"I didn't kill anyone that didn't deserve killing in the first place"

The quote "I didn't kill anyone that didn't deserve killing in the first place" by Mickey Cohen offers a glance into the mindset of a notorious American gangster, active during the mid-20th century. This statement can be interpreted in several methods, reflecting both the personal validation and broader ethical implications of violence and justice.

To start with, the declaration reveals an effort at ethical validation. By asserting that those he eliminated "deserved" it, Cohen appears to rationalize his violent actions as serving a form of unrefined justice or retribution. In his world, identified by the brutal codes of the mob, such a claim might serve both as an individual absolution and a message to others within his sphere. It suggests that his actions were not arbitrary but selectively targeted towards those whom he thought had actually dedicated misbehaviors requiring such an extreme reaction. This introduces a subjective requirement of justice where Cohen positions himself as both judge and executioner.

Moreover, this quote highlights the blurred lines in between right and wrong within the criminal underworld. By suggesting that his victims had it coming, Cohen not only looks for to deflect moral guilt however also exposes a worldview where conventional laws and ethical standards are supplanted by an alternate set of rules. This viewpoint typically defines the mob, where power characteristics and survival impulses dictate actions more than social laws do.

Additionally, the statement highlights a theme typical in the stories of many figures involved in organized crime: the necessity and inevitability of violence as a tool for preserving order and authority. By declaring that the killings were should have, Cohen not just justifies past actions but perhaps also cautions of future ones; it is an assertion of dominance, reminding both allies and rivals of the repercussions of crossing him.

In general, this quote from Mickey Cohen supplies a window into the precarious balance in between morality and survival in the criminal world, where violence is often viewed as both a needed evil and a method to an end. It challenges readers to consider the intricacies of justice and the subjective nature of determining who "should have" penalty.