Talk:Hells Angels

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents 1 Bias 2 The Hells Angels (without an apostrophe) 3 Inflammatory? 4 "$1 billion"?! 5 Founding Date 6 Daughter of a member 7 When You Post a Real Gang - Wikipedia Member's Dispute it - Yet a MC Club is Called a Gang and It Is Accepted 8 come on 9 Hells Angels are sometime asociated to criminals 10 I also agree with the negative editorial slant of this article 11 There are so many wrong things about the comment above 12 Neutral comment 13 Introduction is incomplete 14 Police Conspiracy? No, just a bunch of deluded people 15 Cleanup 16 Ain't fair to pigeon hole anyone 17 Fact Check 18 Bias? (redux) 19 Dual personality. 20 In reference to "In Refrence to earlier post by Founder's Daughter" 21 "since my father was beaten down by a group of them in Miami once" 22 Different chapters 23 Introduction Tug of War 24 canada - death of Chris Swann 25 I laughed when I read this article, and even more so when I read people defending HA on this discussion page 26 And In Conclusion 27 Racism

[edit] Bias

This is easily one of the worst, most biased articles in the entire Wikipedia and should be removed immediately.

All the descriptions of criminal activity listed here are ludicrous and leftover statistics from 30-50 years ago. It's because of that dark image that they've spent the last 20 years going over a massive and publicly advertised image overhaul. Most Angels chapters now frown on any kind of criminal activity and many have a 100% zero tolerance policy. The majority of members are substance free which even includes consumption of alcohol. Many chapters spend their time off the road working on philanthropies and just plain old good causes. Their rough image and free spirit nature may still remain but the danger and mayhem have long since been discarded. Of course there are exceptions, but they are a very, very small minority.

I think this article is by far not negative enough. Perhaps an articles on the bombings in Quebec and the societal fallout might explain why the Hells Angels have needed to wage their publicity campaign to reclaim their public image. Just because they have left the public eye does not mean they have reformed.

Whoever wrote this article is urinating on two decades of incredible and respectable reformation. The only thing going on here that's criminal is the fact that this b.s. exists in the Wiki.

You sound well informed on the viewpoint contray to that commonly expressed on this page. I urge you to amend the article, noting the information you refer to with details & basically to help improve this article rather. I agree with you that it is biassed (EG very little if anything about motorcycling activities & runs) but I don't know enough about the HAMC to accurately correct this, from your post it sounds like you do. AllanHainey 08:59, 2 December 2005 (UTC)

---

[edit] The Hells Angels (without an apostrophe)

Shouldn't the page be under "Hells Angels" if that's the proper name? It could be argued that "Hell's Angels" is the more common form, but I would in turn argue that it's like putting an article on Marven Gardens under "Marvin Gardens" because everybody picked up the misspelling from the Monopoly board. --Furrykef 05:00, 26 Jun 2004 (UTC)

I agree, done. -- Solitude 13:05, 16 Jul 2004 (UTC)

The club's official name is "Hells Angels" and not "Hell's Angels". This can be confirmed by visiting any official web site, or Sony Barger's web site. From there, you can find an explaination as to the difference between the to. Again, officially, it's "Hells Angels"

Why not leave the title without the apostrophe, simply as a disambiguation device, but correct it elsewhere? --Lyle 05:18, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

ACTUALLY, Sonny Barger's book says, "The apostrophe is used in the name of the club and the corporation, but not on the patch." -Page 37 He also uses the apostrophe throughout the entire book, anytime he refers to the Hell's Angels. Also, the name of the book is "Hell's Angel." Also, Hunter Thompson's book is named "Hell's Angels," and he also refers to them WITH the apostrophe throughout his book. Therefore, Mr Annoymous, it is NOT "officially" "Hells Angels." I believe Mr Barger would know just a little bit more about the Hell's Angels than any of you here. I propose that the introduction and the rest of the article be corrected. - W.W. 02/25/2006

Also for reference from the History Channel: "Members of the Hell's Angels Motorcycle Club didn't start out on motorcycles—they started out in airplanes." http://www.historychannel.com/exhibits/wildbunch/hells.html

Why not leave the title without the apostrophe, simply as a disambiguation device, but correct it elsewhere? --Lyle 05:18, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

I agree, the article should be corrected. Officially they ARE the Hell's Angels, except for on their patch. 24 March 2006

I would advise looking out on the net, or in any of their advertised events. The only place you will see an apostrophy in in the FAQ (Q:Should the Hells in Hells Angels have an apostrophe, and be Hell's Angels? A:That would be true if there was only one Hell, but life & history has taught us that there are many versions and forms of Hell.)

I would advise you to do the same... You will see that in Google search "Hell's Angels" has 2,520,000 results, whereas "Hells Angels" only has "1,890,000" results. And all advertised events I found on Google used the apostrophy, unless it was depicting the patch. As the poster above noted, Sonny Barger PLAINLY stated in his book that the apostrophy IS USED in the name of the club and the corporation but not on the patch. How could anyone question Sonny's knowledge on the issue, since he was a founding member?? 04/01/2006

You can google all you want (which will bring up millions of sites that may not have anything to fo with the club. Start here- http://www.hells-angels.com. BTW, Sonny Barger was not a founding member.

According to his book, and many other biographies about him and the club, he was a founding member of the club. His participation in the Oakland chapter and helping set up chapters nationwide are what BUILT the club into what it is today. That fact can not be disputed by anyone with half a brain. Reguardless, you can look up the legal documents if you wish, and they will ALL refer to the club as the "Hell's Angels". The legal corporate name of the club uses the apostrophe, therefore how can anyone dispute what Barger says in his book. The apostrophe is used in the name of the club, and the corporation, but NOT on the patch. 04/01/2006

Well, he is a founding member of the Oakland Chapter, but not the club, which was founded around 1948 in Southern California. Sonny was 10 at that time.

[edit] Inflammatory?

It seems this article is extremely tainted, at least from the way I read it. Is there concrete proof to all those allegations, or should it just proclaim things like "likely" and "allegedly"?

I've attempted to neutralize the article a little bit. Let me know if the changes are acceptable -James

[edit] "$1 billion"?!

Quote: "The FBI estimates the Hells Angels take in $1 billion a year worldwide from drug trafficking, prostitution, and money laundering." That seems insanely inflated, if there's any truth to it at all. Even assuming the membership at 2,000 as quoted in the article (at its height in the late 1960s the Angels numbered less than 300, according to HST) that comes out to an annual revenue of $500,000 each. Seems unlikely. -- Bk0 04:12, 24 Mar 2005 (UTC)

I agree... this is just likely a continuation of efforts by the FBI to demonize the Angels beyond the scope of their real-world actions. - Tom S.

Some of the statistics and organization proceedures may be off but www.rob-profile.com are not

The numbers game was brought up in the book Under and Alone by William Queen... A book on the Mongols. He brought up the fact that in the Mafia, he named 2 prominent families whom I forgot. Only had the make up of about 250 members each. I dunno if $1 billion is an exaggeration or not, but when you're in the business of worldwide gun and drug traffiking you make a pretty penny.

The numbers are provided by an outside source. I've neutralized the statement. - James

[edit] Founding Date

Got a question. I heard a rumor that the Angels actually pre-date WWII, and were active as early as the mid-30s. This comes from a relative of mine who supposedly had an uncle that "rode with the Angels back in the 30s." Is there any truth to this or is the relative mistaken? I'd love to hear the answer to that from a bona-fide Angel, not some FBI pig. Any 1%ers out there with internet access?? Tom S.

You relative might be speaking about the Warlocks, many members of the Hells Angels were Warlocks before the Hells Angels came to be.

Here is the official answer to the question: Prior to the formation, many of the members were part of a club known as 'The Pissed Off Bastards'. Very little is known about the club, other than local San Bernadino law enforcement forced the club to dissolve. This can be verified with the book 'Wild Ride' or Sony Barger's own book.

There were also a number of MC's named Hell's/Hells Angels running around California and other parts before the existing HAMC was formed, some of them later became part of the Hells Angels we know today, other changed there name or were disbanded. ~T.J. McKenzie

[edit] Daughter of a member

I am the daughter of a founding member of the Hells Angels Motorcycle club. I was disgusted when I read this article. All of my life I have had to explain to people that the men I grew up around including my father are not some notorius criminals. That the media has blown things out of the water. Hunter Thompson said things about the club that were far from true. And other media has done the same, I'm not saying that their the perfect citizens, I know that there are members who do take part in illegal acts, I've met a few. But more than 75% of them are normal people. One of the members in the charter is a football coach another is a Lawyer, he went to Yale. I know a member in Arkansaw that teaches 5th grade, and you wouldn't guess in a million years that he's some big bad biker. All I want to make clear is don't beleive anything you read-anywhere, because more often than not what you see and hear is only 1/4 true. I've grown up around the club been raised in the midst of motorcyle rumbles and exhaust fumes. These are good - regular people. Not the durg running, killers i just read about.

I agree not all Hells Angels are badguys. A few people I know are Hells Angels and are nice guys. I'm sure your father isn't part of the club commiting crimes but in a lot of place like Los Angeles, Hell Angels really do all that stuff. It just depends.

Again, www.rob-profile.com stands on truth and merit. Your 75% figure is totalally incorrect. What do you think your Dad is going to tell you, the truth of what the organization is and does. This article is rediculous and probably a joke. You could not be this stupid.

