What Are the Key Factors Which Lead to the Downfall of the Romanov Dynasty Essay Example for Free

What Are the Key Factors Which Lead to the Downfall of the Romanov Dynasty Essay 1917 saw the conclusion of the reign of the Romanov Dynasty, as well as the demise of Russia’s last monarch, Tsar Nicholas II. It is evident that the downfall of the Romanov Dynasty was directly linked to key factors such as the autocratic style of the Romanov dynasty and the nature of the social structure, as well as the evolving nation of Russia, as a result of industrialisation. The Romanov family was viewed by the people of Russia as leaders ‘sent from God’. However as the 20th century neared, this mystical admiration the public possessed for the royal family receded and was replaced by intellect. A growing sense of political and social awareness of the lower classes, as well as the introduction of democratic ideas from the West had sparked a change. The twentieth century saw the birth of new ideologies such as Leninism, Marxism, Liberalism and Socialism. These ideologies proposed new models of government techniques and questions the ruling of the Romanov Dynasty. Tsar Alexander II sensed the rising threat of terrorism threatening the Imperial family and more importantly the Dynasty’s autocratic rule. The responsibility of Russia was bestowed upon Nicholas II, son of Alexander II, based on the dynasty’s ritualistic practice of passing the throne to the Tsar’s eldest son or closest senior male relative. Nicholas II was reluctant to accept the responsibility of Russia, as well as its 126 subjects; however he acknowledged the burden of the crown as a spiritual experience destined by God. By the beginning of the 20th century, Russia had established itself as a vast empire, however in comparison to other countries; Russia was a ‘backward society’ with mostly undeveloped resources. At this time, Russia had established rigid class distinctions, with 88% of the population farming the countryside as serfs, whilst land and high government positions were owned by 5% of Russia’s population. In 1816, serfdom was abolished and peasants were free, however were required to pay compensation for land that they believed they already owned. Although agriculture remained the principle means of maintaining a livelihood for the lower class, peasants often struggled to live above starvation level, as they used inefficient farming techniques and had little land available to them. Those who struggled with agrarian lifestyles flocked to the cities, consequently causing a major increase in the urban population. As a result factory working conditions also suffered. Factory workers received low wages, at times only 25-30% of British workers, as well as long working hours, sometimes extending to 15 hour shifts. Workers were forced to endure these conditions, with little hope of assistance, as the Russian government had provided no means by which workers could express their grievances or dissatisfaction with their present conditions. The Tsar’s power was unlimited with no political party or constitution to inspect the Tsar’s ruling, as well as a secret police, known as the Ohkrana, which terrorised those threatening public order. ‘I shall uphold the principle of Autocracy as firmly and as undeviating as did my late father’ (Nicholas II, first proclamation, 29th January, 1895 source:Punch,9 February 1895 ) This proclamation illustrates Tsar Nicholas’s incentives to intimate his father Alexender II, by means of resisting modernisation and change, in the nation of Russia. Despite these obvious signs of corruption within the Tsar, the public, largely due to the coercive influence of the Russian Orthodox Church, continued to hold a mystical admiration for the Tsar and the royal family. However, while the myth of Tsar Nicholas or the public’s ‘little father’ retained some currency, the events of the years 1904 to 1905 disrupted this myth dramatically. In 1904, the government’s decision to go to war against Japan highlighted its weakness. The two countries had been competing for years over territory and influence in the Korean peninsula of Manchuria. Nicholas, along with most Russian’s believed that a brief encounter with Russia’s vast navy and army would be the solutions to their present conflicts with Japan. Nicholas was wrong. The war ended with the humiliation of Russian defeat, in August 1905. Confirmation of the Russian government and military weakness heightened discontent and fueled many reform movements. Meanwhile other incidences, such as the massacre or ‘Bloody Sunday’ on the 9th of January 1905, sparked political unrest in the capital of Russia. On this day a large crowd of people marched towards the Winter Palace, in St Petersburg, presenting a petition to the Tsar. The petition demanded a series of measures that would improve the position of those being exploited by their factory owners. â€Å"Don’t refuse to help your people, lead them out of the grave of disfranchisement, poverty and ignorance Tear down the wall between you and your people, and let them rule the country with you Look without anger at our requests, they are not intended for an evil but for a good cause, for both of us† (Petition of the Workers and Residents of St Petersburg for Submission to Nicholas II) This extract displays the continuing confidence in the Tsar and assurance that he will overcome his evil advisors and attend to the struggling lower classes. However this confidence in the Tsar was completely destroyed by the following event. Under command, troops, who were guarding the palace, opened fire on the crowd, killing 100 protestors and wounding almost 300. Although it is still unknown who directed the final orders, Nicholas’s absence from the protest, eroded the iconic image of the Tsar and the myth upon which the Tsarist system was sustained. Hostility towards the blood bath was generated from the lower proletarian classes and reverberated upwards throughout the empire. As a result nine months of strikes, peasant revolts and mutinies among the army and navy, followed. Workers began to form councils, known as soviets, where worker’s representatives would voice their grievances and political protest campaigns were fashioned. Under immense pressure from these disturbances, the Tsar was forced to make compromises to the demands of the people in order to preserve the support of the public. On the 17th of October, the Tsar introduced the October Manifesto. This granted the people of Russia the freedom of conscience, speech, meeting and association. The manifesto also promised the introduction of a Duma, or parliament, elected by universal suffrage. The design of the Duma was to provide the people of Russia with the power to create and approve laws. The intentional exclusion of the word ‘constitution’ ensured that the Tsar autocratic power remained unscathed. The Duma was the Tsar’s puppet; he could dismiss and announce the duma, personally choose and dismiss ministers and declare new laws unaided, at any time. The first two Duma’s lasted only a few months before they were later dissolved, by the Tsar. The third Duma survived as a result of an alteration in the electing process of representatives. Subsequently the Duma became dominated by land-owners and businessmen who were more conservative and ‘trustworthy’ elements to the Tsar. This alteration destroyed the sole purpose of Duma as it hindered all classes from expressing their opinions. Although evidence of reform in the government was present, the manifesto did not address current