IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/crimin/v65y2025i1p202-233..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Pulling Back the Curtain on the California Gang Database: Evidence of Racial, Ethnic and Gender Disparities Among 222 Law Enforcement Agencies

Author

Listed:
  • David C Pyrooz
  • James A Densley

Abstract

The California Gang Database (CalGang) is the first, largest and arguably most controversial shared gang database in the United States. This study examined its demographic composition and disparities in 103,840 records input by 222 unique law enforcement agencies between 2017 and 2022; the database was 94 per cent male, 66 per cent Hispanic, 23 per cent Black, 51 per cent 18 to 30 years old and 38 per cent 31–45 years old. About one-quarter of 1 per cent of Californians are listed in CalGang. Age-standardized estimates indicated that males were overrepresented relative to females by a factor of 17 and that Black and Hispanic males were overrepresented relative to White males by factors of 33 and 11, respectively, while Asian males were underrepresented. These demographic disparities generalized across nearly all law enforcement agencies. Gang databases will remain highly controversial owing to significant racial/ethnic disparities, but also concerns about civil liberties, due process, privacy rights and collateral consequences. The generative questions that remain are whether the observed disparities can be explained by legal factors and whether any public safety value can be achieved while protecting individual rights.

Suggested Citation

  • David C Pyrooz & James A Densley, 2025. "Pulling Back the Curtain on the California Gang Database: Evidence of Racial, Ethnic and Gender Disparities Among 222 Law Enforcement Agencies," The British Journal of Criminology, Centre for Crime and Justice Studies, vol. 65(1), pages 202-233.
  • Handle: RePEc:oup:crimin:v:65:y:2025:i:1:p:202-233.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/bjc/azae040
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:oup:crimin:v:65:y:2025:i:1:p:202-233.. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/bjc .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.