Where can I buy durgs??? --Cyberman 03:27, September 7, 2005 (UTC)

At a durg store. Where else? Actually, why didn't you just correct any misspellings and mark them as a minor edit? --Lyle 05:40, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

I apologize for the misspelling. Everything I said stands on what I see, not what my father tells me, I know very well that he wouldn’t tell me the things he does or has done, I wouldn’t expect him to, nor would I believe it. Everything I wrote is based on what I see myself. I go to the parties, the swap meets, and the bike runs. I meet the people and talk to them. I’ve been offered drugs before, I see and hear what anyone else would. The fact of the matter stands that the few bad eggs make the rest of the bunch look bad. It would be like trying to say that all African Americans are gangsters, all Asian people are good at math, all blondes are dumb, and any other stereotype you can think of. Before you can place judgment or try and say that they’re all criminals you have to be around them, and see what they are like first hand.

That is not, in fact, correct — at least according to wikipedia policy. We want to cite sources, not personal experience. If you could find a reputable source (PhD. dissertation, MSc. thesis, publishing in a peer-review journal, published in a reputable news source) which confirms the things you say, please add such facts to the article, citing where you got your information. (Dissertations and thesis are reviewed by a board of professionals, as are peer-reviewed journal articles, while news sources have fact-checkers and editors). MosheZadka 15:36, 9 October 2005 (UTC)

I'm studying history, and personal experiences are seen as important sources within the history science. The same accounts for anthropology. The war in Iraq was an example of how subjective news sources are. The German and Belgian media gave a completely different view of the Americans then the BBC. This different views became apparent by the subjects they used: do you interview American deserters and Iraqis who lost there family in a bombardment or do you interview cheering Iraqis on the side of the road when you accompany your troops. I don't know any Hells Angels, but i see personal experiences as a source.--Daanschr 21:04, 17 October 2005 (UTC)

although they are just personal experenices, the "daughter of a member" is in a much better position to pass comment on HAMC than someone who wrote the article based on books.

You make a good point, but is this person indeed the daughter of a member? I'm sure we all believe she is (at least I do) but the level of certainty is not up to Wikipedia standards. If, for example, she were interviewed by, say, Motorcyclist magazine, they'd do the research to make sure she was the daughter of a founding member, toss in a picture or two of her and her father, name names, etc. Perhaps then her remarks might be included in this article, as they would be more verifiable. --Lyle 05:40, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

i personnally have never met a member of HAMC but i do know members of MC's and yes not all of them are angels (forgive the pun) but on the whole they are very decent people and lets be realistic everyone in an MC isnt a criminal and bikes, road tax, insurance, leathers and a host of other equipment a biker needs is expensive so either all bikers are criminals or, more realisticly, that yes some may be criminals but most will have jobs, families and be decent law abiding people, in the very same sence that some footballers or rugby players will be criminals but most of them will not

my father is a memeber of a motor cycle club (not the hells angles) but any how i am very upset on the bias views of the motor cycle clubs and ridders they are not all bad this is a world i was born into i was born into the club and i am very loyal to them they have had a large part in my up bringing they have taught me all that i know and made me the person that i am today they are not bad people sure they have some bad ones but so does every other group or club dont judge a motor cycle club before you get to know that they are not all bad people and should not be subject to these biased veiws that you so called upper socity have of them we are one big family and that is more than most people can say i know that no matter what they have me on their side and i have someone to catch me if i fall do you have someone that you can put your life in there hands and not worry well i do and guess what they are bikers and they are good people and alot of them are in jail because of crimes that didnt do and you all put them there just to make yourselves feel better you all should be ashamed of yourselves. C.J.V

i'm sorry but C.J.V. you started off quite well but to end your $0.02 with @and they are all in gaol for crimes they didnt commit' and to then blame that on everyone else seems a bit gfar fetched, like come on love

I think there are two different authors: the daughter of a founding member of the Hell's Angels, and the son or daughter of a "memeber of a motor cycle club (not the hells angles)". The latter writes in one-sentence paragraphs (which are not formatted as comments to the former's remarks) and signs himself or herself as C.J.V. --Lyle 05:40, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

Never met an a good and honest HA. In other words HA HA HA. The Hells Angels a motor cycle club maybe in the 50's. Get real girl. Stop taking drugs, your brain is not functioning right. They're animals, and should be treated as such. 2REI

[edit] When You Post a Real Gang - Wikipedia Member's Dispute it - Yet a MC Club is Called a Gang and It Is Accepted

I have no further comments on this page!(UTC)

This page was last modified 00:32, 27 October 2005. All text is available under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License (see Copyrights for details). Privacy policy

129.11.76.229 19:52, 8 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] come on

don't like it? change it.

Dear ***. Are you kidding? These guys are as dangerous as G Gordon Liddy. They kidnapped my next door neibour. The taped him down to a char, shaved his head, broke everything he owned, stole both his cars. Nice Guys! They are easily professional drug addicts. They are 'proported criminals?' They are "alledged?". Alleged? Do you allege Gravity?

"Warning: Alcohol MAY cause intoxication." - Sign in Flordia Gas Station.

Hi, anon. I respect your opinion, but please familiarize yourself with Wikipedia's NPOV policy. As a neutral encyclopedia we must not advocate one point of view over another; rather we report the fact that some sources allege that this group is criminal while others disagree. (BTW, gravity is a pretty contentious subject in the realm of theoretical physics these days; feel free to read the articles on quantum gravity and string theory in your free time.) :) --Bk0 (Talk) 19:34, 12 November 2005 (UTC)

Depending on the countries and their criminal laws, the HAMC organization is, by itself illegal. Furthermore, members of the club have a tendency to be involved in criminal lucrative activities, especially 'full-patch members' (members who are authorized to wear the full logo on the back of their jackets, as seen on the picture with the article).

[edit] Hells Angels are sometime asociated to criminals

In Quebec (a canadian province), under the leadership of Maurice 'Mom' Boucher (he was a prominent leader of an elite chapter called 'Nomads'), the HA have been able to establish themselves as the main elements responsible for drug trafficking in eastern Canada, and probably in north-east USA. The also controlled de street-level commerce of drugs chemical drugs, such as ecstasy, including the liquid version, which was very popular in the mid-90. During the 1994-2001 biker war in Quebec, HA members have been directly responsible of many contract murders, including of two prison guards, and attempted murders, such as an attempt on the life of a criminal-affairs journalist. The war opposed the HA to the Rock Machines, which was associated to the Bandidos, a biker gang opposed to the HA. This war ended in 2001, when the national and local police organizations arrested more then 50 individuals (almost all of the full-patch members of the Nomads and the Rockers) in a single operation. Almost all the people accused have pleaded guilty to various charges, including murder 1 and 2, attempted murder, drug trafficking, extortion and fraud.

I cannot speak for other HA chapters around the world, but the Quebec HA chapters were clearly involved into criminal activities. In fact, criminal activities were institutionalized in the day-to-day activities of the HA in Quebec.

I find it hard to believe this situation was unique in Quebec and that HASF or HANY are all law-abiding citizens.

[edit] I also agree with the negative editorial slant of this article

Far from being outlaws or rebels in any true sense of the word, all Hells Angels' members are just your average suit wearing yuppies during the week who like to blow off a little steam by playing "dress-up" and riding around on their motorcycles on the weekends. Think about it: who else can afford to blow 20K + on a crummy motorcycle like a Harley? Hells Angels are alot like transvestites, except instead of dressing in women's clothes, they wear the uniform of the fabled "outlaw biker"...just substitute the frilly underwear for a leather vest and you get the basic picture.

[edit] There are so many wrong things about the comment above

1-Having Harley Davidson is a standard requirement for HA members But, the thing is, the bike itself is generaly not registered under the name of the biker riding it. It is under his wife/girlfriend/mother/father/children/etc... so that it cannot be seized by law-agency as a product of crime.

2-They can afford it by selling dope (preferably cocaïne because of its persistent high demand and important profit returns), extorting money, loan sharking, theft, fraud and selling more dope.

3-Harley Davidson are not 'crummy'. They are very powerful and well-designed bikes. Also, HA members can put more than 50K on these little babies since it is a general symbol of their rank and status in the chapter.

4-Comparing HA to travestites is funny!

I would like you to call one a crossdresser to his face I think you must live far from any of them for they ARE as dangerous as they ever were.

[edit] Neutral comment

I encourage people who object to the article to edit it, particularly those who know the organization from the inside. I met the Hells Angels only once. I had stopped at a gas station in California's San Joaquin Valley and exchanged a brief greeting with two of them. They were polite and pleasant. I realize these aren't the Boy Scouts. I also realize that if my Sportster had broken down on the freeway they would have stopped and helped out: roadside assistance to other riders is a club public service. I also realize they're the reason why no one ever stole from my saddlebags. Durova 05:31, 24 December 2005 (UTC)

The Hell's Angels used to visit my small hometown of Willits every 4th of July for Frontier Days. They'd take up blocks of parking along Main Street, even parked at right angles to the curb, give the local bars lots of business, and for the most part behave themselves. I was just a kid, but all the Angels I talked to were polite. You would not want to pick a fight with one of them, though, because you would, in effect, be picking a fight with all of them. --Lyle 06:03, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

Just a question for anyone who might be in the position to answer. I have been under the impression, as stated above, that articles should be verifiable through reputable sources. The "rob-profile.com" site was noted a couple of times as being a source for the article. I have to say that, in my opinion, the website is a far cry from being reputable in the way that something like a peer-reviewed journal is. Is a website sufficient as a source for Wikipedia? (For those who may not be aware, while I did not read all of the content on the website, I saw enough to know that it treats some contraversial subjects as fact.) --unsigned

