" ); floatwnd.document.close(); floatwnd.focus(); } } function WPHide( WPid ) { if( bInlineFloats ) eval( "document.all." + WPid + ".style.visibility = 'hidden'" ); }

Report on the Results of the

1998 South Carolina Law Enforcement

Gang Analysis Survey

George W. Knox, Ph.D.

INTRODUCTION

This report provides the results of a small survey project called The 1998 South Carolina Law Enforcement Gang Analysis Survey. The research is based on voluntary responses to a mail questionnaire from law enforcement agencies in the State of South Carolina. The data was collected in March and April of 1998. The results of the analysis undertaken are reported here in full. Recommendations are also provided in this report.

PURPOSE

The sole purpose of the survey was to an provide exploratory research function. As an intentionally "small scale research project" in terms of resources that could be allocated to the study, the goals were very limited and included the following: (1) identify trends and conditions relating to gang activity in the State of South Carolina, (2) identify critical issues in terms of policy that can best be aired to a researcher who is not tied politically or in any other way, by employment, etc, to the State of South Carolina, and (3) provide estimates of the current scope and extent of gang activity in the State of South Carolina.

Therefore, clearly, this research is not designed to provide the definitive answer to all questions about gang activity in the State of Carolina. Rather, this research is intentionally designed to provide a descriptive analysis that may provide new insights about gang activity in the State of South Carolina.

METHODOLOGY

The research methodology used here is that of the mail questionnaire. The unit of analysis is the law enforcement agency, a unit of government that has sworn police personnel. The research is limited solely to law enforcement agencies in the State of South Carolina. These agencies include mostly municipal or city level police departments, but also county sheriff's and campus police departments.

SAMPLE

The sampling strategy was that of complete saturation: mailing a letter, copy of the survey, and postage-paid return envelope to all known law enforcement agencies in the State of South Carolina. Federal law enforcement agencies were not included in the sampling strategy. It was possible to identify a total of N = 322 law enforcement agencies in the State of South Carolina. These consisted primarily of municipal police departments, followed by county Sheriff's agencies, and college or university campus police departments.

A total of N = 40 agencies responded within six weeks after they had received the mail questionnaire. Thus, the sample used for this report consists of the N = 40 responding agencies. Follow-up was not a part of this research project, thus the low response rate overall is reasonable for the type of small scale exploratory research project that was implemented and which is being reported here. Most of the sample (66.7%) consists of municipal or city police departments, some 15.4 percent were county sheriff offices or departments, and 17.9 percent were campus police departments.

FACE VALIDITY

The validity of research means "are we really measuring what we say we are measuring". In this regard, the development of the survey instrument itself certainly holds high face validity, given the sophistication and enhancements it contains regarding the measurement of "gang issues". It is extremely doubtful that any respondent to this research did not know exactly what the questions in the survey meant. The questions are short, straight-forward, unambiguous, and contain "forced-choice" response modes.

All researchers claim their survey instruments are good ones. There is no national clearinghouse that assigns a rating to the quality of survey instruments. What we can report, however, is that the instrument used in this research is a replication and refinement of an instrument that has undergone much previous positive use.

AN ACTUAL VALIDITY TEST

Another way of conceiving of validity in this kind of research would be "are the respondents being truthful". While "truthfulness" per se is not easy to determine under any condition or situation, it is possible to measure and determine the degree of "internal consistency in responses by the responding agencies". In other words, a "lie test" factor can be computed on the basis of the responses of individual agencies represented in the research reported here. How this is done is explained below.

First of all, we know from previous uses of the instrument that one factor regarding gangs seemed to escalate in the 1990's: gang involvement in politics. In Chicago, gangs sponsored their own candidates who got on the slate for the City Council. In New York, gangs like the Latin Kings distribute their own version of a regular "community newsletter" for public relations purposes. In Honolulu, after gangs protested against police, the Mayor invited the gang members to have lunch with him. In February of 1994 Chicago's spokesperson for "Growth and Development" Wallace "Gator" Bradley actually got into the oval office for a talk with President Bill Clinton and the photo opportunity was published on this same event (see Chicago Tribune, Section 2, p. 6, Feb. 18, 1994). Apparently, "Gator" had the audacity to introduce himself to President Clinton as being there representing a group called "Better Growth and Development": read that Black Gangster Disciples. Gangster Disciples (GDs) followed a trend used by other successful gangs to give a "front group" or positive twist on their criminal enterprises, thus a lot of GD's will simply identify their gang allegiance by indicating they are "not a gang", "we are for Growth and Development".

So, the fact is: some of the larger and more sophisticated gangs do get involved in politics. Our national survey results on this same issue are instructive. The trend is clear on this issue. The tendency for the politicization of gangs emerged in the 1990's in predictable fashion. When gangs do get involved in local electoral politics, then this usually signals the gang is so entrenched and the gang problem is so out of control as to almost be at the stage where gangs make the transition into the classical definition of organized crime.

Two very similar, yet slightly differently worded, questions were included in the survey that measure the same thing: gang involvement in politics. Let us examine these two questions to see how identical they are in terms of measuring the same underlying phenomenon. The first question on page two of the survey (ITEM #34 on the survey) asked "Are any gangs in your jurisdiction getting involved with or active in politics?" The second question (ITEM #65) on page four of the survey asked "Have any gangs become active in politics in your jurisdiction".

These two "validity" questions, therefore, measure the same underlying phenomenon: gang involvement in local politics. These two items were intentionally structured in the item order of the survey so that one was located near the beginning of the survey instrument and one was located near the end of the survey instrument. If there was a large degree of inconsistency in answers to these two questions, then this would be indicative of a serious validity problem with the data collected. This research included the capability to test this issue of validity.

The validity test provided here therefore compares the responses to these two identical questions about gang involvement in local politics. Table 1 provides the results of this validity test for the law enforcement respondents in the State of South Carolina.

TABLE 1

Frequency Distribution

Comparing the Response Patterns of Two

Similar But Different Survey Items

Among the Sample of Responding

South Carolina Law Enforcement Agencies

Have Any Gangs Become

Active in Politics In

Your Jurisdiction?

Are any gangs in your

jurisdiction getting NO YES

involved with or

active in politics? NO 33 0

YES 0 0

As seen in Table 1, it is now possible to compute the extent of internal consistency in the response patterns to these two items in the survey instrument. A "No/No" pattern, and a "Yes/Yes" pattern, would both be considered patterns of consistency. A "No/Yes" pattern, and a "Yes/No" pattern, would conversely both be considered patterns of inconsistency. To derive the degree of consistency in the data, then all we need to do is know the total sample size for Table 1 (which is N = 33), and divide that total by the number of consistent respondents (No/No and Yes/Yes, which in Table 1 is N = 33). This yields a percentile of 100 percent. What this means is that 100 percent of the cases show a pattern of internal consistency regarding the issue addressed in Table 1.

While it is uncommon for research of this type to include a validity test regarding internal consistency, clearly the test revealed in Table 1 shows a remarkably high degree of internal consistency in the response patterns of the agencies represented in the sample.

BASIC DESCRIPTIVE FINDINGS FROM THE RESEARCH

The intent of this report is that its findings be easy to understand by those who are the intended consumers: the respondents. Thus, only basic descriptive statistics are used in the analysis that is reported here. Also, the manner in presenting the findings is straight-forward: the findings are presented item by item, exactly in the same order as the questions appeared in the survey itself.

Are Gangs a Problem in Local Police Jurisdictions?

The survey asked "are gangs a problem in your jurisdiction?". Just over two-thirds (69.2%) of the respondents indicated "yes". Only 30.8 percent of the respondents indicated that gangs are not a problem in their jurisdiction.

