CRIME AND PUNISHMENT. ORGANIZED CRIME- WHAT IS IT, AND CAN IT BE STOPPED? PT 4.

The First Large Criminal Gangs were founded in the Eastern U.S., and were formed by Two Main Groups;

IRISH IMMIGRANTS WHO CAME TO THE U.S. IN THE EARLY TO MID 1800s. These Formed in the Poorest Sections of Cities such as New York, Philadelphia, Boston etc.

ANTI- IMMIGRANT OR NATIVIST GANGS.  These also formed in the same areas.

Much of the Conflict Between the Two Groups was not only the Country of Origin and Economic Factors, but a Prominent Religious Element that took the Form of AN ANTI- CATHOLIC SENTIMENT AMONG THE NATIVIST GANGS.

Gangs with Names such as:

-  DEAD RABBITS. 

-  WHYOS.

-  BOWERY BOYS.

-  ROACH GUARDS.

Often numbered in the Hundreds. 

They usually Centered Their Activities in and around the Areas and Neighborhoods from which Their members were Drawn From. As is still the case today, Most of Those Victimized by Criminal Activity were from the same Racial, Ethnic and Economic Class as Those who Committed the Illegal Acts.

While these were the First, CRIMINAL ORGANIZATIONS THAT HAVE BEEN FOUNDED AND FORMED ALONG RACIAL AND ETHNIC LINES ARE QUITE COMMON IN AMERICAN HISTORY.  In Fact, There is no group Living in the U.S. Today that has not had its Share of ORGANIZED CRIMINAL ACTIVITY FORMED WITHIN THE BODY OF THE POPULATION CONTAINED WITHIN ITS DEFINED PARAMETERS.

THE REASONS FOR THIS SEEMS TO BE ALMOST UNIVERSAL ACROSS RACIAL AND ETHNIC LINES, AS ARE THE REASONS FOR THE SUCCESS AND FAILURE OF THEIR CRIMINAL ENTERPRISES.

ETHICS AND MORALITY. WHAT DOES IT MEAN TO FORGIVE? PT 4.

IT IS THE IDEA OF JUDGING THE INTENT VS JUDGING THE OUTCOME.

That I Believe, is the Reason there is so much Confusion, Anxiety, and Distress when it comes to the Concept of Forgiveness.

Why?  Consider the Following.

-  WHAT IS THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN FORGIVING AN INDIVIDUAL WHO COMMITS AN IMMORAL ACT THAT RESULTS IN CATASTROPHIC NEGATIVE CONSEQUENCES, AND ANOTHER PERSON WHO COMMITS THE SAME ACT, WHICH DOES NOT RESULT IN ANY MEANINGFUL HARM TO ANYONE?

-  IS A PERSON WHO SETS OUT TO HURT ANOTHER BY COMMITTING OR PERFORMING CERTAIN ACTIONS, LESS DESERVING OF FORGIVENESS THAN ANOTHER WHO ACTED IN THE SAME MANNER, BUT DID NOT WANT TO CAUSE SUFFERING?

-  IS FORGIVENESS A GIFT YOU GIVE ANOTHER REGARDLESS OF THE PARTICULAR ACT THAT CAUSED UNWANTED PAIN AND SUFFERING?

-  IS GENUINE REGRET, BECAUSE OF AN EMPATHETIC EPIPHANY THAT WAS NOT EXPRESSED EARLIER, A REASON FOR FORGIVENESS?

-  SHOULD YOU FORGIVE ANOTHER, IF THEY ACCEPT NO RESPONSIBILITY FOR THEIR ACTIONS?

FINALLY, IF A PERSON CHOOSES NOT TO FORGIVE ANOTHER, CAN THEIR DECISION BE CONSIDERED IMMORAL?

ETHICS AND MORALITY. WHAT DOES IT MEAN TO FORGIVE? PT 3.

Unfortunately, it seems that the Definition of FORGIVENESS IGNORES TOO MANY IMPORTANT FACTORS. We are expected to apply it to ALL SITUATIONS IN WHICH HARM HAS BEEN INFLICTED UPON US, EITHER DIRECTLY, OR THROUGH THE HURT AND PAIN CAUSED TO OTHERS WHOSE PERSONAL WELFARE AFFECTS US EMOTIONALLY AND/OR INTELLECTUALLY.

Yet not every Situation is the Same, and Certain Important Details are often Ignored.  As I Mentioned Earlier, This Includes the Future Actions of Those Who have Caused Harm, and whether or not there is any Adjustment in the Type of Personal Behavior that led to the Negative Consequences that were Inflicted on Those Innocent of any Immoral or Illegal Behavior.

