GTAV voice actors include actual gangsters

Also your right, jobs are like leaves on trees, and people just need to pick one, unemployment in the world of Black Knight is a thing of the past,Jacanuk

[QUOTE="Shame-usBlackley"]

William Wallace was a rebel fighting against an oppressive regime, not a crimina. Robin Hood is fictional and still a rebel fighting an oppressor and looking out for the poor and the downtrodden. Neither can be compared to gangbangers.Jacanuk

Since you erroneously quoted me, I will be happy to answer. :)

Wallace helped lead a revolt due to England's continued insistence that it had a right to his homeland. How, in any way, does that correlate to anything, at all, about gangbangers?

The only moot point here is your own, because you're trying to tie hoodlums to someone who fought for love of country and freedom. 

 LOL i love how young and naively black/white you look at things, i guess when you grow up and discover the world or stop getting your news from your "middle class" suburbia fox local news channel, you will see what really is going on in the world. Also your right, jobs are like leaves on trees, and people just need to pick one, unemployment in the world of Black Knight is a thing of the past, also keep thinking that you do not need skills or education to get anything above flipping burgers for minimum wage at McD or cleaning up kids wormit. if you can even get that job. Which means in a US economy that one job is not enough to even get your healthcare in order, so good luck when you get sick. Also of course people who join gangs are the scum of the earth,so you keep up the general stereotype view on people. But a good advice BlackKnight, perhaps try to edcuate yourself and learn that not all people are "evil" some just dont have any choice or any hope, so they turn to a life of crime because why work 12hours a day for less than you can make in a hour. Jacanuk

Yeah, BlackKnight, stop being such a goddamned flag-waving, heartless, NeoCon!!! :P

Seriously, guy, stop while you only look stupid instead of sad as well. At least have the presence of mind to know those who you are attempting to slander. Your characterization of BK is completely and totally off the mark. 

*Goes off to watch Colors*

Yeah blackknight you should educate yourself. :Pdvader654

[QUOTE="dvader654"]Yeah blackknight you should educate yourself. :PBlack_Knight_00

[QUOTE="Jacanuk"] LOL i love how young and naively black/white you look at things, i guess when you grow up and discover the world or stop getting your news from your "middle class" suburbia fox local news channel, you will see what really is going on in the world. Also your right, jobs are like leaves on trees, and people just need to pick one, unemployment in the world of Black Knight is a thing of the past, also keep thinking that you do not need skills or education to get anything above flipping burgers for minimum wage at McD or cleaning up kids wormit. if you can even get that job. Which means in a US economy that one job is not enough to even get your healthcare in order, so good luck when you get sick. Also of course people who join gangs are the scum of the earth,so you keep up the general stereotype view on people. But a good advice BlackKnight, perhaps try to edcuate yourself and learn that not all people are "evil" some just dont have any choice or any hope, so they turn to a life of crime because why work 12hours a day for less than you can make in a hour. Shame-usBlackley

Yeah, BlackKnight, stop being such a goddamned flag-waving, heartless, NeoCon!!! :P

Seriously, guy, stop while you only look stupid instead of sad as well. At least have the presence of mind to know those who you are attempting to slander. Your characterization of BK is completely and totally off the mark. 

*Goes off to watch Colors*

[QUOTE="Jacanuk"]Sure, your the most educated person in the world. Still you seem to miss the boat on a insane amount of basic things, like the fact that you cant put people in boxes, jobs doesn't come easy, requires skills and education, and also that using the term "evil" about another human is kinda narrow minded and shows a very uneducated mindset. Also try to google William Wallace , because gaining favors was not the only reason.Black_Knight_00

LOL i kinda feel sorry for Blackknight that he has you to argue his case.Jacanuk

[QUOTE="Jacanuk"]LOL i kinda feel sorry for Blackknight that he has you to argue his case.Black_Knight_00

I dont need help in defending my arguments, they speak for themself.

[QUOTE="Black_Knight_00"][QUOTE="Jacanuk"]LOL i kinda feel sorry for Blackknight that he has you to argue his case.Jacanuk

I dont need help in defending my arguments, they speak for themself.

1) There are no evil actions. There are no evil people, only crazy people

2) Gangsters are not bad people, they are simply unemployed dads trying to feed their kids

3) William Wallace and Robin Hood were gangsters hated by their people

Did I forget any?

I think both of you guys are wrong. Gangsters are not heroes or for the people in any way, shape or form; in some areas there are absolutely no jobs at all, not through temp services, not jobs scrubbing toilets, not anywhere because there's a long line of people trying to get them, even those with college degrees are fighting for Mickey D jobs in this terrible economy.

I think both of you guys are wrong. Gangsters are not heroes or for the people in any way, shape or form; in some areas there are absolutely no jobs at all, not through temp services, not jobs scrubbing toilets, not anywhere because there's a long line of people trying to get them, even those with college degrees are fighting for Mickey D jobs in this terrible economy.

Bigboi500

[QUOTE="Jacanuk"]

[QUOTE="Black_Knight_00"] And yet I don't see anyone defending your case.Black_Knight_00

I dont need help in defending my arguments, they speak for themself.

1) There are no evil actions. There are no evil people, only crazy people

2) Gangsters are not bad people, they are simply unemployed dads trying to feed their kids

3) William Wallace and Robin Hood were gangsters hated by their people

Did I forget any?

They sure do speak for themselfs.

[QUOTE="Jacanuk"][QUOTE="Shame-usBlackley"]

William Wallace was a rebel fighting against an oppressive regime, not a crimina. Robin Hood is fictional and still a rebel fighting an oppressor and looking out for the poor and the downtrodden. Neither can be compared to gangbangers.Shame-usBlackley

Since you erroneously quoted me, I will be happy to answer. :)

Wallace helped lead a revolt due to England's continued insistence that it had a right to his homeland. How, in any way, does that correlate to anything, at all, about gangbangers?

The only moot point here is your own, because you're trying to tie hoodlums to someone who fought for love of country and freedom. 

I think both of you guys are wrong. Gangsters are not heroes or for the people in any way, shape or form; in some areas there are absolutely no jobs at all, not through temp services, not jobs scrubbing toilets, not anywhere because there's a long line of people trying to get them, even those with college degrees are fighting for Mickey D jobs in this terrible economy.

Bigboi500

Gang violence was just as bad under Clinton and a booming economy. It may even have been worse -- does anyone have any statistics on gang violence in the states over the last couple decades?

Economics are A factor, but the assertion that gang violence is a direct result of the economy is flimsy at best. 

[QUOTE="Bigboi500"]

I think both of you guys are wrong. Gangsters are not heroes or for the people in any way, shape or form; in some areas there are absolutely no jobs at all, not through temp services, not jobs scrubbing toilets, not anywhere because there's a long line of people trying to get them, even those with college degrees are fighting for Mickey D jobs in this terrible economy.

Black_Knight_00

[QUOTE="Jacanuk"]

[QUOTE="Black_Knight_00"] And yet I don't see anyone defending your case.Black_Knight_00

I dont need help in defending my arguments, they speak for themself.

1) There are no evil actions. There are no evil people, only crazy people

2) Gangsters are not bad people, they are simply unemployed dads trying to feed their kids

3) William Wallace and Robin Hood were gangsters hated by their people

Did I forget any?

Again evil is a christian term.

And try to recap what i actually said and not just make up things.

What i said was that gangbangers are not all "evil" some turn to this because its their only option, in some neighbourhoods there are no neutral. 

2) "gangsters" ? i thought we were talking about people in gangs, gangsters are a term used about people who were in the Mafia or are in the Mafia. But again some are family dads who just want to provide a way for them to live. But thats a whole new point your making here. 

3) Actually what i said was that all countries have their "criminals" to idolize , again in the eyes of the law, Wallace was a criminal, which by your term makes him evil and all he should do is get a job that bum.

But lets recap what you said

1) All Criminals/Gangbangers are evil

2) If they got a job because jobs are plenty, they would never turn to a life of crime

3) Wallace was a good guy because he was for some in Scotland a freedom fighter (Which contradicts your first point) 

[QUOTE="Bigboi500"]

I think both of you guys are wrong. Gangsters are not heroes or for the people in any way, shape or form; in some areas there are absolutely no jobs at all, not through temp services, not jobs scrubbing toilets, not anywhere because there's a long line of people trying to get them, even those with college degrees are fighting for Mickey D jobs in this terrible economy.

Shame-usBlackley

Gang violence was just as bad under Clinton and a booming economy. It may even have been worse -- does anyone have any statistics on gang violence in the states over the last couple decades?

Economics is A factor, but the assertion that gang violence is a direct result of the economy is flimsy at best. 

Crime is always going to exist, and part of the reason why is because of necessity and lack of governmental leadership and policy. Just saying simple shit like "get a job" isn't going to help, or be an accurate assessment of severe problems we face when dealing with issues like this.

