Vancouver Gang Violence: a historical analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article provides a historical description of key gangs and relevant events in BC, focusing on Vancouver, from 1909 to 2012 with a focus on the main incidents and themes of violence. A primary goal of this article is to dismiss the delusion that we are a more violent society today than ever before and face the harsh reality that violence and gangs in Vancouver are not new, nor are they a product of this new generation. While this nostalgic view of the past may be pleasing to our memories, an examination of newspapers and historical police documents suggests that violence in BC has been relatively constant for more than a century. From 1909 to 2012, gangs were consistently violent: there were murders, shootings, and gang fights. Innocent bystanders were shot, maimed, injured, and killed. Policymakers can’t blame the new generation, media, police, video games, or rap music – it has always been a part of our social fabric. This recognition is important to our current understanding of the gang landscape in Vancouver and our responses to these violent affronts to our society.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.329 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".