Talk:Hells Angels

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Vague[edit]

Talk about a moral panic is too vague to be included in an article like this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.171.217.176 (talk) 13:22, 9 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Karen Katz is behind the talk about a moral panic. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.7.192.143 (talk) 16:04, 21 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
My mom is marcia sipe Steven j sipes wife going April first to rogers park be on the look out for her she’s blonde keep her and girls safe younger daughter briefer tall Michelle sipe eldest daughter Melanie also known as Madonna a veterans family near chase street and Ashland rogers park Chicago beware of son Jason ex heroin attic abuses mother and girls e while wife is divorced and children girls because of him the son domestic violence and drug abuse all over Europe in band mock salvation Jason David sipe repeat dangerous to women 2600:1008:B063:84CE:809:A89:F053:5244 (talk) 04:01, 24 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It is also a mater of opinion, and if it is to be included an explanation is needed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Howardhugest (talkcontribs) 19:59, 16 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'm glad to see that you decided to discuss (although you did delete the content again. Convention is that you leave the article as it was until consensus is reached. So what is vauge and opinionated about the statement? It seems quite clear to me. --Biker Biker (talk) 20:03, 16 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I changed it to specifically say the source was criminologist Karen Katz, and that her assertions were specifically about the Hells Angels drug crimes in Canada. It is a well sourced opinion by a recognized expert in a reliable publication. There are numerous other sources who note that the reaction to biker crimes is out of proportion to their actual impact and frequency, and consider it a classic example of moral panic. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 21:07, 16 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Wrong. It is biased, suggesting public reaction to well known crimes committed by the Hell's Angels are not just. The term "moral panic" is controversial in itself. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Howardhugest (talkcontribs) 21:51, 16 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The appropriate response would be to cite your sources for this controversy. Even if you establish the fact that it is controversial is no reason to keep deleting it. Wikipedia articles are supposed to include significant points of view, even if they are not universally accepted.

It's very clear your edits are not intended to make a better Wikipedia article and if you persist you will very likely be blocked from editing. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 22:18, 16 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

First of all the club did not launch, Hunter Thompson's career. Secondly, the so called "moral panic" is not unjustifiable. HA are the largest criminal organization in Canada. Ignorance of this fact is not an excuse. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Howardhugest (talkcontribs) 22:38, 16 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Well, that was fun, and for his efforts Howardhugest (talk · contribs) has now gained a permanent exclusion from Wikipedia. I suspect he will be back, that type always is. In the meantime an article has gained a bit of attention from other editors so perhaps we can look forward to some constructive editing and some new sources on the article. Thanks everyone. --Biker Biker (talk) 22:50, 16 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The name[edit]

But it doesn't say why Hells Angels isn't called "Hell's Angels"?... I'm curious about that. :-) --95.34.149.128 (talk) 19:16, 26 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Their website has some information on that. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.185.13.91 (talk) 10:43, 21 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe they just don't know the difference?
The latest edition of their web-site speaks on the subject.
They say this is important to you but not to them. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.27.109.117 (talk) 16:01, 29 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Specifically, at the bottom of the FAQ: "Missing apostrophe in Hells Angels? Yes, we know that there is an apostrophe missing but it is you who miss it. We don’t."[23] Chaheel Riens (talk) 16:37, 29 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
It's like when your cat falls of the couch and bangs his head into the bookshelf and then calmly licks his paw to say "I meant to do that!"
I have read that the missing apostrophe is deliberate, with a claim that there are multiple Hells and the Hells Angels represents all of them. I tried to find that claim again and could not. Anyone else hear or read that?
Perhaps but then it would be possessive plural and the apostrophe would go after the S. Either way they don't know or don't care about correct punctuation. And it's been that way for so long it would be embarrassing to fix it.Dennis Bratland (talk) 20:45, 28 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I was told they spell it that way to rebel against social normalities such as using proper spelling, punctuation or grammer. 173.189.165.213 (talk) 02:12, 25 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Contradictions in membership section[edit]

