the need for gangs

[researcher]

if cities provided more opportunities to poor people in the areas which gangs operate and provide higher levels of enforcement would gangs continue to exist?

[wcrockets]

Yes they would, however, the dynamics would be different. I think Alonso made an interesting point when he noted that belonging to a group of people (even a gang) is in itself not illegal. It is crime that is illegal.

I have friends who have pride in the neighborhood gang they grew up in but today are saved Christian people who do good now and haven't been involved in any crime in many many years.

A good example is a family from Watts I know who have really come a long long way. Today they work hard, have a beautiful home, are there to minister to their family and give them the kind of upbringing they didn't get. They attend services regularly and minister to those in need. BUT make no mistake; the Mother of the family has the whole house "Graped out" and Dad wears his purple rag folded in his back pocket.

See for them, they took the right approach. It's not about denying where you come from. It's about supernatural positive change and that starts in the mind and the heart with God. Hope you understand better. Peace.

[potentiallyklien]

Absolutely they would. The end result of gangs may be to make money via criminal activity, but their original intentions are noble... they provide for kids what they can't get at home and economic conditions often have little to do with that. As long as there are disfunctional families, there will be gangs.

[Sentenza]

Gangs exist in every corner of the world where the government fails to provide the population. The Us is an extreme example for it.
If theyd spend half of the money they spend for wars and better equipment of the police in social projects in poor neighbourhoods to give the people better oppurtinitys for the future, gangs and crime would go way down, cause gangs would have no breeding ground.
But unfortunately youll never see that happen, cause it contradicts the Us mentality.
Instead of doing this to create peace in the long run, the government takes money out of social projects, schools etc. and spends it for bigger jails, more police.
Gangs would seize to exist if there would be no need for them.
there are many positive examples in history.

[Sentenza]

Maybe this ones not directly connected to the topic, but its still interesting and maybe part of the explanation......Imagine the state of california just distributing the money which they spend for jails between the poor....No one would have to sell drugs to make a living.

4. CALIFORNIA'S WAR ON THE POOR: LEADING THE WORLD IN
INCARCERATION

A system that cannot feed and house its people must inevitably
turn to police terror to control them!

California currently incarcerates 200,000 adults. Almost 60
percent of these committed nonviolent drug or property offenses.
Eight thousand five hundred youths are in jail and 8,500 youths
are in county camps and juvenile halls. Tens of thousands more
people are on probation or parole.

California jails its people at a greater rate than any country in
the world, even including the rest of the United States, which is
second. The state jails 626 people out of every 100,000. In 1970,
the rate was 228 per 100,000. The state is throwing its people in
jail 175 percent faster than it was 20 years ago. This has been
handled by the largest prison building program in human history.
It costs the state, which is virtually bankrupt, $4 billion a year
simply to maintain the system.

California does not jail its people equally. Out of every 100,000
Anglos, 215 are incarcerated. For African Americans, 1,951 adults
are jailed for every 100,000 people; for Latin Americans, it is
543. The state jails more blacks than South Africa did under
apartheid and at a greater rate. The incarceration rate for
juveniles is higher than for adults. California jails one-quarter
of all children behind bars in the country.

Does this massive program of criminalization work? California
today has the highest violent crime rate in its history with 1,059
violent crimes per 100,000 people. This is higher than any country
in the world, even including the United States which is second
with 732 per 100,000 people. A new approach is desperately needed!

Notice that these figures sum up the situation before "three
strikes" was passed. In the next 20 years, it is projected that
the state will jail 200,000 more adults, requiring 80 new prisons
and costing $23 billion minimum!

Has the state gone crazy? Is California the exception? Far from
it. California has always been the national trendsetter. This is
the state that gave the country Proposition 13, tax revolts,
Ronald Reagan, budget cutbacks and workfare. Regardless of whether
your state passes a "three strikes" law, the new federal crime
bill will criminalize the poor in your state, too!

-- The Oakland Organizing Committee

[Mraka]

Shows me Sentenza, that Hippies ran California in the seventees.
We need more Hippies.Peace love and harmony.

[SAVAGE]

Shows me Sentenza, that Hippies ran California in the seventees.
We need more Hippies.Peace love and harmony.

man shut up with your peace cuz we all know there aint going to be none

[ktip]

I agree that there needs to be more resources available to poor and underpvilileged, but do you think that gang members would really make use of available programs??

