The Mythic Enemy

I have lost too many friends to gang violence not to want Chief William Bratton to succeed in his bid to stop the recent epidemic of killing. But judging from his statements so far, it’s clear that the gang issue in Los Angeles is unlike anything he has encountered in his career. The chief seems to have bought into many of the same old myths about gangs that have been circulating for years. Maybe it’s time to clear up some things -- for the chief and for the rest of the city.

First, it’s important to understand the difference between gang members and gangbangers. As he began his new job, Bratton reminded his rank and file that they were “outnumbered 10 to 1.” There are “100,000 gangbangers out there,” he said. Not so.

Those of us who work with gangs know that, though all gangbangers are gang members, not all gang members “bang.” Gangbangers commit illegal acts -- from misdemeanors like writing on walls to felonies, including murder. Only a small percentage of the estimated 100,000 gang members in Los Angeles are responsible for illegal gang activity. Let’s remember, there have been upward of 300 gang-related homicides thus far this year, which means that only a fraction of a percent of gang members are killing people. If police can understand that their job is to isolate those gang members who “bang,” they’ll find themselves not as outnumbered as they think.

Another persistent myth is that of the “multigenerational” gang member, which views gangs as family dynasties in which the mantle is passed from father to son. Certainly, there are a few gang members whose fathers -- even grandfathers -- were members of the same gang. But those cases are few. Nearly 1,000 gang members a month, from all over Los Angeles County, walk through our doors at Homeboy Industries, and the rarest find is this multigenerational gang member. Failing to understand this deprives police of some of their best allies: parents of gang members, most of whom would like nothing more than to help their children find a productive path.

And then there’s the myth of the “gang associate.” This designation is officially given to kids who come to the attention of law enforcement but can’t be linked to any gang. Once given, the label is hard to shake, appearing in law enforcement databases and station-house files. But ask any gang member in the county about these gang associates and you’ll get blank stares. You’re either a gang member (initiated into the gang by being “jumped in”) or you’re not. But for decades, law enforcement hasn’t known what to do with the teenage neighbor or young cousin seen standing and talking with a gang member, and so they have invented this label.

Bratton has said he’s going to fight gangs the way East Coast law enforcement has fought the Mafia. But our gangs don’t fit the organized crime model. At best, they belong in the category of “disorganized crime.” Prosecutors have tried and largely failed to use the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act, or RICO, to go after L.A. gangs. Gangs rarely have a Tony Soprano-type leader. There are members with more “juice” or influence than others. But if gangs are run at all, they are only loosely managed by an ever-changing politburo or informal “board of directors” that is fluid and unstable.

Alarm bells have been sounded recently about “spoons” -- parolees who return to the street and “stir things up” there. Certainly, these folks exist. But for every spoon, I can name hundreds of gang member parolees who have walked into my office seeking a job or free tattoo removal. These men and women have gotten no job training in prison, and nothing awaits them when they hit the streets (so no one ought to be surprised by California’s 71% recidivism rate -- the highest in the country). Still the spoons are few, and they are easily identified and isolated.

The Los Angeles Police Department has also railed about the prison influence being exerted on gangs. But of the gang-related homicides this year, I’d wager that none was orchestrated from within prison walls. Gang violence is usually random and impulsive. To insist that gang members are puppets manipulated on the streets by prisoners behind the walls is to not acknowledge the intrinsically haphazard nature of gang violence and the utter despair it reflects.

So what can be done? First, if the chief wants communities to participate in the policing of the streets, as he’s been urging them to do, he has to change his approach. People in poor urban parts of Los Angeles often don’t cooperate with the police because they don’t know the police. Officers rarely work in the same community long enough for residents to get to know them -- and vice versa. Unless Bratton turns the incentive system on its head and pays officers to stay put rather than “promote out,” people will continue to feel reluctant to cooperate or come forward with vital information. And since human beings seem less likely to demonize people they know, keeping officers in our communities for longer stretches is healthier all around.

Bratton has identified gang members as the enemy and declared war against them. How many failed law enforcement attempts to effectively deal with gangs have begun with the same battle cry? The problem in declaring war on gangs is that you end up viewing the city and its residents in battlefield terms. Families are seen as harboring the enemy. Police become an occupying army, resorting to tactics like planting evidence and using excessive force because, after all, all’s fair in war.

The chief and his new gang czar, Capt. Michael Hillmann, are smart enough to know that their efforts form only one-third of a city’s response to gangs. Prevention and intervention are the other two-thirds of what has to be a cooperative effort. It is the job of the mayor and other city leaders to bring hope to our despondent, poor communities. It is the chief’s job to keep the streets safe until they do.

The people of L.A. are less interested in getting angry about gangs and more determined than ever to see law enforcement choose smarter strategies in dealing with them. The whole city wishes the new chief well. At the same time, we can only hope that this moment marks a departure from our past failures in rhetoric and tactics.