RESULTS OF THE 1994

ILLINOIS LAW ENFORCEMENT SURVEY:

A Preliminary Report on Gang Migration

and Other Gang Problems in Illinois Today.

By

George W. Knox, Ph.D.

               Director, National Gang Crime Research Center

(Copyright, NGCRC: The 1994 Statewide Gang Assessment Report for the State of Illinois)

ABSTRACT

       A saturation mailing was made on February 3, 1994 to all police chiefs (N = 650) and all county sheriffs (N = 102) in Illinois. The response rate for the police chiefs was 35.3 percent resulting in a usable sample of N = 232 police chiefs. Another 25 county sheriffs also responded to the survey.

       This report is generalizable to smaller cities under 100,000 in population size. The sample does not include large cities like Chicago, where the gang problem is already well documented.

       About two-thirds of all police chiefs now report that youth gangs are a problem in their cities. However, further analysis in this report shows significant variations in the gang problem by the size of the city population.

       As this research project sought to add to our knowledge on issues surrounding "gang migration", the larger problem of "gang proliferation" is discussed in this report. A more detailed analysis is made of one of these exogenous sources of gang proliferation: the "familial gang transplant" phenomenon.

       Recommendations for new criminal code legislation and for new initiatives to monitor the gang proliferation problem are provided.

       A full copy of the survey instrument used along with all descriptive statistics broken down by city vs. county respondents is also provided in this report.

INTRODUCTION

      To what extent have criminal gangs extended their influence throughout the State of Illinois? What type of crime patterns are associated with the major gangs that operate in Illinois? To what degree are smaller towns now experiencing a gang problem, and did this arise because of "gang migration" or because of "gang emulation"? These and other questions about this most important policy issue affecting the public safety of all citizens in Illinois beg our attention. Unfortunately, until the present research project, persons concerned about this issue did not have the benefit of systematic statewide research on the gang problem in Illinois.

      This report is a beginning in the right direction of providing a comprehensive assessment of the gang problem in Illinois. It provides the views and experiences of one important component in any such statewide gang assessment: the data from local law enforcement agencies. Law enforcement officials, as agencies of formal social control, are often some of the first to see the gang problem as it spreads and develops.

      It is, of course, our viewpoint that to have a fully comprehensive statewide assessment that additional research is also needed: particularly among our State's public school system, in our State's adult and juvenile correctional institutions, as well as how victims of gang crime view this problem, and what the business community has experienced in this regard as well. The present report therefore provides one component of this needed knowledge development for the State of Illinois regarding the scope and extent of the gang problem today.

       In spite of the resource limitations faced by the researchers, this report does provide the single largest study of gangs and law enforcement within a given state ever yet reported in the U.S.A. criminal justice literature. The fact that a handful of authors --- without funding --- could produce such a report in a short period of time also illustrates how little our elected officials have done in terms of sponsoring the development of criminological knowledge such as this type of needed information on Illinois. This type of statewide assessment should be institutionalized and ongoing in nature. Because the gang problem will not go away by simply denying its existence!

PREVIOUS RESEARCH

     Knox (1991, 1993) details a number of studies of law enforcement about gang issues. Most of these projects are national in scope and reflect the use of random survey samples. What these studies show --- particularly those conducted over the recent years by the National Gang Crime Research Center --- is that cities of all sizes throughout the United States have experienced a sudden recent onset of gang problems. This basically means that gangs have proliferated in recent years and can now be found in a very large number of cities.

      There has also been some more specialized research about gang issues in terms of law enforcement. Knox, McCurrie and Tromanhauser (1994) report the use of threat analysis as a way of assessing the scope and extent of the Nation's gang problem. Knox, Laske, and Tromanhauser (1992) reported the viewpoints of a survey of gang specialist police officers from the Midwest on what could be done about the gang problem.

      Other studies --- some of which are found in the bibliography --- have also examined the gang issue in terms of law enforcement. However, no single study had previously been reported in the professional literature to our knowledge which focused exclusively on assessing the scope and extent of the gang problem in Illinois. The present study, therefore, seeks to fill in this information gap. It does so quite effectively, as will be described.

THE NATURE OF THIS RESEARCH PROJECT

      This research was planned in 1993 and implemented in early 1994. The idea for this cooperative study came as a result of discussions about the rival and competing explanations for the gang problem in states like Illinois today. The authors hypothesized as to what may or may not be accounting for the rapid proliferation of gangs, which all expected from experience and previous research to also be affecting Illinois. Through a series of discussions and planning meetings, the authors contributed their questions that would be placed before Illinois law enforcement agencies. The final draft of the survey instrument used, therefore, reflects a composite of all such hypotheses examined.

     No funding was sought nor obtained for this research project. The costs were borne somewhat equally by all authors. The different theoretical expectations of the authors and their different hypotheses were basically put to the test here. The idea was to carry out this independent research project and let the facts speak for themselves. The authors had by previous arrangement agreed to present their viewpoints in light of this hard data on Illinois law enforcement agencies at the Annual Meeting of the Academy of Criminal Justice Sciences meeting that was to be held in 1994 .

THE RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

      Approximately 650 municipal police departments and 102 county sheriff's departments were identified in Illinois. A saturation sampling technique was used for this mail questionnaire research. Every agency was sent a survey package on February 3rd, 1994. The survey package included: a cover letter asking the law enforcement agency to participate in the survey, a page of information describing the research and the credentials of the researchers, a copy of the questionnaire, and a return envelope.

       From our experience, about 90+ percent of the data that will be returned is in fact returned within three weeks. Thus, without any follow-up calls or reminders to those not responding, the arbitrary "cut-off" date of March 1, 1994 was used to define the sample size used for this report. As of 1 March 1994 some 232 police chiefs and 25 county sheriffs had responded by providing usable surveys. Surveys were considered "usable" if they were basically filled out. Several were returned --- and not used here --- that had what is called overwhelming missing data: the respondent simply did not answer most of the questions.

      Thus, based on the arbitrary cut-off date for the sample size used here, the data used for police chiefs still reflects about one-third (35.3%) of all such municipal law enforcement agencies in Illinois. A 35 percent response rate is considered very good for research projects like this lacking follow-up resources.

WHAT IS COVERED IN THIS REPORT

     How the different theoretical viewpoints and hypotheses of the authors may have been supported or modified in light of the data collected on Illinois law enforcement agencies is reported elsewhere (Knox and McCurrie, 1994; Tromanhauser, 1994; Laskey, 1994).

     This report provides a straight-forward statistical summary of all quantitative variables from the 1994 Illinois Law Enforcement Survey.

      This report does not link local agency data with supplemental data from other secondary sources such as census data or crime data sources such as the Uniform Crime Reports. While such additional research and analysis would be invaluable, that is beyond the scope of the present effort because it would require much additional resources and funding that has not been made available.

      This report does not provide a full social network analysis of Illinois gang proliferation, emulation, and migration. However, the data environment created by this project does contain the raw elements for such a more detailed analysis. Unfortunately, it too is beyond the scope of the present report. By social network analysis, is meant a systematic tracking of specific gangs, their city of origin, their time span for proliferation across the State of Illinois, and the complex process of diffusion from larger to medium and then to smaller jurisdictions. And yet there is an urgent need for this kind of rigorous and in-depth statistical analysis. However, it is not a knowledge development need that is funded by any agency that we know of.

      What this report does provide is exactly what we promised. We promised what we were collectively capable of doing in a very short period of time with our own meager pooled resources. All labor for this project has been donated. All hard costs have been shared equally to the ability to do so among the authors. In approaching the law enforcement executives of Illinois, the authors promised to provide a copy of the preliminary statewide gang migration assessment to all respondents who wanted it. These results were further promised within two months. Here we meet and exceed our promises made.

BASIC DESCRIPTIVE FINDINGS

      Appendix A contains a copy of the survey instrument. Beneath each question or item in the survey, the basic statistical findings for the both groups of respondents are provided. This shows, for example, the percentage distribution in response to all forced-choice questions for two groups: the police chiefs (PC), and the county sheriffs (CS). The way in which the basic descriptive findings from this research will be presented is straight-forward. That is to say, the findings will be presented in the same order in which the actual questions appear in the survey itself. Just the facts are presented, without inflection, without theoretical references, and without political commentary.

      In this section of the report, providing a basic descriptive summary of the results of this research, only descriptive statistics are provided: percentages, means (AKA: arithmetic average), and frequency distribution if relevant. No effort is made is this section to describe how any of these individual variables interact or are related to each other. Based on issues and trends in the data, the reader will find additional bivariate level statistical analysis in a later section of this report. Conclusions and recommendations are, of course, found at the end of this report.

What Percentage of Illinois Law Enforcement Agencies Report That Youth Gangs Are A Problem in Their Jurisdiction?

     This survey revealed that 68.3 percent of police chiefs in Illinois report that youth gangs are a problem in their jurisdiction. Less than a third (31.7%) of Illinois police chiefs report that youth gangs are not a problem in their city.

Are Youth Gangs a Major, Moderate, or Minor Problem?

     The results of this survey, reflecting a sample size of over a third of all such municipal police departments in Illinois, show that 6 percent felt youth gangs were a "major problem". Some 38.7 percent of the police chiefs felt youth gangs were a "moderate problem". And 55.4 percent of the Illinois police chiefs in this sample felt that youth gangs were a "minor problem" in their city.

What Percentage of Illinois Law Enforcement Agencies Use A SWORD (Statewide Organized Gang Database) Computer Terminal From the State Police?

     The results of this survey conducted in February 1994 show that 30.2 percent of the police chiefs now report using such SWORD computer terminals. The SWORD legislation became effective in Illinois on January 1, 1993. The fact that within a one year time period, this many municipal law enforcement agencies could be taking advantage of this new Illinois law enforcement tool is certainly suggestive of a highly effective implementation of this Act. Still, some 68.3 percent of all municipal police departments in Illinois do not report using a SWORD terminal.

     It is clear that reports of a gang problem exceed reports of using SWORD computer terminals among Illinois law enforcement agencies. A worthwhile future study should perhaps focus on how to extend the usage pattern regarding the SWORD Act to put utilization at least at parity with the level of the reported gang problem in Illinois.

Is Gang-Related Crime Concentrated in Certain Specific Areas?

      Among the police chiefs responding to this survey, some 28.1 percent reported that gang-related crime was in fact concentrated in certain specific areas of their city. Most (71.9%) of the police chiefs indicated that gang-related crime was not concentrated in certain specific areas.

Have Illinois Law Enforcement Agencies Seen Gang Influence From Outside of their Jurisdictions?

     The gang proliferation problem has two possible sources of variation: (1) the indigenous gang problem, that is, the extent to which the gang problem is a naturally occurring phenomenon that has only local ties and origins, where such gang members are native to the local area, and (2) the exogenous gang problem, that is, the extent to which the gang problem is due to some external influence, reflecting a source of origin and/or ties outside of the community or jurisdiction. In theory, gang suppression can best be achieved by strangling the "input" or raw materials (i.e., new gang recruits, new gang members, new initiations, transfers, etc) of the gang organization so that zero growth is achieved. Gang suppression can therefore only begin when negative growth development (through arrests, prosecution, etc) is possible. Unfortunately, current Illinois criminal codes are not sufficient to effectively prevent new gang recruitment, thus imposing great hardship on the extent to which law enforcement agencies in Illinois can effectively confront this vital aspect of the gang problem.

     This survey shows that among police chiefs in Illinois, some 87.4 percent do report having experienced some gang influence from outside of their own community. Recall that a smaller percentage of police chiefs actually reported that youth gangs were a "problem" (68.3%) in their city. This discrepancy (87.4% versus 68.3%) is not a logical inconsistency. All it means is that some respondents report a gang presence, they just do not perceive it to be a "problem".

     This survey therefore shows that among police chiefs in Illinois, only one-eighth (12.6%) of them do not report exogenous gang influences to their city.

