Gang Deconstruction

Turning the Improbable
Into the Exceptional!
Page 2 of 110

The Advocacy Foundation, Inc.
Helping Individuals, Organizations & Communities
Achieve Their Full Potential
Since its founding in 2003, The Advocacy Foundation has become recognized as an effective
provider of support to those who receive our services, having real impact within the communities
we serve. We are currently engaged in community and faith-based collaborative initiatives,
having the overall objective of eradicating all forms of youth violence and correcting injustices
everywhere. In carrying-out these initiatives, we have adopted the evidence-based strategic
framework developed and implemented by the Office of Juvenile Justice & Delinquency
Prevention (OJJDP).
The stated objectives are:
1. Community Mobilization;
2. Social Intervention;
3. Provision of Opportunities;
4. Organizational Change and Development;
5. Suppression [of illegal activities].
Moreover, it is our most fundamental belief that in order to be effective, prevention and
intervention strategies must be Community Specific, Culturally Relevant, Evidence-Based, and
Collaborative. The Violence Prevention and Intervention programming we employ in
implementing this community-enhancing framework include the programs further described
throughout our publications, programs and special projects both domestically and
internationally.
www.TheAdvocacyFoundation.org
ISBN: .........
../2017
......... Printed
in the USA
Advocacy Foundation Publishers
Philadlephia, PA
(878) 222-0450 | Voice | Data | SMS
Page 3 of 110

Page 4 of 110

Dedication
______
Every publication in our many series’ is dedicated to everyone, absolutely everyone, who by
virtue of their calling and by Divine inspiration, direction and guidance, is on the battlefield dayafter-day
striving to follow God’s will and purpose for their lives. And this is with particular affinity
for those Spiritual warriors who are being transformed into excellence through daily academic,
professional, familial, and other challenges.
We pray that you will bear in mind:
Matthew 19:26 (NIV)
Jesus looked at them and said, "With man this is impossible,
but with God all things are possible." (Emphasis added)
To all of us who daily look past our circumstances, and naysayers, to what the Lord says we will
accomplish:
Blessings!!
- The Advocacy Foundation, Inc.
Page 5 of 110

Page 6 of 110

The Transformative Justice Project
Eradicating Juvenile Delinquency Requires a Multi-Disciplinary Approach
The way we accomplish all this is a follows:
The Juvenile Justice system is incredibly overloaded, and
Solutions-Based programs are woefully underfunded. Our
precious children, therefore, particularly young people of
color, often get the “swift” version of justice whenever they
come into contact with the law.
Decisions to build prison facilities are often based on
elementary school test results, and our country incarcerates
more of its young than any other nation on earth. So we at
The Foundation labor to pull our young people out of the
“school to prison” pipeline, and we then coordinate the efforts
of the legal, psychological, governmental and educational
professionals needed to bring an end to delinquency.
We also educate families, police, local businesses, elected
officials, clergy, and schools and other stakeholders about
transforming whole communities, and we labor to change
their thinking about the causes of delinquency with the goal
of helping them embrace the idea of restoration for the young
people in our care who demonstrate repentance for their
mistakes.
1. We vigorously advocate for charges reductions, wherever possible, in the adjudicatory (court)
process, with the ultimate goal of expungement or pardon, in order to maximize the chances for
our clients to graduate high school and progress into college, military service or the workforce
without the stigma of a criminal record;
2. We then enroll each young person into an Evidence-Based, Data-Driven Restorative Justice
program designed to facilitate their rehabilitation and subsequent reintegration back into the
community;
3. While those projects are operating, we conduct a wide variety of ComeUnity-ReEngineering
seminars and workshops on topics ranging from Juvenile Justice to Parental Rights, to Domestic
issues to Police friendly contacts, to CBO and FBO accountability and compliance;
4. Throughout the process, we encourage and maintain frequent personal contact between all
parties;
5 Throughout the process we conduct a continuum of events and fundraisers designed to facilitate
collaboration among professionals and community stakeholders; and finally
Page 7 of 110

6. 1 We disseminate Quarterly publications, like our e-Advocate series Newsletter and our e-Advocate
Quarterly electronic Magazine to all regular donors in order to facilitate a lifelong learning process
on the ever-evolving developments in the Justice system.
And in addition to the help we provide for our young clients and their families, we also facilitate
Community Engagement through the Restorative Justice process, thereby balancing the interesrs
of local businesses, schools, clergy, elected officials, police, and all interested stakeholders. Through
these efforts, relationships are rebuilt & strengthened, local businesses and communities are enhanced &
protected from victimization, young careers are developed, and our precious young people are kept out
of the prison pipeline.
This is a massive undertaking, and we need all the help and financial support you can give! We plan to
help 75 young persons per quarter-year (aggregating to a total of 250 per year) in each jurisdiction we
serve) at an average cost of under $2,500 per client, per year.*
Thank you in advance for your support!
* FYI:
1. The national average cost to taxpayers for minimum-security youth incarceration, is around
$43,000.00 per child, per year.
2. The average annual cost to taxpayers for maximun-security youth incarceration is well over
$148,000.00 per child, per year.
- (US News and World Report, December 9, 2014);
3. In every jurisdiction in the nation, the Plea Bargain rate is above 99%.
The Judicial system engages in a tri-partite balancing task in every single one of these matters, seeking
to balance Rehabilitative Justice with Community Protection and Judicial Economy, and, although
the practitioners work very hard to achieve positive outcomes, the scales are nowhere near balanced
where people of color are involved.
We must reverse this trend, which is right now working very much against the best interests of our young.
Our young people do not belong behind bars.
- Jack Johnson
1
In addition to supporting our world-class programming and support services, all regular donors receive our Quarterly e-Newsletter
(The e-Advocate), as well as The e-Advocate Quarterly Magazine.
Page 8 of 110

Page 9 of 110

Page 10 of 110

The Advocacy Foundation, Inc.
Helping Individuals, Organizations & Communities
Achieve Their Full Potential
…a collection of works on
Gang Deconstruction
“Turning the Improbable Into the Exceptional”
Atlanta
Philadelphia
______
John C Johnson III
Founder & CEO
(878) 222-0450
Voice | Data | SMS
www.TheAdvocacyFoundation.org
Page 11 of 110

Page 12 of 110

Biblical Authority
______
Psalm 1:1
How blessed is the man who does not walk in the counsel of the wicked, Nor stand in
the path of sinners, Nor sit in the seat of scoffers!
Proverbs 1:10-19
My son, if sinners entice you, Do not consent. If they say, "Come with us, Let us lie in
wait for blood, Let us ambush the innocent without cause; Let us swallow them alive like
Sheol, Even whole, as those who go down to the pit; read more.
Proverbs 13:20
He who walks with wise men will be wise, But the companion of fools will suffer harm.
1 Corinthians 15:33
Do not be deceived: "Bad company corrupts good morals."
2 Corinthians 6:14-17
Do not be bound together with unbelievers; for what partnership have righteousness
and lawlessness, or what fellowship has light with darkness? Or what harmony has
Christ with Belial, or what has a believer in common with an unbeliever? Or what
agreement has the temple of God with idols? For we are the temple of the living God;
just as God said, "I WILL DWELL IN THEM AND WALK AMONG THEM; AND I WILL
BE THEIR GOD, AND THEY SHALL BE MY PEOPLE.
"Therefore, COME OUT FROM THEIR MIDST AND BE SEPARATE," says the Lord.
"AND DO NOT TOUCH WHAT IS UNCLEAN; And I will welcome you.
Page 13 of 110

Page 14 of 110

Table of Contents
…a collection of works on
Gang Deconstruction
Biblical Authority
I. Introduction……………………………………………………………………… 17
II. Incentives for Joining Gangs…………………………………………… 27
III. List of Gangs in The U.S……………………………………………….. 39
IV. The War on Gangs in The U.S…………………………………………. 45
V. Gang Report Reveals: Racist Cops the Problem
Not Youth…………………………………………………………………. 49
VI. Global Cease-Fire Operations…………………………………………. 53
VII. Anti-Gang Strategies in the U.S……………………………………….. 59
VIII. Compilation of Gang-Related Legislation…………………………….. 69
IX. References……………………………………………………………….. 73
Attachments
A. Brief Review of Federal & State Definitions of Gangs
B. Getting Out of Gangs; Staying Out of Gangs
C. Gang Prevention: An Overview of Research and Programs
Copyright © 2018 The Advocacy Foundation, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Page 15 of 110

Page 16 of 110

I. Introduction
A gang is a group of friends or family with identifiable leadership and internal
organization, identifying with or claiming control over territory in a community, and
engaging either individually or collectively in illegal or violent behavior. Some criminal
gang members "jumped in" (by going through the process of initiation) or have to prove
their loyalty and right to belong to a group by committing certain acts, usually a theft or
[act of] violence. A member of a gang may be called a gangster or a thug.
Definition
The word "gang" derives from the past participle of Old English gan, meaning "to go". It
is cognate with Old Norse gangster, meaning "journey." It typically means a group of
people, and may have neutral, positive or negative connotations depending on usage.
Page 17 of 110

History
In discussing the banditry in American history Barrington Moore, Jr. suggests that
gangsterism as a "form of self-help which victimizes others" may appear in societies
which lack strong "forces of law and order"; he characterizes European feudalism as
"mainly gangsterism that had become society itself and acquired respectability and
power but gang violences were frequent occurances".
A wide variety of gangs, such as the Order of Assassins, the Damned Crew, Adam the
Leper's gang, Penny Mobs, Indian Thugs, Chinese Triads, Snakehead, Japanese
Yakuza, Irish mob, Pancho Villa's Villistas, Dead Rabbits, American Old West outlaw
gangs, Bowery Boys, Chasers, the Italian mafia, Jewish mafia, and Russian Mafia crime
families have existed for centuries. According to some estimates the Thuggee gangs in
India murdered 1 million people between 1740 and 1840.
The 17th century saw London "terrorized by a series of organized gangs", some of them
known as the Mims, Hectors, Bugles, and Dead Boys. These gangs often came into
conflict with each other. Members dressed in the following way: "with colored ribbons to
distinguish the different factions."
Chicago had over 1,000 gangs in the 1920s. These early gangs had reputations for
many criminal activities, but in most countries could not profit from drug trafficking prior
to drugs being made illegal by laws such as the 1912 International Opium
Convention and the 1919 Volstead Act. Gang involvement in drug trafficking increased
during the 1970s and 1980s, but some gangs continue to have minimal involvement in
the trade.
In the United States, the history of gangs began on the East Coast in 1783 following the
American Revolution. The emergence of the gangs was largely attributed to the vast
rural population immigration to the urban areas. The first street-gang in the United
States, the 40 Thieves, began around the late 1820s in New York City. The gangs
in Washington D.C. had control of what is now Federal Triangle, in a region then known
as Murder Bay.
Current Numbers
In 2007, there were approximately 785,000 active street gang members in the United
States, according to the National Youth Gang Center. In 2011, the National Gang
Intelligence Center of the Federal Bureau of Investigation asserted that "There are
approximately 1.4 million active street, prison, and outlaw gang members comprising
more than 33,500 gangs in the United States." Approximately 230,000 gang members
were in U.S. prisons or jails in 2011.
According to the Chicago Crime Commission publication, "The Gang Book 2012",
Chicago has the highest number of gang members of any city in the United States:
Page 18 of 110

150,000 members. Traditionally Los Angeles County has been considered the Gang
Capital of America, with an estimated 120,000 (41,000 in the City) gang members.
There were at least 30,000 gangs and 800,000 gang members active across the USA in
2007. About 900,000 gang members lived "within local communities across the
country," and about 147,000 were in U.S. prisons or jails in 2009. By 1999, Hispanics
accounted for 47% of all gang members, Blacks 31%, Whites 13%, and Asians 7%.
In December 13, 2009, The New York Times published an article about growing gang
violence on the Pine Ridge Indian Reservation and estimated that there were 39 gangs
with 5,000 members on that reservation alone.
There are between 25,000 and 50,000 gang members in Central America's El Salvador.
More than 1,800 gangs were known to be operating in the UK in 2011.
The FBI estimates that the four Italian organized crime groups active in the United
States have 25,000 members in total.
Page 19 of 110

The Russian, Chechen, Azerbaijani, Ukrainian, Georgian, Armenian, and other former
Soviet organized crime groups or "Bratvas" have many members and associates
affiliated with their various sorts of organized crime, but no statistics are available.
The Yakuza are among one of the largest criminal organizations in the world. As of
2005, there are some 102,400 known members in Japan.
Hong Kong's Triads include up to 160,000 members in the 21st century. It was
estimated that in the 1950s, there were 300,000 Triad members in Hong Kong.
Notable Examples
Perhaps one of the most infamous criminal gangs is the Sicilian Cosa Nostra, known as
the Mafia. The Neapolitan Camorra, the Calabrian 'Ndrangheta and the Apulian Sacra
Corona Unita are similar Italian organized gangs.
Other criminal gangs include the Russian Mafia, Mexican, Colombian Drug Cartels,
Mexican Drug Cartels, the Aryan Brotherhood, the Mexican Mafia, the Texas Syndicate,
the Black Guerrilla Family, the Nuestra Familia, the Mara Salvatrucha, the Primeiro
Comando da Capital, the Irish Mob, the Puerto Rican Mafia, Nuestra familia, the
Chinese Triads, the Japanese Yakuza, the Jamaican-British Yardies, the Haitian
gang Zoe Pound, and other crime syndicates.
On a lower level in the hierarchy of criminal gangs are street gangs in the United States
(mostly branches of larger criminal gangs).
Examples include:
Black gangs like the Bloods and the Crips
National origin and/or racial gangs like the Asian Boyz, the Wa Ching, The Latin
Kings, the Hammerskins and Blood & Honour.
Biker gangs such as the Hells Angels, the Pagans, the Outlaws, and
the Bandidos, known as the "Big Four".
Types and Structure
Many types of gangs make up the general structure of an organized group.
There are street gangs, with members of similar background and motivations. The term
"street gang" is commonly used interchangeably with "youth gang", referring to
neighborhood or street-based youth groups that meet "gang" criteria. Miller (1992)
defines a street gang as "a self-formed association of peers, united by mutual interests,
with identifiable leadership and internal organization, who act collectively or as
Page 20 of 110

individuals to achieve specific purposes, including the conduct of illegal activity and
control of a particular territory, facility, or enterprise."
Understanding the structure of gangs is a critical skill to defining the types of strategies
that are most effective with dealing with them, from the at-risk youth to the gang
leaders. Not all individuals who display the outward signs of gang membership are
actually involved in criminal activities. An individual's age, physical structure, ability to
fight, willingness to commit violence, and arrest record are often principal factors in
determining where an individual stands in the gang hierarchy; now money derived from
criminal activity and ability to provide for the gang also impacts the individual's status
within the gang. The structure of gangs varies depending primarily on size which can
range in size from five or ten to thousands. Many of the larger gangs break up into
smaller groups, cliques or sub-sets. The cliques typically bring more territory to a gang
as they expand and recruit new members. Most gangs operate informally with
leadership falling to whoever takes control; others have distinct leadership and are
highly structured, which resembles more or less a business or corporation.
Prison gangs are groups in prison or correctional institution for mutual protection and
advancement. Prison gangs often have several "affiliates" or "chapters" in different state
prison systems that branch out due to the movement or transfer of their members. The
2005 study neither War nor Peace: International Comparisons of Children and Youth in
Organized Armed Violence studied ten cities worldwide and found that in eight of them,
Page 21 of 110

"street gangs had strong links to prison gangs". According to criminal justice
professor John Hagedorn, many of the biggest gangs from Chicago originated from
prisons. From the St. Charles Illinois Youth Center originated the Conservative Vice
Lords and Blackstone Rangers. Although the majority of gang leaders from Chicago are
now incarcerated, most of those leaders continue to manage their gangs from within
prison.
Criminal gangs may function both inside and outside of prison, such as the Nuestra
Familia, Mexican Mafia, Folk Nation, and the Brazilian PCC. During the 1970s, prison
gangs in Cape Town, South Africa began recruiting street gang members from outside
and helped increase associations between prison and street gangs. In the USA, the
prison gang the Aryan Brotherhood is involved in organized crime outside of prison.
Involvement
Matthew O'Deane has identified five primary steps of gang involvement applicable to
the majority of gangs in the world; at risk, associates, members, hardcore members and
leaders.
Gang leaders are the upper echelons of the gang's command. This gang member is
probably the oldest in the posse, likely has the smallest criminal record, and they often
have the power to direct the gang's activity, whether they are involved or not. In many
jurisdictions, this person is likely a prison gang member calling the shots from within the
prison system or is on parole. Often, they distance themselves from the street gang
activities and make attempts to appear legitimate, possibly operating a business that
they run as fronts for the gang's drug dealing or other illegal operations.
Membership
The numerous push factors experienced by at-risk individuals vary situationally however
follow a common theme for the desire of power, respect, money and protection. These
factors are very influential in the luring process and largely contribute to the reasons
why individuals join gangs. These factors are particularly more attractive and influential
on at-risk youth. Many times individuals are experiencing low levels of these various
factors in their own lives, and feel that joining a gang is the only way to obtain status
and success. Unfortunately, a common sentiment is "if you can't beat 'em, join 'em".
These at-risk individuals feel ostracized from the community and are experiencing a
lack of social support. Upon joining a gang, they instantly gain a feeling of belonging
and identity; they are surrounded with individuals whom they can relate to. They have
generally grown up in the same area as each other and can bond over similar needs. In
some areas, joining a gang is an integrated part of the growing up process.
Gang membership is generally maintained by gangs as a lifetime commitment,
reinforced through identification such as tattoos, and insured through intimidation and
coercion. Gang defectors are often subject to retaliation from the deserted gang. Many
Page 22 of 110

gangs, including foreign and transnational gangs, hold that the only way to leave the
gang is through death. This is sometimes informally called the "morgue rule".
Gang membership represents the phenomenon of a chronic group criminal spin,
accordingly the criminality of members is greater when they belong to the gang than
when they are not in the gang—either before or after being in the gang. In addition,
when together, the gang criminality as a whole is greater than that of its members when
they are alone. The gang operates as a whole greater than its parts and influences the
behavior of its members in the direction of greater extend and stronger degree of
criminality.
Non-Member Women In Gang Culture
Women associated with gangs but who lack membership are typically categorized
based on their relation to gang members. A survey of Mexican American gang members
and associates defined these categories as girlfriends, hoodrats, good girls, and
relatives. Girlfriends are longterm partners of male gang members, and may have
children with them. Hoodrats are seen as being sexually promiscuous and heavy drug
and alcohol users. Gang members may engage in casual sex with these girls, but they
are not viewed as potential longterm partners and are severely stigmatized by both men
and women in gang culture. Good girls are long term friends of members, often from
childhood, and relatives are typically sisters or cousins. These are fluid categories, and
women often change status as they move between them. Valdez found that women with
ties to gang members are often used to hold illegal weapons and drugs, typically,
because members believe the girls are less likely to be searched by police for such
items.
Typical Activities
The United Nations estimates that gangs make most of their money through the drugs
trade, which is thought to be worth $352 billion in total. The United States Department of
Justice estimates there are approximately 30,000 gangs, with 760,000 members,
impacting 2,500 communities across the United States.
Gangs are involved in all areas of street-crime activities like extortion, drug
trafficking, both in and outside the prison system, and theft. Gangs also victimize
individuals by robbery and kidnapping. Cocaine is the primary drug of distribution by
gangs in America, which have used the cities Chicago, Cape Town, and Rio de
Janeiro to transport drugs internationally. Brazilian urbanization has driven the drug
trade to the favelas of Rio. Often, gangs hire "lookouts" to warn members of upcoming
law enforcement. The dense environments of favelas in Rio and public housing projects
in Chicago have helped gang members hide from police easily.
Street gangs take over territory or "turf" in a particular city and are often involved in
"providing protection", often a thin cover for extortion, as the "protection" is usually from
Page 23 of 110

the gang itself, or in other criminal activity. Many gangs use fronts to demonstrate
influence and gain revenue in a particular area.
Gang Violence
Gang violence refers mostly to the illegal and non-political acts of violence perpetrated
by gangs against civilians, other gangs, law enforcement officers, firefighters, or military
personnel. Throughout history, such acts have been committed by gangs at all levels of
organization. Modern gangs introduced new acts of violence, which may also function
as a rite of passage for new gang members.
In 2006, 58 percent of L.A.'s murders were gang-related. Reports of gang-related
homicides are concentrated mostly in the largest cities in the United States, where there
are long-standing and persistent gang problems and a greater number of documented
gang members—most of whom are identified by law enforcement.
There have been reports of racially motivated attacks against African
Americans. Members of the Azusa 13 gang, associated with the Mexican Mafia, were
indicted in 2011 for harassing and intimidating black people in Southern California.
Gang-related activity and violence has increased along the U.S. Southwest border
region, as US-based gangs act as enforcers for Mexican drug cartels.
A gang war is a type of small war that occurs when two gangs end up in a feud over
territory.
Sexual Violence
Women in gang culture are often in environments where sexual assault is common and
considered to be a norm. Women who attend social gatherings and parties with heavy
drug and alcohol use are particularly likely to be assaulted. A girl who becomes
intoxicated and flirts with men is often seen as "asking for it" and is written off as a "hoe"
by men and women. "Hoodrats" and girls associated with rival gangs have lower status
at these social events, and are victimized when members view them as fair game and
other women rationalize assault against them.
Motives
Usually, gangs have gained the most control in poorer, urban communities
and developing countries in response to unemployment and other services. Social
disorganization, the disintegration of societal institutions such as family, school, and the
public safety net enable groups of peers to form gangs. According to surveys conducted
internationally by the World Bank for their World Development Report 2011, by far the
most common reason people suggest as a motive for joining gangs is unemployment.
Page 24 of 110

Ethnic solidarity is a common factor in gangs. Black and Hispanic gangs formed during
the 1960s in the USA often adapted nationalist rhetoric. Both majority and minority
races in society have established gangs in the name of identity: the Igbo gang Bakassi
Boys in Nigeria defend the majority Igbo group violently and through terror, and in the
United States, whites who feel threatened by minorities have formed their own gangs,
such as the Ku Klux Klan. Responding to an increasing black and Hispanic migration, a
white gang called Chicago Gaylords. Some gang members are motivated by religion, as
is the case with the Muslim Patrol.
Identification
Most gang members have identifying characteristics which are unique to their specific
clique or gang. The Bloods, for instance, wear red bandanas, the Crips blue, allowing
these gangs to "represent" their affiliation. Any disrespect of a gang member's color by
an unaffiliated individual is regarded as grounds for violent retaliation, often by multiple
members of the offended gang. Tattoos are also common identifiers, such as an '18'
above the eyebrow to identify a member of the 18th Street gang. Tattoos help a gang
member gain respect within their group, and mark them as members for life. They can
Page 25 of 110

e burned on as well as inked. Some gangs make use of more than one identifier, like
the Nortenos, who wear red bandanas and have "14", "XIV", "x4", and "Norte"
tattoos. Also, many male gang members wear earrings or other types of body jewelry,
or simply have pierced ears to depict gang membership, unlike females, who usually
wear jewelry for fashion.
Gangs often establish distinctive, characteristic identifiers
including graffiti tags colors, hand signals, clothing (for example, the gangsta rap-type
hoodies), jewelry, hair styles, fingernails, slogans, signs (such as the noose and the
burning cross as the symbols of the Klan), flags secret greetings, slurs, or code words
and other group-specific symbols associated with the gang's common beliefs, rituals,
and mythologies to define and differentiate themselves from other groups and gangs.
As an alternative language, hand-signals, symbols, and slurs in speech, graffiti, print,
music, or other mediums communicate specific informational cues used to threaten,
disparage, taunt, harass, intimidate, alarm, influence, or exact specific responses
including obedience, submission, fear, or terror. One study focused on terrorism and
symbols states that "[s]ymbolism is important because it plays a part in impelling
the terrorist to act and then in defining the targets of their actions." Displaying a gang
sign, such as the noose, as a symbolic act can be construed as "a threat to
commit violence communicated with the intent to terrorize another, to cause evacuation
of a building, or to cause serious public inconvenience, in reckless disregard of the risk
of causing such terror or inconvenience … an offense against property or involving
danger to another person that may include but is not limited to recklessly endangering
another person, harassment, stalking, ethnic intimidation, and criminal mischief."
The Internet is one of the most significant media used by gangs to communicate in
terms of the size of the audience they can reach with minimal effort and reduced
risk. The Internet provides a forum for recruitment activities, typically provoking rival
gangs through derogatory postings, and to glorify their gang and themselves. Gangs
use the Internet to communicate with each other, facilitate criminal activity, spread their
message and culture around the nation. As Internet pages like MySpace, YouTube,
Twitter, AIM, and Facebook become more popular, law enforcement works to
understand how to conduct investigations related to gang activity in an online
environment. In most cases the police can and will get the information they need,
however this requires police officers and federal agents to make formal legal requests
for information in a timely manner, which typically requires a search warrant or
subpoena to compel the service providers to supply the needed information. A grand
jury subpoena or administrative subpoena, court order, search warrant; or user consent
is needed to get this information pursuant to the Electronic Communication Privacy Act,
Title 18 U.S.C. § 2701, et seq. (ECPA). Most gang members have personal web pages
or some type of social networking internet account or chat room where they post photos
and videos and talk openly about their gang exploits. The majority of the service
providers that gang members use are free social networking sites that allow users to
create their own profile pages, which can include lists of their favorite musicians, books
and movies, photos of themselves and friends, and links to related web pages. Many of
Page 26 of 110

these services also permit users to send and receive private messages and talk in
private chat rooms. Often a police officer may stumble upon one of these pages, or an
informant can give access to the local gang page. Alternatively, they will have to
formally request the needed information. Most service providers have four basic types
of information about their users that may be relevant to a criminal investigation; 1) basic
identity/subscriber information supplied by the user in creating the account; 2) IP log-in
information; 3) files stored in a user's profile (such as "about me" information or lists of
friends); and 4) user sent and received message content. It is important to know the
law, and understand what the police can get service providers to do and what their
capabilities are. It is also important to understand how gang members use the Internet
and how the police can use their desire to be recognized and respected in their subculture
against them.
Debate Surrounding Impact
In the UK context, law enforcement agencies are increasingly focusing enforcement
efforts on gangs and gang membership. However debate persists over the extent and
nature of gang activity in the UK, with some academics and policy-makers arguing that
the current focus is inadvisable, given a lack of consensus over the relationship
between gangs and crime.
The Runnymede Trust suggests that, despite the well-rehearsed public discourse
around youth gangs and "gang culture", "We actually know very little about 'gangs' in
the UK: about how 'a gang' might be defined or understood, about what being in 'a
gang' means... We know still less about how 'the gang' links to levels of youth violence."
Professor Simon Hallsworth argues that, where they exist, gangs in the UK are "far
more fluid, volatile and amorphous than the myth of the organized group with a
corporate structure". This assertion is supported by a field study conducted
by Manchester University, which found that "most within- and between-gang disputes...
emanated from interpersonal disputes regarding friends, family and romantic
relationships", as opposed to territorial rivalries, and that criminal enterprises were
"rarely gang-coordinated... most involved gang members operating as individuals or in
small groups."
Cottrell-Boyce, writing in the Youth Justice journal, argues that gangs have been
constructed as a "suitable enemy" by politicians and the media, obscuring the wider,
structural roots of youth violence. At the level of enforcement, a focus on gang
membership may be counterproductive; creating confusion and resulting in a drag-net
approach which can criminalize innocent young people rather than focusing resources
on serious violent crime.
Page 27 of 110

Page 28 of 110

II. Incentives for Joining Gangs
Gangs in the United States include several types of groups, including national street
gangs, local street gangs, prison gangs, motorcycle clubs, and ethnic and organized
crime gangs. Approximately 1.4 million people were part of gangs as of 2011, and more
than 33,000 gangs were active in the United States.
Many American gangs began, and still exist, in urban areas. In many cases, national
street gangs originated in major cities such as New York City, Los
Angeles, Chicago, Philadelphia, Miami and they later migrated to other American cities.
Reasons for Joining
People join gangs for various reasons, including:
Profiting from organized crime, which could be a means to obtain food and
shelter, or access to luxury goods and services
Protection from rival gangs or violent crime in general, especially when the police
are distrusted or ineffective
Personal status
A sense of family, identity, or belonging
Intimidation by gang members or pressure from friends
Family tradition
Excitement of risk-taking
Studies aimed at preventing youth involvement in gangs have identified additional "risk
factors" for joining, including:
Lack of parental supervision
Family instability
Family members with violent attitudes
Being part of a socially marginalized group (e.g. ethnic minority)
Family poverty
Lack of youth jobs
Academic problems (frustration at low performance, low expectations, poor
personal relationships with teachers, learning disability)
Violent crime committed by others against the potential gang member, or friends
or family
Involvement in non-gang illegal activity, especially violent crime or drug use
Low self-esteem
Lack of role models
Hyperactivity
Page 29 of 110

Gang membership was also associated with:
Early sexual activity
Illegal gun ownership
Activities and Types
American gangs are responsible for an average of 48% of violent crime in most
jurisdictions, and up to 90% in other jurisdictions. Major urban areas and their suburban
surroundings experience the majority of gang activity, particularly gang-related violent
crime.
Gangs are known to engage in traditionally gang-related gambling, drug trafficking, and
arms trafficking, white collar crime such as counterfeiting, identity theft, and fraud, and
non-traditional activity of human trafficking and prostitution.
Gangs can be categorized based on their ethnic affiliation, their structure, or their
membership. Among the gang types defined by the National Gang Intelligence
Center are the national street gang, the prison gang, the motorcycle gang, and the local
street gang.
Prison Gangs
American prison gangs, like most street
gangs, are formed for protection against
other gangs. The goal of many street gang
members is to gain the respect and
protection that comes from being in a
prison gang. Prison gangs use street
gangs members as their power base for
which they recruit new members. For many
members, reaching prison gang status
shows the ultimate commitment to the
gang.
Some prison gangs are transplanted from
the street, and in some occasions, prison
gangs "outgrow" the penitentiary and
engage in criminal activities on the outside.
Many prison gangs are racially oriented.
Gang umbrella organizations like the Folk
Nation and People Nation have originated
in prisons.
One notable American prison gang is
the Aryan Brotherhood, an organization
Page 30 of 110

known for its violence and white supremacist views. Established in the mid-1960s, the
gang was not affiliated with the Aryan Nations and allegedly engages in violent crime,
drug trafficking, and illegal gambling activities both in and out of prisons. On July 28,
2006, after a six-year federal investigation, four leaders of the gang were convicted of
racketeering, murder, and conspiracy charges. Another significant American prison
gang is the Aryan League, which was formed by an alliance between the Aryan
Brotherhood and Public Enemy No. 1. Working collaboratively, the gangs engage in
drug trafficking, identity theft, and other white collar crime using contacts in the banking
system. The gang has used its connections in the banking system to target law
enforcement agencies and family members of officers.
There has been a long running racial tension between black and Hispanic prison gangs,
as well as significant prison riots in which gangs have targeted each other.
Motorcycle Gangs
The United States has a significant population of motorcycle gangs, which are groups
that use motorcycle clubs as organizational structures for conducting criminal
activity. Some motorcycle clubs are exclusively motorcycle gangs, while others are only
partially compromised by criminal activity. The National Gang Intelligence Center
reports on all motorcycle clubs with gang activity, while other government agencies,
such as the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF) focus on
motorcycle clubs exclusively dedicated to gang activity. The ATF estimates that
approximately 300 exclusively gang-oriented motorcycle clubs exist in the United
States.
Organized Crime Gangs
Organized criminal groups are a subtype of gang with a hierarchical leadership structure
and in which individuals commit crime for personal gain. For most organized criminal
group members, criminal activities constitute their occupation. There are numerous
organized criminal groups with operations in the United States (including transnational
organized crime groups), such as the Sinaloa Cartel, American Mafia, Jewish
Mafia, Triad Society, Russian Mafia, Yakuza, Korean Mafia, Sicilian Mafia, Irish Mob,
and Albanian Mafia.
The activities of organized criminal groups are highly varied, and include drug,
weapons, and human trafficking (including prostitution and kidnapping), art theft, murder
(including contract killings and assassinations), copyright infringement, counterfeiting,
identity theft, money laundering, extortion, illegal gambling, and terrorism. The
complexity and seriousness of the crimes committed by global crime groups pose a
threat not only to law enforcement but to democracy and legitimate economic
development as well.
American national and local street gangs will collaborate with organized criminal groups.
Page 31 of 110

Juvenile Gangs
Youth gangs are composed of young people, male or female, and like most street
gangs, are either formed for protection or for social and economic reasons. Some of the
most notorious and dangerous gangs have evolved from youth gangs. During the late
1980s and early 1990s an increase in violence in the United States took place and this
was due primarily to an increase in violent acts committed by people under the age of
20. Due to gangs spreading to suburban and smaller communities youth gangs are now
more prevalent and exist in all regions of the United States.
Youth gangs have increasingly been creating problems in school and correctional
facilities. However youth gangs are said to be an important social institution for low
income youths and young adults because they often serve as cultural, social, and
economic functions which are no longer served by the family, school or labor
market. Youth gangs tend to emerge during times of rapid social change and instability.
Young people can be attracted to joining a youth gang for a number of reasons. They
provide a degree of order and solidarity for their members and make them feel like part
of a group or a community.
The diffusion of gang culture to the point where it has been integrated into a larger
youth culture has led to widespread adoption by youth of many of the symbols of gang
life. For this reason, more and more youth who earlier may have not condoned gang
behavior are more willing, even challenged to experiment with gang-like activity Youth
Gangs may be an ever-present feature of urban culture that change over time in its
form, social meaning and antisocial behavior. However, in the United States, youth
gangs have taken an especially disturbing form and continue to permeate society.
Page 32 of 110

Demographics
In 1999, Hispanics accounted for 47% of all U.S. gang members, African Americans for
34%, whites for 13%, and Asians for 6%.
Law enforcement agencies reported in 2011 that gangs affiliated with ethnicity and nontraditional
gangs have expanded in recent years.
Hispanic Gangs
Hispanic gangs form the largest group of ethnic-based gangs in the United States. U.S.
immigration investigation programs such as Operation Community Shield, have
detained more than 1,400 illegal immigrants who were also gang members, just a tiny
fraction of gang members nationwide. ICE's Operation Community Shield has since
arrested 7,655 street gang members. A California Department of Justice study reported
in 1995 that 60 percent of the twenty thousand members of the 18th Street Gang in
California are undocumented immigrants.
The Latin Kings is the largest and most organized Hispanic street gang in the United
States. The Latin Kings first emerged in Chicago in the 1940s after several young
Puerto Rican men on the north side—and later, Mexican men on the south side—
organized into a self-defense group to protect their communities. The initial intention
was to unite all Latinos into a collective struggle against oppression and to help each
other overcome the problems of racism and prejudice that newly arriving Latino
immigrants were experiencing. Hence, the name "Latin Kings and Queens", which as it
denotes, is a reference to members of all Latino heritages. They organized themselves
as a vanguard for their communities. Like the Black Panthers, the Young Lords, and
many other groups perceiving social injustices directed at their kind, the Latin Kings
were broken as a movement. They lost touch with their roots and grew into one of the
largest and most infamous criminal gangs in the United States. The group's members
became involved in crimes including murder, drug trafficking, robberies and other
organized criminal activities.
Mara Salvatrucha, commonly abbreviated as "MS", "Mara", or "MS-13", is another
Hispanic street gang operating in the United States. It originated in Los Angeles and
has spread to Central America, other parts of the United States, and Canada. Mara
Salvatrucha is one of the most dangerous gangs in the United States, and its activities
include drug and weapons trafficking, auto theft, burglary, assault, and murder
(including contract killings). The gang also publicly declared that it targets
the Minutemen, a white supremacist vigilante group who take it upon themselves to
target undocumented immigrants, to "teach them a lesson", possibly due to their
smuggling of various Central/South Americans (mostly other gang members), drugs,
and weapons across the border. Mara Salvatrucha has been investigated by the FBI
and U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, and in September 2005 the gang was
targeted by raids against its members, in which 660 people were arrested across the
Page 33 of 110

United States. The US treasury department has imposed Sanctions on members in MS
13 by freezing assets that are related to the gang’s activities. Sanctions were imposed
on six members in June 2013 and three members in April 2015. Sanctions in 2013
follow the lines of Executive Order (E.O.) 13581. The efforts to financially disrupt MS 13
have been a collaborative effort of ICE and the Department of Homeland Security.
Other Ethnic Gangs
Among other ethnic-based gangs are Asian gangs, which operate similar to
Asian organized crime groups with a hierarchical structure and little concern for control
of territory. Asian gangs often victimize Asian populations, and law enforcement faces
difficulty investigating Asian gangs due to language barriers and distrust among the
Asian population. Asian gangs engage in a variety of crime, including violent crime, drug
and human trafficking, and white collar crime.
East African gangs operate in over 30 jurisdictions in the United States. They are
generally divided between Sudanese gangs, Ethiopian gangs and Somali gangs. Unlike
the majority of traditional street gangs, Somali gang members adopt names based on
their clan affiliation. Largely keeping to themselves, they have engaged in violent crime,
weapons trafficking, human, sex and drug trafficking, and credit card fraud. As of 2013,
there has been a decrease in gang-related activity among disaffected Somali youths, as
they have grown more settled. Sudanese gangs have emerged in several states since
2003. Among the most aggressive of these Sudanese gangs is the African Pride gang.
Some Sudanese gang members also possess strategic and weapons knowledge
gained during conflicts in Sudan.
Page 34 of 110

