percent of non-gang females and eleven percent of non-gang males (Bjerregard and Smith 1993).

LITERATURE REVIEW

    What has been the most popular subject of investigation on the topic of gang criminality are the works of Frederick M. Thrasher, Malcolm Klein, and Walter Miller. (1927,1963; 1971; 1975) Many studies spend considerable time discussing the definition of a gang. Since gangs are targets for vigorous law enforcement efforts, the current definition of a gang needs logically to reinforce a gang's criminal and violent image. Thrasher, gang youth were neither more nor less criminal than other youth in their disorganized communities, a point supported by some recent research. For Thrasher, three aspects of gangs and their structure stand out: variation within a community, process of formation, and age divisions. It is these three characteristics that combine to define a gang. Above all a gang is unique, to Thrasher. "It may vary as to membership, type of leaders, mode of organization, interests and activities, and finally as to its status in the community" (1963,36).

   The second most popular theorist on the topic of gang criminality is Walter Miller (1975), a criminologist that has been most influential in criminalizing the definition of gangs. His major works, "Violence by Youth Gangs and Youth groups as a Crime Problem in Major American Cities" surveys officials in twelve U.S. cities concerning their definition of a gang. Miller then summarizes his respondents' views and accepts their definition of a gang as a group of recurrently associating individuals with identifiable leadership, internal organization, identifying with or claiming control over territory in the community, and engaging either individually or collectively in violent or other forms of illegal behavior (Miller 1975). This radical definition that Miller gives is far from the past sociological conceptions of gangs. Miller approves of a major change in the image and formal definition of a gang.

    Klein, who is the third most popular theorist but significant to the field of gangs, points out that criminal justice agencies and the mass media use the term gang more to meet their own ends to achieve disinterested enlightenment (Klein 1971). Klein, who has worked on the definition of what a gang has defines gang as, any denotable adolescent group of youngsters who are generally perceived as a distinct aggregation by others in their neighborhood: recognize themselves as a denotable group (almost invariably with a group name) and have been involved in a sufficient number of delinquent incidents to call forth a consistent negative response from neighborhood residents and/or enforcement agencies (Klein 1971).

RESEARCH PLAN

Gang members are getting younger and bigger in big cities and along the West Coast. This is the Youth Gang Survey Statistics – 1997: Jurisdictions Reporting Youth Gangs by Area Type:

72% -- Large City
33% -- Small City
56% -- Suburban County
24% -- Rural County
51% -- Overall

Jurisdictions Reporting Youth Gangs by Region:
74% -- West
52% -- Midwest
49% -- South
31% -- Northeast
51% -- Overall

Reported Gangs and Members:
Gangs -- 18,267
Gang Members -- 655,385

Estimates to Include Areas not responding to Survey:
Gangs -- 30,533
Gang Members -- 815,896

   According to the Los Angeles Police Department Gang Crime Summary, crime has increased. Homicide has gone up in the last month between June 2001 and July 2001. Attempted Homicide has gone down for the year of July 2001 compared to June 2000.        

The bureau SEU units prepared the gang crime totals and this report was compiled by Detective Support Division

Gang-Related Crimes

Count of Los Angeles City gangs and gang members.

* Includes Battery, ADW and Attempt Murders on Police Officers
** Includes Terrorist Threats

    Correctional Service Canada (CSC) reported an increase among the Aboriginal population. Here is a general breakdown of the gangs around the United States in the year 2000. It includes the population of each gang known in each state, and the number of members each gang has in it.

GANGS INSIDE:

                  POPULATION   PERCENT

                    1/1/2000   OF KNOWN

SYSTEM                         MEMBERS
ALABAMA               25,000   4
ALASKA                 4,197   2.5
ARIZONA               25,986   1.2
ARKANSAS              11,976   30 app.
CALIFORNIA           160,000   30
COLORADO              15,372   8
CONNECTICUT           17,305   4
DELAWARE               6,106   3-5
DISTRICT OF       4,200 app.   < 1
COLUMBIA
FLORIDA               69,596   3.5
GEORGIA          No Response
HAWAII           No Response
IDAHO                  4,608   5
ILLINOIS              44,659   26
INDIANA               18,074   10
IOWA                   7,231   5
KANSAS                 8,484   5
KENTUCKY              15,226   5
LOUISIANA             34,064   2.8
MAINE                    689   10
MARYLAND              22,733   4
MASSACHUSETTS    No Response
MICHIGAN              44,500   6
MINNESOTA              5,927   10.6
MISSISSIPPI           18,331   20
MISSOURI              26,260   15
MONTANA                2,256   one known  member
NEBRASKA               3,601   14
NEVADA                 9,225   7.2
NEW HAMPSHIRE    No Response
NEW JERSEY            32,000   14
NEW MEXICO             5,061   47
NEW YORK              71,802   Unknown
NORTH CAROLINA        31,333   1.8
NORTH DAKOTA             951   7
OHIO                  46,590   9
OKLAHOMA         No Response
OREGON                 9,720   9.23
PENNSYLVANIA          36,384   2.1
RHODE ISLAND           3,020   7-11
SOUTH CAROLINA        22,100   2
SOUTH DAKOTA           2,509   < 10
TENNESSEE             16,793   3
TEXAS                148,471   4
UTAH             No Response
VERMONT                1,143   < 1
VIRGINIA           26,724(1)
WASHINGTON            14,283   5-10
WEST VIRGINIA          2,880   6
WISCONSIN             20,100   28 approx.
WYOMING             1,575(2)   Unknown  

    Each gang identifies itself with different things, such as tattoos, the color of their clothing, the way they walk and talk, the jewelry that is worn, where they hang the most. Here are each states gang identifiers from the year 2000.

