Capital punishment.

[sear]

"who were active in the city from the 1880s to the 1910s." mm #58

"Nor are they unique to the 21st century" mm #60

You have me wondering mm, when did gangs recognizable to us today first manifest. I did a quick search:

The First Gangs - Gang Research
gangresearch.net/Archives/UIC/Courses/history/beforethrash.html
Two Secret Societies are especially important for US gangs, as well as gangs around the world. Both the Chinese Triads and the Italian Mafia and Camorra have ...

History of Gangs in the United States - Sage Publications
www.sagepub.com/sites/default/files/upm-binaries/43455_1.pdf
Mexican immigration accelerated in the early 1950s. Third period: 1950s–1980s. • By the 1950s, African American gangs in Los Angeles were beginning to assume a ...

History of Street Gangs in the United States
www.nationalgangcenter.gov/content/documents/history-of-street-gangs.pdf
May 4, 2010 ... The earliest gangs of New York were not criminal groups. Many street gang members were employed, mostly as common laborers (Adamson, 1998; Sante ...

7 Violent Gangs That Terrorized the Streets in the 19th Century
historyofyesterday.com/7-violent-gangs-that-terrorized-the-streets-in-the-19th-century-dd41b262fb4a
While New York City has a vibrant history of street gangs, the Forty Thieves was its very first gang². Sometime around 1825, these thieves and pickpockets ...

gang | Definition, History, & Facts - Encyclopedia Britannica
www.britannica.com/topic/gang-crime
Often, gangs operated to defend and assert the interests of ethnic groups new to the local society or region; thus, the most visible and violent gangs in each ...

Not much help.
There are various theories about the beginning of civilization. One popular explanation, the agricultural plow. That displaced the nomadic hunter-gatherer lifestyle. Then permanent settlements, food storage, and the early trades: carpentry, masonry, leather working, etc.
Before then there were likely rivalries both win clans, and among them.
But once there were permanent settlements, I suspect raiders soon followed. So the stage of human evolution where gangs first appeared depends heavily on how "gang" is defined. Coarsely, organized confrontation / exploitation of the common order.

It's human nature, and thus has probably been with us since forever. I vaguely recall accounts of what might be considered gang activity in apes, & cetaceans. The definition is determinative.

 

[mark mywords]

The first street-gang in the United States, the 40 Thieves, began around the late 1820s in New York City. The gangs in Washington D.C. had control of what is now Federal Triangle, in a region then known as Murder Bay. - Google

.According to Sante, the history of street gangs in the United States began with their emergence on the East Coast around 1783, as the American Revolution ended. These gangs emerged in rapidly growing eastern U.S. cities, out of the conditions created in large part by multiple waves of large-scale immigration and urban overcrowding. - Sante, L. (1991). Low life: Lures and snares of old New York. New York: Vintage Books.

 

[sear]

I don't mean this to seem accusatory mm #62. But you have me wondering why.
Seems to me if prospective gang persons* formulate, create, found a new gang, it's for a reason. The obvious would seem to me to be discontent with the status quo. But I suppose it's possible one might start a gang for other reasons, such as desiring power, authority s/he wouldn't have.

If that has some potential utility the next obvious question is, why hasn't it been followed through? Perhaps prison gangs answer that. Prisoners are deliberately deprived. And so when prisoners can't count on government, they form their own.

* calling them gang "members" presupposes the existence of a gang.

 

[Wolf]

Perhaps it's just a withered old man's observation, but it seems to me we're not only in a leadership drought, but that we're about due for a new & capable leader to appear. Sear
OH, how your words echo my thoughts Sear.
And yes Mark mywords what we are seeing today is not in any way "unique" to UK and I assume USA history. but as we are seeing the advance in the ability "to spread the word" has changed dramatically. So what used to happen "locally" is now Universal.
Age in all brings an ability to understand, but sadly dare I say the youth today is given a "sometimes distorted view" of what Life in general is all about

 

[sear]

"we are seeing the advance in the ability "to spread the word" has changed dramatically." W #64

Indeed!
The Round Table and CitizenVoice.us are but one category of example. "Social media" also included. Mark Twain said the 3 forms of rapid communication were: telegraph, telephone, & tell a woman.