[Psilly]

Seems like few do, unless you count "gettin a program" to get their ass to a halfway house instead of total lock down or in jail to look good for the parole board. Amazing how prison shows soo many the light, so in that I feel it does the most good. Also teaches hate by conditioning, I feel it's greatest failure.
Or do you mean knocking someone up & not marrying or supporting the child in anyway so they can live with 'they babies momma" in subsidized housing & foodstamps? Many seem to take advantage of that program.

[WhiteBoy]

ironically, gangs are a civic activity for those children that are raised up in violent close urban life,

[Godfather]

Nah...gangs are rebellious groups. In particular, they are common in poor areas, but make no mistake rebels exist in all aspects of society. If areas weren't poor, then perhaps the gang style would differ slightly, but crimes and "gangs" in different forms would still exist.

[Godfather]

Yes they would, however, the dynamics would be different. I think Alonso made an interesting point when he noted that belonging to a group of people (even a gang) is in itself not illegal. It is crime that is illegal.

I have friends who have pride in the neighborhood gang they grew up in but today are saved Christian people who do good now and haven't been involved in any crime in many many years.

A good example is a family from Watts I know who have really come a long long way. Today they work hard, have a beautiful home, are there to minister to their family and give them the kind of upbringing they didn't get. They attend services regularly and minister to those in need. BUT make no mistake; the Mother of the family has the whole house "Graped out" and Dad wears his purple rag folded in his back pocket.

See for them, they took the right approach. It's not about denying where you come from. It's about supernatural positive change and that starts in the mind and the heart with God. Hope you understand better. Peace.

I like that...More power to a family that can remember where they came from. My only question is...don't you feel that the father having the purple rag in his pocket glorifies the gang life for his children? Proves that 'Hey...lemme be in a gang but there's no reason I can't end up like pops later in life'.

[nine one three]

if cities provided more opportunities to poor people in the areas which gangs operate and provide higher levels of enforcement would gangs continue to exist?

maybe but higher levels of enforcement would do no good because the pos would be there but still wouldnt do anything to help us i got involved in gangs for protection that the police werent providing

[Psilly]

Do the cops protect you better now? Great logic. I've never been soooo insecure I had to align myself with others to have them babysit me. Be a man for Gods' sake, or suck someones elses tit to get what your incapable of doing for yourself. Atleast your honest.

[nine one three]

yea im honest, and what are tryin to say that you got involved with gangs for some other reason!??! i was a kid and gettin the shit beat out of me so watch wat you say before you say it

[Psilly]

Okay, good enough, sorry man. I thought you joined older.
I did it for the money, they came in handy for making alot of cash in a business I used to be involved in. I never "joined" per se, I was the money guy, we all made out nicely. I never really respected them, to be honest. They sell loyality to the highest bidder, in this case, me, but lie & steal at every opportunity. I just made it clear, I get screwed once, all further transactions are off. They got real pissed when I went out of business but I said it was out of my hands. I can lie, too, and their lying is why I bailed. That & they made me plenty & I didn't spend every penny I ever came by like them and one fine day you get sick of the risk. Almost all sets have a rat or two, or some weakling who will roll over as soon as he gets cuffed & stuffed. Was only a matter of time, I knew that from day one.
I also never understood why they tell each other their business. I worked with as few people as possible, always. Soo many of them up in each others business they don't even know who ratted on them. I hear feds are actually members now. They'll find out soon enough I guess.
Always wondered how they can trust someone that was forced to join, like you. That & sitting around having to recite some crap & getting boned in the behind by your own gang if you can't remember is pretty gay (lol).
I still would have just stabbed someone first. Being pushed into ganging up that way sucks. Sorry, dude.

[SAINTJAYMES]

ONE OF THE ROOT CAUSES OF THE EPIDIMIC WAS THE DISTRUCTION OF THE BLACK FAMILY STRUCTOR AND BLACK COMMUNITY. IN THE 60S AND EARLY 70S THE F.B.I. REMOVED THE BLACK MAN FROM THE HOME AS A MAN GOD HAS COMISSIONED YOU HEAD AND IF YOU CHOP OFF THE HEAD THE BODY IS SOON TO FOLLOW THATS WHY THE GANG STRUCTOR IS SUCH THERE IS NO HEAD A GANGSTA IS REMOVED FROM THE SET IT DONT MISS A BEAT BUT YOU REMOVE A MAN FROM HIS HOUSEHOLD AND BURDEN THE WOMEN WITH HIS RESPONCEBILTY ON TOP OF HER OWN THE MORAL FRBRIC OF THAT FAMILY IN GREATLY DEMINISHED WE AS BLACK MEN HAVE A GREATER RESPOSCEBILTY TO OUR FUTURE GENERATIONS TO STAND IN THE PLACE OF AUTHORITY AND REGAIN CONTROLL OR DESTINY IT TAKES A STRONG PERSON TO BREAK THE GRIPS OF SHAME ITS HARD TO BE A FATHER WITH NO ROLL TO FOLLOW HARD YES BUT NOT IMPOSSIABLE.

