Gangs, Violence And Victimization

Introduction

From the past decades, gangs have received much more public attention. Although most of the research focuses on violence and victimization. During this research, it has been found that gang members face more risk to be victimized and suffer violence than non-gang members Gang members’ life involves delinquent lifestyles and increase the risk of serious violence and victimization. Group individuals’ incredibly elevated amounts of contributions in violence, this event is a significant point to address. A similar field investigates that subtlety’s harsh acts executed by pack everyone additionally depicts elevated amounts of persecution against gang individuals Gang individuals in these particular investigations died intensely. Rob Papin said that ‘If you join a gang, you have the life expectancy of a cockroach. Because you’re going to get taken out by the cops, by another crew or your own crew,’ According to Papin, individuals involve in gangs for the family, but it is not right way. As he said, young girls are forced for sex and are beaten whereas boys involve in drugs and robbery. Papin quit the gang environment and gave guidance to the students through a seminar to stay away from these as there are other better lifestyles available for them. (Ohler, Shawn. Edmonton Journal; Edmonton, Alta. [Edmonton, Alta], 2001) This research talks about gang member experiences living risky lifestyles and becoming target of their own gang members. This essay will shed light upon the topic of how gang members are influenced in violence and victimization by their own gang members. It is mainly focused on gender differences, involvement in drugs, risky environment and gang membership overlaps violence.

Gender Differences:

Scholars have said that individuals involved in gangs tend to commit more crime than non gang members (Curry, Decker, & Pyrooz, 2014; Thornberry, Krohn, Lizotte, & Chard-Wierschem, 1993; Thrasher, 1927). According to Decker and Van Winkle,1996 “colors make a person a target, a victim and a victimizer.’ Furthermore, by interviews conducted by Joe7 Chesney Lind,1995; Moore,1991; Miller’s 2001 manifested that gang girls are more alarming than non gang girls. Studies demonstrate that 42% of the gang girls had been attacked,52% sexually assaulted and 56% threatened with the weapon. Hence, this evidence is clearly pointing out that gang girls have been victimized much. According to the reports of Miller and Berunson,2000 revealed the gender differences victimization among gang members. Gang women were at more risk of rape and kidnapping whereas men become the victim of causing deaths. According to Lane & Fox, 2012, 2013; Melde, Taylor, & Esbensen, 2009 youth join the gangs for their safety as they often feel that gang members are more safe from violence and victimization. While gang members engage with dangerous people so that increases their victimization risk. In actual gang life is risky, as studied by Huff,1998 gang members involve in variety of crimes, robbery and drug sales. Studies suggested that risky behavior comes out in youth when they commit small crimes. Hence, final study has concluded that gang members are more victimized than non gang members. (Katz, Webb et al., 2011; Spano et al., 2008; Taylor et al., 2008)

Involvement in drugs:

According to Marcus,2005 and some scholars have depicted that violence has become an integral part in youth’s life. Youth are more likely to involve in these activities with peers and committing delinquent crimes. It all includes lifestyle and routine activities and time spent away from home in using drugs and alcohol. As per studies by Esbensen and Winfree 1998; Howell and Decker 1999; Howell and Gleason 1999; Huff 1998; Maxson 1995 found that individuals involved in gangs are more likely to involve in drug sales which tend to increase victimization among them. Furthermore, it has been reported that gang members become the targets of the other gangs to be victimized. According to Stoiber & Good,1998 way to involve in gangs depends upon care that increases resistance in their way. Hill, Howell, Hawkins, and Battin-Pearson ,1999 studies have demonstrated that learners who consume marijuana at age between 10-12 years were four times supposed to engage in gangs in future as compare to the ages 13-18. p. Complex social issues like gangs and school violence require researchers to take a school focused socioecological approach that explores how individual behaviors and attitudes in school mediate or moderate social influences from outside the school, such as gang affiliation (Benbenishty & Astor, 2005). Because laws in the United States require youth to attend school daily, it is logical to assume that gangs could become a normal part of a school culture if the school is nested in a gang area or in the catchment area of regions that have many teen gang members. The 2010 National Survey of American Attitudes on Substance Abuse XV: Teens and Parents reported that 45% of high school students stated there are gangs, or students who consider themselves to be part of a gang, in their schools (National Center on Addiction and Substance Abuse, 2010). More recently, a study that surveyed 12- to 18-year-old students indicated that 18% stated there were gangs at their schools (Robers, Kemp, Truman, & Snyder, 2013). Also, research that surveyed school administrators and teachers found that gangs ranked second only to drugs as the most significant school safety issue (Stephens, 1989; Sullivan & Keeney, 2008).

