Free lnquity- Special Issue #2: Gan,s, Drugs 4c Violence Volume 25 No. I, May I 99 7 Pore 41 OAKLAND 'S FIRST YOUTH : THE SUEY SING BOYS Gregory Vee Mark, University of Hawaii at Manoa

ABS~CT R~rdt eoncemedwlh Chinese in the Unilllld States focuses on two sites, and NewYork. Thiss=xamlnesOaklandChinatownandthedevelopmentofbflratChlnelein'vnigrantyouth gang,theSUeyStng ,durlnglhelveyearsfn:lm1968-1t73.trely=ondatatrom~IOUICIIS.-uch as inlarviewswlhganarnerranandtleld oblervations. Keytopicafor atheformationoftheSuey Sing boys, the relationship of.the youth gangs to the Chinatown social re, and the relationship between gangs in Oakland and San Franasco.

INTRODUCTION (1943), traditional gang research has paid little The gang problem~ an issue of serious or no attention to the Ch~ community. c:oncem to American society. Many people are Reasons include lack of interest by traditional fearful of, and many are adversely affected by, youth gang researchers, often linked to lm­ gangs and their activities. The American pub­ agesofChineseand other as lic demands tougher police tactics, punish­ the ·model minority.· the difficulty of gaining ment, and prisons in response. Despite vigor­ access to Chinese gang members, especially ous efforts, crime ~ gangs continue to be for non-Chinese researchers, and the political major social problems in the United States. and social isolation of the Asian American Altl)ough most Americans can trace their an­ community (Joe 1994). cestry to EU4'0J)e, the literature on youth gangs This paper explores the premise that focuses primarily on African American and Chinatown gangs are not isolated entitles, but Hispanic gangs. are a part of, and connected to, the Chinese The 1960s witnessed the emergence of community; gangs impact community life and contemporary. Chinese gangs in the United the community impacts gangs. The topics dis­ States. The first nationally known Chinese cussed are 1) the historical development ofthe gang, the Hwa Chings, which means "young first contemporary youth gang in the Oakland, Chinese," originated in San Francisco Chin• Chinatown community, 2) the •gang town in 1964. Eventually, branches of this perspedive" onwhytheyformed a gang, 3) the group and other similar types of gangs spread relationship of the Oakland gang to Chinatown throughout America's . Since the convnunity organizations, and 4) the relation­ 1970s, due to escalating violence and ex­ ship between Chinese gangs in different sites, panded criminal activities, Chinese gangs have San Francisco and Oakland. been increasingly viewed as a major social problem in the Chinese American community METtiODOLOGY and as a menace to society-at-large. In gov­ _ ' I began Inquiring about Chineee gangs, ernment reports and the popular media, these in 1968, to understand gang members' expe­ ganga are blamed for the Increasing violence riences and why such garigs form. Oakland, in Chinatowns, shiploads of undocumented California (1960, population 367,548) was an Chinese immigranta, and the massive smug­ ideal city in which to document the develop­ gling of illegal drugs to the United States. ment of a gang. Chlnatowo was located in the Although these eouraes frequently exaggerate heart of the city, adjacent to the downtown the criminality of the Chinese gang situation, it shopping area and the main police headquar­ is accurate to state that Chinese gangs are ters, and near city hall. There were no deviant involved in a variety of criminal activities, such Chinese groups operating In the area. Unlike as extortion, burglary, robbery, assault, and San Francisco Chinatown, with a myrtad of murder, that bring hardship and misery, espe­ social organizations, Oakland Chinatown had cially to the Chinese community. only a few, such as the Wong Family AssO­ Study of Chinese gangs broadens our ciation, the Chinese American Citizen Afti- knowledge of early gang formation and gang ance, and the Suey Sing . - structure, and Illustrates how gangs can inter­ First as a participant observer, my field face with Chinatown organizations within the observations were the foundation to this study. contextofcontemporaryaocialproblems. Since In youth and adult gang studies that utilize the inception of gang studies by researchers observation as the primary methodology Frederick Thrasher (1927} and William VVhyte (Padilla 1993; Patrick 1973; VVhyte 1943), the 42 Volume 25 No. /,May 1997 Specio/lssue #2: Gongs, Drugs & Violence - Free Inquiry

