INCOMING.....Dumb question!
Interesting.
[sm=icon_guiness.gif][sm=popcorn.gif]
Once again! YOU MISSED THE POINT!! Read my last post again--I can't explain it any more-- If you cannot understand what is crystal clear then you are thinking from your azz!!
Denim St, can you give me your real life experiences around 1%'s please, I would like to know what real life experience you have with them?? I mean you must have met many of them to forum your opinion, or otherwise you would be just talkin outta your ***.
Please endulge us with some of your upclose and personal stories of the 1% culture
OK, so you have no real life experience with them, ok got that.
Now, I missed the point???
well here's a couple of your thoughts...
<<They were always a bunch rotten of thugs>>
<<a TRUE 1%er is not a good person>>
Looks like English to me??
I don't think I'm misunderstanding you at all, I think you have zero real life knowledge, I think you've read some books, the odd newspaper article, and you have taken the whole lot of them and thrown them down society's toilet drain.
Denim is referring to the original term 1%er and he is correct. Originally this term defined outlaw MC's back in the day as you all know.
However, they way you stated your original post made it seem like you took a blind stab at any MC's that classifies themselves as 1%'s today.
The term 1%er no longer means what it did years ago, now it is referred to the same MC's but those MC's no longer are involved in criminal activity like they used to be. Since Hell's Angels was a 1%er long ago they still are classified that way today but they are not all criminals anymore.
In light of that, Steeltown and others are correct. While there dedication to there brothers are unparallelled, they are decent individuals. I ain't saying they are going to win any community awards or anything but they certainly are not all thugs but some may be.
In a nutshell, the term 1%er does not reflect in 2006 what it did 40 years ago.
You need to be careful talking about this stuff, watch who is standing around....the M/C is their family. Talking bad about the club is akin to talking bad about someone's family.
All I can tell you is that these guys will do ANYTHING for each other.
you don't join them, they pick you, and you have to "prospect" through and earn the right to wear the full 3 piece patch.
Just don't talk about it when they're around.....I've ridden around them before, and i just don't talk about it. It's a subject that's "off limits" to outsiders, so talk about bikes, or women, whatever, just leave that subject be....

joe
I'm not sure why that point was not crystal clear. Anyone without a severe learning disability would have understood it.
But this leads to the next point. If they are no longer outlaws and are a great bunch of guys (WHICH I AM NOT, NOR HAVE EVER DISPUTED), then what makes thim 1%ers???? What makes them any different that any other MC. You see what I am saying? If they are indeed just a nice bunch of guys, then what earns them the name 1%er??
I am sorry for the all-caps sections, they are for the twinky eating, red necks, with severe learning disabilities who are among us!
Let me settle this because I see both points of view.
Denim is referring to the original term 1%er and he is correct. Originally this term defined outlaw MC's back in the day as you all know.
However, they way you stated your original post made it seem like you took a blind stab at any MC's that classifies themselves as 1%'s today.
The term 1%er no longer means what it did years ago, now it is referred to the same MC's but those MC's no longer are involved in criminal activity like they used to be. Since Hell's Angels was a 1%er long ago they still are classified that way today but they are not all criminals anymore.
In light of that, Steeltown and others are correct. While there dedication to there brothers are unparallelled, they are decent individuals. I ain't saying they are going to win any community awards or anything but they certainly are not all thugs but some may be.
In a nutshell, the term 1%er does not reflect in 2006 what it did 40 years ago.
<<They were always a bunch rotten of thugs>>
<<a TRUE 1%er is not a good person>>
Even the two lines that you took out of context in order to make your stupid point back me up. The words, were and true, (I hope they were large enough for you to absorb them), should show you that I was talking about the original definition of a 1%er and that the good people WE BOTH KNOW that call themselves 1%ers are no different than anyone else who belongs to a MC. They are not 1%ers at all!
I don't think that if I know 1%ers or not has any bearing on this argument since I am agreeing with you that they are not bad people. But just for the record, in the mid 80's I lived on St. Marks Place on the lower east side of NY. I had to keep my bike at my parents house in PA because there was no place to keep it on the streets of NY. Directly across the street from my apartment was a Hell's Angel headquarters. I hung with dozens of them in front of the building for almost 2 years and they used to watch out for me. When I did, on occasion, have my bike, they used to let me park it with theirs because the cops never gave them a ticket. They were great guys. I used to tease them that they were too good to be Hell's Angels.
That has no bearing on this argument, but, for some reason, you NEEDED, to hear it. They called themselves "hells angels" but they were in no way 1%ers by the original definition.
Once again! YOU MISSED THE POINT!! Read my last post again--I can't explain it any more-- If you cannot understand what is crystal clear then you are thinking from your azz!!
Denim St, can you give me your real life experiences around 1%'s please, I would like to know what real life experience you have with them?? I mean you must have met many of them to forum your opinion, or otherwise you would be just talkin outta your ***.
Please endulge us with some of your upclose and personal stories of the 1% culture
OK, so you have no real life experience with them, ok got that.
Now, I missed the point???
well here's a couple of your thoughts...
<<They were always a bunch rotten of thugs>>
<<a TRUE 1%er is not a good person>>
Looks like English to me??
I don't think I'm misunderstanding you at all, I think you have zero real life knowledge, I think you've read some books, the odd newspaper article, and you have taken the whole lot of them and thrown them down society's toilet drain.
I am retired Navy, family, head of Security at an international company, I put people in jail, reserve deputy sherrif. We do both ride Harleys!!!!
nogood o~`o
The Best of Harley-Davidson for Lifelong Riders
For what it is worth. 1%'ers live by a completely different set of rules than the other 99%. The ones I have been associated with are damm fine folks. In a bind, I KNOW that they can be counted on. You never wonder if someone has your back. Sure, there are alot of things that the 99%'ers dont understand about the 1%'er lifestyle. Thats what keeps them seperated. It's akin to the old west. The good people, who just live day to day. The "Other" people, that live life by their own rules, prosper the best way they know how. I understand what it takes to be a 1%'er. I also have the utmost respect for 'em. They are doing what I dream I could. living their own way, 24/7/365.
nogood o~`o
If you want to know what its like to be around a 1% club read a great book called "UNDER AND ALONE" completely true story, or read Sonny Bargers book on the Hells Angels, these will give you some great views on a couple of these clubs by both perspectives, the laws perspective and a founders perspective. Both are great reads and well worth your time. You can argue up and down all you want that 1%'s are great people but all your doing is arguing to make yourself look cool or possibly arguing trying to make it right in your head that night you hung out with them, I dont know, nor do I care. True 1%s do what they want when they want and are in no way law abiding citizens.
Btw for the record I respect both men in different ways. William Queen and Sonny Barger were both the complete opposite ends of the spectrum and yet I respect both of them, like I said in different ways.