Primarily operating along the East Coast, Caribbean ethnic-based gangs include
Dominican, Haitian, and Jamaican gangs. The largest Dominican gang and the fastestgrowing
Caribbean gang is the Trinitarios. Although a prison gang, Trinitario has
members operating as a street gang, and it is known for violent crime and drug
trafficking in the New York and New Jersey area. Haitian gangs, such as Zoe Pound,
are involved in a variety of crime, including violent crime and drug and weapons
trafficking. U.S.-based Jamaican gangs, unlike those in Jamaica, are unsophisticated
and lack hierarchy; however, they often maintain ties to Jamaican organized crime and
engage in drug and weapons trafficking.
Female Gang Membership
Although female gang membership is less common than male membership, women and
girls can become fully-fledged members of mixed-gender or exclusively female gangs.
These gangs operate as functioning units, coed gangs, or female auxiliaries to preexisting
male gangs. National gang statistics show that 2% of all gangs are femaleonly,
and the National Gang Center reports that around 10% of all gang members are
females.
Gang Membership in The Military
Gang members in uniform use their military knowledge, skills, and weapons to commit
and facilitate various crimes. As of April 2011, the NGIC has identified members of at
least 53 gangs whose members have served in or are affiliated with US military.
In 2006, Scott Barfield, a Defense Department investigator, said there is an online
network of gangs and extremists: "They're communicating with each other about
weapons, about recruiting, about keeping their identities secret, about organizing within
the military."
A 2006 Chicago Sun-Times article reports that gangs encourage members to enter the
military to learn urban warfare techniques to teach other gang members. A January
2007 article in the Chicago Sun-Times reported that gang members in the military are
involved in the theft and sale of military weapons, ammunition, and equipment, including
body armor. The Sun-Times began investigating the gang activity in the military after
receiving photos of gang graffiti showing up in Iraq.
The FBI's 2007 report on gang membership in the military states that the military's
recruit screening process is ineffective, allows gang members/extremists to enter the
military, and lists at least eight instances in the last three years in which gang members
have obtained military weapons for their illegal enterprises. "Gang Activity in the U.S.
Armed Forces Increasing", dated January 12, 2007, states that street gangs including
the Bloods, Crips, Black Disciples, Gangster Disciples, Hells Angels, Latin Kings, The
18th Street Gang, Mara Salvatrucha (MS-13), Mexican Mafia, Norteños, Sureños, White
power Skinhead, King Cobras, and Vice Lords have been documented on military
Page 35 of 110

installations both domestic and international although recruiting gang members violates
military regulations.
History
The earliest American street gangs emerged
at the end of the American Revolutionary
War in the early 1780s. However, these early
street gangs had questionable legitimacy,
and more serious gangs did not form until
the early 1800s. The earliest of these serious
gangs formed in northeastern American
cities, particularly in New York.
Early Street Gangs in The Northeast:
1780–1870
employed as common laborers.
Three immigrant groups entered the
Northeast via New York in the early 1800s:
English, Irish, and German. On the Lower
East Side of New York, these immigrant
groups formed into gangs in an area known
as the Five Points. Of these were the
Smiths's Vly gang, the Bowery Boys, the
Broadway Boys, all three of which were
predominantly Irish immigrants. Blacks living
in New York formed two main gangs, the Fly
Boys and the Longbridge Boys. These early
gangs were not exclusively engaged in
criminal activity; their members often were
After the early 1820s, however, gangs began to focus on criminal activity, one example
being the Forty Thieves, which began in the late 1820s in the Five Points area. Other
criminal gangs of the pre-Civil War era included the Dead Rabbits and the Five Points
Gang. The Five Points Gang in particular became influential in recruiting membership to
gangs and toward establishing gang relationships with politicians. By 1855, it was
estimated that the city of New York contained 30,000 men who held allegiances to gang
leaders. The New York City draft riots were said to have been ignited by young Irish
street gangs. Herbert Asbury depicted some of these groups in his history of Irish and
American gangs in Manhattan, and his work was later used by Martin Scorsese as the
basis for the motion picture Gangs of New York. However, these early gangs reached
their peak in the years immediately prior to the Civil War, and gang activity had largely
dissipated by the 1870s.
Page 36 of 110

Reemergence and Growth: 1870–1940
During the late 1800s, gangs reemerged as a criminal force in the Northeast, and they
emerged as new criminal enterprises in the American West and the Midwest. In New
York after the Civil War, the most powerful gang to emerge was the Whyos, which
included reconstituted members of previous Five Points area gangs. Another late 19th
century New York gang was the Jewish Eastman Gang. Meanwhile, Chinese
immigrants formed tongs, which were highly structured gangs involved in gambling and
drug trafficking. These tongs were matched in strength by an emerging Italian organized
crime network that became the American Mafia.
Gangs emerged in the Midwest in the late 19th and early 20th centuries in Chicago.
European immigrant groups such as Poles and Italians formed the core membership of
Chicago gangs, while only 1% of gangs were black. However, gangs in the 19th century
were often multiethnic, as neighborhoods did not display the social polarization that has
segregated different ethnic groups in the postmodern city (see Edward Soja). The
gangs of Chicago in the late 19th century were particularly powerful in the areas around
the Chicago Stockyards, and engaged in robbery and violent crime.
As in New York and northeastern gangs, it was during the early period of Chicago gang
growth that gangs connected themselves politically to local leaders. Such gangs
as Ragen's Colts became influential in Chicago politics. By the 1920s, several gangs
had grown to the point of becoming organized crime groups in Chicago (e.g.
the Chicago Outfit under Al Capone), and gang warfare was common among
them. [52] Street gang activity continued alongside these larger criminal organizations;
contemporary estimates suggested some 25,000 gang members and 1,300 gangs in
Chicago during the late 1920s. By the early 1930s, however, these immigrantdominated
gangs largely died out.
Just as with the Midwest, the American West experienced gang growth during the late
19th century and early 20th century. The earliest Los Angeles gangs were formed in the
1920s, and they were known as "boy gangs"; they were modelled on earlier social
groups of Latino and Chicano men known as palomilla. Frequently these groups were
composed of Mexican immigrants who had been marginalized upon coming to the
United States. The youth of this culture became known as the cholo subculture, and
several gangs formed from among them.
By the 1920s, cholo subculture and palomilla had merged to form the basis of the Los
Angeles gangs. The gangs proliferated in the 1930s and 1940s as adolescents came
together in conflict against the police and other authorities. Territoriality was essential to
the Los Angeles gangs, and graffiti became an important part of marking territory
controlled by gangs. Indeed, neighborhood identity and gang identity merged in ways
unlike other parts of the United States; in addition, the gangs of the West were different
in their ethnic makeup. Finally, they were unique in that, unlike gangs in the Midwest
and the Northeast, they did not grow out of social problems such as poverty, but out of
ethnic segregation and alienation.
Page 37 of 110

Postwar Growth and Change: 1940–1990
Gangs reemerged in the Northeast in cities such as New York during the 1950s and
1960s with rising Latino immigration and a rising population of blacks from the American
South. Although New York built large, urban high-rise public housing in the 1940s, much
of the public housing was built in low-rise form and in outer areas during the 1950s and
1960s; the effect of this was to mitigate much of the gang-on-gang violence that other
American cities suffered in that period. Although spared gang warfare, New York saw
gangs nonetheless form among the youth of the Latino and black population. By the end
of the 1960s, two-thirds of gangs in the city were black or Puerto Rican.
The reemergence of Midwestern gangs also occurred after the rapid increase in the
black population of northern American cities. During the 1910s and 1920s, the Great
Migration of more than one million blacks to these cities created large, extremely poor
populations, creating an atmosphere conducive to gang formation. The significant and
rapid migration created a large population of delinquent black youth, forming a pool of
potential gang members, while black youth athletic groups fueled rivalries that also
encouraged gang formation. A final factor encouraging gang formation was the Chicago
Page 38 of 110

Race Riot of 1919, in which gangs of white youth terrorized the black community, and in
response black youth formed groups for self-protection.
However, the actual formation of Midwestern black gangs only began after World War II,
concomitantly with the Second Great Migration. It was in the late 1940s, 1950s and
1960s that black gangs such as the Devil's Disciples, the Black P-Stones and the Vice
Lords were formed. By the late 1960s, the construction of public housing Chicago
allowed gangs to consolidate their power in black neighborhoods, and the Vice Lords,
P-Stones, and Gangster Disciples controlled the drug trade of the area. These and
others emerged as "super gangs" with more than 1,000 members each by the 1970s.
During and after the 1940s, gangs in the American West expanded dramatically as a
result of three factors: expanding immigration from Mexico, the Sleepy Lagoon murder,
and the Zoot Suit Riots. The two latter events served to unify the Mexican immigrant
population and turned many youth into gang members. It was also from the 1940s to the
1960s that black gangs emerged as a criminal force in Los Angeles, largely as a result
of social exclusion and segregation. Racial anti-black violence on the part of white
youths directly contributed to black youths forming self-protection societies that
transformed into black gangs by the late 1960s.
Black gangs of Los Angeles began forming into territorial-based groups by the early
1970s, and two federations of black gangs, the Bloods and the Crips, emerged during
that period. The practice of allying local street gangs together into federated alliances
began during the 1960s and expanded rapidly across the United States during the
1970s and 1980s. Out of the prison system of Illinois came two gang alliances by the
late 1970s: the Folk Nation and the People Nation alliances. These two alliances
included a variety of white, black, and Hispanic gangs and claimed territory in and
around Chicago and other Midwestern cities. Another of these federated alliances were
the Latin Kings, originally a Chicago-based Latino gang. In the case of the West, nearly
every major city in California reported gang activity by the mid-1970s, and often it was
related to gangs affiliating themselves with the Bloods or Crips.
Contemporary Activities: 1990–Present
By the 1990s, Northeastern gangs (white, black, and Latino) had come into conflict as a
result of urban renewal and ethnic migration. The Northeast had more than 17,000 gang
members and more than 600 gangs in 2008, and Pennsylvania saw heavy growth of
gang activity. During the 2000s, the most active gangs in the region were federations of
the Crips, the Latin Kings, MS-13 (Mara Salvatrucha), Neta, and the Bloods.
In the American West, as job cuts continued to rise and employers began to hire from
the cheaper labour pool of the expanding Latino immigrant community, unemployment
rates of African-American men reached as high as 50% in several areas of South
Central Los Angeles, opening up large recruitment markets for the burgeoning gangs.
The increasing social isolation felt by African-American communities across the nation
Page 39 of 110

continued unabated in the 1980s and 90s, leading to higher rates of social pathologies,
including violence.
As gang-violence accelerated in the West, so too did police violence against African-
American communities, which culminated in the arrest of Rodney King which sparked
the 1992 Los Angeles riots. In the aftermath of the riots, leaders of the Bloods and the
Crips announced a truce (spearheaded by Compton's then mayor Walter R. Tucker,
Jr.), and in May 1992, 1600 rival gang members converged on Imperial Courts, a main
housing project of Watts, Los Angeles, California to demonstrate their new-found
companionship. But after only a few months of relative harmony, tensions between Los
Angeles County's more than 100,000 gang members (in February 1993) began to raise
the murder rates, rising to resemble previous levels. Oakland, California saw 113 drugand/or
gang-related homicides in 2002 alone, and 2003 sported similar figures. The
1995 murder of Stephanie Kuhen in Los Angeles led to condemnation from
President Bill Clinton and a crackdown on Los Angeles-area gangs.
During the 1990s, the
American South saw an
increase in gang activity
that had not been seen
previously. In 1994,
Mary Beth Pelz, a
criminologist
at University of
Houston–Downtown,
said that Texas lacked
"a rich history of street
gangs" compared to
other parts of the United
States. She said
Houston area gangs
began to branch out to
newer developments in
the 1980s. According to a 2006 Texas Monthly article by Skip Hollandsworth, many
street gangs in Texas have no organized command structures. Individual "cliques" of
gangs, defined by streets, parts of streets, apartment complexes, or parts of apartment
complexes, act as individual groups. Texas "Cliques" tend to be headed by leaders
called "OG"s (short for "original gangsters") and each "clique" performs a specific
activity or set of activities in a given area, such as controlling trafficking of recreational
drugs and managing prostitution.
In 2008, an FBI report noted that between 1 and 2% of the U.S. military was affiliated
with a gang.
In 2009, David Kennedy, director of the Center for Crime Prevention and Control
at John Jay College of Criminal Justice of the City University of New York, said that a lot
Page 40 of 110

of violence in inner cities in the United States is mislabeled as "gang violence" when in
fact it involves small, informal cliques of people.
As gang members and factions continued to grow, the introduction of cheap crack
cocaine to American cities would prove fatal. Crack money now could be used to
purchase unprecedented amounts of weaponry, and as newly armed gang members
began to fight over 'turf', or the territory in which gangs would run their lucrative drugtrades,
violence soared, as the FBI's national data of gang-related homicides show:
from 288 in 1985 up to 1362 in 1993.
The targeted killing of the 9-year-old Tyshawn Lee, the son of a Chicago gang member
who was lured into an alley and shot in 2015 marked a new low in gang violence,
associated with the splintering of gangs into less organized factions often motivated by
personal vendettas.
Page 41 of 110

Page 42 of 110

III. List of Gangs in The U.S.
116th Street Crew
14K
18th Street gang
211 Crew
Albanian Boys
Albanian Mafia
Almighty Black P. Stone Nation
Almighty Saints
Almighty Vice Lord Nation
Four Corner Hustlers
American Front
American Mafia
Bonanno crime family
Bufalino crime family
Buffalo crime family
Chicago Outfit
Cleveland crime family
Colombo crime family
DeCavalcante crime family
Detroit Partnership
Gambino crime family
New Orleans crime family
Trafficante crime family
Armenian Power
Aryan Brotherhood of Texas
Aryan Brotherhood
Aryan Circle
Aryan Nation
Aryan Republican Army
Asian Boyz
Barrio Azteca
Black Disciples
Black Guerrilla Family
Black Mafia
Black Mafia Family
Bloods
Black P. Stones (Jungles)
Bounty Hunter Bloods
Double II Set
Nine Trey Gangsters
Pirus
Sex Money Murda
United Blood Nation
Page 43 of 110

Born to Kill
Brothers' Circle
Cali Cartel
Chaldean Mafia
Combat 18
Crips
Du Roc Crips
East Nashville Crips
Grape Street Watts Crips
Rollin 60's Neighborhood Crips
Rollin' 30s Harlem Crips
Venice Shoreline Crips
D.C. Blacks
Dead Man Inc.
Dixie Mafia
Dominicans Don't Play
European Kindred
Flying Dragons
Folk Nation
Four Seas Gang
Fresno Bulldogs
Fullerton Boys
Gangster Disciples
OutLaw Gangster Disciples
Ghetto Brothers
Ghost Shadows
Gulf Cartel
Hammerskins
Hells Angels
Hidden Valley Kings
Indian Posse
Irish Mob
Israeli mafia
Jackson Street Boys
Jewish Mafia
Jheri Curls
Juggalo
Juárez Cartel
K&A Gang
KUMI 415
Keystone State Skinheads
King Cobras
Kkangpae
Ku Klux Klan
La Raza Nation
Latin Eagles
Page 44 of 110

Latin Kings
Los Angeles crime family
Los Solidos
Los Zetas
MS-13, Mara Salvatrucha
Maniac Latin Disciples
Marielitos
Medellín Cartel
Menace of Destruction
Mexican Mafia
Mexikanemi
Mickey Cobras
Mongols
Native Mob
Nazi Lowriders
Ñetas
Norteños
Nuestra Familia
On Leong Chinese Merchants Association
Outlaws Motorcycle Club
People Nation
Playboyz
Polish mob
Public Enemy No. 1
Puro Tango Blast
Rudaj Organization
Russian Mafia
Solntsevskaya Bratva
Satanas
Simon City Royals
Sinaloa Cartel
Snakehead
South Side Popes
Spanish Gangster Disciples
Sun Yee On
Sureños
38th Street gang
The Avenues
Culver City Boys 13
El Monte Flores 13
Logan Heights Gang
Santa Monica 13
Tooner Ville Rifa 13
Varrio Nuevo Estrada
TAP Boyz
Texas Syndicate
Page 45 of 110

The Jersey Crew
Tijuana Cartel
Tiny Rascal gang
Triad
Trinitarios
United Blood Nation
Volksfront
Wah Ching
Wah Kee
Westies
White Aryan Resistance
White power skinhead
Winter Hill Gang
Wo Hop To
Wo Shing Wo
Yakuza
Yamaguchi-gumi
Yoshitomi Group
Zoe Pound Gang
Page 46 of 110

Page 47 of 110

Page 48 of 110

IV. The War on Gangs in The U.S.
In the United States, the War on Gangs is a national movement to reduce gang-related
activity, gang violence, and gang drug involvement on the local, state, and federal level.
The War on Gangs is a multi-lateral approach, as federal agencies seek to disrupt the
cycle of violence through intervention with state police and social workers.
History
Historically, gangs surfaced in the United States as early as the 1820s, mainly in New
York. Gang activity was still considered criminal, however, when drugs were made
illegal in 1912 with the International Opium Convention, gang activity and drug
trafficking increased. The United States saw a major increase in gangs during the 1970s
and 1980s, due to population growth and the demand for drugs. In 1991, it was
estimated that there were 774,000 active gang members in the United States.
Federal Level
Although many gang
enforcement and policing
tactics are carried out on a
state-by-state basis, there are
federal programs that aim to
address the War on Gangs.
National agencies, like
the FBI, Immigration and
Customs
Enforcement (ICE), United
States Marshals Service and
the Bureau of Alcohol,
Tobacco, Firearms, and
Explosives, have enacted
programs that target gangs
and gang related activities at
the federal level.
At the federal level, the “Gangbusters Bill” of 2005, authorized increased federal
spending to support federal, state and local law enforcement efforts against gang
violence and shared intelligence and joint investigation
State Level
The criminalization of those associated with such terminology falls solely upon the state
magistrate, while the policing involves a cohesive effort by local, state, and federal
authorities. The policing tactics implemented and aimed to disrupt, deter, and eliminate
Page 49 of 110

criminal street gang activity naturally varies from city to city and state to state depending
on the size of the problem as well as legislation. However, the advancement
of counterinsurgency technologies and strategies proven effective in militarized zones
such as Iraq and Afghanistan has provided authorities with new ways to fight the “war
on gangs” in America. Statistical analysis in conjunction with advanced military
software can now provide lawmaking authorities with the type of information that maps
connections between gang activities, individual suspects, their social circles, family ties,
and neighborhood connections. Authorities now have the tools to deconstruct the
culture of ‘criminal street gangs’ by not only identifying their territorial boundaries but
criminal industries, politics affiliates both in and out of the penitentiary, gang code and
ethics, as well as illegal activities.
Beyond the push for a national model providing a tactical framework outlining the
methodologies behind the policing strategies of: prevention, intervention, intelligence,
and suppression of criminal street gang activity, there is yet another arena where the
“War on Gangs” continues to be fought, the political arena. Organized criminal street
gangs such as 18th Street are boasting over 65,000 members and are believed to be
operating in over 120 U.S. cities, 37 states, in addition to being considered an
international crime organization linked to corrupt political insurgency. The Gangster
Disciples is an organization with over 30,000 members in 35 states, employing
themselves not only in drug trade but sponsoring political candidates, infiltrating police
and private security agencies, and sponsoring protest marches.
Local and Community Level
Researchers have attempted to understand the theoretical implications for participation
in gang activity. Many of them looked into the reasons why people join gangs. The most
common reasons examined among gang researchers include factors such as
socioeconomic status, peer-to-peer and parent-to-child relationships, and
discrimination. For example, in 2007, California State University-Northridge
professor Kay Kei-Ho Pih and three other university professors conducted a study
examining the purpose of capital (drug trafficking) among Latino and Taiwanese gangs.
Their findings showed that the Latino gang members were raised in poor
neighborhoods, wanted to make quick and easy money from selling drugs, and did not
receive support from their parents about their academic endeavors which led them to
drop out of school or complete a GED. The Taiwanese triad members, on the other
hand, came from higher socioeconomic statuses, prioritized their education getting
undergrad and graduate degrees, and sold drugs for recreation purposes. However,
Hua-Lun Huang argues that gangs such as the Chinese Triads and the Mexican
Mafia could also form because of extremist ideology and political connections to
government outside of the United States. In 2002, the Routine activity theory was used
by California State University, Long Beach criminal justice professor, John Z. Wang in
his case study about eight bank robberies in Houston, Texas, which states that crimes
committed by gangs are influenced by three factors:
Motivated offenders
The availability of suitable targets
Page 50 of 110

The absence of capable guardians
Alternative Approaches
Several scholars suggest that alternative methods should be implemented in order to
fight against the war on gangs including the development of community-based outreach
programs instead of continuing to arrest potential gang members. For example, in
1998, Westminster Police Department director Douglas Kent and Claremont University
professor, George Felkenes conducted a cross-sectional study on the cultural reasons
why Vietnamese youth in Southern California join and participate in gang activity by
interviewing over 250 Vietnamese youth and parents. Felkenes and Kent concluded
their study with recommendations on how to initiate gang prevention programs:
They are necessary and should be carefully planned.
They must focus on minority youth rather than the general public.
They should make the youth population view gangs in a negative light.
They should teach them how to cope with gangs in residential areas by avoiding
their influence.
In addition, University of Illinois-Urbana Champaign criminologist, Jun Sung Hong in his
2010 study about the Bronfenbrenner ecological approach to understanding
Vietnamese gangs in America states that “after-school programs and activities for
youths, such as sports or job training opportunities might enhance pro-social behavior
and reduce motivation to join a gang.” He also argues that professional organizations
and practitioners should also educate government officials about the correlation
between social conditions and the negative outcomes.
Page 51 of 110

Page 52 of 110

V. Gang Report Reveals:
Racist Cops the Problem, Not Gangs
By John Mcdevitt
Aug 03, 2007
The Justice Policy Institute, a Washington, D.C.-based think tank that studies ways to
reduce incarceration, released a report on July 18 entitled “Gang Wars: The Failure of
Enforcement Tactics and the Need for Effective Public Safety Strategies.” The report
was full of useful facts and analysis about the police and gangs.
“Gangs do not drive crime rates, and aggressive suppression tactics simply make the
situation worse by alienating local residents and trapping youth in the criminal justice
system,” said Kevin Pranis, one of the report’s authors.
Despite the media promotion of crime and violence, there are fewer young people
involved in gangs today than 30 years ago. Gang-related crimes account for a relatively
small share of overall national crime. There is no evidence that gang membership is
increasing.
In fact, when gangs have had the highest membership, youth violence has been the
lowest.
The billions of dollars spent on police and prisons have only served to vilify whole
communities and send thousands to prison. Gang involvement, a response to poverty
Page 53 of 110

and lack of opportunity for working-class youth, has remained at constant levels despite
the severe repression.
While gangs are not generally progressive, working-class organizations at this time,
they can provide a way to organize resistance to racist repression.
Politicians Want More Cops
Marxists understand that the capitalist state requires “special bodies of armed” men and
women—the police—to do the bidding of the capitalist class and protect the current
government and system.
California’s Senator Diane Feinstein and Congressman Adam Schiff, both Democrats,
understand this as well. This is why they just introduced legislation that would allot $700
million dollars to so-called “gang suppression activities.”
Helping the police terrorize working-class communities, especially communities of color,
remains a priority of both leading capitalist political parties—it’s the way they maintain
their rule.
“It’s unfortunate that this new legislation threatens to continue this legacy of waste,” said
Judith Greene, another author of the report.
In Chicago, the extreme police repression and high rates of incarceration, coupled with
the legacy of racist segregation in the city, has caused gang activity to remain
constantly high. The report confirms this. More police repression means more gang
activity, not the opposite.
Even so, gangs play a relatively small part in the drug trade. The Los Angeles District
Attorney’s office reported that only one in seven L.A. gang members participate in drug
sales. This remained consistent across the country, in stark contrast to police sources
that claimed that gangs are “the primary retail distributors of drugs in the country.”
Cop Racism Targets Youth of Color
According to the report, law enforcement claims that over 90 percent of those in gangs
are people of color. But survey data shows that the largest single ethnicity of adolescent
gangs is white, accounting for 40 percent.
The Los Angeles Police Department describes on its website the racist ways cops
identify gang-involved youth:
“Examples are preferences for wearing baggy or ‘sagging’ pants or having baseball
caps turned at an angle,” explains the LAPD website.
“Excessive amounts of dark clothing or a predominance of one-color outfits, white t-
Page 54 of 110

shirts and levis with upturned cuffs are also indicators of possible gang involvement,”
the site continues.
The website not only has racist descriptions of Black and Latino youth, but includes
ridiculously subjective details:
“Jewelry: May Be Expensive or Cheap, But The Gaudy Type is Preferred.”
Creating a sense of fear among the general population prevents workers of different
nationalities from uniting against common enemies.
The report shows that most young people who join gangs end up leaving the gang
within a year. But police profiling promotes the identification of ex-members as “gang
members” for the rest of their lives—affecting future job searches and often causing
conflict with people in different gangs.
“Young men of color are disproportionately identified as gang members and targeted for
surveillance, arrest and incarceration, while white—who make up a significant share of
gang members—rarely show up in accounts of gang enforcement efforts,” explains the
report.
It continues with a shocking fact: “The Los Angeles district attorney’s office found that
half of Black males between the ages of 21 and 24 had been entered into the county’s
gang data bases.”
The profiling of young people as gang members is directly related to the racist profiling
that law enforcement agencies carry out against people of color in general.
Black and Latino people suffer the most. But they are not the only oppressed people
under attack. Racist profiling of Arabs and Muslims is used to justify the U.S. occupation
of Iraq and the ongoing plans to dominate the people and resources of the Middle East.
Page 55 of 110

Jobs and Education The Answer
The report rightly concludes that social ills resulting from poverty can only be solved
with more job and educational opportunities for oppressed communities.
“We need to invest in jobs, schools, and programs that are proven to reduce recidivism,
and reject the policies that prevent young people from leaving gang life behind,” said
Luis Rodriguez, a nationally recognized Chicano poet and author.
The report asks policy makers to use proven scientific approaches to resolve gang
problems. These are correct and should be supported.
But these seemingly obvious approaches can never be fully implemented under
capitalism. The capitalist system thrives off of sowing division and repressing entire
communities to maintain the system and extract ever-greater profits.
Page 56 of 110

Page 57 of 110

Page 58 of 110

VI. Global Cease-Fire Operations
Colombia's Main Gang Declares Unilateral Ceasefire
BBC News | 14 December 2017
Colombia's Biggest Criminal Gang Has Declared a Unilateral Ceasefire to Help "Bring
About Peace"
The gang, known as the Gulf Clan or Los Urabeños, said it would stop "offensive
military actions from 13 December".
The truce comes three months after the gang's leader said it would surrender and he
would hand himself in. A framework is still being worked on.
Police have warned that criminal gangs such as the Gulf Clan are the biggest risk to
security in Colombia.
Battle for Control
The Gulf Clan is estimated to have about 1,500 active members. It controls many of the
routes used to smuggle drugs from Colombia to the US and as far away as Russia.
Colombia's Hunt for Elusive Drug Lord
Page 59 of 110

The group also engages in extortion, illegal mining, human trafficking, forced
displacements and murder.
While it was first created in the north of Colombia, in the Gulf of Urabá - hence its
names - it has expanded into many of Colombia's provinces and beyond.
But in recent months its number two and 34 other key figures have been killed or
arrested in a joint police and military operation.
With his deputy killed and the security forces closing in, the gang's leader, known as
Otoniel, announced in September that he was willing to surrender.
The government is currently working on a legal framework for members of criminal
gangs to collectively turn themselves in.
In a statement, the gang said that even though that legal framework was not in place yet
the gang "remained committed to the efforts which will allow us to contribute to a total,
lasting and integral peace".
Last year, Colombia's largest rebel group, the Farc, signed a peace deal with the
government and negotiators are currently holding talks with the second-largest guerrilla
group, the National Liberation Army.
Police warn that some areas formerly under the control of the rebel groups have been
taken over by criminal groups such as the Urabeños and that their fight for territory is
driving violence up.
______
Colombia's Gulf Clan Says It Is Ready to Surrender
BBC News | 6 September 2017
One of Colombia's most powerful drug gangs, the Gulf Clan, has said it wishes to
submit itself to justice.
President Juan Manuel Santos said that he had authorised justice officials to look at the
request.
Mr Santos said more than 1,500 members of the gang had been arrested in the last few
months and its second-in-command had been killed.
The gang's leader, known as Otoniel, has told the president he would hand himself in.
Mr Santos said he had warned the group that its members would not get special
treatment.
Page 60 of 110

"I have told them they are criminals who, if they hand themselves over, the law will give
them some privileges depending on what they deliver and the value to society of what
they deliver," he said.
A Hat Trick for The Government?
Natalio Cosoy, BBC Mundo, Bogotá
After more than two years of intense operations against the Gulf Clan, President Santos
said its leader had contacted the government to find a way of handing himself in along
with the rest of his group.
If their submission to justice materialises, it will be the third landmark in the past few
weeks for peace in Colombia, after the disarmament of the Farc guerrillas and the
recent commitment of the ELN Marxist rebels to a 102-day long truce.
The news is great publicity for President Santos, coming just as Pope Francis is due to
begin his visit to the country.
The gang is known mainly for drug trafficking but has also been accused of extortion,
illegal mining, forced disappearances and murder.
The Gulf Clan - formerly known as the Úsuga Clan or Urabeños - has its power base in
the Uraba region, but its network extends across the country and beyond.
Announcing its surrender, the Gulf Clan published two videos - one addressed to
President Santos and one to the Pope, who begins a visit to Colombia on Wednesday.
In the video to Pope Francis, Otoniel said he was "just another Colombian who longs for
peace" and asked for the pontiff's prayers for stability in the country.
______
Venezuelan Anti-Gang Offensive Arrests Hundreds, Earns Popular Support
By Lucas Koerner
Jul 15th 2015 at 11.46am
https://venezuelanalysis.com/4Zq
Hundreds were arrested across Venezuela in a mass anti-crime operation undertaken
by state security forces to liberate territories occupied by paramilitary gangs in the
capital district and bordering states of Miranda and Aragua on Monday.
Page 61 of 110

Caracas, July 15, 2015 (venezuelanalysis.com) – Hundreds were arrested across
Venezuela in a mass anti-crime operation undertaken by state security forces to liberate
territories occupied by paramilitary gangs in the capital district and bordering states of
Miranda and Aragua on Monday.
In what has been denominated "Operation Liberation and Protection of the People"
(OLP), thousands of police and national guard personnel participated in four
simultaneous raids in the early hours of the morning aimed at confronting heavily armed
paramilitary groups believed to have originated from Colombia.
In the Caracas neighborhood of San Miguel de la Cota, security forces detained 134
suspected criminals, of whom 32 are allegedly foreigners with links to Colombian
paramilitaries.
Meanwhile, in Miranda state, 111 individuals were arrested in two separate raids in
which authorities also confiscated illicit vehicles, firearms, as well as several kilos of
drugs. A similar operation in Aragua state saw the reported dismantling of another gang
with the detention of several suspected criminals.
Venezuelan president Nicolas Maduro praised the operation as a critical blow against
"Colombian paramilitarism" which he accused of seeking to infiltrate the country.
"With these four operations as a start, [...] we have in our hands the elements to
demonstrate that Colombian paramilitarism, Colombian drug trafficking, and all of this
conspiracy has come to take power [...] and install here a model that has done great
harm to Colombia."
"I am firmly dedicated to dismantling [this model]," he continued, adding that OLP will
reportedly continue over the coming days and be extended to other parts of Venezuela.
The operation met with strong backing by a large segment of poor and working class
Venezuelans whose communities have borne the brunt of insecurity, in spite of
international media reports that consistently profile the middle and upper class.
"For those of us in the community, we hope that each one of these actions continues in
order to break up all of the gangs that are harming the people, the economy, as well as
the security of the youth," says Jaime Palacios, a student at the Bolivarian University of
Venezuela and resident of Petare, the deadliest barrio in Caracas.
Javier Gomez, 31, a resident of the barrio of Las Torres in the western Catia region of
Caracas, also voiced support for the operation, adding that the government should step
up efforts against corruption, hoarding, and contraband that often involve the country's
middle and upper classes.
"We applaud these measures, but we also consider the question of crime to be a broad
one. The business-person who hoards food items, who sets up front companies [to
receive government dollars] is also a criminal."
Page 62 of 110

"Crime must be attacked in all of its aspects," he told Venezuelanalysis.
Despite widespread popular support, the action faced criticism by the opposition human
rights NGO PROVEA, who blasted state security forces for what it characterized as
"excessive use of force".
Palacios dismissed PROVEA's allegations, arguing the organization's narrative doesn't
square with the reality of close cooperation between communities and security forces
that makes operations like Monday's feasible.
"As the community organizes itself and coordinates with police officials, it will advance
significantly. At least in Cota, it was the very communal councils who denounced before
authorities the presence of criminal gangs their neighborhood," Palacios stated.
In 2006, the Bolivarian government began a process of police reform that has seen the
replacement of corrupt local police units with a national "preventive" police force
supervised by "citizen police control committee" and trained at the human rightscentered
National Experimental Security University.
Page 63 of 110

Page 64 of 110

VII. Anti-Gang Strategies in the U.S.
by The National Institute of Justice (NIJ)
National Institute of Justice Strategies
Criminal justice agencies use a variety of strategies to combat gang-related crime.
[These strategies include, but are by no means limited to, the following]:
Prevention
Intervention
Assessment
Suppression
Prevention
Prevention refers to services, programs or activities designed to prevent people from
joining gangs. Prevention often focuses on young persons. Situational gang crime
Page 65 of 110

prevention focuses more on the situational causes of crime and less on the dispositional
traits of specific offenders and often addresses the environmental and opportunistic
factors that influence offender decision-making.
Intervention
Intervention seeks to draw gang members and close associates away from the gang
lifestyle. Many programs involve law enforcement coordination with community- or faithbased
organizations to offer education, job training and community service opportunities
as incentives to quit the gang while still holding those receiving services accountable for
continued delinquent or criminal activity.
Assessment
To make anti-gang strategies most successful, an important first step involves
conducting an assessment of the problem. An up-front assessment of a problem helps
leaders understand the problem in as much detail as possible. The leaders can then
focus planning and target their actions on a plan that saves time and money in the long
run.
The assessment process generally consists of three steps:
1. Laying the groundwork and identifying people who can oversee the entire
process and provide direction for data collection efforts.
2. Collecting data, analyzing and interpreting it using a range of indicators in
multiple domains.
3. Preparing reports, findings and final reports that explain in detail the nature and
extent of the situation.
Suppression
Suppression, or gang crime enforcement, encompasses a broad range of criminal
justice activities in which law enforcement, prosecution, probation and parole focus their
resources to limit and assure accountability for the criminal activity of gangs and gang
members.
Suppression tactics may include:
Sharing intelligence about gangs (between criminal justice actors such as law
enforcement and corrections).
Targeting and apprehending serious and chronic gang crime offenders.
Using gang injunctions or civil ordinances to prevent association among known
gang members.
Page 66 of 110

Prosecuting gang offenders using vertical prosecution, enhanced sentencing,
and Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations and conspiracy statutes.[1]
______
Gang Membership as a Prosecution Enhancement
Federal legislation allows U.S. Attorneys to enhance the penalty for crimes committed
by gang members. A growing number of states have passed or are considering passing
similar enhanced prosecution legislation. In practice, it is challenging to prove that an
offender is a member of a gang or that the crime benefits the gang; therefore, it can be
difficult to bring enhancement to bear on prosecuting criminal activity.
California, which leads the nation in the trend to enhance prosecution, describes the
process this way: "any person who is convicted of a felony committed for the benefit of,
at the direction of, or in association with any criminal street gang, with the specific intent
to promote, further, or assist in any criminal conduct by gang members, shall, upon
conviction of that felony, in addition and consecutive to the punishment prescribed for
the felony," become subject to additional terms, enumerated in the code. Guidance is
provided under the California code for persons convicted of misdemeanor offenses.
In many instances, prosecution of gang crime at the federal level relies on codes that
are specific to the crime involved. Other statutes may be brought to bear - for example,
the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO) statute or various
conspiracy statutes.
There is a federal statute specific to gangs: "Criminal Street Gangs" 18 U.S.C. § 521.
This statute holds that "the sentence of a person convicted of an offense described in
subsection (c) [subsection enumerates offenses] shall be increased by up to 10 years if
the offense is committed under the circumstances described in subsection (d)." [See] 18
U.S.C. § 521.
______
[Selected] Research and Evaluation Projects on Gangs
NIJ has sponsored evaluations of anti-gang and anti-gun-violence programs ranging
from Chicago CeaseFire to Project Safe Neighborhoods. These programs were
informed by the strengths and weaknesses of past efforts, such as Boston Ceasefire
and the Strategic Approaches to Community Safety Initiative.
Process and Outcome Evaluation of G.R.E.A.T.
The Gang Resistance Education and Training (G.R.E.A.T.) program is a school-based,
law enforcement officer-instructed classroom curriculum for middle-school youth. The
Page 67 of 110

program's primary objective is prevention. It is intended to immunize young people
against delinquency, violence and gang membership.
Read more about G.R.E.A.T.Exit Notice
An evaluation of G.R.E.A.T. lead to significant changes in the curriculum; the new
curriculum is currently being evaluated. The evaluators are monitoring program fidelity
and tracking students from sixth grade through eleventh grade in seven cities to
understand the impact the revised curriculum is having.
Read the results of the previous evaluation of G.R.E.A.T.
Evaluating the Impact of the Comprehensive Anti-Gang Initiative
The Comprehensive Anti-Gang Initiative (CAGI) is based on the strategic problemsolving
model used in Project Safe Neighborhoods. Under CAGI, the Department of
Justice made competitive awards to multiple sites to implement anti-gang prevention,
enforcement and reentry strategies. The NIJ-sponsored evaluation of CAGI is assessing
the implementation and impact of anti-gang efforts at these sites.
Learn more about CAGI.
Evaluation of the Chicago Project for Violence Prevention
Chicago's Operation CeaseFire uses prevention, intervention and communitymobilization
strategies to reduce shootings and killings. The program is managed by the
Chicago Project for Violence Prevention. This NIJ-sponsored process and outcome
evaluation detailed the program's approaches to building collaborations at the
CeaseFire sites and examined the efficiency and effectiveness of variations in
CeaseFire's local implementation.
Learn more about Chicago CeaseFire and the findings from the NIJ evaluation.
Evaluation of Gang Hot Spots Policing in Chicago
Hot spot policing plays a central role in many violence reduction initiatives. NIJ
sponsored a process and outcome evaluation of gang-specific hot spots policing in
Chicago. The researchers examined when and how it was most effective. They also
summarized best practices for applying the hot spots strategy to reducing violent gang
activity.
Read more about hot spot analysis.
Page 68 of 110