So many unsigned comments here! Please use your userid when posting anything on a discussion page! I just happened across this article in linking from another page. The article appears biased and refers to criminal activities but has little to no sources to back up the accusations to the club as a whole. I see references to a bombing in Quebec which I know nothing about, but there is no source, only another unsigned personal account on this talk page. I don't have any info to add to the article but as a neutral wikipedian on this subject I can clearly see that this article either needs to better sourced to support its apparent bias against HAMC or modified to reflect a more NPOV. I see that "James" (again no userid signature - and I am not going to go thru the history to find out who "James" is) has attempted to make certain NPOV adjustments according to the talk page but the article still alledges many negative aspects without sources listed for the allegations. --Censorwolf 14:12, 9 January 2006 (UTC)

Try reading The Road To Hell, which is a reference on the main page, if you want to know about HA crimes in Quebec and throughout Canada. As for unsigned comments, keep in mind that going public against the HA can be quite dangerous, as many witnesses have found! --M4-10 19:26, 9 January 2006 (UTC)

My point is there are very few references to back up the points, which leads me to distrust the information provided when it is inflamatory. News articles would be helpful for instance. --Censorwolf 21:48, 11 January 2006 (UTC)

As someone who as lived in Montreal in the late 90s early 2000s, I believe this article to be way too neutral. Alleged criminal activities ? Since when being found guilty in a court of law of being behind numerous assasinations, bombings and heavy drug traficking gets you being labeled an "alleged criminal" ? I can not speak of the chapters across the world, but Hells Angels in eastern Canada are law abiding as much as mafia members are legitimate business men. Come on ! You want referenes ? Sure, just look up court records in the province of Quebec. They're publicly available for all to see. You can start by looking up Maurice Boucher. Michele Auger, a journalist, paid dearly for having dared to investigate on them.
http://www.cbc.ca/fifth/featurestories/bikers/timeline.html

Don't forget Richard Vallee. --Lyle 06:03, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Introduction is incomplete

The introduction of this article (the part before the TOC) doesn't say what the Hells Angels actually are. Someone with knowledge on this subject should correct that. -- ironcito 18:07, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

Go to www.rob-profile.com for an actual case,exceptional facts and knowledge.

[edit] Police Conspiracy? No, just a bunch of deluded people

Ok, so let me get this strait. Every time I hear about a raid on a Hell's Angels drug house in the news, it's all a police cover up. Man, your worse than those moon hoax guys, or those holocaust deniers. well, not as bad as the later but pretty close. ok look. I've heard that they are really respectible from some people I know. People into gangs and stuff. But other than that, they are a gang, and those people who say they are nice are also the first to admit that they are ruthless gangsters. Trust me. There's a difference between those who like to ride motercycles as part of motercycle clubs and those who are hell's angels. This article is fact, it is not biased and this shouldn't even be a discution.

[edit] Cleanup

Alright guys, this has gone far enough. This article and indeed this talk page have become something akin to a battleground in which shock-sensationalists and HA aficionados are all too willing to excercise their own belligerence. Can't you all just discuss and contribute without getting so goddamn angry? If, as a community, we cannot pull together - and with at least some semblance of emotional maturity contribute to what I and obviously many others view as an important article - then I vote that it should be deleted. It is, at present, in a sorry, sorry shape. Let's just approach this from a neutral perspective, shall we, and if as nothing more than motorcycle enthusiasts pull together to create a good, coherent and comprehensive article about something which is indisputably important in the history of, among other things, motorcycles, American history and counterculture. --^pirate 17:04, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

Watch out everyone! Pirate's got a thesaurus and he's pissed! Dry your eyes and toughen up you pretentious pussy and keep your patronising moral lectures to yourself you condescending moron. Thunder Cat

if the hells angels are a huge criminal organisation controlling the drug and prostitution industry as som many claim, then society has only itself to blame. no drug dealer would make a cent if nobody bought from them. also, in north america, we have the right to live as we want to, and this includes being scary. yes, bikers are tough and do what they want, and no, most of us are not. but most of us would like to be. don't get involved with bikers and chances are they won't want anything from you. i do know a biker, and he is not a sweet, care-free father of loving children. he is a violent angry man who beat people up a lot. but he was raised with very little going for him. most of his youth was spent being kicked around. he was finally accepted into a local chapter of a biker "club", and believe it or not, he stopped his violent ways, because of club rules. the club is not a charity, and an average person would be in trouble if they ever crossed it, but they don't go out of their way to make life miserable for other people.

• * * *

[edit] Ain't fair to pigeon hole anyone

In a nutshell every member in the HA are there own person. Thats common sense. And being there own persons the membership is as diverse in personalities as any other large organization, and humanity in general. There are good ones and there are bad ones. Not all HA are good and not all HA are bad. Case in point is the liquidation of the chapter in Quebec, which was eliminated by their own organization. I do know if you want respect you give it. In all my experiences with various members from various chapters I never had any problems. And I got some awsome pictures too. This whole article in wiki further makes me realize that wiki is a crap web site. The HA aren't robots and as a consequence all of them are different. How boring it would be if you had to act and be a certain way to be member. Has it dawned on anybody whose written here that there MC is no different then a large corporation with thousands and thousands of employees. I guarantee you those employees have codes of ethics and the HA do to. Except with the HA they go down swinging for what they believe and for that I admire and respect the the MC. Some do illegal activity and some do not. If you arrest an employee or 2 or 3 or more for stealing or whatever does that make that corporation a fraudulent business? No. Same with the HA.

[edit] Fact Check

Oakland was not the first chapter. San Bernadino (aka Berdoo) was the first chapter. San Francisco (aka Frisco) was originally a club called the Market Street Commandos. They and the North Sacramento Chapter (aka Sacto) predate the formation of Oakland HAMC. But, it should be noted that anything culturally interesting about the HAMC ceased circa 1970. Gerund Spelling 02:20, 18 April 2006 (UTC)Gerund, April 17th, 2006

Founder Names:

Otto Friedli, Robert "Bobby" Zimmerman, Ron Hufstetler (Pissed of Bastards of Bloomington, suburb of San Bernardino, then first HA Charter in 1948).

Then: San Gabriel Valley (early 50s)

Later:

NorCal: 1954 Frisco (with Frank Sadilek coming from Berdoo. He also designed the early Deathhead logo in 1954, which was Friscos and other charters color until 1973. The "Barger Larger" deathhead Color is now the official color, first introduced in 1958 by the oakland charter and then worn by mostly NorCal charters like Oakland, Nomads, Fresno, Sonoma Cty, Richmond and Daly City. SoCal and Frisco also with Dago used the "small" deathhead.

"Parts of any police in every part are selling drugs, taking bribes and beating up innocent citizens. Parts of any organization or brotherhood in the whole world are likely doing the same. GET THE PICTURE?

If you need more Info, visit your local charter and have the guts to ask the members about their club! Otherwise keep your potatoe fraps shut, please!

L + R

olli

{{subst:unsigned|89.48.19.254|9 August 2006}

Hello Olli, and welcome to Wiki. While I know that much of what is noted is factual, it's rather difficult to be credible and neutral in the article when listing out an information source as "ask a member or shut up!" I suggust that if you have any credible sources (books, magazines, documentaries, etc), please list them. If you require any assistance, have any questions, etc, you can always ask. Rsm99833 23:38, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

O.K. I am here again: Nice little article from the net:

"Information for this article came from interviews with George Christie and members of the Ventura Hells Angels, conversations with law enforcement officers, the History Channel, and "Hell's Angels: The Strange and Terrible Saga of the Outlaw Motorcycle Gangs," by Hunter S. Thompson.

Motorcycle club's origins clouded in wartime history, but all sides agree on one thing: Today's Hells Angels are no monks By MICHAEL JAMISON of the Missoulian

Paratroopers were probably original Angels

VENTURA, Calif. - The hard-drinking, hard-riding, hard-fisted phenomenon of the Hells Angels Motorcycle Club was kick-started not on America's highways, but in the world's deadly and bleeding fields of war.

The Angels have grown, in the past 50 years, to include three dozen chapters in the United States, a presence in 15 countries and a worldwide membership estimated in the thousands.

But before all that, before roving bands of unwashed malcontents began riding the wild West astride iron horses like so many gun-slinging outlaws, before they tore open America's fabric and sewed themselves into the tapestry of mainstream culture, before they bathed and broke out as businessmen, before all that, their name belonged to other Angels.

"Hells Angels" was a name long favored by mercenaries and soldiers, warriors and troops who risked all for principle, belief, freedom and individual rights - including the right to ride big Harley-Davidson hogs. The history of today's Hells Angels is obscured by the hazy exhaust of half a century of Harleys, and no one can see through quite to the beginning.

But many believe the original Angels were members of the U.S. Army's 11th Airborne Division, an elite group of paratroopers trained to rain death on the enemy from above, drifting in behind the lines of battle.

They called themselves the Hells Angels because they flew on silk wings into hell itself, bringing a brutal hope for peace with 20 pounds of TNT strapped to each leg. The nickname was a badge of honor, a mark of invincibility, a wartime emblem indicating the toughest of the tough. It was a totem to ward off the worst.

Not surprisingly, a handful of those original Hells Angels - along with many other returning soldiers who had awakened to the nightmare of war - found it difficult to settle into the half-sleep of the American Dream. After living on the edge so long, they found only a depressing fatalism and monotony in jobs, family, mortgages, college, suburbia and cookie-cutter houses with white-picket fences.

And so they rode. Motorcycles were cheap in the mid-1940s, sold as military surplus, and they offered a certain wild peacetime freedom not unlike the wartime skies of Europe. Soon, individuals gathered into groups, sharing weekends when they rode hard and partied harder.

But when Monday came, not everyone went home. Some stayed, turning the weekend motorcycle club into a surrogate family of full-time brothers.

Two of the first such fraternities were the Pissed Off Bastards and the Booze Fighters, groups that established early the notoriety of the outlaw biker image. In 1947, at an American Motorcycle Association convention in the drowsy town of Hollister, Calif., the Pissed Off Bastards rode in drunk, wild and destructive, landing as if behind enemy lines with a belly full of TNT. The local sheriff later described the scene as "just one hell of a mess."