researchers target a particular community or Chinese gangs and crime in Oakland ­ group to study. In my case, the gang rner\1bers town. Government criminal intelligence re­ adopted me as friend and confidant. My father ports or law enforcement conference papers was a well respected tong member who had an were of little use because of their unreliability excellent rapport with gang members. I was and lack of emphasis on Oakland. Govern­ also treated with respect and loyalty by the ment reports do show growing concern of state s~ Si{l9 boys. Though not a gang member, and federal law enforcement agencies regard­ I was looked upon as an educated friend Who ing Chinese gangs .~ heroin smuggling. worked for the members' welfare and needs. I Fourth, a few researchers have pub­ had access to the social benefits of gang mem­ lisped books or articles concerning Chinese bership such as intra-group friendship, but gangs in San Francisco and New York (Chin never the responaibilties, such as participating 1990; Chin, Fagan, Kelly 1992; Joe 1994; in violent confrontations with other groups. I Kwong 1987; Lyman 1970; Sung 19n; Takagi, was marg~ a part of the group, Who could Platt 1978). Noone has studied Chinese gangs commumc.te with Its members. I obtained in Oakland. Only Gong and Grant (1930) and meaningful' and valid information as a semi­ Chin (1990) examine· the tongs to any signifi- participant observer. cant extent. . Second, rconducted numerous informal interviews with San Francisco and Oakland REVIEW OF UTERATURE aduft Suey Sing members and the Oakland There is a multitude of youth gang stud­ Suey Sing boys, in a four and a half year period ies in the United States, most concerned with (SL!mmer of 1968 to early 1973). Conversa­ ethnic minority communities. However, there tions were held at restaurants, bowling alleys, has been a dearth of scholarly research and and the Oakland Suey Sing Clubhouse. I re­ publications concerning the Chinese gangs in corded the gist of thase conversations and the United States. VVhat little there is falls into informal interviews but at that time I was not two major categorieS: 1) journalistic accounts, involved in any active gang research. Since some of which are based upon law enforce­ 1993, I hav8 conducted eight interviews. with ment gang task force reports (Bresler 1981; former Oakland Suey Sing ~ ll1d .their Posner 1988), and 2) descriptiveltheoretical aasociates. According to the authors count studies (Chin 1990; Chin, Fagan 1994; Chin, and key Informants, there went •ofticiaUy" 28 Fagan, Kelly 1992; Joe 1993, 1994; Lyman Suey Sing boys. Two were~ to be 1970; Sung 19n; Takagi, Platt 1978). part of the oakland Suey Sing boys and simul­ Some journalistic accounts gtamorize taneously were partofthe San Francisco Suey Chinese gangs and hefghten the fear of these Sing group. One resided and went to school in gangs llooding the u.s. shores with tons of Oakland but spent a great deal of time in San drugs. Two of these accounts, by Bresler Francisco 8nd was considered to be an influ­ (1981) and Posner (1988), state that adult and ential gang member. IntervieWs, which were young Chinese criminals are trafficking in about 1.5 hours~. were tape recorded (with heroin. Breslefbelieves that there is an inter­ pennission) and transcribed in summary form. nationaletineseaimeconspiracythatishead­ Data collection spanned three years (1993- quartered In Asia. Posner maintains that the 1996)~ QuaHty ranged from little useful infor­ Chinese Trtads are the most powerful form of mation to full desaiptions of events and com­ in the world and coniequently munity social life. pose the most serious threat to law enforce­ Third, I examined archival sources In ment. Both charge that the Triads in Asia, the newspapers and governmental reports. From tongs in Chinatowns, and the Chinese youth 1970 to 1988, there were articles about Chi­ gangs are in close contact and structurally nese· gangs in San Francisco, New York, and related, posing a serious threat. . A study of New Yorlc Ttmes Scholarly works on Chinese gangs con­ articles on over an SO­ cern two cities. Lyman's (1970) study focused year period showed an abundance of aime on San Francisco Chinatown gangs, describ­ coverage (Auman, Mark 1997). The study ing they were due to changing demographics notes that half of the coverage analyzed was and a tradition of social bandiby from China. crime-related, followed by political events He examined the development of American (25%).~olhernaws, andcullure(Auman,' bomandforeignbomSanFranciscoChinatown Mark 1997). There were only a few articles on gangs; such as the Hwa Chings and the Red free Inquiry - Special Issue #2: Gongs, Drugs & Violence Vohlme 25 No. I, May 1997 Page 43

