The reason people mainly mention NY and Chicago is because they are bigger and it is assumed that it is harder to run a big family than a small family.
How many of the crime families above were as big as the smallest NY family at the time? Were some of them only as big as a NY crew? Did the small families have only a fraction of the law enforcement surveillance compared to what the bigger families had. How about competition, etc...?
Exactly, it is "assumed" that it is harder to run a bigger city...not altogether true if you have trustworthy Capos and territory bosses that run a tight ship in their respected territories.
Pittsburgh and Cleveland had over 65 members and over 750 associates, Buffalo & Detroit were bigger than that and SF, San Jose and Dallas were smaller...but still relevant in a big way.
Last edited by Bugsyvegas1930; 08/04/1407:57 AM.
Uncle Charlie once said; "Don't get into pissing matches with skunks."
