Essay Sample on Crimes in New York 1850-1950

Crime in the United States, especially in New York City, dates back long before civilization. The historical periods between the 1850 - 1950 was engulfed with criminal activities such as robbery, violence, impersonation and identity theft, gambling, illegal arms dealing, and alcohol production and use. Nevertheless, cases of bribery and increased homicides were rampant during the early 20th century. Violent crimes such as robbery relied on power, which was in the form of guns. The various causes of the violence and felonies in New York City during this period were the high poverty rates in the city, immigration into the city, and war. This paper explores crimes in New York City in 1850 - 1950 as well as analyzing the trial of The People v Henry Ginsberg.

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Order now

Production and consumption of alcohol was a crime in New York in 1920s. There was an amendment in the constitution in 1920 to counter the production and consumption of alcohol. The amendment prohibited the marketing and production of alcohol in New York City and the whole of the United States. The move to reduce consumption of alcohol was sufficient since the use of alcohol decreased tremendously during this period. The government believed that alcohol was the leading cause of the crimes experienced in New York City at that time. However, the reduction in consumption of alcohol was not directly proportional to crime rates. There was an increase in crimes such as gambling and smuggling all across New York City. There was the emergence of large and powerful gangs within New York City.

A critical analysis and comparison of the crimes in New York City between 1850 and 1950 show that cases of homicidal crimes and violent crimes rose dramatically especially around the 1920s. Powerful gangs continued to grow and expand throughout New York City. Thus, the occurrence of murder, violence, and robbery increased abnormally in the 1920s. The judicial system in America was not able to respond effectively to the organized crimes of the 1920s. They feared the organized gangs, or they took bribe thus failing to counter the increasing crime rates. However, there was a significant decrease in the crime rates in New York City towards the end of 1930. The decline is due to effective law enforcement and a functional judicial system.

The trial of The People and Henry Ginsberg serves as a useful tool for the analysis and evaluation of judgment and justice in United States in the 1920s. In the 1920s gambling was a crime in the United States. The trial of The People and Henry Ginsberg presents a group of 30 men playing crap in an apartment in Louis (Woodiwiss, 2001, 59-60). Therefore, the group was participating in criminal activity before the robbery occurred. The robbers are men who live in their neighborhoods and who are daring enough not to cover their faces during the robbery. The theft seems to be an act of blackmail. The robbers might have thought that the group of men would not report the theft to the authority because they were also participating in unlawful activities. Thus, the text "Organized Crime and American Power: A History" by Michael Woodiwiss (2001) affirms that there was a form of organization in America that benefited from such crimes. The text is essential as it explains the arrangement and means of survival of such criminal activities in the United States for a long time.

Armed robbery and violence were the primary forms of crime in New York in the 1950s. The 3070 trial reveals that armed robbers attacked men at around midnight as they were on their leisure in Louis Scharf's apartment. According to the text, armed robbery was profound during these times and more especially in the 1920s. The case is evident in the trial where Gurr states that they were attacked at gunpoint and violently searched and robbed of jewelry and money. It is surprising how people they knew and who were their neighbors would steal them without hiding their faces. They did not believe it, and even at one point, thought that it was just a game or a trick.

A closer analysis of the text shows that violent crimes of the 1920s were the result of uncontrolled use of guns. Thus, the robbers saw themselves as powerful by possessing firearms to the point that they did not see the need to cover their faces when they were robbing the group of men. Although the number of men robbed superseded that of the robbers, the robbers were more powerful. Therefore, the men were to submit as the robbery went on because the robbers were influential at that particular moment. However, the law and the judicial system were powerful than the robbers since the criminals were eventually brought to trial and justice.

The trial brings out a critical aspect of crime hidden within an identity. The use of different names in numerous criminal scenes appears to be rampant in New York during the 1920s. It can be seen as identity theft or impersonation in recent times. Ginsberg uses two different names, Henry and Jacob, as a camouflage mechanism. He denounces the name Jacob and sticks to Henry during the trial. Woodiwiss states that this was a technique that was widely used in America by pickpockets. The tricked worked as pickpockets would pay for bonds and were let loose and would run back into their criminal lives. Ginsberg is a proof for this since he had been arrested on two different occasions and charged with the same crime.

Bribery and intimidation are evident in the trial and seems to affect the decision of judgment and justice. Even though the men are certain that they were robbed by the people they know, the course of the trial suggests that the wisdom and justice would swing to either side of the case. For example, Edward who is the brother to the defenders states that Bochner tried at one point to intimidate him and wanted to collect bribe from him so that he would influence the outcomes of the case. However, he refused to cooperate with Bochner. As a result, he had to present himself to the trial despite missing from the list of witnesses. It is surprising how the court disregards these claims and throws them away yet they seem to have significant influence on the case. The court argues that the combination of these causes of crime would harm the case and thus passes on the case to the jury.

Bibliography

Gurr, Ted Robert, ed. Violence in America: The history of crime. Vol. 1. Sage, 1989.

Woodiwiss, Michael. Organized crime and American power: A history. University of Toronto Press, 2001.