      Substantial evidence would appear to exist at this point in the analysis that gang proliferation has clearly as one of its explanations that of cross-jurisdictional gang influence. While harsh federal laws exist to deter interstate travel for the commission of a felony, the Illinois Criminal Code does not make inter-county travel in the furtherance of a felony a factor in aggravation for sentencing. Criminal code penalties need to be established to deal more effectively with this major problem in Illinois today. As a criminal code statute aimed not specifically at the gang organization, but rather at the behavior pattern of the gang crime itself, this type of law would have a greater chance of standing up in court challenges. This is an ever increasing consideration given the fact that gangs themselves possess the financial resources to effect such challenges to "gang statutes" on constitutional grounds. Or alternatively they can convince legal aid groups that their rights are being abused (i.e., they are not a gang consisting of Gangster Disciples, they are a political "self-help" group interested in "Growth and Development").

TABLE 1

DISTRIBUTION OF CITY POLICE CHIEFS REPORTING A GANG

PROBLEM IN THEIR CITY BY WHETHER THEY

ALSO REPORT SOME EXOGENOUS GANG INFLUENCE

                       Exogenous Gang Influence?

                          NO YES

Are Youth Gangs A

Problem in Your City?

                  NO 27 45

                  YES 2 155

               (% Yes) 6.8% 77.5%

                        Chi-square = 58.5, p < .001

What Types of Crime Problems Do Youth Gangs Cause?

       Table 2 provides the percentage distribution for various crime problems which police chiefs and county sheriffs reported as being caused by youth gangs in their jurisdiction. For the police chiefs, these crime problems are also rank ordered. As can be seen in Table 2, then, slightly over half (59.1%) of all police chiefs responding to the survey indicated that youth gangs are a cause of graffiti problems. Similarly, 45 percent of all municipal police departments in Illinois responding to the survey also indicated that youth gangs are a cause of violence (45.7%), drug sales (45.3%), and burglary (45.3%). About a fourth of the police chiefs responding to the survey (24.1%) indicate that youth gangs are a cause of car thefts in their city. And some 17.1 percent of the police chiefs report that drive-by shootings are caused by gangs in their city.

TABLE 2

PERCENTAGE DISTRIBUTION OF WHETHER VARIOUS CRIME PATTERNS

INVOLVE GANGS BY REPORTS OF ILLINOIS

LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCIES

                                 Type of Law Enf. Agency

                                 Police County

                                 Chiefs Sheriffs

% Reporting Gangs are GRAFFITI 59.1% 48.0%

   Involved in: VIOLENCE 45.7% 44.0%

                     DRUG SALES 45.3% 56.0%

                       BURGLARY 45.3% 40.0%

                      CAR THEFT 24.1% 8.0% DRIVE-BYS 17.1% 32.0%

                        ROBBERY 12.1% 8.0%

                          ARSON 3.0% 0.0%

                   PROSTITUTION .9% 0.0%

                          OTHER 19.0% 16.0%

How Much Crime in Illinois is "Gang-Related"?

      A series of questions in the 1994 Illinois Law Enforcement Survey were designed to provide estimates of how much crime in Illinois is "gang-related". The respondents were asked to provide estimates, because that is all anyone can provide at this point in the evolution of the law enforcement response to the gang problem in America. The reason this is so, is because Illinois law enforcement agencies are not required to "tag" any and all offenses later reported to the State or to the Federal government as "gang-related". The FBI's Annual Uniform Crime Report, for example, is based on reports from local police chiefs and county sheriffs and other law enforcement agencies: but it too does not answer the question "how much crime in America is gang-related".

      When certain crime patterns shock the public imagination, then crime reporting policy also tends to ultimately adapt to this if it is an ongoing problem. Bias crimes existed in America for a very long time, but were not basically recognized as such until the 1980's. As a result of the growing public concern about bias crimes, legislation was introduced to "track" the scope and extent of bias crimes, and these are now reported in the FBI's annual Uniform Crime Report. We can probably expect this same modification at some point in time for "gang-related crimes". However, until then, we shall have to make due with rough estimates of the scope and extent of the problem.

      "Gang-related crime" should probably include: (a) any offense committed by a known gang member or gang associate, (b) any offense of violence where the victim was a gang member, and (c) any offense in which the victim has a factual basis for believing that the crime may be gang-related (e.g., gang slogans shouted, gang dress modes were spotted, gang hand signs were witnessed, etc). Each of these three conditions can be linked to the very nature of the crime threat posed by a modern organized gang. Unfortunately, no Illinois law and no federal law requires the compilation or reporting of these kinds of statistics to the public. While the actual impact in terms of death and destruction in what might be termed "gang-related crime" certainly can be assumed to vastly outweigh "bias crime", we shall have to wait until the public exerts pressure upon the state and federal legislatures demanding this basic information. With the rising tide of crime and violence now known to be associated with gangs, it may be possible at this point to predict that public fears about this problem may shortly force such crime reporting changes as happened with the bias-crime phenomenon.

Table 3

"Gang-Related Crime" Statistical Estimates

for Police Chiefs and County Sheriffs in Illinois

                                  Type of Law Enf. Agency

                                  Police County

                                  Chiefs Sheriffs

Percentage of total crime in

  jurisdiction that is caused

  by gang activity.

                 RANGE: Low 0 0

                          High 70 30

                 MEAN Percentage 8.4% 9.7%

Percentage of total juvenile

   crime in jurisdiction that is

   caused by gang activity.

                   RANGE: Low 0 0

                            High 80 60

                   MEAN Percentage 13.8% 8.9%

Percentage of the crime in

   jurisdiction caused by gangs

   or gang members from outside

   of the same jurisdiction.

                   RANGE: Low 0 0

                            High 100 95

                   MEAN percentage 12.2% 13.9%

The "Outsider Did It" Phenomenon: Estimated Percentage of All Arrests in the Last Year Where the Offenders Were Non-Residents of the Same Jurisdiction.

     This is a most interesting aspect about crime generally, and it basically means the offender was not a part of the community (city or county) he/she was victimizing. The percentage of all arrests committed by non-residents of a city or county also tells us something interesting about the crime pattern itself. For if this is a substantial problem, then there are some measures that can be used in defense against this problem. Some state license plates (e.g., Florida), for example, contain the conspicuous information about county of origin in which the plate was issued. It may be valuable to have allow Illinoisans to also take pride in their own county of origin by having this same information included on Illinois motor vehicle license plates.

       Among police chiefs responding to this survey, the range of values for what percentage of all arrests in the last year were of non-residents of the community/jurisdiction, ranged from a low of zero to a high of 98 percent. The mean value or arithmetic average was 43.3 percent among police chiefs.

       Among county sheriffs, the range was from zero to 95 percent with the mean being 29 percent for all arrests in the last year where the offender was an "outsider".

The Extent to Which Conditions in the Areas Were Economically Declining or Improving.

     A background variable was also included in the survey. It asked the respondent to "rate the extent to which you believe your jurisdiction is economically declining (e.g., loss of jobs, etc) or improving". The response mode choices included a semantic differential scale from zero (declining) to ten (improving). This variable on the economic health of the area may be related to other aspects of the gang problem.

      Among police chiefs the range in responses varied between a low of zero to a high of ten. The mean or average value was 5.48 for the police chiefs. Among the county sheriffs, again the range was between 2 and 10 with an average value of 4.80.

In What Year, Exactly, Did Gangs First Become Recognized As a Problem in Illinois Cities and Counties?

     Figure 1 shows a trend that is cross-validated by very similar findings nationwide. When asked when, in what year specifically, did the gang problem first arise in their communities, the police chiefs in Illinois as shown in Figure 1 generally state that the gang problem is relatively recent in nature. Only 1.7 percent stated that the gang problem first became recognized during or prior to 1980. Only 4.5 percent indicated the gang problem first arose during the time period of 1981 to 1984. About a fifth of all police chiefs in Illinois (20.3%) indicated that the gang problem was first recognized in their cities during the time period of 1985-1988. Remarkably, however, over half (59.4%) indicated that the gang problem was first recognized during the time period of 1989 through 1992. Finally, 10.7 percent indicated the problem just arose (1993).

      Stated alternatively, some 70.1 percent of the police chiefs in Illinois indicated that the gang problem was first recognized within the last five years! For most of these law enforcement agencies, then, the gang problem is a relatively new problem.

      As seen from the distribution in Appendix A for this question, the mean or average year in which gangs were first recognized by city police chiefs was 1988.9 and 1991 for county sheriffs.

Illinois Law Enforcement Personnel Strength Compared With The Force Strength of Their Own Local Gangs.

     Prior research on gangs and law enforcement has been able to conclude that at a national level gang members clearly outnumber sworn police officers. But does this same condition actually apply to Illinois as a state system? The answer is unfortunately yes and worse, apparently in Illinois gang members outnumber sworn police officers not by a simple majority, but by ratios!

     Table 4 provides the results of this analysis of the data from the 1994 Illinois Law Enforcement Survey. As seen here, among police chiefs, the full-time sworn police officers in Illinois at the municipal law enforcement level are outnumbered by gang members at a ratio of 2.48 to 1. This is the aggregate analysis statewide. Because this also includes those respondents who report they have no gang problem, the actual day-to-day battle faced by Illinois law enforcement officers is actually therefore a much more formidable problem than that reported in Table 4. This is true, because we have not at this stage of the analysis limited the calculation of "ratios" to those police departments who do report a gang problem. Some police departments do not report a gang problem. What this very critical finding amounts to is called the Fort Apache Syndrome: the bad guys really do outnumber the good guys in some cities.

TABLE 4

FINDINGS ON NUMBER OF SWORN POLICE OFFICERS AMONG

CITY POLICE CHIEFS AND COUNTY SHERIFFS IN ILLINOIS

AND FORCE STRENGTH ESTIMATES OF THE LOCAL GANG POPULATIONS

                                 Type of Law Enf. Agency

                                 Police County

                                 Chiefs Sheriffs

Total Number of Sworn Full-time

   Police Officers 5189 738

Average or Mean Full-Timers 22.9 29.5

Total Core and Periphery Gang

   Membership Population 12,914 2807

Average or Mean Gang Population 63.9 155.9

Ratio of Sworn Police Officers

   To Gang Members in Illinois 2.48 3.80

Total Number of Sworn Part-Time

    Police Officers 832 31

Average or Mean Part-timers 5.1 2.5

Ratio of All Sworn Personnel

   (Full-time and Part-time)

   To Gang Members in Illinois 2.14 3.65

To What Extent Do Police Officers in Illinois Receive Training in "Gang Awareness" or in Handling Gang Problems?

     Clearly law enforcement agencies are trying to get their sworn personnel trained on gang issues seems to be the finding here. However, the extent of gang training lags behind the extent of the gang problem in Illinois to some extent is also the finding here; and this is a problem for law enforcement as a whole in the State of Illinois.

     Table 5 shows that there is very little difference regarding the provision of "pre-service gang training" by whether or not the same municipal law enforcement agencies also report a gang problem exists in their city. As seen in Table 5, some 66 police chiefs reported that gangs are a problem but that pre-service "gang training" is not provided to their police officers. This is not proportionately greater than those that do provide such pre-service gang training. In other words, no significant statistical difference exists among police chiefs in terms of the effects of whether a gang problem exists and whether pre-service training on gangs is provided.

      Where the significant difference emerges, however, is the factor about "in-service training". What this suggests, clearly, is that the police departments have themselves tried to adapt to this new crime threat by providing in-service training on gangs, the overall structure of pre-service law enforcement training in Illinois has lagged behind the rise of the gang problem. Future research should therefore ascertain whether at least the new recruits to municipal police departments are provided with pre-service gang training; because if not, then the structure of law enforcement training would itself be lagging behind the rising gang problem in Illinois.

TABLE 5

DISTRIBUTION OF CITY POLICE CHIEFS REPORTING A GANG PROBLEM

BY WHETHER THEY ALSO PROVIDE THEIR OFFICERS

WITH GANG TRAINING FROM THE 1994 ILLINOIS SURVEY

                                 Is Pre-Service Training

                                 On Gangs Provided?

                                    NO YES

Are Youth Gangs A Problem

  In Your Jurisdiction? NO 36 25

                           YES 66 68

                        (% Yes) 64.7% 73.1%

                            Chi-square = 1.60, p = .20 (N.S.)

