For a while now I’ve considered the plausibility or, perhaps, inevitability of insurgent tactics witnessed in Iraq and Afghanistan making their way west and finding a new home in the violent counter culture that is the American gangland. Thankfully we have yet to see the drive by shooting evolve into a Los Angeles road side bombing. Thankfully the ethos of the modern “gangbanger” has, at it’s center, a hefty amount of narcissism and so the suicide bomber remains a very remote possibility.
In considering the possibility of native criminals entertaining the tactics of insurgents abroad, I’d also given thought to the “what if” concept of American law enforcement agencies practicing some form of counter insurgency strategy. It turns out the extreme environment of road side bombs and suicide bombers isn’t necessary. Rampant gang related crime has driven one Californian police force to adopt the methods and assistance from some Iraq and Afghanistan war veteran counter-insurgents.
In the space of 11 days this year, seven people were murdered in Salinas. Each killing, like the record 25 homicides the previous year, spilled from the gang warfare that this summer pushed the homicide rate in the city of 140,000 to three times that of Los Angeles. Residents retreated indoors at night, and Mayor Dennis Donohue affirmed his decision to seek help from an unlikely source: the U.S. military.Since February, combat veterans of Iraq and Afghanistan have been advising Salinas police on counterinsurgency strategy, bringing lessons from the battlefield to the meanest streets in an American city.
I’m of two mindsets regarding this evolution of law enforcement. In one respect, I see it as a remarkably adaptive effort in domestic law enforcement’s effort to combat rampant gang related crime. On the other hand, I consider this another step toward the militarization of American law enforcement. This shift toward a more militant stance is and has been incremental in varying degrees; from the glaring example of no knock warrants to the more inconspicuous, psychological effects of police attire (specifically boots; sounds ridiculous but think about it for a moment.)
I don’t envision a near future America being dominated by a militocracy. We’re too socially dynamic and generally rebellious to allow that. But I do fear (and yes it’s an age old fear) a gradual allowance of Constitutional privilege to law enforcement for a return of the perception of safety.
Get the RSS
Comments to this entry
chris
December 10, 2009
9:53 pm
Thomas
December 10, 2009
10:27 pm
While I'm sure there are a number of counter insurgency tactics that can prove very effective against gang warfare, just as there are a number of law enforcement tactics that should be adopted by US forces abroad, there are a number of key differences between an insurgency and a gang conflict.
First, and I'm speaking of American urban gangs as they exist presently, gangs are rarely ideologically motivated. Race and territory matter much more than philosophy.
Second, gangs are not goal oriented. While we can bicker at length about how well an insurgency may approach their goals, they're almost never doing it just for kicks. Whether it's to expel an invader, topple a regime or destroy a rival faith insurgents almost always have some idea of why they're fighting, gangs generally do not.
Finally, while there are a number of inter-insurgencies, the hallmark of such a conflict is an polyglot force battling a uniformed and organized force. American street gangs are most interested in fighting each other than in fighting the US government or the local police.
Again, there are serious overlaps between the two, but it's more that they resemble each other in outcome rather than in practice.
tdaxp
December 10, 2009
10:33 pm
elambend
December 10, 2009
10:45 pm
The only thing worse, for me, is the use of long sleave t-shirts with the word 'Police' emblazoned on it, often the back. Extra demerits for those officers who don't tuck them in.
Chief Wiggum
December 10, 2009
11:30 pm
That seems like a stretch. Would wearing cowboy boots make someone more inclined to lasso cattle?
There are bona fide tactical reasons for wearing boots and tucking in one's pants for combat soldiers, and perhaps some police as well. Boots and tucked in pants are less likely to gets snagged on things, and it keeps debris out of the boots. Lots of people wear military-style pants. The civilian versions are called cargo pants. So far, I haven't felt like lighting anyone up while wearing my cargo pants.
Eric C
December 11, 2009
5:01 am
Alex
December 11, 2009
3:13 pm
I think it's a great idea. The police force needs to have the trust of the people they're serving.
Alex
December 11, 2009
3:16 pm
Eddie
December 11, 2009
4:40 pm
How do you solve this? One huge aspect of the problem is the money/funding gap cities have when faced with this matter. There is little private sector money and definitely little federal/state money to create jobs programs, bring investment into battered neighborhoods, and hire enough officers (or FBI agents to bring federal force to bear on some of the more extreme and violent gangs) to keep the peace.
