TORLAND EDWARDS (100 WORD RESPONSE)
M1D1-1

The definition of a gang according to the guide written by Dr. Valdez states that it’s a group of three or more, has some type of association, a common identifier, and they commit crimes (Valdez, p.26). Although the definition is broad in my opinion it does hit on a couple of key points. A group of three or more and the ability to commit a crime in that same bubble really distinguishes what society feels a gang actually is. Many organizations have an association and common identifiers but doesn’t necessarily make them a gang. For example, NAACP and masonic organizations. So being able to define and identify what a gang is, is very important. In my opinion if the distinction between a group of people who are helping the community and those who are hurting it doesn’t get identified, prejudgment and social bias can occur.

Gangs formed for protection against harsh living conditions and protection of their way of life and community. According to a documentary by Black Power Productions (BPP), the Crips formed when police brutality increased in the black communities. Today that mindset has changed. In my opinion gangs have forgotten what the cause was in the beginning. The fact that gangs have become such a popular way for these kids to be excepted amongst peers and the way to make fast money has clouded the judgment of the ones who participate in the nonsense.

ROXANNE MARTINEZ (75 WORD RESPONSE)
M1D1-2
Gang Culture: An international problem

The word “gang can defines in various contexts. According to the Merriam-Webster dictionary, gang can be defined as a group of criminals; a group of young people who do illegal things together and who often fight against other gangs; or a group of people who are friends and who do things together. When using the word, it is important to identify its connotation. As Valdez explains, in old English the word gang simply meant a number of people who around together (Valdez, pg 3). However, in today’s society, gangs are directly associated with crime. Based on Chapter 1’s reading, initially gangs began when an immigration or excluded group sought against harsh living conditions. I believe that remains the case today. With a rapidly increasing rate of global diveristy and unrest comes the price of recruitment of those looking for a sense of belonging. I recently watched a VICE episode that covered a story on Syria’s refugee crisis. The most vulnerable of those refugees are currently living in limbo Lebanon, living on marginal existences, struggling to meet their own basic needs with uncertain futures. Similarly, the earliest forms of gangs in the United States developed because of class distinction, bias, and racism, cultivating an “us versus them” attitude (Valdez, pg. 3). Considering the advancement rate of technological/media development, the gang culture continues to rampantly spread not just in America, but internationally.

JESSIE HATFIELD
M1D2-1: Gang Violence (100 WORD RESPONSE)

Violence is important to the gangs because it demonstrates a sense of power and respect. Individuals within a gang demonstrate their respect for the gang but also their power so that they gain respect from other members. Being part of a violent act also ties you to the gang which further delves you in to the life of the gang. Part of becoming more respected in the gang is handling more of what the gang determines is a necessity. If a leader wants you to go smoke a rival gang member to demonstrate the power of the gang, you would do so not only because of showing the power of the gang but also because it shows you dedication to the gang which gains respect for you in the eyes of those above and below you in the order. This can lead to advancement in the gang garnering you more of the entitlements that come with advancing also such as money, drugs, etc.

Valdez (2009) discusses that in gang psychology, members essentially are taught that humans who are victims of violence brought the incident upon themselves. One such action discussed concerns a little girl shot and the shooter blamed her for being the victim.

I believe gang members especially starting at such a young age do not realize the consequences that they will face. They believe that regardless of the cost whether it be death, or jail, that they will be respected and remembered as being part of what most consider to be family. They live under the assumption that their fellow gang members will have their back no matter what. This would allow them to justify in their minds of why to commit a violent act alone.

DEANNA PEYATT
M1D2-2: (75 WORD RESPONSE)
Violence in gangs for hierarchy roles

According to Valdez (2009), our nation has displayed violence from the very creation of the New World in 1492
beginning with the Native Americans. In gangs, violence is very important because if fosters dominance and fear which is
ultimately seen to them, as respect. Violence is completed through use of intimidation to maintaining control, influence
others, and commit crimes (Valdez, 2009). This proves vital in hierarchy roles within the gang formation. It demonstrates a
member’s allegiance, empowerment, and possibly even initiation into the gang. The group identity is imperative to the
individual to feel a sense of belonging and acceptance. Gangs provide solidarity for people even if it is only symbolic
(Gang, n.d). Gang members will often complete crimes as a group.