One Vision One Life Evaluation
Pittsburgh's One Vision One Life program is modeled after Chicago CeaseFire. This
NIJ-sponsored evaluation assessed whether homicide, aggravated assault and other
gun and shooting offenses declined after One Vision One Life was implemented
compared to matched control neighborhoods. The evaluation also examined whether
crime was displaced or diffused as a result of the program.
Learn more about the NIJ evaluation results.
Date Created: November 1, 2011
______
The Comprehensive Anti-Gang Initiative
Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention
The proliferation of gang problems in large and small
cities, suburbs, and even rural areas led to the
development of a comprehensive, coordinated
response to America's gang problem by the Office of
Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention
(OJJDP).
OJJDP has long supported a combination of
activities, including research, evaluation, training and
technical assistance, and demonstration programs,
aimed at combating youth gangs. Since the 1980s, OJJDP has developed, funded, and
evaluated community-based anti-gang programs that coordinate prevention,
intervention, enforcement, and reentry strategies.
Recognizing that street gang activities transcend ages of members, in October 2009,
the Office of Justice Programs (OJP) merged its existing resources to create a
new National Gang Center (NGC), developing a comprehensive approach to reduce
gang involvement and gang crime. The reinvigorated NGC is a single, more efficient
entity, responsive to the needs of researchers, practitioners, and the public. The NGC
website features the latest research about gangs; descriptions of evidence-based, antigang
programs; and links to tools, databases, and other resources to assist in
developing and implementing effective community-based gang prevention, intervention,
and suppression strategies. There is also data analysis of the findings from nearly 20
years of data collected by the annual National Youth Gang Survey (NYGS) of 2,500
U.S. law enforcement agencies. Users can read and download publications related to
street gangs, request training and technical assistance as they plan and implement antigang
strategies, and register for a variety of anti-gang training courses.
Based on law enforcement responses to the NYGS, nearly one-third of all responding
Page 69 of 110

law enforcement agencies reported gang activity in 2012. It is estimated that there were
30,700 gangs and 850,000 gang members throughout 3,100 jurisdictions with gang
problems in the United States in 2012. The number of reported gang-related homicides
increased 20 percent from 2011 to 2012. (Highlights of the 2012 National Youth
Gang Survey, December 2014)
A national assessment of gang problems and programs provided the foundation
for OJJDP's Comprehensive Gang Model, a project developed in the mid-1980s. Its
key components reflect the best features of existing and evaluated programs across the
country. The model outlines five strategies: community mobilization, social intervention,
opportunities for educational and vocational advancements, suppression, and
organizational change and development. As most gang members join between the ages
of 12 and 15, prevention is a critical strategy within a comprehensive response to gangs
that includes intervention, suppression and reentry.
OJJDP collaborates with Bureau of Justice Assistance to ensure that OJP has an
array of information and resources available on gangs. OJJDP's strategy is to reduce
gang activity in targeted neighborhoods by incorporating a broad spectrum of researchbased
interventions to address the range of personal, family, and community factors
that contribute to juvenile delinquency and gang activity. This approach attempts to
integrate Federal, state, and local resources to incorporate state-of-the-art practices in
prevention, intervention, and suppression.
Programs
At the direction of President Obama, the Departments of Justice and Education
launched the National Forum on Youth Violence Prevention (Forum) in order to
begin a national conversation concerning youth and gang violence, raising awareness
and elevating the issue to one of national significance. In addition, the Forum was
created to build the capacity of localities across the country to more effectively address
the youth violence through multi-disciplinary partnerships, balanced approaches, datadriven
strategies, comprehensive planning and the sharing of common challenges and
promising strategies. The Forum was created as a new model for Federal and local
collaboration, encouraging Forum members to change the way they "do business"
through increased communication and coordinated action.
The Forum convenes a diverse array of stakeholders at the Federal, state and local
levels. Along with Justice and Education, participating Federal agencies include the
Departments of Health and Human Services, Housing and Urban Development, Labor
and the White House Office of National Drug Control Policy. Communities participating
in the Forum include Boston, Camden, Chicago, Detroit, Memphis, Minneapolis, New
Orleans, Philadelphia, Salinas, San Jose, Long Beach, Cleveland, Louisville, Seattle,
and Baltimore. Other participants include local faith and community-based groups,
youth and family representatives, as well as businesses and philanthropies. See
the Preventing Youth Violence section of Youth.gov for additional information about
Page 70 of 110

the Forum and other efforts.
The Community-Based Violence Prevention Initiative is adapted from the best violence
reduction work in several cities and the public health research of the last several
decades. Evaluation research has identified programs that have demonstrated
effectiveness in reducing the impact of risk factors. These efforts have identified that
responses must be comprehensive, long-term strategic approaches that contain the
spread of gang activity, protect those youth who are most susceptible, and mitigate risk
factors that foster gang activity. The four-pronged approach of effective anti-gang
strategies include: targeted suppression of youth who commit the most serious and
chronic offenses; intervention with youthful gang members; prevention efforts for youth
identified as being at high risk of entering a gang; and implementation of programs that
address risk and protective factors and targets the entire population in high-crime, highrisk
areas. Additional public health research conducted over the last decade shows
success in those programs, which have focused on not only managing incidents of
serious youth violence and gang violence, but also those that include proactive
interventions to prevent further retaliatory acts of youth or gang violence. FY2010 grant
recipients were Brooklyn, NY, Oakland, CA, Denver, CO, and Washington, DC. In
FY2011, OJJDP made awards to Baltimore, MD, Boston, MA, and Newark, NJ. In FY
Page 71 of 110

2013, OJJDP made Community-Based Violence Prevention Initiative awards to
recipients in Baltimore, MD, Camden, NJ, Baton Rouge, LA, Syracuse, NY, Kansas
City, MO, and Newport News, VA.
In FY2011, OJJDP supported the national Boys & Girls Clubs of America
(BGCA) organization of Atlanta, GA, to help local affiliate clubs prevent youth from
joining gangs, intervene with gang members in the early stages of gang involvement,
and divert youth from gangs into more constructive activities. This program reflects a
long-term collaboration between OJJDP and BGCA to reduce problems of juvenile
gangs, delinquency, and violence. The national organization provides training and
technical assistance to local gang prevention and intervention sites and to other clubs
and organizations through regional training sessions and national conferences. Each
year, dozens of new gang prevention sites, gang intervention sites, and a targeted
reintegration sites are added to the many existing programs implementing these
strategies across the country
The Gang Resistance Education And Training (G.R.E.A.T.) Program is a schoolbased,
law enforcement officer-instructed, classroom curriculum administered by
OJJDP. Using a communitywide approach to combat risk factors, the goal of the
G.R.E.A.T. Program is to help youth develop positive life skills that will help them avoid
gang involvement and violent behavior. The G.R.E.A.T. Program consists of four
interrelated components, each designed to target different audiences: Elementary
School Component, Middle School Component, Summer Component, and Families
Component. The components can stand alone to teach the necessary skills and
attitudes that will help youth resist the pressures to become involved in gang behavior
and avoid situations that could lead to violence.
The Urban Institute and Temple University received grant funding to look at norms and
networks of Latino gang youth. This study, Norms and Networks of Latino Gang Youth,
employed a social network framework to understand the patterns of relations by
examining two levels of social processes for the unit of analysis (individual and group
relationships) through both egocentric and sociocentric network analysis, and extending
network analysis to include different types of relationships (e.g., friend, relative,
neighbor), This study examined multiple research questions that have not yet been
addressed in delinquency and gang literature. The results of this study can be found at
the Urban Institute website.
Additional research in the area of gang prevention and intervention is being conducted
by the University of Maryland through the Blueprints for Gang Prevention Project.
Gang membership facilitates increased involvement in violence and serious
delinquency. It is necessary to identify effective programs to reduce the level of gang
membership and to reduce the impact that gang membership has in facilitating
antisocial behaviors. Currently, the numbers of known gang intervention programs that
meet rigorous standards to be considered "evidence-based" are very limited. The
Blueprints for Violence Prevention project has identified programs that have been
Page 72 of 110

shown to reduce violence, delinquency, and drug use, and which meet these evidence
based standards. The purpose of this project is to identify the Blueprint programs that
have the highest probability for success with gang members or youth at risk for gang
membership, modify them to be responsive to the particular needs of gang members,
and then implement and rigorously evaluate their effectiveness. The project has
identified eligible programs and is currently testing one that has been fitted with the
necessary modification.
To access ratings and evaluations of juvenile justice programs, see OJJDP’s Model
Programs Guide (MPG). Captured on MPG is information about youth prevention,
intervention, and reentry programs, including programs that target youth gangs and the
prevention of youth gang activities.
Publications
The second edition of the OJJDP report Best Practices To Address
Community Gang Problems: OJJDP's Comprehensive Gang
Model guides communities responding to a gang problem in
implementing OJJDP's Comprehensive Gang Model. It describes the
research that produced the model and offers best practices obtained
from practitioners with years of experience in planning, implementing,
and overseeing variations of the model within their communities. This
second edition includes a summary of findings from an independent
evaluation of OJJDP’s Gang Reduction Program, a demonstration of the anti-gang
framework in four target sites.
Also see the following gang resources from OJJDP:
Parents’ Guide to Gangs (July 2015) (also in Spanish)
Highlights of the 2012 National Youth Gang Survey (Fact Sheet, December
2014)
o See the Youth Gang Series for additional resources highlighting National
Youth Gang Survey data
Social Networks, Delinquency, and Gang Membership: Using a
Neighborhood Framework to Examine the Influence of Network
Composition and Structure in a Latino Community (Grant Report, February
2012)
Street Outreach and the OJJDP Comprehensive Gang Model (Bulletin, June
2012)
Findings from the Evaluation of OJJDP's Gang Reduction Program (Bulletin,
December 2010)
Page 73 of 110

Gang Prevention: An Overview of Research and Programs (Bulletin,
December 2010)
Responding to Gangs in the School Setting (Bulletin, November 2010)
”Survey Indicates That Gang Activity Continues at High Levels” (in OJJDP
News @ a Glance, May/June 2011)
"New Online Resource Provides Strategies for Preventing Gang Violence"
(in OJJDP News at @ Glance, January/February 2010)
"Strategic Risk-Based Response to Youth Gangs" (in Juvenile Justice
Journal, September 2004)
Youth Gangs in Indian Country (Bulletin, March 2004)
"New Program Supports Community Gang Programs" (in OJJDP News at @
Glance, September/October 2003)
Modern Day Youth Gangs (Bulletin, June 2002)
Resources
OJJDP's Strategic Planning Tool was developed to assist in assessing a community's
gang problem and planning strategies to deal with it. The Tool is a resource that
encompasses four interrelated components to assist in addressing a community's gang
problem. Those components link descriptive information about risk factors, best
practices, strategies, and research-based programs. Communities can catalogue
existing local resources by creating a Web-based Community Resource Inventory
account accessed on this Tool.
The National Gang Center website features the latest research about gangs;
descriptions of evidence-based, anti-gang programs; and links to tools, databases, and
other resources to assist in developing and implementing effective community-based
gang prevention, intervention, and suppression strategies.
The National Institute of Justice’s CrimeSolutions.gov uses rigorous research to
inform practitioners and policy makers about what works in criminal justice, juvenile
justice, and crime victim services. Visit the Gangs section of the site to learn about
applicable programs rated by CrimeSolutions.gov.
Additional gang-related resources may be found on OJJDP's website, by searching by
the keyword "gang".
Page 74 of 110

To keep informed on gang and other juvenile-justice related issues, subscribe to
OJJDP's bimonthly electronic newsletter OJJDP News @ a Glance and JUVJUST
listserv.
Page 75 of 110

Page 76 of 110

VIII. Compilation of Gang-Related
Legislation
Gang-Related Legislation by State
Alabama
Alaska
Arizona
Arkansas
California
Colorado
Connecticut
Delaware
District of Columbia
Florida
Georgia
Hawaii
Idaho
Illinois
Indiana
Iowa
Kansas
Kentucky
Louisiana
Maine
Maryland
Massachusetts
Michigan
Minnesota
Mississippi
Missouri
Montana
Nebraska
Nevada
New Hampshire
New Jersey
New Mexico
New York
North Carolina
North Dakota
Ohio
Oklahoma
Oregon
Pennsylvania
Page 77 of 110

Rhode Island
South Carolina
South Dakota
Tennessee
Texas
Utah
Vermont
Virginia
Washington
West Virginia
Wisconsin
Wyoming
Additional information on state legislation is available through
the National Conference of State Legislatures’ Website.
Gang-Related Legislation by Subject
Carjacking
Community-Based Organizations
Curfew
Drive-By Shooting
Enhanced Penalties—Sentencing
Expert Testimony
Gang Activity and Forfeiture
Gang Databases
Gang Participation
Gang Prevention
Gang Prosecution
Gang Recruitment, Threats, Intimidation
Gang Witnesses/Victims
Gang-Related Civil Causes of Action
Gang-Related Clothing, Dress Codes, School Uniforms
Gang-Related Definitions
Gang-Related Findings and Declarations
Gang-Related Funding
Gangs and Correctional Facilities
Gangs and Schools
Gangs and Weapons
Graffiti
Juvenile Gang Members
Law Enforcement Training
Miscellaneous Gang Legislation
Probation and Parole
Public Nuisance/Premises Used by Gangs
Page 78 of 110

Gang-Related Municipal Codes by Subject
Note: These codes are posted as examples of what has been written on the various
subjects below. The codes are not necessarily current.
Curfew
Daytime Curfew
Definitions
Drive-By Shooting
Enhanced Penalties—Sentencing
Eviction
Gang Membership
Gang Participation
Gang Recruitment
Graffiti
Graffiti Tools
Juvenile Gatherings
Law Enforcement Training
Loitering
Miscellaneous
Parental Responsibility
Public Nuisance
Truancy
Weapons
Page 79 of 110

Page 80 of 110

References
1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gang
2. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gangs_in_the_United_States
3. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_gangs_in_the_United_States
4. https://www.liberationnews.org/07-08-03-gang-report-reveals-racistcops-html/
5. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_on_Gangs
6. http://www.bbc.com/news/world-latin-america-42351037
7. https://venezuelanalysis.com/news/11442
8. https://www.nij.gov/topics/crime/gangs/pages/anti-gangstrategies.aspx
9. https://www.nij.gov/topics/crime/gangs/pages/research.aspx
10. https://www.nationalgangcenter.gov/Content/Documents/Definitions.pdf
11. https://www.ojjdp.gov/programs/antigang/
12. https://www.nationalgangcenter.gov/Content/Documents/Getting-
Out-Staying-Out.pdf
13. https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/ojjdp/231116.pdf
Page 81 of 110

Notes
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
Page 82 of 110

Notes
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
Page 83 of 110

Page 84 of 110

Attachment A
Brief Review of Federal & State
Definitions of Gangs
Page 85 of 110

BRIEF REVIEW OF FEDERAL AND STATE DEFINITIONS OF THE TERMS
“GANG,” “GANG CRIME,” AND “GANG MEMBER”
(AS OF DECEMBER 2016)
FEDERAL LAW
Currently, federal law defines the term “criminal street gang” as “an ongoing group, club, organization, or
association of 5 or more persons—
(A) that has as 1 of its primary purposes the commission of 1 or more of the criminal offenses
described in subsection (c);
(B) the members of which engage, or have engaged within the past 5 years, in a continuing series
of offenses described in subsection (c); and
(C) the activities of which affect interstate or foreign commerce.” 18 U.S.C. § 521(a).
“The offenses described in this section are—
(1) a Federal felony involving a controlled substance (as defined in section 102 of the Controlled
Substances Act (21 USC § 802)) for which the maximum penalty is not less than 5 years;
(2) a Federal felony crime of violence that has as an element the use or attempted use of physical force
against the person of another; and
(3) a conspiracy to commit an offense described in paragraph (1) or (2).” 18 U.S.C. § 521(c).
“The circumstances described in this section are that the offense described in subsection (c) was
committed by a person who—
(1) participates in a criminal street gang with knowledge that its members engage in or have engaged
in a continuing series of offenses described in subsection (c);
(2) intends to promote or further the felonious activities of the criminal street gang or maintain or
increase his or her position in the gang; and
(3) has been convicted within the past 5 years for—
(A) an offense described in subsection (c);
(B) a State offense—
(i) involving a controlled substance (as defined in section 102 of the Controlled Substances Act
(21 USC § 802)) for which the maximum penalty is not less than 5 years’ imprisonment; or
(ii) that is a felony crime of violence that has as an element the use or attempted use of physical
force against the person of another;
(C) any Federal or State felony offense that by its nature involves a substantial risk that physical
force against the person of another may be used in the course of committing the offense; or
(D) a conspiracy to commit an offense described in subparagraph (A), (B), or (C).” 18 U.S.C. § 521(d).
National Gang Center Page 1 of 34 December 2016

Brief Review of Federal and State Definitions
“The sentence of a person convicted of an offense described in subsection (c) shall be increased by up to
10 years if the offense is committed under the circumstances described in subsection (d).” 18 U.S.C. § 521(b).
STATE LAW
A review of current state laws for various states’ definitions of the words “gang,” “gang member,” and
“gang crime” reveals the following information:
“Gang” Definitions
• 44 states and Washington, DC, have legislation that defines “gang.”
• 36 states define a gang as consisting of three or more persons.
• 30 states include a common name, identifying sign, or symbol as identifiers of gangs in their
definitions.
• 43 states refer to a gang as an “organization, association, or group.”
• 28 states and Washington, DC, use the term “criminal street gang” to describe a gang.
• Every definition includes criminal/illegal activity or behavior.
“Gang Member” Definitions
• 11 have legislation that defines a “gang member.”
• 5 states have a list of criteria, some of which a person must meet to be considered a gang member.
• Of those, 6 states require that a person must meet at least two criteria to be considered a gang
member.
“Gang Crime” Definitions
• 31 states define “gang crime/activity.”
• 20 states refer to it as a “pattern of criminal gang activity.”
• 25 states enumerate the exact crimes that are to be considered criminal gang activity.
National Gang Center Page 2 of 34 December 2016

Brief Review of State Definitions of Gang Member
National Gang Center Page 3 of 34 December 2016
DEFINITION OF “GANG MEMBER” BY STATE
STATE TERM(S) NUMBER CRITERIA BELONGS TO OR ENGAGES IN
Arizona
§ 13-105
Florida
§ 874.03
Florida
§ 874.03
Idaho
§ 18-8502
Criminal street gang
member
Criminal gang
member
Criminal gang
associate
Criminal gang
member
2 or more of 7 • Self-proclamation
• Witness testimony or official statement
• Written or electronic correspondence
• Paraphernalia or photographs
• Tattoos
• Clothing or colors
• Any other indicia of street gang membership
N/A
2 or more • Admits to criminal gang membership
N/A
• Is identified as a criminal gang member by a parent or guardian
• Is identified as a criminal gang member by a documented reliable informant
• Adopts the style of dress of a criminal gang
• Adopts the use of a hand sign identified as used by a criminal gang
• Has a tattoo identified as used by a criminal gang
• Associates with one or more known criminal gang members
• Is identified as a criminal gang member by an informant of previously untested reliability
and such identification is corroborated by independent information
• Is identified as a criminal gang member by physical evidence
• Has been observed in the company of one or more known criminal gang members four
or more times. Observation in a custodial setting requires a willful association. It is the
intent of the legislature to allow this criterion to be used to identify gang members who
recruit and organize in jails, prisons, and other detention settings
• Has authored any communication indicating responsibility for the commission of any
crime by the criminal gang
N/A N/A “who admits to criminal gang association;
2 or more • Admits to gang membership
• Is identified as a gang member
• Resides in or frequents a particular gang’s area and adopts its style of dress, use of hand
signs, or tattoos and associates with known gang members
• Has been arrested more than once in the company of identified gang members for
offenses that are consistent with usual gang activity
• Is identified as a gang member by physical evidence such as photographs or other
documentation
• Has been stopped in the company of known gang members four or more times
“who engages in a pattern of criminal
gang activity”

Brief Review of State Definitions of Gang Member
National Gang Center Page 4 of 34 December 2016
STATE TERM(S) NUMBER CRITERIA BELONGS TO OR ENGAGES IN
Illinois
§ 740 ILCS
147-10
Kansas
§ 21-6313
Michigan
§ 750.411u
§ 750.411v
Street gang member
Gang member
Criminal street gang
member
Gang member
Member of a gang
N/A N/A “who actually and in fact belongs to a gang,
and any person who knowingly acts in the
capacity of an agent for or accessory to, or is
legally accountable for, or voluntarily
associates himself with a course or pattern
of gang-related criminal activity, whether in
a preparatory, executory, or cover-up phase
of any activity, or who knowingly performs,
aids, or abets any such activity”
Admission of 3
or more
(b) “criminal street gang member" is a person who:
(1) Admits to criminal street gang membership; or
(2) meets three or more of the following criteria:
(A) Is identified as a criminal street gang member by a parent or guardian;
(B) is identified as a criminal street gang member by a state, county or city law
enforcement officer or correctional officer or documented reliable informant;
(C) is identified as a criminal street gang member by an informant of previously
untested reliability and such identification is corroborated by independent
information;
(D) frequents a particular criminal street gang's area;
(E) adopts such gang's style of dress, color, use of hand signs or tattoos;
(F) associates with known criminal street gang members;
(G) has been arrested more than once in the company of identified criminal street
gang members for offenses which are consistent with usual criminal street
gang activity;
(H) is identified as a criminal street gang member by physical evidence including,
but not limited to, photographs or other documentation;
(I) has been stopped in the company of known criminal street gang members two
or more times; or
(J) has participated in or undergone activities self-identified or identified by a
reliable informant as a criminal street gang initiation ritual
N/A N/A “who belongs to a gang”
N/A

Brief Review of State Definitions of Gang Member
National Gang Center Page 5 of 34 December 2016
STATE TERM(S) NUMBER CRITERIA BELONGS TO OR ENGAGES IN
Mississippi
§ 97-44-3
Nebraska
§ 43-245
New
Hampshire
§ 651:6
South
Carolina
§ 16-8-230
South Dakota
§ 22-10A-1
Street gang member
Gang member
Criminal street gang
member
Criminal street gang
member
Criminal gang
member
N/A gang, and any person who knowingly acts
in the capacity of an agent for or accessory
to, or is legally accountable for, or
voluntarily associates himself with a gangrelated
criminal activity, whether in a
preparatory, executory, or cover-up phase
of any activity, or who knowingly
performs, aids, or abets any such activity”
remains a member of a criminal street
gang”
gang”
N/A “who actually and in fact belongs to a
N/A N/A “who willingly or voluntarily becomes and
2 or more • Admits to criminal street gang membership
N/A
• Is identified as a criminal street gang member by a law enforcement officer, parent,
guardian, or documented reliable informant
• Resides in or frequents a particular criminal street gang’s area and adopts its style of
dress, its use of hand or other signs, tattoos, or other physical markings, and associates
with known criminal street gang members
• Has been arrested more than once in the company of individuals who are identified as
criminal street gang members by law enforcement, for offenses that are consistent with
usual criminal street gang activity
N/A N/A “who is an active member of a criminal
Street gang member 2 or more (2) "Street gang member," any person who engages in a pattern of street gang activity
and who meets two or more of the following criteria:
(a) Admits to gang membership;
(b) Is identified as a gang member by a documented reliable informant;
(c) Resides in or frequents a particular gang's area and adopts its style of dress, its
use of hand signs or its tattoos and associates with known gang members;
(d) Is identified as a gang member by an informant of previously untested reliability
if such identification is corroborated by independent information;
(e) Has been arrested more than once in the company of identified gang members for
offenses which are consistent with usual gang activity;
(f) Is identified as a gang member by physical evidence, such as photographs or other
documentation; or
(g) Has been stopped in the company of known gang members four or more times
“who engages in a pattern of street gang
activity”

Brief Review of State Definitions of Gang Member
National Gang Center Page 6 of 34 December 2016
STATE TERM(S) NUMBER CRITERIA BELONGS TO OR ENGAGES IN
Tennessee
§ 40-35-121
Washington
§ 9.94A.030
Wisconsin
§ 939.22
Criminal gang
member
Criminal street gang
associate or
member
Criminal gang
member
2 or more • Admits to criminal gang involvement
• Is identified as a criminal gang member by a parent or guardian
• Is identified as a criminal gang member by a documented reliable informant
• Resides in or frequents a particular criminal gang’s area; adopts its style of dress, use of
hand signs, or tattoos; and associates with known gang members
• Is identified as a criminal gang member by an informant of previously untested
reliability, and such identification is corroborated by independent information
• Has been arrested more than once in the company of identified criminal gang members
for offenses that are consistent with usual criminal gang activity
• Is identified as a criminal gang member by physical evidence such as photographs or
other documentation
“who is a member of a criminal gang”
N/A N/A “who actively participates in any criminal
N/A N/A “who participates in criminal gang activity

Brief Review of State Definitions of Gang
National Gang Center Page 7 of 34 December 2016
DEFINITION OF “GANG” BY STATE
STATE TERM(S) GROUPING NUMBER FORMALITY PURPOSE OR ACTIVITY IDENTIFIERS
Alabama
§ 13A-6-26
Alaska
§ 11.81.900
Arizona
§ 13-105
Arkansas
§ 5-74-103
California
Penal Code
§ 186.22
Colorado
§ 18-23-101
Connecticut
§ 29-7n
Delaware
11 Del. C.
§ 616
Street gang Combination,
confederation,
alliance,
network,
conspiracy,
understanding,
or other similar
arrangement
Criminal street
gang
Criminal street
gang
Criminal gang,
organization, or
enterprise
Criminal street
gang
Criminal street
gang
3 or more
persons
Group 3 or more
persons
Association At least 1
person who
is a criminal
street gang
member
Group 3 or more
individuals
Organization,
association, or
group
Organization,
association, or
group
3 or more
persons
3 or more
persons
N/A (a) for purposes of this section, the term “street gang” means any
combination, confederation, alliance, network, conspiracy,
understanding, or other similar arrangement in law or in fact, of three
or more persons that, through its membership or through the agency
of any members, engages in a course or pattern of criminal activity.
N/A “who, individually, jointly, or in combination, have committed or
attempted to commit, within the preceding three years, for the benefit
of, at the direction of, or in association with the group, two or more
offenses under any of, or any combination of, the following . . .
offenses”
Formal or
informal
“members or associates individually or collectively engage in the
commission, attempted commission, facilitation, or solicitation of any
felony act”
N/A “who commit a continuing series of two (2) or more predicate criminal
offenses that are undertaken in concert with each other”
Formal or
informal
Formal or
informal
“having as one of its primary activities the commission of one or more
of the criminal acts . . . and whose members individually or collectively
engage in or have engaged in a pattern of criminal gang activity”
“which has as one of its primary objectives or activities the commission
of one or more predicate criminal acts; and whose members
individually or collectively engage in or have engaged in a pattern of
criminal gang activity”
Gang Group N/A N/A “gang” means a group of juveniles or youths who, acting in concert with
each other, or with adults, engage in illegal activities.
Criminal street
3 or more Formal or
gang
persons informal
Organization,
association, or
group
“having as one of its primary activities the commission of one or more
. . . criminal acts . . . and whose members individually or collectively
engage in or have engaged in a pattern of criminal gang activity”
N/A
“name or identifying sign,
symbol, tattoo or other physical
marking, style of dress, or use
of hand signs”
N/A
N/A
“having a common name or
common identifying sign or
symbol”
N/A
N/A
Common name, or common
identifying sign or symbol

Brief Review of State Definitions of Gang
behaviors”
Common name, or common
identifying sign or symbol
National Gang Center Page 8 of 34 December 2016
N/A
N/A
STATE TERM(S) GROUPING NUMBER FORMALITY PURPOSE OR ACTIVITY IDENTIFIERS
Delaware
11 Del. C.
§ 617
Criminal youth
gang
Group 3 or more
persons
N/A “which either promotes, sponsors, assists in, participates in or requires
as a condition of membership submission to group initiation that
results in any felony or any class A misdemeanor”
Gang name, or other identifier.
Identifier means “common
identifying signs, symbols,
tattoos, markings, graffiti or
attire, or other distinguishing
characteristics or indicia of gang
District of
Columbia
§ 22-951
Florida
§ 874.03
Georgia
§ 16-15-3
Criminal street
gang
Association or
group
Criminal gang Organization,
association, or
group
Criminal street
gang
Organization,
association, or
group
6 or more
persons
3 or more
persons
3 or more
persons
N/A “has as a condition of membership or continued membership, the
committing of or actively participating in committing a crime of
violence . . . or has as one of its purposes or frequent activities, the
violation of the criminal laws of the District, or the United States,
except for acts of civil disobedience”
Formal or
informal
Formal or
informal
“that has as one of its primary activities the commission of criminal or
delinquent acts . . . including, but not limited to, terrorist organizations
and hate groups”
“which engages in criminal gang activity . . . [s]uch term shall not
include three or more persons, associated in fact, whether formal or
informal, who are not engaged in criminal gang activity”
membership”
N/A
“common name or common
identifying signs, colors, or
symbols”
“common name or common
identifying signs, symbols,
tattoos, graffiti, attire, or other
distinguishing characteristics,
including, but not limited to,
common activities, customs or
Idaho
§ 18-8502
Illinois
§ 740 ILCS
147/10
Indiana
§ 35-45-9-1
Criminal gang Organization,
association, or
group
Street gang
Gang
Organized gang
Criminal street
gang
Combination,
confederation,
alliance,
network,
conspiracy,
understanding,
or other similar
conjoining
3 or more
persons
3 or more
persons
Criminal gang Group At least 3
members
Formal or
informal
“whose members individually or collectively engage in or have engaged
in a pattern of criminal gang activity, having as one (1) of its primary
activities the commission of one (1) or more . . . criminal acts”
N/A “with an established hierarchy that, through its membership or
through the agency of any member engages in a course or pattern of
criminal activity”
Formal or
informal
As used in this chapter, “criminal organization” means a formal or
informal group with at least three (3) members that specifically:
(1) either (A) promotes, sponsors, or assists in; or (B) participates in; or
(C) has as one (1) of its goals; or (2) requires as a condition of
membership or continued membership; the commission of a felony or
an act that would be a felony if committed by an adult, or a battery
offense.

Brief Review of State Definitions of Gang
National Gang Center Page 9 of 34 December 2016
STATE TERM(S) GROUPING NUMBER FORMALITY PURPOSE OR ACTIVITY IDENTIFIERS
Iowa
§ 723A.1
Kansas
§ 21-6313
Kentucky
§ 506.140
Louisiana
§ 15:1404
Maryland
Criminal Law
Article
§ 9-801
Criminal street
gang
Criminal street
gang
Organization,
association, or
group
Organization,
association, or
group
Criminal gang Alliance,
network, or
conspiracy
Criminal street
gang
Organization,
association, or
group
Criminal gang Group or
association
3 or more
persons
3 or more
persons
5 or more
persons
3 or more
persons
3 or more
persons
Formal or
informal
Formal or
informal
“having as one of its primary activities the commission of one or more
criminal acts . . . and whose members individually or collectively engage
in or have engaged in a pattern of criminal gang activity”
“having as one of its primary activities the commission of one or more
person felonies, person misdemeanors, felony violations of K.S.A.
21-5701 through 21-5717, and amendments thereto, any felony
violation of the uniform controlled substances act . . ., or the
comparable juvenile offenses, which if committed by an adult would
constitute the commission of such felonies or misdemeanors; . . . and
whose members, individually or collectively, engage in or have
engaged in the commission, attempted commission, conspiracy to
commit, or solicitation of two or more person felonies, person
misdemeanors, felony violations of K.S.A. 21-5701 through 21-5717,
and amendments thereto, any felony violation of any provision of the
uniform controlled substances act prior to July 1, 2009, or the
comparable juvenile offenses, which if committed by an adult would
constitute the commission of such felonies or misdemeanors or any
substantially similar offense from another jurisdiction”
N/A “that, through its membership or through the action of any member,
engages in a continuing pattern of criminal activity. ‘Criminal gang’
shall not include fraternal organizations, unions, corporations,
associations, or similar entities, unless organized for the primary
purpose of engaging in criminal activity”
Formal or
informal
“which has as one of its primary activities the commission of one or
more of the criminal acts . . . or . . ., whose members individually or
collectively engage in or have engaged in a pattern of criminal gang
activity”
N/A “whose members individually or collectively engage in a pattern of
criminal gang activity; have as one of their primary objectives or
activities the commission of one or more underlying crimes, including
acts by juveniles that would be underlying crimes if committed by
adults; and have in common . . .”
Identifiable name or identifying
sign or symbol
Common name or common
identifying sign or symbol
An established hierarchy
Or has a common name, or
common identifying sign or
symbol
an overt or covert
organizational or command
structure

Brief Review of State Definitions of Gang
National Gang Center Page 10 of 34 December 2016
STATE TERM(S) GROUPING NUMBER FORMALITY PURPOSE OR ACTIVITY IDENTIFIERS
Michigan
§ 750.411u
§ 750.411v
Minnesota
§ 609.229
Mississippi
§ 97-44-3
Missouri
§ 578.421
Montana
§ 45-8-402
Nebraska
§ 43-245
Nevada
§ 193.168
Gang Organization,
association, or
group
Criminal gang Organization,
association, or
group
Street gang
Gang
Organized gang
Criminal street
gang
Criminal street
gang
Criminal street
gang
Combination,
confederation,
alliance, network
conspiracy,
understanding,
or other similar
conjoining
Organization,
association, or
group
Organization,
association, or
group
5 or more
people
3 or more
persons
3 or more
persons
3 or more
persons
3 or more
persons
N/A “. . . other than a nonprofit organization . . .” . . . identifies itself by all of the
following:
• A unifying mark, manner,
protocol, or method of
expressing membership,
including a common name,
sign, or symbol, means of
recognition, geographical or
territorial sites, or boundary
or location
• An established leadership or
command structure
• Defined membership criteria
Formal or
informal
“has as one of its primary activities the commission of one or more of
the offenses . . . and includes members who individually or collectively
engage in or have engaged in a pattern of criminal gang activity”
N/A “with an established hierarchy that, through its membership or
through the agency of any member engages in felonious criminal
activity”
Formal or
Informal
Formal or
informal
“having as one of its primary activities the commission of one or more
criminal acts . . . whose members individually or collectively engage in
or have engaged in a pattern of criminal gang activity”
“having as one of its primary activities the commission of one or more
of the criminal acts . . . and whose members individually or collectively
engage in or have engaged in a pattern of criminal gang activity”
Common name, or common
identifying sign or symbol
N/A
Common name, or common
identifying sign or symbol
Common name, or common
identifying sign or symbol
Criminal street gang
Group 3 or more people
N/A “whose group identity or purposes include engaging in illegal activities” Common identifying name, sign,
or symbol
Criminal gang Any combination N/A Formal or “so constructed that the organization will continue its operation even Common name or identifying
of persons
informal if individual members enter or leave the organization, which . . . has symbol