We will need to address this issue with greater analysis, because the "69.2 percent" parameter is, we believe, a downward biased estimate of the true scope and extent of the gang problem in South Carolina communities.

The extent of the gang problem in South Carolina, therefore, parallels what is typical of the other 49 States in our Nation. South Carolina is experiencing about the same level of the gang problem that the rest of the country faces. What is unique about South Carolina, as will be seen, is that it is a State facing a high level of gang denial and a low level of being ready to respond to the gang problem.

How Serious is the Gang Problem?

There are a number of ways to assess how serious the gang problem is in any community. The method reported here is a standard one: among those agencies who do report that gangs are a problem in their jurisdiction, the survey also asked a follow-up question where the respondents were instructed to rate the level of seriousness in terms of "major problem, moderate problem, minor problem". No one indicated the gang problem was a major problem. However, 38.5 percent indicated that the gang problem was a "moderate problem", and the single largest category (61.5%) indicated that the gang problem as a "minor problem".

In Most Cases The Gang Population Consists of a Mix of Juvenile and Adult Members

Some previous surveys of law enforcement agencies on the topic of gangs have seriously underestimated the scope and extent of the gang problem by instructing the responding agencies to only report about "juvenile gang problems". It is simply a total misconception that gangs today are primarily a juvenile problem. This survey helps to explain this situation further.

The survey included the question: "Which best describes the gang problem in your jurisdiction?". The respondents were asked to select one of three possible answers: (1) Gang members constitute almost exclusively underage juveniles, (2) Gang members constitute a mix of juveniles and adults, and (3) Gang members constitute almost exclusively adults.

No one in the South Carolina sample indicated that the gang problem in their jurisdiction consists almost exclusively of adults.

About a fourth (25.8%) did indicate that their gang problem consists almost exclusively of juveniles.

In the vast majority of cases (74.2%), however, in fact three-fourths of the jurisdictions that report a gang problem, the gang problem is described as consisting of a mix of juvenile and adult gang members.

The message this should send to other researchers is not to be naive in carrying out gang research on law enforcement agencies and not to try and reduce the gang problem to something that it is not. The gang problem, in most cases, includes a mix of juveniles and adults. Thus, any research that excludes adult involvement in the gang problem is research designed to achieve misinformation if it tries to generalize findings to any geographical area in terms of policy development.

South Carolina Lacks Common Technological Capabilities In Being Able to Respond to the Gang Problem

Most states have developed some "statewide" gang member "tracking system" that is made available to local law enforcement agencies. Typical of these is the SWORD system in Illinois, established under state statute. It allows any law enforcement officer to do a simple name search on a vehicle or suspect and gives the police officer vital information that is crucial to the officer's own survivability. No such system appears to operate in the State of South Carolina.

The survey asked "does your agency use a computer system that is specifically designed to track gang members?". The overwhelming majority (97.4%) indicated "NO": that they lacked this common technological capability that so many other law enforcement agencies throughout the United States now employ.

To the extent that the State of South Carolina continues to stall on not providing this capability to local police departments, then the "defacto" state policy amounts to giving gang members a "free ride" to spread their gang activities across jurisdictions. When no one can check on their activities, the policy of State of South Carolina is to inadvertently allow gangs "free reign" in their travel across jurisdictions inside the State of South Carolina.

As we will see shortly, this situation of not properly arming police officers to respond to a problem that is by its nature typically intra- and inter-jurisdictional in nature (i.e., gang members do travel), may be related to another common problem: GANG DENIAL or the "Ostrich Phenomenon".

Gang Denial and the "Ostrich Phenomenon"

Gang denial means that local politicians who have great influence over law enforcement policy intentionally deny that their city or jurisdiction has any gang problem at all. Apparently this is a very serious problem in the State of South Carolina as the findings below will reveal.

The survey asked "To what extent do community leaders in your jurisdiction deny the gang problem (Check one rating, higher the number the higher the denial, lower the number the lower the level of denial)", where the response modes consisted of the range of options from a low of "zero" (NO DENIAL) to a high of "ten" (HIGH DENIAL).

Table 2: Distribution of Responses to the Level of Gang Denial in a Sample of South Carolina Jurisdictions

Level of

Gang N of

Denial Cases Percentage

NO DENIAL0 5 15.6

1 1 3.1

2 2 6.3

3 1 3.1

4 1 3.1

5 1 3.1

6 5 15.6

7 5 15.6

8 4 12.5

9 4 12.5

HIGH 10 3 9.4

DENIAL

As seen in Table 2, only about a third of the cases (34.4%) indicated a "gang denial" rating of less than or equal to "five" on this scale. Thus, two-thirds (65.6%) of the cases gave a gang denial rating of at least "six" or higher on a zero to ten scale. The arithmetic mean, or statistical average, for this distribution is 5.62 overall. It indicates a serious degree of gang denial among jurisdictions in the State of South Carolina. This situation may have contributed itself to the low response rate from these same agencies.

The reason "gang denial" is sometimes also called the "Ostrich Phenomenon" is that under a gang denial situation, local politicians instruct their law enforcement agency not to talk about the gang problem or admit anything about the gang problem, the theory being that the "gang problem will just go away". Like the proverbial ostrich that puts its head in the sand, some policy makers and leaders do a real disservice to their community when they fail to inform the public on the gang issue. Hiding from a national problem is not going to make a problem go away and unfortunately a large number of politicians have yet to learn this lesson.

Two-Thirds of All South Carolina Communities Have Seen Gang Influence From Outside of Their Own Jurisdiction

What the State of South Carolina has yet to realize is that the gang problem is not limited to large urban areas anymore. Gang members do travel and cross jurisdictional boundaries for a large number of reasons: often to spread their influence. State leadership is needed on the gang issue in South Carolina.

The survey asked "have you seen gang influence from outside of your own community or jurisdiction?". Just over two-thirds (68.4%) reported that they have in fact seen this type of outside gang influence in their areas.

What Kind of Problems Do Gang Members Cause in South Carolina Communities?

In the ideal world a citizen of South Carolina who wanted to have good factual information about what percentage of the "crime problem" can be attributed to offenses committed by gang members, well that citizen would be able to look in the FBI's Uniform Crime Report and take a look at the variety of offenses that a state or major city reports in this most important national source of crime information. But the fact is one can read the 500+ pages of the book length report known as the FBI's Uniform Crime Report and find not one word, not one statistic, that relates to the topic of "gangs" or "gang members". Thus, today all American citizens who really wanted to have good information as the basis of planning a program to counter-act the influence of gangs in any given community, are unable to benefit from the single most important source of crime statistics provided by the federal government.

While it makes exceedingly good sense to finally implement one small change in the FBI's UCR reporting system to include a new question for all arrestees in the United States ("Is the person a gang member?", and if yes, what gang), we sincerely doubt that anyone in the State of South Carolina has written to their U.S. Representative or their U.S. Senator to demand that this change finally be implemented. And one reason it may never be implemented is that if elected politicians are those who are chiefly responsible for "gang denial", then a change in the FBI's UCR reporting system would eliminate "gang denial" nationwide literally overnight. Because the truth about the scope and extent of gang crime in the United States would finally face the light of day and would be in the public domain.

The survey included a "checklist" approach to examining the types of crime-patterns that gang members are responsible for in the State of South Carolina. The survey asked the respondents to "check off" what kinds of problems gang members cause in their respective jurisdictions. Here is what we found for the State of South Carolina.

* Some 53.8 percent of all communities in the State of South Carolina report that gang members are a cause of violence in their jurisdiction.

* Some 66.7 percent of all communities in the State of South Carolina report that gang members are a cause of drug sales in their jurisdiction.

* Some 69.2 percent of all communities in the State of South Carolina report that gang members are a cause of graffiti problems in their jurisdiction.