problems affecting the lower classes such as poverty, low wages and poor working and living conditions. The grievances of the lower classes remained unheard and the gap between the Tsar and his subjects widened. For these reasons recently legalised parties such as the Social Democrats and Socialists revolutionaries had a willing audience. By the end of July 1914, the revolutionary discontent echoed the events of 1905 revolution. When World War II commenced early August 1914, Russia was in no state for battle. Although intensified emotions of patriotism temporarily calmed civil disputes, the hardships of the war brutally hit the home front. Russia’s undeveloped economy struggled to sustain the war efforts and keep up with increased demands. By late 1914, dreams of a short successful battle were doubtful. In addition to previous hardships, concerns of high causality rates, inadequate medical care and shortages of resources, such as food, weaponry and ammunition were affecting the Russian front. In Mid 1915, Nicholas II, with the aim of improving Russia’s current stance in the war, accepted the position as Commander-in-Chief of the Russian forces. Nicholas II had few military skills and was surrounded by ministers who had been chosen by himself, therefore were also sufficiently inexperienced. Meanwhile, German-born Tsarina Alexandra was temporarily responsible for the home front whilst her husband was away. The Tsarina was greatly influenced by Grigori Rasputin, a Russian mystic who was praised by Alexandra for his fanatical abilities to help her haemophilic son, Alexi, the heir to the throne. Tsarina had little political ability and looked towards Rasputin for advice. Due to the nepotism within the royal family, Rasputin was able to quickly posses doctrinal powers and become a influential member of the Russian court. The influence Rasputin had on the royal family as well as the scandalous relationship assumed to be between Alexandra and Rasputin discredited the Tsarist government. These scandals affected the way the public viewed the royal family and supported the idea that the royal family was easily dominated by religious mystics. By late 1916, discontent within Russia had reached crisis point. The duma and the majority of Russia’s upper class no longer supported the Tsar. The Tsar had lost his authority in the eyes of the public. By 25th of January 1917, St Petersburg, the capital of Russia, was at a standstill. Numerous factories were shut, shops closed, public transport ceased to run and radical political leadership seemed to be using all possible means of protest. Unlike 1905, troops did not restrain the strikes; some even rebelled and joined the workers. Tsarist authority had vanished. On the 2nd of March 1917, Nicholas II abdicated and within a few hours, the Grand Duke, Nicholas II’s brother, refused the responsibility of the throne. This was the definitive end to the Romanov Dynasty. In conclusion, although the Tsar’s character had great effect on the downfall of the Romanov Dynasty, it was ultimately the fault of Romanov dynasty’s ineffective style of government. As Russia became more industrialised, larger, and far more complicated, the inadequacies of autocratic Tsarist rule became increasingly apparent. Ritualistic beliefs such as the nepotistic process by which successive monarchs were selected, was unsuitable in an ever evolving world desperate for change and development. The Romanov Dynasty’s Autocratic approach to leadership had been successful for the previous three centuries, however as the twentieth century approached, the need for social and political reform advanced with it. For this reason, Nicholas II, was a victim of a time warp, where despite his best efforts to maintain authority of the autocratic crown, was forced to abandon inherited methods of leadership. He was trapped in a modernising world with outdated beliefs and traditions. Nevertheless, to a minor extent Tsar Nicholas was responsible for his own demise as he was aware of the changes occurring within the nation, however he didn’t not administer the needs and wants of his subjects.

The water loss from leaves through stomata Essay Example for Free

The water loss from leaves through stomata Essay Analysis conclusion As you can see from the table of results leaf 4 lost the least amount of water. Leaf 4 lost the most water because it had no petroleum jelly covering the stomata. This meant water vapour could diffuse from the leaf. My prediction was correct. However I also stated that leaf 3 would lose just as much water as leaf 1. I was incorrect. This was an anomalous result. Leaf 1 lost the least amount of water because it was covered in petroleum jelly. The water vapour, which is formed, was not allowed to diffuse into the air because petroleum jelly is non-permeable. My prediction was correct. This was be However I also stated that leaf 3 would lose as much water as leaf 4 but I was incorrect as leaf 4 lost more water. This was an anomalous result. In the result there are no patterns or trends. In the experiment I discovered that if petroleum jelly was put on the underside of the leaf, it would stop more water vapour escaping than if petroleum jelly was added to the top of the leaf or if none was put on at all. This is because at the underside of the leaf are stomata. There is water loss only through stomata. This occurs when heat from the sun causes water to evaporate from the surface of the cellulose wall. The water vapour formed then diffuses into the air. Stomata are found only on the underside of the leaf. When the underside of the leaf is covered in petroleum jelly the water vapour cannot diffuse through it into the air because it is non-permeable. This prevents the loss of water. When petroleum jelly is added to the top of the leaf (or if none is put on the leaf at all) then water vapour inside the leaf can escape through the stomata, which are found only under the leaf. The explanation is correct because there is proof of this on the graph and in the table of results Evaluation There were enough results obtained to draw a firm conclusion. The results were accurate and reliable. In the experiment however there were anomalous results of all of the leaves. Leaf 1 and 3 should have both lost the same amount of water and leaves 2 and 4 should have lost the same amounts of water. This may have happened because the leaves may have not have had the same amount of water in them at the beginning of the test. Also the leaves themselves may not have had equal surface areas. Also the amount of petroleum jelly may not have covered the whole leaf (this may have given unfair advantage to one of the leaves). The readings were not repeated when any of the values did not fit in with the pattern. The readings, which were taken, were far enough to make a firm conclusion. However the experiment could have improved. In the experiment the size and mass of the leaves were approximately the same but more accurate measurements could have been such as weighing the leaves at the start on an electro balance (before the petroleum jelly was added) to make sure the leaves had the same mass. Also the perimeter of the leave could have been measured to make sure the surface area was the same. To make the test more accurate it couldve been done twice. Also when petroleum jelly was added there may have been gaps in between (so water vapour could have diffused), this should have been checked. To take the experiment further it could have been repeated with different specie of leaf to see if the results were the same.

