Talk:Motorcycle gang

Not sure how to word this, but it needs a lot of clarification. For example, they refer to themselves as "motorcycle clubs" not "gangs" (which is what the "MC" on some of their jackets stands for). And there are even motorcycle clubs specifically for Christians, and one for police officers (called the Blue Knights). RL Barrett 23:32 May 8, 2003 (UTC)

Agreed. Although many motorcycle clubs went through a period in thier history where illegal activities were activily encouraged, those days appear to be far behind us. It is curious that the FBI continues to put out bulletins every year describing the current state of affairs with "drug trafficing" and they always blame a fair amount on the "big four". However, all one has to do is look at the arrest record for the region that they claim is riddled with "motorcycle gang drug trafficing" to see that the report is blatantly false.--War 07:57, 18 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Entirely disagree that "biker" and "motorcycle gang" should be merged. "Biker" is a neutral usage in the UK, Australia and elsewhere and simply indicates a motorcyclist. (No account held)

anti-Harley bias?

This contains the same error found in the section titled "Outlaw Biker". The note of "especially Harley-Davidsons" is just plain not true. Sure, alot of 1%ers like Harleys... but then, so do a lot of other people; myself, my fellow HOG members, and even a boatload of NON-BIKERS! Outlaw bikers, however, seem to gravitate towards ANYTHING with two wheels; although stripped-down cruisers (includign imports) do seem to be the style of choice, they hardly limit themselves to Harley-Davidsons.

I agree that it would be a mistake to merge the words Biker and Motorcycle gangs. It's comparing apples to tennis balls. Both are round, but the similarities pretty much end there.

Members of the Hells Angels are, according to the by-laws of the club, required to own, maintain and ride Harley Davidsons. This is the same for other outlaw motorcycle clubs as well.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by JEdward (talk • contribs) 26 July 2006.

And your source for this is....?Rsm99833 04:22, 27 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know JEdward's source, but I'm sure he is correct. Rick Anderson, Bad Boys, Seattle Weekly, July 12, 2006 is a citation on the Bandidos. I believe you will find this stated explicitly about the Hells Angels in Hunter Thompson's book on Hells Angels. I imagine Sonny Barger also says as much in one of his autobiographical books, but I haven't read them. - Jmabel | Talk 21:04, 30 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This is clearly an attempt to denigrate Harleys, Harley riders, and damage the reputation and heritage of the only remaining mass-market American motorcycle brand. Tom S.

Not sure that there is a clear attempt to denigrate Harley riders.. But, I have removed the reference since it is a common conception.. a common conception but not fact. I would advise to not add it back unless some references can be found on the topic. Mceder 19:25, 12 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Gang vs. Club

I have attempted to clean up Biker gang, Outlaw biker and also this article by adjusting the meaning of the word "gang" and "outlaw" to refer to motorcycle organization with major criminal activities and engagment, and the term 'club' to be more neutral, everyday motorcycle club. I am intending on reworking this article with this as a core as well, please join in or let me know ifyou disagree. Mceder 20:19, 12 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, but i am sorry i do disagree about the usage of Harley Davidsons by Outlaw motorcycle clubs/gangs.It is well known through the motorcycle ferternity that if one wishes to nominate and prospect for a Outlaw club/gang that person must own and ride a Harley Davidson.The days of outlaw club members roaring around on big foreign bikes is a thing of the seventies.Some Outlaw clubs have now seen the value of bringing in a Harley Davidson only rule because if a prospect fails or a member is put out from the club his belongings are usually confiskated from him wich includes his motorcycle.this means a good chunk of change goes into the clubs bank.

Removal of material and citations

This edit removes substantive, cited material. I partially agree with only one aspect of the edit: "puppet members" rather than "prospects" is clearly Anderson's term, not the gangs'/clubs' which is why I put it in quotation marks.

I will point out: this edit removed the only cited material in the article, leaving only the uncited material. Simply saying that an article published in a generally reliable source is "incorrect" is hardly a refutation, especially when no sources to the contrary are cited. - Jmabel | Talk 21:09, 30 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Which uncited material are you refering to. Also, the article that was cited in question was filled with speculations and incorrect data that hinted that the material came from a certain sensasionalistic "investigative" reporter out of Canada, who chose to write on yellow journal paper, than to actually get any facts.Rsm99833 01:14, 31 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The uncited material I am referring to is the list of "motorcycle gangs". I'd consider this a fairly accurate list of major outlaw motorcycle clubs, but it is uncited. Similar remarks apply to the list of various terms used to refer to such clubs: doubtless correct, but entirely uncited.

Both Anderson and the Seattle Weekly have reasonably good reputations; I won't say that they cannot be wrong, they can, but I can say they would normally be considered citable. So far, you have said merely that you think (or know) Anderson is wrong and you claim he is relying on one bad source, which you haven't named. Can you understand why this does not convince me? If that were enough to eliminate using a source, anyone could freely reject any source any time they wanted. - Jmabel | Talk 01:32, 31 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

OK, they have a good reputation. However, the count of how many patched members are within each club is an impossibility. No three-piece club makes that public. Chapter counts could be acceptable, if it's based on a count of each club's web-site, in which some chapters are listed. But even then, it's not an accurate count.Rsm99833 10:34, 31 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that any count of patched members is approximate; I would think that the fact that they all ended in "00" made it obvious that they are estimates. - Jmabel | Talk 06:09, 3 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Let's not forget the Washington approxlimation (10). Rsm99833 13:29, 3 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Racism

I heard that many of these motorcycle gangs or clubs (such as the Hell's Angels) are racist in member selection. Is this true? Zachorious 23:42, 13 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Cut from "notes" section

"The Rebels are now Australias largest 1% Motorcycle Club. http://www.rebelsmc.net/"

Someone else can follow up if this belongs in the article someplace; it certainly did not belong in the notes section. - Jmabel | Talk 07:26, 26 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Notable?

There are an awful lot of obscure, uncited "notable" gangs listed here. I'm by no means expert, but I'm certainly clueful since I've known more than a couple of people in "outlaw" clubs, and I've never in my life heard of some of these (e.g. the Galloping Goose, the Hells Lovers). Can we please see some citations? It really would be in order to have at least one good citation for each of these groups. - Jmabel | Talk 07:23, 21 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Link to Outlaw Biker World

Outlaw Biker World is a website that has news articles (and More) for the Motorcycle/Outlaw community. I feel a link to it from this page is appropriate. The link is http://www.obworld.com: [1]

Chopperguy 21:02, 2 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Usually we don't link to general news sources on a topic. I wouldn't actively object to this link, but I wouldn't particularly advocate for it, either. - Jmabel | Talk 02:36, 5 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Motorcycle club

This article has needed major work for quite some time, and the subject matter for this article is much better covered in the Motorcycle club article, so I changed it to a redirect. Mmoyer 00:48, 3 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]