Gang Resources from the National Crime Prevention Council (NCPC)

The next Gang Talk Thursday will be June 17th from 3:00 – 4:00 pm Eastern time (rescheduled from May 20th, rescheduled from January).

The Emergence of Hybrid Gangs

With an increased national emphasis on homeland security, gang activity has not received the attention it did even a decade ago. The results of recent nationwide surveys of police indicate that gangs have not decreased or become less dangerous to our communities. On the contrary, as police and community pressure have waned, gangs have gained strength and are more active with controlling the drug trade, recruiting new members, and expanding their reach to more communities. Additionally, police agencies are seeing more hybrid gangs that don’t follow traditional organization and operating methods of traditional gangs. Hybridization makes intelligence gathering and dissemination more difficult for people in all facets of the criminal justice system and the community. This webinar was designed to provide an overview of emerging trends in hybrid gang activity.

California Attorney General’s Office Crime and Violence Prevention Center. (2003). Gangs – A COMMUNITY RESPONSE. http://www.safestate.org
National Alliance of Gang Investigators Associations. (2005). National Gang Threat Assessment. http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/BJA/what/2005_threat_assesment.pdf
Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention. (2001). Hybrid and Other Modern Gangs. http://www.nationalgangcenter.gov
Thrasher, F.M. (1927). The Gang: A Study of One Thousand Three Hundred Thirteen Gangs in Chicago. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago.
Valdez, A. (2007). Gangs Across America: History and Sociology. San Clemente, CA: Law Tech Publishing.

This bulletin, from the Bureau of Justice Assistance and the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, reviews the chronology of major historical events associated with the emergence of street gangs in each of the four major U.S. geographic regions. (NCJ 230569)

http://www.nationalgangcenter.gov/Content/Documents/History-of-Street-Gangs.pdf

Here’s an essay on Leaderless Resistance by Louis Beam.

http://www.louisbeam.com/leaderless.htm

Gangs in the Military

Posted: wnRenderDate(‘Thursday, May 13, 2010 2:35 AM EST’, ”, true); May 13, 2010 1:35 AM CDT Thursday, May 13, 2010 2:35 AM EST

Featured Video

if (PLATFORM.EventMan) PLATFORM.EventMan.triggerEvent(‘WNStoryRelatedBoxdone’);

Although gang members constitute only a fraction of military personnel worldwide, they are a significant problem for the military and communities surrounding military bases. Since the early 1990s, the Armed Forces have taken steps to try to gain control the gang problem. The Secretary of the Army’s Task Force on Extremist Activities conducted an investigation in 1996 and found extremist and gang activity in the Army was causing significant security concerns for many soldiers (U.S. Department of Defense, 1996).

Gang members join the military for different reasons.

More at http://www.lawofficer.com/news-and-articles/articles/online/2010/gangs_in_the_military.html

School leaders need to be able to treat gangs as they would any other group of people that threaten the safety of the students. In the elementary, middle, and high schools, youth who are involved with gangs will often be disruptive or divisive in the classroom. Teachers must be able to respond with respect while still controlling the situation. The School Resource Officers are trained to identify problems — including the presence of gangs. Work with them. Don’t let the kids in the school be terrorized by gang members — protect them.

2. What should parents do to keep their kids out of gangs?

Parents need to fight the tendency to think “my child would never join a gang” and act as if they want to do everything in their power to keep that from happening. This applies to parents at all socio-economic levels. Parents need to teach their children discipline and respect and the boldness to express individuality. If you sense that your child has something they don’t belong having in their possession (gang attire, paraphernalia, guns, knives, drugs, etc.) ask them about it and then follow up by looking through their possessions — no matter what they think about it. Gangs are not a minor illness that will go away with time. They are a poison that will kill people. If a police officer suspects your child is in a gang — don’t start by denying it, start by trying to see why it might look that way.

Act like a parent — not a lawyer.

Demand that the local school system stop tolerating the presence of gang members in the schools. Call your elected representatives and public servants regularly and voice your concerns. There are gangs in many of the public schools in Middle Tennessee — stop sitting idly by and letting them establish a presence in the schools. If the people we vote for and pay to run the schools won’t work to keep gangs from taking over the schools — replace them.

3. What should youths who are being recruited to be in a gang do?

If members of a gang try to recruit you — make it clear that you are not interested. It is possible to be respectful while declining an offer to join or even affiliate with the gang. These people will act as if they will be your best friends and yet what they will do is help you ruin your life. Gang members rarely become productive citizens and when they do it is only after they leave the gang – many are dead before they are old enough to be parents. If you don’t know what you want to do with your life — it’s better to do nothing than to join a gang (even if they don’t call themselves a “gang”).

4. What should members of the community (police, churches, neighborhood groups, etc.) do about gangs?

Community leaders need to respond to gangs as if they are poisonous to the welfare and safety of all members of the community — because they are. The gang mentality is being shared through movies, music, and Internet communication methods, and will reach the youth. Members of the community need to be vigilant in their search for indicators of gang activity and find things for the youth to do other than “hanging out” with a bunch of thugs. Avoid denial at all costs — if someone acts like they are in a gang they probably are. There’s no need to support what others are doing when what they are doing hurts them and everyone that comes in contact with them. Being a gang member is not a protected class of society – treat gangs like you want them to go away — and they will.

Carter Smith is an Assistant Professor of Criminal Justice at Middle Tennessee State University (MTSU) and a founding board member of the Tennessee Gang Investigators Association (TNGIA). MTSU and TNGIA are co-hosting a Youth Gang – Organized Crime Symposium March 11-13, 2010. The event is open to the public. For more information, visit http://www.mtsu.edu/fire

More at The Tennessean.

Low-level gang members barely make pocket change, said Carter Smith, a gang expert and assistant professor in the criminal justice department at Middle Tennessee State University.

Compare the structure of a gang to a fast-food restaurant. The local manager doesn’t make much, but the guy who owns three or four McDonald’s can do pretty well.

“The bottom line is it’s business,” Smith said. “It’s just a matter of what risk you’re willing to take.”

Carter Smith, a parent and gang expert who lives in Franklin and works as a professor at Middle Tennessee State University, said parents who think their kids are immune because they live in an upscale neighborhood or don’t fit the typical gang-member profile may be at risk of losing their sons or daughters to gangs.“

People in a gang may target them because they have a car, they have money, and they have accesses to places the members of the gang may not have,” Smith said.

Nothing good can come from street gang members in possession of a military-style rocket launcher, and Chicago police have made sure nothing bad will come of it either.

The department’s Organized Crime Division confiscated the launcher and 13 other weapons after executing several search warrants on the West Side.

Charged in the case is Andre Tatum, 41, of the 800 block of North Lawler. Police say he’s a member of the 4-Corner Hustler’s street gang. He’s charged with 11 counts of misdemeanor firearms possession and one count of misdemeanor possession of ammunition.

A spokesperson from News Affairs could not say why the State’s Attorney’s Office approved misdemeanor as opposed to felony charges. If Tatum is not a convicted felon and has a valid FOID card, that may be two reasons the charges aren’t upgraded.

In Tatum’s home alone, police recovered 5 semi-automatic handguns, 2 shotguns, 4 rifles and 15 boxes of ammo.

Another warrant executed at a different location turned up 3 additional weapons, including the LAW Rocket. LAW stands for light anti-tank weapon and it’s a one-shot only weapon, according to a CPD press release. I haven’t seen any tanks rolling down the streets of Chicago recently, though with this type of weaponry out there, maybe law enforcement should consider investing in a few.

February 13, 8:58 AMChicago Crime ExaminerDeborah O’Malley http://www.examiner.com/x-7520-Chicago-Crime-Examiner~y2010m2d13-Antitank-rocket-launcher-among-14-weapons-seized-on-the-West-Side-of-Chicago

Under the revised instructions,contained in the NEW DoD Instruction:

“Military personnel must not actively advocate supremacist doctrine, ideology, or causes, including those that advance, encourage, or advocate illegal discrimination based on race, creed, color, sex, religion, ethnicity, or national origin or that advance,encourage, or advocate the use of force, violence, or criminal activity or otherwise advance efforts to deprive individuals of their civil rights.”

And then there’s a very short part about gang affiliations:

“Military personnel must reject active participation in criminal gangs pursuant to section 544 of Public Law 110-181 and in other organizations that advocate supremacist doctrine, ideology, or causes; attempt to create illegal discrimination based on race, creed, color, sex, religion, ethnicity, or national origin; advocate the use of force, violence, or criminal activity; or otherwise engage in efforts to deprive individuals of their civil rights.

Active participation in such gangs or organizations is prohibited.

Active participation includes, but is not limited to, fundraising; demonstrating or rallying; recruiting, training, organizing, or leading members; distributing material (including posting on-line); or otherwise engaging in activities in furtherance of the objective of such gangs or organizations that are detrimental to good order, discipline, or mission accomplishment or are incompatible with military service.”

That’s it — just wordsmithing . . . wow, and we waited a year and a half for that!

As noted in Can you prevent membership in organized criminal groups if you are the SecDef?, H.R. 4986: National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008 Section 544 – became law (Public Law 110-181), and required the Secretary of Defense to prescribe regulations to prohibit the active participation of military personnel in street gangs (National Defense Authorization Act [NDAA], 2008, Sec. 544). The bill was passed by both houses of Congress and signed by the President back in January 2008, and it took until November 2009 to make it happen.

Yes, I realize there were other priorities, but at least we could do something that had a chance of working.

Legislative efforts to prohibit street gang members from joining the military were initially added to a defense-spending bill (Public Law 110-181, 2008). The legislation included the provision to add active membership in a street gang to the standing prohibition against active group membership by military members in extremist groups. The legislation was intended to extend the prohibitions of Department of Defense (DoD) Directive 1325.6, which has its history in preventing members of organizations considered subversive and openly anti-government from joining the military in the interests of the national security (Executive Order 10450, 1953). The history of this recent legislation demonstrates a lack of understanding of the requirements for limiting the negative impact of gangs on military communities.

Here’s the problem.

At the time the directive was initially published in 1969, the DoD was concerned with the infiltration of anti-war and anti-military organizations. The directive focused on dissident and protest activities within the military, and especially on activities such as underground newspapers, on-post demonstrations, and serviceman organizations.

In 1986, the Secretary of Defense updated the directive. The directive’s language prohibited “active” participation in “extremist organizations.” This comes from language in Executive Order (EO) 11,785 issued in 1953, during the height of the Cold War, when the government feared Communist infiltration. It was later changed to forbid designating any groups as “totalitarian, fascist, Communist, or subversive” and forbade any circulation or publication of a list of such groups.

I was part of a small group of investigators who saw a gang problem in the military in the early 1990s.

We had problems linking the directive to gangs because of it’s history (originally launched from an Executive Order (EO 10,450: http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/codification/executive-order/10450.html) prohibiting communist groups from infiltrating, then war protesters, now extremists.

It’s pretty clear what actions they wanted to prohibit when they ask “whether the employment or retention in employment in the Federal service of the person being investigated is clearly consistent with the interests of the national security. . . not limited to:

(1) Depending on the relation of the Government employment to the national security:

(i) Any behavior, activities, or associations which tend to show that the individual is not reliable or trustworthy.

(ii) Any deliberate misrepresentations, falsifications, or omissions of material facts.

(iii) Any criminal, infamous, dishonest, immoral, or notoriously disgraceful conduct, habitual use of intoxicants to excess, drug addiction, sexual perversion.

(iv) Any illness, including any mental condition, of a nature which in the opinion of competent medical authority may cause significant defect in the judgment or reliability of the employee, with due regard to the transient or continuing effect of the illness and the medical findings in such case.

(v) Any facts which furnish reason to believe that the individual may be subjected to coercion, influence, or pressure which may cause him to act contrary to the best interests of the national security.

(2) Commission of any act of sabotage, espionage, treason, or sedition, or attempts thereat or preparation therefore, or conspiring with, or aiding or abetting, another to commit or attempt to commit any act of sabotage, espionage, treason, or sedition.

(3) Establishing or continuing a sympathetic association with a saboteur, spy, traitor, seditionist, anarchist, or revolutionist, or with an espionage or other secret agent or representative of a foreign nation, or any representative of a foreign nation whose interests may be inimical to the interests of the United States, or with any person who advocates the use of force or violence to overthrow the government of the United States or the alteration of the form of government of the United States by unconstitutional means.

(4) Advocacy of use of force or violence to overthrow the government of the United States, or of the alteration of the form of government of the United States by unconstitutional means.

(5) Knowing membership with the specific intent of furthering the aims of, or adherence to and active participation in, any foreign or domestic organization, association, movement, group, or combination of persons (hereinafter referred to as organizations) which unlawfully advocates or practices the commission of acts of force or violence to prevent others from exercising their rights under the Constitution or laws of the United States or of any State, or which seeks to overthrow the Government of the United States or any State or subdivision thereof by unlawful means.

(6) Intentional, unauthorized disclosure to any person of security information, or of other information disclosure of which is prohibited by law, or willful violation or disregard of security regulations.

(7) Performing or attempting to perform his duties, or otherwise acting, so as to serve the interests of another government in preference to the interests of the United States.

(8) Refusal by the individual, upon the ground of constitutional privilege against self-incrimination, to testify before a congressional committee regarding charges of his alleged disloyalty or other misconduct.

Note that nowhere in the document is the word “gang” used.

There is and should be a difference between keeping up with people who think that folks of another race are worthless and those who form groups with the intent of committing crime . . .

So now the DoD Reissues DoD Directive 1325.6 as a DoD Instruction. It also contains prohibitions against writing Web sites, BLOGS, and other electronic communications) during duty hours. I can definitely see a connection!

What do you think?