Talk:Hells Angels

message: 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)
replies: text: 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)

text: 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)

text: 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)
replies: text: 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)

text: 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.<P>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)
thread_title:  Vague 

message: 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)
replies: text:  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)

text: 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)
thread_title: Contradictions in membership section

message: 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)
thread_title:  The Chosen Few MC 

message: 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)
replies: text: I am not sure that they have an article of their own in Wikipedia.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by D1arouet (talk • contribs) 17:39, 10 November 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: 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 (talk • contribs) 17:47, 10 November 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cossacks 

message: (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 (talk • contribs) 17:53, 10 November 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: The spelling "Kare" itself seems to be a mistake. There seem to be two with the same name.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by D1arouet (talk • contribs) 17:56, 10 November 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Karen or Kare? 

message: The club seems to be exclusively male (with women playing supportive roles) but it's not mentioned anywhere in the article. Seems odd and sexist, treating male as the default and female as irrelevant. 142.169.80.41 (talk) 00:04, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Female membership