What Donald Trump has made painfully clear, what expands the reach of a message is not necessarily its veracity or its utility, but its popularity. [cart before hoarse]

"Age in all brings an ability to understand, but sadly dare I say the youth today is given a "sometimes distorted view" of what Life in general is all about" W #64

It's a problem more serious than some may realize. So far there's not much to combat or neutralize it. There's FACTCHECK.ORG
But the mismatch between reach and validity remains a challenge that summons to mind King Canute who by royal command ordered the tide not to come in. Even a command from his royal majesty the king cannot battle back the tide. Canute taught us that, Trump reveals the perils.

“Ah, Houston, we’ve had a problem.” NASA / Apollo #13 astronaut Jim Lovell

 

[Wolf]

telegraph, telephone, & tell a woman. Sear By far the quickest if not accurate
I wonder at times whether "Man" has forgotten that "actions speak louder then words". If for the sake of argument anyone proved to have "Killed" someone (accept in self defence) and was after being duly found guilty was "terminated", the listings of Killings which seem to rise and rise dally, would suddenly start to fall. I shall make sure women know so they can spread the word.

 

[sear]

I'd love to know the answer W #66. I believe the debate has raged for centuries if not millennia.
- Do draconian crime sentences / punishments deter crime?
I get the impression the current notion is that even if it does a little, not enough so to generally justify it as policy. Meaning, there may be an "up-side", but that the reciprocal "down-side" produces a net negative. It may vary somewhat from one category of crime to another.

I carry my own personal baggage here. I have more contempt for a criminal that murders for fun, than I do for a destitute homeless mother that steals a pint of milk to feed her starving baby. I'm not endorsing theft. But I endorse the idea that the punishment should fit the crime.
It has been a legal maxim since ancient time: quod alias non fuit licitum, necessitas licitum facit
What otherwise was not lawful, necessity makes lawful

That in turn raises the question: is feeding a starving child a necessity. The answer in Moscow may differ from the answer to the same question in London. TGIO

 

[mark mywords]

Do draconian crime sentences / punishments deter crime?

No, demonstrably so eg states with the death penalty do not have lower murder rates than none DP states. What deters crime is the prospect of being caught, if you arent caught it really doesnt matter how draconian the punishment.
A 80% detection rate with "soft" sentencing is a bigger deterrent than a 20% detection rate with harsh sentencing

2020 US clear up rates for crimes
Car theft 12%
Burglary 14%
Property crime 15%
Larceny 15%
Robbery 29%

UK rates are lower, in some cases much lower

 

[sear]

mm #68
That's a useful insight, but only narrows it down to a 60% range, over half the spectrum.

It raises more fundamental questions. Should government therefore maximize detection? If so wouldn't that be tantamount to slavery? If government taxes at a rate that provides government with 50% GDP, but it could reduce crime further by 0.001% if it increased its share of GDP from 50% to 100%, should it?
Alternatively should government merely aim to provide the best per capita law enforcement / domestic tranquility per dollar spent on it? Best "bang for the $buck" spending policy?

I asked God for a bike, but I know God doesn't work that way.
So I stole a bike and asked for forgiveness.

 

[mark mywords]

As detention serves almost no useful purpose why would you try to maximise it?

Swedish law sets a maximum sentence of 10 years for any crime other than murder for which the maximum is 18 years.

Anders Breivik (Norway) murdered 77 people in a series of gun and bomb attacks he was sentenced to 21 years the maximum allowable under Norwegian law

Many British murderers serve less than 10 years although a few (less than a 100 ever) have been imprisoned for the rest of their lives and our prisons are infinitely more human than American ones (although not quite as good as some European ones where prisoners get family visits for a weekend in chalets or serve their sentences in increments -at week ends or a couple of weeks here and there

 

[sear]

As detention serves almost no useful purpose why would you try to maximise it?

Detection (your word), not detention.

"Anders Breivik" mm #70

I remember that case. I remember the name. I even vaguely remember the 21 year sentence.

Meanwhile, in U.S. gun news:
Hinckley, the guy that shot Reagan has been released. He's running around loose now.
Minority Leader McConnell (R-KY) suggests he'll approve the gun safety legislation bill currently developing in congress.

