When we remove God from a Christian country, it becomes destructive and superficial. Man is supposed to be born “good” and rational, and it is due to bad institutions, bad education, and bad example that he or she develops evil strivings. The structure of the system C societies is very distinct. It is characterized by much interpersonal violence, destructiveness, aggression, and cruelty, both within the family and peer group and against others, a pleasure in way, maliciousness, and treachery. The whole atmosphere of life is one of hostility, tension, and fear. Usually there is a great deal of competition, great emphasis on private property (if not material things than in symbols), strict hierarchies, and a considerable amount of war-making. Collective behavior and social organization such as gangs share many common elements, including group behavior, collective processes, and group structure. Thus it is productive to view collective behavior on a continuum with social organizations rather than regarding them as separate topics of study. Collective behavior processes operate within the gang, and can be used to account for the emergence of collective violence. Such processes include games, fights, meetings, and defining common enemies. The supporting distinctions between gangs and other forms of social organization (exempli gratia, groups, mobs, crowds, publics) make clear the role perceived for collective behaviour can be used to explain gang activity. #RandolphHarris 1 of 21

There are three elements of collective behavior: (1) group, (2) behavior, and (3) common actions that vary on one or more dimensions such as purpose, organization, or duration. Gang violence is a form of collective behavior because it emerges from a group process involving common actions tht have a defined purpose. Gang violence includes a number of acts and is mostly to involve assaults and the use of weapons. Although the motives for these acts are diverse, much gang violence (as discussed above) is retaliatory. This quality is evident in the disproportionate number of assaults and shootings committed in response to the acts of other gangs. Initial interviews made clear that a number of violent acts were committed by gang members outside the gang. It would be inappropriate to classify these acts as gang-related, even though they were committed by gang members. Our classification of gang violence included only those ats committed by gang members which were organized by gang members and motivated by gang concerns, especially revenge, retaliation, reputation, and representation of membership. The centrality of violence to gang life was illustrated by counts of the times a topic was mentioned during an interview. Except for drugs (which were mentioned more than 2,000 times), our subjects mentioned violence more than any other topic. They referred to violence 1,681 times, including hundreds of references to specific acts such as killing or murder (246), assault (148), and robbery (71). #RandolphHarris 2 of 21

As further evidence of the importance of violence nine of our ninety-nine subjects have been killed within ten years of the study; several showed us bullet wounds during the interview. As stated earlier, this group had extensive arrest histories: 80 percent had been arrested at least once, the mean number of arrests per subject was eight, and one third reported that their most recent arrest was for assault or weapons violations. Other incidents also illustrate the salience of violence in the lives of gang members. One day three gang members were sitting on their front porch, waiting for the field ethnographer to pick one of the up for an interview. As he drove u their street, he heard shots and saw the three subjects being shot in a drive-by. Their wounds were superficial, but this incident underscored the daily potential for violence as well as our ability to observe it firsthand. During the course of our research, several gang members offered to demonstrate their ability to use violence, typically by inviting us to accompany them on a drive-by shooting or to drop them off in rival territory and watch them shoot a rival gang member. We declined all such invitations, but they are not uncommon in field research. On a few occasions during interviews, gang members displayed a firearm when asked whether they possessed a gun. Most subjects reported beginning their life in the gang with a violent encounter; usually they were “beaten in” by members of the gang they were joining. #RandolphHarris 3 of 21

The process of leaving the gang was also described in violent terms: by being “beaten out,” leaving through fear of violence, suffering serious injury or death. No society could be characterized as nonviolent and peaceful if it has to live up to an absolute ideal of complete absence of hostility or of any quarrels. However, such a point of view is rather naïve. Even basically unaggressive and nonviolent people will occasionally react with annoyance under certain conditions, especially those with a choleric temperament. This does not mean, however, that their character structure is aggressive, violent, or destructive. One might even go further and say that in a culture where expressions of anger are taboo, sometimes a relatively mild quantity of anger will pile up and be expressed in a quarrel; but only if one is dogmatically attached to the view of man’s innate aggression will one interpret these occasional quarrels as indicating the depth and intensity of the repressed aggression. The research reported here attempts to provide a framework for understanding the peaks and valleys of gang violence. Efforts to understand gang violence must focus both on process variables (such as interactions) and on situational characteristics (such as neighborhood structure, race, and gender). For these reasons, in this series of reports, we concentrate on stages in the gang process that illustrate important aspect of gang violence, and we examine such violence in the context of five spheres of gang activity: (1) the role of violence in defining life in the gang, (2) the role of violence in the process of joining the gang, (3) the use of violence by the gang, (4) tagging grounds for violence, and (5) gang members’ recommendations for ending their gang. #RandolphHarris 4 of 21

