This week’s reading of the CQ Reader, regarding gang violence, was extremely troubling, while also being impeccable in its timing.  Coming from Long Island, until very recently it had been my impression that, with distinct exceptions, gang violence was not an issue we suffered with.  These exceptions had always been in lower income areas, such as in portions of Hempstead.  However, within the last week, I was speaking with my mother who works with the Nassau County Legislature, and she told me that there have recently been gangs transplanted from Los Angeles who had been operating within Nassau County, to the point that there are talks to set up a division within the police force simply to combat the gang violence.  This recent news made this week’s reading far more relevant to the area which I come from, piquing my interest to say the least.

While it did interest me to learn that women were becoming increasingly involved in gangs, as well as the fact that our military bases suffer from gang activity as well, the portion of the reading regarding the efficacy and appropriateness of injunctions being used to prevent gang activity fascinated me.  This issue plays very well off of last week’s reading regarding racial profiling.  The issue in my mind is sticky for two reasons, the first being that these injunctions are primarily used with a racial undertone, so that very specific communities are targeted.  On top of this concept comes into play the First Amendment’s guarantee of the freedom of assembly.  This means that there is no inherent problem with gangs.  The issue comes into play when gangs begin to partake in criminal activity, which is both a crime at the federal and state level.  So a fine line is being danced when broad injunctions are issued to stop gang assembly, while also trying to ensure that a) these gangs are partaking in criminal activity b) the enforcement of the injunction is not being used to target specific groups.  With these two thoughts in mind, especially after having read last week’s reader, I am not convinced that injunctions being used to stop gang violence is an acceptable practice, much like stop and frisk.  While both may be effective, it is a slippery slope when we allow the rights of others, Constitutional rights, to be taken away, simply for our own peace of mind.

On another note, I’ve decided that every issue which our society seems to face nowadays, be it environmental, profiling, gang violence, etc. is either preventable or at least able to be alleviated in some form, by an increase in education.  With this in mind, I apply this concept to the gang issue as well.  Practically speaking, as per the reading, it doesn’t seem that there is the man power within the police force to arrest every gang member, and even if there was, it doesn’t seem that arrests are an effective way of stemming the tide of gang violence.  As such, it would behoove us as the greater community, and future leaders of the City of New York, to work to lessening the causes which lead one to join a gang. The first way to do this would be to work to ensure that children within communities that gang members traditionally come out of are set up with the best possible chance to improve their socio-economic status, if they so desire.