Which political party has a sound plan to tackle rising gang tensions in New Zealand? None of them, says sociologist and gang expert Dr Jarrod Gilbert.
In a live Q&A with Herald Premium subscribers this afternoon, Gilbert and senior investigative journalist Jared Savage acknowledged that inter-gang violence is surging - and that there are no easy answers.
"There's always been violence between gangs, including shootings dating right back to the 1970s and 80s," Savage said. "Gangs have always had guns. However, what I think is slightly different right now is the firepower available ... because of decades of poor firearms regulations and policing of the Arms Act."
Where to start? With a firearms register ("a no-brainer", says Gilbert); continuing efforts to crack down on intimidating behaviour in public - then the hard, complex work of identifying and tackling the underlying issues that draw young people into gangs.
Here's a wrap of this afternoon's discussion:
Peter M: Can you see a direct correlation between gang recruitment and the lift in serious underage crime?
Jarrod G: There might be a spike at the moment, but I don't think the longer term data show a dramatic rise. It is highly possible the recent ram raids are tied to 'feeder' gangs. But there's no evidence I'm aware of that they are being controlled by adult gangs.
Moderator N: Another question for Jarrod G (after reading response to Peter M) - what are 'feeder' gangs please?
Jarrod G: Feeder gangs are groups that exist under the adult groups. Young kids who might have a dad, older brothers, neighbours etc in the gang and try to mimic them. If those young groups survive over time (often they just spring up and fade away) the members will often 'graduate' into the adult gang.
Mark Y: Does it help when Labour gives millions to a gang that has been in the media recently for importing commercial quantities of drugs?
Jared S: Hi Mark. I take it you're referring to the Kahukura programme and the Mongrel Mob in the Hawkes Bay. At first glance, the headline is a terrible look. But I don't know enough about the finer details to comment on that specific case, or how successive that particular programme is. What I would say is that, from my experience on reporting on meth addiction, is that the people who have the most success in helping people struggling with drug use are normally QBE (or Qualified By Experience). I think that means government funding will need to go to individuals or groups at a grassroots/community level that will likely have criminal/gang pasts. Every application for funding must be scrutinised closely, obviously, but I don't think having a blotted copy book should automatically rule someone out - as I think they are most likely to reach others from similar backgrounds. And if we're serious about tackling demand for drugs, I think the wider public will need to be comfortable with that.
Storm R: While the article was written by a researcher having spent 20 years researching gangs ... all it did was criticise so called unsuccessful laws, yet offered no alternative solution. One could ask what has 20 years of research produced?
Jarrod G: There are some solutions in here (about what to be mindful of), but that wasn't the focus of the work. Have a look at the report, I don't think anybody on earth could argue against the findings.
Here's the report
Moderator N: Hi Jarrod and Jared. I'd like to know if you think the gang situation in NZ is worse today than it has been in the past (I guess by that I mean more potential for violence / crime / other social harm)? Thanks.
Jarrod G: The degree of profit-driven crime has certainly increased within the gangs, without question (although the drug trade also extends far beyond the gangs). As for gang violence, I think there have been periods when it has easily been as bad or worse than it is now.
Jared S: In terms of my reporting experience, so about 2008 in this field, this is the worst I've seen in terms of gang-on-gang violence. Most of it is unreported because of the criminal code of silence, unless it spills out into public or someone is killed. As Jarrod says, there's always been violence between gangs, including shootings dating right back to the 1970s and 80s. Gangs have always had guns. However, what I think is slightly different right now is the firepower available (numerous semi-automatic weapons) because of decades of poor firearms regulations and policing of the Arms Act. There are heaps of guns out there, and the arrival of some Australian gangs like the Comancheros and Mongols have brought a new mindset. They're not afraid of ruffling a few feathers, and not afraid to pull the trigger. That has led to some fairly brazen shootings (96 rounds fired at a gang leader's house in Tauranga, pistols fired inside a 5 star hotel lobby in broad daylight etc) that we haven't seen before.
Matt T: As someone who only recently became an NZ citizen, it appears that attitude to gangs is often one of respect, fear and deference from the authorities. Perhaps they should be seen more in the light of domestic terrorists?
Jared S: Hi Matt. Personally, I don't think that's the case ... the police spend an enormous about of time investigating organised [criminals], some of whom are gang members, and the results can often be sentences for drug offending which exceed murder. They get their just desserts. We also seize their ill-gotten assets. On the other hand, not all gang members are organised criminals and most come from marginalised backgrounds with next to nothing in terms of wealth - should the police 'smash' them for simply being gang members? Not under the Bill of Rights. The police must target offending and I think that is where NZ Police could up the ante ... not so much the long term investigations (which are very good) but greater proactive policing in terms of behaviour from gangs which the public finds intimidating or thuggish (what I'd call "disorganised crime"). Also got to step back and look at the wider issues around why people would join a gang - and the answers are complex and intertwined social issues.
Danny C: Hi gents, do you think enough is being done to investigate the wealth these gangs have accrued and the usage of 'proceeds of crime' as a deterrent? Further, do non-association laws actually work and are they being applied effectively?