Quick to control the public relations' damage, the AMA denounced the Bastards, saying it was unfortunate that 1 percent of motorcyclists should ruin it for the law-abiding 99 percent. To this day, the 1 percent insignia remains a badge of honor, worn with pride by those who define themselves as not part of that milquetoast 99 percent majority who ride whining Hondas back and forth to the office.

But in the months following Hollister, internal tension among the Bastards and Booze Fighters was mounting, and in 1948 Bastard Otto Friedli broke from the club, splintering the group to create the Hells Angels Motorcycle Club in Fontana, Calif.

Through the late 1940s and early 1950s, the Hells Angels continued to ride with the other 99 percent, but already their reputation roared out in front.

That reputation crashed into the public consciousness in 1954 when Marlon Brando starred in "The Wild One," a Hollywood sensation inspired by the rumble at Hollister.

That same year, the original Hells Angels chapter merged with San Francisco's Market Street Commandos to spawn the club's second chapter, whose president crafted the intimidating winged death's head that remains the Hells Angels calling card to this day.

Chapters quickly popped up along the California coastline, but there was no organization among the groups, no single vision. All that changed, however, when Ralph "Sonny" Barger helped establish the Oakland Chapter.

Although Barger insists he is not the leader of today's international Hells Angels, he is widely considered so by law enforcement, and undoubtedly wears an unofficial crown. Today, Barger lives in Arizona. George Christie, longtime president of the Ventura, Calif., chapter, is considered Barger's second-in-command and likely successor.

Under Barger's guidance, the Hells Angels chapters came together, hammering out bylaws, codes of conduct, patches, colors, tattoos and club houses. And the myth of the outlaw biker grew. There were tales of mayhem, violence, destruction and, in the early 1960s, accusations of rape in the oceanside town of Monterey.

That high-profile rape case, historians believe, marked the beginnings of what law enforcement now calls an international drug trafficking syndicate. In order to pay legal bills, the legend goes, the Hells Angels made a few drug deals, selling methamphetamines and entering for the first time the world of big-money narcotics.

Whether that version is true, few know for certain and none will admit - proof, perhaps, of the motto "three can keep a secret if two are dead." What is known is that the Hells Angels' defense, however financed, was successful and the rape suspects were acquitted.

It was the first in a long string of high-profile accusations, arrests and acquittals - suggesting either the Angels are slippery or that police like to arrest them despite flimsy evidence. Many believe the truth involves a bit of both.

Regardless, in winning the Monterey rape case the club also won over popular culture, which set the Hells Angels on a pedestal as icons of freedom and resistance to "the system."

The rape acquittals also caught the attention of the California attorney general, who began what would in just a few years become one of the longest running cat-and-mouse games ever played between law enforcement agencies and an established and easily identifiable group.

Infamy bred notoriety, and in the mid-1960s "The Nation" magazine sent a young Hunter S. Thompson off to write about the Hells Angels. Thompson returned to the bikers after completing the article, riding with the Hells Angels for a year while researching his book, "Hell's Angels: The Strange and Terrible Saga of the Outlaw Motorcycle Gang."

At the same time, Hollywood had discovered the bikers. Barger starred next to Jack Nicholson in "Hell's Angels on Wheels." Rock stars such as Jerry Garcia of the Grateful Dead struck up friendships with the bikers, which Garcia admitted was a bit scary, because the Hells Angels were, as he put it, "good in all the violent spaces."

That was proved beyond doubt on Dec. 6, 1969, when the Hells Angels were hired as security for a Rolling Stones concert at Altamont Speedway outside San Francisco.

That night, at the height of the Angels' bare-knuckled stardom, the crowd surged in waves and the Hells Angels braced against it. An irresistible force swept against an immovable object, Mick Jagger sang "Sympathy for the Devil" and everything came unhinged.

An 18-year-old Stones fan named Meredith Hunter rushed the stage, was beaten back, rushed again, was pushed back, pulled a gun, and shot a Hells Angel in the arm.

Barger, interviewed for a recent History Channel special, said that when Hunter fired, "people started stabbing him. The guy killed himself by pulling the gun and shooting it into a crowd. And to me, that's just part of everyday life in the Hells Angels - somebody shoots you, you stab him."

One Hells Angel was arrested for the killing, but later was acquitted, despite the fact that the entire incident was captured on film.

Now, with their bad-boy reputation squarely in place and undeniably earned, the Hells Angels began to emerge as a more sophisticated outfit.

They incorporated, trademarked the infamous death's head and opened chapters around the world.

Their boldness irritated law enforcement, and in the late 1970s and early 1980s, the government tried to pin an official organized crime designation on the group, attempting to prosecute the Hells Angels under laws originally designed to combat the Mafia. The alleged violations of racketeering, influence and corrupt organization laws, however, were never proved, with two hung juries unable to come to a decision on 38 of 44 separate charges.

The $15 million federal prosecution resulted in two mistrials, which prosecutors decried as a miscarriage of justice, while Barger threw a no-holds-barred bash for the jurors.

Despite the verdict exonerating the motorcycle club, police here and overseas continue to consider the Hells Angels a wealthy corporation with a global drug distribution network.

For their part, the Angels continue to deny all charges, and in 1998 happily celebrated their 50th anniversary. The Angels, who Christie admits are "not monks," nevertheless insist that if they were as bad as police allege, they would've been jailed and disbanded years ago.

Their argument goes something like this: with such easy prey (Hells Angels do, after all, advertise their affiliation with emblazoned colors) police must be incompetent investigators or simply working under mistaken assumptions, and they're willing to give police all credit due.

Or perhaps it is as Christie's club members say - cops chase Angels because Angels are easy to chase. Finding real criminals is much tougher, and would require investigative initiative beyond pulling over every biker wearing the infamous winged death's head.

Today, both sides agree much of what the Hells Angels were is as far gone as the origins of their name.

The war of rhetoric between the Angels and police has been spun by popular culture into a complicated web of conflicting myths. And as those myths have emerged, the Hells Angels have become a self-fulfilling prophecy, carried into tomorrow by sheer inertia, like a Harley riding high in the curve, barely holding on, relying on a wisp of friction to keep from blowing over the top and into quiet nothingness.

So far, friction has served them well."

Almost all things correct except that Frisco was not the 2nd charter in the clubs history. It was the San Gabriel Valley Charter in the early 50s." url: www.missoulian.com/specials/hellsangels/ha02.html

And another one: url:http://www.insidevc.com/special/angels/stories/angel17.shtml

"Ventura event a 'milestone' for Hells Angels Last 50 years a wild ride for loved, hated group

By Phillip W. Browne Ventura County Star writer March 15, 1998

It all started in postwar California, then a magnet for veterans who rejected the thought of a nuclear family and a white picket fence.

These veterans of World War II opted for the wild life on the highways, especially Route 66 through San Bernardino.

They formed their own loose-knit families -- anti-heroes clubs -- up and down the coast. They rode Harley-Davidsons. They swam in alcohol. They reveled in a good brawl.

They had their own American Dream.

Among a handful of these surrogate families, one stood tall. The POBOBs -- The Pissed Off Bastards Of Bloomington -- who called an unincorporated area south of Fontana their home. They roamed the highways, throttled their Harleys into bars and restaurants, fought and held drag races.

But there was some strife among the POBOBs, and a biker named Otto Friedli defected, assembling a group of his own in San Bernardino on March 17, 1948. They brought with them the rebellious tradition nurtured in the bloody skies over Europe.

They adopted a name relished by World War II combat pilots, air crews and paratroopers.

The Hells Angels.

Friedli probably didn't know it then, but he began what would become the most

celebrated -- and most feared -- motorcycle organization, which continues to flourish around the globe today.

It has chapters in Europe, Canada and Africa, among other countries. About 1,000 of them will be in Ventura this week to celebrate the organization's 50th anniversary.

"This is a milestone for us -- 50 years," said Ventura Hells Angels' leader George Christie, reciting portions of the organization's history.

"It's a milestone whether you love us or hate us. It's been a long, tedious journey, but it's been fun," he said.

The club became a lean and mean organization in 1957 when a 19-year-old warehouseman formed the club's third chapter in Oakland. His name was Ralph Hubert "Sonny" Barger Jr. In 1958, Barger was elected club president after Friedli was sentenced to jail.

Barger became an exalted leader and still reigns today.

Gonzo journalist Hunter S. Thompson described the Angels of the day as "the hundred carat headline, running fast and loud on the early morning freeway, low in the saddle, nobody smiling, jamming crazy through traffic at 90 miles an hour down the center stripe, missing by inches."

The Hells Angels became the anti-American heroes, loved by some, feared by many and a thorn in the side of law enforcement. During the '60s, the Angels, along with other outlaw motorcycle groups, gained the reputation as leaders of the methamphetamine trade, said Mike Van Winkle, spokesman for the state's Bureau of Narcotics Enforcement.

FBI Agent Kevin P. Bonner once described the Hells Angels as an "organization that lives for or lives on drugs."

In a book called "Hells Angels: Three Can Keep A Secret If Two Are Dead," by Canadian author Yves Lavigne, the author describes a chat with Gary Kautzman, then president of the San Francisco chapter, who dropped a shoebox of methamphetamine onto a desk and said: "This is the best crank in the world. We make it ourselves."

This might have happened in the old days, but Christie said allegations about the Angels once controlling the methamphetamine trade are completely false.

"It's not true, they never proved that, but they continue to make these allegations today," Christie said. "The Hells Angels are not involved with or in control of any criminal activities."

True or not, the Angels were still a handful.