Risky environment:

According to Benbenishty & Astor, 2005; Cornell & Mayer, 2010; Jimerson & Furlong, 2006; Mayer & Furlong, 2010; Swearer, Espelage, Vaillancourt, & Hymel, 2010 found that schools are not likely to include victimization and violence in their environment. Thus, if a student feels himself as supported and careful, victimization in school violence will get reduced. The example announced in this examination is from an arrestee populace, a populace that is less inclined to go to class and bound to be engaged with and experience issue practices, for example, misconduct, exploitation, and gangs. Tonry (1995) noticed that school and arrestee based examples can create opposite discoveries. He found that in the 1980s and 1990s research discoveries from school based examples demonstrated that drug use was reducing, while results gotten through arrestee tests demonstrated that drug use was expanding. Our discoveries likewise feature the significance of neighborhood factors (third theory) for understanding the complex connections between gang enrollment and association in wrongdoing, both as guilty party and as injured individual. Investigations demonstrated that even subsequent to controlling for gang status and contribution in wrongdoing, people who lived in neighborhoods with individuals who are involved in gangs were altogether bound to be brutally deceived than those living in safe areas without rival gangs. This finding is steady with routine exercises hypothesis with the end goal that when reasonable targets are accessible furthermore, less watchmen are available (e.g., low safeguard given by their own gang neighborhood), gang individuals are bound to be exploited. (Lauritsen, 2001; Miethe and Meier, 1994; Rountree, Land, and Miethe, 1994),

Gang membership overlaps Violence:

The speculations most generally connected to the injured individual guilty party overlap all have importance and experimental help in the gang context in daily lifestyle. Contrasted with research on group participation and culpable, thinks about inspecting the connection between pack participation and exploitation have been increasingly mindful to worries of the causal association between gang membership and victimization. (Hoyt, Ryan, and Cauce 1999; DeLisi et al. 2009; Katz et al. 2011; Spano, Frelich, and Bolland 2008; Taylor et al. 2007, 2008; Turanovic and Pratt 2012). Studies using coordinating and relapse strategies normally incorporate a proportion of gang when viewing the connection between group enrollment and exploitation, yet uncover a aggregation results. Further, applied lack of precision encompasses guilty and gang enrollment in these examinations. In a few cases, gang participation is utilized as an intermediary for unsafe ways of life and routine exercises (e.g., Childs, Cochran, and Gibson 2010; Hoyt, Ryan, and Cauce 1999; see Sampson and Lauritsen 1990:111-12) while others use insulting (e.g., Katz et al. 2011; Rufino, Fox, and Kercher 2012; Spano, Frelich, and Bolland 2008; Taylor et al. 2007, 2008). The study used the data collected from 621 individuals who experienced violence and victimization. Descriptive statistics gave the information as 41 percent of the example either was an injured individual (9 percent), a guilty party (12 percent), or both (20 percent). Regardless of such high rates of violence, most of respondents were not victims or guilty parties. Among those associated with savagery, half were either victims or guilty parties while the other half can under overlap. The violence scores depict variations in sayings over respondents. According to Deckeret al. 2013; Fox 2013; Krohn and Thornberry 2008, findings declared that gang individuals are more likely to engage in offending and experience violence and victimization.