How Does The Sociology Explain Society Sociology Essay

How Does The Sociology Explain Society Sociology Essay This essay will examine two theoretical sociological perspectives on society and how it functions. It will compare and contrast Marxism and functionalism. By describing and evaluating the strengths and weaknesses of both perspectives. Marx called the system in which we live in, capitalism, He divided it up into two basic divisions, the bourgeoisie (the owners of production), the bourgeoisie own all the means of production for example the farmland and factories and the proletariat (The Workers) sell their skills and labour to the bourgeoisie. This is a simple view of a complex social phenomenon; theoretically more social classes should be identified. It fails to take into account any sub divisions. The bourgeoisie or ruling class benefit the most from the way that society operates and the proletariat do not and therefore gain far less than they deserve. Marx believed that the proletariats would, in the end, refuse to conform and revolt, destroying the bourgeoisie in order to become free for oppression and gain social mobility. What the Bourgeoisie, therefore produces, above all, is its own grave diggers, (Marx, Engels, 1884). Marx thought that the bourgeoisie did not improve society but created situations of crisis, what he did not take into account was the money that they were putting back into society and that fact that without them the majority of the proletariat would be without work. The superstructure for example: The Government, legal system, religion and the mass media are all owned by and used by the bourgeoisie to create false class consciousness amongst the proletariat in order to avert them from rebelling from their exploitation (Haralambos,2002,p.2). According to Marx capitalism is the newest type of class system, but it will also be the last. A communist society in which the means of production will be equally owned will replace capitalism, he thought that the proletariat will form unions, political parties and revolutionary movements enabling communism to overthrow capitalism (haralambous, 2002, p.7). What Marx failed to do is set a time frame for the revolution. Some unions that have previously revolted against the bourgeoisie have failed and temporarily sent society into disarray. The power in economic systems is separable from other sources, male and female inequalities can not be explained in economic terms (Giddens, 2009, p.93). The theory is inadequate because it only fully explains a proportion of society and does not take into account individuals ideals and ambitions. A positive aspect of Marxism is that it highlights inequality and institutions that foster and perpetuate inequality it has brought a different perspective to examination of social systems and it has demonstrated a social conscience. The focus of Marxism has lead to the formulation of social policies and programs. Functionalism is a sociological perspective that society is based on consensus, consensus assumes that norms and values in society are generally agreed and that social life is based on co-operation, rather than conflict (Lawson, 1996, p.48). What it fails to consider is that some people to not agree with the way that society functions and that not everyone holds that same norms and values. It is the oldest yet still is the most dominant theoretical perspective in sociology. Functionalists such as Talcott Parsons (1902-1979), argued that the key to understanding human behaviour is understanding socialization. He used the analogy of the human body, with each part of society having a function (a purpose) like each vital organ for example; the government of society was compared to the human brain. If one part of society fails the whole system would fail, like the body would if it was to lose a vital organ. Parsons (1971) even viewed the whole world as a system of societies. Functionalists believe that people and their social roles are produced by society and individuals themselves do not produce a society. He claimed that individuals are products of their influences e.g. families, friends, educational and religious background and the media that they are exposed to. They are born into their place in society, play their roles in it and then they die, without at all effecting how society functions, society does not and it continues to work long after they are gone(Moore,2001,p.6). For functionalists social institutes are believed to ensure that the socially acceptable patterns of behaviour are passed on or reproduced. For example family, education and the media socialise people into the key values of society this includes, respect for authority and the hierarchy (Moore, 2001, p.9). Stratification which is inevitable in societies unites people because it derives from shared values. Durkhiem (1938) identified four main characteristics of crime he argued that crime is a social construct, which can actually benefit society because crime strengthens bonds between people. It reinforces norms and values, and a limited amount of crime is necessary to stop society stagnating. Crime could be reduced if individuals were controlled, but this would prevent development of positive deviants who go against societies norms and values, yet move society forward, (Durkhiem, 1938). Parsons (1965) identified religion as an important function in society as it helps people is crises, enabling them to carry on playing their social roles, allowing society to function normally. Parsons also identified that in order for society to function everyone had to continuously play their own roles, he identified the sick role, where the function is to play the role of being ill and to get better as soon as possible in order to get back into your role. In order for the system to perform, all roles must be filled by those best qualified to perform them, he even thought that those who are unemployed had a role to play in order for those in higher authority to keep their roles. He stated that those in who successfully played their roles will be ranked highly and will receive rewards, although it can be argued that the mechanism (social stratification) for insuring effective role allocation; attaches unequal rewards and privileges to positions in society. However a criticism of Functionalism is that it is, descriptive and classificatory and only gives names for society and social changes, and does not explain them. Although both Marxism and Functionalism see society differently, they also have some similarities: they are both positivists, built using scientific research methods. Positivism is called macro sociology because it looks at society as a whole; however looking at society from this perspective does not take into account the individuals and their norms and values. They both have a top down approach, the belief that viewing society as a real thing which exists above and beyond us all as individuals is the best way to view society. Both theories agree on the importance of totality (marsh, 2006) The favoured research methods to look at behavioural patterns is those that generate sets of statistics such as questionnaires- known as quantitative methods this is not always that best approach to research society, because not everyone is studied. They both believe that man is forced into his choices by the structures and systems in society, although they both have different views on this, functionalists believe that this is right and it has to be for society to work, and people accept society as it is. Marxist on the other hand believe that it is wrong and unfair, and that man will fight in order to create a fairer society In contrast to Marxism which recognises social change and aspires towards it functionalism fails to recognise it altogether, and assumes every institution is a positive for society. Looking at the evidence of both Marxism and functionalism, the society, today inclines more towards functionalism. Most people are happy with the system they live in. If too many people were to try and change it society would not work as well; an example of this is the post office strikes; people did not receive bills, money or other important mail, this forces society to have no sympathy for the postal workers. This is also an example of Marxist theory not working as he said it would; although it did not last too long and some people did benefit. This gives us reason to question if we only accept society as it is because as a society we are lazy, if we were to unite as a society, could we overthrow the bourgeoisie as Marx suggested we would? Lower class citizens are keeping the higher classes in work, this keeps money within the system in turn they receive state benefits from the taxes that they pay. If all the lower classes were to try and move up the social ladder they may be no reason for some of the bourgeoisie, for example if all criminals and deviants, reformed and started working there would be no need for, law enforcement services, county courts and probation officers. Some amount of crime is necessary to keep higher classes such as the uniformed services in work.

Fake Love In The Truman Show :: essays research papers

Truman Paper The term fake love in itself does not make that much sense. How can someone express love, which is feeling that provides unconditional caring and commitment, and then call it fake. The only real way to have fake love for someone is to not love at all, but just to think you love. In the movie The Truman Show there are many individuals whom exhibit an illusion of love for the main character, Truman. At the beginning of the movie many of the characters appear to have genuine love for Truman. However, as the movie progresses almost all of the people whom are close to Truman, show in one way or another how they only think they love him. The best examples of these types of characters are his wife, his best friend, and his creator. His own wife, someone whom should be completely faithful and truthful with him lies to him on a daily basis. Her fake love is most clear when she crosses that line between actress and a real person. When she is acting she is trying her best to portray a woman who m truly loves him, but after seeing her act for so long even Truman can see her real personality underneath. He spots a person whom in real life cannot even stand him, but she puts a vale on to cover that. She probably really would like to love him but she cannot change the person she is any more than Truman can. Truman’s best friend has the same fake love traits as his wife. Even though they were friends from children they always had a secret between them. He had the illusion of loving Truman probably just because he had known him so long. Though, once you’ve lied to a person over and over the love is gone. He lied so many times that by the end of the film it could be seen that even at Truman’s worst moment he could lie to him to keep his job and the show going on. Truman’s wife and friend were not the only people in his life that had an illusion of love for him. Every one that he came in contact with in his own little city had a sort of fake love for hi m. He was the reason that they were employed and the reason that the show went on.