* Some 41.0 percent of all communities in the State of South Carolina report that gang members are a cause of burglary problems in their jurisdiction.

* Some 20.5 percent of all communities in the State of South Carolina report that gang members are a cause of robbery problems in their jurisdiction.

* Some 25.6 percent of all communities in the State of South Carolina report that gang members are a cause of drive-by shootings in their jurisdiction.

* Some 2.6 percent of all communities in the State of South Carolina report that gang members are a cause of arson crimes in their jurisdiction.

* Some 5.1 percent of all communities in the State of South Carolina report that gang members are a cause of prostitution problems in their jurisdiction.

* Some 28.2 percent of all communities in the State of South Carolina report that gang members are a cause of car theft crimes in their jurisdiction.

* Some 23.1 percent of all communities in the State of South Carolina report that gang members are a cause of retail theft crimes in their jurisdiction.

* Some 38.5 percent of all communities in the State of South Carolina report that gang members are a cause of criminal damage to property crimes in their jurisdiction.

How Much of the Total Overall Crime Problem in South Carolina Can Be Attributed to Crimes Committed By Gang Members?

The issue here is a very interesting one. It is the issue of the "critical stage" in any problem. In otherwords, at what point does something like the gang problem, in spite of the issue of denial, pass the "critical stage" for policy makers in the State of South Carolina? If 10 percent of all crimes in South Carolina could be laid at the doorstep of gang members, then would this be a sufficiently high "critical stage" to finally result in having policy makers take "proactive steps" to respond to the problem? Would it require something over 50 percent? No one really knows, but we suspect it is a simple enough issue that reflects both the estimated "total crime picture" that is taken up by gangs and gang members and how long they persist over time in carrying out these crimes in any jurisdiction.

This research was designed to shed some light on the issue. A series of questions were included in the survey to provide estimates of the scope and extent of "gang crime" in South Carolina communities.

The survey asked the agencies to estimate the percent of total crime in their jurisdiction that is caused by gang activity. The results ranged from a low of zero percent to a high of 50 percent! The mean, or average statewide, was that 11.9 percent of all crime is caused by gang activity.

The survey asked the agencies to also separately estimate the percent of total juvenile crime in their jurisdiction that is caused by gang activity. Here the results ranged from a low of zero percent to a high of 75 percent! The mean, or statewide average, was that 21.8 percent of all juvenile crime was caused by gang activity. That means that about one in five juvenile offenses in South Carolina is probably caused by gang activity.

The survey also asked the agencies to estimate what percentage of the crime in their jurisdictions is caused by gangs or gang members from outside of the same area. Here the results ranged from a low of zero percent to a high of 100 percent! The mean, or statewide average, was that 10.9 percent of all local crime is probably committed by gangs or gang members from outside of the same jurisdiction experiencing the crime problem.

Finally, as a way of comparing the gang component of the crime picture to other "outsiders", the survey asked the agencies to estimate what percent of all arrests in the last year were of non-residents of their community or jurisdiction. Here the results ranged from a low of zero to a high of 100 percent! The mean, or statewide average, was that 34.3 percent of all local arrests consisted of persons who did not reside in the community in which they were arrested.

Most Believe It Is Hard to Get Gang Members to Become Confidential Informants

The survey asked "in your opinion, is it hard to get gang members to be confidential informants?". National research on gang members shows that generally gang members are no different than ordinary criminals in this regard. National research shows that about a third of all gang members would "flip" or become more than informants, they would testify against their gang, given the right situation and the right offer or treatment. Typically, it means "jamming" up a gang member on good charges, and reducing the severity of the offense if the offender does cooperate with an investigation or prosecution.

Still, the vast majority of the responding agencies (80.0%) felt that it was in fact hard to get gang members to become informants. As good training and good research show, however, this is really not the case. It is rather the "hard core" impression that gang members give in their "walk and talk".

When Gang Problems Were First Recognized in South Carolina Cities

The survey asked "in what year did gangs first become recognized as a problem in your jurisdiction?". It should be noted that under conditions of denial, while a gang problem exists, the problem itself is not necessarily ever recognized. Still, the information provided here suggests that the vast majority of the jurisdictions recognizing a gang problem did so only very recently. The data shows that the earliest date was 1985 and the most recent date was 1997. However, 91.3 percent of all agencies indicated that their gang problem was recognized on or after 1992!

In fact, the gang problem is so recent in hitting the State of South Carolina that this information can be looked at another way as well: 59.6 percent of the agencies reporting that they have recognized the gang problem in their jurisdictions report that this occurred on or after 1995! Essentially, a majority of the agencies reporting a gang problem are therefore reporting that it has hit their jurisdiction only very recently in time.

Number of Sworn Personnel Working in the Agencies Surveyed

The number of full time sworn police officers working in the agencies surveyed ranged from a low of zero to a high of 350. There were two cases of "zero sworn" full time personnel, presumably college security officers that do not operate under sworn police authority.

The number of part-time sworn police officers working in the agencies surveyed ranged from a low of zero to a high of 15.

Gang Training for Police Officers Lags Behind the Actual Scope and Extent of the Gang Problem Itself

The survey asked whether the agencies provide their police officers with training in "gang awareness" or handling gang problems. Only 55.9 percent of the agencies surveyed in South Carolina provide this training in "pre-service" training. Only 53.8 percent provide this training as "in-service" training. Clearly,

Level of Cooperation With Federal Agencies in Gang Cases

The survey asked the responding police departments to rate the level of cooperation they get with gang cases from the following federal agencies: FBI, BATF, DEA, and INS. Table 3 shows the results of this inquiry.

Table 3: Level of Cooperation Reported With Federal Agencies in Gang Cases.

Federal Level of Cooperation

Agency Low Medium High

FBI 58.3 20.8 20.8

BATF 56.0 28.0 16.0

DEA 56.0 28.0 16.0

INS 77.3 18.2 4.5

What Table 3 shows is very clear: those local police departments in South Carolina reporting a high level of cooperation in gang cases with federal agencies are clearly the exception to the rule. Over half report a low level of cooperation with all four of the federal agencies that have a prominent role to play in gang investigation, gang prosecution, and gang suppression.

Estimates of the Total Core and Periphery Gang Membership in South Carolina Jurisdictions

The survey asked the responding agencies to estimate the total core and periphery gang membership in their jurisdiction. The data ranged from a low of zero such gang members to a high of 300 such gang members. The overall total sum of gang members in this way of estimating the gang membership population showed some N = 2,330 gang members for the agencies reporting here.

Estimates of Total Core and Periphery as Well as "Wannabe's" and "Associates" in the Gang Membership Population

The survey asked the follow-up question: "if you included "wannabe's" and "associates", what would you estimate the total gang membership in your jurisdiction to be". The results ranged from a low of zero to a high of 1,000 such gang members. Here a total of some N = 5,397 gang members were identified.

Estimates of the Total Gang Population if We Include Related Security Threat Groups

The survey then asked the follow-up question "If you included all gang members, wannabe's, as well as KKK, Motorcycle gangs, skinheads, white racist extremist groups, what would you estimate the total gang membership in your jurisdiction to be". The results ranged from a low of zero to a high of 2,000 such gang members. Here we see a total of N = 7,675 gang members.

The Breakdown of Juvenile Versus Adults in the Gang Member Population

One of the problems, historically, in getting a handle on the truth about gang crime has been language itself. Some gang experts assume that the gang problem is primarily and fundamentally a "youth" or "juvenile" problem. This is false: gang members can be of any age, and most gang leaders today are not juveniles but are older adult career criminal offenders.