Guards, from the 1950s through the early waterfront and the Oakland downtown/com­ 1970s. mercial area. By 1880, the location of the pres­ Sung (19n) examines New York China­ ent Chinatown was established just a few town gangs using theories of social disor­ blocks from where City Hall is today. As in ganization, social strudure, crime as con­ . most other cities, Chinatown was restricted to formity to explain the nature, and formation of old, undesirable, commercial districts because these youth gangs. of racial segregation in both housing and com­ Chin's 1990 book, Chinese Subcqlture mercial enterprises. Thus, Chinatown was and Criminality, focuses on New York China­ originally established in the midst of ware­ town gangs, examining Chinatowns, Chinese houses, factories, rooning houses, and junk­ secret societies, the development of Chinese yards. By 1960, oakland Chinatown was in a gangs nationally, Chinese gang patterns and sharp decline due to dispersal of Chinese to charaderistics, and social sources of Chinese other areas in the East Bay and the reduction gang delinquency. He studies the relation of of residential housing, attributed to construc­ adult Chinatown organizations and Chinese tion of the Nimitz Fteeway, Laney Community criminality, and why and how Chinese gangs College, the Oakland Museum, and the Bay formed, claiming that New York Chinatown Area Rapid Transit (BART) (Chow 1976). Chinese gangs and the tongs have a symbiotic An additional and forgotten factor in relationship that deeply intertwines both bod­ Chinatown's deterioration was the decline of ies. gambling. This was dUe to the passage of the Karen Joe (1994b) examined the rela­ 1951 Fedet'al Stamp Ad (26 U.S. C. 4401 and tionships between Asian American gangs and 4402), which levied a flat ten percent tax on two variables, organized crime and drug distri­ wagering income and an additional fifty-dollar bution (The New Criminal Conspiracy? Asian tax on gambling operators. VIOlators could Gangs and Organized Crime in San Fran­ receive a $10,000 fine and five yearlin prison. cisco). In regard to San Francisco Chinatown Thus, gambling in Oakland Chlriatown was gangs, .hel", findings indicate that gang mem­ sharply curtailed, which severely Impacted bers know little of and have little or no contact businesses that thrived from the gambling with the tongs in Chinatown. Therefore, Joe industry (Mark 1989). There were fewer jobs, found no evidence to indicate that the tongs in fewer residents, and a~ deaease in San Francisco are actually organized crime Chinatown business activity. · groupe that have incorporated gang members By the mid-1960s, Oakland Chinatown into Illegal enterprises. In addition, her findings stabilized and its residential population grew support the thesis that the gangs as an orga- because of the increase in immigrants as a - nized group are not involved In heroin traflick­ result of the 19651mmigration Nationalization lng. Some gang members, as individuals, Ad. Families began to reappear, and the local were involved with drugs, but not the entire elementary 8c:hool (Uncoln School), the neigh­ gang. borhood junior high school (VVes1 Lake), and Joe (1994a) Myths andRealities ofAsian the two high schools (Qakland Tectmlcal High Gangs on the West Coast, poses two related and Oakland High) enrolled progfesslvety larg­ questions: are Chinese gangs well-organized er numbers of foreign born Chinese students. with ttes to the San Francisco tongs and the In 1970, Qakland'a Chinese population num­ Triads In Alia? and Are Asian gangs in North­ bered 11,335 and the Chinatown cont area em C8llfomia Involved in heroin trafficking? supported a population of 1,807 Chinese Joe refutes the theory, supported by journalis­ (Tracts .o4030 and 4033) which represented tic accounts, that Asian street gangs are part 570 famUies (Homma-True 1978). By 1970, of a larger conspiracy of an •Asian Mafia• and the Chinatown community was comprised organized crime. She also takes Issue with inoatly of Immigrants, and 22 percent of China­ U.S. law enforcement beliefs and policies, in town residents were classified with Incomes particular, the link between Chinese youth below the poverty level as compared to 13 per­ gangs and the Chinese Triads In Hong Kong cent of the rest