Heres another interesting read from one sociology project which again involves Lucky...

"What Charles "Lucky" Luciano's criminal history suggests to us about the nature of offending is that criminals, when adolescents, start offending as the result of a sort of hero worship. "In his world, the guys with the flashy clothes, the big cars, and the folding money never work" (Feder and Joesten, 44). Offending is not the result of being in dire straits and having neuropsychological deficits, rather it is a chosen lifestyle.

The nature of Luciano's crimes also suggest that more elaborate crimes hinder arrest and provide more benefits. Escalation served as a way to escape criminal prosecution. The prostitution case withstanding, Luciano was convicted for minor crimes such as shoplifting and drug dealing, but for more severe ones the networks were either too complex or did not provide sufficient evidence to permit prosecution.
Age was of little importance as a means of social control in Luciano's criminal career. Age at no point in his life served as a means of informal social control and offending was not hindered by an "attachment to the labor force and cohesive marriage (which)- explain variations in criminal behavior independent or prior differences in criminal propensity" (Sampson and Laub, 245).

In fact, in this case, Luciano's nature and onset was the direct result of rebellion against the social institutions, which are supposed to provide social control according to Sampson and Laub. He forfeited his job to seek out a more extravagant life; to live in the high-society that Petersilia described.

The onset of Luciano's criminal career is best described with strain theory. Luciano's goals were not being met when he was working and carrying an "adult" social role. His prospects for the future were bleak and did not provide him with the luxuries he desired. The whole concept of a "crum" is based on the premise that a working class lifestyle is not desirable and that the pressure to succeed is never relieved through these means. Lucky himself aimed to "prove that society alone was to blame for his life of crime" (Feder and Joesten, 308).

Upon entering the realm of "organized crime" it was Luciano's associations that provided him with the ability to attain his goals. Differential association perpetuated and advanced his criminal career. His associations landed him his job selling drugs and would later allow him to live in high-society. Luciano used tremendous agency and planning by learning ways of undermining conventional society.

Differential association theory is also supported by the fact that he escalated. The escalation resulted when he learned new forms of crime and made the necessary associations with other criminals to execute them. The associations grew to the point that they shielded him. Luciano remarked, "They talk about me and never come up with evidence. It's all politics and I'm the victim. It's about time to stop rapping me for all the bad things that happen in the US and in Europe." (Feder and Joesten, 312). Despite the great amount of prosperity that Luciano attained with differential association he always viewed himself as a victim of circumstance. Thereby ironically lamenting an argument of strain, that society could provide nothing but persecution and defeat."

http://www.collegetermpapers.com/Te...f_Charles_Lucky_Lucianos_LifeCourse.html