[QUOTE="Bigboi500"]

I think both of you guys are wrong. Gangsters are not heroes or for the people in any way, shape or form; in some areas there are absolutely no jobs at all, not through temp services, not jobs scrubbing toilets, not anywhere because there's a long line of people trying to get them, even those with college degrees are fighting for Mickey D jobs in this terrible economy.

Shame-usBlackley

Gang violence was just as bad under Clinton and a booming economy. It may even have been worse -- does anyone have any statistics on gang violence in the states over the last couple decades?

Economics is A factor, but the assertion that gang violence is a direct result of the economy is flimsy at best. 

[QUOTE="Shame-usBlackley"]

[QUOTE="Bigboi500"]

I think both of you guys are wrong. Gangsters are not heroes or for the people in any way, shape or form; in some areas there are absolutely no jobs at all, not through temp services, not jobs scrubbing toilets, not anywhere because there's a long line of people trying to get them, even those with college degrees are fighting for Mickey D jobs in this terrible economy.

Bigboi500

Gang violence was just as bad under Clinton and a booming economy. It may even have been worse -- does anyone have any statistics on gang violence in the states over the last couple decades?

Economics is A factor, but the assertion that gang violence is a direct result of the economy is flimsy at best. 

Crime is always going to exist, and part of the reason why is because of necessity and lack of governmental leadership and policy. Just saying simple shit like "get a job" isn't going to help, or be an accurate assessment of severe problems we face when dealing with issues like this.

I'm not either; I'm just pointing out that the last time the economy was actually considered "good" (which was under Clinton) and jobs were abundant, there were still rampant gang problems. 

[QUOTE="Shame-usBlackley"]

[QUOTE="Bigboi500"]

I think both of you guys are wrong. Gangsters are not heroes or for the people in any way, shape or form; in some areas there are absolutely no jobs at all, not through temp services, not jobs scrubbing toilets, not anywhere because there's a long line of people trying to get them, even those with college degrees are fighting for Mickey D jobs in this terrible economy.

Bigboi500

Gang violence was just as bad under Clinton and a booming economy. It may even have been worse -- does anyone have any statistics on gang violence in the states over the last couple decades?

Economics is A factor, but the assertion that gang violence is a direct result of the economy is flimsy at best. 

Crime is always going to exist, and part of the reason why is because of necessity and lack of governmental leadership and policy. Just saying simple shit like "get a job" isn't going to help, or be an accurate assessment of severe problems we face when dealing with issues like this.

[QUOTE="Bigboi500"]

[QUOTE="Shame-usBlackley"]

Gang violence was just as bad under Clinton and a booming economy. It may even have been worse -- does anyone have any statistics on gang violence in the states over the last couple decades?

Economics is A factor, but the assertion that gang violence is a direct result of the economy is flimsy at best. 

Shame-usBlackley

Crime is always going to exist, and part of the reason why is because of necessity and lack of governmental leadership and policy. Just saying simple shit like "get a job" isn't going to help, or be an accurate assessment of severe problems we face when dealing with issues like this.

I'm not either; I'm just pointing out that the last time the economy was actually considered "good" (which was under Clinton) and jobs were abundant, there were still rampant gang problems. 

Again evil is a christian term.

And try to recap what i actually said and not just make up things.

What i said was that gangbangers are not all "evil" some turn to this because its their only option, in some neighbourhoods there are no neutral. 

2) "gangsters" ? i thought we were talking about people in gangs, gangsters are a term used about people who were in the Mafia or are in the Mafia. But again some are family dads who just want to provide a way for them to live. But thats a whole new point your making here. 

3) Actually what i said was that all countries have their "criminals" to idolize , again in the eyes of the law, Wallace was a criminal, which by your term makes him evil and all he should do is get a job that bum.

But lets recap what you said

1) All Criminals/Gangbangers are evil

2) If they got a job because jobs are plenty, they would never turn to a life of crime

3) Wallace was a good guy because he was for some in Scotland a freedom fighter (Which contradicts your first point) 

Jacanuk

1) Eh? unless you go back and edit your posts you have on multiple occasions used it as a absolute, if you had said "some are "evil"" i wouldn't even have put a finger on a key.

2) And again some do your correct in thinking that some do it because its easy money, as i also said a few posts ago, where you use another absolute is saying that all do it, and all they need is to get a job, sure a job helps and most like to make a honest living, but again some dont have a choice, some get killed finacial because they get sick, some do it because they live in a part of town where your either with us or against us.

