Controlling Organized Crime
February 7, 2012
Controlling Organized Crime
Criminal activity is an intimate part of today’s society. Criminal activity has no economical, religious, or social boundaries. Individuals commit crime out of greed, social status and lack of moral values. Over the years several researchers have offered a variety of social structured theories in an attempt to explain the relationship between crime and society. Moreover, the theories help to provide a blue print of the development of the organized crime within society. Though organized crime is difficult to combat, it is possible through an understanding of the various causal theories associated with organized crime development. Organized crime presents a variety of problems for law enforcement, in large part due to the relationships they establish within the community. An organized crime syndicate must maintain and foster a variety of positive relationships to be successful. As with a majority of these relationships, problems can develop between members, authority figures and business associates. Organized crime has flourished because of relationships with politician and law enforcement personnel. It has been established by the Italian Mafia and South American drug cartels exploited the low wages received by law enforcement and politicians. Through continued and lucrative bribes, these groups were allowed them to solidify a foothold in the community. Once established, bribery and violence sustained their criminal enterprise (Lyman & Potter, 2007). The Italian mafia is typically family owned and operated. This family dynamic can create unfavorable relationship between blood members and non-blood members. The potential for internal animosity between members is significant and could negatively impact the daily operations. However, strict behavior controls and consequences for violating them are enforced. This strict enforcement policy allows for resolving internal disputes and politicking quickly (Lyman & Potter, 2007). From an overall problematic perspective, organized crime operates best under the Bureaucratic Corporate Model (Mallory, 2007). Mainly because there is a complex hierarchy filled with very specific traditions. A leader may not necessarily have significant authority or influence over the leaders who preside over the entire organization, such as the boss and under boss. However, the day to day business of organized crime to a large degree communicates by employing the Patron Client Model. This model prefers in person communication over written or electronic format (Mallory, 2007). This in person communication is specifically mandated and designed, to hinder an active or potential criminal investigation, by avoiding the interception of communication through federal and state wiretap investigations. Though there are some legal limitations to combating organized crime, the current federal and state strategies have proven to be effective over the decades. The primary mission and objective for law enforcement is to safeguard the rights and privileges guaranteed under The United States Constitution. Although, law enforcement might perceive additional legal limitations associated with investigating an organized crime group, in reality there are none. There are established and acceptable investigative procedures that all law enforcement agencies must adhere to in order to preserve the integrity of the investigation. According to Abadinsky (2007), “There are three constraints on OC law enforcement: constitutional restraints, jurisdictional limitations, and the intertwining problems of corruption and informants” (p. 388). Critical legal limitations are the provisions within the Fourth Amendment of the Constitution. The Fourth Amendment prohibits unreasonable searches and seizures. In addition, no search warrant shall be issued without establishing probable cause and upon oath (Waksman...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document