A fundamental way to determine the centrality of violence to life in the gang is to examine how gang members defined a gang. Most answers to this question included some mention of violence. Our subjects were able to distinguish between violence within the gang and that which was unrelated to the gang. INT: What is a gang to you? 007: A gang is, I don’t know, just a gang where people hang out together and get into fight. A lot of members of your group will help you fight. INT: So if you just got into a fight with another girl because you did not like her? 007: Then it would be a one-on-one fight, but then like if somebody else jump in, then somebody would come from my side. INT: Why do you call the group you belong to a gang? 047: Violence, I guess. There is more violence than a family. With a gang it’s like fighting all the time, killing, shooting. INT: What kind of things do members of your organization do together? 085: We have drive-bys, shootings, go to parties, we even go to the mall. Most of the thing we do together is dealing with fighting. (Most often the violence was protective, reflecting the belief that belonging to a gang at least would reduce the chance of being attacked.) INT: Are you claiming a gang now? 046: I’m cool with a gang, real cool. INT: What does it mean to be cool? 046: You don’t got to worry about nobody jumping you. You don’t got to worry about getting beat up. #RandolphHarris 5 of 21

Other subjects found the violence in the gang an attractive feature of membership. These individuals were attracted not so much by protection as by the opportunity to engage in violence. INT: Why did you start calling that group a gang? 009: It’s good to be in a gang cause there’s a lot of violence and stuff. INT: So the reason you call it a gang is basically why? 101: Because I beat up folk and shoot them. The last person I shot I was in jail for five years. INT: What’s good about being in a gang? 101: You can get to fight whoever you want and shoot whoever you want. To me, it’s kind of fun. Then again, it’s not…because you have to go to jail for that sh*t. But other than that, being down for who you want to be with, it’s kind of fun. INT: What’s the most important reason for to be in the gang? 057: Beating Crabs. If it wasn’t for beating Crabs, I don’t think I would be in a gang right now. (Whether for protection or for the opportunity to engage in violence, the members of our sample attached considerable importance to the role of violence in their definition of a gang. Many of the comments evoke “mythic violence”—discussions of violent activities between gangs that reinforce the ties of membership and maintain boundaries between neighborhood gangs and those in “rival” neighborhoods. In this sense, violence is a central feature of the normative system of the gang; it is the defining feature and the central value of gang life.) #RandolphHarris 6 of 21

There are 33,000 violent street gangs with 1.4 million members nationwide. However, some estimates indicate the numbers to be twice as high. Well-known companies, Police Departments, the United States Post Office, major pharmaceutical companies, TV News stations, and even the Social Security Administration have found gang members within their ranks carrying out complex illegal operations netting millions annually. Gangs have even gained employment in the U.S. Military, law enforcement, corrections, and even judiciary. Typically, gangs are known for drug trafficking, robbery, prostitution, human trafficking, fraud and other crimes you may think would not infiltrate a common company. Now, they are. However gangs are concentrating their efforts on white-collar crime due to the weaker sentencing guidelines and east of making money, but this does not mean that they left their roots behind. The term “gang activity” involves identity theft, credit card fraud, prescription drug fraud, trafficking stolen goods, money laundering, mortgage fraud, Social Security Administration fraud, tax fraud, counterfeiting, and securities marketing manipulation. Where there is access, there will be individuals willing to participate in capitalizing and even selling their access to those interested in exploiting the system. In 2015, the Outlaw Gangsta Crips in NYC made approximately $500,000 in a paycheck fraud scheme by obtaining a legitimate paycheck from an employee and using the information to create and cash counterfeit checks. #RandolphHarris 7 of 21

