Ex-Gang Members?

[Rudey]

Originally posted by ChaosDST
It's an issue of gangs...PERIOD.

YOU ALL applied your misconceptions and exaggerations of gangs to this topic. You all just blanket said you would want a former member in your org. I respect that opinion, but know that gangs and their activities do not necessarily fit the stereotypes.

Please tell me about the gangs that don't do community service. Let me guess...no names again?

As a member of my organization with influence, I will use influence in my organization as I please. You can talk about making misconceptions all you want and are free to take the violent and the sexual offenders, but I will make decisions for my fraternity. Perhaps your dues can help pay bail for them. By the way do you take 3 time offenders? I hope you don't make misconceptions about them.

Again, I said it depends on what bad they did, how severe it was, and in what context of good the bad was. Real blanket statement.

-Rudey
--So are you game on the killer or do you want the rapist only?

[Rudey]

Originally posted by ChaosDST
Hmmm...care to go back and read your earlier posts? You said that these groups exist, but they do not fit the textbook definition of "gangs." Whether you know it or not, your misconception perpetuates the dismissal of these groups as "gangs."

So, let's not be coy...man up and follow the flow of the convo.

I said that about the neighborhoods in Chicago.

I guess manning up means you can read. Seriously you must communicate with smoke signs and pictures a lot because this obviously isn't your medium of choice.

-Rudey

[ChaosDST]

Originally posted by Rudey
Again, I said it depends on what bad they did, how severe it was, and in what context of good the bad was. Real blanket statement.

-Rudey

Hmmm...did you say that? Yeah right.

Have a good afternoon.

[ChaosDST]

Originally posted by Rudey
I said that about the neighborhoods in Chicago.

I guess manning up means you can read. Seriously you must communicate with smoke signs and pictures a lot because this obviously isn't your medium of choice.

-Rudey

No, that's not what "man up" means...it means own up to your own words and stop getting confused in your own tangents.

But, either way...your previous post has effectively back tracked and taken back some of your earlier words.

We now agree on the basic premise of this thread.

Good day

[Rudey]

Originally posted by ChaosDST
No, that's not what "man up" means...it means own up to your own words and stop getting confused in your own tangents.

But, either way...your previous post has effectively back tracked and taken back some of your earlier words.

We now agree on the basic premise of this thread.

Good day

OK I've got a fire going here and I'm hoping you understand things because obviously reading is difficult for you. Hold on did you get that smoke signal? You're lucky because I don't do this for everyone.

-Rudey

[phimuandfries]

Originally posted by GeekyPenguin
Not in my chapter, they don't. We know. It's how our "process" works.

im not trying to learn the secrets of your "process" but to say you know everything about the past of a prospective member is absolutely retarded.

[valkyrie]

What about the mafia?

I'd almost like to seriously answer the question originally asked, but what's the point when these threads just go straight into the "trainwreck" file?

Who knows, valkyrie. I made a serious reply a few pages back now, and it got lost amidst all the penis-measuring.

[preciousjeni]

Originally posted by Ginger
Who knows, valkyrie. I made a serious reply a few pages back now, and it got lost amidst all the penis-measuring.

Me too!

[preciousjeni]

Originally posted by Ginger
I think what GeekyPenguin is trying to say is that it's not always necessary for the person to divulge on their own... each org's selection process is different. There are some orgs, I can say with certainty, that take measures be positive that a membership candidate does not have an illicit past before they are initiated.

I've already been a little less vague than I would like, but that's all I'm going to say.

And if a member does participate in illegal activity while active, there are measures that can be taken then, as well.

Ginger,

we can have our own convo! I know you said you were being vague, but how on earth can an org know anything with complete certainty?

[GeekyPenguin]

Originally posted by phimuandfries
im not trying to learn the secrets of your "process" but to say you know everything about the past of a prospective member is absolutely retarded.

Wow, I'm feeling the Panhellenic love and I'm sure your sisters are all very proud you're a Phi Mu.

That being said, you have no idea how we do recruitment, but we know the girls aren't criminals or gang members.

[daoine]

Originally posted by GeekyPenguin
Wow, I'm feeling the Panhellenic love and I'm sure your sisters are all very proud you're a Phi Mu.

That being said, you have no idea how we do recruitment, but we know the girls aren't criminals or gang members.

*sigh*

While not the best worded post, I think it's fairly accurate to say that people can never *know* for sure anything about a person's past.

For example, is the criminal who hasn't been caught yet still a criminal? How could you tell? Or take something like the Witness Protection Program, which invents a new past, present and future for people, right down to new official documents. It's rather difficult to discover if someone was a petty thief or low level gang member if they've traded their past for immunity and protection. For all intensive purposes, that person doesn't exist anymore.

I'm sure all orgs take care in selecting members -- it makes sense to be careful in choosing who represents you. However, there's only so much that we as non-omnipotent human beings can actually know.

[Rudey]

Originally posted by daoine
*sigh*

While not the best worded post, I think it's fairly accurate to say that people can never *know* for sure anything about a person's past.

For example, is the criminal who hasn't been caught yet still a criminal? How could you tell? Or take something like the Witness Protection Program, which invents a new past, present and future for people, right down to new official documents. It's rather difficult to discover if someone was a petty thief or low level gang member if they've traded their past for immunity and protection. For all intensive purposes, that person doesn't exist anymore.

I'm sure all orgs take care in selecting members -- it makes sense to be careful in choosing who represents you. However, there's only so much that we as non-omnipotent human beings can actually know.

You're right. Perhaps this will pacify you. 1 out of ever 1000 brothers might have some horrible past being in a gang that he covered up. That ridiculously high odd places us at a 0.1%. I'm glad we talked about this point.

-Rudey

[Peaches-n-Cream]

Originally posted by ChaosDST
*sigh*

I moved it beyond that and made it racial b/c you predicted the thread would become racial. You're slow...I know.

Now...the rest of your post is strange. We're talking about "white" gangs, who you say aren't really gangs....versus REAL gangs, that people think are basically "minority" gangs. So...the point is in how this racialized society racially ratonalizes things, such as deviant behavior.

Now...no need to do a google search. I know they exist and they are actually "gangs," according to the textbook definition. If you need to know names...that just shows that you can't take the general and apply it to the specific. Too bad for you

Originally posted by ChaosDST

Interesting. Since you're smart, I don't have to tell you that child molestation and rape are crimes. Being in a gang, in many places, isn't a crime and you usually can't be arrested for it. Now, if you're associated to criminal behavior, that's a different thing. We already established that many gang members do not commit crimes and those they commit are often petty offenses (which often pale in comparison to child molestation and rape).

I guess that I am confused because I thought being in a gang meant engaging in gang activity which is a crime. Maybe my definition of gang is incorrect. Please clarify this for me. Thanks.

[CarolinaCutie]

Yeah, I am confused. Wouldn't a group of people who dress in similar colors, hang out together, etc. but do NOT commit crimes or violent acts just be considered a clique or a club? I associate the term gang with violence. Is this an ignorant definition? I'm very interested to know more.