3) I am not even talking morally, i was responding to a post that made it seem like americans had a worse history of making idols out of criminals, which again they dont, a lot of countries have that idea. which you then came in with "hoho gangbangers" And yes gangsters in its pure meaning, means anyone in a gang, but the term is most commonly used as a way of describing your wiseguy Al-capone type. but thats just lowering the bar, so use what ever you want.

Actually evil is, if you want to talk about ancient Greece, they would have used kakos which doesn't exactly mean "evil" in the same manor as you use it.

1) Eh? unless you go back and edit your posts you have on multiple occasions used it as a absolute, if you had said "some are "evil"" i wouldn't even have put a finger on a key.

2) And again some do your correct in thinking that some do it because its easy money, as i also said a few posts ago, where you use another absolute is saying that all do it, and all they need is to get a job, sure a job helps and most like to make a honest living, but again some dont have a choice, some get killed finacial because they get sick, some do it because they live in a part of town where your either with us or against us.

3) I am not even talking morally, i was responding to a post that made it seem like americans had a worse history of making idols out of criminals, which again they dont, a lot of countries have that idea. which you then came in with "hoho gangbangers" And yes gangsters in its pure meaning, means anyone in a gang, but the term is most commonly used as a way of describing your wiseguy Al-capone type. but thats just lowering the bar, so use what ever you want.

Jacanuk

[QUOTE="Shame-usBlackley"]

[QUOTE="Bigboi500"]

I think both of you guys are wrong. Gangsters are not heroes or for the people in any way, shape or form; in some areas there are absolutely no jobs at all, not through temp services, not jobs scrubbing toilets, not anywhere because there's a long line of people trying to get them, even those with college degrees are fighting for Mickey D jobs in this terrible economy.

Jacanuk

Gang violence was just as bad under Clinton and a booming economy. It may even have been worse -- does anyone have any statistics on gang violence in the states over the last couple decades?

Economics is A factor, but the assertion that gang violence is a direct result of the economy is flimsy at best. 

Your argument was that opportunity vis a vis economic factors was an issue. I stated that was not the case. In a booming economy, gang initiation rates went up, not down. You weren't arguing about middle or lower class areas, nor was I. However, gangs have permeated the middle class. The three boys who shot that Aussie ball player last week were from a small, middle-class town. Instead of saying that the middle-class is immune to the issue (which is just as much a fallacy as saying that only poor ethnic kids become gang members), we should instead focus on the argument, and that was that economic opportunity has little to do with it. 

And while I realize that gang life is often forced on kids, that is no different than saying that many unemployed hillbillies aren't victims of circumstance either. Bottom line? Personal accountability and initiative have to come into the equation somewhere. Preparedness meets opportunity and all that. Everyone has their own set of challenges, some more than others. 

You do well to mention the term "kakos" which in greek means exactly "evil, ill, wrongdoing, maleficience" To one of my favorites, Epicurus (3rd century BC), belongs a famous quote "Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able?". Evil is not a christian concept, as christianity is pretty much one of the newest kids on the block when it comes to religions and/or philosophy.

That's one point sorted out for good. On to the rest of this toot.

1) I forgot that on the internet people take everything literally. If someone says "Men are pigs" it does not mean that 100% of men are pigs. It's a figure of speech, which is rocket science for so many people, I learned. I keep forgetting that I need to spell out every single concept in the driest, most barebones and inequivocable way possible or it will be misunderstood.

2) I don't know what post you are referring to, but I haven't said that job=no crime. I said that poeple who end up in gangs are not in line at job centers, which I challenge you to deny.

3) Gangster is used for all sorts of gangs. There is an entire musical genre call "gangsta rap" Gangsta=gangster. Why are we even arguing about this?

Black_Knight_00

And you will do well to mention that the term Kakos doesn't mean evil, it actually literally means in a direct translation "rotten character" the problem we are then faced with here is that the term Evil is also being used to describe its meaning today.  But evil today in most cases doesn't just mean "rotten character" So i hope you can see the problem.

1) Well, thats the problem with forums, also you could just have said that you of course didn´t mean ALL in response to my post, and that would have been that 

2) A Lot don't have a job, but i can assure you 100% that some also have jobs, but that wasn't really what the debate was on about, it was more the "just get a job" remark since you must be aware that its not always easy to get a job even if you want to.