In one year, California Silicon Valley firms were hit with more than 50 armed robberies of microchips and electronic components with the average heist netting the robbers $400,000. Gang members are becoming harder to weed out in the hiring process, much of the time because we commonly think of “gang members” as looking like street thugs, and these old stereotypes are costing companies billions annually. Some gangs plant members within a company in a specific department such as infiltrating dispatching, shipping or the financial departments. They can also pose as temporary workers or work for outside vendors to gain access to numerous companies. No industry or company is exempt from the newest wave of gangs which have been penetrating businesses undetected, and gang-related criminal activity can threaten a company and the workforce. Although crime committed by gang members accounts for a small fraction of the estimated $120 billion a year in workplace theft, gangs also impact companies through extortion, violence, and drug sales. Gang member increasingly clock their illicit activities behind the legitimacy of the workplace. The new breed of gangs involves all races, religions, and increasingly involves women. Crimes committed by gang members are becoming more violent and brazen, for example, hijacking trucks, kidnapping, and storming factories to obtain microchip and electronic components. #RandolphHarris 8 of 21

Corporate gang-banging is actually a form of organized crime. Businesses should not underestimate the level of gang sophistication and violence. In addition, businesses should work closely with law enforcement to minimize the incidence of gang-related crimes and should carefully screen employees. However, some corporations are not in the dark and have been taken over by gang members, and their criminality spreads throughout the city affecting divisions of other corporations. Educating employees about how to spot gang activity and how to deal with it is also crucial. Many people wonder, “How is this possible?” well, simple. Gang members are elected into public office, and they hire other gang members on their staff and/or get them jobs in a public or private corporation. Also, foreign investment is another problem. Gang members are able to invest in campaigns, buy politicians, law enforcement agents, become chairs on public and private corporations, and so forth. Many gang members also seek health benefits to cover huge medical bills that can result from gang-related shootings and other activities. A major pharmaceutical firm recently discovered it hired gang members in mail deliver and computer repair. The crooks were carting off close to $1 million a year in computer parts and using the mail department to ship them to a nearby computer store they happened to own. The same gang was also peddling drugs on the premises. Furthermore, a well-known hospital discovered that a supervisor in the laundry department was a gang member who used the position to obtain Social Security numbers, and extorted money from workers every payday. #RandolphHarris 9 of 21

One can see why the growing “privatization” of intelligence is occurring, and not just on Earth but in space. Five nations—the United States of America, France, Japan, India, and even the Soviet Union—now peddle data collective by their space satellites. The process began in 1972, when NASA launched the first Landsat for civilian use. There are now seven Landsat satellites in the Landsat program. Orbiting at 438 miles above the Earth’s surface, the Landsats send down photos, and other data that are routinely used in mineral exploration, crop forecasting, forestry operations, and similar tasks. Landsat images are also automatically down-linked to some fifteen countries, each of which, for a fee of $600,000 per year gets a steady stream of digitized images. Some of these have military significance. Thus, the U.S. Department of Defense is itself a purchaser of Landsat data. Landsat is also used by the Japanese military to keep an eye on Eastern Siberia. In 1984 an American scientist, Dr. John Miller at the University of Alaska, using Landsat photos, was able to detect what appeared to be Soviet tests designed to show if nuclear missiles could be launched by submarines operating under the Arctic ice. On February 21, 1986, the French launched the SPOT satellite and went into competition with Landsat. Since then scholars, scientists, and the public have been able to study military and industrial operations anywhere on Earth. The American and Soviet monopoly of space-based intelligence was cracked wide open. #RandolphHarris 10 of 21

While SPOT and Landsat imaging is not as good as that available to the military, it is plenty good enough. Thus, governments lacking satellites of their own are a market for SPOT’s commercially available military intelligence. More to the point, customers can now buy images and data tapes from several suppliers, then merge and manipulate the data on computers, and come up with inferential information that goes far beyond that which might be available from a single source. Indeed, there is a thriving industry that does little but process date from one or more of these satellites. These range from the Environmental Research Institute of Michigan, to the Saudi Center for Remote Sensing in Riyadh, and the Instituto de Pesquisas Espaciais in Sao Paulo. A company in Atlanta named ERDAS, Inc., in turn, writes software for these “value added” image enhancers—two hundred of them in the World. Perhaps the best example of the de-monopolization of intelligence data is the work of the Stockholm-based Space Media Network, which buys data from both SPOT and Landsat, crunches it through computers, and comes up with images it provides to the World press. Just so the intelligence aspect of its work is not overlooked, an AMN handout describes its work as reporting on “every part of the World where normal media access is limited or out of bounds, id est, closed borders, critical war zones, current crises or catastrophes.” SMN has made public images showing secret Soviet preparations for a shuttle program in Tyuratam, data about a giant Soviet laser that could form part of an antimissile system, a site for Chinese missiles in Saudi Arabia, Pakistan’s nuclear weapons project in Kahuta, and continuous monitoring of the Persian Gulf during the military confrontation there. #RandolphHarris 11 of 21

