Comments on: Seattle "Gangs"

By: John Eddy

John Eddy — Tue, 09 Dec 2008 01:08:27 +0000

…

The Hoovers?

….

Really?

Do they get lots of ‘Hey, Hoovers, you SUCK!’ comments? Or maybe ‘Hey, Hoovers, naming yourselves after the president whose appointment of John J. Parker to the Supreme Court failed when he was opposed by labor groups due to a decision he had written regarding the United Mine Workers and yellow-dog contracts, and by the NAACP due to remarks he had made in 1920 about African-Americans while a candidate for Governor of North Carolina makes you look so non-erudite, you should be washing dishes for my mama.’ (Thanks wikipedia).

By: wesa

wesa — Thu, 04 Dec 2008 21:50:07 +0000

That’s the feeling I have. You stated it better than I could too. There are a few small areas that I won’t walk alone at night, but I think it’s a difference of gender and not because of gangs. Otherwise, I don’t live in fear of getting caught in the midst of a gang fight or what have you. I don’t worry about offending a gang member by wearing the wrong color on their street or whatever it is that gangs do. I’m now convinced though that we should take it a bit more seriously than before.

By: matt0the0engineer

matt0the0engineer — Thu, 04 Dec 2008 21:47:06 +0000

I wonder if LA gangsters make fun of our gangsters as mocha-sipping tree-hugging gangsters. I also wonder if Queen Anne is too yuppie for even our Seattle gangs.

I have to admit that I get exactly what [wesa] is saying. There isn’t anywhere in Seattle I’d feel terribly unsafe walking at night, which isn’t true compared to many other cities. But maybe that’s just a false sense of security (or maybe our kind of gangsters hang out malls and restaurants).

By: wesa

wesa — Wed, 03 Dec 2008 22:50:00 +0000

No, I’m not saying that at all. I’m not sure where you thought I did. I’m just saying that I disregarded the reports that Seattle had real gangs until the evidence has finally changed my mind.

By: Zee Grega

Zee Grega — Wed, 03 Dec 2008 21:41:51 +0000

Wait…are you saying that someone’s only a member of a gang if they shoot someone to death? A group of people hanging out together for the purposes of robbing stores, robbing people, selling drugs, vandalizing property, threatening, harassing, and intimidating people who are not members of their group and generally creating a bad atmosphere without actually shooting anyone to death are not a gang, but only a "gang"? Would a gang become only a "gang" if they, say, knifed someone to death or is killing someone in any other way than shooting them mean you’re not really in a gang?

If somehow you’ve only ever seen gangster wannabes, then somehow you’ve only ever seen wannabes, but there are very real gangs in Seattle and they do represent a very real problem with or without guns.