Jarrod G: I think we have tended to focus on the gangs a little too acutely, and that has meant that white collar criminality (such as money laundering) has not been a specific enough focus. The Criminal Proceeds Recovery Act is a very effective tool for seizing ill-gotten gains - but the patched gangs are easy targets. Organised crime extends well beyond them.
Jared S: Hi Danny. I think the Criminal Proceeds Recovery Act has been applied quite successfully since it came into force. Lots of examples of cash, cars, homes, assets seized. However, I note that the police have struggled in some cases and the Government is proposing some new changes to target gang leaders/organised crime figures alleged to have "insulated" themselves from the profit-driven crime. There will be some debate around this law change because of Bill of Rights issues, but you can read more about the proposal here.
Matt C: I don't think the average New Zealander realises that being a gang member now gets you a reduction in your sentence in court. If you want to reduce gangs - punish people for being in gangs. Don't make out that they are victims. That is what has led to the explosion in gang violence and numbers.
Jared S: Hi Matt. I'm unaware of any provision that gives you a reduced sentence for being a gang member. There are section 27 cultural reports in which a judge 'might' give an offender a slight discount because of their disadvantaged backgrounds (many gang members would fall into this category) and also for drug addiction which fueled their drug dealing (again, gang members would fall into this category). But these two provisions for reduced sentences are available for all NZers, not just gang members.
Jarrod G: Punishment is a key component of the criminal justice system, and certainly I wouldn't argue against that. But we need to include other measures, too. So I would argue it's an AND not OR. All research, not just mine, points the factors that create gangs (or attract young people to them); we need to acknowledge and address those factors too. Again, not instead of punishment, but alongside punishment.
Lisa D: What are your thoughts on how to discourage kids, some of them very young as seen lately in regard of car theft and ram raids, but likely other crimes also, being used by gangs to do their deeds, and as initiations into gang culture in NZ?
Jarrod G: This is a great question. When we just look at gangs as a law and order problem, we can easily forget about the things that drive people into gangs. That doesn't mean we ignore law and order, but we do need to look at why young people join. Efforts to counter that will not be laws, but social policies, and will mean we tackle the cause rather than just the effect.
Elle M: There seems to be this extraordinary imbalance between the gangs' ability to do what they want and the Police's inability to stop them. While no-one wants to see more guns on the street, it seems that we find ourselves at the last resort? If anyone has an effective, non violent way to getting rid of the gangs and their drugs, which is ruining this country, I'd love to hear it. But cuddles and quiet chats aren't cutting it! Enough is enough.
Jarrod G: I'm not sure anybody is promoting cuddles ... But chats - if that means dialogue with gangs - is actually pretty important. You'd be surprised how often the gangs get together when they are warring (often facilitated by police) to try and stop violence.
Elle M: That's awesome to hear, but it feels like there is no outcomes from these discussions. I was being flippant about the cuddles, it does feel like the gangs aren't really doing it tough. Even prison appears to be a rite of passage. Some tangible solutions which can be seen would make a world of difference. Otherwise, gangs will continue to be written off as scourge of society. The first of course would be them renouncing drugs as a source of revenue.
Jarrod G: I was just jesting about the cuddles, too. Prison can be a rite of passage, and even more concerningly a place of recruitment. So people go into prison, become concerned for their safety, and join a gang. That's a real problem. I'm actually in the prisons at the moment doing some work on that very issue. I expect that report to be out by the end of the year.
Robert M: Would it be a good idea to introduce legislation to prohibit and make illegal specifically named motorcycle gangs? Should legislation be introduced to prohibit the displaying of gang names and insignia - be it tattoos, flags or gang vests etc - as has been introduced in Western Australia?
Jarrod G: I did actually look at Australia for this research. There are a few issues with what they're doing around simply driving things underground (meaning enforcement is made more difficult). But I would not be at all surprised to see such measures introduced here.
Viona C: Greg O'Connor in his role as Police Association president once said the National government of the 1990s largely ignored growing gang numbers and an emerging meth trade, decrying the lack of funding Police had in this area at the time and the political will around then to tackle it. Does this fit with your own research, understanding of that period?
Jarrod G: Yeah, looking back I'm not sure Greg always got it right - but he was definitely ahead of the curve in relation to meth. I've gotten to know him in the last few years, and he's a good man.
Jared S: Largely, yes (although the Labour government too). Greg raised issues around methamphetamine for many years, largely downplayed by politicians, and by the time action was taken, meth had taken off and the profits which drove it had changed organised crime (which gangs are part of) forever. We're still seeing the consequences of that today, as it's worse than ever.
Mig B: Which politician or political party have the right idea when it comes to settling down the gang tension and reducing future numbers?
Jarrod G: Frankly, I haven't seen a great plan by any of the parties. But I have to give a shout out to the police here. They are working with other state and community agencies to try and create resilience to organised crime (i.e. keeping people out of gangs). More of that is needed. These problems are not just for the police to solve.
Jeff R: Instead of targeting legitimate gun owners should the Government not ban gun ownership for patched gang members?
