Printable View
Awhile back I read a paper someone did from the War College I think that equated gangs to insurgencies and the similarities in the way they could be combated. If anyone knows of this paper or has any knowledge of other resoures please drop me a line. Any help or ideas would be appreciated. Thanks.
I've been banging on that drum for three years now but haven't produced much of note apart from keeping it as a recurring them in some of my work...Dean Baratta presented on this topic from an intel perspective at the COIN Center Virtual Brown Bag in October or November last year and his presentation should be available online there; also check out www.twshiloh.com as this is a common theme there as well...
Like Dean, I've mainly looked at this topic from an intel POV as there are definitely stronger connections between law enforcement CRIMINT that is more responsive in nature and COIN/Countering irregular activity than there are with traditional predictive-centric military intel i.e. where every intel op wants to the THE who predicts where 3rd Shock Army will make its move.
There are also similarities in granularity and resolution between CRIMINT and C-IA in that both deal more with the less predictable actions of individuals than the more structured and templated actions in traditional conventional platform-based war. I got the platform-based versus individual-based concept from Marine LTC Mike Scheiern who I think may have gone back to RAND - if you Goggle he may have done some work expanding on this concept as well.
Hope this helps and love to see any conclusions you may reach...
PS
Memory kicking in now after a coffeeless day...there was also quite a good thread on this topic on www.cominganarchy.com early last year or late in 09 - I remember because I made some comments about it in my blog and ended up having a bit of a falling out over it with one of the writers over there...that was more about using COIN techniques in law enforcement which also has some merits (IMHO) due to the similarities I mentioned before...
I've been making that suggestion for a number of years.Quote:
Originally Posted by Nobody Special
This it?Quote:
Originally Posted by Nobody Special
http://www.strategicstudiesinstitute...les/pub597.pdf
Read anything you can find by John P. Sullivan, a lot of his stuff is here at the SWJ librabry, Blog, etc.
Max Manwaring has also noted the similarities.
Follow along here
http://council.smallwarsjournal.com/...ead.php?t=5370
All great stuff guys. Alot to digest. I'm doing a proposal for work and hoping since none of the bosses are prior service that I can translate some of this stuff into a workable plan for us. I'll let you know how it goes.
Nick
Not to forget 'Of Mice and Men: Gangs, Narco-Terrorism, and the USA', a long running thread:http://council.smallwarsjournal.com/...ead.php?t=6290
So I had this genius idea slap me in the head but it's so far out of my lane I don't even know how to put it together and what the law, bosses or public would have to say to shoot it down. One of the best things about A-stan when I was there is we had a couple of psy-ops guys attached to us and I have to say they did some great work. So the idea is to start a psy-ops campaign against known or suspected gang members. But like I said, just thinking out loud because it's out of my lane. Thoughts? Ideas?
Could you expand on your idea of what you would want psy-ops to do?Quote:
Originally Posted by Nobody Special
I was thinking along the lines of a disinformation campaign to get the bangers to start distrusting each other more, etc. That in turn should start internal conflict. I'm not really sure though because psy-ops is out of my lane.
The same came be used with registered sex offenders. Put pictures and arrest histories in the local paper and the like. When the normal folks in town see this stuff I believe it would add pressure and make these guys move out of town. I guess you could do the same with drug dealers.
Not really sure how it would work but sewing the seed of discord among the known bad guys would surely spread to the unknown bad guys.
Just thinking out loud.
Certainly gangs could be played against each other more effectively ( I had one LEA official semi-jokingly say we should work to convince them that one needs to kill another gang member to become a gang member. Goal was zero growth and a reduction of such initiation homicides against innocent civilians).
But to reduce the growth and influence of gangs one has to address the psychological reasons why people join such organizations and either mitigate those causal factors or offer better alternatives, or both. Reducing the number of illegal revenue venues would also help (drugs, prostitution, guns, human trafficking, etc). I suspect a more effective integration program for legal and illegal immigrants; coupled with a concerted effort to vastly reduce the size of the prison community in the U.S.
