the hells angel ad

[golden arhat]

i read a letter in the latest issue complaining about u using a known gang member to promote your magazine

i also think this is wrong not just because criminal gangs are just that CRIMINALS but also that your magazine is excellent and i dont think it should be associated with low lives such as him

[GeneChing]

Pick up on post 20 on our Hung Gar special issue thread.

[TenTigers]

HAMC is a motorcycle club. It is not a criminal organization. Although some of its members may or may not be, just like in the Police Department, or Congress.(Masons is not a secret organization, but an organization with secrets) You don't know the backraound of this particular member enough to say he is a criminal, let alone calling him a lowlife. I know members who have absolutely no criminal record whatsoever. Don't judge a book by its cover.
ok, now let's continue the debate....

[lunghushan]

Yes, even the British have a long history of war and conquest for profit, even encouraging privateering all in the name of the crown, yet we still talk to people from the U.K.

Don't judge an organization by a minority membership.

[golden arhat]

the hells angels are a motorcycle club ,granted
they r also a gang with a long history of violence and drugs
and although the man in the advert may have been a nice enough guy i dont think such a great magazine should associate itself IN ANY WAY with the a
group such as this
technically they are not necessarily a violent group
but they are a group with alot of violent members
same as the crips may be a group of people wearing blue who carry guns
we know that they are criminals

[lunghushan]

http://weeklywire.com/ww/09-22-97/knox_gamut.html

"doctors, lawyers, actors, engineers, salesmen, bankers, computer programmers—saddling up a whole raucous, pricey new wave of bikes"

You're about 25 years behind the days when the Hells Angels were some glorious criminal gang. Now it's a corporation. Not saying some of the members aren't allegedly crooks, but whatever.

http://www.hells-angels.com/

[Faruq]

After reading the "Chan Tai San Stories" thread, I wonder how many of the masters featured throughout the years were known Chinese gangsters? I mean if featuring a criminal is wrong in one context, how is it not wrong in another? I personally don't have a problem in either instance.

i read a letter in the latest issue complaining about u using a known gang member to promote your magazine

i also think this is wrong not just because criminal gangs are just that CRIMINALS but also that your magazine is excellent and i dont think it should be associated with low lives such as him

[golden arhat]

i could not agree with dj more
he put into words exactly what i was thinking
well said

[David Jamieson]

After reading the "Chan Tai San Stories" thread, I wonder how many of the masters featured throughout the years were known Chinese gangsters? I mean if featuring a criminal is wrong in one context, how is it not wrong in another? I personally don't have a problem in either instance.

Well, we are wondering as well. the thing is, it is not safe to assume in the case where there is no promotion of the gang or it's symbology or it's ideology.

It is indeed wrong to feature a criminal. But what of a reconciled and turned around man? Now that would be something wouldn't it. Someone who actually used Kungfu to turn their life around and put it all behind them and start in a positive direction.

But, let's not play guessing games, no one is with the HA, I mean, there he is, wearing their colours. Quite blatant.

As for criminal kungfu masters, they aren't as common as all that. Take a look at teh codes of various and sundry schools, the mo duk, the wu de expressly, in almost every single instance forbids criminal behaviour. So, it's not likely you'll find them for the most part and you certainly won't find them promoting their gang or the mnagazine promoting the gang.

people change.

[Faruq]

I don't know that the majority of masters in the Chinatowns teach in schools. From the CTS article, it seems many don't teach at all, and many that do teach teach in 'associations' or 'organisations'. I don't have a problem with it, and if I did, I didn't invent gong fu to begin with and don't have the copyright on it, so who would I be to complain?

Well, we are wondering as well. the thing is, it is not safe to assume in the case where there is no promotion of the gang or it's symbology or it's ideology.

It is indeed wrong to feature a criminal. But what of a reconciled and turned around man? Now that would be something wouldn't it. Someone who actually used Kungfu to turn their life around and put it all behind them and start in a positive direction.

But, let's not play guessing games, no one is with the HA, I mean, there he is, wearing their colours. Quite blatant.

As for criminal kungfu masters, they aren't as common as all that. Take a look at teh codes of various and sundry schools, the mo duk, the wu de expressly, in almost every single instance forbids criminal behaviour. So, it's not likely you'll find them for the most part and you certainly won't find them promoting their gang or the mnagazine promoting the gang.

people change.

[lunghushan]

Yeah, David, I'm not interested in Nambla members unless they can fight well.

Honestly I wouldn't mind MORE criminals in the magazine if they highlighted their fighting methods. That would be worth an issue unto itself.

Because who are you going to go up against on the street? Criminals, right?

Law abiding citizens don't really go around attacking people, do they? If they did then they would be criminals.

[GeneChing]

...is what the next "find your peace in practice" ad will be. Fuki is going to be a tough act to follow.