The survey asked the responding agencies to estimate the "breakdown" for what percentage of their gang population are "underage juveniles" and what percentage of their gang population are old enough to be tried as adults. Some "gang experts" are very cavalier in their use of language by including persons in their early 20's as "juvenile offenders" or "youths". In most states, anyone 18 or above, if arrested, is going to be an adult offender.

The findings show that for the State of South Carolina the current estimate is that about half of the gang members are juveniles and about half are old enough to be tried as adults. Some 49.1 percent of the gang member population is estimated to consist of underage juveniles. Some 40.7 percent of the gang member population is estimated to be old enough to be tried as adults.

The important of this finding is that if a researcher instructs the responding agencies to only report about "juvenile" gang crime, then such a researcher would be missing about half of the gang crime picture.

About Two-Thirds Have Received Free Federal Reports About Gangs

Some 64.1 percent of the responding agencies reported that they have in fact received free federal reports about gangs and gang problems. These are typically distributed through agencies of the U.S. Department of Justice (the National Institute of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, OJJDP, etc). In fact, among those that had received such reports, a large percentage (92.3%) reported that they found these materials useful.

Nearly Two-Thirds Reported an Increase in Gang Graffiti During the Last Year

The survey asked "have you noticed an increase in gang graffiti or tagging in the last year". Some 64.1 percent of the responding agencies in South Carolina did in fact report that they have noticed an increase in gang graffiti during the last year.

Almost Everyone Agrees: Local Politicians Have Influence on Local Law Enforcement Agencies

Some 97.4 percent of the respondents indicated that they agree: that local politicians have influence on local law enforcement agencies.

About A Third Report Some Gang Dress Restrictions in Local Public Schools

The survey asked "to your knowledge, are certain color patterns or modes of dress identified as gang related prohibited in local public schools. Some 35.1 percent of the responding agencies indicated that such gang dress restrictions exist. Thus, most local public schools (64.9%) apparently do not have such restrictions in place yet to reduce gang antagonisms in the school environment.

Very Few Local Jurisdictions Have Taken Local Legal Measures Against Gangs in Terms of Establishing New Laws and Ordinances

The trend nationwide is that about a fourth of all local communities have passed local law and local city ordinances aimed at gangs and gang members. The survey asked "has your city/county jurisdiction passed any laws or municipal ordinances recently that are specifically aimed at gangs (e.g., curfew, etc)". The results show that only 7.9 percent of the communities have had this "wake up call" so far. Thus, the vast majority of communities in South Carolina (92.1%) have yet to introduce such measures.

No Police Department Has Yet Produced Any Public Education Brochures About Gangs

This is perhaps another sign of a combination of things: the sudden recent onset of the gang problem in South Carolina, and to some degree perhaps the high level of gang denial that exists as well. The survey asked "has your department produced any public education brochures or pamphlets related to gangs?". No one reported having done so. This is somewhat unusual given the national norm on this matter. Nationally, some 16.8 percent of all police departments regardless of the size of their jurisdiction have produced such public education materials about gangs. It is just a necessary ingredient in dealing with the public.

Nearly Half Report a Correctional Institution in Their Jurisdiction

The survey asked "is any state or federal correctional instituted located in or very near your community/jurisdiction?". When analyzing a geographical risk of gang activity, this presence of a state or federal correctional institution in the same area plays a prominent role. The fact is: gang members to travel to prisons to visit their confined associates, and this sometimes brings outside gang activity to a jurisdiction that may have previously not seen any such gang activity.

Some 46.2 percent of the respondents indicated that there is in fact a state or federal correctional institution nearby.

Gang Migration

The survey asked "have gang members recently made even temporary visits (of at least a few days, for whatever reasons) to your community/jurisdiction?". Some 31.3 percent of the respondents indicated that they had experienced this type of gang migration recently. A follow-up question asked "were any of these gang members from Chicago?", and half of all who reported this type of gang migration reported that Chicago was in fact the epicenter for this type of gang migration.

The Cause of Gang Proliferation: Spontaneous Eruption or Intentional Migration?

The survey asked the respondents "which to you believe accounts for most of the gang problem in your area of the United States: 1. the gangs arose by normal residential relocation and local genesis, 2. the gangs arose by deliberate migration of gangs into new areas".

The respondents were almost evenly split about their viewpoints on this issue of causality.

Some 52.9 percent believed that the gangs arose by normal residential relocation and local genesis.

Some 47.1 percent believed that the gangs arose by deliberate migration of gangs into new areas.

Half Have Witnessed the "Familial Gang Transplant Phenomenon".

The survey asked the question "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".

Some 55.3 percent of the respondents indicated that they have seen such cases of the familial gang transplant phenomenon. A follow-up question asked if any of these cases were from the Chicago gang epicenter, which revealed that about a third of the cases of the familial gang transplant phenomenon were in fact from Chicago.

Few Consider The Gangs in Their Area to Be an Organized Crime Problem

The survey asked "do you consider any of the gangs in your jurisdiction to be an organized crime problem". Only 13.5 percent of the cases indicated that they believe the gang problem reaches this level of severity.

Most Respondents Have Public Housing in Their Community

The survey asked "does your community/jurisdiction have any public housing other than that for the elderly". Some 76.3 percent of the respondents indicated the presence of public housing in their community.

A follow-up question asked whether gangs have been a problem in these same public housing areas. The results show that half of those cases with public housing are also reporting that gangs have been a problem in the public housing areas.

Size of the Population in the Responding Jurisdictions

The survey asked "what is the current population estimate for your community/jurisdiction". The results ranged from a low of 1,100 to a high of 250,000 in terms of total population.

The overall grand total population for all respondents was 1,247,670.

With this population estimate for the same areas we can now provide some indication of the size of the gang problem in the State of South Carolina and compare it with external data.

Returning to the issue of the estimated size of the local gang member population it is now possible to calculate some "gang member rates".

Table 4: Gang Member Rate Estimates Based on The Known Population of the Survey (1,247,670) and the Gang Populations.

Estimated

Estimated Statewide

Gang Gang

Member Member Rate

Population Per 1000 Pop.

Hard Core Gang Members 2,330 1.86

Core and Associates, etc 5,397 4.32

Core, Associates, and Extremists 7,675 6.15

For every 1,000 in the population of South Carolina communities, the estimate of the gang population therefore varies between 1.86 and 6.15, as seen in Table 4. Basically, any town of 1000 persons would therefore be expected, anywhere in South Carolina, to have from 1 to 6 gang members in that population. Obviously, the larger the jurisdiction, the larger the possible "gang density" as well, and the rate for gang members. This adjustment is called the "ripple effect", where larger urban areas contain a larger concentration of gang members, and it "trickles off" the farther one gets from urban centers.

Three-Fourths Believe The Federal Government Should Play a Greater Role in the Prosecution of Gang Crimes

The survey asked "do you believe the federal government should play a greater role in the prosecution of gang crimes?". Some 75.7 percent of the respondents did believe that the federal government should play a greater role in prosecuting gang crime.

Ethnicity of Gang Members in Relationship to Their Activities

Does any ethnic group have a monopoly on any time of human motivation? We doubt it. But some prior research has suggested that Black gangs are more involved in drug sales as an instrumental motivation (money making motive), while Hispanic gangs are more involved in expressive motivation. Three questions in the survey focused on the matter of ethnicity in relationship to gang activities (drug sales, turf defense, and racial extremism/bias crimes).

For the drug sale activities the survey asked "which type of gang is most active in illegal drug sales in your area".

For the "turf issues" the survey asked "which type of gang is most active in turf issues in your area".

And for the bias crime, the survey asked "which type of gang is most active in racial extremism and bias crime in your area".

The results are provided in Table 5.

Table 5: Percentage Distribution by Ethnicity for Gang Involvement in Drug Sales, Turf Issues, and Racial Extremism/Bias Crimes.

