Gangs in California - how bad of a problem is it? (Los Angeles: sales, most dangerous)

[Stephen1110]

Originally Posted by ExeterMedia

Here's another article that could add insight to this under-counting of the criminal element in Oakland.

Alameda County Violent Crime Factsheet 2001-2010

According to this fact sheet, from 2000 to 2010, Oakland accounted for nearly 80% of all the murders in the entire county over that 10 year span. The aggravated assault numbers are similar for the county. So that shows us unequivocally that Oakland accounts for a disproportionate amount of violent crime in Alameda County even when you take population into account.

Again not to dog pile on the Oakland is a gang land party, but anyone who thinks there are only 800 gang members in the city is blinding themselves to reality.

1. Oakland is the central city of Alameda County and the greater East Bay Area region. Central cities usually contain most of the violent crime. You haven't said anything.

2. The FBI and criminologists does not support a premise that says violent crime = gang presence/activity. That's a very simplistic way of looking at a complex issue. Violent crime - rape, aggravated assaults, armed robberies, and murders - are not even close to being committed solely by gang members. In Oakland, the number of robberies outnumber the other three violent crime offenses combined, yet 75% of all robberies are smartphone related. Smartphone robberies reflect opportunity and anonymity, as smartphones are valuable and ubiquitous, rather than a gang epidemic.

[ExeterMedia]

Yes, Oakland is the largest city in Alameda but that's not all the fact sheet is saying. According to the census, Alameda County has a population of around 1.5 million.
Alameda County QuickFacts from the US Census Bureau

Oakland only accounts for about 26% of the population of Alameda County, yet produces nearly 80% of all violent crime in the county, as well as homicides. So I'm going to disagree with you strongly that it says "nothing", it says statistically that Oakland is responsible for a disproportionate amount of murders and violent crime in the county.



Yes, it's wrong to equate FBI crime stats to automatically mean "more gang members", I don't think anyone here is saying that is a fact. But based on the amount of violent crime, and the fact that the database that records gang members lacks Oakland PD information, it tells me that 800 figure is more than likely a great underestimate of the real number.

To be honest, I think it's a shame that the Oakland PD doesn't consider it important to more properly track gang members like other cities have done. As far as I can tell from the statistics, Oakland year after year has a huge amount of homicides for a city of its size. Maybe they should begin to look at the gang element a little more closely.

[18Montclair]

Once again, ZERO facts to back up your speculation. Just pure personal bias based on stereotypes and that happen to be false.

[ExeterMedia]

I have posted plenty of facts. Oakland has a higher violent crime rate than any city on this poll. Yet you want to claim that it has the least amount of gang members. Who is displaying "pure personal bias" now?

[18Montclair]

Originally Posted by ExeterMedia

I have posted plenty of facts. Oakland has a higher violent crime rate than any city on this poll.

The correlation between violent crimes and street gangs in Oakland is not as prevalent as elsewhere in CA, as evidenced by our high crime rate and relatively low street gang partcipation rate.

Yet you want to claim that it has the least amount of gang members. Who is displaying "pure personal bias" now?

A statewide database is apparently showing personal bias.

Even the most exaggerated estimates say its around 2,000.

2,000 out of 400,000 people, which itself is hugely exaggerated, is still a better ratio than any CA county highlighted by the National Gang Presence Map which states for example, that Ventura County with 800,000 peopla has a whopping 12,000 gang members. Essentially you are saying that they are biased as well.

LOL

No, it's clear that every source in this thread that even naysayers have brought up here, confirm that Oakland's high crime rate is only marginally due to gangs, whereas places like the OC have had to implement gang injunction zones in places like San Clemente..Haha

So yeah, you are clearly biased and refuse to accept the facts regarding crime and gang activity rates in a city you know very little about.

[ExeterMedia]

Originally Posted by 18Montclair

A statewide database is apparently showing personal bias.

No it's not. It's simply not being utilized by the people who could input the information which would make it more accurate for Oakland, namely the Oakland PD. Databases cannot show bias, they are only as good as the information that is put into them. Is this really that difficult to understand?

Even the most exaggerated estimates say its around 2,000.

How do you know that estimate is "exaggerated"? How do you know it's not underestimated?

whereas places like the OC have had to implement gang injunction zones in places like San Clemente..Haha

I don't see why that is funny or why you're bringing that up as a negative. San Clemente has had a declining crime index for the past 15 years, and it's now to a point where the city has one of the lowest crime indexes in the country. In fact it's almost 10 times smaller than Oakland's crime index. Perhaps if Oakland PD had exerted the same amount of effort in addressing their problem (instead of pretending it didn't exist), we wouldn't even be having this discussion today.

[18Montclair]

Originally Posted by ExeterMedia

No it's not. It's simply not being utilized by the people who could input the information which would make it more accurate for Oakland, namely the Oakland PD. Databases cannot show bias, they are only as good as the information that is put into them. Is this really that difficult to understand?

How do you know that estimate is "exaggerated"? How do you know it's not underestimated?

More total speculation based on personal opinion. What else is new?

don't see why that is funny or why you're bringing that up as a negative. San Clemente has had a declining crime index for the past 15 years, and it's now to a point where the city has one of the lowest crime indexes in the country. In fact it's almost 10 times smaller than Oakland's crime index. Perhaps if Oakland PD had exerted the same amount of effort in addressing their problem (instead of pretending it didn't exist), we wouldn't even be having this discussion today.

Yes, but we are discussing Oakland at length because you and others need to be educated on Oakland and sometimes getting people to learn and accept the truth is like applying medication, single doses isn't always enough.

[CA4Now]

"The rise in killings has rattled Pomona perhaps more than any other place in Southern California. The city has dealt with gang problems for years, but killings over the last two decades have steadily dropped. Pomona recorded only 11 homicides in 2011, and 17 in 2012. Officials say the 2013 total of 29 is the highest since the 1990s."
Number of killings surges in some California communities - latimes.com

[BuickGS]

Watch a Rap video....All Ca gang Bangers,

[ExeterMedia]

Originally Posted by CA4Now

"The rise in killings has rattled Pomona perhaps more than any other place in Southern California. The city has dealt with gang problems for years, but killings over the last two decades have steadily dropped. Pomona recorded only 11 homicides in 2011, and 17 in 2012. Officials say the 2013 total of 29 is the highest since the 1990s."
Number of killings surges in some California communities - latimes.com

That's quite a jump, especially with nearby Los Angeles dropping to 1960s levels in homicides.