ENT OF M JU U.S. Department of Justice T S R T A I P C E E D B O J Office of Justice Programs C S F A V M F O I N A C I J S R E BJ G O OJJ DP O F PR Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention JUSTICE Shay Bilchik, Administrator January 1999 The Youth Gangs, From the Administrator The 1980’s saw an increase in youth Drugs, and Violence gang violence and the rise of the crack cocaine epidemic. The public linked these two developments, often Connection with implications of cause and effect. Conventional wisdom, however, is not always reliable. Viewed through James C. Howell and Scott H. Decker the lens of public perception rather than that of scientific knowledge, the The proliferation of youth gangs since Historical Overview of relationships among youth gangs, 1980 has fueled the public’s fear and mag- Gang Drug Use and drugs, and violence are more often nified possible misconceptions about youth talked about than understood. In The gangs. To address the mounting concern Trafficking Youth Gangs, Drugs, and Violence about youth gangs, the Office of Juvenile The predominant image of youth gangs Connection, James Howell and Scott Justice and Delinquency Prevention’s is consistent with a California study of Decker add to our understanding of (OJJDP’s) Youth Gang Series delves into adult (also referred to as criminal) gang the interrelationships of these factors many of the key issues related to youth members conducted by Skolnick and and address relevant questions such gangs. The series considers issues such as colleagues (1988) a decade ago. These re- as the following: gang migration, gang growth, female in- searchers contended that the two major “Is drug trafficking a main activity of volvement with gangs, homicide, drugs and youth gangs?” violence, and the needs of communities and youth who live in the presence of 1 Youth gangs are considered to consist of adoles- “Is drug trafficking a major cause of youth gangs. cents and young adults from the ages of 12 to 24. violence in youth gangs?” Unfortunately, there is no commonly accepted param- The popular image of youth gangs eter of either the age range or proportion of individu- “Are there other important sources ties them directly to drugs and violent als below a certain age (i.e., a youth) that can be used of youth gang violence?” crime (Klein, 1995).1 How interrelated to differentiate youth gangs from adult gangs. This are youth gangs, drugs, and violent makes definitive conclusions from the research diffi- The authors make critical distinctions crime? Is drug trafficking a main activity cult and exacerbates the difference between research between drug gangs and street gangs findings and real world experiences of practitioners of youth gangs? Is drug trafficking a that further enhance our understand- concerned with the prevention of gang involvement ing of the gang phenomenon, as does main cause of violence in youth gangs and the suppression of gang activity. The term “youth or only a correlate? Are there other im- gang” is commonly used interchangeably with “street their exploration of the connections portant sources of gang violence? Be- gang,” referring to neighborhood or street-based between youth gangs and adult fore this OJJDP Bulletin addresses these youth groups that are substantially made up of indi- criminal organizations and the role questions, a brief historical overview of viduals under the age of 24. "Street gangs" may in- of firearms in gang violence. clude both youth gangs and adult criminal gang drug use, trafficking, and violent organizations. Motorcycle gangs, prison gangs, racial It is my hope that in describing the crime is provided. Studies of drug-traf- supremacists, and other hate groups are excluded. relationships among youth gangs, ficking operations are then reviewed to Miller’s definition of a youth gang is applicable to this drugs, and violence, this Bulletin will provide a better understanding of how review: “A youth gang is a self-formed association of help communities begin to address illegal drug sales typically are con- peers, united by mutual interests, with identifiable these problems more effectively. trolled and managed. The Bulletin con- leadership and internal organization, who act collec- tively or as individuals to achieve specific purposes, cludes with a detailed review of studies Shay Bilchik including the conduct of illegal activity and control of Administrator of the gangs, drugs, and violence con- a particular territory, facility, or enterprise” (Miller, nection and an examination of other 1992:21). Unless otherwise noted, the term "gangs" sources of gang violence. refers to youth gangs. Los Angeles gangs, the Crips and Bloods, older African-American adult gang mem- had become entrepreneurial and were bers in Chicago were reported to be sig- expanding their drug-trafficking opera- nificantly involved in drug dealing tions to markets in other cities; where (Spergel, 1995). drug markets appeared, so did violent Early gang studies do not tie