Bottom line is that much of the recent growth of gang numbers and influence is a result of domestic policies that have nothing to do with gangs directly. In that way, gangs are very much like insurgent organizations indeed. A response to ill-formed or implemented domestic policies.
I think you'll find that this occurs already and, in fact, the transfer of useful TTP is probably more from law enforcement to the military in this area as LE has been dealing with it for decades...Quote:
Originally Posted by Nobody Special
The problem with your sex offender scenario is where do they go? Some time the evil you know id better than the evil that just drifts into town after being driven out someplace else...more so in a big population like that of the US, Canada, maybe even Australia....
I doubt it would work in this capacity. Sex offenders are very,very different than drug dealers. Many of the same reason that people join insurgencies are the same reasons they join Gangs....for security and prosperity.....they are "outgroups" because they often come from disenfranchised population groups. There is a role for Information operations connected with good policies but I don't think you are going to see that anytime soon.Quote:
Originally Posted by Nobody Special
Good points. Add respect or "status" to the list.Quote:
Originally Posted by slapout9
All good stuff. Sometimes I get stuff in my head and have to work through it all. The psychology behind the gang thing is a big one and I don't ever foresee a way to get rid of them although it would be nice! The sex offender thing, I just want them gone. Period. Off the planet would be nice:D. The thing I see is that traditional policing methods are behind the power curve and I'm trying to find newer/already done workable solutions to the problems. Maybe I'm just tired of beating my head against the wall because in the end when it all plays out, the work we do gets fragged by the States Attorney's. Been a long couple of days. Thanks for the imput.
Nick
You are correct in stating that insurgencies act a lot like gangs and criminal elements. In fact insurgents do not have a goal of winning in war, just as gangs dont want to over-through the government. The insurgents "win" if the war is protracted. They simply want chaos because chaos provides utility--it allows them to operate unabated and substantiates that, in reality or in appearance, the government cannot provide governance--rule of law, security, public safety, economic opportunity, essential services...Quote:
Originally Posted by Nobody Special
Several years ago, I wrote a paper that addresses the Insurgency Paradigm. I have attached it for your use. On page three the paper addresses the similarities of insurgencies and gangs/criminal elements. It also addresses the concept of "resource scarcity" and violence. I hope this helps.
Have you heard of a concept known as Dunbar's Number? Dunbar makes an argument to the upper limits of social organizations (gangs, terrorists, insurgencies, military operational units, etc). And, although his research was never geared to terrorist groups, insurgents or gangs, it may be effective when dealing with these elements. (Dunbar's research was done many years before Afghanistan, Iraq, Oklahoma City, 911, or other attacks)Quote:
Originally Posted by Nobody Special
Dunbar postulates that the absolute maximum group size would be 150. And that this high number could only exist for "social communities" with a very high incentive to remain together. For a group of this size to remain cohesive, Dunbar speculated that as much as 42% of the group's time would have to be devoted to social grooming. So your idea of Psy-Ops to play the end against the middle may have merit to fracture the insurgency cell (social community). The group might have to expend 80% of its energy trying to hold it together. Correspondingly, only groups under intense survival pressure, such as subsistence villages, nomadic tribes, and historical military groupings have, on average, achieved the 150-member mark.
Moreover, Dunbar noted that such groups are almost always physically close: "... we might expect the upper limit on group size to depend wholly on the degree of social dispersal in A-stan. In dispersed societies, individuals will meet less often and will thus be less familiar with each, so group sizes will be limited to local command and control and be smaller in size as a consequence." Thus, the 150-member group can only occur if there is an intense necessity to be united, i.e. due to intense survival, security, environmental and/or economic pressures. My guess would be that Psy-ops could develop a play geared at group sizes of 70 or less, and that the play could be very effective.
