Rodzilla said:
And LOL @ all da fools sayin U need 2 kill and stay strapped at all times to be a member of a gang, Wats influencing yall? True, theres only 2 or 3 spots in North Cal that gangs are strate Terrorizing......But Wat happened to protecting yur community and its people while reppin it? Dats what people of 650 be doin 4 tha most part......Wahcyall doin?
MaddDogg said:
I mean, peope may call themselves gangsters and wear all red, but they really dont do shit. They dont sell drugs, they dont jack people, they dont rob stores, they don't kill people, they dont retaliate in mass numbers, basically, they dont function as a gang. The bottom line is that wearing a color and throwing up a sign is one thing but doing something is another.
Vamps said:
It's too easy nowadays to claim a "gang," but unless you're doing what's listed above, you're not a gangster..
Rodzilla brought up a good point that you guys seem to have missed...not all gang members are violent and criminal all the time, or even the majority of the time. I would argue that even if they are relatively non-violent they are still gang members. They're still not making it and they're still turning to a dangerous lifestyle at a young age in an attempt to make it. Most people I know in gangs joined up at a young age (by junior high), and their primary goal was
not to jack people and kill rivals. Their primary goal was larger, more important, and much more intangible than that....but jacking & killing became a side effect to reaching that goal. Not all of them had to do crimes...but I'd say they were still "gang members." Simply put, the majority of gang members don't seem to be violent and terrorizing. Big Oso Loc summed up that point and hit the nail square on the head (even if he did call them "cowards" and "bitches"). Yungstamatt also showed evidence for that point by indicating that gangs exist even in areas that don't have high crime rates. I'm not trying to say that less violent "gangsters" are not down for theirs if something goes down--but they're not actively putting in work violently & routinely.
MD, this goes against your point that the function of a gang is to rob/steal/criminalize/terrorize
en masse. I disagree. To me, the function of a gang is to find friends, companionship, dignity, love, values, self-worth, and most of all,
RESPECT in a situation where mainstream society gives you NONE.
Jacking and killing, like I said, are merely side effects of striving for those goals.
When you talk to people who have been bangin', they don't say all they wanted to do in life was to kill rivals. They don't say their big dream in life was to rob liquor stores and jack people on the street. They say they got into banging for the respect it brought them--respect they had to gain by earning bloody stripes because society gave them none in the first place.
So Vamps, I don't quite understand your distinction between violent gangsters and nonviolent "not a gangster"s....they're all affiliated...they're all striving for the same goals...none of them are making it in society...