Ok, so is it an over exaggeration to say that 90% of the members of a top tier 1% MC is going to be involved in meth and or prostitution? Or, is it more accurate to say, that 90% are involved in meth/prostitution/similar level crime, but, if you “stay out of their way” they will probably leave an average citizen alone?
**kopek ** is very much on the money in what he writes in a lot of cases.
It is too bad that the first thing he did was to join the jumping on me which shows that he is still an outsider with outsider information.
Taunting me into saying something stupid
is beyond stupid and shows that you all/he would not be able to remain a member if he actually got in as he has diarrhea of the mouth.
Me? I am not dieing to do anything but laugh, this thread is causing that in spades…
I am not following along because I want to give information or brag about something, just poking enough to expose all the clueless & misinformed to come out of the wood work and spotlight how wrong they can be and howproud they are of that wrongness.
Could we have a glossory here? Terms like 1%, one-patch, and non-AMA are flying over my head.
Moderator Warning
GusNSpot, you know very well that insults are not permitted in GQ. This is an official warning. Do not do this again.
Colibri
General Questions Moderator
or, you could just not be in an MC and not wear colors, you know. there’s no law which says you have to.
you’re asking for hard numbers where there probably are none.
“1%er.” way back, when bikers got a bad reputation, the AMA (American Motorcyclist Association) publicly claimed that “only 1% of those who ride cause problems.” Said individuals took that to be a badge of honor and call themselves 1%ers.
“non-AMA” any MC or RC which does not affiliate themselves with the AMA. also known as “outlaw” clubs. “Outlaw” in this case does not necessarily mean they’re involved in criminal activity.
“one patch.” usually an AMA-affiliated club will have a club patch which is only a logo. They will not have a top or bottom rocker stating the club name and location/territory.
Why would Bandidos be more secret or original than any other criminal organization? A quick google shows that they’ve had their fair share of both infiltrators and police informers over the years, for instance. I would bet that an informed outsider has a pretty clear picture of how these clubs work – I mean, it’s organized crime, not cutting edge scientific research, what the heck could they be doing that’s not already done by others?
Other people are trying to be informative and helpful and yet all you are doing is shooting down what others say without offering any useful info.
Who are we to believe, those who are open and engaging? or you who sits and virtually shakes their head slowly at the wrongness of it all and yet raises not a finger to correct the inaccuracies?
As other have said, if you have something to say…say it. We neither know nor care who you are so the scary biker-boys are unlikely come knocking.
Fighting ignorance…remember?
I’m an insurance defense lawyer and a total square, so my insider knowledge is nil. But a couple of years back my firm had a case defending a trucking company against a plaintiff who was a member of a North Texas outlaw club which was at the time at war with the Bandidos over the Texas patch issue. (They may still be, I don’t know.) So I had to do research on the group as part of our case investigation; the suit itself was a truck v. motorcycle accident where each driver claimed the other was at fault.
I ended up taking the deposition of the plaintiff and four of his friends, who were all patched members of the club. Since we had photos at the scene of them wearing their colors, I asked them about the club and their membership. To a man, they all said it was just a social thing that they did in order to ride their bikes in company, and also to throw charity events. I’m sure that’s only part of the story, but they were all very polite and generally seemed like average blue-collar guys. They’d all done some time for drug and/or assault charges, but that’s not really that atypical in itself. All of them except one who’d just gotten out of prison had day jobs, in stuff like auto mechanics or machine operating. They tended to live in working-class neighborhoods. They had obvious affection for their “brothers”, and mostly they were middle-aged.
If these guys were making a lot of money in organized crime, they weren’t reflecting it in their lifestyles. And we were a little worried that they might try to lean on us or the trucking company or the insurance company, but nothing like that ever happened. In fact they were polite almost to a fault, and even though we ended up winning the suit the plaintiff just basically shrugged it off and we never heard anything about it again. He seemed to accept that we were just doing our jobs – although I wouldn’t care to stand between those dudes and something they wanted in other contexts, and I wouldn’t have wanted to give any of them a personal insult. I don’t think that these guys are going to go out of their way to hassle a “civilian” if for no other reason that it’ll get them attention from the cops.
Maybe kopek or someone else will know how many of the club members are actually involved in illicit activities as opposed to just hanging around, I certainly don’t.
Intersting thread. Thanks.
Sonny Barger may not tell the whole story, but he’s perfectly willing to tell part of it. A person willing to share information, even if it’s incomplete and somewhat sanitized is a lot more credible than someone who only brags that they’re so badass that they can’t even say how badass they are. Ultimately, outlaw bikers are a diverse group made up of many organizations, and nobody can speak for the whole group. Kopek certainly isn’t trying to do that, and making clear that “YMMV” always applies.