The UK's view of the IRA and PIRA was basically that they were a well armed criminal gang, and to be treated as such.Quote:
Originally Posted by Nobody Special
I think the idea of drawing parallels between the LA Cryps and say the RUF in Sierra Leone is a bit of a dead end that may be intellectually entertaining, but will deliver no actual insight.
Is any US "Street Gang" in armed rebellion against the US Govt? Yes, No?
Armed rebellion yes, Armed revolt no. Kinda like the Whiskey Rebellion and even that is a poor analogy, but close enough. They are against US Government laws but not specifically against the US Government in general.They really don't care who or what government is doing except as it impacts their gang business/lifestyle. They simply carve out a certain area where they can do their business and they use violence to essentially keep the government from coming into that area and enforcing certain laws. However I think gangs would certainly cooperate with a political insurgency if they were given the drug franchise for certain areas.Quote:
Originally Posted by William F. Owen
It would probably be even simpler than a franchising option: the actions of both groups would be symbiotic as they both divide and distract the security forces from each other...the real challenge to that relationship might come when the insurgents were established in an are as the 'government' and might find that the presence of criminals in 'their patch' now works against them...
One might well question whether there is "The Dunbar Number", but here is a set of numbers from SWC.
Members who have posted at least once after 31 Dec 2009 and have posted in total:
50 or more - 145
250 or more - 65
500 or more - 42
1000 or more - 31
From "company-sized" to "platoon-sized".
Regards
Mike
Now ya see? This is why I feel uneducated and why I came here for info! Thank you all for the food for thought. My boss and I have been talking about all of this and have decided to put a plan together for the coming year. We're gonna be working business as usual for now but hopefully we'll get something hashed out that's workable. When I get a rough draft together, I'll pitch it to you guys and let you tear it apart. My belief is that it's always good to get out of the pool and go check how things are done elsewhere. Keep up the good fight guys.
Nick
Nick, if you can answer is this plan for inside or outside CONUS?Quote:
Originally Posted by Nobody Special
CONUS. Trying to work this within federal, state, county and local law should be interesting.
Nobody,
Sorry for coming late to the party, but I think you may be missing an opportunity with your sex offenders. Many of them circulate in similar circles to and on the same social levels as your criminal gang elements. They may be a great source of information and their precarious legal status (registration, reporting, residence restrictions) can be exploited to make them good sources of information on criminal gangs. Back when I worked a beat, I used several of the local sex offenders as informal informants. I was always creeped out by talking to them, but their information was typically spot on.
As for running them out of town, much research has been done on the spatial distribution of sex offenders and restricting their movements/residency requirements. Those programs have been shown to be unsuccessful mostly. I remember doing a location analysis showing areas in the city limits that were not within the 1000 feet of a childcare center, church, school or other place children frequent. The result was that sex offenders could live in about 5 areas, none of which were actually residential areas: either vacant fields or industrial parks.
Just my two cents.
Sex offenders is a broad category - and in such general terms I disagree with the statement that they circulate in similar circles to and on the same social levels as street gang members. Certain specific individuals may do so - but many will not, and live and function in circles very different and isolated from the world of street gang members. As usual, it comes down to a case-by-case assessment of location, access and reliability of the individual informant.Quote:
Originally Posted by C_Smith
CJB, May 10: Residential Proximity to Schools and Daycares: An Empirical Analysis of Sex Offense RecidivismQuote:
Originally Posted by C_Smith
Geography & Public Safety, May 09: Residency Restrictions: What’s Geography Got to Do with It?
NIJ, 25 Jul 08: Sex Offender Residency Restrictions: How Mapping Can Inform Policy
http://www.suntimes.com/5871162-417/...mpstat-meeting
Quote:
On Thursday, McCarthy introduced CompStat to Chicago. He was part coach and part interrogator as he quizzed commanders about crime in their districts and what they intended to do about it. He questioned narcotics and detective supervisors about how they’re supporting district commanders.
..........
He also said he wanted narcotics investigators to focus on helping patrol officers shut down open-air drug markets. Narcotics Cmdr. Jim O’Grady pointed to one probe in Humboldt Park that closed such a market with the help of neighborhood leaders, forcing dealers to arrange their sales over the phone.
McCarthy nodded approvingly. “We gotta fight this like a ground war,” he said. “Once we take territory, I don’t want to give it back.”
McCarthy returned to his battle analogy when the discussion turned to the shooting of two girls — ages 2 and 7 — on Wednesday night on a Northwest Side playlot. The 2-year-old was grazed in the head, and the 7-year-old has a serious back wound. Two men were being held for questioning in the shooting, which apparently was targeting gang members nearby. McCarthy said the department must send a message to the Maniac Latin Disciples, who are thought to be responsible.
“We’re going to obliterate that gang,” he said. “Every one of their locations has to get blown up until they cease to exist.”
SecondCityCop has been following some of this stuff pretty well...to include the deflection by leadership of the "flash mob" issue.
A couple questions or issues with the concept of conducting psyops to break up gangs:
1) How do you deal with the political fallout stemming from the increased inter- and intragang violence that is a likely result?
2) How do you deal with the likelihood that such violence will affect more than just gang members?
Regarding using such tactics on sex offenders, I really don't see how that's a good idea. You're taking someone whose ability to interact with society is already compromised in a way that makes them a proven danger to others, and reducing their ability to interact with society normally. Punishment is, ideally, supposed to reduce the likelihood of recidivism, not increase it.
For a moment I thought the new Chicago Police commander was really talking, this is a classic:Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve Blair
Cited whole as unable to link to particular story in the blog:http://www.secondcitycop.blogspot.com/Quote:
Garry McCarthy was asked about this during a press conference.
McCarthy: Today we have a new plan of attack. I have been informed that there are several dozen officers currently assigned to the 311 or callback center. Many of these officers are facing discipline, some of this discipline for excessive force.
We have identified these officers facing discipline and have assigned them to the downtown detail. Here is the plan. We are using our youngest looking female officers as decoys for these mobs. When a mob seems prone to attack, we will call in the former callback officers. When the mob attacks, these officers will attack the mob.
We expect that this tactic will result in lawsuits. Many of these callback officers are borderline psychopaths. Still, businesses have agreed to pay a .1% 'combat-lawsuit' sales tax. Since we are prepared for the lawsuits, we have no reason to hold back. The callback combat unit will have no name tags. In fact, they will only wear black clothing with no police emblems. They will wear face masks. They wear gloves to cover their fingerprints. At the end of the summer all records of this unit will be burned. No case will be criminally prosecuted. In fact, we will not be making any arrests.
We fully expect this problem will be solved after next weekend.
Bill Bratton, ex-NYPD & LAPD, has strong links with some in UK policing and has been over twice this year, once invited by an influential think tank, Policy Exchange and recently by the government to quickly offer help on gangs.
The link is to his most recent thoughts:http://www.policyexchange.org.uk/pag...ngviolence.cgi
Citing his time in LAPD:Near the end:Quote:
Prior to 2002 the focus and priority from gang and crime suppression had been on arrests and incarceration but in spite of that effort crime continued to grow. We learned the hard way that while arrests and punishment are an essential part of any gang and crime reduction strategy, you cannot arrest your way out of the plague of crime and violence. It didn’t work and it entailed enormous costs.
Quote:
I have learned throughout my 40-year career in law enforcement that cops count, police matter. Effective policing can deliver results, even if the desired funding is not always available. Addressing the problem of gangs, as with most crimes, requires effective and committed partnership between law enforcement agencies and the government. Police cannot fight crime on their own. Today’s world is a global one where success depends on collaboration, innovation and sharing the best ideas. Likewise I believe policing should be an open profession where ideas are freely exchanged.
I have previously postulated :D that it is a continuum and as sphere of control and sphere of influence grow the bad dude could develop greater ambition and confidence. I wrote a student paper IRT to this subject not sure i did a very good job on it but i will post it later.