of the city. The median income and Taiwan. in Chinatown was $6,690 compared to $9,626 for the rest of the city. OAKLAND CHINATOWN Oakland Chinatown has been located in five different sites, each centered around the « Vollme 25 No. I, May 1997 Spec:jollssue #2: Gonp, Drugs & Violence - Free lnq~ .. HWA CHINGS" IN SAN FRANCISCO plaguing Chinatown. Tom Tom was quoted CHINATOWN saying: . San Francisco Chinatown supported 40,000 people in an area of 42 blocks (Takagi, TT: ... Wenevermarchedas agang .... You have Platl 1978). American-born Chinese street toklustostop us. Youspltmyheadopen-1 get comer groups such as. the ·chinos· \Chi­ up, keep fighting. We an been to the hospital. 1 nese· in Spanish) became visible in the late been three limes. 1950&. They ~ hot rods and frequented 1: What did you use as weapons? Chinatown. bars. One group known as the TT: Axes and knives. •augs• became involved in burglaries and I: Axes? r were identified by their black clothing and TT:Yeah. Theydon'tslicebuttheyhurtplenty. ,,raised heel bootS. In 1965over a period of six (Wolfe 1969) months, the Bugs committed 48 burglaries worth $7500 cash and $3000 in merchandise In 1967168, San Francisco Chinato (lyman 1970), but the San Franci8C:o Police leaders devised a plan to split the Hwa Chir Department made key arresl$ and broke up into various factions in order to control · the Bugs gang. . Chinatown gang violence and extortion. 1 In 196+65, u,e Hwa Chings (Young Chinatown establishment leaders turned Chinese) were formed by mainly teerHiged one part of the community's social struc:t\ immigrant youths, the majority from Hong the tongs. Four of Chinatown's five rm Kong. The Chinese population"" the United tongs (, Hip Sing Tong, Bt States, and in Chinatowns, in particular were Kong Tong, Y"m On Tong, and Suey S ii'ICI'88Iir}g because of the changes in United Tong) invited gang members to join ~ 1 ~tmmlgration laws and policiet that per­ each identified a Hwa Ching leader and milted anJncrease in Chinele immigration to crulted him and his followers Into the tong. 1 the United States. Aa more Chinese inwni­ tongs offered the youth gang ril8inbei's a c grated to San i=I'II1Cisco. the Hwa chings be­ house to hang out in, a "slush fund'" for t came larger, more visible, and more powerful. and employment opportunities in Chinatc They committed crimes such as burglary and gambling deiJI which they controlled. assault. The Hwa Chings had as estimated The Hop SingTongwas initially them 300 members in a loosely organized group. In active tong in the recruitment of gang mt an interview with a reporter, -Tom Tom· de­ bers. Soon thtt.ir young gang members w clared that the Hwa Chings only WM1ted jobs, demanding protection money from Chinatc girls, and to be left alone (lyman 1970). Tom gambling dens. However, most of the d4 Tom ·'¥88 the gang's main Ieeder, but there were under the pr'Otection- of Suey Sing. A were .OthOrs ·high in the leadership structure result, the SUey Sing Tong actively recrui whO hid many followers. Tom Tom and his Hwa Ching followers in or 13Y 1~7, Hwa Ching aimes became to counteract Hop Sing. The gang situatio more violent. and to the Chinatown estabhh­ Chinatown dramatically changed from 4 rnent.~. when they extorted China­ large gang to five smaller ones, the remn1 town buaineeles for protection money. In the of the Hwa Chlngs and the four torig ·Y

Another gang leader stated: in 1970. Shor6y after the first arrival of Chines workers to the United States in 1850, racl1 I wanted to go to school. And I tried. But It didn't disaimination and hatred was directed t< wortt. You know what happens; the other Chi­ wards the newcomers, culminating in the Ch nese kids say they are not Chinese but Ameri­ nese ExclusionActsof1882, 1888,1892, an cans. They spit on me. (AUard 1975) 1902 (Lai, Choy 1971). For over a hundre years, to be Chinese in the United State As a result, many Chinese immigrant youths meant to be slandered, abused, and treated a were forced to band together with other Chi­ a third class citizen with few of the righ1 nese immigrants In order to protect them­ guaranteed by the Constitution to other Amer selves (Thompson 1976). cans. To many young Chinese Americans, 1 VVhy WO\.IId the ABCs antagonize the be Chinese was not desirable. VVhat wa Chinese immigrant children, convnonly re­ desirable was to be like mainstream whft ferred to .aa "FOes· (Fresh Off the Boat)? · America; speaking standard English, eatin Many lOcal-born Chinese respond to this ques­ sandwiches, cookies, ·and nilk for lunch, an tion by stating .that the foreign-born Chinese wearing the latest American teen fashions.