to thine own self be true: The Conflict between Son and Self in Hamlet :: Shakespeare, Hamlet

"to thine own self be true": The Conflict between Son and Self in Hamlet      Ã‚  Ã‚   A name is a very important aspect of a person. It helps to define who that person is and what is important to that person. In William Shakespeare's Hamlet, the use of the same names for fathers and sons creates a dilemma that is not easily overcome. Laertes does not have the same name as his father, but he is controlled by his father all the same. Not only does this rule apply to characters in the play, but also to the play itself. Shakespeare's Hamlet was preceded by Thomas Kyd's play Ur-Hamlet and Shakespeare had to work hard to differentiate his play from the original. Hamlet, the Prince of Denmark, shares his name with his father, Hamlet, the former King of Denmark. This sharing of names blurs the identity of the Prince with the King. Since the King precedes the Prince, he is able to develop his own distinct identity. He is "a goodly king" (1.2.186), a noble, brave, and self-assured man. Thus it falls on Hamlet, the Prince of Denmark, to define himself beyond the confines of his father's name. Abraham Fraunce suggests the definition of someone consists of two parts, "the generall and the difference†¦ A man is a sensible creature endued with reason, where sensible creature is the generall, and endued with reason is the difference" (Qtd. in Calderwood 10). Hamlet is genetically related to his father as are all sons to their fathers. However, Hamlet is even more closely related due to their common name. Hamlet also inherits the act of filial obligation when the ghost returns and demands revenge for his murder. When he swears to avenge his father 's death, he is promising to "relinquish his personal identity and to unite with his father not merely in name but in actional fact" (Calderwood 10). Hamlet "adopts his father's cause- to make his father's enemy his own enemy, to assume his father's motives, goals, and pains- is to adopt his father's identity" (Calderwood 10). Prior to the ghost's appearance Hamlet is beginning to define himself as an individual person instead of as the son of his father. He has been away at school forging his own path in life. When his father's ghost demands him to exact revenge on Claudius, Hamlet struggles trying to decide if he will take the role of "son" and blend with his father or to become the "self" and breakaway from his father.

kids in the butt :: essays research papers

Substance Use and Abuse Among Children and Teenagers During the past several years, there has been a renewed national concern about drug abuse, culminating in the current "war on drugs." In this review, we emphasize that even though child or teenage drug use is an individual behavior, it is embedded in a sociocultural context that strongly determines its character and manifestations. Our focus is on psychoactive substances both licit (cigarettes and alcohol) and illicit (e.g., cannabis and cocaine). We feel that it is critical to draw a distinction between use and abuse of drugs and to do so from a multidimensional perspective that includes aspects of the stimulus (drug), organism (individual), response, and consequences. Our selective review of substance use and abuse among children and adolescents covers epidemiology (patterns and extent of drug use), etiology (what generates substance use), prevention (how to limit drug use), treatment (interventions with drug users), and consequences (effects and outcomes of youthful drug use). In this abbreviated review, we selectively examine the recent literature and current status of substance use and abuse among children and adolescents. Our focus is on psychoactive substances both licit and illicit, including cigarettes, alcohol, cannabis, cocaine, and other drugs. We examine the use and abuse of substances by children and teenagers from five perspectives: epidemiology, etiology, prevention, treatment, and consequences (see Rogers, 1987 , for additional overviews and references). The United States is a drug culture. Drugs are used commonly and acceptably to wake up in the morning (coffee or tea), get through the stresses of the day (cigarettes), and relax in the evening (alcohol). The Marlboro Man and the Virginia Slims woman are widely seen models, and licit drugs are pushed to remedy all of the ills one may face–stress, headaches, depression, physical illness, and so on. Children face a monumental task of sorting out the many images and messages regarding both licit and illicit drugs. Adolescents are quite adept at spotting hypocrisy and may have difficulty understanding a policy of "saying no to drugs" when suggested by a society that clearly says "yes" to the smorgasbord of drugs that are legal as well as the range of illicit drugs that are widely available and used. A few words are in order on the distinction between use and abuse of drugs. This differentiation is critical to such diverse topics as societal justification for limiting access to drugs (whether By legal or other means) or for considering psychological intervention.