                                 Is In-Service Training

                                 On Gangs Provided?

                                    NO YES

Are Youth Gangs A Problem

   In Your Jurisdiction? NO 25 48

                            YES 23 134

                         (% Yes) 47.9% 73.6%

                                Chi-square = 11.5, p = .001

Estimates Regarding What Percentage of the Total Gang Population is Attributable to Families and Individuals Who Have Recently Relocated to the Jurisdictions Among Police Chiefs and County Sheriffs.

     This was a follow-up question to the question in the survey about the total core and periphery gang membership population. This follow-up question asked the respondent to "estimate what percentage of the total gang population in your jurisdiction is attributable to families or individuals who have recently relocated to your community/jurisdiction?". For police chiefs, this ranged from a low of 0 to a high of 100 percent. Overall, statewide, regardless if they reported a gang problem or not, the average or mean value for this factor was 28.9 percent. For county sheriffs, the mean was 31.9 percent. What this tends to measure is not gang migration, but gang immigration to these cities and counties. In short, these are gang transplants who move with their family or moved to a new area as individuals.

    Additional statistical controls can help to understand this aspect of gang proliferation in Illinois. The above findings, for example, do not control for whether or not the same agencies also report a gang problem. There is a need to analyze this particular factor then by first eliminating those agencies in the sample that do not report a gang problem.

     While several techniques can be employed here for refining the estimates regarding this important aspect of gang proliferation, the method chosen here is to simply look at the subsamples for those who did in fact report that youth gangs are a problem in their jurisdiction. Using this method yields the following results. Among police chiefs, the mean or arithmetic average estimate is 36.4 percent when asked what percentage of the total gang population in the city is attributable to recent immigrants or transplants. Among county sheriffs this figure, delimited to those that also report a gang problem, was 40.2 percent.

     Thus, it would appear that a substantial portion of the gang problem in Illinois is in fact exogenous in nature by being attributable in this instance to recently relocated "new folks" in the community. Still, a sizable portion of the gang proliferation problem, by logical inference, must necessarily be indigenous (i.e., homegrown, native, organic) in nature.

      This issue cannot be resolved entirely here and does in fact require a more rigorous method for estimating the total local gang population in local areas as a prerequisite for adequately testing any of the so-called "gang migration" issues. However, it should be pointed out that even major federally research on the gang migration issue, like that carried out by researchers at the University of Southern California has not made an effort to provide anything other than the crude self-reported estimates of the local gang population sizes. So while even the present research effort is equal in rigor to major federally funded efforts, we recognize that from a social science research perspective it would seem necessary if we were really serious about this "gang migration" issue, to provide some independent corroboration of local estimates; and ideally have such gang population estimates based on hard data (e.g., number of resident entries into the SWORD computer data system, etc). Obviously, in this sense, juvenile and adult offender statistics need to be separately calculated and then combined for a total gang strength force estimate.

The Trend In Dress Code Restrictions Related to the Gang Problem Within Local Public Schools.

      Another question in the 1994 Illinois Law Enforcement Survey asked "to your knowledge, are certain color patterns or modes of dress identified as gang-related prohibited in local public schools?". The data show that statewide, some 54.6 percent of the police chiefs report "yes", that such dress code restrictions are in place within local public schools. Similarly, some 32 percent of the county sheriffs reported this to be the case.

The Trend in Passing City Ordinances and County Level Laws That Are Specifically Aimed at the Gang Problem.

      The results from this survey show that about a fourth (27.6%) of all police chiefs within this sample now report "yes" in response to the question "has your city/county jurisdiction passed any laws recently that are specifically aimed at gangs (e.g., curfew, etc)". Some 12 percent of the county sheriffs also responded "yes" to this question in February of 1994. There is a need to analyze this type of local legislation, and the initiatives in changing local public policy responses to the gang problem such as those anti-gang laws passed as city ordinances. That fact that so many local laws have been recently passed specifically aimed at gangs, does signal an important trend in the public response to the gang problem: while the gang problem for the most part in Illinois is a relatively recent problem in terms of when it was first recognized as a problem by local law enforcement officials, it is a sufficiently salient concern to local citizens throughout Illinois to result in this grassroots groundswell.

     A useful future research and analysis project would therefore collect and codify these recent local laws and examine the commonalities for the potential of generating a model prototype of Zero Tolerance approaches. Some cities may have elected executives who exert influence over the police department, however, and where the mayor may not be a subscriber to the zero tolerance philosophy. The Gang Summit Meeting held in Kansas City, MO in 1993, for example, meant the police department was basically told to have a discretionary or laissez-faire approach to the influx of large numbers of known outside gang members coming to the town for a professional development meeting under the guise of helping to establish a reduction in violence; in fact, the Mayor of Kansas City appeared at and provided a breakfast reception for these visitors to his city. The Kansas City condition preempts a true Zero Tolerance approach by the local police department. Other conditions are also possible: the denial syndrome is one of these, as is the co-optation and collaborationist response. In the latter, the city mayor or city government provides a source of resources of direct benefit to the gang, gang leaders, or gang activist organizers . In the Zero Tolerance response to the gang problem no resource can be given to the gang that will allow it to be stronger than it already is: at least any resource than can be manipulated by the gang for its own benefit, because that would be subsidizing the gang covertly.

     Figure 2 below provides a typology of policy response modes by law enforcement to the gang problem. We would hypothesize that the rise in local legislation to the gang problem would vary significantly by these four different types of communities. Further, that such policy changes are found the least among those in the "denial stage" response and most in the Zero Tolerance policy response mode. Future research should therefore seek to examine this issue in more detail.

FIGURE 2: A Typology of Policy Response Modes

To the Gang Problem By Law Enforcement Agencies

POLICY RESPONSE MODES

TO THE GANG PROBLEM: TYPICAL POSITION STATEMENT ON GANGS

1. Denial Stage "We don't have a gang problem, I'm sure".

2. Coopt/cooperate "We can work with the gang leaders, and

    approach manage the damage by gangs."

3. Discretionary or "We can have a mixed set of responses,

    Laissez-faire one of which is to work with and approach recognize them when desirable."

4. The Zero Tolerance "We recognize gangs are a law enforcement

    approach problem with a plan for abatement".

                            TOLERATE

                            NO YES

GANG PROBLEM NO 1 2

                    YES 4 3

      The value of looking at the particular policy response to the gang problem over time is that longitudinal data on gang force strength and gang-related crime could then be examined together. This would provide not only for an evaluation of what are the most effective policy response to the gang problem, but also whether variations in the policy responses account for any of the increase or decrease in the gang problem itself. Future research should take into account that there may be a built-in bias in the kind of policy response rates to voluntary surveys such as is used in the research reported here . However, the astute researcher knows that the same kind of information in this survey can be component generated from sources other than the police chief or police superintendent, with some of the most basic information being public information readily available from secondary sources of statistical information.

The Trend In Law Enforcement Agencies Producing Brochures or Pamphlets Designed for Public Education Use Related to the Gang Problem.

     The interesting trend observed from this research is that in fact about a fourth of all municipal law enforcement agencies appear to have produced public education brochures or pamphlets related to gangs. Some 27.6 percent of the police chiefs indicated they had produced such brochures for local use. A number of these types of written documents were provided along with the survey response and therefore a later section in this report specifically addresses these public education brochures. As will be seen later, a lot of local agencies are basically reinventing the wheel systematically, and no statewide standard or model or prototype exists at present. Some 20.8 percent of the sheriffs also use such brochures. It may also be that this factor is associated with other policy responses to the gang problem.

     The Pearson correlation coefficient is a statistic that measures the degree of association between two variables. The Pearson correlation statistic is always a numerical value between the ranges of zero (for no correlation so ever) to a high of 100 (for a perfect correlation). It is reasonable to assume therefore that a correlation might exist between policy responses to the gang problem by recently passing new laws aimed at the gang problem and this other aspect of social policy involving the production of brochures or pamphlets designed for public education use about the gang problem.

    Table 6 provides the correlation matrix between this and several related variables. As seen in Table 6, a greater correlation exists between the factors of having local laws passed dealing with gangs and whether the same police department uses such public education brochures about gangs, than exists between the size of the local gang population and the use of such brochures.

TABLE 6

PEARSON CORRELATION COEFFICIENTS AMONG FOUR VARIABLES

FROM CITY POLICE CHIEFS IN THE 1994 SURVEY

USING THE PAIR-WISE METHOD OF CORRELATIONAL ANALYSIS

                    Laws Brochures School Rules Gang Pop.

                    ***** ********* ************ *********

Any Laws Passed 1.0 .31 .33 .17

Any Public Brochure/Pamphlets 1.0 .32 .26

Any School Rules Against Gang Dress Modes 1.0 .27

Size of the Total Local Gang Population in the Area 1.0

      Table 6 indicates that all of the four variables are positively correlated with each other (meaning, the higher one, the higher the other). Table 6 shows that higher correlations exist between the three kinds of policy responses to the gang problem (local laws, public education brochures, and new school regulations prohibiting gang dress modes) than exists between these three factors individually and their association with the size of the local gang population. Not reported here, but also examined was the variable for whether or not the same police chiefs reported that a state or federal correctional institution was located in or near their community; a nearby prison showed a very weak but negative correlation with all three policy responses and the size of the local gang population!

     The fact is that 40.3 percent of the police chiefs and 60 percent of the county sheriffs reported that such correctional institutions were located in the nearby area. Prison construction initiatives in their public relations and impact studies can therefore quote this research as showing that nearby prisons do not correlate highly with local gang populations; there is virtually no relationship between the two and it is a negative correlation (r = -0.004).

The Gang Tourist or Temporary Visitor Phenomenon.

     Another exogenous component of gang proliferation can be called the gang tourist or temporary visitor phenomenon. For later comparison purposes the language of the survey item used here was intentional by its definition: "have gang members recently made even temporary visits (of at least a few days, for whatever reason) to your community/jurisdiction?". The intentional inclusion of the delimiting definitional phrase regarding visiting time duration "of at least a few days" is that also used by the Maxson and Klein (1993) research to define the basic element of "gang migration".

      Our research shows that 67 percent of the police chiefs and 75 percent of the county sheriffs report this gang tourist or temporary visitor phenomenon. This too is a phenomenon that is an important exogenous component of the gang proliferation problem.

The Familial Transplant Phenomenon.

    As explained by Laskey (1994), one of the ways in which the gang problem "spreads" or proliferates may be unintentional in nature, but basically means that a parent relocates to a new area (knowing their child was involved with a gang and perhaps thinking they can simply move away from the problem), and basically "transplants" the gang problem to the new area. This too is an important exogenous component of the gang proliferation problem. This research shows that 62.4 percent of the police chiefs and 60 percent of the county sheriffs now report having seen cases of this familial transplant phenomenon.

Rental Units and Subsidized Housing.

      Two housing variables were used in the survey instrument for background and control variables to permit a later and more in-depth analysis: (1) percentage of the residential housing stock that consists of rental units, and (2) the presence of any federally subsidized housing other than that for the elderly.

      Among police chiefs, the range for the estimated percentage of all households in the city that are rental units ranged from a low of zero percent to a high of 85 percent, with a mean or average value of 22.4 percent.

      Among county sheriffs, the range for the estimate percentage of all households in the county that are rental units ranged from a low of zero percent to a high of 55 percent, with a mean or average value of 19.1 percent.

Population Sizes and Characteristics of the Responding Cities and Counties.

      The survey asked the respondents for the current population estimate of their city or county. For police chiefs this population size ranged from a low of 350 to a high of 105,000. For county sheriffs this ranged from a low of 7500 to a high of 250,000. Clearly, our data best speaks to the smaller and medium sized cities, and does not include larger cities like Chicago.

     The mean percentages for what proportion of the populations were racial or ethnic minorities showed the results of 12.8 percent for cities and 6.74 for counties.

     The respondents were also asked "approximately what percentage of the current population of your area are recent migrants from Chicago?". For police chiefs, this result ranged from a low of 0 to a high of 80 percent, with a mean of 7.3 percent. For sheriffs this result ranged from a low of zero percent to a high of 50 percent with a mean or average value of 5.8 percent.