3) Ya, i know this is kinda ridiculous to argue over.

[QUOTE="Shame-usBlackley"]

[QUOTE="Bigboi500"]It's not a democrat or republican problem in the US. It's a Capitalism problem in my opinion, but I dont' want to start a political philosophy discussion as I'm trying to watch the ball game.

Crime is always going to exist, and part of the reason why is because of necessity and lack of governmental leadership and policy. Just saying simple shit like "get a job" isn't going to help, or be an accurate assessment of severe problems we face when dealing with issues like this.

Jacanuk

I'm not either; I'm just pointing out that the last time the economy was actually considered "good" (which was under Clinton) and jobs were abundant, there were still rampant gang problems. 

Please. Unemployment under Clinton was 4%, and I didn't even like the guy. It's just the hard truth -- if you wanted a job under Clinton, you could find one. Are you really asking me to believe that there was some invisible point of delineation between the Jobs Zone and the No Jobs Zone?

[QUOTE="Jacanuk"][QUOTE="Shame-usBlackley"]

I'm not either; I'm just pointing out that the last time the economy was actually considered "good" (which was under Clinton) and jobs were abundant, there were still rampant gang problems. 

Shame-usBlackley

Please. Unemployment under Clinton was 4%, and I didn't even like the guy. It's just the hard truth -- if you wanted a job under Clinton, you could find one. Are you really asking me to believe that there was some invisible point of delineation between the Jobs Zone and the No Jobs Zone?

[QUOTE="Shame-usBlackley"]

[QUOTE="Jacanuk"] But you forget to look at who and where the jobs were plenty, and where the economic boomed. But if i remember correct, US reported the lowest statics for crime in a long time under Clinton and the booming economy.Jacanuk

Please. Unemployment under Clinton was 4%, and I didn't even like the guy. It's just the hard truth -- if you wanted a job under Clinton, you could find one. Are you really asking me to believe that there was some invisible point of delineation between the Jobs Zone and the No Jobs Zone?

It's hard to find absolute data. However, I did find a DOJ docket on youth gang involvement from 2002, which cites:

An estimated 731,500 gang mem bers and more than 21,500 gangs were active in the United States in 2002. This compares with an estimated 846,000 and 30,800, respectively, in 1996. Reports of youth gang problems by law enforcement agencies in rural and suburban counties and in cities with populations of less than 100,000 noticeably declined over initial survey years. Despite these declines, gangs remain a significant problem, particularly in large cities. Every city with a population of 250,000 or more reported the presence of youth gangs in 2002, as they had in every survey.

The economy began going in the shitter in the early 2000s, yet there was a drop in youth gang activity. The numbers were much higher when the economy was really cranking away in 1996. 

And you will do well to mention that the term Kakos doesn't mean evil, it actually literally means in a direct translation "rotten character" the problem we are then faced with here is that the term Evil is also being used to describe its meaning today.  But evil today in most cases doesn't just mean "rotten character" So i hope you can see the problem.

1) Well, thats the problem with forums, also you could just have said that you of course didn´t mean ALL in response to my post, and that would have been that 

2) A Lot don't have a job, but i can assure you 100% that some also have jobs, but that wasn't really what the debate was on about, it was more the "just get a job" remark since you must be aware that its not always easy to get a job even if you want to.

3) Ya, i know this is kinda ridiculous to argue over.

Jacanuk

Actually "just get a job" is correct: the military is pretty much always enlisting, and not even for combat roles, they are always looking for personnel even in logistic fields (laundry service, kitchen service, supplies). There's always the option to move to better areas where work is more readily available. Trading companies are always looking for sailors to man their cargo ships, drilling companies are always looking for workers to send on open sea platforms or to Alaska. No one wants to work on fishing boats, so fishermen are always looking for help. These latter jobs are pretty tough, but they are there for people with nowhere else to go. There is no excuse for choosing a life of crime. None.

 

Actually "just get a job" is correct: the military is pretty much always enlisting, and not even for combat roles, they are always looking for personnel even in logistic fields (laundry service, kitchen service, supplies). There's always the option to move to better areas where work is more readily available. Trading companies are always looking for sailors to man their cargo ships, drilling companies are always looking for workers to send on open sea platforms or to Alaska. No one wants to work on fishing boats, so fishermen are always looking for help. These latter jobs are pretty tough, but they are there for people with nowhere else to go. There is no excuse for choosing a life of crime. None.