Jhkjjk

Current Issues: Gangs 2011, n. p. Copyright @ 2011 ReferencePoint Press, Website: www. referencepointpress. com. P. O. Box 27779, San Diego, CA 92198. Phone: 858-618-1314. Fax: 858-618-1730. All rights reserved. Current Issues: Gangs By Peggy J. Parks Contents Gangs at a Glance Overview How Serious a Problem Are Gangs? Primary Source Quotes Facts and Illustrations Why Do Young People Join Gangs? Primary Source Quotes Facts and Illustrations Can People Leave the Gang Life Behind? Primary Source Quotes Facts and Illustrations Can Gang Violence Be Stopped? Primary Source QuotesFacts and Illustrations Key People and Advocacy Groups Chronology Related Organizations For Further Research Source Notes About the Author Gangs at a Glance Gangs and Gang Members The U. S. Department of Justice estimates that more than 20,000 gangs with a total of about 1 million members are criminally active in the United States. Gang Migration Gangs are no longer confined to large cities. The FBI states that ga ng activity is rapidly spreading to outlying suburban and rural communities throughout the United States. Types of Gangs Four main types of gangs identified by the U.S. Department of Justice are street gangs, outlaw motorcycle gangs, prison gangs, and military gangs. Gangs and Crime Law enforcement officials say that gangs commit a wide range of crimes, including distribution of drugs, weapons trafficking, drive-by shootings, armed robbery, assault, identity theft, and homicide. In many communities gangs are responsible for as much as 80 percent of crime. Cities with Gang Problems The U. S. Department of Justice has identified Los Angeles, Chicago, and New York as the top three cities for the most gangs and gang-related crime.Reasons for Joining Gangs Young people join gangs for many reasons including the desire to belong to a family-like group, protection from rival gangs, the ability to make money (usually from stealing or selling drugs), prestige, and ready access to drugs. Quitt ing Gangs Whether people are able to leave gangs depends on the particular gang and its rules. Jumping out (being beaten by gang members) is a common way of letting someone out. Some gangs expect their members to remain committed for life and threaten them with death if they try to quit.Fighting Gang Violence In cities throughout the United States, the FBI and state and local law enforcement officials are focusing on the most violent street gangs in an effort to capture their leaders and get them off the streets. Overview â€Å"Gangs are morphing, multiplying, and migrating—entrenching themselves not just in our inner cities but increasingly in our ever-sprawling suburbs and wide-open rural spaces. † —Federal Bureau of Investigation, a law enforcement agency of the U. S. Department of Justice. Gangs and gang-involved kids exist at some level in every community. Certain groups have decided to use violence and retribution, and their acts are affecting all of us. à ¢â‚¬  —Steven D. Strachan, the chief of police of Kent, Washington, a suburb of Seattle. At 16 years old, Melody Ross was thoroughly enjoying life. She had just begun her junior year at Wilson High School in Long Beach, California, where she was an honors student and a pole-vaulter on the track team. She was popular and known for being friendly, kind, and someone who always had a sunny smile on her face.On the evening of October 30, 2009, Melody and her friends went to their school's home ­coming football game. After the game ended, the girls left the stadium and were sitting on the curb in front of the school. Suddenly the loud crack of gunshots filled the air. A feud had broken out between members of rival gangs, and they were shooting at each other—with bystanders caught in the crossfire. By the time the violence ended, three people lay on the ground, wounded and bleeding: two men and Melody. Ambulances rushed them to the hospital, where the men were treated for non-life-threatening injuries.Melody, however, was not so fortunate. She died of a severe bullet wound in her side. Her family and friends were devastated, and as a memorial to her, a classmate named Dylan Vassberg created a Facebook page entitled RIP Melody Ross. â€Å"Every kid our age–we don't ever think we're going to die,† he says. â€Å"We never think that. We think we're going to college and we're going to have a long life and die of old age. Not die because someone decided to shoot a gun. We never think of that. It's not something that crosses our mind ever. Not even fathomable, really. 1 How Serious a Problem Are Gangs? Although the precise number of gangs and gang members (known as gangbangers) is not known, the U. S. Department of Justice makes estimates based on information it receives from state and local law enforcement officials. In January 2009 the Justice Department's National Gang Intelligence Center released a report entitled National Gang Threat As sessment 2009. The report states that more than 20,000 violent gangs with a total of approximately 1 million members were criminally active in the United States as of September 2008.The report's authors state that â€Å"gangs pose a serious threat to public safety. † They warn that throughout the country, gang activity is rapidly spreading from large cities to outlying suburban and rural areas. This, they predict, will cause gang-related violent crime to remain at high levels and likely increase. They write: â€Å"As these gangs encounter resistance from local gangs or other drug distributors in these communities, an increase in violent incidents such as assaults, drive-by shootings, and homicides can be expected. â€Å"2 The Evolution of GangsNo one knows exactly when gangs first formed, but they are often assumed to have been around for centuries. According to Lou Savelli, who is a retired New York City police sergeant and cofounder of the East Coast Gang Investigators As sociation, the word thug dates back to India during the 1200s. It is derived from â€Å"Thugz,† an Indian word that referred to a gang of criminals who traveled throughout the country terrorizing towns. Savelli adds that like gangs today, the Thugz had their own symbols, hand signs, slang language, and rituals.Gang activity is thought to have begun in the United States early in the country's history. Journalist Ed Grabianowski explains: â€Å"Criminal gangs have certainly been around as long as crime itself—it doesn't take a criminal mastermind to realize there is strength in numbers. The urbanization that accompanied the Industrial Revolution gave rise to the modern street gang. â€Å"3 Throughout the 1800s, as more people immigrated to America from other countries, gangs such as the Monk Eastman Gang and Five Points Gang formed and terrorized the streets of New York.But it was the 1920s that ushered in the heyday of gang activity in the United States because of a n otorious gangster named Al Capone, also called Scarface. This was a time known as Prohibition, when the Eighteenth Amendment to the Constitution made the sale or distribution of alcohol illegal. Supporters hoped the legislation would transform American society for the better, but its effects were quite different from what they expected. Once alcohol was no longer legally available, criminal gangs began to distribute it on the black market.These gangs developed rapidly and continued to grow in power, which caused a steep rise in violent crime. Capone and his gang of criminals were responsible for a wave of violence in the Chicago area during the 1920s and 1930s. Savelli says this led to his becoming known as most violent gangster in Chicago and perhaps in all of the United States. Capone's reputation spread far and wide, and his actions strongly influenced the activities of would-be gangsters throughout the country. By the time Prohibition ended in 1933, gangs had become entrenched t hroughout the country and were widely known for their connections with violent crime.During the 1950s gang-related crime was rampant in a number of U. S. cities, including Los Angeles, Chicago, and New York, and it was steadily growing. Over the following decades gangs became better organized and continued to expand their activities from cities into neighboring communities, as the Justice Department explains: â€Å"The gang members who migrated from urban areas often formed new, neighborhood-based local gangs. These local gangs generally controlled their territories through violence and intimidation. 