Look...I do have respect for your information you have compiled on all the families, it is quite impressive. But you like to bend things to fit your perspective and at times have been caught ignoring the FBI's view on how certain things are....or happened etc. Obviously I am not saying you are the only one who does this...but u are also guilty of it.
This post is one example. When it comes to someones list that includes possible members...associates that have not been confirmed as made or they are up in the air....you immediately dismiss it as inflated.
However in your attempt to make the Detroit family look even smaller, you wanted to make your list of members who have died in the last 15 years as large as possible, so you include those people listed as questionable. Quite hypocritical of you there, buddy.
You would have a point if I had said all those guys listed were made. But we really don't know because we haven't seen a verification on some guys here and there and Scott's lists are hardly conclusive. So I put members or possible members.
I have no need of fudging the numbers to make my point. The known facts make it for me. 30 members at most in 1996 with one article citing that same figure 5 years later. No confirmed ceremonies to speak of. But, even if we assume there have been, what are the chances the family has been able to keep up with the number that have died? Even if only, say, half those guys were actually made?
The point is, the idea the family has 40 or 50 members is unrealistic at this point. Even 30 seems a stretch now, all things considered.
Ivy my friend I appreciate you taking the time to respond to my post and acknowledge that you did concede some points. I respect the shit outta ur knowledge and research skills and would never shit on u for ur opinions, we just dont see eye to eye on this one..
Im not arguing that their operations are extremely diversified beyond the Midwest, but what I am saying is that since they've always operated in the shadows and that we can all agree Detroit is rebuilding the climate their is ripe for their quiet success..I mean as silvio dante said and its true "our thing" (gambling, girls, drugs, shylock) have always been recession proof, plus some of the past gambling busts scott has reported on involving guys like Allen Hilf were way into the multi millions and involved turf in Ohio and Milwaukee..twl surrounding cities with alotta action but now mafia families..if we agree theyr active and even if u say 30 members, full admin, and say 100+ associates, these guys have to be earning money no? Otherwise they would be pulling cowboy shit or trusting shady fucks like Merlinos latest bust
The point is, I think you are insanely underestimating the strength and power of detroit..your.argument still is not addressing that when they were at their peak they were just as quiet, lowkey, less violent as they are today meanimg how can u claim theyre not extremely active respective to the times..now again im not dumb they dont have the unions like they did ..and also ivy you failed to rebut my point that ur main gauge for activity is cases, yet Detroit has had the fewest made guys flip(1!!) And theyre all related and intermarried..I.e. you cant judge a lack of cases showing an inactive family in this case..
Serious question for you and anyone..do they really not have any teamsters or other union locals theyve infiltrated? Considering they invented union corruption basically and held sway there for almost a century I find that hard to believe, but I defer to more knowledgeable posters..any thoughts?
I don't think I'm underestimating anything because I also figure attrition into it, which is the biggest killer of mob families in the US. That wasn't a factor decades ago when the family was at its peak so it's sort of apples and oranges. Detroit can have all the intermarriages it wants. It doesn't stop them from dying off. Furthermore, how long are we supposed to use that reasoning to explain away the relative lack of mob cases in Detroit? Another 10 years? 20 years?
As for you're union question, when you say "they invented union corruption," I assume you mean the LCN in general. There was a time when the Detroit family was involved in labor racketeering but there hasn't been any examples of it in a long time. Even the 20 years old GamTax case didn't involve the unions. Scott would bring up Tony LaPiana as his example of Detroit's union connections but he was hardly an example of the family as a whole having any significant labor racketeering activity at this point.