For GusNSpot to be adamantly claiming authoritative knowledge while refusing to share that knowledge even by specifying what he thinks is incorrect combined with many previous posts on related subjects suggest that he is deeply committed to his internet persona and wishes to give the impression that he is a member of an outlaw biker organziation. I’m not sure whether he’s direcly claimed to be in one or just alluded to it. His posts do not demonstrate compliance with what would seem to be the general policy of such organizations which would be to avoid showcasing the bad stuff to the general public.
By the way, I’d highly recommend reading the link in Ambrosio Spinola’s first post about the murder of Anthony Benesh. Fascinating story. One has to be seriously disturbed to do something sure to simultaneously raise the ire of both the Bandidos and the Hell’s Angels. And as of May of this year, the case hasn’t been solved.
Moderator Note
Novelty Bobble, there’s no need for you to junior mod, especially after a moderator has already addressed the issue. Let’s refrain from this in the future.
Colibri
General Questions Moderator
apologies, will do.
Apologizes to Kopek & to the SDMB at large.
Thank you, really, for your account… but you said they all had records. Do you really expect them to admit “yes I am a full time criminal”.
I guess, you are saying, more than anything, their demeanor seemed normal/regular, right?
There are enough documentaries out there about infiltration of biker clubs by LEOs that provide more than enough insight into their methodology.
Setting prostitution aside and just looking at more serious things, it depends on the club. But whoever we’re talking I’m guessing 90% is way high. My best guess in the 6 or so major players is maybe 20% and even that could be way too high. A lot of them will use drugs, own illegal weapons, things like that - and do the odd sale here and there. But serious trafficking is another story; that’s what they use other people for. Receiving stolen property – that’s probably closer to your 90% but still lower. Sort of “don’t ask, don’t tell” where that new motor for your bike came from when another member offers it.
It is very accurate to say that if you stay out of their way and don’t disrespect them, the average citizen isn’t going to be an issue for them. As you know from our various exchanges, I’m not one to hold my thoughts to myself and I haven’t been stomped yet. 
One thing I will say though; prospects and some of the really small clubs (under 50 members) are always a risk. Like the littlest guy on a football team, they have something to prove. And if they have to prove it at your expense, they aren’t going to hesitate much.
What made my decision for me wasn’t the whole secret society thing; find any post I’ve ever made anywhere about the FOE. For me the breakers are the principles of “all for one” and “all on one”. The first means that another member could be a total idiot and you have to stand up for him as much as you would your best friend and mentor in the club. The second is that even if that idiot starts something and has the upper hand, you have to join in and pile on. Neither is even close to being in my nature and the AMA/legal route fit better in the end.
So rest assured that my questioning any of your current or past posts has nothing to do with the actions of others. I was just curious for myself.
Other than there being a lot of question about if any AMA (American Motorcycle Association - the name back then) official actually made that statement, you got it really close. AMA clubs use mostly a one-piece patch although the name and location can be built in. Two piece are more owners groups (HOG), work or fraternal related riding clubs. Three piece patches are considered the sign of an “outlaw” but it varies. I may not be a fan of the Blue Knights, but its hard to lump them in with some of the other groups using three piece patches. But as I’ve posted before, for the average person the rule follows “patch of three, let them be”.
Even with the big players, I really twinge at the criminal organization thing. History shows us that there are a lot of dirty cops in the NYPD but we don’t call that a criminal organization. And its not unknown for firemen to be arrested for arson. We could even toss in something like the Sons of Italy just to liven up the discussion. But if someone in a bike club gets arrested, instant RICO. Seriously; its more brotherhood. Very militaristic but the whole concept was basically started by a bunch of dudes out of the Armed Services so that’s no big surprise. But is more Masonic than it is criminal.
Now ---- have people gotten into that brotherhood and used it to start or enhance their criminal activities? No question. But even a club like the one we’re discussing isn’t going to accept or recruit a person because they are a good criminal. The only thing that will get you in is being a good brother. After that (like with the NYPD) YMMV depending on the biggest factor in anything; you.
Thank you for the acknowledgement.
Colibri
General Questions Moderator
Good point. There’s a difference (often hard to measure) between the values of the majority of the membership of an organization and the official values of that organization itself (if organizations can be seen as even having them). There is also a difference between what behavior is tolerated by an organization (or its membership) and what behavior is officially taught as essential or required. OMG’s pride themselves on being antisocial, clannish, and “us vs. them” - it’s no wonder that criminal activity is tolerated within them and seen as not a big deal.
Compare this with, say, Bronies. Bronies have a very high tolerance and acceptance for gays and other sexual minorities, but does that make them a “gay” organization? Actually, an overwhelming majority of Bronies are heterosexual.
The Ku Klux Klan was mostly founded by Confederate veterans looking for brotherhood and a good time, which included bizarre costumes and outlandish fantasy ranks (Exalted Cyclops?) and whatnot. Very Masonic, actually. The racist aspect was originally fairly minor - but that didn’t last, and it became a primarily racist and political organization later.
Humans are the only animals I know of that exhibit this behavior.
No harm and no foul - totally accepted. We’ve been in enough threads together that I know it wasn’t personal.