Brief Review of State Definitions of Gang
National Gang Center Page 11 of 34 December 2016
STATE TERM(S) GROUPING NUMBER FORMALITY PURPOSE OR ACTIVITY IDENTIFIERS
New
Hampshire
§ 651:6
New Jersey
§ 2C:33-29
Criminal street
gang
Criminal street
gang
Ongoing
organization,
association, or
group
3 or more
persons
N/A 3 or more
persons
Formal or
informal
“which has as one of its primary objectives or activities the commission
of criminal activity . . . and whose members individually or collectively
have engaged in the commission, attempted commission, solicitation
to commit, or conspiracy to commit two or more the following
offenses, or a reasonably equivalent offense in another jurisdiction, on
separate occasions within the preceding three years: violent crimes, as
defined in RSA 651:5, XIII; distribution, sale, or manufacture of a
controlled drug in violation of RSA 318-B:2; Class A felony theft;
unlawful sale of a pistol or revolver; or witness tampering”
N/A “individually or in combination with other members of a criminal street
gang, while engaging in gang-related activity, have committed or
conspired or attempted to commit, within the preceding five years
from the date of the present offense, excluding any period of
imprisonment, one or more offenses on separate occasions of robbery,
carjacking, aggravated assault, assault, aggravated sexual assault,
sexual assault, arson, burglary, kidnapping, extortion, tampering with
witnesses, and informants or a violation of chapter 11, section 3, 4, 5,
6, or 7 of chapter 35 or chapter 39 of Title 2C of the New Jersey
Statutes”
Common name, identifying sign,
symbol, physical marking, style
of dress, or use of hand sign
Two of the following seven
criteria that indicate criminal
street gang membership apply:
• Self-proclamation
• Witness testimony or official
statement
• Written or electronic
correspondence
• Paraphernalia or photographs
• Tattoos
• Clothing or colors
• Any other indicia of street
North Carolina
§ 14-50.16
North Carolina
§ 15A-1340.16
North Dakota
§ 12.1-06.2-01
Ohio
§ 2923.41
Pattern of
Criminal street
gang
Criminal street
gang
Criminal street
gang
Organization,
association, or
group
Organization,
association, or
group
Organization, or
group
Criminal gang Organization,
association, or
group
3 or more
persons
3 or more
persons
3 or more
persons
3 or more
persons
Formal or
informal
Formal or
informal
Formal or
informal
Formal or
informal
“that has as one of its primary activities the commission of one or more
felony offenses, or delinquent acts that would be felonies if committed
by an adult; has three or more members individually or collectively
engaged in, or who have engaged in, criminal street gang activity;
and . . .”
“having as one of its primary activities the commission of felony or
violent misdemeanor offenses, or delinquent acts that would be
felonies or violent misdemeanors if committed by an adult, and . . .”
“that acts in concert or agrees to act in concert with a purpose that
any of those persons alone or in any combination commit or will
commit two or more predicate gang crimes one of which occurs after
August 1, 1995, and the last of which occurred within five years after
the commission of a prior predicate gang crime”
“has as one of its primary activities the commission of one or more of
the offenses . . . the persons in the organization, association, or group
individually or collectively engage in or have engaged in a pattern of
criminal gang activity”
gang activity
May have a common name,
common identifying sign or
symbol
Common name or common
identifying sign, colors, or
symbols
N/A
Common name or one or more
common, identifying signs,
symbols, or colors

Brief Review of State Definitions of Gang
National Gang Center Page 12 of 34 December 2016
STATE TERM(S) GROUPING NUMBER FORMALITY PURPOSE OR ACTIVITY IDENTIFIERS
Oklahoma
21 Okl. St.
§ 856
Oregon
§ 336.109
Pennsylvania
§ 18 5131
Rhode Island
§ 12-19-39
South Carolina
§ 16-8-230
South Dakota
§ 22-10A-1
Tennessee
§ 40-35-121
Texas
Penal Code
§ 71.01
Utah
§ 76-9-802
Virginia
§ 18.2-46.1
Criminal street
gang
Organization,
association, or
group
5 or more
persons
N/A “that specifically either promotes, sponsors, or assists in, or
participates in, and requires as a condition of membership or continued
membership, the commission of one or more . . . criminal acts”
Gang Group N/A N/A N/A Name; unique appearance or
language, including hand signs;
the claiming of geographical
territory; or the espousing of a
distinctive belief system that
frequently results in criminal
activity
Criminal gang Organization,
association or
group
Criminal street
gang
Organization,
association, or
group
Criminal gang Organization,
association, or
group
Street gang Organization,
association, or
group
Criminal gang Organization,
association, or
group
Criminal street
gang
Criminal street
gang
Criminal street
gang
3 or more
persons
3 or more
persons
5 or more
persons
3 or more
persons
3 or more
persons
N/A 3 or more
persons
Organization,
association, or
group
Organization,
association, or
group
3 or more
persons
3 or more
persons
Formal or
informal
Formal or
informal
Formal or
informal
Formal or
informal
Formal or
informal
“with or without an established hierarchy, that has as one of its primary
activities the commission of criminal or delinquent acts”
“having as one of its primary activities the commission of criminal or
delinquent acts; . . .; and whose members individually or collectively
engage in or have engaged in a pattern of criminal gang activity”
“who form for the purpose of committing criminal activity and who
knowingly and actively participate in a pattern of criminal gang activity”
“have members or associates who, individually or collectively, engage
in or have engaged in a pattern of street gang activity”
“has as one (1) of its activities the commission of criminal acts; and two
(2) or more members who, individually or collectively, engage in or
have engaged in a pattern of criminal gang activity”
N/A “who continuously or regularly associate in the commission of criminal
activities”
Formal or
informal
Formal or
informal
“that is currently in operation; that has one of its primary activities the
commission of one or more predicate gang crimes; . . . and whose
members, acting individually or in concert with other members, engage
in or have engaged in a pattern of criminal gang activity”
“which has as one of its primary objectives or activities the commission
of one or more criminal activities . . . and whose members individually
or collectively have engaged in the commission of, attempt to commit,
conspiracy to commit, or solicitation of two or more predicate criminal
acts, at least one of which is an act of violence, provided such acts were
not part of a common act or transaction”
N/A
N/A
“having an identifiable name or
common identifiable signs,
colors or symbols”
N/A
Common name, or common
identifying signs, colors, or
symbols
N/A
Common identifying sign or
symbol or an identifiable
leadership
Identifying name, or identifying
sign or symbol, or both
Identifiable name or identifying
sign or symbol

Brief Review of State Definitions of Gang
National Gang Center Page 13 of 34 December 2016
STATE TERM(S) GROUPING NUMBER FORMALITY PURPOSE OR ACTIVITY IDENTIFIERS
Washington
§ 9.94A.030
Wisconsin
§ 939.22
Wyoming
§ 6-1-104
Criminal street
gang
Organization,
association, or
group
Criminal gang Organization,
association, or
group
Criminal street
gang
Organization,
association, or
group
3 or more
persons
3 or more
persons
5 or more
persons
Formal or
informal
Formal or
informal
Formal or
informal
“having as one of its primary activities the commission of criminal acts,
and whose members or associates individually or collectively engage in
or have engaged in a pattern of criminal street gang activity. This
definition does not apply to employees engaged in concerted activities
for their mutual aid and protection, or to the activities of labor and
bona fide nonprofit organizations or their members or agents”
“that has as one of its primary activities the commission of one or more
one or more of the criminal acts, or acts that would be criminal if the
actor were an adult . . . and whose members individually or collectively
engage in or have engaged in a pattern of criminal gang activity”
“having as one (1) of its primary activities the commission of one (1) or
more of the criminal acts . . . and whose members or associates
individually or collectively engage in or have been engaged in a pattern
of criminal street gang activity”
Common name or common
identifying sign or symbol
Common name, or common
identifying sign or symbol
Common name or identifying
sign or symbol

Brief Review of State Definitions of Gang Crime
National Gang Center Page 14 of 34 December 2016
DEFINITION OF “GANG CRIME” BY STATE
(States that have been highlighted in gray DO NOT have enhanced penalties for gang crimes.)
STATE TERM(S) DEFINITION ENUMERATED/ELUCIDATED VIOLATIONS
Arkansas
§ 5-74-103
California
Penal Code
§ 186.22
Predicate
criminal offense
Pattern of
criminal gang
activity
“any violation of Arkansas law that is a crime of violence or a crime of pecuniary
gain”
“the commission of, attempted commission of, conspiracy to commit, or
solicitation of, sustained juvenile petition for, or conviction of two or more of the
following offenses, provided at least one of these offenses occurred after the
effective date of this chapter and the last of those offenses occurred within three
years after a prior offense, and the offenses were committed on separate
occasions, or by two or more persons”
N/A
• Assault with a deadly weapon or by means of force likely to produce great
bodily injury
• Robbery
• Unlawful homicide or manslaughter
• Sale, possession for sale, transportation, manufacture, offer for sale, or offer
to manufacture controlled substances
• Shooting at an inhabited dwelling or occupied motor vehicle
• Discharging or permitting the discharge of a firearm from a motor vehicle
• Arson
• Intimidation of witnesses and victims
• Grand theft
• Grand theft of any firearm, vehicle, trailer, or vessel
• Burglary
• Rape
• Looting
• Money laundering
• Kidnapping
• Mayhem
• Aggravated mayhem
• Torture
• Felony extortion
• Felony vandalism
• Carjacking
• Sale, delivery, or transfer of a firearm
• Possession of a pistol, revolver, or other firearm
• Threats to commit crimes resulting in death or great bodily injury
• Theft and unlawful taking or driving of a vehicle
• Felony theft of an access card or account information
• Counterfeiting, designing, using, or attempting to use an access card
• Felony fraudulent use of an access card or account information
• Unlawful use of personal identifying information to obtain credit, goods,
services, or medical information
• Wrongfully obtaining Department of Motor Vehicles documentation

Brief Review of State Definitions of Gang Crime
National Gang Center Page 15 of 34 December 2016
(States that have been highlighted in gray DO NOT have enhanced penalties for gang crimes.)
STATE TERM(S) DEFINITION ENUMERATED/ELUCIDATED VIOLATIONS
California
Penal Code
§ 186.22
(continued)
Colorado
§ 18-23-101
Delaware
11 Del. C.
§ 616
Delaware
11 Del. C.
§ 616
Florida
§ 874.03
Pattern of
criminal gang
activity
Pattern of
criminal gang
activity
Illegal gang
participation
Criminal gangrelated
activity
“the commission, attempt, conspiracy, or solicitation of two or more predicate
criminal acts which are committed on separate occasions or by two or more
persons”
“the commission of, attempted commission of, conspiracy to commit,
solicitation of, or conviction of two or more . . . criminal offenses, provided that
at least one (1) of these offenses occurred after July 1, 2003, and that the last of
those offenses occurred within three years after a prior offense, and provided
that the offenses were committed on separate occasions or by two or more
persons”
“a person who actively participates in any criminal street gang with knowledge
that its members engage in or have engaged in a pattern of criminal gang activity
and who knowingly promotes, furthers, or assists in any criminal conduct by
members of that gang which would constitute a felony under Delaware law shall
be guilty of illegal gang participation. Illegal gang participation is a Class F felony”
• Prohibited possession of a firearm
• Carrying a concealed firearm
• Carrying a loaded firearm
“predicate criminal acts means the commission of or attempt, conspiracy, or
solicitation to commit any of the following: any conduct defined as
racketeering activity . . . any violation of section 18-8-706 [“Retaliation against
a witness or victim”] or any criminal act committed in any jurisdiction of
the United States, which, if committed in this state, would violate section
18-8-706”
• Assault
• Any criminal acts causing death
• Any criminal acts relating to sexual offenses
• Any criminal offenses relating to unlawful imprisonment or kidnapping
• Any criminal acts of arson
• Any criminal acts relating to burglary
• Any criminal acts relating to robbery
• Any criminal acts relating to theft or extortion . . . provided that such acts
meet the requirements of felony offenses
• Any criminal acts relating to riot, unlawful disruption, hate crimes, stalking,
or bombs, provided that such acts meet the requirements of felony offenses
• Any criminal acts involving deadly weapons or dangerous instruments
• Any criminal acts involving controlled substances
N/A
N/A • An activity committed with the intent to benefit, promote, or further the
interests of a criminal gang, or for the purposes of increasing a person’s own
standing or position within a criminal gang
• An activity in which the participants are identified as criminal gang members
or criminal gang associates acting individually or collectively to further any
criminal purpose of a criminal gang
• An activity that is identified as criminal gang activity by a documented
reliable informant or
• An activity that is identified as criminal gang activity by an informant of
previously untested reliability and such identification is corroborated by
independent information

Brief Review of State Definitions of Gang Crime
National Gang Center Page 16 of 34 December 2016
(States that have been highlighted in gray DO NOT have enhanced penalties for gang crimes.)
STATE TERM(S) DEFINITION ENUMERATED/ELUCIDATED VIOLATIONS
Georgia
§ 16-15-3
Criminal gang
activity
“the commission, attempted commission, conspiracy to commit, or solicitation,
coercion, or intimidation of another person to commit . . . offenses on or after
July 1, 2006”
(A) Any offense defined as racketeering activity by Code Section 16-14-3;
(B) Any offense defined in Article 7 of Chapter 5 of this title, relating to
stalking;
(C) Any offense defined in Code Section 16-6-1 as rape, 16-6-2 as aggravated
sodomy, 16-6-3 as statutory rape, or 16-6-22.2 as aggravated sexual
battery;
(D) Any offense defined in Article 3 of Chapter 10 of this title, relating to
escape and other offenses related to confinement;
(E) Any offense defined in Article 4 of Chapter 11 of this title, relating to
dangerous instrumentalities and practices;
(F) Any offense defined in Code Section 42-5-15, 42-5-16, 42-5-17, 42-5-18, or
42-5-19, relating to the security of state or county correctional facilities;
(G) Any offense defined in Code Section 49-4A-11, relating to aiding or
encouraging a child to escape from custody;
(H) Any offense of criminal trespass or criminal damage to property resulting
from any act of gang related painting on, tagging, marking on, writing on,
or creating any form of graffiti on the property of another;
(I) Any criminal offense committed in violation of the laws of the United States
or its territories, dominions, or possessions, any of the several states, or
any foreign nation which, if committed in this state, would be considered
criminal gang activity under this Code section; and
(J) Any criminal offense in the State of Georgia, any other state, or the
United States that involves violence, possession of a weapon, or use of a
weapon, whether designated as a felony or not, and regardless of the
maximum sentence that could be imposed or actually was imposed.

Brief Review of State Definitions of Gang Crime
National Gang Center Page 17 of 34 December 2016
(States that have been highlighted in gray DO NOT have enhanced penalties for gang crimes.)
STATE TERM(S) DEFINITION ENUMERATED/ELUCIDATED VIOLATIONS
Idaho
§ 18-8502
Pattern of
criminal gang
activity
“the commission, attempted commission, or solicitation of two (2) or more of
the following offenses, provided that the offenses are committed on separate
occasions or by two (2) or more gang members”
• Robbery
• Arson
• Burglary
• Murder or manslaughter
• Any violation . . . that involves possession with intent to deliver, distribute,
deliver, or manufacture of a prohibited substance
• Any unlawful use or possession a weapon, bomb, or destructive device
• Assault and battery
• Criminal solicitation
• Computer crime
• Theft
• Evidence falsified or concealed and witnesses intimidated or bribed
• Forgery and counterfeiting
• Gambling
• Kidnapping
• Mayhem
• Prostitution
• Rape
• Racketeering
• Malicious harassment
• Terrorism
• Money laundering and illegal investment
• Sexual abuse of a child under the age of sixteen years
• Sexual exploitation of a child
• Lewd conduct with a minor child under sixteen
• Sexual battery of a minor child sixteen or seventeen years of age
• Escape or rescue of prisoners
• Riot
• Disturbing the peace
• Malicious injury to property
• Injuring jails
• Injury by graffiti
• Human trafficking

Brief Review of State Definitions of Gang Crime
National Gang Center Page 18 of 34 December 2016
(States that have been highlighted in gray DO NOT have enhanced penalties for gang crimes.)
STATE TERM(S) DEFINITION ENUMERATED/ELUCIDATED VIOLATIONS
Illinois
§ 740 ILCS
147/10
Illinois
§ 725 ILCS
173/5
Course or pattern
of criminal
activity
“2 or more gang-related criminal offenses committed in whole or in part within this
State when: (1) at least one such offense was committed after the effective date
of this Act; (2) both offenses were committed within 5 years of each other; and (3)
at least one offense involved the solicitation to commit, conspiracy to commit,
attempt to commit, or commission of any offense defined as a felony or forcible
felony”
Gang crime “any criminal offense committed by a member of a ‘gang’ as that term is defined
in Section 10 of the Illinois Streetgang Terrorism Omnibus Prevention Act when the
offense is in furtherance of any activity, enterprise, pursuit, or undertaking of a
gang”
• “‘Course or pattern of criminal activity’ also means one or more acts of
criminal defacement of property under Section 21-1.3 of the Criminal Code
of 1961 or the Criminal Code of 2012, if the defacement includes a sign or
other symbol intended to identify the street gang”
• “‘Street gang-related’ or ‘gang-related’ means any criminal activity,
enterprise, pursuit, or undertaking directed by, ordered by, authorized by,
consented to, agreed to, requested by, acquiesced in, or ratified by any gang
leader, officer, or governing or policy-making person or authority, or by any
agent, representative, or deputy of any such officer, person, or authority:
(1) With the intent to increase the gang’s size, membership, prestige,
dominance, or control in any geographical area; or
(2) With the intent to provide the gang with any advantage in, or any control
or dominance over any criminal market sector, including but not limited
to, the manufacture, delivery, or sale of controlled substances or
cannabis; arson or arson-for-hire; traffic in stolen property or stolen
credit cards; traffic in prostitution, obscenity, or pornography; or that
involves robbery, burglary, or theft; or
(3) With the intent to exact revenge or retribution for the gang or any
member of the gang; or
(4) With the intent to obstruct justice, or intimidate or eliminate any witness
against the gang or any member of the gang; or
(5) With the intent to otherwise directly or indirectly cause any benefit,
aggrandizement, gain, profit or other advantage whatsoever to or for the
gang, its reputation, influence, or membership”
N/A

Brief Review of State Definitions of Gang Crime
National Gang Center Page 19 of 34 December 2016
(States that have been highlighted in gray DO NOT have enhanced penalties for gang crimes.)
STATE TERM(S) DEFINITION ENUMERATED/ELUCIDATED VIOLATIONS
Iowa
§ 723A.1
Kansas
§ 21-6313
Kentucky
§ 506.140
Pattern of
criminal gang
activity
Criminal street
gang activity
Continuing
pattern of
criminal activity
“means the commission, attempt to commit, conspiring to commit, or
solicitation or two or more criminal acts, provided the criminal acts were
committed on separate dates or by two or more persons who are members of,
or belong to, the same criminal street gang”
“the commission or attempted commission of, or solicitation or conspiracy to
commit, one or more person felonies, person misdemeanors, felony violations
of K.S.A. 21-5701 through 21-5717, and amendments thereto, any felony
violation of any provision of the uniform controlled substances act prior to
July 1, 2009, or the comparable juvenile offenses, which if committed by an adult
would constitute the commission of such felonies or misdemeanors on separate
occasions”
“a conviction by any member or members of a criminal gang for the commission,
attempt, or solicitation of two (2) or more felony offenses, the commission of
two (2) or more violent misdemeanor offenses, or a combination of at least one
(1) of these felony offenses and one (1) of these violent misdemeanor offenses,
on separate occasions within a two (2)-year period for the purpose of furthering
gang activity”
1. “Criminal acts” means any of the following or any combination of the
following:
a. An offense constituting a violation of section 124.401 involving a
controlled substance, a counterfeit substance, or a simulated controlled
substance
b. An offense constituting a violation of chapter 711 involving a robbery or
extortion
c. An offense constituting a violation of section 708.6 involving intimidation
with a dangerous weapon
d. An offense constituting a violation of section 708.8
e. An offense constituting a violation of section 720.4
f. Any other offense constituting a forcible felony as defined in section
702.11
g. An offense constituting a violation of chapter 724
h. Brandishing a dangerous weapon
N/A
“Violent misdemeanor offense” means KRS 508.030, 508.050, 508.070,
508.080, 508.120, 508.150, 509.030, and 509.080”

Brief Review of State Definitions of Gang Crime
National Gang Center Page 20 of 34 December 2016
(States that have been highlighted in gray DO NOT have enhanced penalties for gang crimes.)
STATE TERM(S) DEFINITION ENUMERATED/ELUCIDATED VIOLATIONS
Louisiana
§ 15:1404
Maryland
Criminal Law
Article § 9-801
Minnesota
§ 617.91
Pattern of
criminal gang
activity
Pattern of
criminal gang
activity
“the commission or attempted commission of two or more of the following
offenses, provided that the offenses occurred within a three-year period, and
the offenses are committed on separate occasions by two or more persons”
“means the commission of, attempted commission of, conspiracy to commit, or
solicitation of two or more underlying crimes or acts by a juvenile that would be
an underlying crime if committed by an adult, provided the crimes or acts were
not part of the same incident”
• Aggravated battery or second-degree battery
• Armed robbery
• First- or second-degree murder or manslaughter
• Sale, possession for sale, transportation, manufacture, offer for sale, or offer
to manufacture controlled substances
• Illegal use of weapons or dangerous instrumentalities
• Aggravated arson
• Intimidating, impeding, or injuring witnesses; or injuring officers
• Theft of any vehicle, trailer, or vessel
• Assault by drive-by shooting
• Riot or inciting to riot
• Aggravated criminal damage to property
• Simple burglary
• Looting
(f) “Underlying crime” means:
(1) a crime of violence as defined under § 14-101 of this article;
(2) a violation of § 3-203 (second-degree assault), § 4-203 (wearing,
carrying, or transporting a handgun), § 9-302 (inducing false testimony
or avoidance of subpoena), § 9-303 (retaliation for testimony), § 9-305
(intimidating or corrupting juror), § 11-303 (human trafficking),
§ 11-304 (receiving earnings of a prostitute), or § 11-306 (a)(2), (3), or
(4) (house of prostitution) of this article;
(3) a felony violation of § 3-701 (extortion), § 4-503 (manufacture or
possession of destructive device), § 5-602 (distribution of CDS),
§ 5-603 (manufacturing CDS or equipment), § 6-103 (second-degree
arson), § 6-202 (first-degree burglary), § 6-203 (second-degree
burglary), § 6-204 (third-degree burglary), § 7-104 (theft), or § 7-105
(unauthorized use of a motor vehicle) of this article; or
(4) a felony violation of § 5-133 of the Public Safety Article
Gang activity • criminal damage to property in the first or second degree under section
• disorderly conduct under section 609.72; or
• unlawful possession of a firearm by a minor under section 624.713,
“the commission of one or more of the offenses” • offenses listed in section 609.11, subdivision 9;
609.595, subdivision 1 or 1a;
• trespass under section 609.605;
subdivision 1, clause (1)

Brief Review of State Definitions of Gang Crime
National Gang Center Page 21 of 34 December 2016
(States that have been highlighted in gray DO NOT have enhanced penalties for gang crimes.)
STATE TERM(S) DEFINITION ENUMERATED/ELUCIDATED VIOLATIONS
Mississippi
§ 97-44-3
Missouri
§ 578.421
N/A pursuit, or undertaking directed by, ordered by, authorized by, consented
to, agreed to, requested by, acquiesced in, or ratified by any gang leader,
officer, or governing or policy-making person or authority, or by any agent,
representative, or deputy of any such officer, person, or authority:
• With intent to increase the gang’s size, membership, prestige, dominance,
or control in any geographical area; or
• With intent to exact revenge or retribution for the gang or any member of
• With intent to provide the gang with any advantage in, or any control or
dominance over, any criminal market sector, including but not limited to the
unlawful manufacture, delivery, possession, or sale of controlled
substances; arson; traffic in stolen property or stolen credit cards; traffic in
prostitution, obscenity, or pornography; or that involves robbery, armed
• With intent to obstruct justice, or intimidate or eliminate any witness against
the gang or any member of the gang; or
• With intent to otherwise directly or indirectly, cause any benefit,
aggrandizement, gain, profit, or other advantage whatsoever to or for the
gang, its reputation, influence, or membership”
N/A • “Street gang-related or gang-related means any criminal activity, enterprise,
the gang; or
robbery, burglary, or larceny; or
Pattern of
criminal street
gang activity
“the commission, attempted commission, or solicitation of two or more of
the following offenses, provided at least one of those offenses occurred after
August 28, 1993, and the last of those offenses occurred within three years after
a prior offense, and the offenses are committed on separate occasions, or by two
or more persons”
• Assault with a deadly weapon or by means of force likely to cause serious
physical injury
• Robbery, arson, and those offenses under chapter 569, RSMo, which are
related to robbery and arson
• Murder or manslaughter
• Any violation of the provisions of chapter 195, RSMo, which involves the
distribution, delivery, or manufacture of a substance prohibited by chapter
195, RSMo
• Unlawful use of a weapon, which is a felony
• Tampering with witnesses and victims

Brief Review of State Definitions of Gang Crime
National Gang Center Page 22 of 34 December 2016
(States that have been highlighted in gray DO NOT have enhanced penalties for gang crimes.)
STATE TERM(S) DEFINITION ENUMERATED/ELUCIDATED VIOLATIONS
Montana
§ 45-8-405
New Jersey
§ 2C:33-29
North Carolina
§ 14-50.16
Pattern of
criminal street
gang activity
“the commission, solicitation, conspiracy, or attempt, the adjudication as a
delinquent youth for the commission, attempt, or solicitation, or the conviction
of two or more of the offenses listed in subsection (2) within a three-year period
which offenses were committed on separate occasions”
Gang criminality “A person is guilty of the crime of gang criminality if, while knowingly involved in
criminal street gang activity, he commits, attempts to commit, or conspires to
commit, whether as a principal or an accomplice, any crime specified in . . . A
crime is committed while involved in a criminal street gang-related activity if the
crime was committed for the benefit of, at the direction of, or in association with
a criminal street gang”
Criminal street
gang activity
“to commit, to attempt to commit, or to solicit, coerce, or intimidate another
person to commit an act or acts, with the specific intent that such act or acts
were intended or committed for the purpose, or in furtherance, of the person’s
involvement in a criminal street gang or street gang. An act or acts are included
if accompanied by the necessary mens rea or criminal intent and would be
chargeable by indictment under the following laws of this State”
• Deliberate homicide
• Assault with a weapon
• Intimidation
• Kidnapping
• Aggravated kidnapping
• Robbery
• Sexual intercourse without consent
• Aggravated promotion of prostitution
• Criminal mischief
• Arson
• Burglary
• Theft
• Forgery
• Tampering with witnesses and informants
• Bringing armed men into the state
• Unlawful possession of a firearm by a convicted person
• Carrying a concealed weapon
• Possession of a deadly weapon by a prisoner
• Possession of a destructive device
• Possession of explosives
• Possession of a sawed-off firearm
• Sale, possession for sale, transportation, manufacture, offer for sale, offer to
manufacture, or other offense involving a dangerous drug
• Use of threat to coerce criminal street gang membership or use of violence
to coerce criminal street gang membership
any crime specified in chapters 11 through 18, 20, 33, 35 or 37 of Title 2C of
the New Jersey Statutes; N.J.S.2C:34-1; N.J.S.2C:39-3; N.J.S.2C:39-4; section 1
of P.L.1998, c.26 (C.2C:39-4.1); N.J.S.2C:39-9
“(1) Any offense under Article 5 of Chapter 90 of the General Statutes
(Controlled Substances Act).
(2) Any offense under Chapter 14 of the General Statutes except Articles 9,
22A, 40, 46, 47, 59 thereof; and further excepting G.S. 14-78.1, 14-82,
14-86, 14-145, 14-179, 14-183, 14-184, 14-186, 14-190.9, 14-195, 14-197,
14-201, 14-247, 14-248, 14-313 thereof.”

Brief Review of State Definitions of Gang Crime
National Gang Center Page 23 of 34 December 2016
(States that have been highlighted in gray DO NOT have enhanced penalties for gang crimes.)
STATE TERM(S) DEFINITION ENUMERATED/ELUCIDATED VIOLATIONS
North Carolina
§ 14-50.16
North Dakota
§ 12.1-06.2-01
Pattern of
criminal street
gang activity
Predicate gang
crime
“engaging in, and having a conviction for, at least two prior incidents of criminal
street gang activity, that have the same or similar purposes, results, accomplices,
victims, or methods of commission or otherwise are interrelated by common
characteristics and are not isolated and unrelated incidents, provided that at
least one of these offenses occurred after December 1, 2008, and the last of the
offenses occurred within three years, excluding any periods of imprisonment, of
prior criminal street gang activity. Any offenses committed by a defendant prior
to indictment for an offense based upon a pattern of street gang activity shall
not be used as the basis for any subsequent indictments for offenses involving a
pattern of street gang activity”
“the commission, attempted commission, or solicitation of any felony,
misdemeanor crime of violence, or misdemeanor crime of pecuniary gain”
• “crime of violence means any violation of state law where a person
purposely or knowingly causes or threatens to cause death or physical bodily
injury to another person or persons”
• “crime of pecuniary gain means any violation of state law that directly results
or was intended to result in the defendant alone, or in association with others,
receiving income, benefit, property, money, or anything of value”

Brief Review of State Definitions of Gang Crime
National Gang Center Page 24 of 34 December 2016
(States that have been highlighted in gray DO NOT have enhanced penalties for gang crimes.)
STATE TERM(S) DEFINITION ENUMERATED/ELUCIDATED VIOLATIONS
Ohio
§ 2923.41
Pattern of
criminal gang
activity
“persons in the criminal gang have committed, attempted to commit, conspired
to commit, been complicitors in the commission of, or solicited, coerced, or
intimidated another to commit, attempt to commit, conspire to commit, or be in
complicity in the commission of two or more of any of the following offenses”
• A felony or an act committed by a juvenile that would be a felony if
committed by an adult
• An offense of violence or an act committed by a juvenile that would be an
offense of violence if committed by an adult
• A violation of section 2907.04 (Unlawful Sexual Conduct with Minor),
2909.06 (Sexual Imposition), 2911.211 (Aggravated Trespass), 2917.04
(Failure to Disperse), 2919.23 (Interference with Custody), or 2919.24
(Contributing to Unruliness or Delinquency of a Child) of the Revised Code,
section 2921.04 (Intimidation of Attorney, Victim or Witness in Criminal
Case), or 2923.16 (Improperly Handling Firearms in a Motor Vehicle) of the
Revised Code, section 2925.03 (Trafficking in Drugs), of the Revised Code if
the offense is trafficking in marijuana, or section 2927.12 (Ethnic
Intimidation) of the Revised Code
There is a “pattern of criminal gang activity” if all of the following apply with
respect to the offenses that are listed in division (B)(1)(a), (b), or (c) of this
section and that persons in the criminal gang committed, attempted to
commit, conspired to commit, were in complicity in committing, or solicited,
coerced, or intimidated another to commit, attempt to commit, conspire to
commit, or be in complicity in committing:
• At least one of the two or more offenses is a felony
• At least one of those two or more offenses occurs on or after January 1, 1999
• The last of those two or more offenses occurs within five years after at least
one of those offenses
• The two or more offenses are committed on separate occasions or by two
or more persons

Brief Review of State Definitions of Gang Crime
National Gang Center Page 25 of 34 December 2016
(States that have been highlighted in gray DO NOT have enhanced penalties for gang crimes.)
STATE TERM(S) DEFINITION ENUMERATED/ELUCIDATED VIOLATIONS
Oklahoma
21 Okl. St. 856
Criminal acts “criminal street gang means . . . and requires as a condition of membership . . .
the commission of one or more of the following criminal acts:”
1. Assault, battery, or assault and battery with a deadly weapon, as defined
in Section 645 of this title;
2. Aggravated assault and battery as defined by Section 646 of this title;
3. Robbery by force or fear, as defined in Sections 791 through 797 of this
title;
4. Robbery or attempted robbery with a dangerous weapon or imitation
firearm, as defined by Section 801 of this title;
5. Unlawful homicide or manslaughter, as defined in Sections 691 through
722 of this title;
6. The sale, possession for sale, transportation, manufacture, offer for sale,
or offer to manufacture controlled dangerous substances, as defined in
Section 2-101 et seq. of Title 63 of the Oklahoma Statutes;
7. Trafficking in illegal drugs, as provided for in the Trafficking in Illegal Drugs
Act, Section 2-414 of Title 63 of the Oklahoma Statutes;
8. Arson, as defined in Sections 1401 through 1403 of this title;
9. The influence or intimidation of witnesses and jurors, as defined in
Sections 388, 455 and 545 of this title;
10. Theft of any vehicle, as described in Section 1720 of this title;
11. Rape, as defined in Section 1111 of this title;
12. Extortion, as defined in Section 1481 of this title;
13. Transporting a loaded firearm in a motor vehicle, in violation of Section
1289.13 of this title;
14. Possession of a concealed weapon, as defined by Section 1289.8 of this title;
or
15. Shooting or discharging a firearm, as defined by Section 652 of this title.

Brief Review of State Definitions of Gang Crime
National Gang Center Page 26 of 34 December 2016
(States that have been highlighted in gray DO NOT have enhanced penalties for gang crimes.)
STATE TERM(S) DEFINITION ENUMERATED/ELUCIDATED VIOLATIONS
South Carolina
§ 16-8-230
South Dakota
§ 22-10A-1
Tennessee
§ 40-35-121
Pattern of
criminal gang
activity
Pattern of street
gang activity
Pattern of
criminal gang
activity
“the commission or attempted commission of, commission as an accessory
before or after the fact to, or solicitation or conspiracy to commit, by a criminal
gang member, while knowingly and actively participating in criminal gang
activity, four or more . . . offenses occurring within a two-year period, provided
that at least three of these offenses occurred after July 1, 2007”
“the commission, attempted commission, or solicitation by any member or
members of a street gang of two or more felony or violent misdemeanor
offenses on separate occasions within a three-year period for the purpose of
furthering gang activity”
“Prior convictions for the commission or attempted commission of, facilitation
of, solicitation of, or conspiracy to commit”
• A violent offense as defined in Section 16-1-60 committed as a part of
criminal gang activity
• Financial transaction card crimes as defined in Chapter 14 of Title 16
committed as a part of criminal gang activity
• First-degree lynching as defined in Section 16-3-210 committed as a part of
criminal gang activity
• Second-degree lynching as defined in Section 16-3-220 committed as a part
of criminal gang activity
• Breaking into a motor vehicle as defined in Section 16-13-160 committed as
a part of criminal gang activity
• Grand larceny as defined in Section 16-13-30 committed as a part of criminal
gang activity
• Blackmail as defined in Section 16-17-640 committed as a part of criminal
gang activity
• Malicious injury to property as defined in Sections 16-11-510, 16-11-520,
16-11-530, and 16-11-535 committed as a part of criminal gang activity
• Drug offense as defined in Sections 44-53-370 and 44-53-375 committed as
a part of criminal gang activity
• Harassment, stalking, or aggravated stalking as defined in Article 17, Chapter
3 of Title 16 committed as a part of criminal gang activity
• Pointing a firearm at any person as defined in Section 16-23-410 committed
as a part of criminal gang activity
• Discharging a firearm at or into dwellings, structures, enclosures, vehicles,
or equipment as defined in Section 16-23-440 committed as a part of
criminal gang activity
• The common law offense of assault and battery of a high and aggravated
nature committed as a part of criminal gang activity
• The common law offense of obstruction of justice committed as a part of
criminal gang activity
N/A
• Two (2) or more criminal gang offenses that are classified as felonies; or
• Three (3) or more criminal gang offenses that are classified as misdemeanors;
or
• One (1) or more criminal gang offenses that are classified as felonies and
two (2) or more criminal gang offenses that are classified as misdemeanors;
and

Brief Review of State Definitions of Gang Crime
National Gang Center Page 27 of 34 December 2016
(States that have been highlighted in gray DO NOT have enhanced penalties for gang crimes.)
STATE TERM(S) DEFINITION ENUMERATED/ELUCIDATED VIOLATIONS
Tennessee
§ 40-35-121
(continued)
• The criminal gang offenses are committed on separate occasions; and
• The criminal gang offenses are committed within a five-year period
• “Criminal gang offense” means
• (A) A criminal offense committed prior to July 1, 2013, that:
• (i) During the perpetration of which the defendant knowingly causes, or
threatens to cause, death or bodily injury to another person or persons and
specifically includes rape of a child, aggravated rape and rape; or
• (ii) Results, or was intended to result, in the defendant’s receiving income,
benefit, property, money or anything of value from the commission of any
aggravated burglary, or from the illegal sale, delivery, or manufacture of a
controlled substance, controlled substance analogue, or firearm; or
• (B) The commission or attempted commission, facilitation of, solicitation of, or
conspiracy to commit any of the following offenses on or after July 1, 2013:
• (i) First-degree murder, as defined in § 39-13-202;
• (ii) Second-degree murder, as defined in § 39-13-210;
• (iii) Voluntary manslaughter, as defined in § 39-13-211;
• (iv) Assault, as defined in § 39-13-101;
• (v) Aggravated assault, as defined in § 39-13-102;
• (vi) Kidnapping, as defined in § 39-13-303;
• (vii) Aggravated kidnapping, as defined in § 39-13-304;
• (viii) Especially aggravated kidnapping, as defined in § 39-13-305;
• (ix) Robbery, as defined in § 39-13-401;
• (x) Aggravated robbery, as defined in § 39-13-402;
• (xi) Especially aggravated robbery, as defined in § 39-13-403;
• (xii) Carjacking, as defined in § 39-13-404;
• (xiii) Rape, as defined in § 39-13-503;
• (xiv) Aggravated rape, as defined in § 39-13-502;
• (xv) Rape of a child, as defined in § 39-13-522;
• (xvi) Aggravated burglary, as defined in § 39-14-403;
• (xvii) Especially aggravated burglary, as defined in § 39-14-404;
• (xviii) Aggravated criminal trespass, as defined in § 39-14-406;
• (xix) Coercion of witness, as defined in § 39-16-507;
• (xx) Retaliation for past action, as defined in § 39-16-510;
• (xxi) Riot, as defined in § 39-17-302;
• (xxii) Aggravated riot, as defined in § 39-17-303;
• (xxiii) Inciting to riot, as defined in § 39-17-304;
• (xxiv) The illegal sale, delivery or manufacture of a controlled substance or
controlled substance analogue, as defined in §§ 39-17-417 and 39-17-454;

