According to Fighting Gangs, “immigration drove gang formation” (164).  Foreign-born groups possessed a sense of wanting to belong in a novel place, but felt unwelcomed by natives who denied them jobs, adequate living conditions, and cultural acceptance. When segregation merged with urban renewal projects, poor, minority/immigrant families were forced into the least desirable, packed housing areas of the Bronx.  Natives blamed these groups for the decline in housing, but these groups were forced to remain there because they could not make enough money to move.  Immigrants would develop these neighborhoods into “enclaves,” or communities in which the residents are culturally or ethnically distinct.  While the familiarity of being surrounded by one’s own people in a place that “feels like home” is comforting, conversely, it can also act as a disadvantage to migrants.  Being raised in an enclave sometimes makes it impossible to live anywhere else, for reasons such as never learning English or being forced into the family business.  Enclaves are a form of segregation because they isolate immigrant groups and sometimes exploit minorities living there due to miscommunication between the two groups.  When new immigrant groups would enter these pre-established ethnic communities, the already existing groups would feel threatened.  A fear that their way of life would be changed or that they could be kicked out of one of the few places they can afford forced many individuals to turn to crime in order to defend their homes and as a means to survive when resources were scarce.

Immigrants feel that they need to live in these tight-knit neighborhoods for two reasons: to survive being in a foreign country, and their low economic status gives them a lack of housing options. Therefore, ownership of one’s ethnicity, history of mistreatment, and identity issues play an integral role in the creation of immigrant gangs.  Chapter 7 states, “Waves of poor European immigrants formed ethnic gangs for protections and resorted to crime to make money” (159).  With many jobs closed off to newcomers, there were not many opportunities to build financial stability.  At first, the majority of crimes committed by gangs solely involved drug distribution.  This eventually led to more serious crimes, such as assassinations and kidnappings.  Today, technological advancements have provided gangs with a larger platform for crime than before.  For example, the internet has made it easier to recruit and influence the younger generation through “websites and public and private Facebook pages” (166).  For these kids, joining a gang gives them a projection of power, a method for making money, and provides a sense of identity.

The growth of gangs and gang violence in New York City has prompted Law Enforcement to switch their approach from “punishment of crimes” to “prevention of crimes.”  Public officials are promoting the creation of youth intervention programs, since they are targeted as new recruitments by these gangs.  But this problem goes deeper.  Why waste funding on prevention programs when we need to focus on providing better education, more accessible jobs, and adequate housing for the minority youths?  Their home and its residents highly influence their future, and without being given the opportunity to leave they inevitably turn to violence and crime as well. Our current institutions and systems sustain social inequalities; therefore, as long as minorities are treated unequally no amount of money or law enforcement will have a long-term impact on gang violence.