The handwriting is not on the wall, but in the sky. Space-based intelligence will continue to be de-monopolized as additional satellites and additional computer technology become available. Counties like Iraq and Brazil are deep in satellite development. Others, including Egypt and Argentina, are developing missile launch capability, and Inscom, a Brazil-China joint venture, aims to combine Brazilian satellite know-how with Chinese rocket-launch capabilities. What was once available only to superpowers and their spies is increasingly available to lesser powers and, at some level at least, to private users and to the World media. Indeed, with this, the media itself becomes a prime competitor to the manufacturers of intelligence. Says a former senior White House official: “When I first arrived I was a victim of the ‘secrecy mystique’—if it was stamped ‘secret’ it was going to be really valuable. I soon found that I was often reading something I had previously read in the Financial Times. Even faster, instant television coverage normally beats the spies to the punch.” The continuing privatization and “media-ization” of intelligence or “para-intelligence” will force the spymasters to restructure their operations, just as many corporate CEOs have had to do. Espionage, too, will have to adapt to the new system of wealth creation on the planet. However, espionage faces problems that other industries do not. #RandolphHarris 12 of 21

Job also was deceived, as were the messengers that came to him, when he believed the report that the fire which had fallen from Heaven was “from God” Job 1.16 and that all other calamities which befell him in the loss of wealth, home and children came directly from the hand of God. For the early part of the book of Job clearly shows that Satan was the primary cause of all his troubles as “prince of the power of the air,” using the elements of nature and the wickedness of men to afflict the servant of God. He hoped that ultimately he could force Job into renouncing his faith in God, who seemed to be unjustly punishing him without cause. That this was Satan’s aim is suggested in the words of the wife of the patriarch, who became a tool for the Adversary when she urged the suffering man to “curse God and die.” She also was deceived by the Enemy into believing that God was the primary cause of all the trouble and the unmerited suffering which had come upon him. In the history of Israel during the time of Moses, the veil is lifted more clearly from the satanic powers and we are shown the condition of the World as sunk in idolatry—said in the New Testament to be the direct work of Satan (1 Cor. 10.20)—and having actual dealing with evil spirits. The whole inhabited Earth was thus in a state of deception and held by the deceiver in his power. We also find numbers of the people of Israel, through contact with others under satanic power, deceived into communicating with “familiar spirits” and into the using of “divination” and other kindred arts inculcated by the powers of darkness—even though they knew the laws of God and had seen His manifested judgments among them (see Lev. 17.7, margin: “satyrs”; 19.31; 20.6, 27; Deut. 18.10-11. #RandolphHarris 13 of 21

In the book of Daniel we find a still further stage of revelation reached concerning the hierarchy of evil powers when, in the tenth chapter, we are shown the existence of two “princes” of Satan actively opposing the messenger of God sent to Daniel to make him understand God’s counsels for His people. There are also other references to the workings of Satan, his princes, and the hosts of wicked spirts carrying out his will, scattered throughout the Old Testament; but on the whole the veil is kept upon their doings until the great hour arrives when the “Seed” of woman, who was to bruised the head of the serpent, is manifested on Earth in human form (Gal. 4.4). Suppose a man is made conscious by someone else; he will become an instrument in the hands of others. One’s own efforts are necessary because otherwise even if a man is made conscious, he will not be able to use his consciousness. It is in the very nature of things that consciousness and will cannot be given. One must buy everything’ nothing is given free. The most difficult thing is to learn how to pay. One gets exactly as much as one pays for, but if this could be explained in a few words there would be no need to go to school. One must realize one’s position and one must be prepared to pay. The more one is prepared to pay, the more one acquires. Nothing can be given. The same thing applies to compassion. If one has something and wants to give it, one cannot. The nature of the thing one wants to give is such that people must pay for it. One cannot make them take it; they mut want it very much and be prepared to pay for it. There is no other way. Only then can it become their own; otherwise it is lost. #RandolphHarris 14 of 21