Brief Review of State Definitions of Gang Crime
National Gang Center Page 28 of 34 December 2016
(States that have been highlighted in gray DO NOT have enhanced penalties for gang crimes.)
STATE TERM(S) DEFINITION ENUMERATED/ELUCIDATED VIOLATIONS
Tennessee
§ 40-35-121
(continued)
Texas
Fam. Code
§ 54.0491
Utah
§ 78A-6-1202
Utah
§ 76-9-802
Gang-related
conduct
“conduct that violates a penal law of the grade of Class B misdemeanor or higher
and in which a child engages with the intent to:
• further the criminal activities of a criminal street gang of which the child is a
member;
• gain membership in a criminal street gang; or
• avoid detection as a member of a criminal street gang”
Gang activity “any criminal activity that is conducted as part of an organized youth gang. It
includes any criminal activity that is done in concert with other gang members,
or done alone if it is to fulfill gang purposes. ‘Gang activity’ does not include
graffiti”
Pattern of
criminal gang
activity
“committing, attempting to commit, conspiring to commit, or soliciting the
commission of two or more predicate gang crimes within five years; the
predicate gang crimes are: committed by two or more persons; or committed
by an individual at the direction of, or in association with a criminal street gang;
and the criminal activity was committed with the specific intent to promote,
further, or assist in any criminal conduct by members of the criminal street gang”
• (xxv) Possession of a controlled substance or controlled substance analogue
with intent to sell, deliver, or manufacture, as defined in § 39-17-417(a)(4)
and § 39 17-454;
• (xxvi) Unlawful carrying or possession of a weapon, as defined in
§ 39-17-1307;
• (xxvii) Trafficking for commercial sex acts, as defined in § 39-13-309.
• As used in this subsection (a), “prior conviction” means a criminal gang
offense for which a criminal gang member was convicted prior to the
commission of the instant criminal gang offense by the defendant and
includes convictions occurring prior to July 1, 1997. “Prior conviction”
includes convictions under the laws of any other state, government, or
country which, if committed in this state, would have constituted a criminal
gang offense. In the event that a conviction from a jurisdiction other than
Tennessee is not specifically named the same as a criminal gang offense, the
elements of the offense in the other jurisdiction shall be used by the
Tennessee court to determine if the offense is a criminal gang offense
• Convictions for multiple criminal gang offenses committed as part of a single
course of conduct within twenty-four (24) hours are not committed on
“separate occasions.” However, acts which constitute criminal gang
offenses under subdivision (a)(3)(A) shall not be construed to be a single
course of conduct
N/A
N/A
“Predicate gang crime” means any of the following offenses:
• Title 41, Chapter 1a, Motor Vehicle Act: Section 41-1a-1313, regarding
possession of a motor vehicle without an identification number
• Section 41-1a-1315, regarding false evidence of title and registration
• Section 41-1a-1316, regarding receiving or transferring stolen vehicles
• Section 41-1a-1317, regarding selling or buying a motor vehicle without an
identification number; or

Brief Review of State Definitions of Gang Crime
National Gang Center Page 29 of 34 December 2016
(States that have been highlighted in gray DO NOT have enhanced penalties for gang crimes.)
STATE TERM(S) DEFINITION ENUMERATED/ELUCIDATED VIOLATIONS
Utah
§ 76-9-802
(continued)
• Section 41-1a-1318, regarding the fraudulent alteration of an identification
number
Any criminal violation of the following provisions:
• Title 58, Chapter 37, Utah Controlled Substances Act
• Title 58, Chapter 37a, Utah Drug Paraphernalia Act
• Title 58, Chapter 37b, Imitation Controlled Substances Act; or
• Title 58, Chapter 37c, Utah Controlled Substance Precursor Act
• Sections 76-5-102 through 76-5-103.5, which address assault offenses
• Title 76, Chapter 5, Part 2, Criminal Homicide
• Sections 76-5-301 through 76-5-304, which address kidnapping and related
offenses
• Any felony offense under Title 76, Chapter 5, Part 4, Sexual Offenses;
• Title 76, Chapter 6, Part 1, Property Destruction
• Title 76, Chapter 6, Part 2, Burglary and Criminal Trespass
• Title 76, Chapter 6, Part 3, Robbery
• Any felony offense under Title 76, Chapter 6, Part 4, Theft, or under Title 76,
Chapter 6, Part 6, Retail Theft, except Sections 76-6-404.5, 76-6-405,
76-6-407, 76-6-408, 76-6-409, 76-6-409.1, 76-6-409.3, 76-6-409.6, 76-6-409.7,
76-6-409.8, 76-6-409.9, 76-6-410, and 76-6-410.5
• Title 76, Chapter 6, Part 5, Fraud, except Sections 76-6-504, 76-6-505,
76-6-507, 76-6-508, 76-6-509, 76-6-510, 76-6-511, 76-6-512, 76-6-513,
76-6-514, 76-6-516, 76-6-517, 76-6-518, and 76-6-520
• Title 76, Chapter 6, Part 11, Identity Fraud Act
• Title 76, Chapter 8, Part 3, Obstructing Governmental Operations, except
Sections 76-8-302, 76-8-303, 76-8-304, 76-8-307, 76-8-308, and 76-8-312
• Section 76-8-508, which includes tampering with a witness; Section
76-8-508.3, which includes retaliation against a witness or victim
• Section 76-8-509, which includes extortion or bribery to dismiss a criminal
proceeding
• Title 76, Chapter 10, Part 3, Explosives
• Title 76, Chapter 10, Part 5, Weapons
• Title 76, Chapter 10, Part 15, Bus Passenger Safety Act
• Title 76, Chapter 10, Part 16, Pattern of Unlawful Activity Act
• Section 76-10-1801, which addresses communications fraud
• Title 76, Chapter 10, Part 19, Money Laundering and Currency Transaction
Reporting Act; or
• Section 76-10-2002, which addresses burglary of a research facility

Brief Review of State Definitions of Gang Crime
National Gang Center Page 30 of 34 December 2016
(States that have been highlighted in gray DO NOT have enhanced penalties for gang crimes.)
STATE TERM(S) DEFINITION ENUMERATED/ELUCIDATED VIOLATIONS
Utah
§ 76-9-802
(continued)
Virginia
§ 18.2-46.1
Criminal Street
Gang
"Criminal street gang" means any ongoing organization, association, or group of
three or more persons, whether formal or informal, (i) which has as one of its
primary objectives or activities the commission of one or more criminal activities;
(ii) which has an identifiable name or identifying sign or symbol; and (iii) whose
members individually or collectively have engaged in the commission of, attempt
to commit, conspiracy to commit, or solicitation of two or more predicate
criminal acts, at least one of which is an act of violence, provided such acts were
not part of a common act or transaction.
“Predicate gang crime” also includes:
• Any state or federal criminal offense that by its nature involves a substantial
risk that physical force may be used against another in the course of
committing the offense; and
• Any felony violation of a criminal statute of any other state, the United
States, or any district, possession, or territory of the United States which
would constitute a violation of any offense in Subsection (4)(a) if committed
in this state
Predicate criminal act means
• An act of violence
• Any violation of §18.2-42 (Assault or Battery by a Mob), 18.2-46.3
(Recruitment of Persons for Criminal Street Gang; Penalty), 18.2-51
(Shooting, Stabbing, Etc., with Intent to Maim, Kill, Etc.), 18.2-51.1
(Malicious Bodily Injury to Law-Enforcement Officers, Firefighters, Search
and Rescue Personnel, or Emergency Medical Service Providers; Penalty;
Lesser-Included Offense), 18.2-51.2 (Aggravated Malicious Wounding;
Penalty), 18.2-51.3 (Prohibition Against Reckless Endangerment of Others by
Throwing Objects from Places Higher than One Story; Penalty), 18.2-51.6
(Strangulation of Another; Penalty), 18.2-52 (Malicious Bodily Injury by
Means of any Caustic Substance or Agent or Use of any Explosive or Fire),
18.2-52.1 (Possession of Infectious Biological Substances or Radiological
Agents; Penalties), 18.2-53 (Shooting, Etc., in Committing or Attempting a
Felony), 18.2-55 (Bodily Injuries Caused by Prisoners, State Juvenile
Probationers and State and Local Adult Probationers or Adult Parolees),
18.2-56.1 (Reckless Handling of Firearms; Reckless Handling While Hunting),
18.2-57 (Assault and Battery), 18.2-57.2 (Assault and Battery Against a
Family or Household Member; Penalty), 18.2-59 (Extorting Money, Etc., by
Threats), 18.2-83 (Threats to Bomb or Damage Buildings or Means of
Transportation; False Information as to Danger to Such Buildings, etc.;
Punishment; Venue), 18.2-89 (Burglary; How Punished), 18.2-90 (Entering
Dwelling House, etc., with Intent to Commit Murder, Rape, Robbery or
Arson; Penalty), 18.2-95 (Grand Larceny Defined; How Punished), 18.2-108.1
(Receipt of Stolen Firearm), 18.2-121 (Entering Property of Another for
Purpose of Damaging it, Etc), 18.2-127 (Injuries to Churches, Church
Property, Cemeteries, Burial Grounds, Etc.; Penalty), 18.2-128 (Trespass
upon Church or School Property), 18.2-137 (Injuring, Etc., Any Property,
Monument, Etc), 18.2-138 (Damaging Public Buildings, Etc.; Penalty),
18.2-146 (Breaking, Injuring, Defacing, Destroying or Preventing the
Operation of Vehicle, Aircraft or Boat), 18.2-147 (Entering or Setting in

Brief Review of State Definitions of Gang Crime
National Gang Center Page 31 of 34 December 2016
(States that have been highlighted in gray DO NOT have enhanced penalties for gang crimes.)
STATE TERM(S) DEFINITION ENUMERATED/ELUCIDATED VIOLATIONS
Virginia
§ 18.2-46.1
(continued)
Motion, Vehicle, Aircraft, Boat, Locomotive or Rolling Stock of Railroad;
Exceptions), § 18.2-248.01 (Transporting Controlled Substances Into the
Commonwealth; Penalty), 18.2-248.03 (Manufacturing, Selling, Giving,
Distributing, or Possessing with Intent to Manufacture, Sell, Give, or
Distribute Methamphetamine; Penalty), 18.2-255 (Distribution of Certain
Drugs to Persons Under 18 Prohibited; Penalty), 18.2-255.2 (Prohibiting the
Sale or Manufacture of Drugs on or Near Certain Properties; Penalty),
18.2-279 (Discharging Firearms or Missiles within or at Building or Dwelling
House; Penalty), 18.2-282.1 (Brandishing a Machete or Other Bladed
Weapon with Intent to Intimidate; Penalty),18.2-286.1 (Shooting from
Vehicles so as to Endanger Persons; Penalty), 18.2-287.4 (Carrying Loaded
Firearms in Public Areas Prohibited; Penalty), 18.2-289 (Use of Machine Gun
for Crime of Violence), 18.2-300 (Possession or Use of “Sawed-off” Shotgun
or Rifle), 18.2-308.1 (Possession of Firearm, Stun Weapon, or Other Weapon
on School Property Prohibited), 18.2-308.2 (Possession or Transportation of
Firearms, Firearms Ammunition, Stun Weapons, Explosives or Concealed
Weapons by Convicted Felons; Penalties; Petition for Permit; When Issued),
18.2-308.2:01 (Possession or Transportation of Certain Firearms by Certain
Persons), 18.2-308.4 (Possession of Firearms While in Possession of Certain
Substances), 18.2-355 (Taking, detaining, etc., person for prostitution, etc.,
or consenting thereto), 18.2-356 (Receiving Money for Procuring Person),
18.2-357 (Receiving money from earnings of male or female prostitute), or
18.2-357.1 (Commercial sex trafficking; penalties)
• A felony violation of § 18.2-60.3 (Stalking; Penalty);
• A felony violation of § 18.2-248 (Manufacturing, Selling, Giving, Distributing,
or Possessing with Intent to Manufacture, Sell, Give, or Distribute a
Controlled Substance or an Imitation Controlled Substance Prohibited;
Penalties) or of § 18.2-248.1 (Penalties for Sale, Gift, Distribution or
Possession with Intent to Sell, Give or Distribute Marijuana) or a conspiracy
to commit a felony violation of § 18.2-248 (Manufacturing, Selling, Giving,
Distributing, or Possessing with Intent to Manufacture, Sell, Give, or
Distribute a Controlled Substance or an Imitation Controlled Substance
Prohibited; Penalties) or 18.2-248.1 (Penalties for Sale, Gift, Distribution or
Possession with Intent to Sell, Give or Distribute Marijuana);
• Any violation of a local ordinance adopted pursuant to § 15.2-1812.2 (Willful
and Malicious Damage to or Defacement of Public or Private Facilities;
Penalty); or
• Any substantially similar offense under the laws of another state or territory
of the United States, the District of Columbia, or the United States

Brief Review of State Definitions of Gang Crime
National Gang Center Page 32 of 34 December 2016
(States that have been highlighted in gray DO NOT have enhanced penalties for gang crimes.)
STATE TERM(S) DEFINITION ENUMERATED/ELUCIDATED VIOLATIONS
Washington
§ 9.94A.030
Washington
§ 9.94A.030
Criminal street
gang-related
offense
Pattern of
criminal street
gang activity
“any felony or misdemeanor offense, whether in this state or elsewhere, that is
committed for the benefit of, at the direction of, or in association with any
criminal street gang, or is committed with the intent to promote, further, or
assist in any criminal conduct by the gang, or is committed for one or more of
the following reasons”
“the commission, attempt, conspiracy, or solicitation of, or any prior juvenile
adjudication of or adult conviction of, two or more of the following criminal
street gang-related offenses: . . .; that at least one of the offenses . . . shall have
occurred after July 1, 2008; that the most recent committed offense . . . occurred
within three years of a prior offense . . .; and of the offenses that were committed
. . ., the offenses occurred on separate occasions or were committed by two or
more persons”
• To gain admission, prestige, or promotion within the gang
• To increase or maintain the gang’s size, membership, prestige, dominance,
or control in any geographical area
• To exact revenge or retribution for the gang or any member of the gang
• To obstruct justice, or intimidate or eliminate any witness against the gang
or any member of the gang
• To directly or indirectly cause any benefit, aggrandizement, gain, profit, or
other advantage for the gang, its reputation, influence, or membership
• To provide the gang with any advantage in, or any control or dominance over
any criminal market sector, including, but not limited to, manufacturing,
delivering, or selling any controlled substance (chapter 69.50 RCW); arson
(chapter 9A.48 RCW); trafficking in stolen property (chapter 9A.82 RCW);
promoting prostitution (chapter 9A.88 RCW); human trafficking (RCW
9A.40.100); promoting commercial sexual abuse of a minor (RCW
9.68A.101); or promoting pornography (chapter 9.68 RCW)
• Any “serious violent” felony offense as defined in RCW 9.94A.030, excluding
Homicide by Abuse (RCW 9A.32.055) and Assault of a Child 1 (RCW
9A.36.120)
• Any “violent” offense as defined by RCW 9.94A.030, excluding Assault of a
Child 2 (RCW 9A.36.130)
• Delivery or Possession with Intent to Deliver a Controlled Substance (chapter
69.50 RCW)
• Any violation of the firearms and dangerous weapon act (chapter 9.41 RCW)
• Theft of a Firearm (RCW 9A.56.300)
• Possession of a Stolen Firearm (RCW 9A.56.310)
• Malicious Harassment (RCW 9A.36.080)
• Harassment where a subsequent violation or deadly threat is made (RCW
9A.46.020(2)(b))
• Criminal Gang Intimidation (RCW 9A.46.120)
• Any felony conviction by a person eighteen years of age or older with a
special finding of involving a juvenile in a felony offense under section 302
of this act
• Residential Burglary (RCW 9A.52.025)
• Burglary 2 (RCW 9A.52.030)
• Malicious Mischief 1 (RCW 9A.48.070)
• Malicious Mischief 2 (RCW 9A.48.080)
• Theft of a Motor Vehicle (RCW 9A.56.065)
• Possession of a Stolen Motor Vehicle (RCW 9A.56.068)

Brief Review of State Definitions of Gang Crime
National Gang Center Page 33 of 34 December 2016
(States that have been highlighted in gray DO NOT have enhanced penalties for gang crimes.)
STATE TERM(S) DEFINITION ENUMERATED/ELUCIDATED VIOLATIONS
Washington
§ 9.94A.030
(continued)
Wisconsin
§ 941.38
Pattern of
criminal gang
activity
“the commission of, attempt to commit or solicitation to commit one or more of
the following crimes, or acts that would be crimes if the actor were an adult,
committed for the benefit of, at the direction of or in association with any
criminal gang, with the specific intent to promote, further or assist in any criminal
conduct by criminal gang members”
• Taking a Motor Vehicle Without Permission 1 (RCW 9A.56.070)
• Taking a Motor Vehicle Without Permission 2 (RCW 9A.56.075)
• Extortion 1 (RCW 9A.56.120)
• Extortion 2 (RCW 9A.56.130)
• Intimidating a Witness (RCW 9A.72.110)
• Tampering with a Witness (RCW 9A.72.120)
• Reckless Endangerment (RCW 9A.36.050)
• Coercion (RCW 9A.36.070)
• Harassment (RCW 9A.46.020)
• Malicious Mischief 3 (RCW 9A.48.090)
• Manufacture, distribution, or delivery of a controlled substance or
controlled substance analog
• First-degree intentional homicide
• Second-degree intentional homicide
• Battery
• Battery, special circumstances
• Battery or threat to witness
• Mayhem
• Sexual assault
• False imprisonment
• Taking hostages
• Kidnapping
• Intimidation of witnesses
• Intimidation of victims
• Criminal damage to property
• Criminal damage to or threat to criminally damage the property of a witness
• Arson of buildings or damage by explosives
• Burglary
• Theft
• Taking, driving, or operating a vehicle, or removing a part or component of
a vehicle, without the owner’s consent
• Robbery
• Sexual assault of a child
• Repeated acts of sexual assault of the same child
• A crime under s. 943.81, 943.82, 943.83, 943.85, 943.86, 943.87, 943.88,
943.89, or 943.90 or, if the victim is a financial institution, as defined in
s. 943.80 (2), a crime under s. 943.84 (1) or (2)
• Sexual assault of a child placed in substitute care

Brief Review of State Definitions of Gang Crime
National Gang Center Page 34 of 34 December 2016
(States that have been highlighted in gray DO NOT have enhanced penalties for gang crimes.)
STATE TERM(S) DEFINITION ENUMERATED/ELUCIDATED VIOLATIONS
Wyoming
§ 6-1-104
Pattern of
criminal street
gang activity
“the commission of, conviction or adjudication for or solicitation, conspiracy or
attempt to commit two (2) or more . . . offenses . . . on separate occasions within
a three (3) year period”
Offenses that form a pattern of criminal street gang activity include:
• A violent felony as defined in paragraph (xii) of this subsection
• Promoting prostitution in violation of W.S. 6-4-103
• Felony property destruction and defacement in violation of W.S. 6-3-201
and punishable under W.S. 6-3-201(b)(iii)
• Theft in violation of W.S. 6-3-402
• Wrongful taking or disposing of property in violation of W.S. 6-3-403
• Forgery in violation of W.S. 6-3-602
• Influencing, intimidating or impeding jurors, witnesses and officers, or
obstructing or impeding justice in violation of W.S. 6-5-305
• Possession of a firearm by a person convicted of certain felony offenses in
violation of W.S. 6-8-102
• Wearing or carrying concealed weapons in violation of W.S. 6-8-104
• Possession, manufacture or disposition of a deadly weapon with unlawful
intent in violation of W.S. 6-8-103
• Blackmail in violation of W.S. 6-2-402
• Possession, manufacture, transportation and sale of any explosive,
improvised explosive device or incendiary apparatus with unlawful intent in
violation of W.S. 6-3-111
• Sports bribery in violation of W.S. 6-3-609
• Aggravated cruelty to animals in violation of W.S. 6-3-203(c)
• The unlawful sale or possession with intent to manufacture, distribute or
dispense a controlled substance in violation of W.S. 35-7-1031
• Simple assault in violation of W.S. 6-2-501(a)
• Battery in violation of W.S. 6-2-501(b)

Page 86 of 110

Attachment B
Getting Out of Gangs;
Staying Out of Gangs
Page 87 of 110

Bureau of Justice Assistance
U.S. Department of Justice
National Gang Center Bulletin
No. 81 February January 2013 2007
Getting Out of Gangs, Staying Out of Gangs:
Gang intervention and Desistence Stategies
Michelle Arciaga Young, National Gang Center
Victor Gonzalez, Houston Mayor’s Anti-Gang Office
Introduction
Adults working with gang-involved clients often have
questions about the reasons that individuals remain
involved in gangs long-term, and how they can assist
teenagers and young adults with leaving the gang. This
article describes the pivotal life points at which targeted
gang interventions may have increased effectiveness,
and recommendations for strategies.
A considerable amount of gang research over the
past 30 years has identified factors leading to gang
membership, including specific “pushes” and “pulls”
that influence an individual’s decision to join a gang.
Individuals may be pushed into gangs because of
negative outside factors, barriers, and conditions
in their social environment such as poverty, family
problems, and lack of success in school. At the same
time, they may also be pulled into gangs because the
gang offers a perceived benefit (Decker and Van Winkle,
1996) such as safety/protection, love and support,
excitement, financial opportunities, and a sense of
belonging.
Until recently, very few studies have examined the
factors that may contribute to an individual’s decision
to leave the gang (desistence). Longitudinal studies
in cities with emerging gang problems conclude that
turnover of membership in gangs is constant, and most
gang members report staying in the gang for one year or
less (Hill et al., 2001; Peterson et al., 2004; Thornberry et
al., 2003; Thornberry et al., 2004). Research with former
gang members indicates that marginal and short-term
gang members generally are able to leave the gang
without serious consequences (Decker and Lauritsen,
2002; Decker and Van Winkle, 1996). However, field
studies conducted on a smaller scale in Los Angeles
and Chicago in entrenched gang areas (Horowitz, 1983;
Moore, 1991) found that gang members remained in
gangs for a longer period of time and that the decision
to leave a gang is more complicated. The ability and
willingness of individuals to leave gangs appears to be
related to factors such as the longevity of an individual’s
participation in the gang, and how established and
severe the level of gang activity is in the community.
Even short-term gang involvement can have long-term
effects, including increased participation in crime,
school problems, decreased employment prospects,
1
exposure/involvement with drug and alcohol use/abuse,
and increased risk of victimization. As early as 1927,
researcher Frederick Thrasher noted that participation
in gangs reduces the gang member’s connections to
other mainstream social pursuits:
“. . . his conception of his role is more vivid with
reference to his gang than to other social groups.
Since he lives largely in the present, he conceives of
the part that he is playing in life as being in the gang;
his status with other groups is unimportant to him,
for the gang is his social world.” (1963/1927; p. 231)
This process has been referred to as “knifing off”
(Moffitt, 1993), as the gang member cuts ties to other
important social groups and organizations such as
family, friends, schools, and religious community to
focus more intensively on gang participation and
identity, leading to higher levels of delinquency.
Research conducted with 6th- to 9th-grade students
in 15 schools with reported gang problems found that
“the onset of gang membership was associated with an
82 percent increase in delinquency frequency.” (Melde
and Esbensen, 2011, p. 535)
As a gang member is pushed/pulled into the gang, the
experience of gang membership further separates him
from successful participation in mainstream society,
worsening the social conditions he experiences,
and escalating his involvement in crime. Long-term
gang membership is associated with an escalating
succession of effects such as dropping out of school,
increased risk of teen fatherhood/pregnancy, and
lack of employment success (Thornberry, et al., 2003;
Thornberry, et al., 2004). The longer an individual is
involved in gangs, the more severe the effect becomes,
and the greater the distance between the gang member
and the mainstream.
Why Gang Members Disengage:
Pushes Plus Pulls
Desistence research has similarly identified a set of
factors that may push or pull individuals out of gang
participation. Interviews with former gang members
in Fresno and Los Angeles, California, and St. Louis,
Missouri, found that both internal (pulls) and external
(pushes) factors, or a combination of pushes/pulls,
provided the impetus and opportunity to leave the

gang (Pyrooz and Decker, 2011). Push factors “make
persistence in that social environment unappealing,
they are viewed as ‘pushing’ the individual away from
the gang” (Decker and Pyrooz, 2011, p. 12). Pull factors,
alternatively, are “circumstances or situations that attract
individuals to alternative routes…toward new activities
and pathways” (Decker and Pyrooz, 2011, p. 12).
Most desistence studies note that the effects of
these pushes and pulls are cumulative. Former gang
members in Los Angeles noted that maturity, increased
family commitments, and peer victimization created
a snowballing effect which, in combination, led to
the decision to disengage from the gang (Vigil, 1998).
Research with gang members in St. Louis found that
exposure to gang-related violence involving the gang
member, his close friends, and/or family members led
the individual to renounce ties to the gang (Decker and
Lauritsen, 2002). Decker and Lauritsen note: “Familial
ties and victimization experiences were cited far
more often than institutional affiliations as reasons to
terminate the ties to the gang.” (2002, p. 58)
Increased family responsibilities and, in particular,
the birth of a child, also may provide an incentive for a
major lifestyle change for gang members: “For many
young men, fatherhood acts as a significant turning
point, facilitating a shift away from gang involvement,
crime and drug sales; a decline in substance abuse;
and engagement with education and legitimate
employment” (Moloney, et. al., 2009, p. 306).
Pushes
• Grew out of the gang
lifestyle
• Criminal justice system
Involvement
• Police harassment or
pressure
• Personal or vicarious
victimization
Decker and Lauritsen, 2011
Pulls
• Familial responsibilities
• Job responsibilities
• Significant other
• Moved
• Family left the gang
• Gang fell apart
factors that appear to influence gang desistence have
implications for gang intervention programming.
Using Gang Desistence Research
to Identify Leverage Points
Desistence research highlights crucial leverage points
in a gang member’s life that may lead him to reconsider
and end his gang membership. These experiences
include involvement with the criminal justice system,
negative contacts with law enforcement, victimization
by other gang members, periods of disruption of
the framework of the gang, and client maturation/
life change events such as a romantic relationship,
pregnancy, birth of a child, family health issues, etc.
(Decker and Lauritsen, 2002). Whether these points
occur abruptly or over a period of time, they influence
the client’s view of his own gang membership and its
value to him.
These leverage points provide an opportunity when
clients who have previously been committed to the gang
lifestyle may become more receptive to alternatives:
“Many of these gang members, though lacking
work opportunities and experience, aspire to lead a
“conventional life,” particularly to obtain legitimate
employment, to have their own place, and to
have a family. They are cognizant of their limited
educational background and lack of technical
training, and realize that their future employment
prospects lie in low-paid occupations unless
they can obtain further education. . .Where
they may once have been uninterested or
disdainful of various job-opportunity, training,
or educational programs, after fatherhood many
were increasingly desirous of such supports,
but sometimes found them difficult to access.”
(Moloney et al., 2009, p. 318).
Using these leverage points to focus gang
intervention activities may increase long-term
programmatic effectiveness.
Each individual who is involved in gangs has a
tolerance limit for the negative experiences connected
with his gang membership. When that limit is
reached, the negatives of gang membership start to
outweigh the positives (Pyrooz et al., 2010), and other
alternatives become more appealing. Decker and Pyrooz
note that:
“. . .many of the people interviewed talked about
how things eventually built up for them and
they had to find a new lifestyle—that the gang
lifestyle and its attendant pressures (arrests, being
stopped by the police, living under the threat of
victimization) just got to be too much for them.
These pressures, coupled with increasing family and
job responsibilities, laid the groundwork for getting
out of gang life.” (2011, p. 13)
While the combination of factors that lead to gang
desistence is different for each individual, the overall
Creating a Gang Desistence Plan
While the majority of desistence research has focused
on gang members’ reasons for leaving the gang,
research conducted with 91 gang-involved fathers
in San Francisco (Moloney et al., 2009) focused on
their long-term success at staying out of gang and
criminal involvement. The personal circumstances of
these research subjects demonstrate the long-term
negative effects of gang affiliation and separation from
mainstream pursuits:
“Less than half received a high-school diploma, and
more than one-quarter dropped out of school and
never returned. . .Close to half of the fathers had
jobs, although the overall median job income was
relatively low at U.S. $1,300 per month. Additional
income among gang fathers came from a variety
of sources, especially drug sales.” (Moloney et al.,
2009, p. 310).
2

While little research has been conducted on long-term
gang desistence strategies, more extensive research
on criminal and substance abuse desistence can help
to inform gang intervention strategies. Best practices
in those areas include removing barriers which may
keep the individual stuck in a life of gangs and crime
while simultaneously helping the individual to gain and
maintain “new adult roles and responsibilities” and
affirming these steps forward (Hussong et al., 2004).
Further, research by Moloney et al. (2009) provides
insights into components of interventions with gang
members that may increase long-term success with
desistence.
Gang interventionists can help gang members who are
seeking to leave the gang lifestyle by providing them
with accurate advice about transitioning out of gangs
and helping them design a plan for leaving the gang
lifestyle. This gang desistence plan should identify/
remove barriers and replace them with appropriate
opportunities to successfully reenter the mainstream
world.
Step 1: Remove barriers
Without a high school diploma, and with more street
skills than employment skills, the gang member who
decides to change his life may quickly run into barriers
to the noncriminal world. These barriers might include
lack of education and/or literacy, lack of employment
skills, lack of documents needed to work, unfamiliarity
with the methods of obtaining employment, unfamiliarity
with the protocols necessary to succeed on the job, and
personal issues such as anger management issues,
family conflict, mental health issues, and involvement
in substance abuse.
Interventionists should help gang-involved clients
identify and remove barriers that currently keep them
from leaving the gang and participating in prosocial
activities. These might include the following:
• Threat of violence from the gang
“Blood in, blood out” is a common phrase used by
street gangs to describe the process of entering
and leaving a gang, though it is rarely acted upon
in a fatal manner. It can be interpreted as follows:
gang members may shed their blood (during
the initiation) to get into the gang, and they are
frequently told that they have to shed their blood
to get out.
However, most individuals are able to leave their
gangs without the threat of violence. Interviews
conducted by Decker and Pyrooz (2011) with former
gang members found that the overwhelming
majority (91 percent) “just left their gang and did
not have to engage in any exceptional means to
quit” (p. 13).
In the worst cases, though, gang members are
threatened with death if they leave the gang. In
prison gangs, this threat of violence is occasionally
carried out. It also has been acted upon by street
gangs, and in some cases, gang members who
attempted to leave the gang have been threatened,
assaulted, and even killed. Any adult working with
gang members should be aware of the potential
risks and consequences, both to the gang member
and to his family, and ensure that any advice that
is given takes these risks into consideration. Gang
interventionists also should ensure that they are
familiar with local gangs, their rivalries, territories,
and current activities and conflicts.
Clients should be advised not to openly discuss
leaving the gang with their gang or its leaders, or
to participate in departure rituals such as getting
cliqued or jumped out. These approaches can
result in serious harm to the client. In most cases,
gradually disconnecting (fading away) from the
gang is the best approach. Gang interventionists
also must be careful not to share information
about the client’s plan with other gang members
or clients.
The risks posed to individual gang members vary
by community and individual, so interventionists
must carefully address the following considerations
with each client:
• Is the gang member or his family at risk of immediate
harm for cutting ties with the gang?
• Does his gang typically threaten or victimize
individuals who try to leave?
Based on the answers to these questions, the
interventionist should work with the client to
develop a plan for the client’s departure from the
gang. This plan should include the following steps:
• Avoid direct confrontations and making
statements about leaving the gang
• Spend less time with the gang/individual gang
members
• Focus on court/family/school/work responsibilities
• Practice refusal skills and excuses
• Notify interventionist/law enforcement in the
event of safety concerns
Adults can help gang members who are seeking
to leave the gang lifestyle by providing them with
accurate advice about transitioning out of gangs
and helping them design a plan for leaving the
gang.
Ideally, the client’s desistence plan should limit his
ability to spend time with other gang members by
increasing his participation in alternative activities
(job/school/spending time with family). It may also
include family or criminal justice sanctions such as
curfews, no-contact probation orders, electronic
monitoring, etc.
Clients also need coaching on making excuses if
they are directly confronted by the gang, using
family members to provide a barrier to gang
attempts to reach them, and on how to reach out to
interventionists and/or law enforcement if they are
3

directly or indirectly threatened. In some situations,
more extreme solutions such as moving or relocation
may be required to protect an individual from gang
retaliation or punishment
• External identification as a gang member
Gang symbols, clothing, tattoos, and other visual
cues can mark an individual as a gang member,
making the transition out of the gang more
difficult and dangerous. Gang attire and tattoos
pose barriers to educational and employment
opportunities and acceptance in mainstream
pursuits, and they also can lead to confrontations
with rivals and enemies.
The gang member should be asked to identify
clothes associated with the gang lifestyle and to
discard them. Highly visible gang tattoos also
should be identified, hidden, and considered for
removal or masking. The interventionist should
identify resources that can provide the gang
member with alternative clothing through the use
of vouchers, guided shopping trips, donations from
thrift stores and/or dry cleaners, and corporate
sponsors. A shopping trip with coaching by the
gang interventionist can provide the client with
guidance on work-appropriate clothing choices.
Partnering with local medical professionals or tattoo
removal facilities to perform free or low-cost tattoo
removals also can be helpful.
The interventionist should help the gang member
identify danger zones where rivals may be present
(on the bus, at school, on certain street corners,
in certain neighborhoods) and help the individual
develop an action plan to avoid encountering rival
gang members and/or to respond to an inadvertent
confrontation.
Long-term gang members with high-profile street
reputations are likely to experience more difficulties
with disengaging from the gang. The individual’s
history of gang involvement may include long list of
prior hostilities with rival gangs and participation in
violent crimes. As a result, rival gang members are
unlikely to stop pursuing their grievances against
the client simply because he has taken steps to
distance himself from his gang. Interventionists
need to spend time explaining this issue to the
client and working with law enforcement or criminal
justice agencies to assess the individual’s risk of
being targeted for retaliation to ensure that the
measures taken to disconnect the individual from
the gang will be safe. Public transportation, for
instance, may not be a safe option for some gang
members.
Even for less-involved gang members, proximity
to the gang or neighborhood may keep the
individual tied to gang activity, drug use, and crime.
Understanding and addressing the connection
between the individual, the gang, rival gang
members, and the community is crucial to effective
intervention.
Changing Self Image
Frank K. joined the JQA when he was 10 years old.
He had a poor relationship with his parents, and his
younger brother eventually joined the gang as well.
Frank K. gradually gained stature in the gang. By
age 19, he was given responsibility for recruitment
of new members and for ensuring that all of the
schools in the gang’s territory were controlled by
JQA members. His younger brother played a similar
role in the gang. In 2011, Frank K. was assaulted by
prison gang members in retaliation for a homicide
committed by JQA, and his home was burglarized
by the prison gang. As a result, Frank K. decided
to decrease his gang involvement to protect himself
and his family.
Frank K. met with a gang intervention specialist to
discuss his future goals. While he was confident
about his leadership skills in his gang, he was
unsure how to be a good father, boyfriend, and
role model to his brother. Over a period of months,
the interventionist worked with Frank to help
him identify changes he should make, including
removing gang tattoos, changing his style of dress,
and reducing the amount of time he spent with
the gang. Frank K. suffered a few setbacks during
this process, including being fired for having an
argument with another employee. However, the
interventionist continued to encourage Frank K’s
behavioral changes, meeting with him two to three
times a week to discuss his daily activities and
helping him change his behavior patterns. Prior
to each tattoo-removal session, Frank K. also met
with his interventionist to discuss the internal and
external changes he was making.
The interventionist also assisted Frank with
obtaining professional attire and feeling comfortable
in normal clothing. Once Frank became comfortable
with these changes, the interventionist took him
to an employment center where he received leads
about two jobs, both offering more money than he
was currently making. The employment counselor
told Frank K. that he was given the leads because
of his professional appearance and because he
appeared focused and goal-oriented during the
interview. This positive feedback increased Frank’s
self-confidence. He successfully interviewed for one
of the jobs and was hired.
Frank K. shared with his intervention counselor that
he felt like a normal person, not a gang member, at
the job interview, and that he feels he is learning to
function in mainstream society. Frank states that
he will keep making efforts because he wants his
son to see him as a good father, not a gang member
who passes on the gang lifestyle to his child. Frank
realizes that he has more changes to make and that
he has to be consistent in his new way of life.
4

