Should gang members be deemed domestic terrorist organizations?

1. 60

   terced ojosposted 15 years ago

   Should gang members be deemed domestic terrorist organizations?
   
     I grew up in an area in Los Angeles that is replete with gang members of all stripes and flavors.  It was routine to be accosted by them and on a couple of occasions shot at.  In short these people are sworn to lawlessness. Much like the L.A.P.D..but I digress.  Gang members are sworn to lawlessness and make neighborhoods basically unlivable; should they be deemed terrorist organizations and subject in some way to documents like the Patriot Act?

   replyreport
2. 68

   mkottposted 15 years ago

   Never thought of it that way but why not. 
   
   Though I disagree with you about LAPD don't let a few bad apples spoil the bunch.  Put it this way, would you actually want to deal with these people 40+ hours a week year after year.  I worked as a civilian in law enforcement in a controlled enviroment in LA County and that was enough to make me sick and afraid.  I am not one easily shaken.  To classify these low lifes as domestic terrrorist sounds good to me.  But my other thought is they (gang bangers) would think this is cool and who knows what they would do to earn brownie points within the gang and to gain notoriety.

   replyreport
3. 73

   someonewhoknowsposted 15 years ago

   I know you mean "Gangs" as organizations ,not individuals who do things on their own.What would you classify a single individual.who acts on their own? How about a scenario where someone acts on their own and the government uses that as an excuse to charge all the members of their family.
   
   If,you charge all of them as terrorists,for the actions of one of them.That's no different than charging all arabs who are members of a religious group with being terrorists ,if one of them is. That's the same thing.
   
   Are you are saying,we should round up all gang members,as terrorists.and lock them up.For how long?
   
   It's better to address the cause than to wait for them to act in a negative matter.   
   
   If,you want security,at the cost of freedom ,you don't deserve freedom.Defend yourself,no one else will do it.for you.

   replyreport
4. 60

   terced ojosposted 15 years ago

   Hmmmm. The gangs already readily identify themselves with well established groups.  I am of course speaking of those who openly show their allegiance to their particular gang; much of what they do in the way of lawlessness, drug sales in their communities goes to support other gang activities.  I have seen police files that document hundreds of members of particular gangs.  I don't know that tracking them would be that much of a problem given their proclivity to "represent" as they say.  The thing is you just get tired of living in a wild west atmosphere.  I just wish something of a greater effect could be done to these people. I just believe that if you are sworn to lawlessness and you act on your gang mentality and committ crimes against your community then you should all be rounded up and jailed. I'm tired of living in fear.  Clearly the local gang members make this a terrorist state.

   replyreport
5. 68

   Marquisposted 15 years ago

   If the American people are fed up with the consistent drug activity and the violence which is associated with it, maybe. However, I believe that there have to be degrees to which the term "domestic terrorist" must represent in order for that to happen.
   
   Then again, since these individuals can represent a clear and present danger to the American people, maybe these criminals may be seen as being "domestic terrorists."

   replyreport
6. 60

   John for truthposted 15 years ago

   Yes I agree with you. The terrorism overseas is fake and set up to create fear allowing the greedy to corrupt and gain power.
   
   It is here in our own country where we should be concentrating on the problem. Image the trillions of dollars we could save and not to mention our childrens future

   replyreport
7. 60

   Dark knight ridesposted 15 years ago

   Some gangs have been dealt with using the Patriot Act, as well as RICO statutes. It really depends on the scope of their activities. As long as they stay in their neighborhood and don't engage in interstate criminal activity, they can stay out of the federal jurisdiction in a lot of cases. If they start threatening government officials, it tends to move them up the ladder.

   replyreport
8. 61

   StreetSenseposted 15 years ago

   An interesting question, and one that's sure to draw a lot of conjecture no matter which way you vote. As an Gang Investigator I can only provide you with my opinion. I've worked with gang members for the past two decades and some gangs are affiliated with terrorist organizations both domestic and international.
   
   By definition gangs are a criminal organization and are generally motivated by profit while terrorist organizations are generally more motivated by politcs. It is a difficult problem for a couple of reasons. All criminals are lawless, but they are not committing acts of terrorism. What gangs lack is the dogma and political ideology to put them into the same catagory of terrorism.
   
   Do gangs terrorise communities; absolutely. Are they capable of causing death and destruction through the use of violence, drugs and fear; positively. Do most of them have the zeal and conviction to sacrifice themselves for the cause; NO. For as many gang members that I've worked with who claim to be ready to die for the group and it's goals most of them run for cover when the bullets start flying.
   
   We need to be careful about lumping everyone into the same boat, because it detracts and distracts from both issues. Should gangs be prosecuted and eliminated when possible; absolutely. Do they have the infrastructure, political support and ideology to be classified with true domestic terrorists; no because they'd sell out their political beliefs in an instant if it furthered the gangs bottom line...profit.

   replyreport
9. 59

   mandybeau1posted 14 years ago

   Be a hard one to enforce, I don't think you could enforce it. Civil Liberties, are something that Gang Members know about.
   Here they are stopped from wearing there Patches, but just in this Town,  But really if they are just Guys out for a Bike I have no problem. But there are Gangs and Gangs, Are you just meaning criminal Gangs, because differentiation, would be hard to prove. Surely not all of them are Terrorist Organizations.

   replyreport
10. 64

    proton66posted 14 years ago

    Everyone is a suspect according to law enforcers. And I say, everyone is a potential thief, murderer, robber, and terrorist.
    
    
    If the Patriot Act is designed to identify the true terrorist(s) then it is good. If someone poisons his/her neighbor's dog, do we say that is a terrorist activity? How about placing a bomb under a car? That's an activity one may say too extreme. Gangs have certain activities but, if their activities disrupts decent people's lives or involves killing, then the Patriot Act is truly useful. And if that doesn't work, have laws that will make them think twice.
    
    
    You see it on TV how the older ones asking the why question to the younger ones. Why tell them it bad when it's all about them fitting in or loyalty? Puttng them to jails is really joke. Most of these crazies don't learn much as they go back and forth.

    replyreport
11. 36

    thomasczechposted 14 years ago

    In one word..."Yes". They strike terror into people just as the US is doing in Afghanistan and Iraq.

    replyreport