Summary: Little Village Gang Violence Reduction

Chapter Four is entitled, “[The] Scope and Nature of the Current Gang Problem.” It focuses on recent trends in number of gangs, gang members and gang-related crimes in each city. In Inglewood, almost all the neighborhoods were claimed by at least one gang, with gang-unit officers agreeing that the city was facing a major gang problem. In Albuquerque, gangs were involved in drug trafficking and property offenses, with 7 out of 8 gang-unit officers believing the city had a major gang problem. In Las Vegas, migration from other cities was thought to be the primary cause of an increase in gang members. 50% of crime in Las Vegas is attributed to gangs, with most officers believing they had a moderate to major gang problem. In Phoenix, the gang problem is described as wave-like, with 70% of gang-unit officers thinking the city had a major gang problem. These statistics were backed up through interviews with officers and city records.

In low income areas and large cities, gang violence is a major problem. Gang violence in Chicago is reaching alarming proportions. Day by day they are increasing rapidly. None of the solutions work effectively to eliminate gangs. However police departments and other government officials are trying their best to provide the same security as other areas in chicago. Thousands of innocent people are dying each year from these ill mannered thugs. In today’s societies gang activity is everywhere, whether it includes violence, drugs, death or any illegal activity. There are several aspects which are causing these violent activities. In past years the police department and the mayor designed different strategies to stop this violence. From my perspective better education and scholarships are the only way to reduce gangs and other illegal activities.

In society today, there is a major problem We live in a society where gangs are taking over our neighborhoods in numbers. It is the responsibility of the individuals to part take in getting their neighborhoods back under control. Gangs are becoming a growing problem in American society. More young people are turning to gangs to solve problems in their lives or for acceptance. When youths join gangs, they drop all their social activities with school, family, and friends. However, individuals ruin their lives, and the chances of them having a decent education, and a successful life by getting involved in gang activity.

A two-pronged prevention approach has proven effective, with primary prevention strategies aimed at the community 's general population and secondary prevention strategies targeting youth between the ages of 7 and 14 who are at high risk of joining gangs. Prevention efforts undertaken by law enforcement departments around the country include: “Participating in community awareness campaigns (e.g. developing public service announcements and poster campaigns). Contacting the parents of peripheral gang members (through the mail or during personal visits) to alert them that their children are involved with a gang. Sponsoring gang hotlines to gather information and facilitate a quick response to gang-related issues. Organizing athletic events with teams of law enforcement officers and gang members. Establishing working relationships with local social service agencies. Making presentations about gangs to schools and community groups as a combined effort at prevention and information gathering. Sponsoring school-based gang and drug prevention programs (e.g. DARE and GREAT)” (Hess, 2013 p.230).

With the leading number of gangs in the country, Los Angeles is thought of as the gang capital of the world. Employing gang suppression strategies that take distinct forms, from anti-gang injunctions to high rate of incarcerations, the City of Angels has failed to live up to its angelic name. Known instead for its demonic gang activity and police suppression efforts, Los Angeles has taken over media headlines as one of the most dangerous places to subsist. Representing a worrisome issue for residents, visitors, city government officials, as well as urban planners, gang violence has rapidly become a threat to public safety. Although current-day gang culture has eased off on the violence, it continues to be one of the greatest planning challenges

The correlation between gangs and drugs has always been an issue for the United States government. Major cities often overlooked the problem of youth gang violence, thinking it was only a 1960’s trend. Sixty years later, gangs and drugs continue to be a problem, but in an increasing number within urban, suburban and rural areas in the United States. People may characterize this problem with words such as violence, increase drug activity, and delinquencies, but not many seem to see the bigger picture. Lack of interaction, collaboration, and strategies from law enforcement, youth centers, businesses, churches, and political icons are increasing gang violence and drug related offenses in major cities. In such cities as Chicago, minority groups are the most vulnerable to joining a gang, which then leads to an involvement with drugs; they are faced with barriers – lack of family support, poverty, segregation, unemployment, etc. An incident that happened in Chicago history is the closing of the Cabrini-Green Project, where people involved with gangs had to find a new home, scattering gang-members throughout the city, and eventually leading to their spread and growth.

As demonstrated by Crime in Chicagoland, Little Village is an area plagued by high crime rates and gang violence. Although the community comprises only 4.4 square miles, police recorded 263 crimes from June 21-July 21, 2017, including 92 thefts, 20 robberies, 5 criminal sexual assaults and 58 quality of life crimes (Chicago Tribune, 2017). While these crimes rates may be construed as normal occurrences in an urban setting, violence and gang activities have a pervasive impact on the development of Little Village youth. According to Kimberly Shinew, Monika Stodolska, Caterina Roman, and Jennifer Yahner (2013), “fear of crime, level of crime victimization, and perceived level of incivilities in the community were related to physical activity,

