There is no definite explanation as to what a youth gang is, however, they are alleged of as a self-formed participation of peers with the appearances of a gang name, identifiable symbols, recognizable leadership, topographical territory, regular meeting pattern, and collective actions to carry out illegal activity. The questions how and why youth gangs are form, who joins then and how violent, are these gangs? (Decker, 2011) The amount of youngsters that joins gangs varies by area. Surveys establish that 14%-30% of youths become a gang member at some time in their life and are frequently around 12 to 24 years old. The members of these gangs come from a diversity of racial and ethnic backgrounds. There has been a growing of youth gangs since 1980 and a number of cities broadcasting youth gang difficulties continue to increase. (Decker, 2011) Violence in these youth gang’s increases as the number of gangs and members becomes a lot more. Furthermore, the availability of firearms contributes to an increase in violence. This is due to a sequence of intensifying hostilities between or inside gangs as well as contact to and usage of firearms.
The differences frequently include gang member recruitment, spontaneous and emotional defense of one’s distinctiveness as a gang member, neighborhood security and expansion, protecting the principle of the gang, drug wars, and trivial actions of a belligerent nature. (Decker, 2011) The gangs will go back and forth inciting each other until somebody is killed generating a loop in which one killing validates another. Female gang and crime connection are also expanding. Even though, it is not clear exactly how, but the impression is that it’s part of the general growth in teenage gang participation. Research indicates that gang members are accountable for a great amount of violent crimes. (Decker, 2011) The primary research question to be defined is; what is gang to you? There are many reasons why kids join gangs, but like the majority youth activities, whether criminal or otherwise, most kids join gangs for companionship, love, social, economic and cultural forces push many adolescents in the direction of gangs.
For the most part, teens become gang followers to satisfy their necessity to fit. Occasionally, those teens have dysfunctional folks or are outsiders. Gangs are viewed for security, fidelity and a sense of identity. Members believe themselves part as a family and vision their gang as a cause of honor. Gangs may justify the necessity for acceptance and acknowledgment as well. (Decker, 2001) I believe the question the research asked is appropriate. The reason why is because many of those kids stated that they needed to fit in, or they need to feel accepted; they come from a broken home, being rebellious, and peer pressure are those major influences on some kid’s decision to join gangs. Adolescents now days encounter more peer pressure than ever before. Gang involvement has been higher in the last ten years. (Decker, 2001) The aim of the research process is 1) to better understand youth delinquency, 2) to identify actions to prevent crime among youths and 3) to re-socialize young offenders.
The research procedure should notify a public discussion between policy makers, consultants, youths and their families to recognize approaches and achievement plans to address youth criminal behavior. In order to do so, the research method has to confirm adequate inclusiveness. The use of a mixture of research methodologies, including both quantitative and qualitative methods for data gathering that consult youths as well as their friends and families, involved policy makers and related practitioners, ensures a holistic picture of the problem, its context and its causes. (Knox, 2010) In its easiest creation snowball sampling, depend on recognizing defendants who are used to mention researchers on to other defendants. In snowball sampling one subject gives the investigator the name of alternative subject, who in turn delivers the name of a third, and so on. Snowball sampling can be located within an extensive set of link-tracing procedures, which strive to take benefit of the social networks of known respondents to offer a researcher with an ever increasing set of possible contacts.
This procedure is based on the supposition that a ‘bond’ or ‘link’ exists between the original sample and others in the similar objective population, allowing a series of recommendations to be made within a ring of associate. (Knox, 2010) While some may seek to characterize the topics for which snowball strategies have been used as being trivial or obscure, the main value of snowball sampling is as a method for obtaining respondents where they are few in numbers or where some degree of trust is required to initiate contact. Faith may be instituted as suggestions made by contacts or peers rather than other proper techniques of credentials. Under these conditions, methods of ‘chain referral’ may infuse the investigator with characteristics associated with being an insider or group associate, and this can help entry to settings where conservative tactics it finds hard to succeed. (Knox, 2010) The reputational snowball procedure is a dependable method to classify a micro-level plan network.
If the policy network being researched has distinct margins, the reputational snowball will routinely stop when these limitations are reached because no new names will develop. In our experience, individuals who met our criteria, acknowledge gang membership, and agree to an interview were included in our sample. We verify membership through information from previous subjects, our own observations, or both. (Knox, 2010) The reputational snowball is predominantly useful for measuring levels of encouragement. By counting the numbers of nominations each individual received, we were able to gauge how influential they were in the network. Being named by multiple nominators 4 or more suggests that an individual persuasive is seen to play an important policy role by people who sit in different places during the policy process. (Knox, 2010)
Decker, S. H. (2011). C O L L E C T I V E A N D N O R M A T I V E Decker, S. H. (2001). 8. In C. E. Pope, R. Lovell, & S. G. Brandl (Eds.), Voices From The Field (pp. 160-181). Milwaukee: Wadsworth. F E A T U R E S O F G A N G V I O L E N C E * . Retrieved from http://faculty.cua.edu/sullins/soc371/Decker%20-%20Gang%20Violence.pdf Knox, G. W. (2010). THE FACTS ABOUT GANG LIFE IN AMERICA TODAY: A NATIONAL STUDY OF OVER 4,000 GANG
MEMBERS. Retrieved from http://www.ngcrc.com/ngcrc/gfactp.pdf