Black Hispanic White All Races

Drug Sales: 44.4% 0.0% 8.3% 47.2%

Turf Issues: 58.1% 0.0% 9.7% 32.3%

Bias Crimes: 14.3% 0.0% 42.9% 42.9%

As seen in Table 5, Blacks stand out as the single largest group involved in Turf Issues (58.1%). Hispanic gangs are apparently not a major problem. Regarding drug sales it is a toss up: 44.4% felt Black gangs dominated here, while 47.2% felt all races of gangs were involved in drug sales. White gangs did profile for bias crimes: 42.9% felt whites were most active in racial extremism/bias crimes, but still another 42.9 percent felt all races of gangs were good for this activity.

Views About Whether Some Well Known Nationally Distributed Gangs Can Be Considered Forms of Organized Crime

The survey asked "do you feel any of the following gangs could be considered forms of organized crime (Check all that apply)". The results are provided in Table 6.

Table 6: Percentage of Respondents that Consider Some Gangs Forms of Organized Crime.

Considered

Organized

Gang Crime

Crips 71.8%

Bloods 61.5%

Gangster Disciples 43.6%

Vice Lords 41.0%

Latin Kings 41.0%

Aryan Brotherhood 48.7%

Table 6 shows that over half consider the Crips and Bloods forms of organized crime. Nearly half consider the Aryan Brotherhood a form of organized crime as well.

Only Half Report the Gangs in Their Areas Are Predominantly Racial Minorities

The survey asked "are the gang members in your area predominantly racial and ethnic minorities"? Some 51.5 percent of the respondents indicated that the gang members in their area are predominantly racial and ethnic minorities. Still the other half (48.5%) indicated that the gang members in their area were not predominantly racial or ethnic minorities.

Most Do Not Have Officers Working on Gang Problem Full-Time

The survey asked "how many sworn officers from your department are assigned to work full-time on the gang problem". Some 84.2 percent indicated "NONE". Five agencies indicated they had one such full time gang specialist police officer working on gang issues. And one agency had two such full-time officers detailed to work on gang issues.

Names of the Largest Gangs in South Carolina Communities

The survey did include three open-ended items to capture the names of the three largest gangs operating in the area of the responding agency.

Our survey did not track gang membership by type of gang, so all that can be said here is that Crips and Bloods groups are clearly at the top of the list in terms of the most frequently cited gangs found in South Carolina communities.

However, we have compiled an Appendix of city by city listings about the gang names. This is provided in Appendix A of this report. In includes the information from both the open-ended items on the survey, a "check list" included at the end of the survey, and other sources of information.

Vast Majority of Police Departments in South Carolina Do Not Have A Specialized Gang Unit

The survey asked "does your department have a special unit to handle gang problems?". Some 97.4 percent of the respondents indicated "NO".

Vast Majority of Respondents Do Believe They Are Subject to The Effects of Gang Migration

The survey asked "do you believe some gangs can migrate to jurisdictions such as your own?". Some 97.4 percent expressed the believe that "YES" gangs can migrate to their jurisdictions.

But Only About Half Believe Any of the Gang Problem in Their Own Jurisdiction is Due to Gang Migration

The survey asked "do you believe any of the gang problem in your jurisdiction is due to gang migration?". Some 41.7 percent did not believe any of their gang problem was due to gang migration. But some 58.3 percent did believe that some of their gang problem is due to gang migration.

Less Than One Out of Five Agencies Have A Strategic Plan to Deal With the Gang Problem

The survey asked "does your department have a strategic plan for dealing with the gang problem?". Only 17.9 percent of the agencies indicated that they had such a strategic plan already in place.

Another Confirmation of Low Impact From Gang Migration

The survey asked the agencies to estimate to what extent the gang problem in their area arose because of "gang migration" (i.e., outside gangs coming into their area to develop their own local franchises or local chapters). This way of measuring gang migration basically means "gang imperialism" or "inter-jurisdictional gang expansion". The respondents were asked to rate the extent to which this factor explained their own gang problem. The respondents could choose between a low of "zero" for "not a factor" to a high of "ten" for "major factor". Thus, they could "scale" their impact from values ranging from zero all the way up to ten.

Overall, it appears that there is a low level of impact from this type of gang migration. The overall mean, or statewide average, was only 2.17 on a scale from zero to ten.

Higher Impact from "Copycat" Syndrome

The survey asked the agencies to estimate the extent to which the gang problem in their 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). The respondents could choose between a low of "zero" for "not a factor" to a high of "ten" for "major factor". Thus, they could "scale" their impact from values ranging from zero all the way up to ten. Overall, it appears there is a higher level of impact from this type of "copy cat" syndrome or "gang emulation", in that the mean (statewide) was 6.25 on a scale from zero to ten.

A Fourth of the Communities in South Carolina Report "Hate Groups" (KKK, etc) Are a Local Crime Problem

The survey asked "do you feel that hate groups (KKK, neo-nazis, skinheads, etc) are a crime problem in your area?". Some 26.3 percent of the agencies reported that hate groups such as the KKK, etc, are in fact a crime problem in their area.

Less Than a Fifth of the Communities in South Carolina Report Motorcycle Gangs Are a Local Crime Problem

The survey asked "do you feel that motorcycle gangs are a crime problem in your area?". Only 17.9 percent of the agencies reported the belief that motorcycle gangs were a local crime problem.

Low Level of Gangster Disciple Influence

The survey asked "have any gang members in your jurisdiction used the phrase Growth and Development or Better Growth and Development to refer to the Gangster Disciples and Black Gangster Disciples respectively?". The fact is that Gangster Disciples (GDs) in recent years initiated an effort to "present themselves" as "good guys" by using such "public relations" phrases. The GDs also do this on the internet and do get exposure to a lot of American youths this way. But only 8.1 percent of the responding agencies indicated that they have witnessed this recent trend.

Three-Fourths Believe Less Media Attention to Gangs Could Help Kids to Stay Out of Gangs

The survey asked "do you feel that if less attention was given to gangs on television, in newspapers, and in movies that fewer people would join gangs". Here some 76.9 percent agreed that less media attention might help kids stay out of gangs. Obviously, though, no one can legislate content on television, in newspapers, or in Hollywood movies.

Strong Support Exists for "Rites of Passage" Mentoring Programs

The survey asked "do you feel that rites of passage or mentoring programs for juveniles would be useful for gang prevention in your jurisdiction?". Some 86.8 percent of the responding agencies agreed that rites of passage or mentoring programs for juveniles would be useful in their own jurisdictions for purposes of gang prevention.

South Carolina Police Believe in A Combination of Suppression and Prevention

The survey asked "in your opinion, which is the most effective law enforcement strategy for dealing with gang problems (check one response only)?". The options or choices were: 1. Prevention, 2. Suppression, and 3. Both Prevention and Suppression.

Oddly, no one chose only suppression. Only 5.1 percent chose only prevention. The overwhelming majority (94.9%) chose a combination of prevention and suppression as being the best strategy to deal with gangs.

Yet Strong Support Exists for an Aggressive Gang Suppression Policy

The survey asked "do you believe that a very aggressive gang suppression policy by your agency could substantially reduce the gang crime problem in your area?". Some 87.9 percent agreed that a very aggressive gang suppression policy by their agency could substantially reduce the gang crime problem in their area. However, "a very aggressive gang suppression policy" would take funding: for training and resources that these same police agencies probably do not have. It might require a statewide gang task force that also does not currently exist in the State of South Carolina. It might require statutory enabling legislation for a number of "basic items" like a statewide gang tracking computer that local police agencies in South Carolina could use (which is not available at present).