 

[Wolf]

IMHO both you Sear and Mm are right in different ways.
But surely it would perhaps better to hugely invest in the Police and Law enforcement agency's so that when someone kills for reasons of gain or revenge, they are caught and given if not a" Termination sentence" one that will take away their freedom for a very long time.
Again IMHO and perhaps due to living in the UK, I see reports which again seem to growing that Law and Order is being compromised due to so called "Mind readers" who blame an attack by a person on another person, is due to problems in an early personal life.
Well just as mater of little importance, being born many years ago when codes of conduct were generally lived by, now it seems as though "those that live by the sword... no longer die by the sword" . As may be a solver to the problems of keeping a person in Prison for a term, why not induce a type of "sleep" where someone who commits taking of life crime, are rendered to serve their term "under sedation". This would great reduce Prison staff and make sure none who were sentenced being able to escape. Sadly I already hear the "Mind Readers" crying "shame and non-human behaviour", to which I would hasten to add "what if it was one of your family who were done down".

 

[mark mywords]

yes sorry obviously detection is the key to crime reduction and detection of minor crime is as important as detection of major crime - the people involved in major crime also commit minor crime.

 

[sear]

"better to hugely invest in the Police and Law enforcement agency's so that when someone kills for reasons of gain or revenge, they are caught ..." W #72

W,
I can't read your #72 without a mental image of a resource allocation pie chart diagram flashing to my mind. Surely if it were a yes / no decision: should we catch the bad guys, or let them go,
it's a no brainer. BUT !!
I believe it's a practical inevitability that it winds up as a close cousin to the "guns / butter" debate. With a finite budget, with a limited federal budget, if we increase the budget for catching bad guys by £10%
that £10% will have to be taken from some other spending priority.
Bottom line, powerful political interests are competing for the most generous slice of the chronically under-sized £resource pie. Seems to me that's how we got to where we are today. Legislators would rather spend on widows and orphans than criminals. Right?

"I would hasten to add "what if it was one of your family who were done down"." W

amen
In a democracy the spending priority goes to the majority. Perhaps in the U.S. we are closer to reaching the stage you refer to.

"detection is the key to crime reduction" mm #73

It seems to be an indispensable component of systemic crime suppression, but detection is obviously insufficient on its own. But this perspective seems burdened by pedagogical estrangement.
But there is at least the risk of playing with fire, reductio ad absurdum: Orwell's 1984.

A government big enough to give you everything you want, is strong enough to take everything you have. -- Thomas Jefferson

"In framing a government which is to be administered by men over men, the great difficulty is in this: you must first enable the government to control the governed, and in the next place, oblige it to control itself." James Madison

"and detection of minor crime is as important as detection of major crime - the people involved in major crime also commit minor crime." mm #73

NYC Mayor Giuliani made good use of James Q. Wilson's "Broken Window Theory", for maintaining law & order. Wilson's idea: if a pedestrian sees a broken window he may believe the area may be more suited to crime, & thus commit crime of his own, whereas we can snuff out the wildfire most easily while it's still on the match. Repair the broken window, and prevent a murder. My apology to Wilson if my description is flawed.

mm, I may be on a reach here, but I get the impression for a given culture, not merely down to city level, but even down to neighborhood level, crime suppression is somewhat asymptotic, and that in some ways we've reached noise level of the curve. As I was suggesting to W #72, we could at great expense reformulate the curve. But that would entail budgetary detriment to other spending priorities. It took millennia to get to where we are today.

 

[mark mywords]

Remember in the 1990s some dude called " Guiliani" (what ever became of him?) introduced a policy under which policy would aggressively every criminal act. In the first year total arrests went up by 23% misdemeanor arrests were up by 40% iin the years that followed there was a 60% drop in murders, a 12% drop in rapes, a 48% drop in robberies and a 46% drop in burglaries.
Obviously in the early stages it cost money (more police and prison occupancy) but as the policy played out the costs dropped - crimes that arent committed dont need investigating and people who didnt commit crime didnt end up in prison,
Compared to the cost of keeping people in prison the price of policing is cheap
The biggest plus however was a vast improvement in the living standards for those in New York.

 

[sear]

" Guiliani" (what ever became of him?)

Rudy who?


You're preaching to the choir to some degree here mm.
I'm a law-&-order fan too. But there's a law of diminishing returns.