Gangs commit crimes in group settings and no longer take individual responsibility for violence when committed as a
group. In a group environment reason, control and judgment give way to strong uncontrolled emotion rather than long-term
beliefs and consequences. The sense of unrest and chaotic behavior grows and explodes through risk taking that would not
typically happen if done as an individual (Gang, n.d.) and then becomes easier to do. Today many violent crimes are more
sophisticated and involve knives or weapons. They are impulsive and sometimes directed with no purpose in mind. The lack
of organization coupled with weapons makes them more dangerous. Gangs also blame victims for their injuries as being in
the wrong place at the wrong time and as they see them as less than human (Valdez, 2009).

RACHEL LUTHER
M1D1-1 (100 WORD RESPONSE)

Federal laws are rules that are enforced through out the United States and apply to everyone. State and/or local laws apply to anyone who live, works or travels through those areas specifically. These areas can be states, commonwealths, County, city, town, municipality, town, village or township. (Legal Aid Society, n.d.)

Some of the most commonly recognized federal laws are; immigration, bankruptcy, civil rights laws, copyright and patent laws, and criminal law (tax fraud, counterfeiting, etc.) Some of the most recognizable laws for states include; criminal law, divorce or family court matters, business law, welfare, death and inheritance, business, personal injuries, etc. (Legal Aid Society, n.d.) Local laws typically consists of things such as safety, rents and and zoning,

The court structure between federal and state are also different. There are 13 U.S. Court of Appeals, 94 U.S. District Courts, U.S. Court of claims, U.S. Court of International Trade and U.S. Bankruptcy Court. States have family court, probate court, juvenile court, etc. Federal appeals go to the U.S. Court of Appeals while state goes to intermediate court of appeals. (US Courts, n.d.) When it comes to the judges that occupy seats in both jurisdictions there are different methods for placement. In Federal Courts the judges are appointed (selected) by the President and confirmed by senate and cover their term for life. In states many judges are elected by the people, given specific years in term or nominated for life.

RYAN KNOWLES
M1D1-2 State vs. Federal (100 WORD RESPONSE)

List and explain any differences and similarities you find among the federal, state, and civil laws and legal systems in the United States. This will take some research. Are there significant differences? If so, explain what they are. Do you see one system being more stringent, citizen friendly, liberal, harsh, etc.?

As we all know the US Gov’t is established through the U.S. Constitution and managed via checks and balances. The legal system in terms of Federal, State and City levels are all built upon from the Federal policies and laws mandated down from Federal, to State to city, county, etc. The Supreme Court at the federal level reviews and oversees the policies and the nations laws, and ensure civil liberties and freedoms of individuals and people are being interpreted clearly. The State level along with the city and lower laws are smaller scale but more directed interpretations of the Federal laws. The state and county laws are mandated from same level constitutions designed from the Federal level and constitutional authorities.

States and cities are primarily trying the criminal cases, and the Federal courts hear the appellate and more individual specific cases that need more deliberation due to the possibility these cases may affect immediate and future laws and or policies. Examples could be the Stop and Frisk laws, the Gender bathroom issues and Marijuana.

Major differences are the oversight of the cases, the majority of the courts at the state and lower level hear many cases that can stem from bankruptcy to murder. The variety of courts civil, traffic, and criminal courts are broken up at the state level. The Federal level has specific courts who hear specific cases for specific reasons, up to the US Supreme Court. The selection at the federal level is practiced through judicial discretion and judicial activism is practiced more at this level because of the purposes of hearing the cases. The state level purpose of hearing cases is less selective but more funneled with the high case load and broken up through city and county and state jurisdictions. “. A person can go to federal or state court to bring a case under the federal law or both the federal and state laws. A state-law-only case can be brought only in state court (Rueters, 2016).”

The state level is less stringent than the federal level, because the case load and interpretation of the constitution is more diversified and broken down to jurisdictions and counties. The variety the judges see daily so much more robust and the case work load can be high. “State courts have broad jurisdiction, so the cases individual citizens are most likely to be involved in — such as robberies, traffic violations, broken contracts, and family disputes — are usually tried in state courts (Rueters, 2016).” The Federal level is more stringent due to the high visibility on the cases and the manner in which they can be selective about which cases they wish to hear, whether appellate courts chose to hear certain cases, the case load can be managed easier.