Urban centers throughout the United States of America and the world have experienced violence within the inner city communities. Many of the inner city communities are low-income and are poverty stricken. The spread of gang membership within the communities has influenced many young adolescents. Activities such as drug dealing, theft, assaults, and murders drive law enforcement to prevent crime. The justice system is also being changed due to the increase in minor violence. One of the reasons is due to people being part of minority groups. The charges pushed by the judicial

Chicago has the biggest gang problem in the country (Thomas & Bass, 2009). “There are more gang members per citizen in Chicago than anywhere else in the country” (Thomas, 2009, para 4). The average Chicago gang leader is 43, convicted of murder and lives in the suburbs. That leader on many occasions directs his gang from jail (Main, 2006) and 95 percent of inmates in the Cook County Jail are gang members (Thomas, 2009). Gangs are everywhere today just like they use to be. The high number of gangs causes violence and deaths to rise in Chicago.

Although these types of programs sound wonderful on paper, most of these programs are unsuccessful and show no signs of deterring at risk youth from joining a gang. A study conducted by Esbensen, Peterson, Taylor, Freng, Osgood, Carson, and Matsuda, (2012), evaluated the success of the G.R.E.A.T. program and found that the rates of violence, delinquency, and gang membership in comparison to the control group were not statistically significant (Peterson et al., 2010). As argued in the study justification midterm question, policy implications geared toward gang reduction focus on social learning and social strain theories, however this has proved thus far to be ineffective in lowering crime rates and gang membership. While policy implications toward gang membership has proved to be unsuccessful and unproductive, I suggest that gang disengagement should instead be heavily focused on, with the specific focus on the types of criminological theories that impact the choices for disengagement and less

Gangs currently hold the power in this community while residents are powerless. They have placed fear on the residents who feel like prisoners in their own community. The goal of Social Action is to shift power back to the community. Residents must act and resist the threats of gangs, and the only way to achieve change in their community is to mobilize against gangs. The community must confront gang and drug activity with the resources provided by the City Manager and Police Chief.

Attorney’s Office and District Attorney’s Office, actively work to stop or curtail criminal acts as they are occurring (BPD, n.d.). One of the intervention tactics discussed involves working in areas of high gang violence to ease tensions and directly address ongoing disputes, in an ultimate attempt to curb the violence associated with gang disputes (BPD, n.d.). This is an example of an intervention method because it attempts to tackle a problem that already exists by directly injecting law enforcement into the situation. Another innovative intervention approach used by the Boston Police focuses on a joint effort between the police and the probation department, wherein the two groups work together to encourage at-risk youth to stay in and maintain curfews, while also violating more dangerous offenders as soon as they break the rules (BPD, n.d.). A final example of an intervention technique is the unique Youth Service Providers Network, which allows police to refer at-risk children for services like counseling, emergency housing and tutoring (BPD, n.d.) In doing so, Boston police can intervene in a child’s life without having to arrest the youth. As Siegel and Welsh (2012) point out, youth crime rates often stem from a lack of other important supportive services, so this type of program is an incredibly powerful response to intervene in the lives of children who might otherwise simply be arrested and funneled into the justice

The national trend towards getting tough on juvenile crime by altering the juvenile justice system to more closely mirror the adult system was examined in order to determine whether secure confinement of juvenile offenders is as effective as community-based rehabilitative and treatment programs for these youth. Politicians and public perceptions have allowed the juvenile justice system to evolve from one of reform based thinking to one of punishment based thinking, placing more young offenders in secure facilities than ever before. The social repercussions of

My topic is to discover gang prevention programs and their effectiveness. The prevention programs being discussed are the G.R.E.A.T. program and the Comprehensive Anti-Gang Initiative (CAGI). The problem is that these prevention methods are not effective in alternatives to gang life. The alternatives could include family, protection, and these support that gangs give to their members. If these programs are not successful in offering these alternatives then the program will not be as effective.

Reginald Clemons conducted this research for is doctoral dissertation. He draws on this large amount of research to immediately make the assertion that juvenile delinquency destroys communities in the United States via criminal behavior as a whole. Juveniles learn a response to societal rules based on their parents own response. Clemons asserts that recidivist juveniles who repeatedly appear in juvenile court may eventually engage in adult criminal behavior. Clemons touches on the Rational Choice Theory and the Neoclassical School of Positivism and notes several initiatives in the State of California to stop juvenile crime. He also states the identification of juvenile delinquents most at risk of continued offending and the factors contributing to their repeat offender is crucial in reducing their offender behavior. Clemons sets out to determine the importance of a number of treatment programs to reducing juvenile recidivism. Secondarily, he attempts to identify and describe the components of juvenile treatment programs that most contribute to a reduction in recidivism. Lastly, he explains his desire to identify and determine which juvenile treatment programs were perceived to be most effective. The three of these purposes are judged by Deputy Probation officers in Los Angeles and Riverside Counties. Clemons identifies four research questions: 1. What is the perceived importance of having a variety of alternative juvenile referral treatment programs to the rate of