To date, I have not heard anyone in the main stream media (newspapers, TV, Radio) refer to the biker gangs in Waco, TX as "thugs". I wonder why?
Because they were not looting places of business. They were not taking advantage of a situation and intentionally harming innocent people. They were just fighting among themselves.
Are these biker ruffians, robbers, or murders? What is their criminal past? I really do not know. Just a brawl in the streets does not necessarily mean they fit any of those descriptions. If some of those involved DO have an extensive criminal past, I would agree that they are thugs. However, that does not mean that they should be perceived as such based on this incident. While I am sure they did damage personal property of innocent people, I have read no indication that it was the intent of those involved. They seemed pretty focused on killing each other. For me, a thug is someone that has a history of taking advantage of the weak and innocent through strong arm tactics, looting, robbery, etc. This incident had none of those that I am aware of.
So.. you're giving members of outlaw biker gangs like the Bandidos and Cossacks the benefit of the doubt? Are you kidding? It's perfectly reasonable to assume that everyone involved in that shootout was a thug.
No, I am not giving them benefit of the doubt. As I said, I do not know their history as I am not following this story closely. What I am saying is just this event alone does not constitute "thugness", as they were not focused on harming innocents, but were focused on killing each other. In Baltimore, there is no doubt that the looters were intend on harming innocent people by stealing their items and destroying their property. There is no doubt about their intent. I have little doubt that many of those bikers were and are thugs. That does not mean ALL of them live the a "thug lifestyle", and this event does not prove that they do.
You've got to be joking. EVERY member of the Bandido/Cossacks/etc lives the thug lifestyle. That's what 1%ers do. You're giving criminal bikers the benefit of the doubt.
Sorry, but I am not familiar with either the Bandidos or the Cossacks. I was not even familiar with the term 1%er in regards to bikers. However, because of your post, I looked up the Bandidos and you are probably right that they are a bunch of thugs (didn't bother looking up the Cossacks as I would probably find the same). I am familiar with other less infamous biker groups and not all of them are bad people. I was taking this event on it's own merits. Had either of these biker groups ran through the town with the intent of destroying other people's property, then I have no doubt they would be called "thugs" in the media. My point was that a bunch of bikers getting into a rumble, on that face alone, is not "thuggish", though I agree that past actions does make them appear to be thugs.
All it takes is 10 seconds on google, and you would be able to know. here, to start you off http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bandidos_Motorcycle_Club They fit the very definition of Thug.
Could it be that they did not prey on anyone innocent? Could it be that they only went to war with each other? You didn't see Biker gangs robbing stores, stealing hair extensions and cans of Afro Sheen just because someone bad mouthed the movie "Easy Rider."
Biker gangs are not pretending to be something other than the thugs they are, so there's no point in pointing out that they are thugs. Ferguson or Baltimore protests involved a large segment of them using the cover of "justice" to go out and be thugs, and so it was necessary to make the distinction between the "good" protestors and the "thug" protestors. There is no such distinction needed for biker gangs. They are all thugs, and they have never pretended to be something otherwise.
For your education: http://www.complex.com/sports/2014/...rcycle-gangs-in-america/vagos-motorcycle-club And there were people in that restaurant who were NOT members of a biker gang, don't cha know.
Not really: Gang - 1. (of a number of people) form a group or gang. "the smaller supermarket chains are ganging together to beat the big boys" synonyms: conspire, cooperate, collude, work together, act together, combine, join forces, team up, get together, unite, ally "they all ganged up to put me down" thug - 1. a violent person, especially a criminal. synonyms: ruffian, hooligan, vandal, hoodlum, gangster, villain, criminal; More informaltough, bruiser, hardman, goon, heavy, enforcer, hired gun, hood "one of Capone's thugs" 2. historical a member of a religious organization of robbers and assassins in India. Devotees of the goddess Kali, the Thugs waylaid and strangled their victims, usually travelers, in a ritually prescribed manner. They were suppressed by the British in the 1830s.
Are you kidding me or are you really this uninformed. Here, for your education...read carefully: http://www.complex.com/sports/2014/06/10-most-dangerous-motorcycle-gangs-in-america/the-pagans
If there is no distinction, then why not use the term? See, "thug" connotes a whole other level of nasty and immediate danger (see the definition I gave another poster here on this thread), while biker gangs have always been portrayed as something you almost have to go out of your way to be a victim of (which is not the case, as the FBI will tell you). - - - Updated - - - Read through my responses to the other posters here.