• Internal identification as a gang member
Gang membership provides an individual with
an identity linked to aggression and violence.
Giordano, Schroeder, and Cernkovich (2007)
characterized this self-concept as an “anger
identity” and noted that individuals involved in
gangs came to view themselves as having low
levels of impulse control and a hair-trigger tendency
to resort to violence.
The gang member’s internal identity also may
include a script that describes what it means to
be a man/woman, methods of self-protection,
the role of the opposite sex, one’s standing in the
community, ways to obtain respect, and a view of
success. These scripts are shaped by the processes
of gang involvement and even may be survival
mechanisms. However, these internal scripts are
often incompatible with the prosocial changes that
the client wishes to make. The client’s desistence
plan should identify internal scripts that may pose a
barrier between the client and the mainstream, and
should devise strategies to change these scripts.
• Mental health/substance issues
Many gang-involved clients have untreated mental
health issues such as post traumatic stress disorder,
anger management issues, attention deficit
disorder, oppositional defiant disorder, etc. In
some cases, these clients may cope with untreated
mental health issues by using drugs and/or alcohol.
It is important for the gang interventionist to work
closely with the client to identify substance abuse/
mental health issues and then support the client
in dealing with these issues. Typically, the gang
interventionist is not a substance abuse treatment
provider, but interventionists should develop
relationships with local providers, learn about
available services, be able to explain the treatment
process and services to clients, help the client
access services, and “bridge” the client into these
services by providing transportation and going with
the client to initial meetings to provide support.
• Dependence on the gang for social support
For many clients, the gang serves as their primary
mechanism of social support. The gang represents
friendship, family, and community. When the client
leaves the gang, this source of love and support
is lost. Gang members in transition often have
difficulties developing new social connections to
replace their former gang associates. Addressing
this barrier will require the interventionist to
facilitate new sources of social support for the client,
including working with the family, identifying new
peer groups, and identifying a support network for
the client at school, at work, and in the community.
• Multigenerational Gang Families
Numerous studies have documented the existence
of multigenerational gang affiliation in entrenched
gang areas. In one study (Sanchez-Jankowski,
1991), 32 percent of the fathers of gang members
who were interviewed stated that their children
belonged to the same gang to which the fathers had
once belonged, and 11 percent stated that as many
as four generations had belonged to the same gang.
Miller (2001) found that 79 percent of the female
gang members she interviewed had at least one
family member involved in gangs, and 60 percent
had two or more family members involved in gangs.
In multigenerational gang families, interventions
with gang members who wish to leave the gang
can be extraordinarily difficult, because the
family may be antagonistic and unsupportive
toward the client’s efforts to change. In such
instances, residential programs outside the home
area that offer structured educational/vocational
opportunities, like the Job Corps program, may be
a helpful alternative.
Interventionists often find that gang members
experience multiple barriers to leaving the gang. The
desistence plan should prioritize the most serious
barriers first, and then work with gang members over
time to systematically address and/or remove these
barriers. In some rare instances, the danger to a gang
member attempting to leave the gang may be so great
that the individual is required to relocate outside the
local area or even to another state. If so, collaboration
with other local agencies, particularly law enforcement,
is vital to protect the individual’s safety.
Step 2: Help the client “gain and
maintain” adult responsibilities
• Help the client reenvision his personal identity
The development of internal gang-influenced
scripts was discussed earlier. To successfully leave
the gang and rejoin the mainstream, the client must
rewrite his internal identity, including methods of
handling conflict, gender identity, criminal behavior,
personal ethics, interpersonal relationships, and
sense of personal safety. This is a long-term
process. Gang interventionists can help the client
identify his “gang programming” and the ganginfluenced
scripts that are incompatible with his
goals, as well as rethink his programmed “gang”
responses to a variety of situations.
For instance, street-thinking would suggest a
violent response to perceived disrespect or criticism
to avoid losing face with violent peers. On the
job, however, the former gang member is going to
have to learn other methods for responding to his
boss and fellow employees if a conflict arises. To
support these changes, it may be helpful for the
client to participate in evidence-based therapeutic
interventions such as cognitive behavioral therapy
or aggression replacement therapy. These types
of programs address critical thinking errors and
interpersonal skill deficits while providing gang
members with new tools for handling difficult
situations as they reframe their self-images.
5

Ongoing coaching by interventionists is also
helpful to support these internal changes as the
client redefines his identity as a person, parent,
and member of the community. Instead of being
proud of his prowess in fighting, for instance, the
gang member can be encouraged to take pride as
a breadwinner and provider, good parent, positive
role model, and successful employee, among his
other positive responsibilities.
• Help the client set and achieve goals
Gang clients may be unclear about their personal
and professional goals and also may feel trapped
by the number of steps they must take in order to
reach those goals. Because of the quick pace and
fatalistic mentality of the gang lifestyle, gang clients
also may have difficulty being emotionally engaged
in long-term outcomes. A gang interventionist can
use techniques such as motivational interviewing
to help a client identify short-, medium-, and longterm
goals. Then the interventionist can help the
client break these goals down into manageable
tasks and walk the client through the process of
achieving these smaller goals.
For instance, a client whose long-term goal is to get
a job currently cannot do so because he does not
have a driver’s license. His short-term goal would
be to obtain a driver’s license. The interventionist
can help him create a short list of tasks that he
must complete to get his driver’s license: locate
his birth certificate/social security card/proof of
residency, clear up traffic tickets, and study for
his driver’s test. Successfully completing each of
these tasks will bring the client closer to meeting
his short-term and long-term goals. Once these
tasks are accomplished and the goal is met, the
interventionist can help the client by mentally
reviewing the process, acknowledging the client’s
success and/or missteps, and using the goal-setting
and task-identification process to help the client
with his next goal.
Accomplishing short-term goals helps build the
client’s self-confidence, which, in time, can help
sustain the momentum of his long-term goals. If
the client gets discouraged, the interventionist
can help him revisit the goals he has successfully
completed. This serves to remind the client that
change is a long-term process, but that he is making
consistent and measurable progress.
• Provide access to educational opportunities
The interventionist should work closely with a
local educational agency to assess the client’s
educational status and identify any literacy
deficits. Providing the client with maximum
results as quickly as possible is crucial. Gang
interventionists should identify the fastest way for
the individual to complete or catch up on his high
school education using credit recovery programs,
general equivalency degree (GED) classes,
educational assistance programs, alternative school
settings, or programs within mainstream high
Providing Employment Support
Mathis is a 34-year-old OB gang member who has
served multiple short prison sentences and typically
reoffended within 2–3 months after release. During
his last period of incarceration, he participated in
gang intervention activities for about five months.
As a result of his participation in these activities, he
realized the importance of being involved in the lives
of his wife and children. He decided that gaining
legitimate employment was important to avoid
returning to his previous involvement in drug sales.
After release, Mathis reconnected with his family
for a few weeks and then a met with a gang
interventionist to discuss employment options.
Mathis and his wife had many questions. Mathis
previously had negative experiences working with
employment agencies and felt that they did not
help him find a job. The intervention specialist
reassured Mathis that the intervention agency
provided regular training to the employment agency
on working with gang members. He also told him
about the program’s successes with other ganginvolved
clients.
The intervention specialist spent time discussing
the process of working with the employment
agency, and helped Mathis gather identification
documents and enroll in the employment agency’s
computerized client database. The intervention
specialist also personally introduced Mathis to an
employment counselor with experience working
with gang-involved clients. This introduction helped
Mathis feel more comfortable with the process.
While talking to the employment counselor, Mathis
disclosed that he wanted a job, but that he had no
idea what type of work he would like to do. The
employment counselor discussed several options
with Mathis, including welding classes, and even
showed Mathis how he could obtain funding to pay
for this training. Shortly after this meeting, Mathis
decided to delay accepting full-time employment
and enrolled in the welding certification program.
While in the welding program, Mathis met with his
intervention specialist two to three times a week
to discuss his desistence plan and daily activities.
After Mathis completed his welding certification, he
decided to enroll in an advanced welding course to
increase his employability and earnings.
Five months after his release from prison, Mathis
continues to do well and has not reoffended. As
a result of his welding certifications, he can earn
$18–$20 per hour in the local job market. He is
proud of his accomplishments, as are his wife
and children.
6

schools that serve high-risk students. Once the
initial educational goal is accomplished, the client
should be encouraged to identify future vocational/
educational goals. To effectively assist clients,
interventionists need to build relationships and gain
familiarity with the services of local educational
programs and services, such as those offered by
local school districts, community colleges and
technical centers, neighborhood and alternative
educational programs, and government agencies
such as vocational rehabilitation.
• Provide access to economic opportunities
Gang interventionists should help clients identify
short- and long-term employment goals and work
with clients over time to ensure that they are ready
to work; that they have addressed any educational
deficits, substance abuse, or mental health issues;
and that the employment opportunities provided
“set the clients up to succeed.” It can take a
considerable amount of work for a client to be ready
to start employment. In the short-term, however,
the individual may need to earn money immediately
by doing less-skilled work for less pay.
These types of jobs can help the client build a
work history, identify problematic thinking and
behaviors, and teach the client basic work skills,
such as showing up on time and getting along with
coworkers. They should be presented to the client
as stepping stones to his long-term goals. The
client’s long-term plan should include opportunities
to earn more pay and attain greater professional
respect. Steps the client must take to accomplish
that long-term goal might include participation in
vocational training, college or technical classes,
and/or employment training programs that provide
job opportunities in skilled fields.
Interventionists should understand that employment
that meets the client’s need to feel respected for
his work is crucial to long-term gang desistance
success:
“When they managed to break into a job
in which they had a sense of dignity, gang
fathers were more likely to sustain those jobs
longer. . .On the other hand, employment in
menial jobs such as janitorial, restaurant work,
retail sales, and telemarketing was often shortlived,
inconsistent, and instrumentally and
intrinsically unfulfilling.” (Moloney et al., 2009,
p. 318).
Once a client has obtained employment or is
attending training/education classes, the role of
the interventionist is to continue to support his
success and provide coaching to help him resolve
any difficulties. It may take a client more than
one try to succeed at maintaining employment,
and interventionists should be prepared for this
possibility. Interventionists cannot assume
that the client will just understand how to be
successful at maintaining employment. Instead, an
interventionist should continue to meet with a client
Strengthening Family Bonds
Jason is an 18-year-old gang member who
was referred to gang intervention services by
juvenile probation when he was 15 years old.
Jason maintained infrequent contact with gang
intervention personnel over a two-year period
while he rotated in and out of the juvenile
justice system and struggled with his parents’
substance addictions. Eventually, Jason moved
in with his girlfriend’s family, and her parents
assumed guardianship of him. His girlfriend
became pregnant and gave birth to a son. Jason
successfully completed juvenile probation but
could not maintain employment because of his
literacy issues.
Jason’s primary goal was to gain employment
in the transportation industry so he could take
care of his son and girlfriend. He also wished to
rebuild his relationship with his parents, who were
working to address their substance addictions.
The gang interventionist connected Jason with
a local program that helped him access necessary
identification documents and get enrolled in an
online high school diploma program to address
his literacy deficits and complete his GED. The
interventionist also helped Jason access family
counseling services so he could start rebuilding
a relationship with his parents and develop more
effective skills to parent his young son.
During repeated meetings with his intervention
specialist, Jason shared that his biggest fear was
having his son ask him about his gang-related
tattoos. With the assistance of his intervention
specialist, he enrolled in a tattoo removal program.
During the tattoo removal process, the intervention
specialist received information that the gang was
considering retaliation against Jason for leaving
the gang. The intervention specialist helped Jason
explain to the gang that he was focusing on taking
care of his family and accomplishing his career
goals. The intervention specialist also helped
Jason create a plan to avoid future interactions
with the gang. Jason successfully completed his
high school diploma, received his transportation
worker identification credentials, and obtained an
entry-level position.
He is currently working and taking care of his son
and girlfriend.
7

on an ongoing basis to discuss his daily problems
and successes, provide feedback, identify areas
for improvement, encourage the client’s goals, and
praise his efforts.
• Provide support to bolster the client’s efforts
to change
When the social structure that the gang provided is
no longer present in the client’s life, it is crucial to
teach the client how to seek out and gain support
that can help sustain his positive efforts. It is also
important to provide the client with opportunities
and coaching to help him gain access to more
positive peer groups where he can meet his need
for belonging and socialization. Interventionists
can help facilitate this process by introducing the
individual to recreational, educational, social, and
faith-based programs.
As part of the desistence planning process, the
client (with coaching from the interventionist) can
identify adults who will provide ongoing assistance:
parents, relatives, teachers, social services
providers, and religious leaders. The individual
should identify supportive adults in different
aspects of his life (neighborhood, home, school,
community agencies, probation/parole) who can be
available if the individual has a problem or needs
to talk. The adults in this support network can
assist by being available, providing good advice,
and helping as needed. These adults also must
be briefed so they clearly understand the possible
risks and dangers to this client, and how to respond
appropriately.
• Strengthen family bonds
Protective factors that have been found to support
substance abuse and antisocial behavior desistence
include strong family ties, solid personal and/or
marital relationships, and meaningful employment
(Hussong et al., 2004). It is likely that these
same protective factors also apply to gang
desistance, particularly in light of the weight
that is given to these factors when former gang
members articulate their reasons for leaving the
gang (Decker and Pyrooz, 2011). For this reason,
interventionists should assess the support for the
clients’ life changes in their home and interpersonal
relationships and intervene where necessary
to help address problems. Gang intervention
strategies might include reducing/mediating family
conflicts; helping clients build their relationships
with parents/siblings/family members/significant
others; teaching parents of gang members more
effective family management skills; assisting
clients who are preparing for the birth of a child;
helping clients learn effective parenting skills;
and providing opportunities for families to spend
positive time together. Interventionists also should
be prepared to help clients access evidence-based
programs designed to strengthen and support
family bonds, such as functional family therapy,
when necessary.
While the decision to leave a gang may be a sudden
one, gang desistance should be viewed as a longterm,
gradual process. It took time for the client
to become a gang member, and it will take time
for him to develop new patterns of behavior, to
finish educational and career goals, and to distance
himself emotionally from his complex relationship
to the gang. There may be potholes, bumps, stops,
and starts during the gang desistance journey, and
these are no different from any other difficulties
faced by individuals who set out to accomplish a
goal or change their lives.
Conclusion
In summary, gang interventionists should remain
cognizant of the following:
• Effectiveness with clients is increased when
leverage points are utilized to help clients recognize
that they are ready to leave the gang and live in a
different way.
• Interventionists should have a current working
knowledge of local gangs and gang dynamics.
• Interventionists should coach clients on interactions
with the gang and avoiding safety risks.
• Interventionists should work to establish
connections with law enforcement and criminal
justice agencies to address issues with client safety.
• Interventionists should establish relationships with
agencies that assist with education, tattoo removal,
employment, substance abuse, family problems,
and other services clients need.
• Gang desistence is a long-term process that
involves helping the clients identify and change
their self-image, internal scripts, personal behavior,
and goals.
• Desistence plans need to be developed and revised
as necessary based on a client’s current needs
• Interventionists should reach out to parents, family
members, and supportive professionals who can
encourage and support clients’ efforts to change.
Gang affiliation creates wide-ranging negative effects
on individuals that can last throughout their lives. These
include reduced educational attainment, unemployment
or underemployment, poverty, and family crises. All of
these effects can escalate over time.
For these reasons, it is particularly important that future
research on gang desistence, including identification
of factors predictive of success or failure in leaving the
gang, be conducted, and that existing research be used
to inform and strengthen current gang intervention
activities. Achieving success in gang intervention can
have a profound effect, not only on that individual, but
on his community, peers, family, and children.
8

Sources
Decker, S. H., and Lauritsen, J. L. 2002. “Breaking the Bonds of Membership: Leaving the Gang,” in C. R. Huff
(ed.), Gangs in America III (pp. 103–122), Thousand Oaks, California: Sage Publications, Inc.
Decker, S. H., and Van Winkle, B. 1996. Life in the Gang: Family, Friends, and Violence, New York: Cambridge
University Press.
Decker, S. H. and Pyrooz, David C. 2011. “Leaving the Gang: Logging Off and Moving On,” Council on Foreign
Relations Press, online: http://www.cfr.org/counterradicalization/save-supporting-document-leaving-gang/p.
26590 (October 12, 2013).
Giordano, P. D., Schroeder, R. D., and Cernkorich, S. A. (2007). “Emotions and Crime Over the Life Course: A Neo-
Meadian Perspective on Criminal Continuity and Change.” American Journal of Sociology, 112(6): pp. 1603-1661.
Hill, K. G., Lui, C., and Hawkins, J. D. 2001. “Early Precursors of Gang Membership: A Study of Seattle Youth.”
(OJJDP Juvenile Justice Bulletin.) Youth Gang Series. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of
Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention. (Adobe PDF)
Horowitz, R. 1983. Honor and the American Dream, New Brunswick, New Jersey: Rutgers University Press.
Hussong, A., Curran, P., Moffitt, T., Caspi, A., and Carrig, M. 2004. “Substance Abuse Hinders Desistance in Young
Adults’ Antisocial Behavior,” Development and Psychopathology 16, pp. 1024–1046. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge
University Press.
Melde, Chris and Esbensen, Finn Aage, 2011. “Gang Membership as a Turning Point in the Life Course,”
Criminology, 49 (2), pp. 513–552.
Miller, J. 2001. One of the Guys: Girls, Gangs and Gender. New York, Oxford University Press.
Moffitt T. E. 1993. “Adolescence-Limited and Life-Course-Persistent Anti-Social Behavior: A Developmental
Taxonomy,” Psychological Review, 100, pp. 674–701.
Moloney M., MacKenzie K., Hunt G., and Joe-Laidler 2009. “The Path and Promise of Fatherhood for Gang
Members.” British Journal of Criminology, 49, pp. 305–325. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press. Accessed online at
www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/pmc263018, (February 15, 2013)
Moore, J. W. 1991. Going Down to the Barrio: Homeboys and Homegirls in Change, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania:
Temple University Press.
Peterson, D., Taylor, T. J., and Esbensen, F. 2004. “Gang Membership and Violent Victimization,” Justice Quarterly,
21(4), pp. 794–815.
Pyrooz, David C., Scott H. Decker, and Vincent J. Webb, 2010. “The Ties that Bind: Desistance From Gangs,”
Crime and Delinquency. Sage Journals Online.
Pyrooz, D. C., and Decker, S. H. (2011) “Motives and Methods for Leaving the Gang: Understanding the Process
of Gany Desistence,” Journal of Criminal Justice.
Sanchez-Jankowski, M. S. 1991. Islands in the Street: Gangs and American Urban Society, Berkeley, California:
University of California Press.
Thornberry, T. P., Huizinga, D., and Loeber, R. 2004. “The Causes and Correlates Studies: Findings and Policy
Implications,” Juvenile Justice, 10 (1), pp. 3–19. (Adobe PDF)
Thornberry, T. P., Krohn, M. D., Lizotte, A. J., Smith, C. A., and Tobin, K. 2003. Gangs and Delinquency in
Developmental Perspective, New York: Cambridge University Press.
Thrasher, F. (1927/1963). The Gang: A Study of 1313 Gangs. Chicago, IL: University fo Chicago Press.
Vigil, D. 1988. Barrio Gangs: Street Life and Identity in Southern California, Austin, Texas. University of
Texas Press.
9

The National Gang Center (NGC) is a collaborative effort between
the Office of Justice Programs’ (OJP) Office of Juvenile Justice and
Delinquency Prevention (OJJDP) and Bureau of Justice Assistance (BJA).
This partnership works to provide professionals in the field of gangs
with tools that can be used in a comprehensive range of strategies to
respond to street gangs, from prevention and intervention to criminal
justice strategies such as suppression, prosecution, and reentry.
Michelle Arciaga Young is a senior research associate with the
National Gang Center operated by the Institute for Intergovernmental
Research (IIR) in Tallahassee, Florida.
Victor Gonzalez is the director of Prevention and Intervention
Services, Major’s Anti-Gang Office, Houston, Texas.
This project was supported by Cooperative Agreement No. 2011-MU-MU-K001, awarded by the Office of Juvenile Justice
and Delinquency Prevention, Office of Justice Programs. The opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations
in this publication are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the U.S. Department of Justice.
Copyright © 2013 by the Institute of Intergovernmental Research® on behalf of the National Gang Center. All rights
reserved. No copies or extractions may be made without express permission.
10

Page 88 of 110

Attachment C
Gang Prevention:
An Overview of Research and Programs
Page 89 of 110

U.S. Department of Justice
Office of Justice Programs
Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention
December 2010
Jeff Slowikowski, Acting Administrator
From the Administrator
For more than half a century, gangs
have presented a critical challenge
to communities across the
United States. Despite the growth
in the number of gangs and gang
members over the past several years,
little is known about the dynamics
underlying this increase. We need to
enhance our understanding of which
youth join gangs and why.
This bulletin draws on research
findings to examine how gangs form
and how communities may assess
and respond to their gang problems.
The author, Dr. James C. Howell,
a senior research associate with the
National Gang Center, identifies
nine programs evidencing effectiveness
in combating gangs.
The content provided in these pages
has informed the Office of Juvenile
Justice and Delinquency Prevention’s
FY 2010 Youth Gang Prevention
and Intervention Program.
While additional research needs to
be done, by adapting the secondary
prevention programs described
herein and similar evidence-based
approaches to address their local
gang problems, communities can ensure
a better future for their youth.
Jeff Slowikowski
Acting Administrator
Gang Prevention: An Overview of
Research and Programs
by James C. Howell
Highlights
This bulletin presents research on why youth join gangs and how a community
can build gang prevention and intervention services. The author summarizes
recent literature on gang formation and identifies promising and effective programs
for gang prevention. The following are some key findings:
• Youth join gangs for protection, enjoyment, respect, money, or
because a friend is in a gang.
• Youth are at higher risk of joining a gang if they engage in delinquent
behaviors, are aggressive or violent, experience multiple caretaker
transitions, have many problems at school, associate with other
gang-involved youth, or live in communities where they feel unsafe
and where many youth are in trouble.
• To prevent youth from joining gangs, communities must strengthen
families and schools, improve community supervision, train teachers
and parents to manage disruptive youth, and teach students interpersonal
skills.
Guides for assessing community gang problems and implementing intervention
and prevention strategies, part of the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency
Prevention’s Comprehensive Gang Model, are available on the National
Gang Center Web site (www.nationalgangcenter.gov/Publications).
Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention
ojjdp.gov

DECEMBER 2010
Gang Prevention: An Overview of Research and Programs
by James C. Howell
Introduction
Since the mid-20th century, gang violence in this country
has become widespread—all 50 states and the District of
Columbia report gang problems, and reports have increased
for 5 of the past 7 years. Despite the steady growth
in the number and size of gangs across the United States
and the criminal behavior and violence they spawn, little
is known about the dynamics that drive gangs and how
to best combat their growth. For instance, no consensus
exists on how gangs form, and few gang prevention programs
have been rigorously evaluated. This bulletin presents
a compilation of current research on gangs, including
data on the state of gang problems in the United States today,
why youth join gangs, the risk factors and attractions
that increase youth’s propensity to join gangs, and how
gangs form. The author examines how community members
can begin to assess their gang problems and provide
necessary enhancements to prevention and intervention
activities. The bulletin also describes a number of effective
and promising programs that may help prevent youth
delinquency and gang violence.
Background
Trends in Gang Activity
Local youth gang problems in the United States increased
during the 25-year period leading up to the mid-1990s
(W.B. Miller, 2001). Whereas in the 1970s, only 19 states
reported youth gang problems, before the turn of the 21st
century, all 50 states and the District of Columbia had acknowledged
gang activity. Gang problems reported by law
enforcement in the National Youth Gang Survey (NYGS) 1
peaked in the mid-1990s, followed by a precipitous decline
(Egley, Howell, and Major, 2004). An overall 15-percent
increase in youth gang problems reported in the NYGS
from 2002 to 2008 followed this decline, and all segments
of the U.S. population reported increases in gang problems:
suburban counties (22 percent), rural counties (16
percent), smaller cities (15 percent), and larger cities (13
percent) (Egley, Howell, and Moore, 2010). Only time
will show whether the recent increase in gang activity is a
lasting trend.
Students report a similar trend in gang activity in schools.
In the mid-1990s, 28 percent of a national sample of
students reported that gangs were present in their schools
(Chandler et al., 1998). This statistic dropped to 17
percent in 1999 and then began to increase to 23 percent
in 2007, approaching the level reported a decade earlier
(Dinkes et al., 2009).
How Many Youth Join Gangs?
According to the National Longitudinal Survey of Youth
(a nationally representative sample of 9,000 adolescents),
8 percent of the youth surveyed had belonged to a gang
at some point between the ages of 12 and 17 (Snyder
and Sickmund, 2006). A survey of nearly 6,000 eighthgraders
conducted in 11 cities with known gang problems
found that 9 percent were currently gang members and 17
percent said they had belonged to a gang at some point in
their lives (Esbensen and Deschenes, 1998; Esbensen et
al., 2010). However, this percentage varied from 4 to 15
percent depending on location (see table 1). In a subsequent
15-city sample of adolescents (about 13 years old),
almost 8 percent were gang members (Esbensen et al.,
2008). Gang membership is even greater among representative
samples of youth in high-risk areas of large cities,
according to studies in Seattle, WA (15 percent); Denver,
CO (17 percent); Pittsburgh, PA (24 percent); and Rochester,
NY (32 percent) (Hill et al., 1999; Huizinga and
Lovegrove, 2009; Lahey et al., 1999; Thornberry, Krohn,
et al., 2003).
2 Juvenile Justice Bulletin

Table 1. Gang Membership by Study Location
Location
Percentage of Youth Who Are
Gang Members
Kansas City, MO 10.1
Las Cruces, NM 11.0
Milwaukee, WI 15.4
Omaha, NE 11.4
Orlando, FL 9.6
Philadelphia, PA 7.7
Phoenix, AZ 12.6
Pocatello, ID 5.6
Providence, RI 6.0
Torrance, CA 6.3
Will County, IL 3.8
Overall 9.1
Source: Esbensen et al., 2010, table 5.1. Used with permission.
Demographic Characteristics of
Gang Members
The demographic characteristics of gang members vary
by geographic location—mainly reflecting the demographic
makeup of the youth population (Esbensen and
Lynskey, 2001).
Race
According to the 2008 NYGS, half (50 percent) of all
gang members are Hispanic/Latino, 32 percent are
African American/black, and 11 percent are Caucasian/
white (National Gang Center, 2010). Studies where youth
self-report gang membership show more equal proportions
of racial/ethnic groups in samples. For example, in
a 15-city sample, racial and ethnic proportions of youth
reporting gang membership were quite similar for whites
(7.3 percent), blacks (8.3 percent), and Hispanics (9.0
percent), but larger (12.9 percent) for multiracial groups
(Esbensen et al., 2008).
Gender
In the 1997 National Longitudinal Survey of Youth, the
male-to-female ratio of gang members was approximately
2 to 1 (11 percent of males versus 6 percent of females)
(Snyder and Sickmund, 2006). But a more recent 15-city
sample that used self-reports classified 8.8 percent of boys
and 7.8 percent of girls as current gang members
(Esbensen et al., 2008).
Starter Gangs and Gang
Formation Theories
This bulletin examines how youth move from delinquency
to joining gangs and how gangs form. Youth make a
conscious choice to join a gang during adolescence, and
multiple personal and environmental factors influence
this choice.
During adolescence, peer groups and social networks
form, each of which can positively or negatively influence a
youth’s life. Rather than immediately joining serious, violent
gangs, some youth become involved in less delinquent
groups, called “starter gangs.”
Children and adolescents form starter gangs to introduce
themselves to gang culture (i.e., distinctive attitudes,
jargon, rituals, and symbols). In some areas, established
gangs sometimes create cliques or sets composed of
younger youth called “wannabes,” “juniors,” “pee wees,”
and the like (Vigil, 1993). Where members of starter
gangs may engage in minor delinquent behaviors, gang
members may be involved in serious and violent offenses.
Researchers sometimes find it difficult to distinguish
“gangs in embryo” from ordinary small groups of delinquents.
A complicating factor is that very young gangs
are extremely unstable. Adolescence is a time of changing
peer relations and fleeting allegiances to both friends
(Warr, 2002) and gangs (Curry, Decker, and Egley, 2002;
Valdez, 2007).
Shifting membership and an intermittent existence characterize
many gangs, especially those with younger members.
Because involvement in a variety of peer groups is common
during adolescence, in many situations, gangs should
be viewed as social networks rather than as bounded
“organizations” (Fleisher, 2006; Papachristos, 2006).
Youth drift in and out of these groups, and even members
may be unable to name all current members (Fleisher,
1998). In a recent survey of middle school students in
nine cities, 25 percent of all gangs the students identified
had been in existence for less than 1 year, and only
10 percent were said to have existed for 11 years or more
(Esbensen et al., 2008).
The dynamics of gang formation are complex, and researchers
and practitioners have studied them from
psychological, sociological, and criminological perspectives
(Thrasher, 2000; Redl, 1945; Cloward and Ohlin, 1960;
Davis, 1993; Esbensen, Huizinga, and Weiher, 1993;
Cureton, 1999; Lahey et al., 1999; Thornberry, Krohn,
et al., 2003; Tita and Ridgeway, 2007; Wood and Alleyne,
2010; Vigil, 1993). A very popular assumption is that they
Juvenile Justice Bulletin 3

In many large cities around the United States, serious
gangs have been established for years. In these circumstances,
one might anticipate and yet find it difficult to
prevent a youth from joining a gang. For instance, the
Chicano gangs in the southwestern United States that
formed in the early 1900s (Vigil, 1993) were populated by
second-generation, “marginalized” children of extremely
poor, immigrant Mexican American families who found it
difficult to adjust socially and culturally to the American
way of life (Vigil, 2008). Youth naturally joined the gangs
affiliated with their barrios (i.e., neighborhoods). After
more than a half-century of continuous presence in some
barrios, the Chicano gangs of Los Angeles have become
institutionalized.
grow out of conflicts among groups of young adolescents
(Cloward and Ohlin, 1960; Cohen and Short, 1958) and
conflicts with the law-abiding community (Short and
Strodtbeck, 1974). Where gangs are not established, they
may form under extreme community conditions—particularly
when youth are alienated from key socializing institutions,
especially families and schools.
A recent French study (Debarbieux and Baya, 2008) suggests
that some gangs emerge from “difficult schools”
that contain a small group of highly rebellious pupils. This
group of students (4 to 5 percent of the student population)
was responsible for most of the disorder and violence
in 16 schools that were studied. In the most difficult
schools, as many as 11 percent of all students were members
of these gangs.
In this theory, adolescents form gangs when they are
excluded from school for disciplinary reasons because
school is a place that provides support, education, and
social networks for youth. This exclusion may help solidify
the group and lead toward gang formation. To become
a law-violating gang, adolescents involved must commit
to a criminal orientation (or willingness to use violence)
(Decker and Van Winkle, 1996). Secondarily, the group
must take on a criminal orientation as “a gang” that is set
apart from other groups in the community (Klein, 1995).
This group may be further solidified by conflict with
school authorities and the police.
When gangs are already established, researchers observe
that the gang-joining process is similar to the manner in
which most people would go about joining an organization.
A youth typically begins hanging out with gang
members at age 12 or 13 (even younger in some instances)
and joins the gang between ages 13 and 15. This process
typically takes 6 months to a year or two from the time
of initial association (Decker and Van Winkle, 1996;
Esbensen and Huizinga, 1993; Huff, 1996, 1998).
Attractions to Gangs
Factors that contribute to a youth’s decision to join a gang
fall into two categories: attractions and risk factors (Decker
and Van Winkle, 1996). This section discusses attractions
to gangs.
A common public perception is that most youth are
coerced into joining a gang (Howell, 2007). Quite to the
contrary, most youth who join want to belong to a gang.
Gangs are often at the center of appealing social action—
parties, hanging out, music, drugs, and opportunities to
socialize with members of the opposite sex. The gang may
be appealing because it meets a youth’s social needs.
Youth reported the following reasons for joining a gang,
in the order of descending importance (Esbensen,
Deschenes, and Winfree, 1999):
• For protection.
• For fun.
• For respect.
• For money.
• Because a friend was in the gang.
These are the typical gang attractions that youth acknowledge.
Of these reasons, youth most commonly join gangs
for the safety they believe the gang provides (Decker and
Curry, 2000; Decker and Van Winkle, 1996; Peterson,
Taylor, and Esbensen, 2004; Thornberry, Krohn, et al.,
2003). Another important influence is family members
(especially siblings or cousins) who already are part of
the gang (Curry, Decker, and Egley, 2002; Thornberry,
Krohn, et al., 2003), especially for Mexican American
youth (Valdez, 2007). Youth also occasionally cite economic
reasons, such as selling drugs or making money,
for joining a gang (Decker and Van Winkle, 1996).
4 Juvenile Justice Bulletin

Ethnicity
In many large cities, the attraction of gangs is in part a
byproduct of population migration (Adamson, 2000;
Howell and Moore, 2010; Vigil, 2002, 2008). Diego
Vigil suggests that this may be a result of the difficulties
immigrant youth may experience in dealing with life in
a new culture, combined with inadequate parenting and
schooling. The language, cultural, and economic barriers
they face “[leave] them with few options or resources to
better their lives. Often, they seek a place where they are
not marginalized—and find it in the streets” (Vigil, 2002,
p. 7). Gang life also meets these youth’s need for family and
community by filling the void that inadequate family care
and schooling leave.
Popular Culture
Apart from personal reasons for joining a gang, media presentations
make gangs seem very appealing (Miller, 1992).
The “hip” lifestyle and sensational portrayals of gangs and
their members have a significant influence, particularly on
more susceptible youth, for reasons that Walter B. Miller
(2001, p. 46) aptly explains:
In the 1950’s, the musical drama West Side Story
portrayed gang life as seen through the eyes of
adult middle-class writers and presented themes of
honor, romantic love, and mild rebellion consistent
with the values and perspectives of these
writers. In the 1990’s, the substance of gang life
was communicated to national audiences through
a new medium known as gangsta rap. For the first
time, this lifestyle was portrayed by youthful insiders,
not adult outsiders. The character and values
of gang life described by the rappers differed radically
from the images of West Side Story. Language
was rough and insistently obscene; women were
prostitutes (“bitches,” “ho’s,” and “sluts”) to
be used, beaten, and thrown away; and extreme
violence and cruelty, the gang lifestyle, and craziness
or insanity were glorified. Among the rappers’
targets of hatred, scorn, and murder threats
were police, especially black police (referred to as
“house slaves” and “field hands”); other races and
ethnic groups; society as a whole; and members of
rival gangs . . . Gangsta rap strengthened the desire
of youth to become part of a gang subculture
that was portrayed by the rappers as a glamorous
and rewarding lifestyle.
experiment with gang life” (Klein, 2002, p. 246). The diffusion
of street gang culture in modern-day movies, music,
and clothing merchandizing has served to intertwine gang
culture with the general youth subculture.
Researchers have shown how youth experiment with gang
life in several studies. In a St. Louis, MO, study of middle
school students, more than half of the surveyed youth who
had never been in a gang said that they had engaged in at
least one kind of gang involvement (Curry, Decker, and
Egley, 2002). More than one-third of the youth who had
not been in gangs had gang members as friends, nearly
one-third had worn gang colors, nearly one-quarter had
hung out with gang members, and one-fifth had flashed
gang signs. In a study of Florida middle school students
(Eitle, Gunkel, and Gundy, 2004), only 5 percent of the
sample of nearly 10,000 students reported having joined
a gang, but half of the youth who had not joined had
engaged in 1 or more behaviors that suggested “gang
orientations” (Eitle, Gunkel, and Gundy, 2004, p. 101)—
they had flashed gang signs, worn gang colors on purpose,
drunk alcohol or gotten high with gang members, or hung
out with gang members.
Friendships and Romantic Relationships
Many female adolescents are attracted to gangs because
their friends or boyfriends have joined. One book looked
at girls in San Antonio, TX, who hung out with male gang
members (Valdez, 2007). Although they were not recognized
as gang members, these girls were “distinctly integrated”
into the male gangs (Valdez, 2007, p. 87). They
began hanging out with the gang in childhood, just before
age 12, and at the time of the study, 40 percent reported
having a boyfriend in a gang and 80 percent said they had
a good friend in a male gang. Gang associations led to
the girls’ involvement in delinquent and criminal activities,
including holding drugs (55 percent), selling drugs
Increased media popularization of gang culture has led to
the point that now, “most young people in America recognize
the look, the walk, and the talk of gang members.
Many mimic it in part or in whole. Many try it out as a
personal style. Play groups, break-dancing groups,
taggers (i.e., graffiti artists), and school peer groups
Juvenile Justice Bulletin 5

(31 percent), and holding weapons (27 percent) (Valdez,
2007). Hence, program development and service delivery
should not ignore gang associates.
Risk Factors for Joining Gangs
This section examines risk factors—forces that push youth
toward gangs or increase the likelihood that affected youth
will join a gang. 2 Researchers cannot predict whether a
particular individual will join a gang. Rather, research
shows that individuals who possess certain risk factors have
an elevated chance of joining a gang.
The Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention’s
(OJJDP’s) Strategic Planning Tool (www.nationalgangcenter.
gov/SPT) includes a list of risk factors that predict juvenile
delinquency and gang membership because virtually all
youth who join a gang previously were involved in delinquent
acts (Hill et al., 1999; Esbensen and Huizinga,
1993; Thornberry, Krohn, et al., 2003). To compile this
list, the National Gang Center (NGC) analyzed a number
of studies of children and adolescents who were surveyed
over several years. The studies examined risk factors for
serious and violent delinquency or gang involvement
(Loeber and Farrington, 1998, 2001; Howell and Egley,
2005). The risk factors discussed in the Strategic Planning
Tool also draw heavily on the two more comprehensive reviews
on this topic (Loeber and Farrington, 1998, 2001). 3
The following discussion of risk factors for gang involvement
summarizes longitudinal research shown in the
OJJDP Strategic Planning Tool. Other kinds of studies,
particularly ethnographic research that provides insights
into how particular risk factors may operate, supplement
this discussion. The discussion organizes these risk factors
into five domains: individual, family, school, peer group,
and community, based on a systematic literature review
(Howell and Egley, 2005).
Individual Risk Factors
A number of personal risk factors make children more
likely to join gangs.
Antisocial behavior. Children whose antisocial behavior
consistently worsens are most likely to join gangs. These
behaviors include early involvement in delinquency, aggression,
violence (without a weapon), alcohol or drug
use, early dating, and precocious sexual activity (Craig et
al., 2002; Lahey et al., 1999; Thornberry, Krohn, et al.,
2003). In adolescence, other forms of violence emerge—
such as attacking someone with a weapon—that may also
predict joining a gang (Thornberry, Krohn, et al., 2003).
Alcohol and drug use. Alcohol and drug use also predict
joining a gang (Huizinga and Lovegrove, 2009). These
two early problem behaviors increase the likelihood of
later gang involvement, particularly when alcohol or drug
use is extensive and involves marijuana (Hill et al., 1999;
Thornberry, Krohn, et al., 2003).
Mental health problems. Although little research has
been done on the subject, evidence suggests that certain
mental health problems in young people increase their risk
of joining a gang. These problems include conduct disorders,
externalizing behaviors, hyperactivity, and depression
(Howell and Egley, 2005). Davis and Flannery (2001)
noted that gang members in juvenile corrections facilities
“often are admitted with histories of physical and sexual
abuse, substance abuse, psychiatric disturbances, posttraumatic
stress disorder, cognitive deficits, poor self-esteem,
and other problems” (Davis and Flannery, 2001, p. 37).
Victimization. Children who are victims of abuse or
neglect are more likely to join gangs (Fleisher, 1998; J.A.
Miller, 2001; Thornberry, Krohn, et al., 2003). Forms of
violent victimization outside the home, such as assaults,
also increase youth’s risk of joining a gang (Peterson,
Taylor, and Esbensen, 2004; Taylor, 2008; Taylor et al.,
2007, 2008).
Negative life events. Youth—particularly boys—who
experience negative life events also are more likely to join
gangs (Thornberry, Krohn, et al., 2003). These events
6 Juvenile Justice Bulletin