~ represented everything that they "wanted to a result, anyltring associating them with Chin get SNIBY from• such as speaking Chinese, and being Chinese was rejected. dressing djfferentfy, eating Chinese food, and simply. not being ·Aineric;an.• Ignatius Chinn, THE OAKLAND SUEY SING TONG who for 21 years was the primary pollee officer YOUTH GROUP wot:king in OatdandChinatown, expresses this The Oakland Suey Sing Tong is locate sentiment Chinn grew·up in a middfe.dass on 8th Street, right in the heart of Chinatow family, his father was an Oakland acc:ountant, Oakland Chinatown supports several Chine1 hiaii)Other a aeaetarY. Asked about his youth, traditional associations and community se Chinn spe&Q With painful candor. vice organizations; but Suey Sing is the on tong. In 196811967, teenage immigrants b Whenlwa~ lwatrylngllobewhle. Molt gan to develop a community reputation as of my friends • westlake Junior High and group of young toughs who frequently got in Oakland High School were while. When I saw trouble. One incident occurred In late 19E Asian Immigrants I thoughtthey weregeeks. I when two Oaktand youths, •Bany" and "Puk feltc;onblmptforthem beCause they reminded were beaten up in San Francisco Ch~ me ofwho I didn't want to be... by some Hwa Ching members including •94 Gong· and a youth nicknamed •eig Head.· J Wrth difficulty, Chinn tells of feeling ashamed a result. Tom Tom and his San FranciS~ when friends visited his house and inet his folloWers assisted and befriended the two frQ uncle from Canton, who spoke no English. Oakland. •een Gong• was later murdentd 1970, in an unrelated crime. By 19671e lfeltuncomfortablebec:ausetheY reminded me approximately 28 young men who hung out 4 of what I wu trying so hard not to be. I felt the comer of 8th and Webster started to spe1 be1Weeni'IIC8S, betweencullures.ldldn'thave time in the Suey Sing Tong clubhouse. Th much baCkground about anything Asian. ages ranged from 15 to 18 years old and th (Rolenthal1991) families had Immigrated from Hong Kong. , were fluent in Cantonese and one was COt A method for the ABCs to create a barrier pletely fluent in English. They wore cas\ between themselves and the FOBs was to clothes. Only one eventually completed hi! make fun of, put down, and verbaUy and school. AU but four lived at home with th physically harass their foreign born cousins. In families. this waytheforeign-bom would be established A merger between youth gangs and t as a different and distinct group from the old established Oakland tong was brokered American-born Chinese. two tong members. They had establish VVhy did Chinese bom in the U.S. feel rapport with gang members and were willins ashamed of their ethnic background; or, in take on this risky endeavor. •uncle Choy" w other words, suffer an ethnic identity conflict? the Suey Sing Tong member who recruit The Chinese were a sman ethnic minority and advised the San Francisco youth group. numbering only 237,292 in 1960, and 431,583 that time, ·uncle Yee," my father, was act Free Inquiry- Special Issue #2: Gangs, Drugs & VIOlence VoNme 25 No. I, May 1997 Page47

in San Francisco, and was also the Oakland Oakland counterparts in fighting the "Rick­ Suey Sing President. According to O.F ., ·unde shaw Runners• in a number of skirmishes. vee· was the main Oakland Suey Sing contad Eventually, the "Rickshaw Runners• were and worked with "Unde Choy• to recruit the forced to back down and maintain their dis­ Oakiand Suey Sing group. tance froOl Chinese immigrants in general, The motives for the Oakland Suey Sing and the Suey Sing boys in particular. boys were different. They simply wanted a In August 1969, the East Bay Chinese place to hang. oUt They also desired affiliation Youth Council (EBCYC) was established in with the San Francisco Suey Sing group for Oakland Chinatown.ltwasorganizedby Ameri­ their protection from other youths. At the same can-born Chinesecolegestudentswhowanted time, Tom Tom and his San Francisco Suey to bring a progressive voice to the East Bay Sing Tong followers believed that the Oakland Chinese community. They lobbied to increase group could assist them in turf battles in San social services for Chinese·youth.ln the East Francisco Chinatown. By 1968, the group was Bay cities of Oakland, Alameda, Emeryville, called the ·oakland Suey Sing boys" or "Sing and Berkeley. Unlike other