Describe the civil methods some cities have used to address gangs. What does the evidence say about such methods?

Question

What will be an ideal response?

Answer 1

In addition to criminal penalties, cities have also turned to civil remedies to control gang activity. For example, in the ancient civil remedy, the injunction to abate public nuisances, which is still used, city attorneys ask courts to declare gang activities and gang members' public nuisances and to issue public nuisance injunctions, court orders to eliminate the particular nuisance. Injunctions, like crimes that outlaw gang activities, call for balancing community and individual rights. The community interest in the quality of life requires peace, quiet, order, and a sense of security. At the same time, even members of street gangs have the right to associate, express themselves, travel freely, and be free from vague laws (see Chapter 2, "The Void-for-Vagueness Doctrine" section). Professors Cheryl Maxson, Karen Hennigan, and David Sloane (2005) conducted the first scientific assessment of CGIs in San Bernardino, California. They found positive evidence of short-term effects in the disordered, primary injunction area, including less gang presence, fewer reports of gang intimidation, and less fear of confrontation with gang members, but no significant changes in intermediate or long-term outcomes except for less fear of crime (577). Professor Jeffrey Grogger (2002) evaluated the effectiveness of CGIs. The analysis indicates that, in the first year after the injunctions are imposed, they lead the level of violent crime to decrease by 5% to 10% (69).