Payment is something quite different from giving money or anything like that. Payment is a principle. Giving money and service is a question of possibility. Unfortunately, there is only the one word “payment” so it has to be used in different senses. Money payment depends partly on understanding, partly on possibility. The other payment is the more important matter and it must be understood that it is absolutely necessary. “I find that I work for immediate results, not for waking up. Is this a wrong aim?” There is no question of knowing your aim. Aim must always be in the present and refer to the future. “Trying to define my aim has made me see that I do not know what it is and that I must find out before I can get further.” I am afraid you only think about it in an abstract way. Just imagine yourself going to a big shop with many different departments. You must know what you want to buy. How can you get something if you do not know what you want? This is the way to approach the problem. The first question is: What do you want? Once you know this, then the next question will be: Is it worth paying for and have you enough money? However, the first question is: “What?” Payment is a most important principle in the work and it must be understood that it is absolutely necessary. Without payment you can get nothing; and you can only get as much as you pay for—no more. The question was put in Petersburg: “If one pays more and more and more, so much, can one get something?” That means sacrifice. However, there must not be too much self-will, event about a sacrifice. #RandolphHarris 15 of 21

“In our present state, can we judge what is a moral action?” It is very easy to make mistakes but, at the same time, we can. We are just beginning. The greater our control, the greater our consciousness; and consciousness in that sense includes will. In our ordinary state, without control, we cannot speak except about conventional morality, but when we have some control we become more responsible. The less consciousness we have, the more our actions may be contrary to morality. In any case, the first necessity for moral action is that is must be conscious. In general, of course, the individual tends to avoid gatherings where more commitment will be demanded than one is in a position to give at the time, the implication being that enough concern for the occasion would be too much for one. Thus, we may read in etiquette books that after a death in the family one should not go to dinners of more than eight persons, or to fashionable restaurants, the opera, the theater, or the races. The implication is that in all of these settings participant are expected to maintain a somewhat festive spirit and give themselves up rather extensively to the occasioned involvement; and since a properly downcast person will not be in a position to “come out of himself” this far, one should not go at all. One may even feel at times (as when someone close to one has just died) that one should not be able to handle a particular set of situational requirements, and hence may feel obliged to avoid a particular gathering even though one is really prepared for it. #RandolphHarris 16 of 21

Just how fast should you drive? In particular, should you abide by the speed limit? Again the answer is found by looking at the gam where your decision interacts with those of all the other drivers. If nobody is abiding by the law, then you have two reasons to break it too. First, some experts argue that it is actually safer to drive at the same speed as the flow of traffic. On most highways, anyone who tries to drive at fifty-five miles per hour creates a dangerous obstacle that everyone else must go around. Second, when you tag along with the other speeders, your chances of getting caught are almost zero, unless you drive a high-end or flashy car. The police simply cannot pull over more than a small percentage of the speeding cars. As long as you go with the flow of traffic, there is usually safety in numbers. (Be sure to always abide by the laws of the road to reduce chances of accidents.) As more people become law-abiding, both reasons to speed vanish. It becomes more dangerous to speed, since this will require weaving in and out of traffic. And your chances of getting caught increase dramatically. There are three equilibria, of which only the extreme ones can arise from the process of social dynamics as drivers adjust to one another’s behavior. In the case of the commuters choosing between the two roads, the dynamics converge on the equilibrium in the middle. Here the tendency is toward one of the extremes. The difference arises because of the way interactions work. With commuting, either choice becomes less attractive when more of the others follow you, whereas with speeding, additional company make it more attractive. #RandolphHarris 17 of 21

The general theme of one person’s decision affecting the others applies here, too. If one driver speeds up, one makes it a little safer for others to speed without getting caught. If no one is speeding, no one is willing to be the first to do so and provide this “benefit” to the others without being “rewarded” for doing so. However, there is a new twist: if everyone is speeding, then no one wants to be the only one to slow down. Can this situation be affected by changing the speed limit? The curves are drawn for a specific speed limit, say 55 m.p.h. Suppose the limit is raised to 65. The value of breaking the limits falls, since beyond a point, higher speeds do become dangerous, and the extra advantage of going 75 instead of 65 is less than the gain of going 65 over 55. Furthermore, above 55 miles an hour, gasoline consumption goes up exponentially at 65 than at 55, but it could easily be 40 percent more expensive to drive at 75 rather than at 65. What can lawmakers learn from this if they want to encourage people to drive at the speed limit? It is not necessary to set the speed limit so high that everyone is happy to obey it. The key is to get a critical mass of drivers obeying the speed limit. Thus a short phase of extremely strict enforcement and harsh penalties can change the behavior of enough drivers to generate the momentum toward full compliance. The equilibrium moves from one extreme (where everyone speeds up) to the other (where everyone complies). With the new equilibrium, the police can cut back on enforcement, and the compliance behavior is self-sustaining. More generally, what this suggests is that short but intense enforcement can be significantly more effective than the same total effort applied at a more moderate level for a longer time. #RandolphHarris 18 of 21

