I have a broad interpretation of “Honor among thieves”. I interpret that dishonest criminals (bookmakers, drug dealers, pimps, etc., and not just robbers, thieves, and swindlers) that associate with each other play by normal rules when interacting amongst themselves. Perhaps the phrase only involves one’s immediate circle of crooks.
Exceptions? In Breaking Bad, death and mugging seems the norm. I think of all the people that Michael Corleone murdered as well as Frank (the Enforcer) Nitti on “The Untouchables”. In the real world, I can think of the Saint Valentine’s Day Massacre as well as the current trial of James “Whitey” Bulger.
Is “Honor Among Thieves” just a saying with no basis, or are the examples in the last paragraph the exception to the normal day’s events. What’s the origin of the phrase?
And on a related note, do people in organized crime have the same life expectancy as other folks?
I’ve never heard " honor among thieves" except as a title for a TV episode, book ,etc. IME , it’s more common to hear " There’s no honor among thieves"
Criminals don’t usually have much honor at all. However, I have known enough low-lifes in my day to know that most of them have some unofficial rules that they follow. There is nothing admirable about it, the rules are there to prevent needless conflict and turf-wars. Drug dealers typically have an area they cover and may only sell certain substances because of informal territorial arrangements. They don’t follow them because they have honor, they do it because they could get killed if they don’t. Other types of criminal activity have the same arrangements. That doesn’t mean that everyone follows them but it does provide a reason when retribution is sought. Even criminals know that it is generally a bad idea to piss off someone as immoral or unstable as they are.
There is an episode of ‘My Name of Earl’ that referenced this. In the episode ‘Stole a Badge’, Clint Howard’s character is presented as the worst form of criminal possible because he was a thief that stole from other thieves and that is huge faux pas.
Sometimes people belong to an “alternative” society (even if it’s more common than the “legal” one) which happens to have social norms divergent from what’s “legal”. Other times people break the law for isolated reasons, because they’re desperate, or calculating, or greedy, or stupid, or whatever.
The first will have rules (most) people follow; the second will not.
I’ve heard things like pick-pocketing used to have “professionals” who taught the trade and kept out outsiders, but now there’s so many people willing to try it’s basically everyone for themselves, though I don’t know how accurate/widespread that is.
It seems it would be more applicable to organized crime.
Just being an organization suggests respect for rules and leadership that could be called honor.
Enough pressure (greed, jealousy, law enforcement, competition) can break the bond and scrap the honor. In the end, after all, it is usually about self preservation.
Drug dealers are often targeted for burglary and robbery, of course.
Drug users can get desperate and do some really shitty things.
It will really be shades of gray all over the place, though. Try answering “Is there really [broad characteristic] among [generalized group]?” for example.
So, not actually honor (which entails some degree of action, restraint, or sacrifice to the benefit of another) but just a patina of honor to be shed as soon as convenience dictates?
The term “honor among thieves” is usually stated in the paradoxical or ironical context, i.e. there is none. Of course, a criminal crew which works together may have a certain degree of bonding and mutual trust for one another by virtue of having to rely on each other to perform in their criminal enterprise, but that isn’t really the same thing as honor, per se; they are agreeing to a mutually beneficial relationship which is subject to renegotiation at any time should the risks or payouts change. Honor, on the other hand, is a code by which one swears some kind of allegiance (either explicitly or implicitly by joining) regardless of the outcome to the participant. One may cite examples such as the code of the Omertà among Sicilians and Corsicans (among other societies dominated by organized crime syndicates) but even a cursory look of history indicates that these codes are matters of convenience and repercussion rather than some kind of honor borne of loyalty. Ditto for bushidō and medieval chivalry (which existed mostly in the writing of authors and accurately skewered by Miguel de Cervantes Saavedra in Don Quixote).
Actual thieves? I’ve worked with more than a few in kitchens. There is no fucking honor. There is just the amount of bullshit one can get away with without getting called out or shivved by another.
I think we have to differentiate between criminals and thieves, one is a subset of the other.
Thieves have no honour whatever between themselves at all, even among accomplices. They will sell each other dodgy hot gear, steal from each other, grass each other - turn evidence in court against each other. Occasionally they will decide there are some limits, so that some will say they only burgle industrials and not dwellings but this is pretty much a self justification.
I’ve only been in the company of a couple of proper old skool villians (London, working class) and there absolutely was a code, it may have been based in no small part on the certainty of very, very painful revenge, but it did exist.
These are very tough, mentally resolved to any consequence types. They had a code, and it only worked becasue it was enforced.