ChinatqY,~R organi­ Sing boys" and the San Francisco group was zations, the founders were a diverse group of referred to as the "Tom Tom Gang• (Chin young people. Some of the founding members 1990). The Oakland group was relatively small, and original EBCYC Board of Directors in­ consisting Qf.; eight paid official Suey Sing duded three Suey Sing boys from Oakland. members and about 20 associates. Unlike the Tom Tom from San F,rancisco was a founding Hwa Chings and, later, Tom Tom's group, the member. I was the oiganization's founder and Qakland Suey Sing boys did not have a clearly first President. • defined leader. From my observations, be­ Unfortunately, the goals of the gang tween 1968 w1972, they often deferred to members involved in EBCYC was not to bring Tom Tom, but by no means was he their about community empowerment anc~···soaal acknowledged leader. change, but to make "easy money" through One day in August 1968, a Suey Sing government-funded programs the way Tom member was beaten up by two Hop Sing Tong Torn did in San Francisco. Jn San Franasco members. Later that night the former saw "Big Tom Tom was employed as a gang outreach Nose" of the Hop Sings driving his car on Grant worker and often WOrked' onlY 15 Minutes per Avenue in San Francisco, and ran up and shot day. His job was to control gang activities and "Big Nose" in the head. Although "Big Nose" violence. However. this position only further eurvived and knew who shot him, the assailant enhanced Tom Tom) ability to reauit new was never arrested. The assailant was able to gang merribers btd.use It demonstrated to leave San Francisco and flee across the Bay potential members that he had the connec­ where he stayed for one night at the ~ of tions and the' Intelligence to manipulate "the one of the Oakland Suey Sing youths, and then system.• In the case of the East Bay Chinese stayed the next three weeks at the Oakland Youth Council, it never became a source of home of a tong elder. After a cooling off period, "easy money.• The Youth Council never ob­ the Suey Sing member joined the Merchant tained the gang prevention funding that other Marine and .tell the gang life. organizations in San Francisco Chinatown By 1980, the Oakland group faced two were able to obtain, and the EBCYC staff was major challeriges. One was conflict with Chi­ interested only in working for the larger com­ canos, especially at Oakland Technical High munitY. School. VVhen Chinese students were beaten The relationship between EBCYC and up by Chicano students, older Suey Sing the gang members had a profound effect upon members canie to the aid of the high school the latter. Between 1970-1972, new members members and used hatchets as weapons to (ages 14-17) attached themselves to the Osk­ defend the ChineSe students. During the same la,ci Suey Sing youth grOup and were also par- time period an Oakland-based American born . ticipants in EBCYC's programs such as the group of Chinese·and Japanese, "The Rick­ War on Poverty's Neighborhood Youth Corps shaw Runners; posed the second challenge. Program. Many of the older gang members The Runners had numerous altercation with (ages 18-22) had changed and had adopted the Suey Sing boys in Oakland Chinatown and the principles of the college studentS. Those at the local bowling alley. In this case, the San older gang mernberswere now concerned with Francisco Suey Sing members assisted their improving Chinatown community life. 48 Volume 25 No. I, May 1997 Sf'edol Issue #2: Gongs, Drugs & Violence - Free lnqu,

By the end of 1972, Tom Tom's gangs provide Chinese-speaking referral and soc power base eroded because of a change in services to the Oakland Chinese communi policy by the San Francisco tongs and inaeas­ In 1970, OCCC hired its first full-time salari ing competition and conflict With C)'lher gangs Executive Director, Edward K. Chook. Lit in Chinatown. First, by the~ of 1972, was known about Chook except that he w the San Francisco~oflncorporating active in the loc8l Kuomi~ (KMT) Party. the former Hwa Chinga into the tongs was the beginning of his tenure, EBCYC and E deemed a failure. The tong yOuth groups were ward Chook'had·a cordial wof1dng relatic viewed as too~ a liability. In San Francisco, ship. By 1972, the relationship had coolec both the Hop Sing and Suey Sing tongs, who great deal. According to Tom Tom, Chook h had tt18 largest_~ groups, either expelled advised him and his followers to take overt many yquth rnemb8ts or no longer supported Youth