Regarding Giuliani, he first showed up on my radar when he was a federal prosecutor, bashing mob bosses. At that time I not only appreciated his crime fighting efforts, but marveled at his ability to remain alive.
As you have probably already deduced, my esteem of Giuliani has slipped enormously since then.

note: the faux CNN graphic appears to be from Stephen Colbert's Late Show. It's satirical, not factual.

 

[Wolf]

So, and lets be clear, we are all under the influence of a power that "we cannot see, we cannot directly approach, and cannot hear directly"?. Sorry I just cannot understand that reasoning. There a number of so called "Religions " in this world of ours, and each one has a doctoring that those that believe in it, follow. Again sorry I still can't understand the logic. If, and it's a very big if, there is a Power what ever Religion it calls it's self, is "out there", are people saying "come and save us"?
The way things are going, Man will destroy the life on this plant, soon. So by riding this world of those that have no respect for others, and want to live a life of "take-Murder-steal" than Man has to make a choice.
At this time a report published yesterday in the UK, stated that over 90% of crimes against Households (breaking and entering to steal) not only have not been solved, but again in the majority of cases the Police have not even answered an a emergency call from the house holds.
This is what has happened in the UK I have no doubt it is occurred in other countries. So If people no longer feel safe, a growing number will take to the real Law "protect one's self" the net result being either "marshal Law is bought in", or there comes a defining moment Law and Order will break down..

 

[sear]

"So, and lets be clear, we are all under the influence of a power that "we cannot see, we cannot directly approach, and cannot hear directly"?. Sorry I just cannot understand that reasoning." W #77

You elevate it to call it "reasoning". "Belief", or "faith" more likely. Faith is belief without proof.

Many a religionist has provided dire warning about ruthless Satan may be in tricking the unwary. But how could Satan be more treacherous than to assume the mantle of the religionists, and preach demonic treachery from the lectern.

"I would rather have a mind opened by wonder than one closed by belief." Gerry Spence, Attorney at Law

Just because a delusional religionist portrays his spew as truth is not sufficient justification to abandon openmindedness. But I agree, the omniscient punitive taskmaster in the sky punishing slights at each opportunity is a model suitable for terrorizing children, not for enlightening adults.

You've embraced quite a spectrum here W #77.
It could be addressed with as little as adding a lock to the kitchen window, to extensive legislative reforms that would insure a substantially more equitable distribution of wealth. A wide range between haves and have-nots may motivate crime among the have-nots. Would narrowing that range produce a corresponding reduction in such crime?

 

[Wolf]

Excellent post Sear.
My view, if some may say is "extreme" is born about by "living over the years I have lived and seeing the tings I have". Plus I have seen many things change over the period I have lived. I am as have posted "sorting out boxes packed from moving", and yesterday came across a set of volumes collected some years ago which graphicly illustrated the Second World War. They start by explaining the start of the War, then what happened during the War, and finally what happened to the World after the War. It shows the "change" that took place to the World over some 7 or 10 years.
There is a similarity as todays World, more so what has happened to Ukraine and the invasion by Russia.
This is in many ways is" likened" to the invasion of mainland Europe by Germany in the late 30's.

So retuning to the theme of Capital Punishment, it appears as some become more powerful, or rather "defy Law and order" a balance has to be set, and in many ways "fear of punishment" has to be a way of dissuading "some" and to make them think twice before they commit a crime. As for those who do commit a crime of "taking a life", then the reasoning I give as to taking their life not only acts as deterrent, but saves on cost of keeping some in Prison.
Back to theme of "Power beyond Man" , again if there were such a Power, and we must also recognise some Religions do use a Death Penalty to "curb" members, surly either the power remains "hidden" to allow Man to if possible find a solution, or Man on this Earth is but a cycle, and will end when we "Man" destroy ourselves.

 

[sear]

"There is a similarity as todays World, more so what has happened to Ukraine and the invasion by Russia." W #79

That Russia has done so is tragic. But it seems the EU & NATO compound the tragedy. Aid to Ukraine has been parsimonious, inadequate. Russia already controls most of the territory it wanted to solidify its Crimea acquisition.
Western forces seem to be saying to Ukraine:
we'll do enough to protect ourselves, but we don't care how many thousands of Ukrainian troops and civilians die in the process.

This conspicuous lack of Western urgency is not mirrored by the People of Ukraine. The result is a scenario in which everyone but Russia loses. Our negligent response thus now sows the seed of future strife from Russia.