VISIBLE IDENTIFIERS:
ALABAMA          Clothing, tattoos, documents in possession
ALASKA           Tattoos and graffiti on mail and property
ARIZONA          Tattoos, body language, associations
ARKANSAS         Tattoos
CALIFORNIA       Clothing, shoes, tattoos
COLORADO         Clothing, hair, tattoos
CONNECTICUT      Clothing, beads, tattoos
DELAWARE         Clothing, shoes, hair, fingernails, beads, tattoos, jewelry, literature, wall art   and graffiti
DISTRICT OF      Tattoos
COLUMBIA
FLORIDA          Tattoos, documents, drawings, photos, publications, books, associations
GEORGIA
HAWAII
IDAHO            Clothing, shoes, hair, fingernails, beads, tattoos, unauthorized inmate organizations
ILLINOIS         Clothing, shoes, hair, fingernails, beads, tattoos
INDIANA          Clothing, tattoos (with a confirmation process)
IOWA             Clothing, tattoos, self-reporting, case history, informants, associations, actions, possession of materials, correspondence
KANSAS           Clothing, shoes, hair, fingernails, beads, tattoos and an established         identification criteria
KENTUCKY         Clothing, shoes, hair, fingernails, beads, tattoos, left/right identifiers
LOUISIANA        Hair, tattoos, evidence of body piercing
MAINE            Clothing, hair, tattoos, eyebrows, graffiti, visitor contacts, hand signs, photos (of known gang members and others using hand signs)
MARYLAND         Clothing, beads, tattoos
MASSACHUSETTS
MICHIGAN         Clothing, shoes, hair, beads, tattoos
MINNESOTA        Clothing, shoes, hair, fingernails, beads, tattoos, eyebrows
MISSISSIPPI      Clothing, shoes, hair, fingernails, beads, tattoos, colors
MISSOURI         Clothing, shoes, beads, tattoos
MONTANA          NA
NEBRASKA         Clothing, shoes, hair, fingernails, beads, tattoos
NEVADA           Tattoos
NEW HAMPSHIRE
NEW JERSEY       Clothing, shoes, hair, fingernails, beads, tattoos, burn marks (brands),     bandanas, head rags
NEW MEXICO       Clothing, shoes, hair, tattoos, specific colors, groupings during         activities or movements, graffiti, symbolism, association, correspondence, group photos,         self-proclamation
NEW YORK         Tattoos; due to policy on grooming and clothing standards, combined with rules on beads, very little gang apparel is evident
NORTH CAROLINA   Hair, fingernails, beads, tattoos
NORTH DAKOTA     Clothing, hair, tattoos, law enforcement information
OHIO             Clothing, shoes, hair, beads, tattoos, groupings, property (paperwork, photos)
OKLAHOMA
OREGON           Clothing, hair, beads, tattoos, activities and statements by inmates
PENNSYLVANIA     Clothing, shoes, hair, beads, tattoos
RHODE ISLAND     Clothing, shoes, hair, fingernails, beads, tattoos
SOUTH CAROLINA   Clothing, shoes, hair, beads, tattoos
SOUTH DAKOTA     Clothing, shoes, beads, tattoos, hand signals
TENNESSEE        Clothing, shoes, beads, tattoos, groupings, inmate patterns
TEXAS            Tattoos, correspondence, known security-threat group paraphernalia
UTAH
VERMONT          Beads, tattoos, self proclaimed
VIRGINIA
WASHINGTON       Clothing, shoes, tattoos, hair ties, manner of wearing clothing
WEST VIRGINIA    Tattoos; all other identifiers are corrected before entering system
WISCONSIN        Clothing, hair, tattoos
WYOMING          Tattoos, correspondence, incident reports, self-proclamation            confidential informants

    Gangs tend to be composed of ethnically similar members, with ethnic gangs distinguishing themselves in terms of such factors as principal orientation such as profit, turf, honor, and socialization, choice of crimes if they are into drug sale, extortion, assault, hate crimes, car theft, and armed robbery, drug of choice, and use of symbols.

PERCENTAGE OF ETHNIC BREAKDOWNS (needs to be put in a neater table)

SYSTEM           Black   White   Hispanic   Asian   Other

ALABAMA          Unable to determine due to older computer

                 program

ALASKA             51      15      .009      22     .1, Native

                                                    American

ARIZONA           .05     .25       .92

ARKANSAS         Breakdown unavailable

CALIFORNIA         30      30        30

COLORADO           39      19        40       1     1, Native

                                                    American

CONNECTICUT      27.1    15.1      57.7             .1, Native

                                                    American

DELAWARE           60    32.2       7.8

DISTRICT OF        80                20

COLUMBIA

FLORIDA          28.1    47.5      22.9      .4

GEORGIA

HAWAII

IDAHO               3      65        29       3

ILLINOIS           74      10        15       1

INDIANA            45      50         5

IOWA             More black and Hispanic than in

                 regular population

KANSAS           Breakdown unavailable

KENTUCKY           56      40         3       1

LOUISIANA         2.4      .4

MAINE              15      79         6

MARYLAND           70      25         5

MASSACHUSETTS

MICHIGAN         Race is not monitored regarding gang membership

                 and is not used as a factor

MINNESOTA          57      23         9       6     5, Native

                                                    American

MISSISSIPPI