Retired Fontana police Detective Frank Donlon used to watch the bars and other local haunts where they hung out during the '60s. He retired in 1992.

Yes, they were involved in all sorts of malfeasance, but they didn't cause many problems in Fontana, he said.

"We kept tabs on them, but the ones who caused the problems were the E prospects," Donlon said. "They would fight a lot. They were into drugs. They could strip a stolen motorcycle in three minutes flat."

Donlon became friendly with several of the Angels, and even saved one in a vicious barroom brawl.

"There was a guy with a bar stool standing over an Angel named Crazy Wayne. He was going to smash it into his face," Donlon said. "I grabbed ahold of the bar stool and Crazy Wayne took off. He thanked me for saving his life."

San Bernardino County sheriff's Sgt. Paul Capitelli said the Angels haven't been as active in recent years, but police still watch them. They continue to gather intelligence on the "suspected outlaw group," he said.

The Hells Angels also became unpopular with some of the original WWII Hells Angels. Charles Lawrence, with the Veterans Administration in Oxnard, said the original Hells Angels were an "honorable group of veterans who served their country well."

The 11th Airborne Division, the only parachute division to fight in the Pacific during World War II, got its nickname from the division's patch, a blue shield emblazoned with a white-winged "11."

At least one Army Air Force unit also used the nickname during the war.

Oxnard resident Norman Batten, 72, an original member of the 11th Airborne, said he doesn't like what the name now signifies.

"The glory doesn't belong to them. It doesn't seem right," Batten said. "I don't even know who Mr. Christie is."

Christie established the Ventura chapter in 1978. He was a member of the Los Angeles chapter, but wanted to return to his roots in Ventura, he said.

In the '60s and '70s, and still today, the Angels became somewhat philanthropic, donating thousands of dollars to charitable organizations like Toys for Tots. They help whenever they can. All of the money they win in civil lawsuits goes to charity, Christie said.

Christie's darkest public hour was in 1986 when he and associate Danny Fabricant were accused of trying to arrange the murder of a federal prison inmate.

It was two years after Christie gained worldwide publicity when he carried the Olympic Torch for a mile in Ventura County.

But Christie beat the rap in 1987 when a jury acquitted him, deciding that the government had entrapped them.

Today in Ventura, the Hells Angels are 25 members strong and growing. Christie won't say what's in his future, but one thing's for sure. He's an Angel forever.

"We're going to continue our motorcycle brotherhood. We'll change and adapt with the times," Christie said. "We'll continue to be all one organization heading full throttle." (end of article)

So long + take care

olli

—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 89.48.51.206 (talk • contribs) 11 August 2006.

[edit] Bias? (redux)

In Canada, the Hell's Angels are criminals. End of story.

Please consult this link:

http://www.cbc.ca/news/background/bikergangs/

Going by the article, anyone wearing colors or riding motorcycles is a criminal.

[edit] Dual personality.

I think like many organizations and institutions, perhaps the Hells Angels suffer two reputations, good and bad. Political science and history suggest that a bad organization can persist far easier behind the front of a good organization of the same name. Sometimes the good side prevails and wipes out the bad, and sometimes the opposite happens. The mafia if believed to have begun as rebels against oppression. The Christians generally started out as rebels and free-thinkers, but in time were supplanted by ruthless theocratic institutions. If one investigates the history of the Knights Templars and Freemasons you will find this to be the case as well. The Hebrew were known as both civilizers and destroyers throughout history, and their descendents have been cursed with that dual personality ever since, usually without justification. And look at Muslims! Wisdom and peace overshadowed by oppression and terrorism. So, is it no feasible that criminal gangs masquerade under the Hells Angel name? Many organizations, including gangs, started off with the idea of opposing injustice or oppression, and then are corrupted by their own power. Anyway, food for thought. Jcchat66 18:04, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

All entries from Thunder Cat will hereby be deleted from my insert. This individual has proven beyond the shadow of any doubt that they cannot engage in professional debate. Hostility and arrogance will not be tolerated. Jcchat66 06:56, 30 April 2006 (UTC)

I would suggest that if you have any problems with an individual that you take it up with the mediators (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Mediation_Cabal), and let them rule on the matter. However, if you chose to delete enteries based soley on the fact that they were entered by an individual and doing so without a mediator, you run a 99% risk of being permanently banned.

Keep this in mind.

Rsm99833 07:13, 30 April 2006 (UTC)

Thank you, Rsm99833. As I am a newcomer to this site, I will need to be informed of any wiki blunders I make. However, deletions seem to be a no-no on the Articles pages, not the talk pages. In addition Wiki seems very much against hostile behavior, personal attacks, biting the newcomers, and other users that discourage members to become editors. In fact, it states that if the rules themselves discourage us from posting something, then ignore the rules! I could find nothing yet on Wiki policies to suggest that deleting hostile remarks is out of order.

I wish to keep my entry section clean, and not let it get mucked up with garbage that is unrelated to the specific topic, which is the Hells Angels in this case. Add your own entry like everyone else and stop mucking up mine, PLEASE! Jcchat66 22:41, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

Well it sounds like someone, incase you don't guess it's Jcchat66, is afraid of an argument. He doesn't like someone disagreeing with him so he tries to silence them, a true fascist if there ever was one. And he claims that this is insert belongs to him. Well since he put it in the public domain it's not and I will continue to place entries if choose to do so. Some people would say that trying to remove one's freedom of speech is hostile Jcchat66 so you may care to bear that in mind although I wouldn't try too hard as you may do yourself an injury. Thanks Rsm99833, very professional and you didn't take a side which is very respectable. Thunder Cat

Hey, look everyone, another personal attack from Thunder Cat! I like how you harp on freedom of speech, which not all governments acknowledge, but you deny "innocent until proven guilty" when it does not suit you, under the claim that not all governments acknowledge that. This is precisely why I will not engage in any more BS from you. Jcchat66 22:41, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

Well, Freedom of Speech is a basic human right and is in international legislation ( Universal Declaration of Human Rights and Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights). Basically every country has to allow it, whether they do or not is a different matter. And do you not think killing every Hells Angel ridiculous? I probably should have specified it to "in my view" but I took that for a given since there's no measure of ridiculousness although if there was I'm sure this discussion would be pretty high. Thunder Cat

Presumtion of innocence is also a basic human right, look it up on Wikipedia. But nope, not going to get into it, wrong topic again. Thank you Thunder Cat for keeping it more civil this time. Jcchat66 20:14, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

Could you place a link for this please or at least quote legislation? I looked on the Human Rights article and couldn't find it. Thunder Cat

Too many links to add, just Wiki "presumption of innocence." This already has all the reference material you need. I do not leave links to issues that are already in Wiki and easy to look up. I even have a discussion on the article, if you care to debate that subject there. Jcchat66 17:24, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

Sooooo, you decide what entries are rediculous? Your thinking does not appear to be in the spirit of Wikipedia. This is not a soapbox or a blog, Thunder Cat, nor is this a place for you to judge what is a "rediculous entry." But at least you're finally willing to admit your faults, except that you then nagate that by being imperious again. Why don't you just STOP being sarcastic and pompous, instead of just trying?

That said, let's get back to the point. Does anyone think or have anything to add to the notion that many gangs start out fighting some kind of perceived injustice? Everyone likes to just blame it on money, but the Bloods and the Crips and the Hells Angels do not appear to be rolling in it like the mafia does. The Bloods claim to have formed in response to the Crips. Did rhe Hells Angels also form in response to some kind of hostility? What about the Bandidos? I would like to see more info on why the Hells Angels formed. Jcchat66 22:41, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] In reference to "In Refrence to earlier post by Founder's Daughter"

 (quoted from above referenced post)

I've been around them myself, my father was actually a semi-prospect (NYC Charter) for a period of time (Decided 

to pull out though when proposed with a contract hit, while my mother was pregnant with myself).

  Regarding the above 'statement'.................. better check out these 'actually' facts: 

No such thing as 'semi-prospect'. Did you mean to say he was a hang-around? Regarding '(Decided to pull out though when proposed with a contract hit, while my mother was pregnant with myself).', This is actually hysterical.....Let me see if I've got this right: The HA (in NY no less) proposes a contract hit to a....what was that? a semi-prospect (whom it must be assumed was not aware that he was actually a 'hangaround', or was he?!) whom decides to 'pull out' after the 'hit proposal'? HUH???? Firstly, HA does not 'contract hit' (as a group activity anyway, or for that matter individually). Secondly, if there were a remote possiblity that this scenerio did take place, it would not be put on offer to a hangaround, or a prospect, and never to a 'semi-prospect' (especially since he did not realize he was really a hangaround! Or wait a minute, was he a hangaround?)

  Another reference:  (and I quote)

as an example being the fact that my father had three of his Harleys stolen and was beaten with a lead pipe and attacked by 4 Hells Angels This event could have occurred, more than likely did occur and if it didn't it should have. The first quote you know the 'semi-prospect' and the contract hit stuff?) spells out exactly why this poster could be on to something 'example being the fact'. Just reading this post gives me every indication as to why this is a possibility (the beating & bike stealing). (Although just reading this post also gives me every indication that either the dad is full of s*#t and should have been made sterile at birth, or the kid thinks he knows what he's talking about, but really is from another planet and happened to see an HA at the fairgrounds in NY, thereby deeming himself/herself knowledgeable enough to comment.)

  Further this post: (Quoting said post)

Also heard it wasn't in check with the current founder of the NYC Charter wanted, since my father was on pretty good terms with him. Shit happens though) What does this mean? 'current founder of the NYC Charter?' There is only one NYC charter. It has been in place for over 40 years. The current founder? Does this mean more than one founder? If so, does that make the current founder THE founder, thereby making the old founder nobody? There are no 'founders', you moron. There may be 'founders' somewhere, but they are not recognized as 'founders' or anything else. Now if the 'founder' happens to be the president of the charter.........now you're on to something. Nevermind, this gets way too stupid to continue to comment on 'founder'.

