1. Youth Gangs in the UK
How different are they from their American counterparts?
Judith Aldridge, Juanjo Medina, Robert Ralphs
University of Manchester, UK

2. Outline: comparisons to US gangs
Context and background
Prevalence
History & evolution
Structure, organisation, drug dealing
Culture
Ethnicity
Violence

3. Context

4. UK: objections to gang research
Create moral panics
Demonise young people ‘ASBOs’ ‘Hoodies’
Stigmatise young people, communities
Reinforce, glorify, perpetuate, even ‘create’ gangs
Nothing new to see here: in UK, groups are the same as we’ve been seeing/studying for decades

5. Top headlines in Guardian newspaper search
‘Turf war among drug gangs blamed as youth, 17, dies after shooting’
‘Drug gangs rampant in top Dublin youth jail’
‘Youths pick chic Paris mall for gang rumble’
‘Gang chased youth, 16, and stabbed him to death, court told’

6. References to ‘youth’ ‘gangs’ in Guardian newspaper

7. Academic papers with ‘youth/street gangs’ and UK, Britain, England

8. UK: Why we persist Use of term ‘gang’ in UK not new
Must remedy predominant focus in research, police & journalistic accounts on ethnic minority youth
Must balance journalistic accounts that glorify gangs
Policy transfer from USA NOW occurring
Demystify gangs
Challenge overly punitive official responses: schools, government, police

9. Context: conclusion Discussion about gangs is ‘newer’
Different research ‘history’ (focus more on youth subcultures, not gangs)
More wariness/fear of the label by academics, policy makers
But actual use of the term increasing in the last five years particularly

10. Prevalence

11. Prevalence YOCJS: (10-19 year olds) NEW-ADAM: (arrestees 17 and over)
3% in street gangs, group existed 3m or more, group commits crime together
NEW-ADAM: (arrestees 17 and over)
4% in a gang with name and territory
Edinburgh Study of Youth Transitions and Crime (13 year olds)
3.5% of 13 year old in a gang with a name & special saying or sign
Communities that Care (11 – 17 year olds)
4% in London in a gang with a name and a territory
Staying Safe Study (14 schools in south of England)
3.9% in an ‘offending gang’

12. Prevalence: conclusion
Difficult to say because of variations in measurement, samples, age groups BUT:
Possibly broadly similar to US
Nevertheless, undoubtedly lots of very interesting differences, but research isn’t quite there yet to disentangle them
Some comparative research currently under way

13. YOGEC: Research design and methods
ESRC funded ethnographic study: 2 years fieldwork
3 neighbourhoods in large English city
Group Characteristics; Drug use and dealing; Violence; Ethnicity; Gender; Community relations; and Lifecourse (onset and desistance)
100+ interviews - gang ‘members’, ‘associates’ (friends, girlfriends, relatives), key informants (e.g. police, youth workers, local government)
9 focus groups - non-gang involved young people, parents, & representatives of community/statutory agencies

14. History

15. History RC gangs going back 2 decades, even 100+ years
In Inner West we documented history going back to 80s and early 90s
Predominantly ethnic minority youth
Drawn to informal economy for standard of living above basic survival
Specialist drugs gangs operating open drugs markets
In pyramid structures, dealing heroin & crack
By late 90s until now:
Open to closed markets (mobile phones, police crackdowns)
Heroin and crack to cannabis
Gang coordinated to individual dealing
Greater to lesser earnings
Combined with legitimate income sources

16. History: conclusion Likely very similar history of gangs
RC was unusual in this specialist ‘drugs gangs’ status in the UK
Evidence anecdotal, police
In a similar way, American has research identified these specialist ‘drugs gangs’ in some cities (e.g. Chicago)
But like the UK, in the US, specialist drugs gangs are rare even if drug dealing is common

17. Structure, organisation, drug dealing

18. Structure, organisation, drug dealing
Little evidence of hierarchy in these same gangs
No evidence that X and Y were ‘leaders’ or ‘running’ this gang
In contrast to heroin in cocaine the vast majority of the dealing we identified was cannabis
Most dealing not gang co-ordinated – sold individually, 2/3s
Individuals kept all their own profits
No evidence of dealers being paid a wage at the lower levels (though this did happen with ‘runners’, though nothing like at this level)
Members do not live extravagantly, more concerned with status
No "card-carrying" members, loose affiliation
But this view amongst police ‘new’, does it arise as a result of our report? In all our research, referred to clear affiliations

19. Structure, organisation, drug dealing: conclusion
Probably very similar for most US youth gangs
Specialist (e.g. drugs) youth gangs in US are the exception rather than the rule
True of UK too
Exception: we found one specialist girl gang – highly organised, shared profits from illegal activities, role differentiated - got the job done, did so without violence or the threat of it
But! Key members of group were sisters/relatives of highly involved male gang members, group virtually disbanded now

20. Culture

21. Culture Gang ‘joining’ probably not that useful a term
No recruitment
Consistent with the formation of neighbourhood and school friendship groups
To ‘join’ more about developing different kinds of relationships with existing contacts
Self-protection, labelling and taking advantage of illegal opportunities define the ‘difference’
Cultural identifiers
No initiation rituals (though ‘proving oneself’ sometimes discussed)
Few/no identifiers like colours, tattoos, hand signs
Few ‘codes of conduct’ (though a few are patchily referred to and almost always betrayed)
Few/no organised meetings
Some of these things may be changing – especially through social networking sites (e.g. MySpace)

22. Culture: conclusion
The process of ‘joining’ is probably very similar to the US
The idea of ‘joining’ in both US and UK based on stereotyped media image
US likely to have more rituals and cultural signifiers
Even though there are signs this is changing

23. Ethnicity

24. Media & political discourse around gangs and race
Strong media & political tendency to present black community as responsible for gang problems:
Tony Blair, April 2007:
“The black community – the vast majority of whom in these communities are decent, law-abiding people horrified at what is happening – need to be mobilised in denunciation of this gang culture that is killing innocent young black kids.”