Council. Chook even promised Tc the youltl. In San Francisco Suey Sing, only Tom that he would help set up youth progl"81 fift8en Wbo .. actually became tong members such as the summer Neighborhood VOl remained. · Corp program. In 197211973, Tom Tom's ' Another factor was the reemergence Of forts to remodel EBCYC for his personal bt the .Hwa Chings. In January 1970, one of the efit had failed and the organization had a qu old Hwa Ching leaders, Kenny~. was dis­ end. Tom Tom lost his followers and w chargedfron\the~U.S. army. He maneuv8ftld shortly aftenvan:l deported to Hong Kong t his way baCk into power and revitalized the cause of a felony conviction. Hwa Cbings. One night in August 1972, TOm Unlike their San Francisco counterpar Tom was sevetaly beaten in a San Francisco the original Oakland Suey Sing youth gro Chinatown restaurant. He was hospitalized for did not extort Oakland Chinatown business six weeks .. During that time, 1he Tom Tom and community members. However, after t .gang \fiiiQived: some joined o1her gangs, and group no longer existed as a Suey Sing To otherf left the gang lfe. Sllll ott..~ to flee sponsored group, some of Tom Tom's you because Tom tom ~ no longer protect Oakland followers named themselves •su them, and a· feW.~ Tom Tom himself, Sing boys• and began to extort members of1 moved to Oakland. Tt1u8, the transition of oakland Chinese community. In Novemt power was ,....__.,. Hwa .Chings b8came 1972, a local newspaper reported the am thestrongeetgangin sanF~Chinatown. , and conviction of four Chinese juveniles a Tom Tom and the ~·otthe San two adults who were part of an extortion ri1 Fra~Cist»Suey Sing(ll'aupaitt8mpledtoreetta­ To their victims they Identified themselves blish tbemlelvel.as a Yiable_gang.in Oaldand. ·suey. Sing boys.• Tom Tom approached the Oakland Suey Sing .The Suey Sing boys took a variety boys a was rejected by the older group that paths. Four continued_ their deviant life • once supported him. A$ mentioned drtier. and have become involVed with drugs and t EBCYC had Positively inftue(1ced some of the were inCarcerated for serious crimes such older gang members and th8Y did not want to murder. Twenty are married with chHdren, a follow Tom Tom. they have indicated that they doltotwantth Some of the younger Suey Sing mem­ to join any gang. Six own and operate bt.J bers and their friends followed Tom Tom and nesses. One is a well known ctief and rest initiated a hostile takeover of the EBCYC club rant owner In another city. Approximately house, programs, and staff. I ~ed in are gainfully employed in occupations such three months of negotiations which resulted in hair stylist and automobile mechanic, 1 the takeover of the Youth Council by Tom Tom seventeen have moved out of oakland butt and a few of his followers. Sy the time the 98"9 live in the greater , 1 members took over the EBCYC, nothing ttas are successful in their professional and p left to take over except for an empty shell of a sonallives. club house. The EBCYC Board of Directors · and staff had transferred everything to the IMPUCATIONS AND CONCLUSIONS newly founded organization, East Bay Mlans The findings from this study sugg for Community Action, which continued and that earty Chinese gangs on the West Co expanded upon the EBCYC prOgrams. . were notoliginany a product of~ greed 1 In 1968, the Oakland Chinese Com­ irratiOnal dev1ant behavior. Instead, they w munity Council (OCCC) was established to initially a group ofyouths who banded toget Free Inquiry - Special Issue #2: Gangs. Drugs & Violence Volume 25 No. I, May 1997 Page 49 for protection and survival. Even today, thirty different today. There are now 16 predominantly years later, young, immigrants still join Chi­ ethnic Chinese gangs in Oakland and many nese gangs, Samoan gangs, Cambodian are based in Chinatown. They have gang gangs, and Filipino gangs for mutual-proteC­ names such as the Red Fire, , Viet- tion (Aiegado 1994; Revilla 1996). The impli­ . namese Troublemakers, Asian car Thieves, cations of this study for public policy makers is and Chinatown Rulers (Rosenthal1991). VVhat that they should look beyond the gangs as the can we do? sole problem, and to look inwards towards the broader Asian American community. One ob­ REFERENCES vious question to be addressed is how we can Alegado D 1994/mmigrant Youths From the Philip­ pines: Embedded ldentitiesinHawBilsl.kban Com­ reduce the rift between local-bom Asians and munity Contexts December paper presented at our