The Debate About How Aggressive Policing Could Inadvertently Increase the Gang Problem

The survey asked "do you believe that a very aggressive gang suppression policy by your agency could inadvertently increase the solidarity of the gang members prosecuted?". This is a debate that stems from some research in California where the author argued that police should be more "laid back" in dealing with gangs and gang members. The theory was that aggressive policy would give the gangs something to "fight", a symbol, a "cause". That theory is rejected by research carried out by the National Gang Crime Research Center which consistently shows that gangs do respond to legitimate power.

The findings for South Carolina reflect the basic debate: respondents were evenly split on this issue. Half felt aggressive policy could inadvertently increase the solidarity of the gang members prosecuted. Half rejected such an assumption. What might make this a moot point, in terms of how the question was phrased for this research, is that if they are in fact convicted and imprisoned as a result of prosecution, it is clear that the gang problem will be destabilized in terms of its impact on the community for those gang members so prosecuted. Once they are in prison, that is another story.

Poor National Report Card Given to Federal Leaders for Addressing the Gang Problem Since 1992

The survey asked "what kind of report card grade would you give elected federal government officials for addressing the national gang problem since 1992?". The respondents could give a grade of A, B, C, D, or F. Table 7 below shows the distribution of grades.

Table 7: Distribution of Grades for Elected Federal Officials for Addressing the National Gang Problem Since 1992.

Grade Percent

A 2.8

B 11.1

C 44.4

D 27.8

F 13.9

As seen in Table 7, a grade point average of 1.4 is all that elected federal officials earned from this sample. That translates into a "D-minus".

Poor Statewide Report Card in South Carolina As Well

The survey asked "what kind of report card grade would you give elected state government officials in South Carolina for addressing the gang problem in your state since 1992?". The results are provided in Table 8. This also translates in an overall GPA grade-equivalent of a "D" (1.5).

Table 8: Report Card Grades for State Elected Officials for Addressing the Gang Problem in South Carolina Since 1992.

Grade Percent

A 2.8

B 11.1

C 33.3

D 36.1

F 16.7

Low Level of Gang Involvement/Control of Legitimate Businesses

While this is the national trend, it has not hit South Carolina yet apparently. The survey asked "has your agency uncovered any gang involvement in local legitimate businesses?". Only one respondent indicated this trend (game room/video arcades, car washes, dance clubs).

Strong Support for a "Zero Tolerance" Policy on Gangs

The survey asked the respondents to agree or disagree with the statement: "A zero-tolerance policy is the best approach for dealing with gangs and gang members". Some 89.5 percent either strongly agreed or agreed with this idea.

Most Who Have a Gang Presence Also Report the Involvement of Females in the Local Gang Problem

Some 73.5 percent reported that females are also involved in gangs in their area or jurisdiction.

A separate follow-up question asked "estimate what percentage of the total gang member population in your jurisdiction are females". The data for this variable ranged from a low of one percent to a high of 30 percent. The overall average, or statewide mean, was that females constitute 11.9 percent of the total gang member population in South Carolina.

Half of All Areas Report "Gang Disturbances" in Public Schools During the Last Year

The survey asked "have there been any gang disturbances in the public schools in your area in the last year?". Some 52.6 percent reported that there had in fact been such gang disturbances in the public schools in their area during the last one year period.

Almost Three-Fourths of the Responding Law Enforcement Agencies Report Politicians Want Them to "Down Play" or Deny the Gang Problem

The survey asked "do you believe that some politicians want law enforcement agencies to downplay or even deny the gang problem?". Some 73.7 percent of the respondents answered "YES". Only a fourth (26.3%) answered "NO". So the overwhelming perception is that the majority of South Carolina cities are facing some pressure from politicians to ignore the gang problem.

Low Level of Asian Gang Member Involvement

The survey asked "have any Asian gangs or Asian gang members been active in your jurisdiction?". Only 15.8 percent indicated such an Asian gang presence.

Cults Are More Prevalent Than Motorcycle Gang Problems

The survey asked "are there any cults that operate in your jurisdiction?". Some 25 percent, one fourth of all South Carolina communities, reported "YES": that cults do operate in their jurisdiction. So cults are apparently more prevalent overall than are motorcycle gangs (17.9%).

Over A Third of South Carolina Jurisdictions Report Occult-Type Activities in Their Area

The survey asked "have there been any reports of occult-type activities in your jurisdiction (Satanism, witchcraft, Vampirism, Animal Sacrifice, etc)?". Some 38.9 percent of the responding agencies did in fact report such occult-type activities.

Methamphetamine Hits South Carolina in a Big Way

The survey asked "have there been any arrests for the possession of Methamphetamines in your jurisdiction in the last 12 months?". Some 52.6 percent of the respondents indicated that there have in fact been arrests for the possession of methamphetamines in their jurisdictions during the last one year period. Thus, there have been methamphetamine possession arrests in half of the communities in South Carolina.

About a Fourth of South Carolina Communities Have Made Arrests for the Sale of Methamphetamines During the Last Year

The survey asked "have there been any arrests for sales of Methamphetamines in your jurisdiction in the last 12 months?". Some 28.9 percent of the responding agencies indicated that there have in fact been such arrests for the sale of methamphetamines in their jurisdictions during the last year.

Most Expect Violent Juvenile Crimes to Increase in the Next Two Years

The survey also explored the issue of violent crimes by juveniles and whether this was expected to increase, decrease, or remain the same in the next two year period. Three-fourths of the agencies surveyed (76.9%) expect the problem of violent juvenile crime to increase in the next two year period. Only one respondent thought the problem would decrease. About a fifth (20.5%) felt the problem would remain essentially the same at current levels.

Vast Majority Believe that Parents Should Be Held Financially Responsible for Crimes Committed by Their Children

The survey asked "do you believe parents should be held financially responsible for crimes committed by their children?". Some 84.6 percent of the respondents did in fact agree that parents should be held financially responsible for the crimes their children commit.

Vast Majority Also Believe That the Modern Gang Has Become A Kind of Substitute "Rites of Passage" for Children

The survey asked "do you think that for some children the gang has become a kind of substitute for the rites of passage ceremony?". Some 88.6 percent of the respondents agreed with this appraisal.

A Third of South Carolina Communities Reported an Increase in Female Gang Involvement During the Last Year

The survey asked "has your jurisdiction seen an increase in female gang involvement in the last one year time period?". Some 32.4 percent of the agencies surveyed did in fact report such an increase during the last year in terms of female gang involvement in their areas.

The Zip Code Distribution

The zip code of the responding agency is a way to detect if there is any specific "bias" or pattern of "non-reporting" in a survey such as this. The survey did ask for the zip code of the responding agency and did ask whether it was okay to use this information for analysis and reporting purposes. No one chose "NO" in the question of whether it was permissible to use the zip code for analysis and reporting purposes.

The distribution of the Zip Codes for the respondents in this study shows no specific geographical area that is really "excluded" from the study. There is in fact great variation in the distribution of the zip codes. This would suggest that a large geographical area of South Carolina is covered by the study. It therefore seems reasonable to conclude that the findings reported here, while using a small sample size, would still hold up if we were able to more aggressively obtain the cooperation of all law enforcement agencies in the State.

Table 9 shows the zip code distribution from the present study of South Carolina law enforcement agencies.

As seen in Table 9 there is really no one geographical area of South Carolina that is over or under represented in the sample. The data is quite geographically dispersed.

Table 9: Distribution of Zip Codes for South Carolina Law Enforcement Agencies Surveyed in 1998.