   To continue with this post: (quoting)

It's like that in every organization though, you will always have a bad seed and you will always have people outside of the organization bending the truth to propagate the demise of the other. The Hells Angels, however, will live on forever because they stick to their true colors (I love puns!) - they won't say one thing and then proceed to do another, such as the following examples:'

HELLLOOOOOOO.....'people outside bending the truth'...geeze, you don't think???!!! Should this read 'semi-prospects' parenting morons and the morons are bending their broccoli?!!!

 One more reference and this is a BIG correction:  Regarding the following paragraph within that post:  

How many of you here would say at one point or even now, wanted to be apart of the early 1900s Mafia? Yet, you may be repulsed by the thought of becoming a Hells Angel because of how some of their members look, raped women, traffic drugs, travel together as family, et cetera. This is a very small percentage of the members as well, most are very respectful of the law and I know for a fact that some are even great friends with people in the Law Enforcement fields . As the person above said, despite what you people may want to believe, Hells Angels aren't what others present them to be; Some have doctorettes, some are entrepeneurs in legal businesses, some are business accountants, some are teachers (From College Professors to Kindergarten), some have military/law enforcement backgrounds that even include Sea, Air and Land (SEAL), Marine Core Reconnassiance (MCRecon), and Special Weapons and Tactics Team (S.W.A.T.).

TRUE: Many members are ex-military and further, some members may have the some professions mentioned. EXCEPT they most definitely will NOT have law enforcement backgrounds as this strictly forbidden criteria by HA would immediately eliminate the person with this background from membership, or even consideration of membership. This includes correctional institution officers, and most certainly includes SWAT and/or any other type of law enforcement officer (LEO). If a member IS of this type of background, it is not known to the other members, and the LEO more than likely lied to patch up with the HA. In this unlikely event (although it has happened) the LEO is undercover or is a professional liar with the capability of forever hiding his prior career & past. Should the Leo be the professional liar, gets through 'hangaround' and gets through 'prospect' and becomes a full patched member, and it is discovered that he once was LEO, he'd be outta there..........(I don't know that the second scenerio has or has not occurred, but the undercover scenario has.)

And lastly (from same post): Anyway, that's just my two cents in remark to things. I agree as well that the main Hells Angels topic is a bit biased, maybe not by the writer - but the information collected atleast. You don't have to believe anything I said - I'll respect that, but please just stick to actual facts. Just makes you look like an ignorant dickhead when you spew some of the bullshit out like some of these posts.

Uhmmm, ignorant dickhead? Well, ya got one in a row right!!! Bravo....

Most of the posts in this discussion have very little fact if any to them. This is a joke. It's a fishing expedition. It's a 'my dad was a 'semi-prospect' and 'my dad was beaten down by them' one-upmanship! (Please see my post regarding the beaten down dad.)

FACT: Three criteria to become a member of HA: Must be a male. Must be over the age of 21. Must have a motorcycle. To become a member one usually will be a hangaround for a period of time (usually a year, but varies per charter), then will become a prospect for a period of time (again, usually a year, but varies per charter), which means he will receive a bottom rocker (indicating the charter he hopes to patch up with). Should the hopeful member get through these two periods, and both the club & himself feel they are making the right choices for the right reasons he will then be given his patch and be a full patch holding member. (There are at times exceptions to this procedure, but they are rare and mostly occur when entire clubs are patching over HA from another) There are many, many more facts regarding this club which are not secret.

I would like to just edit that the "fact" of having to be of the age of 21 to join is incorrect. I know several members that have joined under the age of 21. If that rule has changed since they have joined I, myself do not know. I assume that it has not reasoning that I have been incouraged to join.

To sum things up: Whomever posted this knows nothing about this subject. If he even has a father, his father knows even less. He has presented his statements as facts. They are not. What I have stated here is not secret, nor is it covered up by members. Should anyone ever meet and get to know a member, they will be more than happy to answer your questions regarding their club, but, please, don't get stupid and ask about their club business. I promise you, they will not ask you for your bank statements or about your underwear drawer & it's contents. So have the same considerations.

[edit] "since my father was beaten down by a group of them in Miami once"

 Regarding the above reverenced subject (which is a quote by jcchat66), and again I quote same 

(same post), "So let's gather the facts before making outrageous claims!"

Do you know approximately when it was that your father was 'beaten down by a group of them in Miami'? How did your father identify them as HA?

I'm not going to say that what jcchat66 is claiming (or that what his father related to him) is not true, nor will I say it can't be true. I will say it is highly unlikely that the 'beating down' was done by HA. Florida is not nor has it ever been 'HA territory'. HA have no charters there, they may have one support club in the entire state, and they seldom travel there (if ever). On the rare occassion(s) HA may travel there; 1. At most their 'group' would likely consist of three or four members. 2. They most likely would be on four wheels rather than two. 3. 99 out of 100 people would not know they are HA as it would be very likely they would not be wearing their identifiable patches. (Should they deem wearing their patches necessary they would seek permission to wear them from the one percenter club that dominates that area; Florida is "Outlaw Territory". Once again, highly unlikely as they are bitter enemies. Should they deem not asking the Outlaws permission, and wear them anyway, they would probably be on a mission and committed to all out war with the Outlaws, thereby making it hard to believe there was a 'group' of them in Miami. Had the word(s) Charters, or large pack(s) been the adjectives here, i.e., very large numbers this would be much easier to digest) 4. Should they 'officially' make Florida part of their travel itinerary, that travel would probably include all the east coast charter members (and perhaps many in the midwest), traveling in a pack, on their motorcycles, wearing their patches and in GREAT numbers. 5. In the unlikely event of number four (above) they probably would not travel south of Daytona. 6. They do their best to not get involved in domestics or 'he saids/she saids and/or similar situations that jcchat66 referenced. This is especially true if they are not on their own turf. As a matter of fact I have seen them on many occassions giving someone that is trying to stir 's*#t with them, every opportunity to back down, to leave and not look back, rather than to have to 'go there'. The only time I have seen them confrontational is when someone has done them irrepairable wrong. Basically, if you treat them with respect, they give the same back and they do not go looking for confrontation.

Of course, they are not saints. Neither are the priests that abuse children. Nor are all priests abusers.

The above mentioned quote was purely speculation made by my father, the police that investigated afterwards, and witnesses. They were men on motorcycles, dressed in black, etc. Since this was back in the early 80's, I have nothing to support this as fact, and it should not be contrued as such. My father said they had claimed to be Hells Angels themselves, perhpas for intimidation purposes, but of course this does not mean that they were. My appologies.

The point of this discussion page is to see if any facts can be extracted from experiences or other sources. Is this not how facts are obtained? Do you think the theory of relativity began as a fact? No, it began as an opinion and evolved into probably fact as people came to more and more conclusions regarding the topic. The Greeks knew the earth was round, which qualified as knowledge, but could not make it absolute fact until they could actually sail around the globe. So, please, everyone, get off the soap box. All we have is knowledge about the Hells Angels, but not enough facts to right a better article. An encyclopedia is a collection of knowledge, not facts (Wiki the word encyclopedia and knowledge). That's what the word has come to mean, though in Greek it simply means "a general education." So why are so many of you trying to force it to be more than that? Jcchat66 17:19, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