“Students who feel vulnerable at school
may seek protection in the gang.”
include failing a course at school, being suspended from
school, breaking up with a boyfriend/girlfriend, having a
fight or problem with a friend, and the death of someone
close.
Family Risk Factors
From birth, parents are critical in promoting child development
(Loeber and Farrington, 2001). Early on, weaknesses
in family structure (e.g., a single-parent household,
multiple family transitions, or caretaker changes), poverty,
and general financial stress are potent risk factors. These
adversities diminish effective parental supervision and control
and disturb the development of strong family bonds
(Howell and Egley, 2005). Other factors compromise
parents’ capacities to encourage their children’s growth
and development, including lack of education, attitudes
that condone violence inside and outside the home, and
child abuse or neglect (Howell and Egley, 2005). If family
members are involved in gangs or criminal behavior, this
can lead youth to join gangs and alienate them from a
healthy family life (Moore, 1991; Vigil, 1988).
School Risk Factors
Most studies that examine school-related risk factors for
juvenile delinquency and gang membership have only examined
a student’s level of academic achievement—which
is a strong predictor for gang membership. For example,
poor school performance on math tests predicts male gang
membership (Thornberry, Krohn, et al., 2003). However,
studies of school experiences now include measures
of “school climate” (Gottfredson et al., 2005) and student
“connectedness” to schools (Resnick, Ireland, and
Borowsky, 2004). Future gang members perform poorly
in elementary school and generally have a low degree of
commitment to and involvement in school (Hill et al.,
1999; Le Blanc and Lanctot, 1998) and weak attachment
to teachers (Thornberry, Krohn, et al., 2003).
A French study (discussed on p. 4) identified current or
future gang members among a small subgroup of students
“who consider that everything is wrong with school and
that teachers are awful, who commit aggression more
often than others, who are punished repeatedly and more
frequently than the others, and who have developed a
feeling of hatred and rejection of everything that represents
order” (Debarbieux and Baya, 2008, p. 214). These
students most often attended the most difficult schools—
schools characterized by greater levels of student victimization,
self-reported violence, poor student-teacher relations,
and systems of punishment that pupils did not accept well
(Debarbieux and Baya, 2008, p. 212). Other research
suggests that poorly functioning schools with high levels
of student and teacher victimization, large student-teacher
ratios, poor academic quality, poor school climates, and
high rates of social sanctions (e.g., suspensions, expulsions,
and referrals to juvenile court) hold a greater percentage
of students who form and join gangs (Bernburg, Krohn,
and Rivera, 2006; Debarbieux and Baya, 2008; Gottfredson
and Gottfredson, 2001; Morrison and Skiba, 2001;
Thornberry, Lizotte, et al., 2003; Weisel and Howell,
2007). For example, nearly 8 of 10 gang-involved youth
referred to juvenile court in Durham, NC, had been suspended,
truant, expelled, or otherwise disconnected from
school (Weisel and Howell, 2007).
In addition, negative conditions in difficult schools can
increase future delinquency (Hemphill et al., 2006; Huizinga
and Henry, 2008; Kaplan and Damphouse, 1997),
which also increases gang membership (Esbensen and
Huizinga, 1993; Hill et al., 1999; Thornberry, Lizotte,
et al., 2003).
Feeling unsafe at school may also predict gang involvement
(Gottfredson and Gottfredson, 2001; Vigil, 1993).
Students who feel vulnerable at school may seek protection
in the gang.
Peer Group Risk Factors
One of the strongest risk factors for gang membership is
associating with peers who engage in delinquency (Thornberry,
Lizotte, et al., 2003). Aggressive and antisocial
youth begin to affiliate with one another in childhood, and
this pattern of aggressive friendships continues through
adolescence (Kupersmidt, Coie, and Howell, 2003; Warr,
Juvenile Justice Bulletin 7

2002). Association with aggressive peers during childhood
and early adolescence is a strong predictor of joining a gang
(Craig et al., 2002; Lahey et al., 1999), as is the experience
of having been rejected by peers (Huizinga and Lovegrove,
2009).
Community Risk Factors
As children grow older and venture out from their families,
community conditions become a greater influence.
Gangs tend to cluster in high-crime and economically
disadvantaged neighborhoods (Pyrooz, Fox, and Decker,
2010; Thornberry, Krohn, et al., 2003; Valdez, 2007;
Vigil, 1988). When gangs cluster in these neighborhoods,
a number of negative conditions may arise, including
(Howell and Egley, 2005):
• A greater level of criminal activity.
• A large number of neighborhood youth involved in
illegal behaviors.
• Widespread availability and use of firearms and drugs.
• A small level of neighborhood attachment (i.e., positive
feelings of belonging and being valued).
Unfortunately, in most distressed neighborhoods, schools,
churches, and other community agencies and institutions
do not provide adequate gang prevention and intervention
services (Thrasher, 2000). In the worst conditions, “collective
efficacy” 4 may be lacking (Morenoff, Sampson, and
Raudenbush, 2001).
Risk Factors: A Summary
Children who are on a trajectory of worsening antisocial
behavior, including child delinquency, are more likely to
join gangs during adolescence. Gang members tend to
have more risk factors than other serious and violent
offenders, and these factors can often be placed in
multiple developmental domains. In essence, one can
think of gang entry as the next developmental step in escalating
delinquent behavior (Craig et al., 2002; Esbensen
and Huizinga, 1993). Gang membership is not a product
of several specific risk factors, but the result of the accumulation
of many varied kinds of risk factors (Krohn and
Thornberry, 2008).
Risk factors in each of the five developmental domains
operate collectively to increase youth’s propensity to join
gangs. Youth who initiate delinquent behaviors and exhibit
aggression or violence at an early age (individual); experience
multiple caretaker transitions (family); have numerous
school-related problems (school); associate with other
aggressive, gang-involved delinquents (peers); and live in
communities where they feel unsafe and where many
youth are in trouble (community) are at a higher risk of
joining a gang.
How Risk Factors Work
Risk factors predict increased risk for developing a problem
or disorder. They also help determine the pathways that
some children and adolescents take when they become
involved in juvenile delinquency and gangs. However, the
presence of specific risk factors does not guarantee the
development of specific problem behaviors.
Risk factors function in a cumulative fashion—the larger
the number of risk factors, the greater the likelihood of
a negative outcome, such as joining a gang. In a Seattle
study, children younger than age 12 who experienced 7
of 19 measured risk factors were 13 times more likely to
join a gang than children with only 1 risk factor or no risk
factors (Hill et al., 1999; Hill, Lui, and Hawkins, 2001).
The likelihood of joining a gang is even greater when youth
experience multiple risk factors in multiple domains. For
example, Rochester researchers (Thornberry, Krohn, et al.,
2003) measured seven risk-factor domains—neighborhood
characteristics, family/sociodemographic characteristics,
parent-child relations, school, peers, individual characteristics,
and early delinquency—and found that 61 percent
of the boys and 40 percent of the girls who had elevated
scores in all seven domains were gang members. In
contrast, when youth experienced risk in only four to six
domains, about one-third of the boys and one-fifth of the
girls joined a gang.
Abundant evidence exists to show that common risk factors
cause various problem behaviors. Many of the same
factors that predict delinquency also predict school failure,
poor physical health, physical abuse, teen pregnancy, and
drug use (Durlak, 1998). Future gang members share
several of the same risk factors seen in future serious and
8 Juvenile Justice Bulletin

violent adolescent offenders, including association with
delinquent peers, drug and alcohol use, school problems,
and family problems (Howell and Egley, 2005). As youth
accumulate more of these risk factors, they are more likely
to become involved with gangs as opposed to violence
(52 percent of gang members experienced 11 or more risk
factors, compared with 36 percent of violent offenders)
(Esbensen et al., 2009).
Still, risk factors do not cause youth to join gangs. Rather,
they increase the probability that youth will join gangs.
Additionally, the features of the specific gangs in an area
and the type of activities they engage in, such as violence,
may influence risk factors for joining a gang. For example,
a Chicago study found that the neighborhoods with a
high level of general violence “are not necessarily the same
neighborhoods that have high levels of gang violence”
(Papachristos and Kirk, 2006, p. 80).
Risk factors also interact with protective factors that keep
youth from becoming delinquent. Youth who experience
more risk factors than protective factors may be prone to
serious juvenile delinquency and other problem behaviors.
Nonetheless, in extremely high-risk conditions, youth
need more than a simple majority of protective factors to
overcome multiple risk factors (Stouthamer-Loeber et al.,
2002, 2008). The gang literature has suggested numerous
possible protective factors that might discourage
youth from joining a gang (Bjerregaard and Smith, 1993;
Esbensen, Huizinga, and Weiher, 1993; Hill et al., 1999;
Howell, 2004; Klein and Maxson, 2006; Li et al., 2002;
Maxson, Whitlock, and Klein, 1998; Thornberry, Krohn,
et al., 2003; Wyrick, 2000). However, the research is far
too limited to compile a research-supported list of protective
factors at this time; hence, potential factors are not
presented here.
Gang Intervention: Strategies,
Services, and Tools
This section discusses how communities can identify gang
problems, develop a framework for intervention, and
implement strategies.
Community Assessments
When starting a program for delinquency and gang prevention,
a community should conduct a gang-problem
assessment to identify elevated risk factors that lead to
child delinquency and gang involvement. Communities
must define youth gangs, locate them, and identify and
target the youth who are at greatest risk of joining
(Bjerregaard, 2002; Esbensen, Winfree, et al., 2001;
Howell, 2009). Because every community has its own
characteristics, each must agree on a unique definition that
will guide its data collection and strategic planning. The
following are widely accepted criteria among researchers
for classifying groups as youth gangs (Bjerregaard, 2002;
Curry and Decker, 2003; Esbensen, Winfree, et al., 2001;
Howell, 2009; Klein, 1995; Oehme, 1997; Miller, 1992;
Spergel, 1995):
• The group has three or more members.
• Members share an identity, typically linked to a name
and, often, other symbols.
• Members view themselves as a gang, and others recognize
them as a gang.
• The group has some permanence and a degree of
organization.
• The group is involved in an elevated level of criminal
activity.
As part of its Comprehensive Gang Model, OJJDP has
published A Guide to Assessing Your Community’s Youth
Gang Problem (www.nationalgangcenter.gov/Content/
Documents/Assessment-Guide/Assessment-Guide.pdf),
a user-friendly resource to assist communities that are
conducting a gang-problem assessment (Office of Juvenile
Justice and Delinquency Prevention, 2009a). This guide
simplifies the data-collection process, helping communities
determine types and levels of gang activity, gang crime patterns,
community perceptions of local gangs and gang activity,
and gaps in community services for gang prevention.
Ideally, the assessment should provide an understanding of
the “evolution of gangs in time and space” within the city,
community, or neighborhood (Hughes, 2006). To help
communities understand their unique gang situation, an
assessment should answer these questions:
• Who is involved in gang-related activity and what is the
history of these gangs?
• What crimes are these individuals committing?
• When are these crimes being committed?
Juvenile Justice Bulletin 9

• Where is gang-related activity primarily occurring?
• Why is the criminal activity happening (e.g., individual
conflicts, gang feuds, gang members acting on their
own)?
In addition to helping communities answer these questions,
OJJDP’s Comprehensive Gang Model promotes a
problem-solving approach to gang-related crime, asking
communities to identify:
• Neighborhoods with many risk factors for gang
involvement.
• Schools and other community settings in which gangs
are active.
• Hot spots of gang crime.
• High-rate gang offenders.
• Violent gangs.
To assist with these identifications, the OJJDP Strategic
Planning Tool provides the following:
• A list of risk factors for delinquency and gang membership
organized by age.
• Data indicators (i.e., measures of risk factors).
• Data sources (from which relevant data can be
retrieved).
• A Community Resource Inventory, where community
planning groups can record information on existing
programs. This helps planning groups identify program
gaps.
• Information on promising and effective juvenile delinquency
and gang programs.
• Hyperlinks connecting risk factors with effective programs
that address them.
• Strategies that address specific risk factors for various
age groups.
The next step is to identify program gaps and develop and
coordinate a continuum of prevention and intervention
program services and sanctions, in concert with a targeted
strategy of community and government agency responses
to serious and violent gang activity. Prevention and intervention
services should be directed to the neighborhoods,
schools, and families from which gangs emanate.
A Framework for Intervention
A framework for delinquency prevention and early intervention
is shown in figure 1. Because gang membership is
presented as a pathway to serious and violent delinquency,
delinquency prevention programs must work to target
gang involvement. The top section of the figure shows
the major risk factor domains that influence youth: family,
school, peer group, individual characteristics, and community.
At birth—or beginning in the prenatal period for
some infants—the biological family is the central influence
on infants and children. During preschool, and especially
in elementary school and onward, the array of risk factors
expands as some children are exposed to negative influences
outside the home (particularly school problems and
delinquent peers). Family, school, and peer influences
continue from childhood to young adulthood, although
family influences gradually fade as friends become more
important. In addition, individual characteristics and
community factors can come into play at any point during
childhood and adolescence.
Figure 1. Framework for Delinquency Prevention and
Early Intervention
Family
School
Risk and Protective Factors
Peer
Group
Individual
Characteristics
Community
Age 3 Age 6 Age 9 Age 15 Age 18
Conduct
Problems
Elementary
School
Failure
Child
Delinquency
Gang
Member
Serious and
Violent
Delinquency
Prevention Intervention Suppression
Source: Howell, 2009, p. 151. Copyrighted by Sage Publications, Inc.
Used with permission.
“From one-fourth to one-third of disruptive children are at risk of becoming
child delinquents, and about one-third of all child delinquents later become
serious, violent, and chronic offenders” (Loeber and Farrington, 2001).
10 Juvenile Justice Bulletin

Prevention and intervention efforts are organized around
age periods, from about age 3 into young adulthood. The
middle section of figure 1 illustrates the process that leads
to delinquency and gang involvement if prevention and
intervention efforts are not successful. The bottom section
of the figure illustrates which category of intervention is
most appropriate (prevention, intervention, and suppression
measures), given youth’s age and progression toward
gang involvement and serious delinquency.
Research supports the progression from conduct problems
to gang involvement to serious and violent offending
(Howell, 2003; Howell and Egley, 2005). Concentrated
disadvantage at the community level, family problems, and
individual characteristics lead to early childhood problems
(aggression and disruptive behavior). Each of these events
increases the likelihood of delinquency in childhood and
gang membership in adolescence. From one-fourth to
one-third of disruptive children are at risk of becoming
child delinquents, and about one-third of all child delinquents
later become serious, violent, and chronic offenders
(Loeber and Farrington, 2001).
Strategies for Delinquency and Gang
Intervention and Prevention
Current research suggests three distinct strategies for
early intervention with predelinquents and delinquents.
The first strategy is to intervene at the individual level
with at-risk children, particularly disruptive children. The
second strategy is family prevention, and the third strategy
is school- and community-level prevention (see Farrington
and Welsh, 2007, and Welsh and Farrington, 2007, for
illustrations of these strategies with research-based delinquency
prevention programs).
If these intervention strategies address risk and protective
factors at or slightly before the developmental points at
which they begin to predict later gang involvement and
other problem behaviors, they are more likely to be effective
(Institute of Medicine, 2008).
2008; Spergel, Wa, and Sosa, 2006; Wyrick, 2006; Wyrick
and Howell, 2004). Prevention programs target youth at
risk of gang involvement and help reduce the number of
youth who join gangs. Intervention programs and strategies
provide sanctions and services for younger youth who
are actively involved in gangs to push them away from
gangs. Law enforcement suppression strategies and intensive
services target and rehabilitate the most violent gangs
and older, criminally active gang members. 5
Figure 2 presents a model that is useful for planning a
continuum of programs and strategies in a community
with gang problems. Group 1, at the top of the triangle,
represents serious, chronic, and violent gang and nongang
offenders. These offenders make up a relatively small portion
of the population, but commit a disproportionately
large share of illegal activity. Group 2 consists of ganginvolved
youth and their associates, who make up a
relatively larger share of the population. These youth are
involved in significant levels of illegal activity but are not
necessarily in the highest offending category. They typically
range in age from 12 to 24 years old. Group 3 is made
up of high-risk youth—7- to 14-year-olds who have already
Figure 2. Gang Prevention and Intervention Strategies
Serious and
Chronic Offenders
Gang-Involved Youth
High-Risk Youth
All Youth
Source: Wyrick, 2006.
1
2
3
4
Targeted Suppression
Gang Intervention
Secondary
Prevention
Primary
Prevention
A balance of prevention, intervention, and suppression
strategies is important for success in any community
(Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention,
Juvenile Justice Bulletin 11

displayed early signs of delinquency and an elevated risk
for gang membership but are not yet gang involved. Most
of these youth will not join gangs, but they represent a
pool of candidates for future gang membership. Group 4
represents all youth living in a community where gangs
are present.
These four groups should be targeted with the four basic
strategies for combating gangs:
• Members of group 1 are candidates for targeted enforcement
and prosecution because of their high level
of involvement in crime and violent gangs and the small
probability that other strategies will reduce their criminal
behavior. These individuals may represent as few as
4 to 8 percent of offenders, but they may account for
the majority of all adolescent crimes in some communities
(Loeber and Farrington, 1998).
• Members of group 2 are candidates for intensive treatment
services and supervision. Such services should
include group therapy, family therapy, mentoring, and
cognitive-behavioral therapy—consisting of as much as
40 hours of direct contact over a 130-day period (Deas,
2008).
• Members of group 3 are candidates for secondary
prevention services, which are less intensive than those
provided to group 2 but more intensive than those
provided to youth in the community at large.
• Members of group 4 receive primary prevention
services.
Primary prevention refers to services and supports that
reach the entire population in communities with large
amounts of crime or gang activity (Wyrick, 2006). These
efforts address needs or risk factors and are available to
all youth and families in a community. Government, local
schools, community organizations, or faith-based organizations
may deliver these services. Examples of primary
prevention include public awareness campaigns, one-stop
centers that improve access to public services, schoolbased
life skills programs, community cleanup and lighting
projects, and community organizing efforts.
Secondary prevention refers to programs and services
directed toward youth who have already displayed early
signs of problem behavior and are at high risk for gang
involvement (Wyrick, 2006). As Wyrick explains, for many
people, this group is recognized as the top prevention
priority because youth in this group are most likely to
confront the decision of whether or not to join a gang in
the near future. If secondary prevention programs offer
attractive alternatives, they can provide socially rewarding,
healthy, and accessible social opportunities that serve to
divert a youth’s time and attention from the gang lifestyle.
In addition, “effective support systems are necessary to
address specific social, emotional, and psychological needs
and challenges faced by adolescents,” particularly high-risk
adolescents (Wyrick, 2006, p. 56). Last, Wyrick emphasizes,
program staff must hold adolescents accountable
for their behavior; program staff should demonstrate and
enforce clear expectations for appropriate behavior.
Promising and Effective Programs
for Gang Prevention
This section discusses promising and effective primary and
secondary prevention programs, as shown in figure 2 and
described above.
FEDERAl REPOSITORIES OF RESEARCH-BASED DelINquENCY
PREVENTION PROGRAMS
A number of federal repositories offer further information
about current delinquency prevention programs that may
help with gang prevention. They include:
• The Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency
Prevention’s Youth Gang Strategic Planning Tool:
www.nationalgangcenter.gov/SPT.
• The Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention’s
Model Programs Guide: www2.dsgonline.com/
mpg.
• The National Registry of Evidence-Based Programs
and Practices: http://nrepp.samhsa.gov.
• The Exemplary and Promising Safe, Disciplined and
Drug-Free Schools Programs: www2.ed.gov/admins/
lead/safety/exemplary01/index.html.
• The What Works Clearinghouse (on educational
interventions, some of which address youth violence
and substance abuse prevention): http://ies.ed.gov/
ncee/wwc.
• Blueprints for Violence Prevention: www.colorado.edu/
cspv/index.html.
12 Juvenile Justice Bulletin

This bulletin provides examples of effective and promising
gang-related prevention programs that nine federal
agencies identified in systematic reviews beginning in 2005
(Howell, 2009). Programs are scored on the following
widely accepted scientific standards for judging program
effectiveness:
• The soundness/clarity of the program’s framework.
• Program fidelity (i.e., adherence to original program
operation guidelines).
• The strength of the evaluation’s design.
• The empirical evidence demonstrating that the program
prevents or reduces problem behaviors.
Programs in the database fall into one of the following
classifications: 6
• Level 1 programs have been scientifically proven to
prevent delinquency, reduce risk factors, or enhance
protective factors for delinquency and other juvenile
problems. These programs employ a high-quality research
design (i.e., an experimental design and random
assignment of subjects). Programs in this category are
designated “exemplary” or “model” programs and are
considered very effective.
• Level 2 programs have been scientifically proven to
prevent delinquency, reduce risk factors, or enhance
protective factors for delinquency and other juvenile
problems. These programs employ an experimental or
quasi-experimental research design with a comparison
group. Evidence from program evaluations suggests
these programs are effective or potentially effective,
but this evidence is not as strong as for the level 1
programs.
• Level 3 programs display a strong theoretical base.
They have been demonstrated to prevent delinquency
and other juvenile problems or to reduce risk factors
or enhance protective factors. They employ limited
research methods and do not require a control group
in their research design. The programs in this category
appear promising, but their success must be confirmed
using more rigorous scientific techniques.
Few gang-related programs have been rigorously evaluated
(Howell, 1998, 2000; Klein and Maxson, 2006), which
means that most of the prevention programs described
here are rated “promising.” These programs are included
here because programs do not need to produce dramatic
results to have practical utility in dealing with gang problems.
The effectiveness levels of programs that follow are
shown in parentheses as L–1, L–2, or L–3.
Because electronic databases contain comprehensive
information on programs, the programs are not described
in detail here, and only a few are presented. 7 Communities
should consider several programs to determine how to
best meet their needs.
Primary Prevention Program
The Gang Resistance Education And Training
(G.R.E.A.T.) program (L–2) is a school-based gangprevention
curriculum that has demonstrated evidence of
effectiveness (Esbensen, Osgood, et al., 2001). Law enforcement
officers offer middle school students a 13-week
curriculum that describes the dangers of gang involvement.
The lesson content emphasizes cognitive-behavioral
training, social skills development, refusal skills, and
conflict resolution. The G.R.E.A.T. program also offers
an elementary school curriculum, a summer program, and
training for families (www.great-online.org).
Secondary Prevention Programs
The Preventive Treatment Program (L–1) in Montreal is
an excellent example of an early intervention program that
has reduced gang involvement, even though it was not developed
with this purpose in mind. It was designed to prevent
antisocial behavior among boys ages 7 to 9 with a low
socioeconomic status who had previously displayed disruptive
behavior in kindergarten. The program improved
school performance, reduced delinquency and substance
use, and showed that a combination of parent training and
childhood skill development can steer some children away
from gangs before they reach midadolescence (Tremblay
et al., 1996; Gatti et al., 2005).
Aggression Replacement Training (ART) (L–2) is a
secondary prevention program for highly aggressive and
delinquent youth that has demonstrated evidence of effectiveness.
It consists of a 10-week, 30-hour cognitivebehavioral
program administered to groups of 8 to 12
adolescents. During these 10 weeks, youth typically attend
three 1-hour sessions per week on skill streaming, anger
control, and moral reasoning training. ART showed
positive results when tested with gang-involved youth in
Brooklyn, NY (Goldstein and Glick, 1994; Goldstein,
Glick, and Gibbs, 1998).
CeaseFire–Chicago (L–2) is a community-level, gunrelated
violence prevention program that has demonstrated
effectiveness in gang crime prevention (Skogan et al.,
2008). The program sponsors a strong public education
campaign to instill the message that shootings and violence
are not acceptable, which works to change community
norms regarding violence. It provides alternatives to
violence when gangs and individuals on the street are
deciding whether to engage in violent actions.
Juvenile Justice Bulletin 13

school-based programs (see Office of Juvenile Justice and
Delinquency Prevention, 2008).
Striving Together to Achieve Rewarding Tomorrows
(CASASTART) is an effective family- and school-centered
program (L–2) designed to keep high-risk 8- to 13-yearold
youth free of substance abuse, delinquency, and gang
involvement. CASASTART works through a partnership
between the lead agency, schools, and the police. Compared
with control group youth, CASASTART clients
were less likely to report at followup the use of any drugs,
involvement in drug trafficking, and violent acts.
Additionally, CeaseFire–Chicago strengthens communities,
gives them the ability to exercise informal social control,
and mobilizes them to reverse the epidemic of violence. It
specifically targets dangerous activities of carefully selected
members of the community who have a great chance of
either being shot or being shooters in the immediate
future. Generally speaking, program outreach workers,
called “violence interrupters” (most of whom are former
gang members), work on the street and in hospitals to
mediate conflicts between gangs and especially individual
gang members, but they also intervene on behalf of clients
to stem the cycle of retaliatory violence. Outreach workers
carry caseloads of 15 clients for whom they broker services,
assist with employment, and provide direct counseling and
support services in many ways.
The OJJDP Comprehensive Gang Prevention, Intervention,
and Suppression Model (L–2) (Office of Juvenile
Justice and Delinquency Prevention, 2008) is a strategic
planning process that has demonstrated evidence of effectiveness
in reducing gang-related crime (Spergel, 2007;
Spergel, Wa, and Sosa, 2006). The model was initially used
to reduce the level of gang violence among youth involved
in violent Chicago gangs. It successfully integrated outreach
activities (including mentoring) and a variety of services
with surveillance and suppression strategies (Spergel,
2007; Spergel, Wa, and Sosa, 2006). The next iteration
of the OJJDP Comprehensive Gang Model added
primary and secondary prevention components (Wyrick,
2006). Early evaluations of this second model have shown
positive results in the gang reduction programs in Boyle
Heights in Los Angeles and the Southside community in
Richmond (Hayeslip and Cahill, 2009), and have shown
promising outcomes for the North Miami Beach gang reduction
program. Although an independent evaluation of
the Pittsburgh and Houston Gang-Free Schools projects
was not completed, these appear to be very promising
Boys & Girls Clubs Gang Prevention Through Targeted
Outreach (L–3) is a promising program that fills at-risk
youth’s (ages 6 to 18) desire for gang membership (i.e.,
a need for supportive adults, challenging activities, and
a place to belong) with an alternative social activity that
reinforces positive behaviors (Arbreton and McClanahan,
2002).
Boys & Girls Clubs Gang Intervention Through Targeted
Outreach (L–3) is a promising program that recruits
gang-involved youth into club membership to decrease
gang-related behaviors and contact with the juvenile
justice system.
The Broader Urban Involvement and Leadership Development
Detention Program (L–3) is a promising program
with four components that work with community youth,
gang members, adult mentors, and adjudicated youth in
detention centers.
Movimiento Ascendencia (Upward Movement) (L–3) is a
promising program for Mexican American girls to prevent
them from joining gangs and to reduce the gang involvement
of active members.
Some so-called gang “programs” are more properly classified
as “structures” in which beneficial program activities
(such as gang awareness) are provided along with
limited therapeutic program services. Gang Resistance Is
Paramount (L–3) performs both of these functions (Solis,
Schwartz, and Hinton, 2003), providing a school-based
anti-gang curriculum, recreational activities, gang awareness
education for parents, and counseling for parents and
youth.
The Mountlake Terrace Neutral Zone (L–3) (Thurman
and Mueller, 2003) primarily provides a promising program
structure. The center serves as a safe place where
at-risk youth can voluntarily congregate, engage in social
activities, and receive counseling and other problemsolving
services.
14 Juvenile Justice Bulletin

A Model for Prevention
Before choosing any of the aforementioned programs,
services, or activities, communities and neighborhoods
that have gangs should complete a comprehensive assessment
that identifies elevated risk factors for gangs and how
gangs affect the local community. An assessment protocol
is available to assist communities in conducting such an
assessment through the OJJDP Comprehensive Gang
Model. An implementation guide is also available.
These resource materials can be found online at
www.nationalgangcenter.gov/Publications (Office of
Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, 2008,
2009a, 2009b).
OJJDP’s Comprehensive Gang Model helps communities
develop a continuum of gang prevention, intervention,
and suppression programs and strategies. Prevention
programs target youth at risk for gang involvement and
reduce the number of youth who join gangs. Intervention
programs and strategies provide sanctions and services for
younger youth who are actively involved in gangs. Law
enforcement suppression strategies target the most violent
gangs and older, criminally active gang members. A balanced
and integrated approach is most likely to be effective
(Hayeslip and Cahill, 2009; Office of Juvenile Justice and
Delinquency Prevention, 2008; Spergel, 2007; Spergel,
Wa, and Sosa, 2006).
Points to Consider
Preventing youth from joining gangs is challenging, and
most programs have not shown noteworthy results (Howell,
1998, 2000; Klein and Maxson, 2006). Several factors
contribute to this challenge. They seek a place where they
are accepted socially and find it in the streets (Vigil, 2002).
Most youth who join gangs experience many risk factors
and family, school, and community problems. Joining a
gang can be a natural process for many youth in socially
and economically deprived areas of large cities. The gang
may already be there, in their neighborhood, and their
friends and relatives often belong to it. The gang’s promises
of protection gradually envelop these youth.
Despite obstacles, communities can take steps to prevent
youth from joining gangs. The first level of prevention
involves changing the experiences that propel children
and adolescents into gangs. It involves strengthening the
core social institutions, such as schools and families, which
sometimes let youth down in the early years of their lives.
Moreover, communities must provide interventions for
youth at high risk for delinquency and gang involvement
early in life, specifically targeting areas where gang problems
are serious and more permanent. Programs should
target girls and boys and both white and minority youth.
Interventions such as effective school-based gang prevention
programs are much in demand, and practical steps in
integrating them with other measures that increase school
safety have been identified (Lassiter and Perry, 2009).
Poor implementation of gang-related programs in schools
is a significant problem (Gottfredson and Gottfredson,
2001). For effective implementation, delinquency and
crime reduction programs that target children and adolescents
must adhere with high fidelity to the requirements
of the original model and target high-risk offenders
(Lipsey, 2009).
Moreover, no programs have been developed specifically
to prevent gangs from emerging. In the meantime, to prevent
youth from joining gangs, communities must employ
multiple strategies and services, including:
• Addressing elevated risk factors for joining a gang.
• Strengthening families.
• Reducing youth’s conflicts.
• Improving community-level supervision of youth.
• Providing training for teachers on how to manage
disruptive students.
Another major problem is the lack of gang awareness in
schools, among community leaders, and among parents.
A national study showed that, in the 10 percent of schools
with the greatest student gang participation rates, only 18
percent of principals recognized that gangs were a problem
in their schools (Gottfredson and Gottfredson, 2001).
Fortunately, school resource officers and safe and drugfree
school coordinators recognize gang activity more
frequently (North Carolina Department of Juvenile Justice
and Delinquency Prevention and Department of Public
Instruction, 2008).
Juvenile Justice Bulletin 15

• Providing training for parents of disruptive and delinquent
youth.
• Reviewing and softening school “zero tolerance”
policies to reduce suspensions and expulsions.
• Ensuring that punitive sanctions target delinquent gang
behaviors, not gang apparel, signs, and symbols.
• Providing tutoring for students who are performing
poorly in school.
• Increasing adult supervision of students after school.
• Providing interpersonal skills training to students to
help resolve conflicts.
• Providing a center for youth recreation and referrals
for services.
• Providing gang awareness training for school personnel,
parents, and students.
• Teaching students that gangs can be dangerous.
• Providing training for school resource officers in
mediating conflicts.
Conclusion
A community with an emerging youth gang problem is
not alone. Many small cities, towns, and rural areas are
experiencing gang problems for the first time. In some
communities, officials jump to the conclusion that gangs
are present because local youth display gang symbols (such
as the colors and hand signs of big-city gangs), but these
conclusions can be mistaken because these actions alone
do not necessarily signify a genuine gang problem. Local
groups of youth often imitate big-city gangs, generally in
an attempt to enhance their self-image or to seek popularity
and acceptance among their peers. Although community
officials and residents may encounter episodic or solitary
signs of gang activity in an area (e.g., graffiti, arrest of
a nonlocal gang member, and other isolated incidents),
absent further conclusive and ongoing evidence, this does
not necessarily indicate an “emerging” gang problem
that is likely to persist. Communities should undertake a
systematic assessment of the troubling behavior that local
youth display before developing a plan of action. This bulletin
has provided user-friendly tools to assist in such an
assessment, on which communities can base a tailored and
appropriate action plan.
Endnotes
1. The National Youth Gang Survey, started in 1996
and administered annually, measures the presence, characteristics,
and behaviors of local gangs in jurisdictions
throughout the United States. The National Gang Center
conducts the survey. Each year, the center surveys a nationally
representative sample of law enforcement agencies.
Standard survey questions examine the presence or
absence of gang activity, the number of gangs and gang
members, the number of homicides involving gangs, and
an assessment of the gang problem from the previous
year. Survey results are presented online at
www.nationalgangcenter.gov/Survey-Analysis.
2. Researchers do not agree on the most important risk
factors for gang membership. Three credible lists of such
risk factors have been generated (Howell and Egley,
2005; Klein and Maxson, 2006; Huizinga and Lovegrove,
2009). Howell and Egley’s research is detailed in the discussion
in the main text of this bulletin.
Klein and Maxson’s (2006) compilation was drawn
predominantly from cross-sectional studies (14 of the 20
studies they reviewed are in this category). The crosssectional
studies measure both risk factors and outcomes
at the same time, hence the causal ordering cannot be
determined with certainty; what appears to be a predictor
could well be an outcome of gang involvement.
Huizinga and Lovegrove (2009) compiled a short list of
research-supported risk factors from an analysis of a number
of longitudinal studies. This list was limited to factors
that proved especially strong in at least two study sites.
This method is sound, but the drawback is that only 11
of 35 statistically significant risk factors met Huizinga and
Lovegrove’s stringent criteria. Consequently, this listing
provides few distinctive risk factors. This is problematic
because research clearly shows that youth who have
numerous risk factors in multiple domains are most likely
to join gangs (Krohn and Thornberry, 2008). Moreover,
research has established that the prevalence of risk factors
varies from one community to another (Loeber and
Farrington, 1998). Therefore, each community should
examine a broad array of research-supported risk factors to
identify those that apply to that community.
3. For more detailed information regarding this literature
review, see the “Research Review Criteria” in the “Risk
Factors” section of the OJJDP Strategic Planning Tool
(www.nationalgangcenter.gov/SPT).
4. Collective efficacy is the propensity of residents to work
together for the common good of a neighborhood.
5. These components are also integrated in the OJJDP
Comprehensive Gang Model (Office of Juvenile Justice
and Delinquency Prevention, 2008).
6. The OJJDP Model Programs Guide (www2.dsgonline.
com/mpg), an online tool that offers a database of
evidence-based, scientifically proven programs that address
16 Juvenile Justice Bulletin

a range of issues, including substance abuse, mental health,
and education, uses the same program rating scheme. This
guide contains more detailed information on the programs
in OJJDP’s Strategic Planning Tool, including evaluation
information.
7. The OJJDP Strategic Planning Tool provides additional
information on the gang prevention programs described
briefly here and other programs. To learn more, see
www.nationalgangcenter.gov/SPT.
References
Adamson, C. 2000. Defensive localism in white and black:
A comparative history of European-American and African-
American youth gangs. Ethnic and Racial Studies 23:
272–298.
Arbreton, A.J.A., and McClanahan, W. 2002. Targeted
Outreach: Boys and Girls Clubs of America’s Approach to
Gang Prevention and Intervention. Philadelphia, PA:
Public/Private Ventures.
Bernburg, J.G., Krohn, M.D., and Rivera, C.J. 2006. Official
labeling, criminal embeddedness, and subsequent
delinquency: A longitudinal test of labeling theory. Journal
of Research in Crime and Delinquency 43:67–88.
Bjerregaard, B. 2002. Self-definitions of gang membership
and involvement in delinquent activities. Youth and Society
34:31–54.
Bjerregaard, B., and Smith, C. 1993. Gender differences
in gang participation, delinquency, and substance use.
Journal of Quantitative Criminology 9:329–355.
Chandler, K.A., Chapman, C.D., Rand, M.R., and Taylor,
B.M. 1998. Students’ Reports of School Crime: 1989 and
1995. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Office
of Justice Programs, Bureau of Justice Statistics and
National Center for Education Statistics.
Curry, G.D., and Decker, S.H. 2003. Confronting Gangs:
Crime and Community (2nd ed.). Los Angeles, CA:
Roxbury.
Curry, G.D., Decker, S.H., and Egley, A., Jr. 2002. Gang
involvement and delinquency in a middle school population.
Justice Quarterly 19:275–292.
Davis, J. 1993. Psychological versus sociological explanations
for delinquent conduct and gang formation. Journal
of Contemporary Criminal Justice 9:81–93.
Davis, M.S., and Flannery, D.J. 2001. The institutional
treatment of gang members. Corrections Management
Quarterly 5:38–47.
Deas, D. 2008. Evidence-based treatments for alcohol use
disorders in adolescents. Pediatrics 121:S348–S354.
Debarbieux, E., and Baya, C. 2008. An interactive construction
of gangs and ethnicity: The role of school segregation
in France. In Street Gangs, Migration and Ethnicity,
edited by F. Van Gemert, D. Peterson, and I.L. Lien.
Portland, OR: Willan Publishing, pp. 211–226.
Decker, S.H., and Curry, G.D. 2000. Addressing key features
of gang membership: Measuring the involvement of
young members. Journal of Criminal Justice 28:473–482.
Decker, S.H., and Van Winkle, B. 1996. Life in the Gang:
Family, Friends, and Violence. New York, NY: Cambridge
University Press.
Dinkes, R., Kemp, J., Baum, K., and Snyder, T.D. 2009.
Indicators of School Crime and Safety, 2008. Washington,
DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs,
Bureau of Justice Statistics.
Cloward, R.A., and Ohlin, L.E. 1960. Delinquency and
Opportunity: A Theory of Delinquent Gangs. New York, NY:
The Free Press.
Cohen, A.K., and Short, J.F., Jr. 1958. Research in delinquent
subcultures. Journal of Social Issues 14:20–37.
Craig, W.M., Vitaro, F., Gagnon, C., and Tremblay, R.E.
2002. The road to gang membership: Characteristics of
male gang and non-gang members from ages 10 to 14.
Social Development 11:53–68.
Cureton, S.R. 1999. Gang membership: Gang formation
and gang joining. Journal of Gang Research 7:13–21.
Juvenile Justice Bulletin 17

Esbensen, F.-A., and Lynskey, D.P. 2001. Young gang
members in a school survey. In The Eurogang Paradox:
Street Gangs and Youth Groups in the U.S. and Europe,
edited by M.W. Klein, H. Kerner, C.L. Maxson, and E.
Weitekampf. Amsterdam, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic
Publishers, pp. 93–113.
Esbensen, F.-A., Osgood, D.W., Taylor, T.J., Peterson,
D., and Freng, A. 2001. How great is G.R.E.A.T.? Results
from a longitudinal quasi-experimental design. Criminology
and Public Policy 1:87–118.
Durlak, J.A. 1998. Common risk and protective factors
in successful prevention programs. American Journal of
Orthopsychiatry 68:512–520.
Egley, A., Jr., Howell, J.C., and Major, A.K. 2004. Recent
patterns of gang problems in the United States: Results
from the 1996–2002 National Youth Gang Survey. In
American Youth Gangs at the Millennium, edited by F.-A.
Esbensen, S.G. Tibbetts, and L. Gaines. Long Grove, IL:
Waveland Press, Inc., pp. 90–108.
Egley, A., Jr., Howell, J.C., and Moore, J.P. 2010. Highlights
of the 2008 National Youth Gang Survey. Fact Sheet.
Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of
Justice Programs, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency
Prevention.
Eitle, D., Gunkel, S., and Gundy, K.V. 2004. Cumulative
exposure to stressful life events and male gang membership.
Journal of Criminal Justice 32:95–111.
Esbensen, F.-A., Brick, B.T., Melde, C., Tusinski, K., and
Taylor, T.J. 2008. The role of race and ethnicity in gang
membership. In Street Gangs, Migration and Ethnicity,
edited by F. Van Gemert, D. Peterson, and I.L. Lien.
Portland, OR: Willan Publishing, pp. 117–139.
Esbensen, F.-A., and Deschenes, E.P. 1998. A multi-site
examination of gang membership: Does gender matter?
Criminology 36:799–828.
Esbensen, F.-A., Deschenes, E.P., and Winfree, L.T. 1999.
Differences between gang girls and gang boys: Results
from a multi-site survey. Youth and Society 31:27–53.
Esbensen, F.-A., and Huizinga, D. 1993. Gangs, drugs,
and delinquency in a survey of urban youth. Criminology
31:565–589.
Esbensen, F.-A., Huizinga, D., and Weiher, A.W. 1993.
Gang and non-gang youth: Differences in explanatory
variables. Journal of Contemporary Criminal Justice
9:94–116.
Esbensen, F.-A., Peterson, D., Taylor, T.J., and Freng, A.
2009. Similarities and differences in risk factors for violent
offending and gang membership. The Australian and New
Zealand Journal of Criminology 42:1–26.
Esbensen, F.-A., Peterson, D., Taylor, T.J., and Freng, A.
2010. Youth Violence: Sex and Race Differences in Offending,
Victimization, and Gang Membership. Philadelphia,
PA: Temple University Press.
Esbensen, F.-A., Winfree, L.T., He, N., and Taylor, T.J.
2001. Youth gangs and definitional issues: When is a gang
a gang, and why does it matter? Crime and Delinquency
47:105–130.
Farrington, D.P., and Welsh, B.C. 2007. Saving Children
from a Life of Crime: Early Risk Factors and Effective Interventions.
New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
Fleisher, M.S. 1998. Dead End Kids: Gang Girls and the
Boys They Know. Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin.
Fleisher, M.S. 2006. Youth gang social dynamics and social
network analysis: Applying degree centrality measures
to assess the nature of gang boundaries. In Studying Youth
Gangs, edited by J.F. Short and L.A. Hughes. Lanham,
MD: AltaMira Press, pp. 86–99.
Gatti, U., Tremblay, R.E., Vitaro, F., and McDuff, P.
2005. Youth gangs, delinquency and drug use: A test of
selection, facilitation, and enhancement hypotheses. Journal
of Child Psychology and Psychiatry 46:1178–1190.
Goldstein, A.P., and Glick, B. 1994. The Prosocial Gang:
Implementing Aggression Replacement Training. Thousand
Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Goldstein, A.P., Glick, B., and Gibbs, J.C. 1998. Aggression
Replacement Training: A Comprehensive Intervention
for Aggressive Youth. Champaign, IL: Research Press.
Gottfredson, G.D., and Gottfredson, D.C. 2001. Gang
Problems and Gang Programs in a National Sample of
Schools. Ellicott City, MD: Gottfredson Associates.
18 Juvenile Justice Bulletin

Gottfredson, G.D., Gottfredson, D.C., Payne, A.A., and
Gottfredson, N.C. 2005. School climate predictors of
disorder: Results from a national study of delinquency
prevention in schools. Journal of Research in Crime and
Delinquency 42:412–444.
Hayeslip, D., and Cahill, M. 2009. Community Collaboratives
Addressing Youth Gangs: Final Evaluation Findings
from the Gang Reduction Program. Washington, DC:
Urban Institute.
Hemphill, S.A., Toumborou, J.W., Herrenkohl, T.L.,
McMorris, B.J., and Catalano, R.F. 2006. The effect of
school suspensions and arrests on subsequent adolescent
behavior in Australia and the United States. Journal of
Adolescent Health 39:736–744.
Hill, K.G., Howell, J.C., Hawkins, J.D., and Battin-
Pearson, S.R. 1999. Childhood risk factors for adolescent
gang membership: Results from the Seattle Social Development
Project. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency
36:300–322.
Hill, K.G., Lui, C., and Hawkins, J.D. 2001. Early Precursors
of Gang Membership: A Study of Seattle Youth. Bulletin.
Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of
Justice Programs, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency
Prevention.
Howell, J.C. 1998. Promising programs for youth gang
violence prevention and intervention. In Serious and
Violent Juvenile Offenders: Risk Factors and Successful
Interventions, edited by R. Loeber and D.P. Farrington.
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, pp. 284–312.
Howell, J.C. 2000. Youth Gang Programs and Strategies.
Summary. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice,
Office of Justice Programs, Office of Juvenile Justice and
Delinquency Prevention.
Howell, J.C. 2003. Preventing and Reducing Juvenile
Delinquency: A Comprehensive Framework. Thousand
Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Howell, J.C. 2004. Youth gangs: Prevention and intervention.
In Intervention With Children and Adolescents: An
Interdisciplinary Perspective, edited by P. Allen-Meares and
M.W. Fraser. Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon, pp. 493–514.
Howell, J.C. 2007. Menacing or mimicking? Realities
of youth gangs. The Juvenile and Family Court Journal
58:9–20.
Howell, J.C. 2009. Preventing and Reducing Juvenile
Delinquency: A Comprehensive Framework (2nd ed.).
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Howell, J.C., and Egley, A., Jr. 2005. Moving risk factors
into developmental theories of gang membership. Youth
Violence and Juvenile Justice 3:334–354.
Howell, J.C., and Moore, J.P. 2010. History of Street
Gangs in the United States. Tallahassee, FL: National Gang
Center.
Huff, C.R. 1996. The criminal behavior of gang members
and non-gang at-risk youth. In Gangs in America, edited
by C.R. Huff. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, pp.
75–102.
Huff, C.R. 1998. Comparing the Criminal Behavior of
Youth Gangs and At-Risk Youth. Research in Brief. Washington,
DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice
Programs, National Institute of Justice.
Hughes, L.A. 2006. Studying youth gangs: The importance
of context. In Studying Youth Gangs, edited by J.F.
Short and L.A. Hughes. Lanham, MD: AltaMira Press, pp.
37–46.
Huizinga, D., and Henry, K.L. 2008. The effect of arrest
and justice system sanctions on subsequent behavior: Findings
from longitudinal and other studies. In The Long View
of Crime: A Synthesis of Longitudinal Research, edited by
A. Liberman. New York, NY: Springer, pp. 220–254.
Huizinga, D., and Lovegrove, P. 2009. Summary of Important
Risk Factors for Gang Membership. Boulder, CO:
Institute for Behavioral Research.
Institute of Medicine. 2008. Preventing Mental, Emotional,
and Behavioral Disorders Among Young People. Washington,
DC: National Academy Press.
Kaplan, H.B., and Damphouse, K.R. 1997. Negative social
sanctions, self-derogation, and deviant behavior: Main
and interactive effects in longitudinal perspective. Deviant
Behavior 18:1–26.
Klein, M.W. 1995. The American Street Gang. New York,
NY: Oxford University Press.
Klein, M.W. 2002. Street gangs: A cross-national perspective.
In Gangs in America III, edited by C.R. Huff. Thousand
Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, pp. 237–254.
Klein, M.W., and Maxson, C.L. 2006. Street Gang Patterns
and Policies. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
Krohn, M.D., and Thornberry, T.P. 2008. Longitudinal
perspectives on adolescent street gangs. In The Long View
of Crime: A Synthesis of Longitudinal Research, edited by
A. Liberman. New York, NY: Springer, pp. 128–160.
Kupersmidt, J.B., Coie, J.D., and Howell, J.C. 2003.
Building resilience in children exposed to negative peer
Juvenile Justice Bulletin 19

influences. In Investing in Children, Youth, Families, and
Communities: Strengths-Based Research and Policy, edited
by K.I. Maton, C.J. Schellenbach, B.J. Leadbeater, and
A.L. Solarz. Washington, DC: American Psychological
Association, pp. 251–268.
Lahey, B.B., Gordon, R.A., Loeber, R., Stouthamer-
Loeber, M., and Farrington, D.P. 1999. Boys who join
gangs: A prospective study of predictors of first gang entry.
Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology 27:261–276.
Lassiter, W.L., and Perry, D.C. 2009. Preventing Violence
and Crime in America’s Schools: From Put-Downs to Lock-
Downs. Santa Barbara, CA: Praeger.
Le Blanc, M., and Lanctot, N. 1998. Social and psychological
characteristics of gang members according to the
gang structure and its subcultural and ethnic makeup.
Journal of Gang Research 5:15–28.
Li, X., Stanton, B., Pack, R., Harris, C., Cottrell, L., and
Burns, J. 2002. Risk and protective factors associated with
gang involvement among urban African American adolescents.
Youth and Society 34:172–194.
Lipsey, M.W. 2009. The primary factors that characterize
effective interventions with juvenile offenders: A metaanalytic
overview. Victims and Offenders 4:124–147.
Loeber, R., and Farrington, D.P., eds. 1998. Serious and
Violent Juvenile Offenders: Risk Factors and Successful Interventions.
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Loeber, R., and Farrington D.P., eds. 2001. Child Delinquents:
Development, Interventions, and Service Needs.
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Maxson, C.L., Whitlock, M., and Klein, M.W. 1998.
Vulnerability to street gang membership: Implications for
prevention. Social Service Review 72:70–91.
Miller, J.A. 2001. One of the Guys: Girls, Gangs and Gender.
New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
Miller, W.B. 1992 (Revised from 1982). Crime by Youth
Gangs and Groups in the United States. Report. Washington,
DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice
Programs, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency
Prevention.
Miller, W.B. 2001. The Growth of Youth Gang Problems in
the United States: 1970–1998. Report. Washington, DC:
U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs,
Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention.
Moore, J.W. 1991. Going Down to the Barrio: Homeboys
and Homegirls in Change. Philadelphia, PA: Temple University
Press.
Morenoff, J.D., Sampson, R.J., and Raudenbush, S.W.
2001. Neighborhood inequality, collective efficacy, and
the spatial dynamics of urban violence. Criminology
39:517–559.
Morrison, G.M., and Skiba, R. 2001. Predicting violence
from school misbehavior: Promises and perils. Psychology in
Schools 38:173–184.
National Gang Center. 2010. National Youth Gang Survey
Analysis. Available from: www.nationalgangcenter.gov/
Survey-Analysis.
North Carolina Department of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency
Prevention and Department of Public Instruction.
2008. School Violence/Gang Activity Study (S.L. 2008–56).
Raleigh, NC: North Carolina Department of Juvenile
Justice and Delinquency Prevention.
Oehme, C.G. 1997. Gangs, Groups and Crime: Perceptions
and Responses of Community Organizations. Durham, NC:
Carolina Academic Press.
Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention.
2008. Best Practices to Address Community Gang Problems:
OJJDP’s Comprehensive Gang Model. Report. Washington,
DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice
Programs, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency
Prevention.
Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention.
2009a. OJJDP’s Comprehensive Gang Model: A Guide to
Assessing Your Community’s Youth Gang Problem. Tallahassee,
FL: National Youth Gang Center, Institute for
Intergovernmental Research.
Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention.
2009b. OJJDP’s Comprehensive Gang Model: Planning for
Implementation. Tallahassee, FL: National Youth Gang
Center, Institute for Intergovernmental Research.
Papachristos, A.V. 2006. Social network analysis and gang
research: Theory and methods. In Studying Youth Gangs,
edited by J.F. Short and L.A. Hughes. Lanham, MD:
AltaMira Press, pp. 99–116.
Papachristos, A.V., and Kirk, D.S. 2006. Neighborhood
effects on street gang behavior. In Studying Youth Gangs,
edited by J.F. Short and L.A. Hughes. Lanham, MD:
AltaMira Press, pp. 63–84.
Peterson, D., Taylor, T.J., and Esbensen, F.-A. 2004.
Gang membership and violent victimization. Justice Quarterly
21:793–815.
Pyrooz, D.C., Fox, A.M., and Decker, S.H. 2010. Racial
and ethnic heterogeneity, economic disadvantage, and
gangs: A macro-level study of gang membership in urban
America. Justice Quarterly 27:1–26.
20 Juvenile Justice Bulletin

Redl, F. 1945. The psychology of gang formation and the
treatment of juvenile delinquents. Psychoanalytic Study of
the Child 1:367–377.
Resnick, M.D., Ireland, M., and Borowsky, I. 2004. Youth
violence perpetration: What protects? What predicts? Findings
from the National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent
Health. Journal of Adolescent Health 35:424.e1–424.e10.
Short, J.F., Jr., and Strodtbeck, F.L. 1974 (Revised from
1965). Group Process and Gang Delinquency. Chicago, IL:
University of Chicago Press.
Skogan, W.G., Hartnett, S.M., Bump, N., and Dubois,
J. 2008. Evaluation of CeaseFire–Chicago. Chicago, IL:
Northwestern University.
Snyder, H.N., and Sickmund, M. 2006. Juvenile Offenders
and Victims: 2006 National Report. Report. Washington,
DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice
Programs, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency
Prevention.
Solis, A., Schwartz, W., and Hinton, T. 2003. Gang Resistance
Is Paramount (GRIP) Program Evaluation: Final
Report. Los Angeles, CA: University of Southern California,
Center for Economic Development.
Spergel, I.A. 1995. The Youth Gang Problem. New York,
NY: Oxford University Press.
Spergel, I.A. 2007. Reducing Youth Gang Violence: The
Little Village Gang Project in Chicago. Lanham, MD:
AltaMira Press.
Spergel, I.A., Wa, K.M., and Sosa, R.V. 2006. The comprehensive,
community-wide, gang program model: Success
and failure. In Studying Youth Gangs, edited by J.F.
Short and L.A. Hughes. Lanham, MD: AltaMira Press,
pp. 203–224.
Stouthamer-Loeber, M., Loeber, R., Stallings, R., and
Lacourse, E. 2008. Desistance from and persistence in
offending. In Violence and Serious Theft: Development and
Prediction from Childhood to Adulthood, edited by R. Loeber,
D.P. Farrington, M. Stouthamer-Loeber, and H.R.
White. New York, NY: Routledge, pp. 269–306.
Stouthamer-Loeber, M., Loeber, R., Wei, E., Farrington,
D.P., and Wikstrom, P.H. 2002. Risk and promotive effects
in the explanation of persistent serious delinquency
in boys. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology
70:111–123.
Taylor, T.J. 2008. The boulevard ain’t safe for your kids . . .
Youth gang membership and violent victimization. Journal
of Contemporary Criminal Justice 24:125–136.
Taylor, T.J., Freng, A., Esbensen, F.-A., and Peterson, D.
2008. Youth gang membership and serious violent victimization:
The importance of lifestyles and routine activities.
Journal of Interpersonal Violence 23:1441–1464.
Taylor, T.J., Peterson, D., Esbensen, F.-A., and Freng,
A. 2007. Gang membership as a risk factor for adolescent
violent victimization. Journal of Research in Crime and
Delinquency 44:352–380.
Thornberry, T.P., Krohn, M.D., Lizotte, A.J., Smith, C.A.,
and Tobin, K. 2003. Gangs and Delinquency in Developmental
Perspective. New York, NY: Cambridge University
Press.
Thornberry, T.P., Lizotte, A.J., Krohn, M.D., Smith, C.A.,
and Porter, P.K. 2003. Causes and consequences of delinquency:
Findings from the Rochester Youth Development
Study. In Taking Stock of Delinquency: An Overview of
Findings from Contemporary Longitudinal Studies, edited
by T.P. Thornberry and M.D. Krohn. New York, NY: Kluwer
Academic/Plenum Publishers, pp. 11–46.
Thrasher, F.M. 2000 (Revised from 1927). The Gang: A
Study of 1,313 Gangs in Chicago. Chicago, IL: University
of Chicago Press.
Thurman, Q.C., and Mueller, D.G. 2003. Beyond curfews
and crackdowns: An overview of the Mountlake Terrace
Neutral Zone-AmeriCorps program. In Policing Gangs
and Youth Violence, edited by S.H. Decker. Belmont, CA:
Wadsworth/Thompson Learning, pp. 167–187.
Tita, G., and Ridgeway, G. 2007. The impact of gang
formation on local patterns of crime. Journal of Research
in Crime and Delinquency 44:208–237.
Tremblay, R.E., Masse, L., Pagani, L., and Vitaro, F.
1996. From childhood physical aggression to adolescent
maladjustment: The Montreal Prevention Experiment.
In Preventing Childhood Disorders, Substance Abuse, and
Delinquency, edited by R.D. Peters and R.J. McMahon.
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, pp. 268–298.
Valdez, A. 2007. Mexican American Girls and Gang Violence:
Beyond Risk. New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan.
Vigil, J.D. 1988. Barrio Gangs: Street Life and Identity in
Southern California. Austin, TX: University of Texas Press.
Vigil, J.D. 1993. The established gang. In Gangs: The
Origins and Impact of Contemporary Youth Gangs in the
United States, edited by S. Cummings and D.J. Monti. Albany,
NY: State University of New York Press, pp. 95–112.
Vigil, J.D. 2002. A Rainbow of Gangs: Street Cultures in
the Mega-City. Austin, TX: University of Texas Press.
Juvenile Justice Bulletin 21

Vigil, J.D. 2008. Mexican migrants in gangs: A secondgeneration
history. In Street Gangs, Migration, and Ethnicity,
edited by F. Van Gemert, D. Peterson, and I.L. Lien.
Portland, OR: Willan Publishing, p. 62.
Warr, M. 2002. Companions in Crime: The Social Aspects of
Criminal Conduct. New York, NY: Cambridge University
Press.
Weisel, D.L., and Howell, J.C. 2007. Comprehensive Gang
Assessment: A Report to the Durham Police Department and
Durham County Sheriff’s Office. Durham, NC: Durham
Police Department.
Welsh, B.C., and Farrington, D.P. 2007. Save children
from a life of crime. Criminology and Public Policy
6:871–879.
Wood, J., and Alleyne, E. 2010. Street gang theory and
practice: Where are we now and where do we go from
here? Aggression and Violent Behavior 15:100–111.
Wyrick, P.A. 2000. Vietnamese Youth Gang Involvement.
Fact Sheet. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice,
Office of Justice Programs, Office of Juvenile Justice and
Delinquency Prevention.
Wyrick, P.A. 2006. Gang prevention: How to make the
“front end” of your anti-gang effort work. United States
Attorneys’ Bulletin 54:52–60.
Wyrick, P.A., and Howell, J.C. 2004. Strategic risk-based
response to youth gangs. Juvenile Justice 10:20–29.
22 Juvenile Justice Bulletin

U.S. Department of Justice
Office of Justice Programs
Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention
Washington, DC 20531
Official Business
Penalty for Private Use $300
*NCJ~231116*
PRESORTED STANDARD
POSTAGE & FEES PAID
DOJ/OJJDP
Permit No. G–91
Acknowledgments
James C. Howell, Ph.D., is a senior research associate with the National Gang
Center (NGC). The author is grateful to John P. Moore, Director of the NGC,
and Dr. Finn-Aage Esbensen, University of Missouri–St. Louis, for their careful
reviews and helpful comments.
This bulletin was prepared under grant number
2007–JV–FX–0008 from the Office of Juvenile
Justice and Delinquency Prevention (OJJDP),
U.S. Department of Justice.
Points of view or opinions expressed in this document
are those of the author and do not necessarily
represent the official position or policies of
OJJDP or the U.S. Department of Justice.
Share With Your Colleagues
Unless otherwise noted, OJJDP publications
are not copyright protected. We encourage you
to reproduce this document, share it with your
colleagues, and reprint it in your newsletter
or journal. However, if you reprint, please cite
OJJDP and the authors of this bulletin. We are
also interested in your feedback, such as how
you received a copy, how you intend to use the
information, and how OJJDP materials meet
your individual or agency needs.
Please direct comments
and/or questions to:
National Criminal Justice
Reference Service
P.O. Box 6000
Rockville, MD 20849–6000
800–851–3420
301–519–5600 (fax)
Web: tellncjrs.ncjrs.gov
The Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency
Prevention is a component of the
Office of Justice Programs, which also includes
the Bureau of Justice Assistance; the
Bureau of Justice Statistics; the Community
Capacity Development Office; the National
Institute of Justice; the Office for Victims
of Crime; and the Office of Sex Offender
Sentencing, Monitoring, Apprehending,
Registering, and Tracking (SMART).
24 Juvenile Justice Bulletin
NCJ 231116

Page 90 of 110

Advocacy Foundation Publishers
Page 91 of 110

Advocacy Foundation Publishers
The e-Advocate Quarterly
Page 92 of 110

Issue Title Quarterly
Vol. I 2015 The Fundamentals
I
The ComeUnity ReEngineering
Project Initiative
Q-1 2015
II The Adolescent Law Group Q-2 2015
III
Landmark Cases in US
Juvenile Justice (PA)
Q-3 2015
IV The First Amendment Project Q-4 2015
Vol. II 2016 Strategic Development
V The Fourth Amendment Project Q-1 2016
VI
Landmark Cases in US
Juvenile Justice (NJ)
Q-2 2016
VII Youth Court Q-3 2016
VIII
The Economic Consequences of Legal
Decision-Making
Q-4 2016
Vol. III 2017 Sustainability
IX The Sixth Amendment Project Q-1 2017
X
The Theological Foundations of
US Law & Government
Q-2 2017
XI The Eighth Amendment Project Q-3 2017
XII
The EB-5 Investor
Immigration Project*
Q-4 2017
Vol. IV 2018 Collaboration
XIII Strategic Planning Q-1 2018
XIV
The Juvenile Justice
Legislative Reform Initiative
Q-2 2018
XV The Advocacy Foundation Coalition Q-3 2018
Page 93 of 110

XVI
for Drug-Free Communities
Landmark Cases in US
Juvenile Justice (GA)
Q-4 2018
Page 94 of 110

Issue Title Quarterly
Vol. V 2019 Organizational Development
XVII The Board of Directors Q-1 2019
XVIII The Inner Circle Q-2 2019
XIX Staff & Management Q-3 2019
XX Succession Planning Q-4 2019
XXI The Budget* Bonus #1
XXII Data-Driven Resource Allocation* Bonus #2
Vol. VI 2020 Missions
XXIII Critical Thinking Q-1 2020
XXIV
The Advocacy Foundation
Endowments Initiative Project
Q-2 2020
XXV International Labor Relations Q-3 2020
XXVI Immigration Q-4 2020
Vol. VII 2021 Community Engagement
XXVII
The 21 st Century Charter Schools
Initiative
Q-1 2021
XXVIII The All-Sports Ministry @ ... Q-2 2021
XXIX Lobbying for Nonprofits Q-3 2021
XXX
XXXI
Advocacy Foundation Missions -
Domestic
Advocacy Foundation Missions -
International
Q-4 2021
Bonus
Page 95 of 110

Vol. VIII
2022 ComeUnity ReEngineering
XXXII
The Creative & Fine Arts Ministry
@ The Foundation
Q-1 2022
XXXIII The Advisory Council & Committees Q-2 2022
XXXIV
The Theological Origins
of Contemporary Judicial Process
Q-3 2022
XXXV The Second Chance Ministry @ ... Q-4 2022
Vol. IX 2023 Legal Reformation
XXXVI The Fifth Amendment Project Q-1 2023
XXXVII The Judicial Re-Engineering Initiative Q-2 2023
XXXVIII
The Inner-Cities Strategic
Revitalization Initiative
Q-3 2023
XXXVIX Habeas Corpus Q-4 2023
Vol. X 2024 ComeUnity Development
XXXVX
The Inner-City Strategic
Revitalization Plan
Q-1 2024
XXXVXI The Mentoring Initiative Q-2 2024
XXXVXII The Violence Prevention Framework Q-3 2024
XXXVXIII The Fatherhood Initiative Q-4 2024
Vol. XI 2025 Public Interest
XXXVXIV Public Interest Law Q-1 2025
L (50) Spiritual Resource Development Q-2 2025
Page 96 of 110

LI
Nonprofit Confidentiality
In The Age of Big Data
Q-3 2025
LII Interpreting The Facts Q-4 2025
Vol. XII 2026 Poverty In America
LIII
American Poverty
In The New Millennium
Q-1 2026
LIV Outcome-Based Thinking Q-2 2026
LV Transformational Social Leadership Q-3 2026
LVI The Cycle of Poverty Q-4 2026
Vol. XIII 2027 Raising Awareness
LVII ReEngineering Juvenile Justice Q-1 2027
LVIII Corporations Q-2 2027
LVIX The Prison Industrial Complex Q-3 2027
LX Restoration of Rights Q-4 2027
Vol. XIV 2028 Culturally Relevant Programming
LXI Community Culture Q-1 2028
LXII Corporate Culture Q-2 2028
LXIII Strategic Cultural Planning Q-3 2028
LXIV
The Cross-Sector/ Coordinated
Service Approach to Delinquency
Prevention
Q-4 2028
Page 97 of 110

Vol. XV 2029 Inner-Cities Revitalization
LXIV
LXV
LXVI
Part I – Strategic Housing
Revitalization
(The Twenty Percent Profit Margin)
Part II – Jobs Training, Educational
Redevelopment
and Economic Empowerment
Part III - Financial Literacy
and Sustainability
Q-1 2029
Q-2 2029
Q-3 2029
LXVII Part IV – Solutions for Homelessness Q-4 2029
LXVIII
The Strategic Home Mortgage
Initiative
Bonus
Vol. XVI 2030 Sustainability
LXVIII Social Program Sustainability Q-1 2030
LXIX
The Advocacy Foundation
Endowments Initiative
Q-2 2030
LXX Capital Gains Q-3 2030
LXXI Sustainability Investments Q-4 2030
Vol. XVII 2031 The Justice Series
LXXII Distributive Justice Q-1 2031
LXXIII Retributive Justice Q-2 2031
LXXIV Procedural Justice Q-3 2031
LXXV (75) Restorative Justice Q-4 2031
LXXVI Unjust Legal Reasoning Bonus
Page 98 of 110

Vol. XVIII 2032 Public Policy
LXXVII Public Interest Law Q-1 2032
LXXVIII Reforming Public Policy Q-2 2032
LXXVIX ... Q-3 2032
LXXVX ... Q-4 2032
Page 99 of 110

The e-Advocate Journal
of Theological Jurisprudence
Vol. I - 2017
The Theological Origins of Contemporary Judicial Process
Scriptural Application to The Model Criminal Code
Scriptural Application for Tort Reform
Scriptural Application to Juvenile Justice Reformation
Vol. II - 2018
Scriptural Application for The Canons of Ethics
Scriptural Application to Contracts Reform
& The Uniform Commercial Code
Scriptural Application to The Law of Property
Scriptural Application to The Law of Evidence
Page 100 of 110

Legal Missions International
Page 101 of 110

Issue Title Quarterly
Vol. I 2015
I
II
God’s Will and The 21 st Century
Democratic Process
The Community
Engagement Strategy
Q-1 2015
Q-2 2015
III Foreign Policy Q-3 2015
IV
Public Interest Law
in The New Millennium
Q-4 2015
Vol. II 2016
V Ethiopia Q-1 2016
VI Zimbabwe Q-2 2016
VII Jamaica Q-3 2016
VIII Brazil Q-4 2016
Vol. III 2017
IX India Q-1 2017
X Suriname Q-2 2017
XI The Caribbean Q-3 2017
XII United States/ Estados Unidos Q-4 2017
Vol. IV 2018
XIII Cuba Q-1 2018
XIV Guinea Q-2 2018
XV Indonesia Q-3 2018
XVI Sri Lanka Q-4 2018
Vol. V 2019
Page 102 of 110

XVII Russia Q-1 2019
XVIII Australia Q-2 2019
XIV South Korea Q-3 2019
XV Puerto Rico Q-4 2019
Issue Title Quarterly
Vol. VI 2020
XVI Trinidad & Tobago Q-1 2020
XVII Egypt Q-2 2020
XVIII Sierra Leone Q-3 2020
XIX South Africa Q-4 2020
XX Israel Bonus
Vol. VII 2021
XXI Haiti Q-1 2021
XXII Peru Q-2 2021
XXIII Costa Rica Q-3 2021
XXIV China Q-4 2021
XXV Japan Bonus
Vol VIII 2022
XXVI Chile Q-1 2022
Page 103 of 110

The e-Advocate Juvenile Justice Report
______
Vol. I – Juvenile Delinquency in The US
Vol. II. – The Prison Industrial Complex
Vol. III – Restorative/ Transformative Justice
Vol. IV – The Sixth Amendment Right to The Effective Assistance of Counsel
Vol. V – The Theological Foundations of Juvenile Justice
Vol. VI – Collaborating to Eradicate Juvenile Delinquency
Page 104 of 110

The e-Advocate Newsletter
Genesis of The Problem
Family Structure
Societal Influences
Evidence-Based Programming
Strengthening Assets v. Eliminating Deficits
2012 - Juvenile Delinquency in The US
Introduction/Ideology/Key Values
Philosophy/Application & Practice
Expungement & Pardons
Pardons & Clemency
Examples/Best Practices
2013 - Restorative Justice in The US
2014 - The Prison Industrial Complex
25% of the World's Inmates Are In the US
The Economics of Prison Enterprise
The Federal Bureau of Prisons
The After-Effects of Incarceration/Individual/Societal
The Fourth Amendment Project
The Sixth Amendment Project
The Eighth Amendment Project
The Adolescent Law Group
2015 - US Constitutional Issues In The New Millennium
Page 105 of 110

2018 - The Theological Law Firm Academy
The Theological Foundations of US Law & Government
The Economic Consequences of Legal Decision-Making
The Juvenile Justice Legislative Reform Initiative
The EB-5 International Investors Initiative
2017 - Organizational Development
The Board of Directors
The Inner Circle
Staff & Management
Succession Planning
Bonus #1 The Budget
Bonus #2 Data-Driven Resource Allocation
2018 - Sustainability
The Data-Driven Resource Allocation Process
The Quality Assurance Initiative
The Advocacy Foundation Endowments Initiative
The Community Engagement Strategy
2019 - Collaboration
Critical Thinking for Transformative Justice
International Labor Relations
Immigration
God's Will & The 21st Century Democratic Process
The Community Engagement Strategy
The 21st Century Charter Schools Initiative
2020 - Community Engagement
Page 106 of 110

Extras
The Nonprofit Advisors Group Newsletters
The 501(c)(3) Acquisition Process
The Board of Directors
The Gladiator Mentality
Strategic Planning
Fundraising
501(c)(3) Reinstatements
The Collaborative US/ International Newsletters
How You Think Is Everything
The Reciprocal Nature of Business Relationships
Accelerate Your Professional Development
The Competitive Nature of Grant Writing
Assessing The Risks
Page 107 of 110

About The Author
John C (Jack) Johnson III
Founder & CEO
Jack was educated at Temple University, in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania and Rutgers
Law School, in Camden, New Jersey. In 1999, he moved to Atlanta, Georgia to pursue
greater opportunities to provide Advocacy and Preventive Programmatic services for atrisk/
at-promise young persons, their families, and Justice Professionals embedded in the
Juvenile Justice process in order to help facilitate its transcendence into the 21 st Century.
There, along with a small group of community and faith-based professionals, “The Advocacy Foundation, Inc." was conceived
and developed over roughly a thirteen year period, originally chartered as a Juvenile Delinquency Prevention and Educational
Support Services organization consisting of Mentoring, Tutoring, Counseling, Character Development, Community Change
Management, Practitioner Re-Education & Training, and a host of related components.
The Foundation’s Overarching Mission is “To help Individuals, Organizations, & Communities Achieve Their Full Potential”, by
implementing a wide array of evidence-based proactive multi-disciplinary "Restorative & Transformative Justice" programs &
projects currently throughout the northeast, southeast, and western international-waters regions, providing prevention and support
services to at-risk/ at-promise youth, to young adults, to their families, and to Social Service, Justice and Mental
Health professionals” everywhere. The Foundation has since relocated its headquarters to Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, and been
expanded to include a three-tier mission.
In addition to his work with the Foundation, Jack also served as an Adjunct Professor of Law & Business at National-Louis
University of Atlanta (where he taught Political Science, Business & Legal Ethics, Labor & Employment Relations, and Critical
Thinking courses to undergraduate and graduate level students). Jack has also served as Board President for a host of wellestablished
and up & coming nonprofit organizations throughout the region, including “Visions Unlimited Community
Development Systems, Inc.”, a multi-million dollar, award-winning, Violence Prevention and Gang Intervention Social Service
organization in Atlanta, as well as Vice-Chair of the Georgia/ Metropolitan Atlanta Violence Prevention Partnership, a state-wide
300 organizational member, violence prevention group led by the Morehouse School of Medicine, Emory University and The
Original, Atlanta-Based, Martin Luther King Center.
Attorney Johnson’s prior accomplishments include a wide-array of Professional Legal practice areas, including Private Firm,
Corporate and Government postings, just about all of which yielded significant professional awards & accolades, the history and
chronology of which are available for review online. Throughout his career, Jack has served a wide variety of for-profit
corporations, law firms, and nonprofit organizations as Board Chairman, Secretary, Associate, and General Counsel since 1990.
www.TheAdvocacyFoundation.org
Clayton County Youth Services Partnership, Inc. – Chair; Georgia Violence Prevention Partnership, Inc – Vice Chair; Fayette
County NAACP - Legal Redress Committee Chairman; Clayton County Fatherhood Initiative Partnership – Principal
Investigator; Morehouse School of Medicine School of Community Health Feasibility Study - Steering Committee; Atlanta
Violence Prevention Capacity Building Project – Project Partner; Clayton County Minister’s Conference, President 2006-2007;
Liberty In Life Ministries, Inc. – Board Secretary; Young Adults Talk, Inc. – Board of Directors; ROYAL, Inc - Board of
Directors; Temple University Alumni Association; Rutgers Law School Alumni Association; Sertoma International; Our
Common Welfare Board of Directors – President)2003-2005; River’s Edge Elementary School PTA (Co-President); Summerhill
Community Ministries; Outstanding Young Men of America; Employee of the Year; Academic All-American - Basketball;
Church Trustee.
Page 108 of 110

www.TheAdvocacyFoundation.org
Page 109 of 110

Page 110 of 110