Number of Zip

Respondents Percent Code

1 2.6 29063

2 5.1 29072

1 2.6 29108

1 2.6 29119

1 2.6 29170

1 2.6 29303

2 5.1 29304

1 2.6 29305

1 2.6 29340

1 2.6 29349

1 2.6 29353

1 2.6 29461

1 2.6 29464

1 2.6 29501

1 2.6 29525

1 2.6 29526

1 2.6 29556

1 2.6 29571

1 2.6 29575

1 2.6 29577

1 2.6 29606

1 2.6 29620

1 2.6 29644

1 2.6 29650

1 2.6 29662

1 2.6 29666

1 2.6 29670

1 2.6 29671

1 2.6 29688

1 2.6 29691

1 2.6 29692

1 2.6 29728

1 2.6 29730

2 5.1 29801

1 2.6 29809

1 2.6 29817

CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

We come now to the matter of the conclusions this study and commenting on major findings. What follows, therefore, are analytical observations which constitute the major findings from this study.

This has been a small scale study of the gang problem as reported by law enforcement agencies in the State of South Carolina. A sample size of N = 40 was used for the analysis reported here. The validity and the extent to which the data are representative of geographical areas in South Carolina were examined and found acceptable for studies of this nature.

We can now answer some basic questions about the scope and extent of the gang problem in the State of South Carolina.

1. Is the gang problem in South Carolina any less or any more serious than else where in the United States? NO. Nationally, between two-thirds to three-fourths of all cities, large or small, currently report a gang problem. Some 69.2 percent of all South Carolina jurisdictions surveyed here reported a gang problem.

2. Is South Carolina a "new comer" in terms of facing the onset of the gang problem? Basically, yes. While the gang problem in South Carolina does trace back throughout the 1990's, data from this study suggest that in terms of most communities, the gang problem has had a relatively recent onset.

3. Is the gang problem in South Carolina predominantly a problem of juvenile delinquency? NO. The assumption that the gang population itself consists predominantly of underage juveniles who would, if arrested for any offense, be tried as juveniles, is a false assumption. This false assumption comes from the way some free federal research findings have been disseminated, findings that came from research which itself was biased in terms of discounting the role of adults. The best estimate for South Carolina, as elsewhere, is that the gang population is about half and half: equally distributed in terms of being capable, by legal age, of being tried as both juveniles and adults.

4. Is South Carolina positioned with sufficient training and technological resources for its local municipal police officers to respond to the modern gang problem? We answer, adamantly, no. South Carolina, for reasons suspected which are addressed elsewhere in this report, lags significantly behind in its response capability in terms of dealing with the modern gang problem that most American communities today face. South Carolina lacks a statewide gang computer system, lacks a statewide gang task force, lacks on gang training for police officers, and lacks in terms of organizational enhancement in terms of having specialized "gang units" and detailed plans to deal with the gang problem. The citizenry of South Carolina are certainly not benefiting from public information materials about gangs from their local police departments either, which is traditionally found in other states throughout our Nation.

5. Does South Carolina face mostly "homegrown" local "wannabe" gangs which are not a serious threat in terms of crime and violence? NO. South Carolina has what a lot of the rest of the Nation has today: local factions of national gangs (Crips, Bloods, People, Folks, white racist extremist groups, motorcycle gangs, etc). There is a significant "outside" influence in terms of the impact of gangs from other areas upon communities in the State of South Carolina.

6. Is there a problem with "gang denial" in communities throughout the State of South Carolina? Absolutely yes. The analysis reported here provided ample evidence of this. So if South Carolina "stands out" in a comparison with other states in the United States today on the gang issue, it stands out in terms of its tendency towards a denial syndrome.

7. Is the problem of the denial syndrome in South Carolina communities basically a political issue? Yes. The evidence presented in this report certainly suggests that the blame must be placed at the door of elected officials in the State of South Carolina.

8. Do gangs and gang members account for a small share of the overall crime problem in the State of South Carolina? No they do not. As illustrated in this report, and the findings are comparable to nationwide figures as well, gang members in South Carolina account for about one-fifth (21.8 percent) of all juvenile crime in the State of South Carolina. Gang members, looking at the total crime picture, account for at least one out of every ten crimes committed in the State of South Carolina. Gangs and gang members are having a tremendously negative impact on communities in the State of South Carolina.

9. Why is South Carolina is so unprepared to deal with the gang problem? There are, unfortunately for South Carolina, a number of reasons: (a) the problem hit South Carolina communities, for the most part, only very recently (9 out of 10 communities report the problem first surface on or after 1992), (b) the scope and extent of the gang problem far exceeds the degree to which police departments are currently geared up to provide gang training as pre-service and in-service expertise to their police officers, (c) most South Carolina police departments do not report a high level of cooperation on gang cases with federal agencies (FBI, BATF, DEA, INS), (d) few cities have passed ordinances to implement a policy that would discourage gang activity, (e) few if any police departments have produced public education materials about gangs making the State of South Carolina a leader with a dubious distinction in this regard, (f) most police agencies in the State of South Carolina do not have police officers assigned full-time to be gang specialist to work on the gang problem in their respective jurisdictions which again is a problem traced to policy-making and lack of training, (g) typically when the gang problem does hit a town anywhere in America, large or small, eventually there is a change in police organization and management to include a specialized "gang unit" in the agency, but 97.4 percent of the police departments in South Carolina lag behind in terms of this organizational capability to respond to the gang problem, (h) police department respondents tended to admit to a great deal of political influence from elected officials to "deny the gang problem" and implement the "Ostrich policy" about gangs, which means "bury your head in the sand, and hope the gang problem goes away before the citizens realize we have this problem and are ill-equipped to protect them in that regard", (i) police department respondents tend to be skeptical about the leadership effectiveness of elected officials (federal and state leaders) in terms of their ability to deal with the gang problem: when asked to grade their elected public officials, the politicians get a "D-minus" for their leadership in this regard, and (j) almost three-fourths of all police departments report that politicians want them to "down play" or deny the gang problem which leaves the citizens in the dark and the public uninformed about real and present dangers and constitutes an unacceptable amount of political encroachment by politicians upon the law enforcement function in the State of South Carolina.

10. Is there anything noteworthy about the gang problem in South Carolina? Yes, we have reported on these matters fully here, but a summary is worthwhile to provide as well. Here are some reasons to be worried or concerned about the gang problem in the State of South Carolina.

* Half of the communities in South Carolina have reported gang disturbances in public schools during the last year.

* Cults are more prevalent than motorcycle gang problems.

* A third of the communities in South Carolina report some occult-type activity (Satanism, etc) in their area.

* Methamphetamine drugs are hitting South Carolina in a big way and this promises further devastation: this is a drug produced by gangs and distributed by gangs, and half of the cities in South Carolina reported arrests for the illegal possession of methamphetamine drugs in the last year, further one out of every four communities in South Carolina reported arrests for the sale of methamphetamine drugs in the last year.

* Most (76.9%) law enforcement agencies in South Carolina expect an increase in violent crimes by juveniles in the next two year period.

* A third of the agencies are reporting an increase in female involvement in gangs during the last year.

* Two thirds of all South Carolina communities are seeing outside gang influence in their jurisdictions, but they are seeing no outside and particularly no statewide or regional support on dealing with this inter-jurisdictional problem.

* Two-thirds of all South Carolina communities have seen an increase in gang graffiti during the last year, but have no seen any increase in the leadership effectiveness of elected public officials to respond to this public danger.

* Three-fourths of all South Carolina law enforcement agencies surveyed believe that the federal government should play a greater role in the prosecution of gang crimes. A significant share of South Carolina communities are subject to inter-state gang influence, but are apparently lacking in federal resources to deal with the gang problem.