     These are background and control variables.

The Fallacy of the Expressive/Instrumental Motivation Oversimplification About Gangs.

      As explained by Knox (1991: p. 45) we make the logical error of over-aggregation or over-simplification when traditional concepts such as applied to individual motivation --- as complex as it is itself --- is extended to try and account for organizational and group motivated outcomes or effects of gangs behavior (e.g., homicides, etc). A recent study on street gang crime in Chicago also discussed this issue of expressive versus instrumental streetgang-motivated violence (Block and Block, 1993: p. 8). This idea was the traditional social-psychological dichotomy on individual motivation that was earlier discussed in its application to gangs by Horowitz (1990).

     The problem of gang crime is sufficiently complex that no simple psychological construct designed to explain individual motivational differences may be expected to adequately account for the behavioral results or impact of groups of persons or organizations which we call "gangs" (Knox, 1991; Knox, 1993).

Nevertheless, psychological reductionism as a way of trying to oversimplify the gang problem persists in the public imagination; many would like to believe that gang members are simply "crazy" or "mentally ill", or maybe even have the "gang genetic code marker" of a social-Darwin variety of dogmatism. However, as government agency researchers and some others continue to espouse such oversimplifications, we felt it best to investigate this aspect of the problem as well in the present project. The way this has been simplified by Block and Block (1993) basically means predominantly Latin gangs may be more "expressive" (e.g., turf defense) and predominantly African-American gangs may be more "instrumental" (e.g., drug sales). This is also a common belief, at least, held by those who work in local law enforcement. But does it really hold up under an analysis that goes beyond the "big city" problem and it is generalizable is the real issue.

      The authors of this report are unanimous in agreeing that a more fair and a more logical approach is to assume that no ethnic or racial group through its gang behavior has any monopoly on any form of individual human motivation. And further, that such claims regarding the application of what is essentially an individual psychological trait to the group or organizational context we call "gangs" faces the logical errors involving over-generalization, misplaced concreteness and conceptual reification. In addition, of course, when used to differentiate African-American and Hispanic/Latino gangs it may in fact --- depending on the extent to which this issue is vigorously investigated and such hard data can be developed beyond the research involving one city case studies --- face the additional criticism of contributing unnecessarily to racial and ethnic stereotypes (e.g., Latinos are "hot blooded", Blacks "just want money", etc) that are counterproductive for achieving good modern race relations.

Further, the issue of the reduction of the focus of analysis to a motivational component of expressive versus instrumental lacks utility in answering the basic issue involved in gang violence: which is the most dangerous gang (e.g., threat analysis considerations).

     The Block and Block (1993) research would basically lead us to believe that the gang problem in America is so easy to understand by the expressive-instrumental individual motivation dimension from social psychology, such that Hispanic/Latino gangs being more expressive can be expected to be involved more in "turf" defense behavior, and African-American gangs can be expected to be involved more in "drug sales" or income-producing behavior. Authors like Block and Block (1993), of course, recognize that any individual human being can have a mixed set of motivations, but that one can be considered a primary motivation (e.g., expressive or instrumental). Is it really that simple? Not really is the answer from this research on Illinois law enforcement agencies.

       We directly tested this issue and extended the level of analysis somewhat.

      One question was "which type of gang is most active in illegal drug sales in your area?". The results for police chiefs were as follows: 37.8% Black, 14.6% Hispanic, 38.4% White, and 9.2% mixed. The results for county sheriffs were: 50% Black, 20% Hispanic, 15% White, and 15% mixed. Clearly, no single ethnic group has the monopoly on such income-producing crimes (i.e., illegal drug sales). In fact, whites rival and slightly exceed Blacks in this category at the smaller city level.

       Another question was "which type of gang is most active in TURF ISSUES in your area?". The results again dramatically reject the simplistic notion from Block and Block. The results for police chiefs were as follows: 27.6% Black, 22.4% Hispanic, 40.4% white, and 9.6% mixed. Here, apparently, whites as identified with "type of gang" is more "expressive" in turf defense than are Hispanics; and indeed, Blacks exceed Hispanics as well, very much in contradiction to the hypothesized relationship we would expect from the Block and Block (1993) study.

      In summary, both of these issues (i.e., drug dealing as instrumental motivation, and turf defense as expressive motivation) about instrumental vs. expressive motivation in terms of differentiating ethnic gang behavior do not hold water. It may, however, be worthwhile to examine this issue in greater detail; certainly in more detail than that tested previously.

     Thus, another question in the survey asked "which type of gang is most active in racial extremism and bias crime in your area?". Racial extremism and bias crimes can be both expressive and integrative, thus defying any classification into one or the other category, and if true then completely nullifying the logical value of such a two-fold "typology" of gang crime motivation. A bias crime is on its face value most obviously an expressive crime by its nature, but in the context of a white supremacist gang (e.g., neo-Nazi skinheads, etc) it is also instrumental in a political and ideological way: the benefit structure or tangible "reward" is the recognition afforded such an offender who takes a victim in his/her conception of the "race war". The results for this question among police chiefs show the following: 28.9% Black, 14.8% Hispanic, 51.1% white, and 5.2% mixed. While whites obviously dominate in this category, they clearly do not have the monopoly.

      A far greater issue implied in these findings goes beyond the simple issue of a psychological fallacy regarding gang theory. It is the issue of ethnic/racial composition in gangs in Illinois. White gangs apparently have their fair share of the blame for a lot of the Illinois gang problem is what this data says. That is, the gang problem in Illinois is most certainly not simply one that is limited to solely or even predominantly, when analyzed beyond the "Big City" picture, racial or ethnic minorities. A Sesame Street version of these findings would be this: white gangs like to express themselves and make money too.

    Another question in the survey was even more pinpointed in this area and serves as a redundancy factor in support of the conclusions drawn here. This additional question about race and ethnicity asked "are the gang members in your area predominantly racial and ethnic minorities?". Some 49.5 percent of the police chiefs, and 78.9 percent of the county sheriffs, indicated "yes". Thus, some 50.5 percent of the city police chiefs and 21.1 percent of the county sheriffs indicate that the gang members in their areas are not predominantly racial and ethnic minorities. This would seem to say that the gang problem in Illinois is not simply a surrogate measure of a racial and ethnic minority problem.

     As one further test of this issue as it relates to the ethnic and racial composition of gangs, it is well to be reminded from the Knox (1991) textbook that throughout history all ethnic groups and all races in America --- at one time or another --- have had their gangs. Fear breeds more fear, continually providing an impetus for gang proliferation, in a context where conflict --- often along dimensions of race and ethnicity --- is part and parcel of the gang problem itself. Another question in the survey asked "Are the gang members in your area mostly: ___Black ___Hispanic ___White ___Other". The results of this question for police chiefs shows that 31.4 percent indicated Black, 19.4 percent Hispanic, 48.6 percent white, and .6 percent other. Again, it would appear that once we expand our unit of analysis beyond the "Big City", that at least in Illinois a different picture emerges entirely about the ethnic and racial composition of gangs than that which we have been led to believe from research on "Big City" gang problems (i.e., Chicago, Detroit, Los Angeles, etc). This could also signal a disturbing new trend if white gang members evolve along white racist dimensions as exemplified by groups like the organized factions of skinheads, neo-Nazis, Aryan Nation, etc. Gang theory would hold that such racial extremist ideologies would be very appealing to white gang members and that racial conflict would rise as well. This assumes no new gang activist emerges who seeks in addition to "Gang Summitry", to establish a truly "Rainbow" gang coalition .

     This conclusion is, after all, largely consistent with the huge body of literature on "gangs": that gangs like much crime falls within the realm of the normal not the abnormal, and our explanations for their behavior including homicide are not readily reduced within the realm of the abnormal psychology nor even individual psychology concepts such as a simple difference between expressive versus instrument, or expressive versus integrative, motivations.

     To recap, the Block and Block (1993) research discusses individual motivations in the context of a group or organizational crime problem: i.e., gangs. Thus, it is not surprising logically that much of their analysis along these lines appears to be a clear fallacy.

Local Participation in the Midwest Gang Investigators Association.

      The Midwest Gang Investigators Association (MGIA) is the group that provides the informal networking and opportunities for skill enhancement among police officers and other criminal justice practitioners who are interested in or whose job requires them to deal with gang issues on a day-to-day basis. This survey asked whether any of the sworn officers in the city and county agencies were members of the MGIA.

      The results are as follows: 25.6 percent of the police chiefs, and 8 percent of the county sheriffs, reported that they had sworn officers in their departments who were members of the Midwest Gang Investigators Association. Local participation in the MGIA clearly lags behind the scope and extent of the gang problem throughout Illinois is another logical conclusion from this study.

The Allocation of Sworn Police Officers to Full-Time Duty as Gang Crimes Specialists.

     The national trend is for police departments in their response to the gang problem, to modify their organizational structure slightly to establish a new unit within the force: the gang crime unit. The 1994 Illinois Law Enforcement Survey also asked "how many sworn officers from your department are assigned to work full-time on the gang problem?". Among police chiefs, the results ranged from a low of zero to a high of 21 such officers; but with a statewide mean or average of .55 --- that is, on the average each city police department has one-half of one officer assigned to the gang detail. Expressed somewhat differently, an average of .55 police officers are assigned full-time to deal with an average of 63.9 gang members among municipal law enforcement agencies in Illinois responding to this survey.

The Major Gangs in Illinois Today.

      The survey asked the respondents for the names of the largest three gangs in their area. The way that this narrative information was analyzed is simple: the names of the top three gangs were all computerized and a count was made for the number of times any specific gang was mentioned among the top three. A number of gangs were only mentioned once as seen in the alphabetical listing of Table 7. From this overall breakdown, one can simply rank the gangs by how many times they were listed among the top three in any given jurisdiction. The Latin Kings (N = 115) lead this list; followed almost equally by Gangster Disciples (N = 79) and Vice Lords (N = 78). These three clearly stand out in Table 7. Other "Folks" and Disciples factions that seem prominent are: Black Gangster Disciples (N = 29), Disciples (N=21), Two-Sixers (N=15), and the Satan's Disciples (N=11).

         TABLE 7: Alpha Listing of Gangs by Police Chiefs

Gang Names (Outside of Chicago) Number Top Three Mentions

11th Street Posse 2

12th Street Players 2

38 Specials 1

Ambrose 5

Bishops 1

Black Disciples 7

Black Gangster Disciples 29

Black Gangsters 1

Black P. Stone Nation 9

Bloods 5

Brothers of the Struggle 1

C-Notes 1

Crips 6

Damage Incorporated 1

Deuces 1

Disciples 21

Four Corner Hustlers 7

Gangster Disciples 79

Gaylords 1

II Down Posse 1

Imperial Gangsters 2

Imperial Gangster Disciples 1

Insane Deuces 2

Insane Gangsters 1

Insane Gangster Disciples 1

Iron Sledge 1

Ku Klux Klan 1

Latin Counts 3

Latin Disciples 1

Latin Homeboys 1

Latin Kings 115

Low Lifes 1

Majestics 1

Maniac Latin Disciples 8

Metros/Metro East 1

Playboys 1

Saddle Tramps 1

Satan's Disciples 11

Satanic Cult Gangs 1

Simon City Royals 6

Skinhead Gangs 3

Spanish Cobras 6

Table 7: Continued

Spanish Gangster Disciples 4

Supreme White Power (SWP) 1

The Arabian Posse (TAPs) 2

Two-Sixers/Two Six Nation 15

Two-Two Boys 8

Unknown Assassins 1

Vice Lords 78

White Gangster Disciples 2

The Trend Towards Specialized Units to Handle Gang Problems.

      Another question in the survey asked whether their Department has a special unit to handle gang problems. About a fifth of the police chiefs responding to the survey (20.9%) indicated that yes in fact their departments did now have such specialized gang units. Still, that means about four out of five municipal police departments in Illinois do not have a gang unit. The evolution of the specialized gang unit within police organization and management appears to lag behind the evolution of the gang problem.