4 Gang membership—and associated violent crime—continued to grow throughout the rest of the twentieth century and into the twenty-first. Street Gangs and Motorcycle Outlaws Gangs often differ significantly from one another based on membership requirements, structure, and the ages and ethnicity of the members. Two main types that have been identified by law enforcement off icials are street gangs and outlaw motorcycle gangs. The Justice Department says that street gangs pose a considerable threat to communities because they are the largest group and also control the greatest geographical area. Therefore,† Justice Department authorities explain, criminal activities such as violence and drug trafficking perpetrated by street gangs pose the greatest threat. The threat becomes magnified as national- and regional-level street gangs migrate from urban areas to suburban and rural communities, expanding their influence in most regions and broadening their presence outside the United States to develop associations with . . . criminal organizations in Mexico, Central America, and Canada. 5Most street gangs are local-level gangs that operate in single locations while regional-level street gangs are more organized and larger. Some of the largest and most violent street gangs are Hispanic gangs such as MS ­13, 18th Street, Surenos, and Almighty Latin King and Queen Nation (Latin Kings) and the predominately African American gangs Bloods, Crips, and Black P. Stone Nation. Asian gangs such as the Asian Boyz are also developing a reputation as a result of their links to drug trafficking and violent crimes. Though less common than gangs of other racial and ethnic groups, white gangs also pose a threat.The white supremacist street gang Nazi Low-riders has a growing presence in Southern California, Arizona, Colorado, Florida, and Illinois, and members have been connected with a number of racially motivated violent crimes. Outlaw motorcycle gangs also pose a significant threat because they engage in numerous criminal activities, such as trafficking in weapons and drugs, and often commit violent crimes. State and local law enforcement agencies have identified as many as 520 outlaw motorcycle gangs with an estimated total of 20,000 members of various races and ethnicities.The motorcycle gangs that the FBI considers the greatest threat because of criminal activities are the Sons of Silence, Bandidos, Mongols, Hells Angels, and Outlaws. Gangs Behind Bars Just because people are incarcerated, and even sentenced to life in prison, does not necessarily prevent them from engaging in gang activities. According to the Justice Department, prison gangs are highly structured criminal networks that are active within prisons throughout the United States. It adds that as of September 2008, more than 147,000 documented gang members were incarcerated in federal, state, and local correctional facilities.One state where this is a particularly serious problem is Washington. According to a study released in 2009, gang-affiliated inmates are responsible for 43 percent of all violent crimes that are committed in the state's prisons. The report also states that the Crips are the most represented prison gang, with 2,385 inmate members. Also well known for violence behind bars is the white supremacist gang Aryan Brotherhood and the Latino gangs Barrio Azteca and Mexican Mafia. One gang that has been especially violent in Texas prisons is the Texas Syndicate.In February 2007 federal authorities issued indictments for gang members who were suspected of being responsible for as many as 16 murders outside the state's prisons, including a triple slaying in 2003. The indictment states: â€Å"It is understood that members and prospects of the TS may receive a telephone call and instructions to commit a murder . . . at any time. Regardless of the member's friendship or association with the victim, the orders are to be carried out. â€Å"6 Not only are gangs extremely active in prisons, gang members who have been imprisoned are often the gangs' top leaders.According to Sergeant Jeremy Young, who is a supervisor with the Modesto, California, police street crimes unit, the bottom level of a gang's chain of command is made up of gangbangers who are the â€Å"soldiers† on the street; the mid-level is composed of the leaders o f street crews who run the operation; and the top level are the bosses who are often inside prisons. â€Å"The (gang leaders in the) prisons run the street,† he says. â€Å"A lot of things that start in there end up out here. â€Å"7 Criminal Activities Gangs are involved in a wide range of crimes.These include drug distribution, assault, armed robbery, drive-by shootings, auto theft, identity theft, extortion, weapons trafficking, and homicide. In fact, the National Gang Threat Assessment report says that according to law enforcement officials throughout the United States, criminal gangs commit as much as 80 percent of the crime in many communities. Yet the connection between gangs and crime is a controversial is ­sue. According to the Justice Policy Institute, a Washington, D. C. –based think tank that supports alternatives to incarceration, gang members are not responsible for the biggest share of crime in most jurisdictions.In a July 2007 report, the group stat es that many crimes committed by gang members are unrelated to gang activity, and reliable data on the extent of gang crime do not exist. The report's authors write: â€Å"The available evidence indicates that gang members play a relatively small role in the national crime problem. . . . National estimates and local research findings suggest that gang members may be responsible for fewer than one in 10 homicides; fewer than one in 16 violent offenses; and fewer than one in 20 serious . . . crimes. â€Å"8 Gang-Infested CitiesAlthough gangs have a presence in communities all over the United States, the National Gang Center says that the three cities with the most gangs and worst gang-related crime are Los Angeles, Chicago, and New York. According to John S. Pistole, who is the deputy director of the FBI, Los Angeles is â€Å"ground zero for modern gang activity,† with over 400 gangs and an estimated 40,000 gang members. â€Å"Many gangs were born here, a generation ago,â₠¬  he says. â€Å"But they are no longer limited to Los Angeles. Like a cancer, gangs are spreading to communities across America. â€Å"9Two other California cities where gang-related crime is increasing are San Diego, where gang-related homicides rose 56 percent between 2006 and 2007, and Salinas, where gang-related homicides increased 125 percent during that same period of time. Gangs are also a serious problem in Hartford, Connecticut, and Camden, New Jersey. And Pistole adds that gangs are becoming more active in many other cities including Baltimore, Houston, Washington, D. C. , Denver, Atlanta, Indianapolis, New Orleans, and Omaha, Nebraska. High-Tech Gangbanging The Internet has opened up a whole new way for gangbangers to recruit new members.As a February 2007 ABC News report states: â€Å"By posting online content that glorifies the thug lifestyle, gangs are using the Web to recruit—some using children as young as 8 years old as part of the on ­line recruiting process, known as ‘Net Banging. ‘†10 Sometimes rival gang members spar with each other online, proudly displaying their gang colors, tattoos, and gang hand signs in photos. They also use the Internet to schedule fights with each other as well as brag about crimes that they have committed. By monitoring these sites, federal and state law enforcement officials can track gang activity.Cell phones also play a crucial role in gang operations. Gangbangers communicate with each other by sending text messages, and it is not uncommon for them to use multiple phones that they discard after they have completed criminal operations such as drug trafficking. The Justice Department offers an example: â€Å"The leader of an African American street gang operating on the north side of Milwaukee used more than 20 cell phones to coordinate drug-related activities of the gang: most were prepaid phones that the leader routinely discarded and replaced. 