violence to crime. Although this research did not drug trafficking because gangs evidenced address the order of occurrences and the little involvement in drug sales. The first overlap of adult gang violence and street major gang study (Thrasher, 1927) de- drug sales, youth gangs are still charac- scribed the drug dealing of Chicago’s Chi- terized mainly by public perceptions nese tongs, but gang violence mainly con- conveyed in the California studies and sisted of fighting. An account of early 20th by popular media images rather than by century east coast adult gangs linked gang scientific knowledge (Decker and Kempf, violence to territorial fights among orga- 1991; Hunzeker, 1993; Jackson, 1997; nized crime groups that used teenagers in Johnson, 1989; Miller, 1990). “numbers running” and as lookouts in Little mention is made of gang drug use gambling and bootlegging operations and trafficking in gang studies published (Sante, 1991). Except for occasional fight- before the 1960’s and 1970’s (Klein, 1971; ing, violent crime by youth gangs was rela- Short and Strodtbeck, 1965; Spergel, 1964). tively rare until the latter part of this cen- By all accounts, gang involvement in drug tury (Miller, Geertz, and Cutter, 1962). use and trafficking was either very limited or unnoticed before the 1960’s (Wilkinson Growing Involvement in and Fagan, 1996). Moore (1991) described Drugs and Violent Crime heroin and some barbiturate use among The early to mid-1980’s saw rapid Los Angeles gang members in the 1940’s, growth in the use of cocaine as crack be- mostly after they left gangs. In the 1950’s came the drug of choice in the inner cit- and into the 1960’s, youth gang members ies (Fagan, 1996; Fagan and Chin, 1990; (Chin, 1990; Chin and Fagan, 1990; Fagan, displayed ambivalence about gang mem- Klein and Maxson, 1994). Trend data that 1989). Studies also show differences in the ber drug use and trafficking (Spergel, would indicate whether gang members extent of drug use. For example, Hill, 1995). Some gangs of that era used—or were responsible for the increased Howell, and Hawkins (1996) found that at least tolerated—marijuana. Heroin- prevalence of cocaine use during this gang membership was related to increased using cliques were common in East Los period are not available. However, sev- marijuana use but not crack cocaine use Angeles gangs by the middle of the 1950’s eral studies document considerable (except among youth who were in the gang (Bullington, 1977). Other gang cliques, the youth and adult gang involvement in the for only 1 year). Huff (1996) reported partying members of gangs, began to use drug trade after the cocaine epidemic gangs that used large amounts of all kinds barbiturates (Moore, 1978). Cloward and began around 1985.2 The Chicago Vice of drugs. Fagan (1989) found variations in Ohlin’s (1960) typology of youth gangs put Lords, a large and violent criminal street drug use among different gangs and sev- drug users in a “retreatist” subculture of eral other studies found predominantly gang (Dawley, 1992; Keiser, 1969; Spergel, 4 addicts (withdrawing from active involve- 1995), grew during this era, providing drug-trafficking youth gangs. ment in the gang). Even in the 1970’s, drug one example that suggests gangs and For the most part, the findings of the use did not appear to be a dominant form crack sales emerged concurrently. studies outlined in the previous para- of illegal activity among gang members, Research conducted in the 1980’s and graph apply only to males. Some cities, either as a proportion of their own arrests such as Detroit (Taylor, 1993) and San or in comparison with arrested nongang 1990’s has documented extensive youth Francisco (Lauderback, Hansen, and youth (Miller, 1992). and adult gang member involvement in drug use and generally higher levels of Waldorf, 1992), found an increasing num- In his historical account of gangs, use compared with nongang members.3 ber of females involved in gang drug traf- Spergel (1995) noted that in some in- ficking and violent crime, but the consen- stances drug-abusing members, particu- However, gang members do not all use sus is that female involvement in these larly those who used heroin, were forced drugs or do not use them extensively behaviors has not increased commensu- out of gangs in the 1950’s and 1960’s (and rately with the increase among males also in the 1990’s) because they could not (Chesney-Lind, 1993; Maxson, 1995; 2 be relied on in fights with other gangs. See Anderson, 1990; Block and Block, 1993; Decker Moore and Hagedorn, 1996). Gangs have also been reported to drive and Van Winkle, 1994, 1996; Hagedorn, 1991, 1994a, 1994b; Maxson, Gordon, and Klein, 1985; Padilla, 1992; Why has youth gang involvement in drug traffickers out of the neighborhood Perkins, 1987; Reiner, 1992; Sanchez-Jankowski, 1991; drug trafficking increased in the past de- (Short and Strodtbeck, 1965, Spergel, Sanders, 1994; Skolnick, 1989; Taylor, 1989, 1990; cade? Fagan (1993) suggested two reasons: 1964).