The 2007 New Jersey Gang Survey
25 10 2007The New Jersey State Police released their 2007 Street Gang Survey today. This is the third survey (others were in 2001 and 2004 although the first survey did not result in a published report) in what looks to be a regular three year cycle. Highlights from the findings include:
- Gang presence in New Jersey is widespread, but generally ‘thin on the ground’ -Types of gang theft crimes reported tend to be ‘crimes of opportunity’ or ‘impulse crimes’ rather than crimes requiring planning, resources or organization. meaning that although many (43%) municipalities report the presence of gangs, the size of gangs in these towns is usually (84%) relatively small (fewer than 50 members, and often more like a dozen).
- Types of gang theft crimes reported tend to be ‘crimes of opportunity’ or ‘impulse
crimes’ rather than crimes requiring planning, resources or organization. - Violent crime in schools (aggravated assault, attempted homicide, homicide) is very rare.
- The Bloods street gang was named by a large majority (87%) of municipal respondents reporting the presence of gangs. No other gang was named by more than half of the municipalities with a gang presence.
A very interesting and positive aspect of the survey is that it refrains from making estimates of the total numbers of gang members in the state. There’s often big demands to make such estimates in order to justify political points of view but such numbers generally have little real practical value. Thus, the report states:
The 2007 New Jersey State Police Street Gang Survey makes no attempt to estimate the total number of street gang members in New Jersey. The quality and precision of available data does not support such efforts, and past attempts to generate statewide gang membership estimates have been incorrectly characterized and misrepresented in public discourse.
The 2004 Gang Survey (which is worth checking out as well to compare with the new report) estimated almost 17,000 gang members throughout the state but my question was (and remains), so what? Would there be a policy difference if the estimate was 15,000 or 20,000? How about 10,000 or 30,000? Basically, once you get to these sorts of numbers I think you cross a line where variations of the estimate don’t effect how you react to them. Best to just say: “There’s a whole heck of a lot of gang members out there.” and move on.
Of course there’s also the problem that there are no universally held definition for gangs or gang members. New Jersey has 567 municipalities, 21 counties and several state law enforcement agencies, each of which can independently decide what constitutes a gang, gang member and gang crime, assuming they want to define them in the first place.
More later as I digest the report and commentary…