[mikg]

Great posts Sentenza.

I live in Helsinki, the capital of Finland (in Europe). My country is nowadays a well established welfare society, but it hasn't always been like that. Back in the days our country wasn't as rich as it is now.

We don't have any turf gangs anymore (and only very few others - and they are more organized crime than gangs), but my mother told me that when she was young (in the 60s), gangs were all over the city. And it was serious, beeing from the wrong place would've gotten you beat up. There were no firearms or shit like that, but there were a lot of territorial fights where gangmembers used brass knuckles, clubs, knives and stuff like that.

Social changes has made my country a much better place to live in.

[Comatose]

The US justice system built gangs. Sentenza pegged it directly on the head: Gangs form when there is no support from the government. I think its fair to say there was anti-support from this government, that there were steps actively taken to try to break blacc families and punish them for the heinous crime of insisting to be treated remotely fairly. What would you have expected to happen?

researcher
PostPosted: Sat Feb 28, 2004 5:36 pm Post subject: the need for gangs

if cities provided more opportunities to poor people in the areas which gangs operate and provide higher levels of enforcement would gangs continue to exist?

Its too little too late. And what if there were no more Bloods and Crips anyway. Do you think thats where bangin started or somethin? As long as there are any group of people who hold the same ideals, there will be gangs. "Gangs" have been around for thousands of years.

[Jiggaboo_Jones]

Gangs ALWAYS been in this country! The Micks and the Wops, Greasers and the Jets What ever, they just recently can blame the shit on Subject races, when NOT TOO LONG ago it was they folks, thay pappies and shit that was Bangin' I saw that shit on the History Channel that talked about gangs in early New York....

Gangs is always gonna Be, on the reasons why will be differant!

[salamanda_palaganda]

if cities provided more opportunities to poor people in the areas which gangs operate and provide higher levels of enforcement would gangs continue to exist?

There would still be gangs but there would be less violence and fewer gang members.

[Psilly]

Think of it this way, how many "gangstas" would still end up as dishwashers because in a capitilistic coumtry such as the U.S. everyone seems to rise to their own level of incompetence.

[ejerzeygirl]

I agree that there needs to be more resources available to poor and underpvilileged, but do you think that gang members would really make use of available programs??

I think they would, To me I think that gangs do criminal activities as a way to survive. I think if resources were available they would definatly make use of them. BUT this will never happen. The resources they do "make available" are almost impossible to cash in on..There are so many restrictions that almost NO ONE is actually qualified to recieve them.

I mean be rea, people come out of jail and most of the time can't get a job paying more then minimum wage. How can you support your family yet yourself on this?? you can't! The goverment makes it so people have to commit crimes to survive so they can lock them up and cash in on them as inmates. When they are on the street they aren't making any money for "the goverment" but locked up the goverement gets over $30g's per inmate.

[Comatose]

^^^Real shit.

[Garf]

Gangs balance out other peoples jobs; without gangs people would lose thier legitimate jobs, they have whole units specifically for gangs, those hard working people would lose thier jobs, but if police listen better to gang members and help more then the violence level would probably decline.

[Richboy]

theres kids that want protection, or get respected. That ends up getting them into gangs. Many people today want to join a gang because they think it is cool even though it is not. Others want to make money instead of getting a real job.

[Noog]

In London right now the gang hype is going balistic. Younga's are on a full on gang flex, every estate, every neighbourhood and endz all over London are pushing the gang thing. I'm hearing about new cliques popping up all over, everyday. Most of the new cliques will fade, true, but stronger teams incorporate those lil' new teams. Its hard to communicate the hype right now, but something viral is happening. Why? Because of social circumastances, because youth can't get housed, can't get jobs, can't get training, can't make legit paper and the big man on the endz will pay plenty to move something for him round the place and next time its hard to say no. Ghetto love style, cant say no next time...and its easy to stay in from there.....In London, the 'modern' gang thing is on the up and its nuttin to celebrate, only comiserate. And so yeah, I'll go with something said earlier by Sentanza, that solid welfare programmes do change areas/cities/countries for the better, no doubts.
So there it is for me - Massive social welfare and reform - to support families and communities
Legalisation of all streetdrugs - and medical/social treatment in place of criminalisation
A NEW New Deal