11 Why Do Young People Join Gangs ? Law enforcement professionals say that the issue of why kids join gangs is complex. According to the Justice Policy Institute, no single risk factor or set of factors can accurately predict which young people will become gang members. One of the most common reasons kids join gangs is that they are from broken homes and desperately want to be part of a family-like group, and they perceive gangs as being able to provide that. Brandon Robinson grew up in a housing project in Kansas City, Missouri.As a participant in a 2007 survey about gangs, he told interviewers that many of those who join share the commonality of being from poverty-stricken, dysfunctional backgrounds. â€Å"You got family members on crack and you ain't eating right,† he says. â€Å"Everybody's hungry. â€Å"12 According to Robinson, gang members look out for each other, help feed each other, and stick up for each other, much like a family would. â€Å"That's when you start loving your street,†13 he says.Other reasons for joining gangs include the lure of having money to spend (from stealing or selling drugs), easy access to drugs, and protection from the dangers of the street and rival gangs. Yet many criminal justice experts say that being part of a gang does not keep kids safer at all. In fact, studies have shown that young people who are involved with gangs have a markedly higher likelihood of being injured or killed than those who are not gang-affiliated. Girl Gangs Traditionally, gangs have been dominated by males and that is still true today.But the Justice Department states that female involvement in gangs is on the upswing. A May 2008 study by the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention found that in high-crime neighborhoods nearly 30 percent of girls surveyed claimed that they were members of gangs. The report ranked â€Å"young females as the fastest growing offenders in the national juvenile justice population. â€Å"14 One city that has experienced growing problems with girl gangs is Flint, Michigan. Gina Nyovane, a 22-year-old graduate of Flint Northwestern High School, has observed girl gangs in her former school and throughout the city.She says that these gangs are becoming more widespread and more violent, as she explains: â€Å"I hear it all the time. Girls are quick to pull a gun out, faster than a guy. â€Å"15 Over Labor Day weekend in 2009, members of a girl gang called the Goonies followed a car that was carrying members of a rival gang, the Dufflebacks. A young man traveling with the Goonies fired six shots at the other car, killing an 18-year-old male passenger and wounding the female driver. Can People Leave the Gang Life Behind? The common view is that people who join gangs are never allowed to leave them.The Justice Policy Institute says its research has found that gang membership is not a â€Å"one-way street† and that the typical gang member is active for a year or less. The group explains: â€Å"Thi s myth is perpetuated not only by the media but also by gang members who exaggerate the stakes of membership in order to underscore the importance and permanence of their collective bond. â€Å"16 Yet many people say that joining a gang is a lifetime commitment, and the only way someone can leave is by dying or going to prison. Former gang member Hashim Garrett was 15 years old when he was shot six times in the back and legs.Today he struggles to walk and must use forearm crutches because his right leg is paralyzed. In a speech to students at a middle school in 2008, Garrett addressed the realities of gang life: â€Å"They say they're like your family, but your loved ones don't ask much of you. Come home on time, clean up your room, be polite, eat your vegetables. The gang's going to ask more than that. Hold this gun. Hold these drugs. Prove you're wild. Maybe kill somebody. † He adds that most gang members want to quit the gang but are too afraid to do so. If you join the f ootball team and you don't like the coach, you can quit. You can't quit a gang that easy. â€Å"17 Can Gang Violence Be Stopped? Controlling gang proliferation and gang-related crime is one of the most significant challenges facing law enforcement officials every day of the year. Federal agencies such as the FBI and the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives have partnered with state and local police departments throughout the United States in an effort to bring down gangs and put an end to their crime sprees.In many cities, the focus is on eliminating the leadership of gang enterprises. According to Pistole, the goal is to do more than just disrupt their activities—it is to â€Å"dismantle them entirely. † He explains: Taking apart a gang is like demolishing a building. Hacking away at individual walls and beams might damage the building, but it doesn't destroy it. But using federal drug and racketeering statutes is akin to dynamiting the foundation. On ce the gang's leadership infrastructure implodes, all members are weakened. It becomes difficult for the group to operate.Eventually, it crumbles. And so our strategy is to prosecute as many gang leaders, members, and associates as possible so there are no pieces left which are large enough to allow the gang to rebuild. 18 How Serious a Problem Are Gangs? â€Å"Following a marked decline from the mid-1990s to the early 2000s, a steady resurgence of gang problems has occurred in recent years. † —James C. Howell, Arlen Egley Jr. , and Christina O'Donnell, research associates with the National Gang Center. â€Å"Wherever MS-13 goes, violence follows.Gang members have carried out beheadings and grenade attacks in Central America and have hacked people with machetes in cities along the East Coast in the United States. † —Jessica M. Vaughan and John D. Feere, policy analysts with the Center for Immigration Studies. For people in many areas of the world, includi ng the United States, gang violence is a harsh reality of life. According to the U. S. Department of Justice, the problem in America is growing worse. The Justice Department estimates that the number of gang members totaled about 1 million as of September 2008, which was an increase from 800,000 in 2005.One reason gangs continue to grow larger and more powerful is that they are fostering relationships with criminal organizations in Mexico, Central America, and Canada. This has led to a proliferation of drugs and weapons being smuggled across the U. S. border as well as an influx of illegal aliens who join gangs. To emphasize the seriousness of America's gang violence, FBI director John Pistole tells the story of a young woman who was working at a Los Angeles outdoor market in September 2007. Her newborn son, Luis, was beside her is his stroller.Members of the 18th Street gang approached one of the market's vendors, telling him that he could not sell his goods in their territory unle ss he paid them rent. He had steadfastly refused to meet their demands in the past, and when he continued to do so at the market, gang members drew their guns and opened fire on him. The man survived, but Luis did not. A stray bullet struck the baby and killed him instantly. Pistole says that this tragic incident is indicative of what is happening throughout the country: â€Å"In too many neighborhoods, too many young people are recruited into gangs.They fall into a life of crime, drugs, and violence. They shoot each other, with no regard to the innocent bystanders caught in the crossfire. Crime and violence are not confined to their cliques, but have a chilling effect on entire communities. â€Å"19 A Ruthlessly Vicious Gang Of all the gangs known to law enforcement, Mara Salvatrucha, or MS ­13, is one of the most violent. It started as a small Los Angeles street gang formed during the 1980s by immigrants from El Salvador. Now, however, it is among the largest and most dangerou s gangs in the United States and Central America.According to the Bureau of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), MS-13 has â€Å"mushroomed into the size of a small army† and â€Å"strives to be the most violent and feared gang in the world. â€Å"20 ICE states that MS-13 members have been convicted of murder, assault, extortion, kidnapping, theft, drug dealing, rape, robbery, and other violent crimes. One city that is plagued by the violence of MS-13 is Houston, Texas. Although larger gangs are active in the city, the FBI considers MS-13 to be â€Å"of particular concern because members are often heavily armed and well trained in the use of weapons and assault tactics. 