       Among county sheriffs, some 12 percent indicated that they had a specialized unit to handle gang problems.

The Trend Towards Developing Strategic Plans for Dealing with Youth Gangs.

     Another organizational adaptation to the gang problem is the trend towards developing strategic plans for dealing with youth gangs. The findings from this survey show that 31.4 percent of the police chiefs now report that their departments have such a strategic plan for dealing with youth gangs. Some 8 percent of the county sheriffs also indicated having such strategic plans.

More On the Gang Migration Issue.

     Almost everyone believes it is possible is the finding here. When asked "do you believe some gangs can migrate to jurisdictions such as your own?", some 96.5 percent of the police chiefs agreed. Similarly, some 95.8 percent of the county sheriffs also believe this is possible.

      A more specific question in the survey asked "Do you believe any of the gang problem in your jurisdiction is due to gang migration?". Here some 68.2 percent of the police chiefs, and 63.6 percent among the county sheriffs, replied in the affirmative. So at this point, clearly, most believe that gang proliferation can have an exogenous source, and about two-thirds report this phenomenon impacting on their own gang problem to some extent.

       Another question asked the respondent to "estimate to what extent the gang problem in your area arose because of gang migration (i.e., outside gangs coming into your area to develop their own local franchises or local chapters", which comes close to measuring what is also meant by "gang imperialism" or "gang franchising". On a scale from zero (NOT A FACTOR) to ten (MAJOR FACTOR), the respondents marked how much of a factor they believed this was in terms of its local impact. For police chiefs, the range of scores varied from a low of zero to a high of ten, with a mean or average score of 3.98; for county sheriffs the mean was 3.63 on this exogenous source regarding the gang proliferation issue.

     A question that looks at the so-called contagion effect, a source of indigenous input to the problem of gang proliferation, was as follows: "Please estimate to what extent the gang problem in your area arose because of the copy cat phenomenon (i.e., youths who use the names of national groups without really having ties to the same groups in other areas)". Again the response modes using a continuum from zero (NOT A FACTOR) to ten (MAJOR FACTOR) were used. For police chiefs, again the range of scores covered the entire spectrum (0-10), but with a mean or average score of 5.07, which is higher than the previously exogenous score. The county sheriffs showed an average score of 3.16 on this question.

The Prevalence of "Hate Groups" As a Crime Problem in Illinois.

     Another question on the survey asked "Do you feel that hate groups (KKK, neo-nazis, skinheads, etc) are a crime problem in your area?". Some 12.9 percent of the police chiefs, and 12.5 percent of the county sheriffs, felt such hate groups were in fact a crime problem in their area.

Female Involvement With Gangs in Illinois.

     Asked if females are also involved in the gangs in their areas, some 74.2 percent of the police chiefs and 68.2 percent of the county sheriffs indicated this was true.

The Trend in "Gang Disturbances" Within Public Schools.

     Asked if there have been any "gang disturbances" in the public schools in their areas within the last year, some 44.7 percent of the police chiefs reported this phenomenon. Among the county sheriffs, some 25 percent reported such gang disturbances in the public schools in their areas within the last year.

     These are basically "mini riots", typically involving two rival factions of a gang within the school building or nearby the school property. A common pattern is for this to have racial overtones as well: where the gang membership becomes a surrogate measure of race or ethnicity (e.g., Latin Kings fighting Black Gangster Disciples, etc). It is interesting to note, then, that only about a fourth of municipal police departments (23.3%) have K-9 units, compared to 44 percent among county sheriffs.

Findings About Asian Gangs and Asian Gang Members.

     Asked if any Asian gangs or Asian gang members have been active in their jurisdiction, some 6.1 percent of the police chiefs and 12.5 percent of the county sheriffs reported this to be the case. In the smaller cities such as those surveyed here, apparently Asian gangs are not as large a problem as has been reported in the "Big City" environment where they have more anonymity.

Gangs and Politics

     Apparently this is also a "Big City" phenomenon. The survey asked whether gangs have become active in politics in their areas. Some 2.6 percent of the police chiefs and 8 percent of the county sheriffs indicated this was true. Thus, most of the smaller cities as are represented in this survey do not report that their gangs are active in politics.

     Finally, a Chicago-based group called "21st Century V.O.T.E.", a kind of political wing of the Gangster Disciples, has certainly been active in Chicago and elsewhere, using gang members in the electoral process, in some cases running their own candidates on the ballot. However, only 4.3 percent of the police chiefs and only 4.2 percent of the county sheriffs report that this same group (21st Century V.O.T.E.) has been active in any capacity in their jurisdictions.

THE SIGNIFICANCE OF UNINTENTIONAL GANG "TRANSPLANTING"

      The analysis reported in section deals specifically with the question in the survey which asked "have you seen cases where a parent relocates to your area (knowing their child was involved with a gang and perhaps thinking they can simply move away from the problem), and basically transplants the gang problem to your area". For purposes of the analysis reported here, those who replied "NO" are cities with no familial transplanting. Similarly, those who replied "YES" are considered cities who have been a part of this familial gang transplanting phenomenon. For the purposes of the more detailed analysis reported in this section, only cities are used (i.e., city police departments). Thus, county sheriffs are not used in the analysis reported here.

       Remember that through cross-sectional survey data such as that used here, it is not possible to prove "causality". The only legitimate statistical inference that can be made would be whether the "familial gang transplanting phenomenon" is associated with other variables. This, then, is the purpose of this section: to ascertain the extent to which this "familial transplant" variable is significantly associated with other aspects of the gang problem and other variables measured in the survey research project. For additional information about this phenomenon, however, consult Laskey (1994).

     Table 8 shows the variables that significantly differentiate the familial gang transplant phenomenon in the same consistent logical direction. This single factor, then, is revealed to be a major profile factor at the municipal law enforcement level for understanding a large variety of other gang issues. The city that has witnessed this kind of familial gang transplant phenomenon is also one with higher gang crime and higher gang problems, and one that has had to use greater resources in combatting the gang problem. This finding is consistent throughout Table 8. All of the findings shown in the distribution in Table 8 are also statistically significant by the Chi-square test .

TABLE 8

SUMMARY OF VARIABLES SIGNIFICANTLY DIFFERENTIATING

THE "FAMILIAL GANG TRANSPLANTING" FACTOR

                                  (Percentage)

                                 Familial Gang

                                  Transplant ?

VARIABLES: Percent YES

Are youth gangs a problem

in your city? NO 33.3%

                          YES 76.1%

                               Chi = 38.4, p < .001

Does your Dept. have a

SWORD computer terminal? NO 56.1%

                          YES 77.6%

                               Chi = 9.22, p = .002

Is gang-related crime

concentrated in certain

specific areas of city? NO 57.3%

                          YES 76.5%

                               Chi = 7.29, p = .007

Have you seen gang influence

from outside of your city?

                          NO 17.8%

                          YES 69.0%

                                Chi = 27.4, p < .001

Gangs involved in VIOLENCE

in your city? NO 44.7%

                          YES 83.0%

                                Chi = 35.6, p < .001

Gangs involved in DRUG SALES

in your city? NO 50.0%

                          YES 77.1%

                                Chi = 17.8, p < .001

Gangs involved in GRAFFITI

in your city? NO 40.8%

                          YES 77.2%

                                Chi = 31.1, p < .001

Gangs involved in BURGLARY

in your city? NO 50.4%

                          YES 76.9%

                                Chi = 17.02, p < .001

TABLE 8 Continued:

Gangs involved in DRIVE BYS

in your city? NO 56.3%

                           YES 90.2%

                                 Chi = 16.4, p < .001

Gangs involved in CAR THEFTS

in your city? NO 56.3%

                            YES 81.8%

                                  Chi = 11.5, p = .001

More Gang Members in City

Than Full-Time Officers? NO 50.8%

                            YES 74.7%

                                   Chi = 13.96, p < .001

% of Total Crime in City

Caused by Gang Activity

                     <=4% LOW 44.8%

                     >=5% HIGH 77.6%

                                     Chi = 23.9, p < .001

% of Juvenile Crime in City

Caused by Gang Activity

                      <=4% LOW 41.1%

                      >=5% HIGH 77.8%

                                     Chi = 29.7, p < .001

% of Crime in City Caused by

Gangs From Outside of Area

                     <=4% LOW 49.5%

                     >=5% HIGH 76.6%

                                     Chi = 16.6, p < .001

Rated extent of economic

decline/improvement

                     <=5 DECLINING 52.5%

                     >=6 IMPROVING 75.2%

                                     Chi = 12.3, p < .001

Density of gang members in

the city <= 10 LOW 38.2%

                    >= 11 HIGH 84.9%

                                      Chi = 47.4, p < .001

City Population Size

                    <=5,500 SMALLER 39.0%

                    >=6,000 LARGER 82.1%

                                     Chi = 44.7, p < .001

Table 8: Continued

% of Racial/Ethnic Minorities

in the City <= 4% LOWER 40.1%

                    >= 5% HIGHER 82.5%

                                     Chi = 42.3, p < .001

% of Population in the City

Recent Migrants from Chicago

                    < = 1% LOWER 39.7%

                    > = 2% HIGHER 81.7

                                      Chi = 31.7, p < .001

Rated Belief that the Gang Problem

in City Arose Because of MIGRATION

                    < = 3 LOW RATING 49.1%

                    > = 4 HIGH RATING 82.3%

                                       Chi = 26.0, p < .001

% of Gang Population in the City

Attributable to Families/Individuals

Who have recently relocated to the city.

                    < = 14% LOW 43.8%

                    > = 15% HIGH 87.2%

                                       Chi = 39.6, p < .001 

Have you noticed an increase in

gang graffiti or tagging in the

last year? NO 45.2%

                             YES 79.6%

                                       Chi = 28.7, p < .001

Are certain gang-related color

patterns/dress modes prohibited

in local public schools? NO 47.0%

                             YES 77.0%

                                      Chi = 21.5, p < .001

Has your city passed any laws

recently specifically aimed at gangs?

                             NO 52.7%

                             YES 87.5%

                                      Chi = 23.7, p < .001

Has your City Police Dept. produced

any public education brochures

related to gangs? NO 55.2%

                             YES 84.4%

                                       Chi = 15.7, p < .001

Table 8: Continued

Have gang members recently made

even temporary visits (of at least

a few days, for whatever reasons)?

                              NO 36.9%

                              YES 76.5%

                                        Chi = 33.0, p < .001

Does your city have any federally

subsidized housing other than that

for the elderly? NO 51.0%

                               YES 70.8%

                                        Chi = 9.29, p = .002

Are any of the sworn officers of

your City police Department members

of the Midwest Gang Investigators

Association? NO 54.2%

                               YES 86.2%

                                        Chi = 18.76, p < .001

Does your Department have a special

unit to handle gang problems? NO 56.6%

                                YES 85.1%

                                        Chi = 12.8, p < .001

Do you believe any of the gang problem

in your city is due to "gang migration"?

                                 NO 44.6%

                                 YES 77.6%

                                        Chi = 22.1, p < .001

Does your Department have a strategic

plan for dealing with youth gangs?

                                NO 54.1%

                                YES 80.2%

                                        Chi = 14.1, p < .001

Rate the extent to which the gang problem

in your city arose because of copy cat phenomenon.

                     <=5 NOT A FACTOR 57.0%

                     >=6 MAJOR FACTOR 71.1%

                                         Chi = 4.75, p = .029

Are females also involved in gangs in

your city? NO 41.5%

                                YES 75.3%

                                         Chi = 20.2, p < .001

Table 8: Continued

Have there been any "gang disturbances"

in your public schools in the last year?

                                NO 45.6%

                                YES 83.1%

                                       Chi = 33.60, p < .001

      To summarize the wealth of evidence in Table 8, there is a strong consistent association between the "familial gang transplant" phenomenon and many other aspects of the gang problem and the police response to it at the local level in Illinois.

