Comment by pakled_engineer | Hacker News Reader

Comment by pakled_engineer | Hacker News Reader

pakled_engineer

Bikers have done this too, here they own development corps which are just rackets to exploit city tenders. Nobody else can bid or else you find your yards and equipment robbed or destroyed. Police don't do anything because propping up org crime is part of their management strategy of the failed war on drugs. Young violent upstarts who heat out the city with public shootings are better handled by the dominant org crime group so they let them racketeer it up so long as they promise to reign in the lesser groups that make the police look bad with public violence. Since these young upstarts need the money laundering services only mafia/bikers can provide on that scale they generally fall into line.

They also are propped up in the prison system in turn for helping the guards establish order in overcrowded units. Guards do set ups to make sure the dominant group always has an upper hand in any conflicts, like 4 associates being "accidentally" put in the same class/program with a rival of another group.

I'd like to know more about this, do you have any references to articles about the subject?

I'll post some later tonight when not swamped at work crunch time, what would end this is legalizing most of the black market since all you need to make a million dollars right now is a handful of drug delivery drivers and a couple of guns to shoot at and rob all the other drivers. Cities can then break up the entrenched corruption since they don't need a "boss crew" to keep order. Prisons won't be overcrowded with drug convictions either.

There will always be gangs but they won't have access to millions in capital to fund huge street wars thus less incentive for new recruits to join them.

Sounds most intriguing. Please do post.

Here's one example, cops ask gang to police their members http://www.canada.com/story.html?id=5ccc1c20-c1ef-4dc5-a4f9-... and shortly afterwards said members start "losing status" (getting killed) http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/british-columbia/ex-hell... said member also ran a tender corp.

The prison beating lawsuits are all here http://blogs.vancouversun.com/2015/11/26/violent-attacks-in-...

There's also a well known illegal drugs shack called the "blackdoor" that operates with impunity because before they arrived the streets were a free for all of violence, during the Olympics the police asked them to close so the media wouldn't discover it and embarass them.

Then of course there was all the Quebec mafia corruption probes into illegal city tenders that went nowhere.

Fascinating. Thanks for posting.

It's the plot to Sons of Anarchy.

Which is a silly retelling of some Hells Angels history and folklore.

In your estimation, what would it take for the police to become as effective as organized crime at keeping young publicly hyper-violent criminals in line?

Legalize victimless crime, and hold property owners responsible for securing their own property. When police can concentrate solely on reducing violence, they will do a better job of it.

> and hold property owners responsible for securing their own property

So if someone is robbed, it's their own fault?

I'm not advocating anything above, merely answering the question. Police are like any other people; they respond to the situations in which they are placed. Drug use cannot be stopped, merely pushed around from one place to another. If police are forced to attempt the impossible, they will not succeed.

To answer the question, robbery is violence. I'm talking about securing property against theft, vandalism, etc. "Fault" seems like a moral judgement, which isn't necessary here. To hold someone responsible is to expect responsible behavior from that person.

The police becoming "as effective" as organized crime at "keeping publicly hyper-violent criminals in line" is easy, traditional police are more effective and use similar methods - there's a line you can't cross.

David Simon describes both this phenomena and how the war on drugs tossed this approach [1].

That said, this hardly eliminates crime or makes it OK. Poverty and the turf wars over facilities for victimless crimes are always going to spur violent crime.

[1] https://www.themarshallproject.org/2015/04/29/david-simon-on...

Where in the world is your "here"?

Parent's comment falls more or less in line with my (anecdotal) understanding of organized crime operations and their relation to the justice system in most mid-to-large Canadian cities. I can't imagine American cities are much different.

isn't this kind of like how Yakuza operates, allowed/enabled/blind-eye by the police? maybe it's the natural evolution of org crime

Sufficiently advanced crime is indistinguishable from sovereignty.

As long as we agree that sovereignty and legitimacy are two different things.

Of course, and I bet that's the GP's point. In fact, the commonly held definition of a state is the organization that holds the monopoly of violence. Whether that organization is a United Nations member state or haunted down by Interpol has historically depended more on old friendships and stalemates and Who Has The Oil than anything else.

So the solution is to legalize drugs and somehow the corruption will magically go away?

Your entire post is filled with speculation verging on crackpot conspiracy theory.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com