21 In January 2009 MS-13 gang members robbed a Houston beauty salon at gunpoint and sexually assaulted an employee. They warned her not to go to the police, saying that if she did she would regret it. They also threatened the salon owner, telling her that they would kill her if she reported the incide nt, and they demanded that she pay them a weekly protection fee of $100. The salon owner was terrified—but she was also angry. She had seen the same kinds of crimes committed in her native El Salvador, and she was determined to fight to keep them from happening in her adopted country.Even though she feared for her life and the lives of her family members, she went to the FBI and told agents what happened. During that visit she turned over a security surveillance tape that showed the gang members' faces. About a week later the woman had not paid the protection money. In retaliation, two MS-13 gangbangers drove by the salon and sprayed the front door with bullets—but they did not get away with the violent act. Because of the tapes and the salon owner's cooperation, the FBI agents arrested seven members of the gang. As one agent explains: â€Å"This case is proof that victims of crime should not suffer in silence. He adds that the salon owner, who was placed in protectiv e custody by the FBI, â€Å"was courageous to stand up to gang members, and as a result those gang members are now in jail. â€Å"22 Violent Communities Located on the shores of Lake Michigan, Chicago is often called one of America's most beautiful cities. With its tree-lined neighborhoods of stately brownstone homes, the â€Å"Magnificent Mile† shopping district, prolific theaters and restaurants, and world-renowned museums, the city attracts tourists from many different countries—yet it also has a dark and dangerous side.Law enforcement officials estimate that 50 to 60 gangs are active in Chicago and that together, they have as many as 30,000 members. Armed gangbangers roam the streets of the South Side of Chicago, committing crimes and terrorizing the people who live there. A chilling testament to this gang violence is evident in one of the city's lesser-known monuments: an arrangement of more than 150 landscaping stones, each bearing the name of a school-age chil d killed by gang violence since 2007. Police superintendent Jody Weis states that Chicago youth have become increasingly more violent over the years.He explains: â€Å"There's simply too many gangs, too many guns and too many drugs on the streets. We've got a problem with some of our young people . . . resorting to use of weapons and violence to solve any type of conflicts they may have. â€Å"23 Chicago has had a problem with gang violence for many years, but public outrage was sparked in 2007 when a 16-year-old honors student named Blair Holt was killed. Holt, who was not involved with a gang, was riding in a city bus with a friend when members of rival gangs started shooting at each other. He attempted to shield his friend by pushing her down into a seat.His heroic act saved her life, but he was fatally shot in the stomach. Afterward, his father, a Chicago police officer, expressed his despair and frustration over gangs who do not think twice about killing people: â€Å"You wo nder where it comes from. What causes a child to wantonly and blatantly hatch such an ill-conceived plan? To go out and do something like this? What makes them do it? Where is this coming from? What are the influences? â€Å"24 Chicago is far from alone in its ongoing struggle with gang violence. It is prevalent in communities all over the country.In South Carolina, for instance, the rate of gang violence has risen nearly 1,000 percent over the past decade, with the highest number of incidents reported in Colleton County. Although Colleton County is home to just 38,000 people, law enforcement investigators have identified about 20 active gangs with an estimated total of 400 members. According to Sheriff George Malone, â€Å"The violence in Colleton County is out of control. â€Å"25 One incident occurred in November 2009 in the small town of Walterboro. A group of people were playing cards in the front yard of their home when a car pulled up and suddenly opened fire on the group. A 20-month-old toddler and 2 adults were killed; 6 others were injured. Gangs in the Military According to the Justice Department, gang activity is on the upswing in the military. Members of every major street gang and some outlaw motorcycle gangs have been identified on both domestic and international military bases. One incident involved three soldiers stationed in Alaska who were charged with murder after killing a civilian as they shot at members of a rival gang. Another involved a soldier who was arrested in October 2007 for the gang-related shooting of five people in Oklahoma.A 2009 Yale Law Journal article describes one case in which a marine sergeant who was a gang member â€Å"shot his commanding officer and executive officer—both lieutenant colonels—and threatened to continue killing officers until his fellow gang members were released from confinement. â€Å"26 While on active duty, gang members may abuse their security privileges and access to weapons and other military equipment to further gang activities. For instance, military gang members may take advantage of their positions to engage in criminal acts such as trafficking illicit drugs or weapons.According to the same article, a gang member in the army who was stationed in Iraq smuggled home four AK ­47 assault rifles that were later used to commit multiple bank robberies. After gang members have been discharged from the military, they remain a serious threat to society. They can use their combat skills against rival gangs and also teach those skills to others. The Justice Department says that this poses a â€Å"potentially significant threat,† as it explains: â€Å"Gang members with military training pose a unique threat to law enforcement personnel because of the distinctive military skills that they possess . . especially if gang members trained in weapons, tactics, and planning pass this instruction on to other gang members. â€Å"27 The Justice Department adds th at such military training could ultimately result in more organized, sophisticated, and dangerous gangs as well as an increase of deadly assaults on law enforcement officers. Incarcerated Gangs Incarcerated gang members are every bit as threatening as those who are on the streets because gang members who are behind bars often control crimes that are committed outside of prison.One example is the Mexican Mafia (also known as the Eme), a violent prison gang with as many as 75,000 members. The incarcerated leaders rule over associates who are given the authority to order crimes in neighborhoods or cities. Tony Rafael, the author of the book The Mexican Mafia, explains: â€Å"Street gangsters very often are puppets of the big homies locked up in prison. The proof is overwhelming and plays itself out on an almost daily basis in almost every neighborhood in Southern California. â€Å"28Members of the Mexican Mafia and their associates have been connected with kidnapping, murder, drug tr afficking, and extortion, among other crimes. According to Rafael, the gang has grown into a large, powerful, and violent organization. He writes: â€Å"It has far-reaching intelligence and communications systems, as well as a standing army of thousands of street soldiers. â€Å"29 Rafael adds that the Mexican Mafia continues to expand its power over street crime: â€Å"Most neighborhoods in Southern California that have a strong Hispanic street gang presence feel the power of the Mexican Mafia.It took local and state law enforcement over twenty years from the founding of the Mexican Mafia to recognize its influence on the streets. It took another two decades for federal law enforcement to address the Eme as a significant criminal organization. â€Å"30 Aside from controlling crime on the streets, these gangs are also involved in violent acts inside prisons. This is a serious problem in Ohio, where attacks in state prisons have doubled from nearly 500 in 2005 to more than 1,000 during 2008.Corrections officials say that part of the increase in violence is due to an influx of gangs such as the Heartless Felons, who are known for attacking prisoners in bands of six or more. Some of the worst violence has broken out at Mansfield Reformatory, a prison built for 1,536 inmates that now houses 2,475–161 percent over capacity. â€Å"These are dangerous times,† says Shirley Pope, the director of the state's Correctional Institutional Inspection Committee. â€Å"Mansfield is overcrowded. It is understaffed and on top of that, it has this peculiar group of younger inmates who have been described as incredibly vicious.An Ongoing Problem Whether they are terrorizing people in neighborhoods, committing crimes while in the military, or reigning over street crime from inside prisons, gangs are a significant problem all over the United States. Law enforcement officials report that gangs now have a presence in every U. S. state and the District of Columbia, a nd gang membership appears to be growing. According to reports from local, state, and federal authorities, there is no sign that this situation will change anytime in the near future.