THE VARIATION IN GANG PROBLEMS BY CITY POPULATION SIZE

      The fundamental premise of much sociological research on rural versus urban differences basically assumes that there is a qualitative difference in social life in what might be called "Small Town USA". This section of the report therefore examines the variation in gang problems and responses by law enforcement to the gang problem in terms of city population size. Three such categories of city population size are used here: (1) small town Illinois (350 - 3,500 total city population), (2) medium city Illinois (3,501 - 10,000 total city population), and (3) large city Illinois (10,001 - 105,000 total city population). This arbitrary city size population basically breaks the sample of cities into three relatively equal sized groups.

     Table 9 provides factors that were significantly differentiated by city population size in this research.

TABLE 9

FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTIONS FOR

FACTORS SIGNIFICANTLY DIFFERENTIATED BY

CITY POPULATION SIZE

(Using Police Chiefs Only: Sheriffs Excluded from Analysis)

                                   City Population Size

                                350-3500 3501-10000 10001+

                                Small Medium Large

                                 TOWN CITY CITY

                                 ****** ******* ****

Are youth gangs a problem in

your city? NO 48 20 5

                         YES 32 45 79

                    (% Yes) (40.0%) (69.2%) (94.0%) Chi square = 55.1, p < .001

Are youth gangs in your city

a major, moderate, or minor problem?

                   MAJOR PROBLEM 0 3 7

                MODERATE PROBLEM 8 20 36

                   MINOR PROBLEM 29 27 37

                                  Chi-square = 11.6, p = .02

Does your City Police Dept. use a

SWORD Computer Terminal? NO 61 45 50

                             YES 15 22 31

                          (% Yes) (19.7%) (32.8%) (38.2%)

                                  Chi-square = 6.64, p = .03

Is gang-related crime concentrated

in certain specific areas of your

city? NO 70 51 45

                             YES 9 16 39

                          (% Yes) (11.3%) (23.8%) (46.4%)

                                  Chi-square = 25.6, p < .001

Have you seen gang influence from

outside of your community? NO 20 7 2

                             YES 59 60 82

                        (% Yes) (74.6%) (89.5%) (97.6%)

                                  Chi-square = 19.8, p < .001

Have youth gangs been involved

in VIOLENCE in your city? NO 64 39 23

                             YES 16 28 61

                         (% Yes) (20.0%) (41.7%) (72.6%)

                                  Chi-square = 46.2, p < .001

Table 9: Continued

                                 Small Medium Large

Have youth gangs been involved Town City City

in DRUG SALES in your city? NO 58 34 35

                             YES 22 33 49

                         (% Yes) (27.5%) (49.2%) (58.3%) Chi-square = 16.4, p < .001

Have youth gangs caused a problem

of GRAFFITI in your city? NO 55 30 10

                             YES 25 37 74

                         (% Yes) (31.2%) (55.2%) (88.0%)

                                 Chi-square = 55.2, p < .001

Have youth gangs been involved

in BURGLARY in your city? NO 65 33 29

                             YES 15 34 55

                         (% Yes) (18.7%) (50.7%) (65.4%) Chi-square = 37.3, p < .001

Have youth gangs been involved

in ROBBERY in your city? NO 78 63 63

                             YES 2 4 21

                          (% Yes) (2.5%) (5.9%) (25%)

                                 Chi-square = 23.0, p < .001

Have youth gangs been involved

in DRIVE-BYS in your city? NO 76 57 58

                             YES 4 10 26

                          (% Yes) (5.0%) (14.9%) (30.9%)

                                 Chi-square = 19.6, p < .001

Have youth gangs been involved

in CAR THEFTS in your city?

                             NO 77 48 51

                            YES 3 19 33

                       (% Yes) (3.7%) (28.3%) (39.2%)

                                 Chi-square = 29.6, p < .001

Estimated Percent of TOTAL CRIME

in City Caused by Gang Activity.

                    (<=4%) LOW 52 24 23

                    (>=5%) HIGH 21 37 54

                         (% High) (28.7%) (60.6%) (70.1%)

                                 Chi-square = 27.7, p < .001

Table 9: Continued

Estimated Percent of JUVENILE CRIME

in City Caused by Gang Activity.

                   (<=5%) LOW 55 28 30

                   (>=6%) HIGH 20 33 47

                         (% High) (26.6%) (54.0%) (61.0%)

                                 Chi-square = 19.7, p < .001

Estimated Percent of Crime in City

Caused by Gangs or Gang Members Small Medium Large

From Outside of the Same Area. Town City City

                   (<=4%) LOW 49 21 34

                   (>=5%) HIGH 21 40 46

                     (% High) (30.0%) (65.5%) (57.5%)

                                 Chi-square = 18.8, p < .001

Rated Belief in Whether City is

Economically Declining/Improving.

           (score 0-5) DECLINING 52 34 34

          (score 6-10) IMPROVING 25 32 48

                    (% Improving) (32.4%) (48.4%) (58.5%)

                                 Chi-square = 10.9, p = .004

Time Frame During Which Gangs First

Became Recognized in the City.

              (1970-1989) OLDER 6 19 42

              (1990-1993) RECENT 39 32 38

                       (% Recent) (86.6%) (62.7%) (47.5%)

                                 Chi-square = 18.7, p < .001

Size of City Police Department in

Number of Full-Time Sworn Officers.

                 (0-12) SMALLER 72 37 3

                 (13+) LARGER 2 30 81

                     (% Larger) (2.7%) (44.7%) (96.4%)

                            Chi-square = 139.3, p < .001

Do your police officers receive

Pre-Service Training About Gangs?

                             NO 47 29 23

                             YES 18 27 38

                          (% Yes) (30.4%) (51.6%) (61.1%)

                               Chi-square = 13.5, p = .001

Table 9: Continued

Do your police officers receive

In-Service Training About Gangs?

                             NO 26 13 10

                             YES 54 54 74

                          (% Yes) (67.5%) (80.5%) (88.0%

                                Chi-square = 10.5, p = .005

Estimated Size of the Gang Member

Population in the City.

                   (<=13) SMALL 60 26 11

                   (>=14) LARGE 9 32 63

                        (% Large) (13.0%) (55.1%) (85.1%)

                                Chi-square = 74.7, p < .001

Estimated Percentage of Total Gang

Member Population in the City that

is attributable to families and

individuals who have recently Small Medium Large

relocated to your city. Town City City

                  (<=10%) LOW 48 32 18

                  (>=15%) HIGH 15 25 54

                        (% High) (23.8%) (43.8%) (75.0%)

                               Chi-square = 36.0, p < .001

Have you noticed an increase in

gang graffiti or tagging in the

last year? NO 58 32 28

                            YES 22 35 55

                         (% Yes) (27.5%) (52.2%) (66.2%)

                                Chi-square = 24.9, p < .001

Are certain color patterns or modes

of dress identified as "gang related"

prohibited in local public schools?

                            NO 53 30 20

                            YES 24 35 64

                         (% Yes) (31.1%) (53.8%) (76.1%)

                                Chi-square = 32.8, p < .001

Has your city/county jurisdiction

passed any recent laws that are

specifically aimed at gangs?

                             NO 69 44 54

                            YES 11 23 30

                         (% Yes) (13.7%) (34.3%) (35.7%)

                                Chi-square = 11.9, p = .003

Table 9: Continued

Has your police dept. produced any

public education brochures or

pamphlets related to gangs? NO 74 52 46

                            YES 6 14 38

                         (% Yes) (7.5%) (21.2%) (45.2%)

                                 Chi-square = 31.7, p < .001

Is there any state or federal

correctional institution located

in or near your city? NO 40 32 65

                            YES 38 35 19

                         (% Yes) (48.1%) (52.2%) (22.6%)

                                 Chi-square = 16.9, p < .001

Have you seen cases where a parent

relocates to your area (knowing their

child was involved with a gang and

perhaps thinking they can simply

"move away" from the problem) and

basically transplants the gang Small Medium Large

problem to your area? Town City City

                            NO 56 19 11

                            YES 24 46 72

                         (% Yes) (30.0%) (70.7%) (86.7%)

                                Chi-square = 58.6, p < .001

Does your city have any federally

subsidized housing other than that

for the elderly? NO 47 22 27

                            YES 33 45 56

                         (% Yes) (41.2%) (67.1%) (67.4%)

                                Chi-square = 14.5, p = .001

Approximately what percentage of

the current population of your

city are racial or ethnic minorities?

              (<=4%) BELOW AVG. 60 26 18

              (>=5%) ABOVE AVG. 18 40 62

                  (% Above Avg.) (23.0%) (60.6%) (77.5%)

                                Chi-square = 48.8, p < .001

Approximately what percentage of the

current population of your city are

recent migrants from Chicago?

              (<=1%) BELOW AVG. 53 24 16

              (>=2%) ABOVE AVG. 16 24 42

                  (% Above Avg.) (23.1%) (50.0%) (72.4%)

                                Chi-square = 30.9, p < .001

Table 9: Continued

Which type of gang is most active

in illegal drug sales in your area?

                        BLACK 15 17 37

                     HISPANIC 2 10 15

                        WHITE 31 24 16

                        MIXED 3 5 9

                                Chi-square = 23.7, p = .001

Are any of the sworn officers in your

department members of the Midwest

Gang Investigators Association?

                           NO 75 53 41

                           YES 3 13 41

                        (% Yes) (3.8%) (19.6%) (50.0%)

                                Chi-square = 46.6, p < .001

Are the gang members in your area

predominantly racial and ethnic Small Medium Large

minorities? Town City City

                           NO 38 29 31

                           YES 19 26 50

                        (% Yes) (33.3%) (47.2%) (61.7%)

                                Chi-square = 10.9, p = .004

Does your Department have a special

unit to handle gang problems?

                           NO 76 56 49

                           YES 3 11 34

                        (% Yes) (3.7%) (16.4%) (40.9%)

                               Chi-square = 34.9, p < .001

Do you believe any of the gang

problem in your city is due to

"gang migration"? NO 37 16 14

                           YES 31 43 69

                        (% Yes) (45.5%) (72.8%) (83.1%)

                               Chi-square = 25.1, p < .001

Does your Department have a

strategic plan for dealing with

youth gangs? NO 69 43 44

                           YES 10 24 38

                        (% Yes) (12.6%) (35.8%) (46.3%)

                                Chi-square = 21.9, p < .001

Table 9: Continued

Estimated extent to which the

gang problem in their city arose

because of "gang migration" (i.e.,

outside gangs coming in to develop

their own local franchises or chapters).

      (0-3 rating) NOT A FACTOR 56 28 32

     (4-10 rating) MAJOR FACTOR 16 34 52

                (% Major Factor) (22.2%) (54.8%) (61.9%)

                              Chi-square = 26.7, p < .001

Are females also involved in the

gangs in your city? NO 31 15 8

                          YES 36 44 74

                       (% Yes) (53.7%) (74.5%) (90.2%)

                               Chi-square = 25.5, p < .001

Have there been any "gang disturbances"

in the public schools in your city

in the last year? NO 62 38 26

                          YES 16 28 57

                       (% Yes) (20.5%) (42.4%) (68.6%)

                               Chi-square = 37.9, p < .001

       As seen in Table 9, this variable reflecting the size of the population is remarkably consistent in the trends regarding gangs in Illinois towns and cities. Small towns generally have a smaller gang problem. Small towns have only recently experienced this gang problem. And small towns have fewer law enforcement resources with which to combat the problem. Another finding reported in Table 9 shows that these small towns in Illinois were felt to be declining economically in comparison with the improving economic conditions of medium and larger cities.

        Recall, our data is limited to the range of small towns (minimum size 350) to a medium sized city (105,000). Our data, being limited to the State of Illinois, also does not include Chicago --- a large mega-city. The raw data city population size was recoded into three arbitrary categories of town and city size. As shown in Table 9 a great many variables related to the gang problem and the response by law enforcement are in fact significantly associated with this important factor of town/city population size .

