A thug with a degree?

:smt038

 

The thought of this sounds HOT!!!

 

Intrigued I love you to death but I got to call bullshit on this. Thugs dont give a F who they rob, who they hurt, they all about getting money period. At some point the collective damage caused by that lifestyle outweighs whatever good they think they are.

As someone who has been "touched" on more than one occasion by thugs and thug mentality, I get just plain sick of people romanticizing that shit.

 

Hmm, Fly makes some really good points.

 

As an undergrad, I met two people who grew up in South Central L.A. and had previous gang ties. Despite the past we shared, all three of us knew that getting into a university and graduating required that we reinvent ourselves along the way. The values of Los Angeles gang life were not compatible with being a UCLA student or having a successful future.

 

Do you have to be a gang banger to be a thug?

 

I understand your point Fly....but that is my point. That mentality is romanticized as you mentioned. However, it is a mentality that one must supercede to understand the trappings of the 'real world'.

Perhaps I could've of articulated it better. However, I still must disagree that 'all' so-called thugs are horrible people. Poor and reckless decisions are often the calling card but trust me, all are not malicious.

Pls know I'm not making excuses for anyone, but some of us make mistakes but learn from them and become better individuals. Many of us lack guidance, but I believe in self-reliance and responsibility. It's not all black and white.

Nonetheless I appreciate your candor.:smt058

 

Not necessarily but in Los Angeles the two are fairly synonymous and if you're out there making moves, you don't want to be an independent contractor if some shit goes down and need backup.

 

Not at all.

 

Fly, he emphasizes my point. They shed that mentality and refined their goals and realized what the 'real world' had to offer and what they might offer the world.

People aren't born thugs, they either embrace or revoke (dependent upon enviroment and circumstances) that way of thinking.:smt025

 

Thank you my two Preciouses

 

:smt020

So let me ask you, fly...is there a difference between thugs robbing people and accountants stealing from their clients...employees stealing from their employers...doctors rippiing off patients and the public health-care system...and executives who rip off their investors?

 

I think you might be onto something..

 

The difference is that was not the topic of this thread. I dont go for deflecting criticism by bringing up something/someone different.

 

IMO...there is a difference between a thug and a criminal. A thug can be any dude...black or white...who doesnt fit your stereotypical mold of a white collar professional or business person. For instance, most barbers are thugs, but the smart ones own their own shops...thus making them business men.

A criminal is someone who earns his living thru a life of crime. And to me there is no difference between snatching a woman's purse and white collar crimes. A thief is a thief.

 

My mold? Jelly I havent posted a thing about how I feel about white collar professionals. If you actually knew me and how I feel, you would know I am a hard core unionist. So my views on white collar folks are gonna surprise you. LOL

 

I wasnt deflecting criticism...I was just asking a question. But if someone chooses to define thugs as someone who commits crimes of theft, then white collar thieves are thugs too. There is no difference. (But thats not how I define a "thug.") As you stated before...being a "thug" is a mentality, and I believe it isnt limited to the streets or a particular race.

Hell, more than a hanful of the dudes I know who make a white-collar living are only concerned about getting rich as quickly and as legally as possible. But, what they are not concerned about whether or not they hurt someone (financially) in the process. If they can get paid and dont have to go to jail to do it, they wouldnt give a damn if the whole east coast went up in flames. (Sound familiar?)

I was using "your" in a general sense. I wasnt addressing you personally.

Someone is awfully touchy...

 

I never said anything about thugs being limited to the streets or their ethnicity.

Here is the definition of thug....

Source: WordNet (r) 1.7
thug
n : an aggressive and violent young criminal [syn: hood, hoodlum,
goon, punk, tough, toughie, strong-armer]
Source: Webster's Revised Unabridged Dictionary (1913)
Thug \Thug\, n.
An assassin; a ruffian; a rough. ``Thugs and midnight
rounders.'' --The Century. Thug \Thug\, n. [Hind. thag a deceiver, robber.]
One of an association of robbers and murderers in India who
practiced murder by stealthy approaches, and from religious
motives. They have been nearly exterminated by the British
government.

 

You edited your comment to remove where you had quoted me prior to making that statement. If you quote me and use your, then it is a pretty easy to understand why I would think you meant me. But whatever Jelly, you are just circling, looking for an in to attack and I aint gonna play.

 

Fly, you're right, that wasn't the topic and I respect your point.

However, Jelly articulated my point better than I could. I understand 'Webster's' definition, however, that doesn't necessarily correlate to the Street's 'applicable' definition of a thug.

The point is, as Webster has defined it, there are 'Thugs' with degrees, no doubt. However, those individuals who may have had a 'thuggish' lifestyle, rose beyond the lifestyle to obtain something better. Therefore, they at minimum could cognate that education would put them in a position where 'thuggish ways' would be a thing of the past. Hence, it's a mentality that can be defeated.

I guess that's my own theory designed by my own experiences.