Black_Knight_00

[QUOTE="Jacanuk"]And you will do well to mention that the term Kakos doesn't mean evil, it actually literally means in a direct translation "rotten character" the problem we are then faced with here is that the term Evil is also being used to describe its meaning today.  But evil today in most cases doesn't just mean "rotten character" So i hope you can see the problem.

1) Well, thats the problem with forums, also you could just have said that you of course didn´t mean ALL in response to my post, and that would have been that 

2) A Lot don't have a job, but i can assure you 100% that some also have jobs, but that wasn't really what the debate was on about, it was more the "just get a job" remark since you must be aware that its not always easy to get a job even if you want to.

3) Ya, i know this is kinda ridiculous to argue over.

Black_Knight_00

Actually "just get a job" is correct: the military is pretty much always enlisting, and not even for combat roles, they are always looking for personnel even in logistic fields (laundry service, kitchen service, supplies). There's always the option to move to better areas where work is more readily available. Trading companies are always looking for sailors to man their cargo ships, drilling companies are always looking for workers to send on open sea platforms or to Alaska. No one wants to work on fishing boats, so fishermen are always looking for help. These latter jobs are pretty tough, but they are there for people with nowhere else to go. There is no excuse for choosing a life of crime. None.

By the way, not to stir up any more shit or anything, but here's the definition of evil:

"profoundly immoral and malevolent."

Moraiity is the distinction of right and wrong, essentially. BlackKnight is correct -- the use of the term only has religious connotations when used in certain contexts. It is fully logical and proper to use it when describing the actions of someone who possesses an unclear grasp of right and wrong. 

By the way, not to stir up any more shit or anything, but here's the definition of evil:

"profoundly immoral and malevolent."

Moraiity is the distinction of right and wrong, essentially. BlackKnight is correct -- the use of the term only has religious connotations when used in certain contexts. It is fully logical and proper to use it when describing the actions of someone who possesses an unclear grasp of right and wrong. 

Shame-usBlackley

[QUOTE="Shame-usBlackley"]

By the way, not to stir up any more shit or anything, but here's the definition of evil:

"profoundly immoral and malevolent."

Moraiity is the distinction of right and wrong, essentially. BlackKnight is correct -- the use of the term only has religious connotations when used in certain contexts. It is fully logical and proper to use it when describing the actions of someone who possesses an unclear grasp of right and wrong. 

chrisrooR

But not specifically religion. The argument being waged was that the term "evil" was entirely Christian, which it clearly is not.

[QUOTE="chrisrooR"][QUOTE="Shame-usBlackley"]

By the way, not to stir up any more shit or anything, but here's the definition of evil:

"profoundly immoral and malevolent."

Moraiity is the distinction of right and wrong, essentially. BlackKnight is correct -- the use of the term only has religious connotations when used in certain contexts. It is fully logical and proper to use it when describing the actions of someone who possesses an unclear grasp of right and wrong.

Shame-usBlackley

But not specifically religion. The argument being waged was that the term "evil" was entirely Christian, which it clearly is not.

I felt the need to chime in on this as well because clearly, the designation of "evil" as being a Christian invention is absolutely and demonstrably false.

The entire notion of good vs. evil and the accompanying dualistic struggle related to these concepts predate the Christian faith by centuries, perhaps millennia.

You also have to realize that its a crowd psychology problem. It always starts from a few control freaks that manipulate youngsters down to their level. They would have had different lives if the pull and power of the gangs werent so strong and pervasive. Thats why people set up rehab programs for gang members. The Ted Bundys and James Holmes, of the world make up their own minds to savagely destroy human life and feed their own psychosis. If you could even call it that.platinumking320

[QUOTE="platinumking320"]You also have to realize that its a crowd psychology problem. It always starts from a few control freaks that manipulate youngsters down to their level. They would have had different lives if the pull and power of the gangs werent so strong and pervasive. Thats why people set up rehab programs for gang members. The Ted Bundys and James Holmes, of the world make up their own minds to savagely destroy human life and feed their own psychosis. If you could even call it that.Black_Knight_00

Tell people in Nicaragua who live in absolute monetary poverty and try and convince them to go to Alaska, or go join the Army. There are places in the world where what you and I would consider 'criminal' behaviour is actually quite normal.chrisrooR

[QUOTE="chrisrooR"]Tell people in Nicaragua who live in absolute monetary poverty and try and convince them to go to Alaska, or go join the Army. There are places in the world where what you and I would consider 'criminal' behaviour is actually quite normal.Black_Knight_00