So guys, in my country there are some areas dominated by crime, where it’s difficult for the government to operate.
These places are basically controlled by organized crime. Is there anything like that in the U.S.? For example, places where the police can’t easily access or operate.
27 comments
No
No
No
No
No
No
Nope
No
No, but considering we *are* the state, that would be a given.
Oh heavens no.
There are places that go under the radar because the government either doesn’t know or doesn’t really care all that much.
But the idea that any crime (or any group) would be powerful enough that the US wouldn’t stomp them at will is completely unimaginable.
The US has absolutely zero problem sending in the big guns to knock down crime, and *no one* has bigger guns than the US.
If any crime group tried to actively resist the force of the US then the government would just keep sending more and more force until they absolutely devastate any and all resistance.
No.
The only thing that contests the US government control over these lands is mother nature herself.
Depends on where you get your news from but honestly No. There are definitely places where things might happen slower than other places but in the end it’ll get there.
There are native American reservations where the federal and state governments have limited authority and they are pretty much self governed enclaves but this is the result of treaties ending hostilities (read American aggression against native people) over a century ago. There isn’t anything like what you are describing.
There have–throughout our history–been places like that. In the 1800’s the “wild, wild west.” Some neighborhoods in cities…maybe a few square blocks can be pretty rough, but even then I would stop short of saying “can’t touch.”
Dangerous places? Yes. Completely lawless? No, not really. Law enforcement can go in if they need to.
Organized crime has to be elite level and typically always in transit or consumed. Trafficking, drugs, weapons dealing are all in motion constantly. The idea of setting up shop in a single locale outside of law enforcement jurisdiction is nearly unheard of.
There is a reason why Epstein had an island to whisk victims away to.
There’s this one train station in rural Montana…
That’s a joke about a popular TV show. No, I’m not aware of any place the government couldn’t go if they really wanted to.
It’s not so much that they can’t operate there. It’s generally that the US is too massive to had law enforcement presence everywhere.
For instance, back during prohibition, enterprising lawbreakers would operate homemade stills to manufacture alcohol way out in the countryside and were chased by Revenue Men.
In today’s world, the same can be said about a number of other manufacturing, such as illicit drugs and narcotics.
Lastly, there are so many ways to break the law and we have such a massive population compared to our Law enforcement, a lot of crime happens simply because there aren’t enough resources to stop/catch/prosecute every crime.
Not in the way that you’re describing but there are definitely corrupt police departments that act in some ways as an organized crime syndicate. Vallejo PD is a recent example.
There are some places the police may not be constantly present, such as Northern Alaska, parts of the Rocky mountains, parts of the Appalachian mountains, certain Indian reservations. You can, in theory, hide out there for a good long time like the Unabomber did. But he was actually doing his crimes in populated areas and just retreating to his mountain hideout.
If you are just a homeless dude living light on the land and moving around periodically, police probably aren’t going to hassle you, although Park Rangers might check in with you occasionally.
If you’re on a crime spree, though, they are definitely coming to find you even in the Rocky mountains or Northern Alaska.
>places where the police can’t easily access or operate
Strictly by that definition, sure. There’s a lot of wilderness in the United States where government agents would have difficulty getting to and basically don’t unless the situation is extreme enough to justify the cost in equipment and manpower. There can also be jurisdictional issues that can slow down an operation as different agencies coordinate who has access to what.
For the organized crime reasons, no, not really. Police might still choose to ignore areas with a lot of organized crime for whatever reason, but if they want to move in they will
Can’t is the wrong word. In general there is no place so dangerous a cop will never go, but there are some places so messy that the cops don’t even bother patrolling.
Nope. Gangs and extremists might think they can tell the government they aren’t allowed, but if the government wants to go there, there’s no stopping them.
The US literally entered Venezuela and captured their President. What makes you think a local crime boss would be more untouchable than Maduro?
Yes, two areas come to mind:
* The ultra-rich
* The police themselves
It’s not that either group is categorically, permanently out of reach… but the state is very slow and very forgiving with both groups. That’s probably true in most nations.
I know your question was more focused on geography, but that’s not as much a limiting factor here. The government is capable of almost anything – it is limited by will, not by capability.
There are areas so remote that criminals can get away with more just because there are no witnesses (e.g. out in the remote desert along the Mexican border, in remote parts of the Rocky Mountains)… but if the criminality gets too visible, the government will go in and take action.
Philadelphia police department once dropped a bomb on a house and burned down half a city block to end a standoff.
Yeah, it’s pretty hard for any law enforcement to get into the White House these days.
Can’t? No.
Won’t? Sometimes.
See coverage of the [CHAZ](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capitol_Hill_Occupied_Protest) for instance a few years ago in Portland.
Police didn’t go there because elected officials ordered them to stand down 100% for political reasons.
They were 100% capable of going in there (the local PD, solo, with no reinforcement).
Not a fan of President Bukele of El Salvador, but he is correct when he says that the only way a functioning state can lose to criminals is if the state is in some way complicit.