What I Have Learned Essay Example for Free

What I Have Learned Essay The past three weeks I can say that I have learned quite a lot, I never really thought I could understand what entailed through organized crime. There are many different attributes that were involved to form organized crime. Without knowing exactly what those attributes are you would never be able to figure out what it takes to organize crime or even get why they call it organized crime. I would say to myself why do these mafia and big groups put so much time and effort into making sure that there plans to through and who heads up their plans because of the path that has been set from organized crime. I will be explaining the major areas concerning the foundations of organized crime. What two definitions best fits organized crime, how organized crime gained a foothold in the United States, How organized crime groups sought to influence government and the organization of organized crime groups in the post-Prohibition era. Conventional criminals are different from the persons that are involved with organized crime through variety and a larger scale. Organized crime has no political agenda. In every group or family there is a main boss, underboss and follows down the ladder. There are qualifications to be accepted into any crime family or group. In these groups they feel as if they are untouchable that they do not need to follow any laws, people must follow their laws. In any group they must keep their group strong so they have to constantly find new members, they only look for individuals who they think will be beneficial to their group. When a member is finally accepted into a family there are still rules and regulations that must be followed, if these rules are not followed your consequences could be death. Every person and/ or organization will have their own definition when it comes to organized crime it is like terrorism; every organization has its own definition to what consists of a terrorist. According to Donald Creesy organized crime is any crime that is committed by a person occupying in an establishment of labor, a position that is designed for a person from the commission to be that of a corrupter, a position for the corruptee, and one position for the enforcer. Donald Creepy’s definition I think is actually a good definition that truly can identify was the commission’s main task was for. I mean if you think about it the commission will find someone that is behind the lines of a company that they need ties with to get them the information and goods they need for the mob. Michael Maltz has a different perspective on the definition for organized crime. He says that organized crime is a crime that is made from more than one person, and the persons that are involved stay to be associated with each other for the purpose to succeed in committing the crimes. Michael Maltz also has a great definition because he wants every person that is involved with organized crime to be found at fault. For myself I would have to agree with Maltz because I do believe that every person that is involved with organized crime should be found guilty. How do you think you are going to stop a problem from happening if you do not try to find every person who is involved guilty; everything would stay the same and the matter would not be fixed. The attributes of organized crime are as follows has no political goals, is hierarchical, has limited or exclusive membership, constitutes a unique subculture, perpetuates itself, exhibits a willingness to use illegal violence, is monopolistic, and is governed by explicit rules and regulations. These eight attributes pretty much can show you how if they are not implemented then a group’s plan will not go as planned. As a part of the set of attributes it is only natural for a group to make sure that when they set up a plan every step that was made should be followed.