However, that is the Final Evaluation;

-  After the Act has been Committed.

-  When the Affects of such Behavior have become known,

at least the Physical, on the Victim(s). ( Mentally, the Victim 

may Suffer Ill- Effects for Years, which may not always be Readily Apparent.)

-  Once Punishment, (Through the Legal System) , has been Exacted.

-  WHEN RESTITUTION , if it is Possible, is made to make THE VICTIM WHOLE, or as Close To as is Possible.

However, that is all Done AFTER THE FACT.  It is at This Point that the Expectation of FORGIVENESS is Usually Confronted, whether or not it 

should be Offered, and if not, WHY?

THIS TYPE OF REASONING EXCLUDES THE MOST IMPORTANT ASPECT

OF ALL, WHEN WE JUDGE THE ACTIONS OF ANOTHER:  

WHAT LED TO BEHAVIOR THAT CAUSED INJURY OR SUFFERING, AND HOW DOES THIS MITIGATE OR ALTER THE DEGREE TO WHICH WE HOLD THE INDIVIDUAL RESPONSIBLE FOR ANY NEGATIVE CONSEQUENCES RESULTING FROM THEIR ACTIONS.

IT IS THE IDEA OF JUDGING THE INTENT VS JUDGING THE OUTCOME.

END OF PT 3.

ETHICS AND MORALITY. WHAT DOES IT MEAN TO FORGIVE? PT 2.

I Ended Part 1 with an example, and a "WHAT WOULD YOU DO?" Question.  However, You may have noticed that Answering such a Challenge isn't easy.  Nor should it be.  "FORGIVENESS" is not the Simplistic Concept Many would have you believe, for it contains Different Elements and Levels that are Unique to each Situation.

Those who believe that Short and Quick Resolutions are the Answer to Resolving Conflicts, sometime begin Their Advice with words like the following;

-  "He's really sorry for what he did, you should forgive him."

-  "She's not like that usually, it won't happen again, don't worry about it."

-  "You pushed the Wrong Buttons, you know how they are.  Watch it 

next time."

THIRD PARTY INDIVIDUALS are usually the ones to offer such "ADVICE."  Either by Design, Ignorance or Fear, They seek to place the BURDEN OF RESOLVING THE SITUATION ON THOSE WHO HAVE BEEN HARMED, OFTEN WITHOUT ANY SANCTIONS AGAINST THOSE WHO HAVE CAUSED THE SUFFERING. 

It is just another CASE OF BLAMING THE VICTIM.

So where do We Start?  How and When should "FORGIVENESS" BE OFFERED, AND UNDER WHAT CIRCUMSTANCES?

How about Defining "FORGIVE."

THIS IS THE DEFINITION TAKEN FROM THE MERRIAM- WEBSTER DICTIONARY.

: to stop feeling anger toward (someone who has done something wrong) : to stop blaming (someone)

: to stop feeling anger about (something) : to forgive someone for (something wrong)

THIS IS TAKEN FROM THE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA- BERKELEY "GREATER GOOD."  THE SCIENCE OF A MEANINGFUL LIFE, WEBSITE.

What Is Forgiveness?

Psychologists generally define forgiveness as a conscious, deliberate decision to release feelings of resentment or vengeance toward a person or group who has harmed you, regardless of whether they actually deserve your forgiveness.

These Definitions are fairly close to others I came across, and all have Basically the same things in common.

HOWEVER, THERE ARE TWO IMPORTANT THINGS THAT SHOULD BE NOTICED:

-  BOTH DEFINITIONS REQUIRE NOTHING FROM THE INDIVIDUAL(S) WHO HAVE CAUSED THE PHYSICAL OR MENTAL TRAUMA.

-  BOTH USE THE TERM "FEELINGS,"  AS A NEGATIVE DESCRIPTION REGARDING HOW THE VICTIM CONTINUES TO PERCEIVE THE PERSON AND ACTIONS THAT HAVE HURT THEM.

THIS LEADS US TO THE FOLLOWING:

IS "FORGIVENESS" JUST ANOTHER FORM OF "ACCEPTANCE," SINCE NOTHING HAS CHANGED IN THE DYNAMIC BETWEEN THE "VICTIM" AND THE "PERPETRATOR?"

WHY IS CONTINUING TO JUDGE THOSE WHO HAVE HARMED YOU SOMETHING THAT MUST BE OVERCOME, IF THE INDIVIDUAL(S) INVOLVED HAVE NOT ALTERED THEIR PERSONAL BEHAVIOR, WHICH MAY CONTINUE TO CAUSE PAIN AND SUFFERING TO YOU AND OTHERS? 

END OF PT 2.