My problem with this COIN strategy is that there is not nearly enough money behind it. COIN worked in Iraq largely because we could afford to bribe tribes and individuals with money and jobs to stay out of trouble and punish violent offenders. You can't do that in America at this point.
What could help (and what would be the best outcome of multiple states going bankrupt or having to severely cut funding across the board) would be for non-violent crimes to cease entailing incarceration and for drug offenses in particular to be radically changed from the current system of locking up pot and crack smokers for 10-20 years a pop. With much smaller prisons and prison budgets, some of the money could be re-routed to cities to make up for 40 years of failed social policy that has utterly devastated certain poor communities by robbing them of young men, jobs and good schools. Use that money to back up COIN experiments like the one mentioned in the article and you might actually get somewhere in the long run.
SJPONeill
December 11, 2009
7:07 pm
I say more power to those in Salinas who got out of the square and tried something new. The essence of COIN is to identify and address the core issues behind an insurgency and many of the principles are the same in law enforcement which also requires a multi-level multi-agency approach for success.
If nothing else comes from the Monterey study that the insight into police officer recruiting, it will have been a valuable activity upon which others can build...instead of just sounding off...
Lexington Green
December 11, 2009
10:26 pm
If we had the same trauma care today as in 1960 we'd have five times the murder rate. People are TRYING to kill each other at astronomical and unprecedented rates.
Plus, we are a diverse country now, and we do not demand assimilation. So ethnic enclaves carry on with the cultural norms of foreign cultures, yet with the constitutional safeguards meant for a homogeneous and high-trust culture that is withering away. Diversity = low trust, violent and atomized localities which don't function as communities. All the happy-talk is a bunch of lies.
The resulting threats are approaching military-scale, unlike in the past.
America is an intolerant, middle class country that highly values civil peace and safe streets, and will tolerate whatever means are necessary to get them.
As Dan notes, the Warren Court era was unusual. Before that, limitations on law enforcement were only constitutional for the Federal government. State and local law enforcement were much closer to democratic control and majority preferences.
Nonetheless, COIN is more like the civilian-police-ization of the military. COIN methods can and should be used to attack organized gangs. So-called third generation gangs are a major menace.
Oliver
December 11, 2009
10:47 pm
Isn't running an economic activity a goal? You are pumping too much money into illegal channels by banning too much lucrative business. Legalize narcotics and prostitution and much of the problem vanishes.
So what if… « The World According to Me…
December 12, 2009
4:05 am
Lexington Green
December 12, 2009
8:17 pm
http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2009/12/11/this_week_at_war_mexicos_narco_armies?page=0,0
No surprise the cops are escalating in response, and that the public is tolerating that response.
I tend to be a drug libertarian, and I think the War on Drugs should be wrapped up and shut down, though the details of how that would be done would be critically important. (As a matter of political reality, I don't think it will ever be stopped.) However, it is not clear that legalizing drugs now, after these monsters have been created, will make them go away. In fact, it is pretty unlikely. The Mobs that grew out of Prohibition did not go away, they just got into different businesses.
There are only bad options, which is typical of serious, real-world problems.
Munro Ferguson
December 12, 2009
11:04 pm
You and I have similar views on drug laws. Seems to me that Mafia syndicates had extensive avenues of criminal profit making before prohibition. Once the alcohol ban was lifted they "fell back" on their previous exploits. American gangs seem to be a bit less sophisticated on the black marketeering front, not nearly as embedded in politics, unions, etc. What avenue do you suppose they'd "fall back" on would narcotics be legalized?
Lexington Green
December 13, 2009
6:40 am
What the ingenuity of hardcore criminals might come up with is beyond my ken.
Extortion and protection rackets, kidnapping ...
" your average American gangbanger is, as often as not, packing a handgun ... "
True, so far, most of the time, though the Chicago gangs are apparently increasingly heavily armed, sometimes with machine pistols. The trend is not good. I recall one Chicago cop who is no longer "on the job" telling me about how when he started out, the worst you ever heard was "bangbangbang" but that by the time he retired he had heard "brrrp brrrrp brrrrp" a few times and was glad to get out. I have no reason to doubt him.
Oliver
December 13, 2009
3:04 pm
True, but except for trafficking people and smuggling, the victims have an incentive to cooperate with the police. Police forces have to act like occupation forces because they are imposing laws nobody among the affected people wants.