Nanotechnology will have little direct effect on the World until it is well developed, many years from now. The expectation of nanotechnology, however, is influencing how people think and act today. Yet even this expectation is still in the early stages of development and will likely have little effect on World affairs for years to come. In sketching scenarios, it seems sensible to begin with the standard Worldview, at least for the next few years, and then to look at how nanotechnology and the expectation of nanotechnology might later begin interacting with large-scale developments. At this this being written, old protections of East European, Middle Eastern, and World affairs have recently been upended, and expectations are fairly muddy. Still, one can identify the broad outlines of a conventional-wisdom view of expected events in the coming years and decades: Technology does not change much in the next five year, or indeed in the next fifty. Computer power continues to grow rapidly, but with few important effects. The great challenges of technology are environmental: dealing with greenhouse gases and acid rain and the problems of toxic waste. In parallel, more and more nations climb the ladder of technological capability to such thresholds as the ability to launch satellites, build nuclear weapons, and manufacture computer chips. With the Worldwide flow of technical information and the Worldwide emphasis on technological development, more and more second-rank countries follow close on the heels of the technological leaders. #RandolphHarris 19 of 21

Consumer electronics continues to improve, but this leads to a better-entertained population rather than  better-informed one. Exciting announcements like high-temperature superconductors and low-temperature fusion continue to appear, but after hearing cries of “Wolf!” and seeing only puppy dogs, and fairy tales, most people discount news of purported breakthroughs. Even in the thirty-to-fifty year time frame, most newspaper stories and respected analysts assume there will be little technological change. Fifty-year projections of carbon-dioxide accumulation in the atmosphere assume that most energy will continue to come from fossil fuels. Thirty-year projections of economic crisis due to an aging population and a shrinking work force assume that economic productivity does not change greatly. In terms of productivity and wealth, the United States of America continues to lose ground relative to the booming economies of Eastern Asia: to Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, and Singapore. In political terms, the Ordinary Expectations scenario is less clear, but expectations seems to run something like this: The breakup of Eastern bloc and the collapse of communism as a “progressive” ideal lead to a freer and more democratic World. In Eastern Europe and perhaps in Central Asia, independent countries emerge, each with an industrial base and a population having substantial education in science and technology. #RandolphHarris 20 of 21

The relative decline of the United States of America economically and the Soviet Union militarily loosen some of the ties that today bind the World’s democracies to one another. The decrease threat of Soviet military power weakens alliances. As NATO loosens, and as the nation of Europe integrate their economic and political lives, the gaps between the United State of America and Europe grow. As Soviet pressure on Japan weakens, the U.S.A.-Japanese military alliance weakens and trade frictions look larger in comparison. In this environment, protectionist pressures increase. An economic crash grows more likely. A shift from friendly relationships to peaceful hostility becomes and ominous possibility. The rise of multiple, nearly equal centers of economic and technological capability provides incentives for greater integration and cooperation, but also motives for great competition and secrecy. In the long term, however, limited resources and the costs both of pollution and of pollution controls bring economic growth to a halt in an increasingly impoverished World. Population growth during this time has slowed, but creates great economic and environmental pressures. Resource conflicts escalate into war. The climate has changed irreversibly, the old forests are nearly gone, and extinction has swept a majority of species into nothingness. (Variations on the first five to ten years of the Ordinary Expectations scenario can provide a backdrop for scenarios covering the rise of nanotechnology in, perhaps, the next ten to twenty years.) #RandolphHarris 21 of 21

Cresleigh Homes

We’re excited to tell you all about #MagnoliaStation coming soon…starting with Residence 1! 🏡

As the smallest of the floor plans offered at our brand new Rancho Cordova neighborhood, this 2,293 square feet single story home packs plenty of punch! With 3 bedrooms, 2 bathrooms, den, great room, and dining room, there is enough room for all members of the family to have their corner of the house. The two car garage boasts ample storage and a covered patio comes included in the home, too!

Plus you’ll enjoy all the luxuries included in a #CresleighHome such as hand set tiles in entry way, kitchen and wet areas, large eat-in kitchen island, ample storage, and All-Ready Smart Home package. ✨

Visit our website to learn more about Magnolia Station – coming soon! 🎉