O.K., now we are getting to the bottom of this, uhhhmmm sorta. Prospect/hangaround. If he were a prospect he would have already been through the hangaround period and he would have received his bottom rocker. Did he have a rocker? Do you understand what a rocker is? Also, it is extremely uncommon for anyone to go through these two phases that exceeds more than three to four years. It has happened but is extremely rare. Two years is the usual amount of time, sometimes three and maybe four years has occured with little more than a handful of hopeful members. You now mention him as "being in prospect status (at that time) (or as I would put it 'hangaround') for 5+ years, if you would like to know (So you could define it as hangaround, considering the amount of time he put things off, if you wish.)" Time out. It's either hangaround or prospect. Never the twain shall meet. He may have considered himself a hangaround, but if he had the rocker, plain & simple, he was a prospect. If the club considered him a prospect, he would have had a rocker. They would never refer to a hangaround as a prospect or vise-versa, a hangaround would never have a rocker and a prospect would most definitely have earned his rocker or he would not be called a prospect. As to the 'contract hit'; fine, thanks for the clarification. There was nothing signed, thank you and as for a 'hit' thanks I know what that means. So, why did you initially use that terminology? The term did not confuse me at all, but, apparently you have no problem adding little ditties (i.e., the word 'contract') to your statements (as does jcchat66) that have no reason being there. As to the 'hit', did it ever occur to anyone that this could have been a request to your father to judge his reaction to that request? That it was no more than a vehicle used by a or some members to judge the reaction? (That is if the request was even stated. I don't know if it was or wasn't as I also was not there.) Did it ever occur to you that whomever you may have consulted was not lying but relating to you only what they were told by your father? I'm not saying your father was lying, I'm saying step outside the box, and take into consideration that there could be much more to this than appears to you, your family, your father's friends, and I. The men that comprise the HA are not idiots. In fact, many of them are of the genius level. There are alot of head games played with hangarounds and prospects. The reason for this is to judge the man's reactions, and actions and judge how he deals with whatever it is that is slung at him. This is a method to know his real character. I am sorry for the loss of your father. I also apologize for name calling. But, I also call upon you to consider what I am trying to portray here. Many times there is much more to consider (be it known or not) when a request like this is made. It is entirely possible that no 'hit' was ever on the agenda, and that this was strictly a pass/no pass maneuver for one of the members to judge your father worthy (or not) of becoming a brother. As to the LEOs becoming members; I stand by that and I know that is fact, and if you have any access to any member, this is a question that they will answer forthwith, no ifs, ands or buts. There is no negotiation here, and if you think about it, at the other end, why would a LEO (either current or retired) want to join an (as they lable them) 'outlaw motorcycle gang' (OMG)? As much as the club banishes & despises them, the LEOs feel the same about them (HA). The suspicion of them being a criminal organization was taken upon themseleves (LEOs) way before the club ruled that LEOs (past or present) could never join or be considered. If indeed you know of someone in the club that once was in the Sheriff's department, (I'm assuming you mean that worked for the Sheriff's department?) I guarantee you this is not known by his brothers (club members) and if it is fact and becomes known, there will definitely be some internal excavating as this person is not who he says he is and has covered up the fact of working with law enforcement, thereby not being a brother at all. As to my attacking you, your father, your family, I'm simply trying to extract some facts here. What I've been reading in the supposed 'factual' discussion makes me irate. Considering as you said these occurances were 20-30 years ago, and the person involved is now deceased, I can't understand why some of these statements are written as to be actual facts. Regarding your statement about LEOs and my bias to them; I have no bias, I'm simply telling it the way it is. LEOs are not members of the club (known members that is) nor are they given the consideration. Period, end of statement. Regarding LEOs being undercover in the club and actually infiltrating, do a Google search on HA (spell it out Hells Angels) and then do a 'search within' using the term 'undercover' or 'Tait'. This is an ongoing battle between the Feds and the club, as they (the Feds) are constantly trying to infiltrate (undercover that is). The most famous occurance of this was Anthony Tait (FBI agent) infiltrating the club in the mid 80's. Regarding this affair, author Yves Lavigne wrote the book, Hells Angels: Into the Abyss which is an autobiography of Tait & his rise through the HA ranks. More recently (2003) three LEOs infiltrated the club up to the point of prospect, (yep, they got their rocker) which resulted in raids all over the southwestern U.S. with many arrests, and many charges of RICO. Within the past two or three months all of the RICO charges have been dropped (or thrown out of court) and the Feds' hopes of the demise of the club have all but vanished (at this point in time) as only a handful of members remain with any charges, and the charges that stuck on the few that got any charges were miniscule compared to what they thought (the Feds) they had. Most of the charges were thrown out of court and of the 60 something arrested approx 5 will do any time with the max being 5 years. I'm sorry that I chose you and jcchat66 to pick on, but, I'm picking for a reason. Trust me, there are many posts b-4 your posts that need to be ripped apart also, but, this is enough. I've seen and read enough. As I've mentioned in a post regarding jcchat66's b.s., this site is not an encyclopedia. It is not factual. It is a blog. It is a farce. It is a sham. Hopefully most will not buy into this site as having any credence whatsoever. I can't conceive the thought of a new generation of Internet users using this as a reference point for anything. You seem more interested in getting to fact than most, so, if you have questions or if I've confused this topic in any way, please, ask away. If I can share with you anything at all, I will do so. Should there be uncertainty as to an answer to be factual, I will give no answer. If I do not know, I will state so. Meanwhile, if more contributors would think in this fashion and indeed post in this fashion, there could be something to this. But, it appears that won't be happening. It appears human nature will not provide for this as most posts involve folks posting things that they 'think' they know rather than stating any facts. Once again, apologies for the name-calling, I should not have done that. At the same time, think about what I have stated in that you were not there, this happened (according to you) some 20-30 years ago, the person involved is now deceased and you must rely on sources that were not in the club let alone even close to the club. Once again, I stand by anything/all that I have stated to be factual and true.

O.K., now we are getting to the bottom of this, uhhhmmm sorta. Prospect/hangaround. If he were a prospect he would have already been through the hangaround period and he would have received his bottom rocker. Did he have a rocker? Do you understand what a rocker is? Also, it is extremely uncommon for anyone to go through these two phases that exceeds more than three to four years. It has happened but is extremely rare. Two years is the usual amount of time, sometimes three and maybe four years has occured with little more than a handful of hopeful members. You now mention him as "being in prospect status (at that time) (or as I would put it 'hangaround') for 5+ years, if you would like to know (So you could define it as hangaround, considering the amount of time he put things off, if you wish.)" Time out. It's either hangaround or prospect. Never the twain shall meet. He may have considered himself a hangaround, but if he had the rocker, plain & simple, he was a prospect. If the club considered him a prospect, he would have had a rocker. They would never refer to a hangaround as a prospect or vise-versa, a hangaround would never have a rocker and a prospect would most definitely have earned his rocker or he would not be called a prospect. As to the 'contract hit'; fine, thanks for the clarification. There was nothing signed, thank you and as for a 'hit' thanks I know what that means. So, why did you initially use that terminology? The term did not confuse me at all, but, apparently you have no problem adding little ditties (i.e., the word 'contract') to your statements (as does jcchat66) that have no reason being there. As to the 'hit', did it ever occur to anyone that this could have been a request to your father to judge his reaction to that request? That it was no more than a vehicle used by a or some members to judge the reaction? (That is if the request was even stated. I don't know if it was or wasn't as I also was not there.) Did it ever occur to you that whomever you may have consulted was not lying but relating to you only what they were told by your father? I'm not saying your father was lying, I'm saying step outside the box, and take into consideration that there could be much more to this than appears to you, your family, your father's friends, and I. The men that comprise the HA are not idiots. In fact, many of them are of the genius level. There are alot of head games played with hangarounds and prospects. The reason for this is to judge the man's reactions, and actions and judge how he deals with whatever it is that is slung at him. This is a method to know his real character. I am sorry for the loss of your father. I also apologize for name calling. But, I also call upon you to consider what I am trying to portray here. Many times there is much more to consider (be it known or not) when a request like this is made. It is entirely possible that no 'hit' was ever on the agenda, and that this was strictly a pass/no pass maneuver for one of the members to judge your father worthy (or not) of becoming a brother. As to the LEOs becoming members; I stand by that and I know that is fact, and if you have any access to any member, this is a question that they will answer forthwith, no ifs, ands or buts. There is no negotiation here, and if you think about it, at the other end, why would a LEO (either current or retired) want to join an (as they lable them) 'outlaw motorcycle gang' (OMG)? As much as the club banishes & despises them, the LEOs feel the same about them (HA). The suspicion of them being a criminal organization was taken upon themseleves (LEOs) way before the club ruled that LEOs (past or present) could never join or be considered. If indeed you know of someone in the club that once was in the Sheriff's department, (I'm assuming you mean that worked for the Sheriff's department?) I guarantee you this is not known by his brothers (club members) and if it is fact and becomes known, there will definitely be some internal excavating as this person is not who he says he is and has covered up the fact of working with law enforcement, thereby not being a brother at all. As to my attacking you, your father, your family, I'm simply trying to extract some facts here. What I've been reading in the supposed 'factual' discussion makes me irate. Considering as you said these occurances were 20-30 years ago, and the person involved is now deceased, I can't understand why some of these statements are written as to be actual facts. Regarding your statement about LEOs and my bias to them; I have no bias, I'm simply telling it the way it is. LEOs are not members of the club (known members that is) nor are they given the consideration. Period, end of statement. Regarding LEOs being undercover in the club and actually infiltrating, do a Google search on HA (spell it out Hells Angels) and then do a 'search within' using the term 'undercover' or 'Tait'. This is an ongoing battle between the Feds and the club, as they (the Feds) are constantly trying to infiltrate (undercover that is). The most famous occurance of this was Anthony Tait (FBI agent) infiltrating the club in the mid 80's. Regarding this affair, author Yves Lavigne wrote the book, Hells Angels: Into the Abyss which is an autobiography of Tait & his rise through the HA ranks. More recently (2003) three LEOs infiltrated the club up to the point of prospect, (yep, they got their rocker) which resulted in raids all over the southwestern U.S. with many arrests, and many charges of RICO. Within the past two or three months all of the RICO charges have been dropped (or thrown out of court) and the Feds' hopes of the demise of the club have all but vanished (at this point in time) as only a handful of members remain with any charges, and the charges that stuck on the few that got any charges were miniscule compared to what they thought (the Feds) they had. Most of the charges were thrown out of court and of the 60 something arrested approx 5 will do any time with the max being 5 years. I'm sorry that I chose you and jcchat66 to pick on, but, I'm picking for a reason. Trust me, there are many posts b-4 your posts that need to be ripped apart also, but, this is enough. I've seen and read enough. As I've mentioned in a post regarding jcchat66's b.s., this site is not an encyclopedia. It is not factual. It is a blog. It is a farce. It is a sham. Hopefully most will not buy into this site as having any credence whatsoever. I can't conceive the thought of a new generation of Internet users using this as a reference point for anything. You seem more interested in getting to fact than most, so, if you have questions or if I've confused this topic in any way, please, ask away. If I can share with you anything at all, I will do so. Should there be uncertainty as to an answer to be factual, I will give no answer. If I do not know, I will state so. Meanwhile, if more contributors would think in this fashion and indeed post in this fashion, there could be something to this. But, it appears that won't be happening. It appears human nature will not provide for this as most posts involve folks posting things that they 'think' they know rather than stating any facts. Once again, apologies for the name-calling, I should not have done that. At the same time, think about what I have stated in that you were not there, this happened (according to you) some 20-30 years ago, the person involved is now deceased and you must rely on sources that were not in the club let alone even close to the club. Once again, I stand by anything/all that I have stated to be factual and true.