25. Ethnicity NEW-ADAM: Majority of gang members are white
Edinburgh Study on Youth Transitions and Crime: 94.3% of the sample were white and so were the overwhelming majority of gang members
Offending Crime and Justice Survey (2004): there is little to suggest ethnic differences or a particular over-representation of young black males in gangs
YOGEC: in predominantly white areas, we found gangs were mostly white; in areas with the highest concentration of black ethnic minorities, we found gangs that were mostly black

26. Ethnicity: surprise!
Areas with higher ethnic (black) population received media and policy attention
Police claimed not to use race as defining criteria, but do!
Whilst: much more gun violence there (reflects police priorities)
But white gangs also used guns!
Thus greater vulnerability of black youth to discriminatory, aggressive, intrusive policing
White areas complained of ‘discriminatory neglect’!
Black community leaders: stuck
Recognised gun/gang violence in their communities (empowering?)
But drawbacks to ‘racialising’ the gang problem
negative stereotypes about black people, ‘suspect’ community, allows for simplistic explanations, legitimisation of inadequate interventions, police harassment

27. Ethnicity: conclusion
Immigration history, ethnic make-up very different
UK: shorter, less (8%), different groups
Indian sub-continent, Caribbean and Africa
US: longer, more (~ 30+%)
Hispanic/Latino & Black American
UK less geographically segregated
Highest ethnic minority areas in RC still mostly white
We do not have racial ghettos (by definition)
Gangs arise in areas of deprivation, and their ethnic composition reflects the composition of the neighbourhoods that spawn them

28. Violence

29. How different is context of violence in the US and UK?
In relation to gun crime & homicide:
US > UK
St Louis > Research City
BUT!
Research City ~ St Louis

30. Firearm violence in Research City
Firearm violence for last 20 years relatively high in RC for the British context
Disproportionately concentrated in Inner West
Victims and perpetrators often/mostly gang affiliated

31. Violence in RC gangs
Gangs did not ‘specialise’ in violence, generally tried to avoid it
But! Violence symbolically and rhetorically important
Potential often present; references to, memories of, violence
Idea of ‘trigger happy’ gangster motivated to protect reputation
Alternate conflict resolution strategies employed
Conflict within gangs as important as conflict between gangs
More ‘important’ day-to-day
About: business, friendships, romantic relationships, family – same for most of us
Jealousy and debt recovery were key – came up over and over – generally, these are likely within not between gangs

32. Violence and drugs markets
Violence was linked to drug sales, but not disputes over markets/customers
Instead, ‘taxing’ other dealers (same & different gangs)
Played role in gang members arming themselves
Even in the hey-day of Inner West specialist drugs gangs, conflict only rarely about drugs markets

33. Unacknowledged trauma
References to violence, and exposure to violence as victims, perpetrators and witnesses was part of everyday conversation and growing up
Ex-girlfriend of key gang member explains:
‘There was that many shootings at the time that it was just normal, it was sad and everything, but then a couple of days later you would have forgotten about it and somebody else would have been shot’ (30 year old woman)

34. Interview with female gang member, sister of male gang member
I lost the plot when I seen that poor – when I seen that poor boy got shot dead, and in front of me. I could have took that bullet, it could have been me dead. I had the Regional Crime Squad, I had the Murder Squad at me door. Do you know what I mean? I was getting phone calls – shit myself. I thought, “I’ve gotta get the fuck out of the city. I’ve gotta get away.” And I couldn’t cope with what I’d seen, and I cracked up and went to me doctor’s. The police weren’t interested, they just wanted to get me statement, I told them to sling it. Do you know what I mean? Went to me doctor’s, told him, you know um, “I’ve seen someone shot.” And he said, “Well you shouldn’t put yourself in them situations, should you?”

35. Violence Different gangs, different violence
Inner West: having, holding, accessing, using guns all important re: gang status
Far West: valued the masculinity of physical fights (being ‘handy’) as opposed to ‘cowardly’ resort to guns
But access to guns (‘real’ and ‘replica’) common across all gangs/research sites

36. Sources of violence
Most violence emanated from interpersonal disputes
often about friends, family and romantic relationships
Not linked to disputes about drug markets
Jealousy and debt motivated a considerable degree of within-gang conflict
Association (by blood or company) to other gang members was a ‘risk factor’ for bullying and victimisation
By other gangs, by police
‘Unsolved’ violence (esp. murders) by police resulted in violent ‘vendettas’ among these gangs (‘crime as social control’)
Glorified in plethora of recent journalistic books

37. Violence: conclusion Suspect many similarities
Research in UK early days
But lack of connection between violence and drugs markets consistent
Our focus on ‘within gang’ conflict not discussed widely in the US
Does not necessarily point to cross-national differences
Could be our research focus.

38. Conclusions

39. Gangs in Research City
Not well-organised profit making hierarchical criminal enterprises with an interest on franchising themselves and active recruitment
But “bunch of kids with guns”, small minority older members involved in more serious money-making criminal activities
Cultural identity as ‘gang’ not as institutionalised as in the US
Drug sales now mostly individual activity, not controlled by the gang, although sometimes involving some cooperation and division of labour

40. Any questions?