BROCHURES FOR PUBLIC "GANG AWARENESS"

     A number of police departments now have such gang awareness brochures that are distributed to the public. A variety of these were reviewed when, as requested, they were submitted along with the questionnaire in this survey research project of Illinois law enforcement agencies. The following departments (listed alphabetically) provided such brochures for review here: Belvidere P.D., Carol Stream P.D. , Cary P.D., Crystal Lake P.D., Elgin P.D., Elk Grove Village P.D., Hodgkins P.D., Jacksonville P.D., Minooka P.D. , Schaumburg P.D., Skokie P.D., Waukegan P.D., Willowbrook P.D., and Yorkville P.D.

      While the typical pattern for these brochures is to quote or adapt information from the 1991 version of the Chicago P.D. Guide to Gang Identification, others are clearly very unique and provide a distinctive viewpoint. Another common pattern is to have both an English and Spanish version of the same gang awareness brochures (and other languages). Generally, good basic advice is given in these brochures (e.g., the need for "zero tolerance" regarding gangs) and most of these also provide examples of gang signs and symbols.

          Still, some problems may exist in some of these brochures, regarding accuracy and over-generalization. Some are minor mistakes: citing the origin of the Vice Lords in a "Juvenile Detention Center in St. Charles", it was not a short term detention center, it was at the time the "State Training School for Boys" where the CVLN is said to have arisen. Other issues seem more serious: such as in describing the internal structure of a street gang as business-like, making a claim such as "this type of business like organizational structure is not true for all ...many of the Latino gangs like the Latin Kings, do not have a definite leader...". Gino Colon or "Baby King, two of the top midwest leaders of the Latin Kings, would probably take exception to this generalization. Most such brochures do not adequately warn the public that these types of gangs (especially the Latin Kings, Vice Lords, and various Disciples factions) almost always have a written constitution and by-laws, which on the surface may sound like a brotherhood of civil rights activists (see Knox, 1993). Parents need to know that if their children are claiming to being "doing their homework", what that means for kids associated with gangs is often studying and memorizing the written gang prayers and gang creeds.

      If we read these brochures from the viewpoint of the parent or local citizen, when descriptions of the ethnic or racial content of gangs are provided, most such casual readers would conclude they only have to worry about white kids joining a group like the Simon City Royals or a skinhead/neo-nazi group. In Chicago, and elsewhere, there are factions of groups with the name "Black Disciples" etc, which actually have a mix of races including Spanish and caucasian youths. Some cities are now reporting groups with such names as the "White Gangster Disciples".

      We actually asked a high level informant in the GDs about this "White Gangster Disciple" phenomenon. The informant remarked, "they are seriously perpetrating". Implying, of course, that such groups are renegade gangs (i.e., they are homegrown varieties that have simply adopted the a variation of a more well-known big city gang name that sounds tough and threatening). The point here is that many parents who might read these brochures might still assume their child is "okay" just because the child did not have close friends and associates of another race or ethnic group. That is not a safe assumption. Other "profile" factors of gang membership are also not necessarily empirically based, but are rather what is called "impressionistic". For example, describing the typical gang member as being "unemployed"; when in fact, there are some communities in Illinois where the only gang members are there because of their jobs in that high rent community. Authors wishing to establish more empirical profiles (social, psychological, behavioral, developmental, etc) of young gang members should consult a book that provides such research (Knox, Laske, and Tromanhauser, 1992).

      Some detailed results were provided for how the gang problem varied between small rural towns, medium cities, and larger cities. Again, highly consistent results appeared, with the general tendency in the data being that the larger cities experience more of the gang problem; where the small rural town has experienced the gang problem more recently and in a diminished form when compared to larger cities; and where the small rural town is least prepared to effectively responde to the gang problem. Further analysis on this issue is underway and reported elsewhere (Houston, 1994).

       Some persons in law enforcement take issue with distributing public information brochures that contain gang symbols, the reason is the fear that such documents can end up in the hands of alienated youths who use such materials to begin emulating gang symbols and graffiti behavior. In what is called contagion theory, this is a correct analysis . However, at this historical point in time, the proliferation of gangs is so great throughout the State of Illinois that this really is a moot issue. The community that reports no gang problem whatsoever is an ever vanishing species.

The present authors would side with most others in examining the risk-benefit ratio: more is to be gained at this point by directly confronting such symbols, and warning the civilian audience about these specific signs and totems. The gang proliferation problem in the State of Illinois is so pervasive at this point that there is little risk for a contagion effect as things stand now.

       A quality and detailed statewide gang awareness brochure is still sorely needed. While a variety of state agencies could have been the source for this (State Attorney General, Governor's office, DCFS, State Police, etc), no such document has been produced for the citizens of Illinois that truly covers the gamut of all gangs known to exist in Illinois, their variations, and their threat levels. A number of political candidates for state office in Illinois are now posturing about what they will do about the "gang problem". The astute reader may want to provide a copy of this report to their favorites in this current race.

CONCLUSIONS

     Our findings can best be generalized to municipal law enforcement agencies in smaller and medium sized cities in Illinois (e.g., populations <= 105,000) . About a third (35.3) of all such police chiefs in Illinois do in fact have their views and beliefs analyzed in this survey. Obviously, the authors would have preferred to have a true saturation sample that would have the strength of a statewide census on the issues.

    For an unfunded research project which used no reminder or follow-up efforts the sample analyzed here (N = 232 police chiefs in Illinois) is still respectable. By way of comparison, this is particularly true given that the sample size used here exceeds any statewide law enforcement agency analysis yet reported in the literature on gangs.

     In one sense the proliferation of the gang problem throughout the State of Illinois can be compared to what might be called the Fort Apache syndrome. Fort Apache was a Hollywood movie about a police station where problems escalated to such an extent that the police station itself was attacked by mobs of criminals that vastly outnumbered sworn police officers. Among the police chiefs responding to the survey, they reported a total of 5,189 full time sworn officers and another 832 part-time officers. But the police chiefs also reported a sum of 12,914 gang members in their cities. Thus, local police are outnumbered by local gang members at a ratio of two to one is the finding from this survey. Secondly, among County Sheriff's responding to the survey, a total sum of 738 full-time officers were reported, along with 31 part-timers. But the county sheriffs also reported a sum of 2,807 gang members in their counties. While additional analysis from this and other sources is currently underway by the authors, it would appear that gang migration is indeed a problem affecting communities throughout the State of Illinois. The process is not necessarily as simple as that involving larger gangs whose city of orientation was Chicago where such major gangs as the Latin Kings, Gangster Disciples, and Vice Lords systematically seek to "carve up" territories throughout Illinois. Further, it would appear that the spread is not necessarily direct from the larger areas like Chicago; rather it appears to be a process of diffusion, where a major gang from Chicago establishes influence and/or operations in a medium sized city (Aurora, Decatur, Joliet, Springfield, E. St. Louis, etc), and such groups then spread their influence to much smaller contiguous or neighboring communities. Further, it would appear that a major competing rival hypothesis to what is traditionally thought to be simple "gang migration" may actually be the "familial gang transplant" phenomenon examined great detail in this report. It is also clear that not all of the problem of gang proliferation throughout Illinois is explained by gang migration. There is also gang emulation, also called the copycat syndrome, also called the contagion effect. What this small effort at trying to understand the scope and extent of gang migration in Illinois has clearly shown, however, is the need for some more systematic way of assessing this problem. The current project was not a funded research project, and the authors could therefore not contact the agencies not responding to the survey and encourage them to do so. A large need exists to have the legislature of the State of Illinois conduct such a statewide assessment, where the investigators could enjoy the resources of ensuring follow-up to provide a true saturation study of the Illinois gang problem.

     The bias in reporting that is introduced by the type of mail survey reported here is that the much larger jurisdictions do not respond. Chicago and Cook County, for example, did not respond to the survey; which the authors view as a function of organizational complexity: The higher the organizational complexity, the less likely the agency is to respond on time to a survey such as this. Yet the gang crime problems in large metropolitan areas are already well known. Thus, there is no fault in the generalizations made from this survey, because we have not generalized to jurisdictions with populations over 105,000 persons. To repeat, the findings in this report apply only to medium sized and smaller sized cities and counties. The value of this report, therefore, is in how it documents the gang problem in medium sized and small sized cities throughout Illinois.

RECOMMENDATIONS:

     (1) Recent advances in gang crime threat analysis, focusing not on the individual offender but rather on the group and organizational structure of the gang, need to be applied to the Illinois context regarding gang proliferation. This localized gang intelligence can be a powerful tool in understanding, predicting, and suppressing the gang problem. Gang research and analysis funding should be developed at the city level where local needs and local concerns can be reflected in the knowledge that is developed for use combatting the gang crime problem.

      (2) The Illinois state legislature needs to be informed about some of the implications of the research reported here. The authors cannot assume this responsibility to educate these and other elected officials. Therefore, readers are encouraged to send copies of this report their own state, county, and local elected officials.

      (3) Many municipal police departments in medium sized cities and smaller townships throughout Illinois appear from this research to lack the additional resources that are needed to confront the rising gang crime epidemic. Additional resources to add more sworn officers and for in-depth gang training are sorely needed. Special legislation should be considered for supplementing law enforcement agency resources in smaller jurisdictions, i.e., those under 100,000 in population size. It is the smaller police department, not the large city police department, that needs extra help here. The reasoning here is clear: in the smaller cities there is still a chance to combat this gang crime problem, in the larger cities gangs have become such a part of everyday life and so powerful that they have established front organizations like "21st Century VOTE" to put their own candidates on the ballot in seeking political power as well. This sudden surge of good citizenship or pro-social behavior among gang leaders would not be a problem if political encroachment on the law enforcement function did not exist in American society, however it always has and probably always will exist. In some police districts in places like Chicago, for example, the gang problem is beyond control at this point and the police station is referred to by other officers in the city as the "Wild Kingdom".

     (4) This kind of statewide research needs to be continuously conducted (on at least a yearly basis) so that longitudinal data will allow for a more objective evaluation of suppression efforts and to gauge the extent of continued gang proliferation throughout the State of Illinois. The gang problem is a volatile area: it changes quickly. Such research efforts cannot afford the traditional "Ivory Tower" style of waiting a year or longer until reporting the research results to those in need of the information (by which time the gang situation may have changed). Instead, a "rapid response approach" style such as that exemplified in the present project is needed.

         To the extent that police agencies implement "community policing" initiatives as well, what often happens is gang displacement. With the "heat" turned up on the gang, it shifts operations to a nearby community (e.g., gang displacement). In this framework, the success of Town X is the new problem for contiguous Towns Y and Z. In this sense, perhaps even a quarterly reporting system for this kind of statewide gang information would be even more valuable. Particularly, if it could provide impact and threat level estimates at the level of the individual gang identity (e.g., the gang organization). Such a quarterly statewide assessment data system would do much to alert neighboring communities of gangs that might be wanting to set up new shops, and it would do much in the way of providing an informational basis for coordination between existing law enforcement agencies in Illinois.

BIBLIOGRAPHY AND REFERENCES

Block, Carolyn Rebecca and Richard Block

     1993 "Street Gang Crime in Chicago", Research in Brief,        (December, 1993), National Institute of Justice,      Office of Justice Programs, U.S. Department of        Justice, Washington, D.C. (11 pp.).

Houston, James G.

     1994 "Gang Migration: Impact on Small Rural Communities

           in the Midwest", paper presented at the Annual Meeting   of the Academy of Criminal Justice Sciences, March 10, 1994, Chicago, IL.

Knox, George W.

     1991 An Introduction to Gangs. First edition. Berrien       Springs, MI: Vande Vere Publishing.

     1993 An Introduction to Gangs. 2nd and Expanded Edition.        Buchanan, Mich: Vande Vere Ltd., Vande Vere Publishing.

Knox, George W.; David L. Laske; and Edward D. Tromanhauser

     1992 Schools Under Siege. Dubuque, IA: Kendall-Hunt          Publishing Company. Order Phone: (800) 228-0810.

Laskey, John A.

     1994 "Gang Migration by Parental Good Intentions: Moving   to New Neighborhoods Within a Metropolitan Area",

          paper presented March 10, 1994 at the Annual Meeting       of the Academy of Criminal Justice Sciences, Chicago,      IL.