There is only one recommendation the author of this study has regarding this report: drop a dime. This is not a classified report. It is, however, being provided only to the law enforcement agencies that actually participated in the study. It may be worthwhile to photocopy this document (a privilege we are extending to participating agencies) and mail it to any concerned parties: newspapers, radio "talk show" programs, progressive pro-law enforcement elected officials, community groups, etc. The reasoning here is that it is going to take a fire lit under the seats of some of the major policy makers in South Carolina before anything is done about the statewide gang problem. So turning up the heat in terms of public debate might be a positive long-range strategy under the theory that exposing the issue will bring about a sufficient number of questions that cannot be answered and some resources might eventually be allocated to local law enforcement in the State of South Carolina.

Appendix A:

Gang List for South Carolina:

Legend of Data Source Codes: The two letter designation that appears in parentheses following a geographical city or county name identifier is the source of the data. As can be seen, South Carolina has appeared in the NGCRC's National Gang Tracking System (a database maintained since 1990 by the NGCRC) dating back to 1990. Thus, the SC project reported here is not the first time the NGCRC has gathered data in the State of South Carolina. The NGCRC is simply making this historical data available here as well to supplement the SC project.

PC = Police Chief Survey 1990.

AI = Adult Correctional Institution Survey 1991.

PP = Probation and Parole Officer Survey 1991.

CS = County Sheriff's Survey 1991.

LE = National Law Enforcement Survey 1992.

JA = National Jail Survey 1992.

W3 = State Prison Warden Survey 1993.

W4 = State Prison Warden Survey 1994.

W5 = State Prison Warden Survey 1995.

SC = South Carolina Law Enforcement Survey 1998.

Abbeville Co. (SC): Eastside Crips; Westside Bloods; Black Gangster Disciples, Blue Hats/Blue Rags, Crips, Eight Balls, Folks, KKK, Southside Boys, West Side Posse.

Aiken (SC): Irish Mafia; Westside Locos; Northside Boys.

Aiken Co. (SC): Irish Mafia; Westside Locos; Loco's 3.

Allendale (JA): The Eliminaters, Public Enemy, Posse, Death Row Posse, KKK.

Anderson (PC): Westside, Eastside, KKK

Anderson Co. (LE): Eastside gang, Westside gang, Black Mafia, Hell's Angels, KKK, Miami Boys, Outlaws, West Side Boyz.

Berkeley Co. (CS): DBL (Down By the Law), Hells Angels (national headquarters), Sun Downers Posse, KKK, Pagans, Miami Boys.

Bishopville (W4): Five Percenters, KKK, Aryan Brotherhood, Bikers, Hoods, Skinheads, White Knights.

Blackville (PC): Ri-Lo, Miami Boys.

Charleston So. Univ. (SC): Crips.

Charleston (AI): Aryan Brotherhood, Skinheads, Posse, Bikers, KKK.

Cheraw (PC): K-9 Posse.

Chesterfield Co. (PP): KKK.

Clarendon Co. (CS):KKK.

Columbia (PP): Bump Boys Posse, Miami Boys

Columbia (AI): Bikers, KKK

Columbia (W4): Rock Hill; Metro, Charleston, Up State; Five Percenters.

Columbia (W5): Charleston Group, Five Percenters, Metro Boys; KKK.

Conway (SC): LC Boyz (Levi Corner Boys); Brown Swamp Boyz; 905 Boyz.

Enoree (AI): Bikers, KKK.

Enoree (AI): Boston Boys, Posse, Bloods, El Rukns, Miami Boys, Bikers, KKK.

Enoree (W4): Five Percenters, Hell's Angels.

Fairfax (AI): Bloods, Crips.

Fairfax (W5): Five Percenters; Bloods, Crips, Dirty White Boys, White Peoples Party.

Florence (PC): Aryan Brotherhood, neo-nazis, Bikers, KKK, Pagans.

Florence (Francis Marion University)(SC): Westside; Eastside.

Fountain Inn (SC): Eastside Folk/Crips; GC Click; Westside Crips; BGDs, Five Percenters, Spartanburg Gang.

Gafney (SC): KKK.

Greenville (LE): West Greenville Posse, Rolling 60's, Dream Team, Bloods, Cross Suns, Eight Balls, El Rukns.

Greenwood (W5): Aryan Brotherhood, Bloods.

Greer (SC): People/Bloods; Folk Nation; KKK; Bikers, Crips.

Inman (SC): Crips; Bloods; Black Mafia, Boston Boys, Devastation Black Boys (DBB's), Lynch Mob, Satanic Cult Gangs, Satan's Disciples, The Crew.

Irmo (SC): Toy Soldiers; Nine Clique; Lexington Mafia; Crips.

Jonesville (SC): Bloods, KKK.

Kingstree (SC): Thugs; The No Limits; Blues, Folks; The "G"s; Black Gangster Disciples, Black Disciples, Bloods, G-Boys, Insane Crips.

Lexington (SC): Crips.

Lexington Co. (SC): Vice Lords; Crips; Bloods; Dirty White Boys, Eight Balls, Folks, Hell's Angels, KKK, Pagans, Skinheads, Warlocks.

Marion (SC): Hilltop Hustlers.

Mauldin (SC): Eastside/Westside Crips; Folk Nation; Avalon Set (Crips); Bloods, Five Percenters, Vicelords.

McCormick (W3): Five Percenters.

McCormick (W4): Five Percenters, Aryan Brotherhood, Aryan Nation, Bikers, Bloods, Dirty White Boys, Eight Balls, El Rukns, Four Horsemen of the Apolcalypse, Fruits of Islam, G-Boys, Headbangers, KKK, Outlaws.

Moncks Corner (SC): Crips/Folk (Eight Ball); Bloods; Imperial Gangsta Disciples; DBL's, Dragons, Gangster Disciples, Hell's Angels.

Mount Pleasant (SC): Crips; Bloods; Skeleton; Aces, Aryan Brotherhood.

Myrtle Beach (SC): Pagans M.C.; Crips ; Ghost Riders, Hell's Angels, Outlaws, Warlocks.

Newberrry Co. (SC): Wu Tang; West Side.

New Ellenton (SC): Crips/Shilo Boys; Hard Core White Boys; Irish Mafia; Crazy White Boys, South Side Boys.

North Charleston (W5): Five Percenters; Hell's Angels, KKK, Skinheads.

Pelzer (AI): Bikers, KKK.

Pelzer (W3): Five Percenters, Spartanburg Gang, Greenville Gang; Bikers, Dirty White Boys, El Rukns, Fruits of Islam, Hell's Angels, Satanic Cult Gangs, Satan's Disciples, White Knights.

Pelzer (W5): Aryan Nation, KKK, Aryan Brotherhood, Black Gangster Disciples, Brothers of the Struggle, Crips, Eight Balls, Mexican Mafia, Nuestra Familia, Satanic Cult Gangs, Vice Lords.

Pickens Co. (SC): KKK.

Pickens Co. (CS): The Crew, Skinheads, KKK, Neo-nazis.

Rock Hill YTC : KKK.

Rock Hill (LE): Grey Boyz, Cobras, Spider Boyz.

Spartanburg Co. (SC): Gangster Disciples; Insane Gangster Disciples; Oriental Bloods; Big Top Locos, Blue Hats/Blue Rags, Dragons, Foul Play, Get Money Gang, Knights, Latin Locos, Macomb Street Gang, Pagans, TKK.

Spartanburg (USCS PD) (SC): Crips; Bloods; Disciples; Boston Boys, KKK, Latin Locos.

Spartanburg (SC): North Side Gang; West Side Gang; Red Mafia; Crips, Folks, KKK.

State Park (W3): Five Percenters.

Walhalla (SC): New World Order; East Side Boys; "Wannabe" Crips/Bloods.

Ware Shoals (SC): Bloods, Crips, KKK

Woodruff (PC): Scooter Gang, Hammer Gang, KKK.