Jared S: Hi Jeff. Gang members are mostly banned from owning guns, there might be less than 10 who gained licences under previous rules. Going forward, when the licences expire, the police can now take into account gang membership under the "fit and proper" criteria they assess when granting/declining who can have a firearms licence. Of course, most gang members/organised criminals who have guns don't really care about having a licence. The real issue is stopping legitimate firearms falling into the wrong hands, and this is where the firearms register comes into play. I've written more about this here.
Jarrod G: Absolutely we need a firearms registry. No-brainer in my view.
James H: There must be a way to get them to participate in society in a legitimate less harmful manner, maybe the proceeds of crime act should have an alternative that allows them to keep the wealth if it is invested into legitimate business endeavours stipulating no more criminal behaviour, as well as a requirement for influencing youth in more positive directions (you have to admit, their social media is pretty slick).
Jarrod G: We can't allow organised criminals to keep their proceeds even if invested well. We really need to discourage that asset base - not least because big money leads to the problems of corruption. New Zealand is very lucky in that regard currently, but we need to do everything we can to keep it that way. But you're bang on the money about influencing youth in more positive directions. We can't just say, 'Don't do this' without giving them viable alternatives. At the risk of sounded simplistic, I like sport here. A sporting team offers many of the social-psychological factors that gangs provide.
Laurence D: We've tried everything, the situation is just getting worse, the public are fed up, have no time for them and want to quickly see real action and results. If your programs and suggestions do not produce results and fast, can you see how the public will just pressure politicians to implement tougher Australian styled police organisations to combat them? Also surely it's our democratic right as citizens in a democratic country to enforce strict rules so we are not harassed, threatened or intimidated by violent gang behaviour.
Jared S: Hi Laurence. I think there's a two-pronged approach here which, to be fair, the police are trying to do at the same time. And it's not just up to them. I think there needs to be long term plans/programmes to tackle the reasons why a gang is attractive (poverty, unemployment, poor housing and education etc). These are complex intertwined social issues which everyone in NZ will benefit from, if committed to. So we need to do that. At the same time, the Police also need to a greater focus on behaviour that the public finds unacceptable/intimidating. We've seen that recently, in terms of traffic checkpoints on large gang parties/bike runs in Auckland, and I'm picking we'll see more of it simply because of the reason you state - public pressure is getting a reaction from the government - and the police need to send a message. On top of that, you have the longer-term organised crime investigations which NZ does very well and there are often senior gang figures involved in those too.
Brett W: Hi Jarrod. Do you think that gang members have less fear of Police than they used to? In the "good old days" gang members who stepped out of line often got a bit of a towel up from Police who were generally large physically strong males. Nowadays with the advent of cellphones filming everything and also significant increases in the number of quite small female Police (who 20 years ago would not have met the physical criteria to join the Police) there is no intimidation factor for gang members any more, especially the rising numbers of 501 gang members who are using steroids, bodybuilding etc.
Jared S: Hi Brett. I'm sure things got very physical in the "good old days" - on both sides. However, I don't think gangs would have been intimidated by that back then, or now. The police don't need to physically intimidate gang members - they need to close down criminal behaviour, either publicly or covertly. We do a great job on the long term organised crime investigations, but I think the police could do more around shutting down poor behaviour by gangs that might intimidate people. We've seen more of that in recent weeks with the police checkpoints on bike rides - even just looking for minor traffic infringements - and I get the sense we'll see more of it heading into election year.
Laurence O: I have witnessed the aggressive recruitment drive by the Mongrel Mob - targeting influential leaders in a community by providing them with drugs, bikes and bling - essentially establishing a franchise in that community. What are your thoughts on the effects of this type of recruitment drive?
Jared S: Hi Laurence. Yes, this is something that I'm aware of too. A lot of this style of recruitment is driven through social media too (Instagram, Tiktok etc) and it's highly effective. If you come from nothing, then I'm sure bikes/bling etc would be highly enticing to join a gang. Australia went through a similar stage a few years back, they called it the "Nike Bikie", as the new generation of gangs looked clean cut, muscular, nice clothes, cars, good looking partners etc. It was quite a shift from the more dishevelled look of a gang member back in the 1970s and 80s. But like many things on social media, it doesn't always live up to reality - it also puts a target on your back for the police to chase.
Brent A: I can't remember where it was but a week or two ago the Killer [Beez] had a gang meeting in a public place and normal citizens were forbidden to go into that zone by a police force gathered there because it was dangerous. In what backwards world do we need tax funded police to PREVENT members of the public from going into a public place because a bunch of criminals are meeting there? It's pathetic.
Jared S: Hi Brent. The Killer Beez did a bike run the other week, after staying in a motel in Ramarama, and the police did set up a traffic checkpoint for the gang's bike run. I was unaware of the public being stopped from going in, and understand why you'd be upset about this. I'm only guessing but am presuming this was simply traffic management in the first instance, and was a temporary measure. It's important to note that a convoy of bikes - while perhaps intimidating - is not necessarily breaking any road rules.