Maxson, Cheryl L. and Malcolm W. Klein

     1993 "The Scope of Street Gang Migration in the U.S.: An       Interim Report to Survey Participants", 4 pp. (mimeo),       University of Southern California; paper presented at

          the Annual Meeting of the American Society of         Criminology, Phoenix, Arizona.

The Journal of Gang Research: An Interdisciplinary Research Quarterly

    1993-present. A full professional "journal" about gangs.       Provides the most current and uptodate research findings        about the gang problem. Book Reviews. Interviews. Views   From the Field. A MUST FOR THE GANG SPECIALIST POLICE     OFFICER. THE ONLY AUTHORITATIVE JOURNAL OF ITS TYPE IN        THE WORLD. For subscription information: Contact        National Gang Crime Research Center, George W. Knox,        (312) 995-2108.

APPENDIX A:

PERCENTAGE DISTRIBUTION AND OTHER STATISTICS FOR THE

THE 1994 ILLINOIS LAW ENFORCEMENT SURVEY

(1) Are youth gangs a problem in your jurisdiction?

                 ___Yes ____No

Police Chiefs 68.3% 31.7% (N = 232)

County Sheriffs 64.0 36.0% (N = 25)

     IF YES:

           ___Major Problem ___Moderate problem ___Minor problem

  Chiefs 6.0% 38.7% 55.4%

Sheriffs 10.5% 36.8% 52.6%

(2) Does your Department use a SWORD (Statewide Organized Gang Database) computer terminal from the State Police?

                 ___Yes ___No

Police Chiefs 30.2% 69.8%

County Sheriffs 36.0% 64.0%

(3) Is gang-related crime concentrated in certain specific areas of your jurisdiction? ___Yes ___No

            Police Chiefs 28.1% 71.9%

            County Sheriffs 59.1% 40.9%

(4) Have you seen gang influence from outside of your community or jurisdiction? ___Yes ___No

     PC Police Chiefs 87.4% 12.6%

     CS County Sheriffs 79.2% 20.8%

(5) What kinds of problems do youth gangs cause in your jurisdiction? (Percentages for the Full Sample)

    ___Violence ___Drug sales ___Graffiti ___Burglary ___Robbery

PC: 45.7% 45.3% 59.1% 45.3% 12.1%

CS: 44.0% 56.0% 48.0% 40.0% 8.0%

    ___Drive-by shootings ___Arson ___Prostitution ___Car theft

PC: 17.1% 3.0% .9% 24.1%

CS: 32.0% 0.0% 0.0% 8.0%

    ___Other (please write in here:_____________________________)

PC: 19.0%

CS: 16.0%

(6) Please estimate the percent of total crime in your jurisdiction that is caused by gang activity? ____%

PC: Range 0-70 Mean = 7.9%

CS: Range 0-30 Mean = 9.7%

(7) Please estimate the percent of total juvenile crime in your jurisdiction that is caused by gang activity? ____%

PC: Range 0-80 Mean = 13.5%

CS: Range 0-60 Mean = 8.9%

(8) Please estimate what percent of the crime in your community/jurisdiction is caused by gangs or gang members from outside of your same area. _____%

PC: Range 0-100 Mean = 12.6%

CS: Range 0-95 Mean = 13.9%

(9) Please estimate what percent of all arrests in the last year were of non-residents of your community/jurisdiction? _____%

PC: Range 0-98 Mean = 44.4%

CS: Range 0-98 Mean = 29.0%

(10) Rate the extent to which you believe your jurisdiction is economically declining (e.g., loss of jobs, etc) or improving.

     DECLINING IMPROVING

             __0 __1 __2 __3 __4 __5 __6 __7 __8 __9 __10

PC: Range 0-10 Mean = 5.3

CS: Range 2-10 Mean = 4.8

(11) In what year did gangs first become recognized as a problem in your jurisdiction? 19_____

PC: Range 1970-1993 Mean = 1989.4

CS: Range 1988-1993 Mean = 1991

(12) How many sworn police officers are employed by your Department:

                   ____ Full-time and ____Part-time

PC: Ranges 0-219 0-30

PC: Means 21.9 4.8

CS: Ranges 2-265 0-7

CS: Means 29.5 2.5

(13) Do your police officers receive training in "gang awareness" or handling gang problems?

       PRE-SERVICE TRAINING: ___Yes ___No

                Police Chiefs 47.7% 52.3%

               County Sheriffs 45.0% 55.0%

       IN-SERVICE TRAINING: ___Yes ___No

                 Police Chiefs 78.9% 21.1%

               County Sheriffs 80.0% 20.0%

(14) What would you estimate the total core and periphery gang membership in your jurisdiction to be:______ total members

PC: Range 0-1200 Mean = 50.1

CS: Range 0-1,000 Mean = 155.9

(15) Please estimate what percentage of the total gang population in your jurisdiction (see question #14) is attributable to families and individuals who have recently relocated to your community/jurisdiction. _____%

PC: Range 0-100 Mean = 29.2%

CS: Range 0-100 Mean = 31.9%

(16) Have you noticed an increase in gang graffiti or tagging in the last year? ___Yes ___No

     Police Chiefs 48.9% 51.1%

    County Sheriffs 52.0% 48.0%

(17) To your knowledge, are certain color patterns or modes of dress identified as "gang related" prohibited in local public schools? ___Yes ___No

     Police Chiefs 54.6% 45.4%

   County Sheriffs 32.0% 68.0%

(18) Has your city/county jurisdiction passed any laws recently that are specifically aimed at gangs (e.g., curfew, etc)? ___Yes ___No

 Police Chiefs 27.6% 72.4%

County Sheriffs 12% 88%

(19) Has your Department produced any public education brochures or pamphlets related to gangs? ___Yes ___No

                      Police Chiefs 25.1% 74.9%

                    County Sheriffs 20.8% 79.2%

(20) Is any state or federal correctional institution located in or very near your community/jurisdiction? ___Yes ___No

                                   Police Chiefs 40.3% 59.7%

                                  County Sheriffs 60.0% 40.0%

(21) Have gang members recently made even temporary visits (of at least a few days, for whatever reasons) to your community/jurisdiction? ___Yes ___No

                  Police Chiefs 67.0% 33.0%

                County Sheriffs 75.0% 25.0%

         If yes, when was your first experience with even temporary visits of gang members to your area? 19_____

PC: Range 1970-1994 Mean = 1989.5

CS: Range 1976-1993 Mean = 1989.5

(22) With regard to even temporary visits by gang members to your area, what was the city of origin of these gang migrants? (FIRST CITY OF ORIGIN only among THOSE reporting data)

PC: Chicago 44.5%, Aurora 4.5%, Joliet 4.5%

CS: Chicago 52%, Peoria 11.8%

(23) Have you seen cases where a parent relocates to your area (knowing their child was involved with a gang and perhaps thinking they can simply "move away" from the problem), and basically "transplants" the gang problem to your area? ___Yes ___No

PC: 62.4% 37.6%

CS: 60.0% 40.0%

(24) Please estimate what percentage of all households in your area are rental units? _____%

PC: Range 0-85 Mean = 22.3%

CS: Range 0-55 Mean = 19.1%

(25) Does your community/jurisdiction have any federally subsidized housing other than that for the elderly?

         ___Yes ___No

PC: 58.4% 41.6%

CS: 96.0% 4.0%

(26) What is the current population estimate of your community/jurisdiction? __________

PC: Range 350 - 105,000 Mean = 11,916

CS: Range 7500 - 250,000 Mean = 47,210

(27) Approximately what percentage of the current population of your area are racial or ethnic minorities? ____%

PC: Range 0-99 Mean = 11.5%

CS: Range 0-45 Mean = 6.7%

(28) Approximately what percentage of the current population of your area are recent migrants from Chicago? ______%

PC: Range 0-80 Mean = 6.8%

CS: Range 0-50 Mean = 5.8%

(29) Which type of gang is most active in illegal drug sales in your area:

       ___Black ___Hispanic ___White ___Mixed

PC: 37.8% 14.6% 38.4% 9.2%

CS: 50.0% 20.0% 15.0% 15.0%

(30) Which type of gang is most active in "turf issues" in your area:

       ___Black ___Hispanic ___White ___Mixed

PC: 27.6% 22.4% 40.4% 9.6%

CS: 35.3% 17.6% 35.3% 11.8%

(31) Which type of gang is most active in racial extremism and bias crime in your area? ___Black ___Hispanic ___White ___Mixed

PC: 28.9% 14.8% 51.1% 5.2%

CS: 37.5% 12.5% 50.0% 0%

(32) Are any of the sworn officers of your department members of the Midwest Gang Investigators Association? ___Yes ___No

                                               PC: 25.6% 74.4%

                                               CS: 8.0% 92.0%

(33) Are the gang members in your area predominantly racial and ethnic minorities? ___Yes ___No

                      PC: 49.5% 50.5%

                      CS: 78.9% 21.1%

(34) Are the gang members in your area mostly (check one):

       ___Black ___Hispanic ___White ___Other

PC: 31.4% 19.4% 48.6% .6%

CS: 50.0% 22.2% 27.8% 0%

(35) How many sworn officers from your department are assigned to work full-time on the gang problem? _______

PC: Range 0-21 Mean = .52 (average = half a person)

CS: Range 0-2 Mean = .21 (average = 1/5th a person)

(36) What are the names of the largest three gangs in your area:

      (First gang listed only)

PC: Latin Kings 34.1%, Gangster Disciples 20.5%, Vice Lords 11.9%

CS: Latin Kings 26.3%, Various Disciples factions 47.4%

(37) Does your Department have a special unit to handle gang problems? ___Yes ___No

             PC: 20.9% 79.1%

             CS: 12% 88%

(38) Do you believe some gangs can migrate to jurisdictions such as your own? ___Yes ___No

                PC: 96.5% 3.5%

                CS: 95.8% 4.2%

(39) Do you believe any of the gang problem in your jurisdiction is due to "gang migration"? ___Yes ___No

                             PC: 68.2% 31.8%

                             CS: 63.6% 36.4%

(40) Does your Department have a strategic plan for dealing with youth gangs? ___Yes ___No

                  PC: 31.4% 68.6%

                  CS: 8.0% 92.0%

(41) Please estimate to what extent the gang problem in your area arose because of "gang migration" (i.e., outside gangs coming into your area to develop their own local franchises or local chapters).

     NOT A __0 __1 __2 __3 __4 __5 __6 __7 __8 __9 __10 MAJOR

     FACTOR FACTOR

PC: Range 0-10 Mean = 3.89

CS: Range 0-10 Mean = 3.60

(42) Please estimate to what extent the gang problem in your area arose because of the "copy cat" phenomenon (i.e., youths who use names of national groups without really having ties to the same groups in other areas).

      NOT A __0 __1 __2 __3 __4 __5 __6 __7 __8 __9 __10 MAJOR

      FACTOR FACTOR

PC: Range 0-10 Mean = 5.09

CS: Range 0-10 Mean = 3.16

(43) Do you feel that "hate groups" (KKK, neo-nazis, skinheads, etc) are a crime problem in your area? ___Yes ___No

                                         PC: 12.9% 87.1%

                                         CS: 12.5% 87.5%

(44) Are females also involved in the gangs in your area?

      ___Yes ___No

 PC: 74.2% 25.8%

 CS: 68.2% 31.8%

(45) Have there been any "gang disturbances" in the public schools in your area in the last year? ___Yes ___No

                                          PC: 44.7% 55.3%

                                          CS: 25.0% 75.0%

(46) Does your department have a K-9 unit? ___Yes ___No

                                         PC: 23.3% 76.7%

                                         CS: 44.0% 56.0%

(47) Have any Asian gangs or Asian gang members been active in your jurisdiction? ___Yes ___No

                        PC: 6.1% 93.9%

                        CS: 12.5% 87.5%

(48) Have any gangs become active in politics in your jurisdiction? ___Yes ___No

                  PC: 2.6% 97.4%

                  CS: 8.0% 92.0%

(49) Has a group known as "21st Century V.O.T.E." been active in any capacity in your jurisdiction? ___Yes ___No

                                         PC: 4.3% 95.7%

                                         CS: 4.2% 95.8%

ENDNOTES: