Cities all across the nation are doing what they can to stem gang violence and prevent youths from joining gangs. Residents in many cities, including Los Angeles, Oakland, New Orleans, Baltimore, and Philadelphia have sometimes found themselves in desperate situations as gang problems spiral out of control. Consequently, some large cities dealing with serious gang violence have also adapted more desperate policies in order to combat the problem. Some authors have highlighted these new prevention techniques on this blog with mixed emotions.
Los Angeles, which has some of the toughest anti-gang measures in the country, has inspired other cities to follow suit. However, as a recent New York Times article described it, some of those cities that adapted policies like L.A.’s are starting to repeal them, as they view many of the policies as ineffective, even counterproductive.
Large-scale arrests have been a primary component of L.A.’s anti-gang initiatives. But according to the Times article, in Dallas, where many of the L.A. policies are currently being retracted, District Attorney Craig Watkins said, “L.A. has this approach of being tough on crime. But the result of that is overflowing prisons, high crime rates, and increasing numbers of gang members. Now we want to be smart on crime.” The article went on to describe how, even in Los Angeles, law enforcement officers have recently begun to focus more on prevention and intervention, visiting the homes of possible gang members to encourage their parents to get involved, rather than relying solely on arrests to reduce crime.
But meanwhile, California’s overcrowded prison system is being labeled “an emergency,” and the wide-net approach to arrests has unavoidably placed young people who are not actual gang members into prison systems where they are immersed in gang culture. Across the country in Charlotte, NC, which has adopted many of the hard-line policies of Los Angeles, the city’s Mayor Patrick McCrory recently conceded that “young black men not affiliated with gangs could easily be mistaken for gang members,” according to the Times article. He was quoted as saying, “If they act and dress like a gang member, most people will assume they are a gang member, and that’s not beneficial for anyone. This gang-like culture is tough to separate out — whether that’s fair or not, that’s the truth.”
And it really is the truth. I can easily recall years of being unfairly stereotyped myself. And even today, I still experience it from time to time, due to some of my rougher features, I suppose. But that’s where the problem lies. The vast majority of young people are positive and caring citizens, and I truly believe that by casting such a wide net to catch violent gang members, we are in fact creating more criminals in the process.
In Boston, Police Commissioner Edward S. Davis said that his department focuses only on violent offenders now. The Times article quotes him as saying, “We clearly don’t participate in a wide net of arrests. What we’re trying to do is be very focused on those individuals who are actually shooting.” For that, I applaud him.
Why applaud such a minimal goal as only arresting shooters in Boston? What about the rest of the urban chaos and dysfunction that leads to disinvestment from certain neighborhoods. The point is to create safe, welcoming communities. We need to prevent gangs from claiming public spaces as their turf. There should be a third institution between juvie and penitentiary for a last chance to produce young men who will pull the weight in their communities instead of dragging them down. Bigger carrots and sticks. They know they are wasting their time in a dead end gang role but it is too fun to be cool in the moment on the street corner.
Why are prisons ceded to the gangs? You should read "Warden Ragen of Joliet" on how he dealt with the gangs and rehabilitation at Stateville (home to Chicago's felons).
Crime development formula is a virtuous cycle = safe streets + real estate redevelopment to highest best use + tax base strengthened + improved infrastructure, amenities, education (at minimum functional literacy) + employment, housing opportunities + vibrant neighborhoods + many pedestrians and shoppers different hours + beat cops walking = safe streets etc. Also, govt. needs to be employer of first and last resort to convicted felons because they carry the stigm of prison record.
Posted by: Charles Ragen | October 02, 2007 at 04:54 PM
Charles, thank you for your thoughtful comment. You make good points. However, I would not call focusing on violent offenders a minimal goal, but rather a logical goal. The point of my blog article here was to discourage the wide-net approach to arrests in which juveniles, whether they are involved with gangs or not, are arrested on the street and imprisoned for utilizing public property. Sure, we net a few dangerous people in the process, but we also continue to flood our already over-crowded prison systems and turn nonviolent offenders into gang members in the process. And in my opinion, that is the serious problem that we as a society must deal with now. We cannot continue to arrest our way out of crime. I haven't found much on the book you mentioned, but I gather that the point was that gang hierarchies must exist outside of prison to exist in prison...? And I don't deny that whatsoever. But if gangs are hard to resist on the streets, then they are impossible to avoid in prison. I disagree that youths join gangs because "it is fun to be cool in the moment on the street corner." I believe they join gangs for much larger and more serious reasons, particularly family issues and lack of options in the community. Luckily, I did not face these problems, but many youths all over the country do on a daily basis. They need more than short stints in and out of violent prisons. They need jobs and rehabilitation to join society. There is plenty of research that indicates prison can cause more crime overall when it is misused, via the broken homes created and the gang culture inside. If you are willing, please extrapolate on the "third" institution you mentioned, and also how to deal with the stigma of prison records in securing jobs. Thanks again!
Posted by: Brandon Bryn | October 03, 2007 at 05:33 PM
I just wanted to add a link to this article I recently came across: http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9D0CE6DB1E30F936A35753C1A9619C8B63
It describes how deputies in California recently contributed to the problem I describe above by holding "competitions" to make as many arrests as possible. This means that the most dangerous offenders were ignored while the most accessible criminals were prosecutetd, further straining the overcrowded prison population in that state.
Can anyone else contribute?
Posted by: Brandon Bryn | October 15, 2007 at 04:53 PM