immigrant/refugee cousins. First World Congress on Indigenous Filipino Psy­ Oakland Chinatown's Suey Sing boys chology and Culture. did not come into existence as a gang because AllardWA1975Chinatown,thegildedghettoNationa/ GeogtaphicNovember of their association with San Frandsco China­ Auman A, GY Mark 1997 From 'heathen Chinee' to town gang members nor due to the Oakland 'model minority': the portrayal of Chinese Ameri­ Suey Sing Tong. Before their recruitment into cansintheU.S.newsmedia.lnU.S.NewsCover­ age of Racial Minorities: A Sourcebook, 1934 to Oakland Suey Sing, they already functioned PresentWestport. CT: Greenwood Press as a gang. However, theywereacknowledged Bresler F 1981 The Chinese Mafia NY: Stein and Day as a gang only after they became affiliated with Chin K 1990 Chinese Subcultute and Criminality: Suey Sing Tong and the nature of their activi­ Nontraditional Crime Groups in America Westport, CT: Greenwood Press ties were in fact influenced by the San Fran­ ChinK,JFagan1994Socialorderandgangformation dsco Tom Tom gang. In other urban centers, in ChinatownAdvsncesin Crimino/Oglcai'T1Jeoty6 the pattern of gang members in one city creat­ 216-251 ing or influendng the development of a new ChinK, J Fagan, R Kelly 1992 Pattems of Chinese gang extortion Justice Qrlly9 625-&46 gang in another city has been a major factor in ChowWT 197608kland Chinatown: they dynamics of the spread of Chinatown gangs in the United inner city adjustment China GeogntpherSpring States. This phenomena requires additional Gong YE, S Grant 1930 Tong Warll«: NL Brown study not only for Chinese gangs but other Homma-TrueR 1976 Characteristics of contrasti1g Chinatowns Social CasewarlcMarch 155-159 Asian gangs in the United States. Joe KA 1993 Getting into the gang: methodological The Asian gang literature does make issues in studying ethnic iCJrugAbuseAmong linkages (Chin 1990) and non-linkages (Joe MnorltyYouth: ~~Issues end Recent 1994) with the tongs and Triads. What I dis­ Research Advances 130 ~57 19948 Myths and realities ofAsian gangs on cuss in this study that requires further research ---uiiWest CoaSt Humanity and Society 18 3-18 is the links to other c;ommunity organizations ___ 1994b The newaiminal conspiracy? Asian such as those ofthe Suey Sing boys to the East gangs and organized crime in San FranciscoJ Res Bay Chinese Youth Coundl. For the Suey Sing Crime DelinauenCY31 390-415 Kwong P 1987 The NeW Chinatown NY: Hill and Wang boys, the gang's development and also its Lal HM, PP Choy 19n Outline Histotyofthe Chinese demise were influenced by a variety of COI11PO­ inAmeticaSanFrancisco:ChineseHistoricaiSo­ nents of the Chinese community. Future gang ciety ofAmerica studies need to address these important is­ Lyman SM 1970 The Asian in the West Reno & Las Vegas: Westem Studies Center and Desert Re­ sues of gang/social structure relations. An­ aUrch Institute other topic for examination is: can self help Mark GY 1989Gamblng in08klancl Chinatown: a case community-based organizations positively im­ of constructive crime. In Frontiers ofAsian Ameri­ pact the nature of a gang, gang membership, can Studies Pullman, WA: Washington State U Press and violence perpetuated by gang members? Padilla FM 1993 The Gang as an American Enterprise If so, should there be more community pro­ New Brunswick: Rutger U Press grams for our youth? And what should these Patrick J 1973 A Glasgow Gang Observed London: programs look like? These questions have EyreMelhuen PosnerG 1988 WarloRtsofCttmesNY: McGraw-Hill significant public policy implications regard­ Revilla L 1996 FilplnoAmericans: Issues for Identity In ing the control of gangs and related criminal Hawaii. In Pagdlrtwang 1996: t.sgacyend Vision of activities. Hawaii's Filipino Americans Honolulu: SEED and In 1971, Oakland Chinatown had only Center for Southeast Asian Studies, U of HawaH one gang, the Suey Sing boys. This group Rosenthal D 19911ggy Chinn'slast patrol San Fran­ cisoo Examlnerliiiege March 311-321 operated as a gang for approximately five years. The situation in Oakland Chinatown is 50 Volume 25 No. I, May 1997 Special Issue #2: Gongs. Drugs & Violence - Free Inquiry

Su'!9 B 19n Gangs in New Yorlc's Chinatown NY: Department of Asian Studies, City College of New York. monoaraDh No.6 Takagi P, A Plitt 1978 Behind the gilded ghetto: an analylla of raee, class, and crime In Chinatown CrimeandSoclaiJusticeSDrina-Summer2-25 Thrasher FM 19271be Gang: A stridyof1,313Gengs in Chicago Chicago: U Chicago Press