I read the thread before posting. That doesn't change that the estimated 1.4 million gang member estimate is from the report and it states the methodology and criteria used to determine how it got it's estimation
However, considering that, the FBI report states that most Juggalo-related crime is "sporadic, disorganized, individualistic" and involves "simple assault, personal drug use and possession, petty theft and vandalism." A subset of the Juggalo community have been known to engage in felony assaults, robberies and drug dealing. The threat assessment also indicates that many Juggalos are transient or homeless individuals. It also states that been classified as a gang for exhibiting gang-like behavior and criminal activity in Arizona, California, Pennsylvania and Utah. Nor does it ever state how many of the subset of Juggalos are participating in the criminal gang-like activity.
By their criteria of what is a gang, that subset is a gang. It's just a gang that goes by the same name a larger community uses.
Is it right that the community as a whole is scrutinized for it? No. That, however, doesn't change the fact that, by the evidence that the FBI collected, the subset of Juggalos are a gang in the criminal sense and have the same name, identifying marks, and social groups as a larger subset of people.
It doesn't work that way, and I am surprised you would attempt to claim it such.
Yes, and if you would have been following along in this thread, or even read the opening post, you would see that they are giving the label to people who clearly are not engaging in organized gang activity, as per their own requirements, which they clearly admitted in the lawsuit mentioned in the first post.
Try to keep up.
Stevo
I read the thread before posting. That doesn't change that the estimated 1.4 million gang member estimate is from the report and it states the methodology and criteria used to determine how it got it's estimation
However, considering that, the FBI report states that most Juggalo-related crime is "sporadic, disorganized, individualistic" and involves "simple assault, personal drug use and possession, petty theft and vandalism." A subset of the Juggalo community have been known to engage in felony assaults, robberies and drug dealing. The threat assessment also indicates that many Juggalos are transient or homeless individuals. It also states that been classified as a gang for exhibiting gang-like behavior and criminal activity in Arizona, California, Pennsylvania and Utah. Nor does it ever state how many of the subset of Juggalos are participating in the criminal gang-like activity.
By their criteria of what is a gang, that subset is a gang. It's just a gang that goes by the same name a larger community uses.
Is it right that the community as a whole is scrutinized for it? No. That, however, doesn't change the fact that, by the evidence that the FBI collected, the subset of Juggalos are a gang in the criminal sense and have the same name, identifying marks, and social groups as a larger subset of people.
Yes, and if you would have been following along in this thread, or even read the opening post, you would see that they are giving the label to people who clearly are not engaging in organized gang activity, as per their own requirements, which they clearly admitted in the lawsuit mentioned in the first post.
The methodology used is presented in the report as well.
Yes, and if you would have been following along in this thread, or even read the opening post, you would see that they are giving the label to people who clearly are not engaging in organized gang activity, as per their own requirements, which they clearly admitted in the lawsuit mentioned in the first post.
The Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS) is the United States' primary source for criminal justice statistics that cover a wide range of topics.
I bet the number is actually higher.
The numbers you listed, as you know, are for a wide range of criminal acts, of which only a small portion are actually gang-related. I can't see the logic of using it as some sort of proof of your theory, but go ahead.
It's fun as fuck to troll them. They get really bent out of shape when you let them know the stereotypes surrounding them, then question why they choose to associate with those stereotypes.
Leave a comment: