The Construction of the Gang in British Columbia: Mafioso, Gangster, or Thug? An Examination of the Uniqueness of the BC Gangster Phenomenon
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This thesis explores the structure, demographics, and history of gangs in British Columbia (BC), Canada, through a social constructionist lens. The purpose of the research is for the reader to consider the current state of gangs in BC as inherently different from other places in the world, to assist in understanding why there may be misconceptions, and to promote the research and implement of more appropriate context-specific intereventions. Building on previous work conducted as a Vancouver Police officer of over 27 years, I participated in field observations with gang units in Toronto and Hobbema, Canada; Chicago and Los Angeles, USA; and London, England. I also examined gang typologies and definitions in academic literature as a segment of the historical context of gang research and highlight how these bodies of literature contribute to the social construction of gangs. A historical review of media-reported gang violence in BC from 1903 to 2012 demonstrates that gang violence is not a new phenomenon, and its history is an essential element in the constructed concept of the gang. As well, I conducted semi-structured interviews with participants who either police gangs, work with gangs, or were former gang members to get their perspectives on the issue. The research findings highlight that gangs in BC are distinct from other locations, Whereas traditional at-risk youth dominate gangs elsewhere, BC has a large number of youth involved in gangs who do not appear to possess the typical antecedents to gang involvement. Because of these differences, it is crucial that anti-gang initiatives and policies be adapted to BC context to effectively reduce gang activity and ultimately eliminate gangs.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.008 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.039 | 0.015 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".