This section says: "To become a full member, the Prospect must be voted on unanimously by the rest of the full club members." But then later seems to contradict that saying "Successful admission usually requires more than a simple majority, and some clubs may reject a Prospect for a single dissenting vote." Either it is unanimity or it isn't. Which? Valenciano (talk) 18:42, 15 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Wow. You live in a black and white world. Some of the rest of us can appreciate shades of gray; many of my brothers and I see the world in Technicolor. Let me try to answer in a way that might make a bit of sense for you. It depends on which club; in this case we are talking Hells Angels, it depends on which chapter, and it depends on which time period. Some outlaw clubs used to just require a majority vote, others had/have different rules. People always make the mistake of looking at clubs the way they do a large corporation with a top down hierarchical structure, i.e. a National President being the equivalent of a CEO or corporate President. In actuality, most clubs started out, and some remain, more like an Assembly of First Nations, where they as a larger entity have many common goals and purposes, but each chapter has a certain degree of regional autonomy, again, depending on which club you are talking about (i.e. Hells Angels in this case), and what time period. Compare, for example, Hells Angels club structure of the mid-fifties where, for example, Frisco and Oakland operated quite differently from each other, to now, when, after several decades of influence from leaders such as Sonny Barger, power has been concentrated somewhat more as the club has grown in size, and as the club moved from relatively independent chapters sharing a logo and brotherhood, with some involvement in what one might refer to as disorganized crime, into a large, global, well organized criminal organization, but still with great regional autonomy, especially when looking at charters in different cities, states, provinces, nations. Take Quebec, for example. Please. Garth of the Forest (talk) 06:13, 27 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Barger himself was puzzled to see photos of girl members of the Hells Angels in the late 1940's or early 1950's. There has always been a certain amount of variation in membership requirements and the like. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.150.158.53 (talk) 12:57, 6 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    • Well then it ought to say "some clubs require a unanimous vote, while others have less stringent requirements", not "it requires a unanimous vote to get into Hells Angels", followed a little while later by a contradictory statement about how SOME clubs require a unanimous vote, while others don't. Typical Wikipedia article. But I guess inconsistency isn't too much of a surprise from an organization who claims to be "outlaw" and to reject the mores of society, yet who files a trademark registration on their logo with the US copyright office and files lawsuits in the US courts to protect their "rights". The whole "we don't believe in your damn laws and regulations...unless they are in our behalf!" business.

64.223.160.117 (talk) 11:08, 27 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The Chosen Few MC[edit]

When reference was made to the Chosen Few MC, when they were offered to patch over to the Angels, it wasn't the black Chosen Few that offer was made to, but an unrelated white club with the same name. Hells Angels have always had a no blacks' policy, so they wouldn't offer to patch over a black club. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.51.198.170 (talk) 16:40, 12 June 2014 (UTC) [reply]

Also, it's a joke to quote an article from Ebony magazine in 1966 on the topic of blacks joining, during the height of racial segregation in the US. Ridiculous! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:A:1280:24EC:BD47:13C1:2371:EE1F (talk) 00:36, 19 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding the racial policy it has to be noted that this is restricted to the US only as in countries like the Netherlands there is no such policy being that the former of HA Holland, Daniel Uneputty, is of Molukkan origin. Runlevel0 08:10, 14 June 2015 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Runlevel0 (talkcontribs)

Cossacks[edit]

The Cossacks are a Hells Angels "farm team". Should they have a mention here or their own article? Jbottero (talk) 01:29, 19 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I am not sure that they have an article of their own in Wikipedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by D1arouet (talkcontribs) 17:39, 10 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
A Google search on "Hells Angels Cossacks" will provide a great deal of information about the Cossacks in Texas. As they say in America, you have just volunteered as a writer of a Wikipedia article on the Cossacks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by D1arouet (talkcontribs) 17:47, 10 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Karen or Kare?[edit]

(I see there is already some discussion here about "Karen Katz", in re: the matter of a "moral panic", but this does not concern that issue per se)

However, I don't think the click-through reference to "Karen Katz" is correct. Clicking on Karen Katz brings up a children's book author who, as far as I can tell, is not a criminologist. Furthermore, in the references section at the bottom of this (HAMC) page, it refers to her as "Kare", not "Karen". So, I'm guessing, not the same person.

The Wikipedia article on Karen Katz certainly refers to another. The name "Katz" is common, in certain circles. — Preceding unsigned comment added by D1arouet (talkcontribs) 17:53, 10 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The spelling "Kare" itself seems to be a mistake. There seem to be two with the same name. — Preceding unsigned comment added by D1arouet (talkcontribs) 17:56, 10 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

'Charter'?[edit]

Chapters have always been the local groups. What are the 'charters' that have infiltrated this article.

For years, HAs have referred to chapters. E.g. in this documentary about HAs in England https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ng8Ll7x08Vk

Their website uses "charter". The subject crops up repeatedly.