    I apologize, I put the above response beginning with 

"O.K. now we're getting to the bottom of this, uhhhmmm sorta" in the wrong place. That response is a response to 64.246.154.64 which is the post immediately prior to this.

   Regarding jcchat66' response to my questions regarding 

the beating down of his father:

Thank you very much for the clarification in this matter. Thank you for defining what appeared to be stated as fact, i.e., "since my father was beaten down by a group of them in Miami once" (reference HA). O.K. They were men, they were on motorcycles, they were in black, and now you state that this was in the early 80's, you have nothing to support this as fact and it should not be construed as such. Why on earth did you wait until questioned to let this be known? In the same paragraph, four or five sentences after your statement about the 'beating down', you give the rant "So let's gather the facts before making outrageous claims!" You got some balls. You knowingly make a statement which is not factual and then prod others to gather facts. This is how/why some individuals/groups/clubs/companies/organizations are violated by slander. Since it was not truly known (according to your ammendment, by the law, by your father or by anyone), why wasn't this clarified? (You did not even mention that 'they called themselves' in your original statement.) Using the theory of relativity as an example of something that began with fact is totally outrageous and irresponsible. Theory is indeed just that.....i.e., the definition of theory is: An assumption based on limited information or knowledge; a conjecture. If the point of this discussion page is to seek facts, and you yourself made the statement, "So let's gather the facts before making outrageous claims!" in one sentence and then in another sentence ramble on about how your father was beaten down..........KNOWING that (as you later clarified when called upon it) it was purely speculation, why would you blatantly spew that out as fact and not clarify that you did not intend it to be fact? Why would it not be perceived as fact after your request of gathering facts was made? Why would you not clarify the statement with, "purley speculation made by my father" in the original statement? Had someone not asked for clarification, there never would have been any given. This is my point. How dare you say get off the soap box! You get off the soap box. You are the one fueling the fire for these misnomers by your statements that are not factual and making those statements knowing they are not factual. The definition of fact is: Knowledge or information based on real occurrences: an account based on fact; Something demonstrated to exist or known to have existed; A real occurrence; an event: In Law: The aspect of a case at law comprising events determined by evidence. Key word here EVIDENCE. As to your statement, "All we have is knowledge about the Hells Angels, but not enough facts to right a better article." No, you have no knowledge, and if you know you do not have enough facts to WRITE a better article, why even attempt it? An encyclopedia IS a collection of knowledge, based on facts, not hearsay. So, if you were/are not interested in facts, once again, I question your statement "So let's gather the facts before making outrageous claims!" and why did you make it when you yourself disregard this statement by making the outrageous claim about your father being beaten down by HA knowing full and well there is/was nothing to support this? Within the past three months there have been numerous interviews/discussions in National media, on National & International television networks as well as local media & television abouut Wiki. All of the topics were about people or entities that had been slandered in Wiki (either in an article or discussion or both). This happens to be why I even got here to begin with. I had never used it, nor will I ever again. I wanted to see what all the fuss was over. I chose Hells Angels as my first topic to look up, as I do have first-hand knowledge of this club. I have gotten no further (looking up any more topics), nor do I intend to go any further. I can only hope that more media pick up on the b.s. offered here and publicize it as such and publicize it well. This site is no more than a blog. There is nothing encyclopedic about this. I would love to see the people making some of these claims come out from behind their monitors and keyboards and make these supposed 'factual statements' in front of the people that they are slandering and have little if any knowledge of which they speak. As for you jcchat66, you need to check out what the left side of your mouth is saying, before you try to amend anything with the right side. (Or should I say 'write' side?! bwhahhhaaaa) You are full of more b.s. than most politicians. You have contradicted your own statements with more of your own statements within one paragraph. You have no credibility whatsoever, especially after the aforementioned clarification by yourself. You are wrong to make statements without clarifying them to be purely hearsay in the original statement, knowing full and well that's what it was....hearsay, pure & simple.

You're right, and I stand corrected, and should have practiced what I preached to begin with. I have no accuse and will certainly be careful next time. Jcchat66 00:22, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

Reading through all this, it seems like the divergence of opinion is itself a significant part of the the article. Is it possible to get to a statement of encyclopedia-worthy facts? "The HAMC is strongly associated in the popular mind with criminality, violence and antisocial behavior. The justice of this view is sharply disputed by those who attribute the reputation to a combination of elements of club-culture long since abandoned, incidents involving individual members or local clubs but not attributable to the entire organization, generalization based on other organizations, and deliberate mythologizing by some members of the HAMC." Adamdavis

That appears to be in a good direction. Rsm99833 04:20, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Different chapters

There are no references to the UK or Australian chapters of HA. It might be good to see some more details about it and maybe something about the Windsor Chapter in the UK?

== All Hells Angels are criminals

For those of you engaging in the immature hero worship of a criminal organization, I just want to say that you are all pretty pathetic. The Hells Angels are criminals. Period.

That is your point of view 70.25.72.192, however it's neither provable, POV, and goes against Wiki's guidlines. Rsm99833 04:15, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

Fine, I retract my statement.

I think that could be said of any organized group including or ecspecially those who may get away with it easier than others. Need I say more.

[edit] Introduction Tug of War

To be brief, the qualifying adjectives before Hells Angels have been switched around constantly. The changes seem to revolve around degrees of criminality from POV negative weasel words "widely considered a criminal organization" to POV positive, merely stating it's just an outlaw motorcycle club - not mentioning even alleged criminal activity. I don't want to quibble but whoever's tugging needs to (and we all need to) agree on something. I like "allegedly a criminal organization" and/or "widely considered to have some criminal elements." Ranieldule 12:45, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

While you may believe that the phrase "widely considered a criminal organization" constitutes "weasel words", this simply reflects your inability to handle the nuance of fine phraseology. The truth of the matter is that they are widely considered to be a criminal organization. The use of the adjective "allegedly", on the other hand makes it seem as if this designation "criminal" only exists in the minds of a few. Take a poll and most people will tell you that they are a criminal organization. This doesn't mean that they are, just that most people consider them so. Of course, most people would be right. P.S. You might want to look into the Al-Qaeda entry - I hear that their "allegedly" a terrorist organization.

I have little opinion on this (other than that we would do better to find someone's published phrase and quote and credit it), but I do believe that my cited information (numbers, name of the 1940s predecessor club) should definitely be there rather than the uncited information it replaced. If someone has other clearly cited numbers, fine, but otherwise, I believe citation wins out here. -- Jmabel | Talk 05:49, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

They areweasel words. Going with cited material would definitely beat any quibbling. Ranieldule 12:27, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] canada - death of Chris Swann

this is all the news has been talking about on vancoover island, the death of Chris Swann. there is plenty of articles on it, if anybody wants to do some typing, hehehe. Victoria times columnist, Parksville/Qualicum The News, Vancouver Sun. sorry about putting this second from the bottom, but i couldn't figure out how to get my comment out of that box. ~~Patrick~~ 19:53, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] I laughed when I read this article, and even more so when I read people defending HA on this discussion page

[edit] And In Conclusion

So the HA's aren't criminals, yet anyone who's weighed in on this page who seems to have any legitimate connection to this particular gang seems to qualify this statement with "but don't ever cross one or you're in for a world of hurt", "you'll never understand the life of an outlaw MC'er, and pray that you never do" or some other similar thinly-veiled threat. It seems if the club doesn't actually exist above-board as an "official organized crime sydndicate" (although I suppose that would be theoretically impossible) or even an organization that promotes individual criminal behaviors, the least we can surmize is that the HA's routinely turn a blind eye to the anti-social and illegal undertakings of it's members, and as such tends to attract people with sociopathic/criminal tendencies. But never forget "they're all a bunch of nice guys at heart, we're like family". Whatever.

"Many people consider the club a criminal organization" Haha if anyone doubts or tries do defend these maniacs as law-abiding citizens,then you need to come to Canada. It would be a better country and world if every one of the Hells Angels suffered what they do to people up here. They are criminals and are responsible for so much crime, violence and death up here that they should be described without a doubt in this article for what they are: ruthless criminals. It is a fact. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 24.64.223.203 (talk • contribs) 27 July 2006.

   I am a patch holder in an outlaw mc.  I would not attempt to dissuade
 people from their preconceptions as most people form a viewpoint and are not 
open to, or willing, to change it.  There is a lot of myth and legend mixed 
with some reality.  If you want to know what an outlaw mc is about, go to 
a biker bar and talk with one.  As for the criminality of mc's, keep in mind 
that racketeering laws, specifically the RICO laws have made clubs denounce 
club wide criminal activities and have left it to the individuals to decide 
what they do.  
    The lifestyle draws a lot of attention because it is not considered 
to be mainstream.  I don't speak for any other "patch holders."  Defending 
oneself's way of life gets tiring, some will never understand it.  I do know 
from my own experience that any violent or criminal behavior committed 
by a patch holder is not done for whimsical purposes as there is too much to 
risk.  Outlaw mc's have difficulties with club rivalries, and if an act is 
committed, take the time to think that maybe it was for a reason, you may not 
understand the reason, or feel it is a good one, that is not yours to decide. 
Keep in mind there are rules and politics between clubs and individuals.
Remember that there is three sides to a story, yours, theirs and the truth.  
A patch holder would not risk the consequence of committing a crime for no 
reason, so before you condemn the patch holder, consider that it is not always 
black and white, the world of an outlaw mc cannot be understood until you live it. 
~Exabache-8/30/06

It's always amusing to hear a dumb thug trying to sound well-spoken. I don't know about elsewhere, but the HA in Vancouver are all thugs and bullies that thrive on intimidating "regular" people. It's a FACT they're a criminal organization. All of them are thieves, drug dealers, murderers... losers.

[edit] 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? 24.82.176.52 06:04, 4 December 2006 (UTC)