data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/d0042/d004283176c623236332d7654f63c1fc4663493b" alt=""
The bill was passed by both houses of Congress and signed by the President back in January, yet here we are, more than six months later, with no changes to military policy on gang membership.
It didn't take that long to pass the USAPATRIOT Act.
Perhaps we are being more careful. Or, perhaps we are trying to see if denial works yet . . .
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/5dd51/5dd51a249c71d963774a09a6ff3710e6e994dcb1" alt=""
Gangs aren't a new blip on the radar screen -- over twelve years ago, the Secretary of the Army and the Secretary of Defense were told, "Gang-related activities appear to be more pervasive than extremist activities as defined in Army Regulation 600-20."
This was from an investigative Task Force formed in response to an Extremist-related killing that was looking to see if there was a problem with Extremists in the Army. The task force visited 28 major Army installations in the United States, Germany, and Korea during January and February 1996. After conducting over 7,000 interviews and 17,080 written surveys, the task force concluded that there was minimal evidence of extremist-group activity in the Army . . .
They did note there was more of a “security concern” with street gangs.
They said "Yes, But . . ." when responding to the Secretary. Their response essentially was "Yes, there are a few more of those hate-mongers in the military, but there's a related problem that you really ought to pay attention to -- street gangs!"
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/6076c/6076cae65be6a51bfb46c2b8833b64d700589f14" alt=""
Do you wait twelve years to process this new information?
So here we are twelve years later, Congress AND the President agreed with the Task Force's report, and after six months . . . nothing. The NFL gets it, why not the Secretary of Defense?
What's it going to take?