Latin Kings

[MMRbkaRudog]

I've seen "Sureno LK" tagging from the late 80's with disses towards Chicago gangs, so obviously must've been an original member. It's already been stated that there is/was 2 LK gangs in the LA area (at least 1 that had ties to Chicago), but I hope I'm not repeating myself. We already have a lot of pages on this, so I don't know why someone would come over here & type out an essay.

[MMRbkaRudog]

OK, I've read more of the essay. LOL There's been "Chicago gangs" in Calif, but very lil gang activity. I'm sure a lot of what MadIP talks about is lil stuff he heard or makes up. The GD's he's talking about in SD (Oceanside) to be exact were reported in a news paper. I already explained some things about the LK's, but who knows if they're still active in CA..

[MENACE18]

OK, I've read more of the essay. LOL There's been "Chicago gangs" in Calif, but very lil gang activity. I'm sure a lot of what MadIP talks about is lil stuff he heard or makes up. The GD's he's talking about in SD (Oceanside) to be exact were reported in a news paper. I already explained some things about the LK's, but who knows if they're still active in CA..

I KNEW DIS GIRL WHO RECENTLY PASSED AWAY,SHE WAS FROM CEDRUS ST CRIP GANG IN VAN NUYS AND SHE HAD HOMIES FROM GDS THAT CAME TO LA AND THEY WERE TRYEN TO START UP IN LA BUT IVE NEVER HEARD OF GDS IN SD,AND IN NEW YORK AND NEW JERSEY THEYRES EASTCOAST 18ST LOS CHOLOS,THEN THEYRES 18ST AND MORGAN WHICH ISNT 18ST FROM CALI,THEY ARE THEYRE OWN HOOD WITH THEYRE OWN SHIT,WERE OLDER THEN THEM AND THEY HAVE NO TIES TO US

[MadIP]

OF COURSE I AINT BEEN TO OCEANSIDE, BUT HAVE YOU BEEN TO WATTS WHEN U TALK ABOUT A CRIP GANG FOOL ? TO SAY THE BPS OF LA AINT RELATED TO CHICAGO IS BS, CAUSE A BPS FROM CHICAGO STARTED THEM MAYBE WITHOUT PERMISSION, BUT HOW THE FUCK U THINK ALL THOSE CRIP SETS POPPED UP IN THE EAST COAST , WHEN MEMBERS STARTED GANGS WITHOUT TELLIN THERE HOMEBOYS OF THE ORIGINAL HOOD. WHAT YOU DONT UNDERSTAND ITS THAT THIS GANGS EXPANDED IN THE 90´S, JUST THINK HOW MANY GANGS WILL HAVE STARTED JUST AFTER SEEING COLORS, AND REPPIN CRIPS, THEY FAKE ? WHY ? OTHER LA GANGS START REPPIN CRIP LIKE THAT, THERES NO CENTRAL AUTHORITY OF CRIPS , LIKE NOT OF SURENOS. SO WHAT HAPPENED IS GUYS FROM DIFFERENT HOODS CHANGE OF CITY AND THEY TOOK THERE GANG WAYS, MANY GANGS OF LAS VEGAS STARTED LIKE THAT, THATS WHY U HAD HOOVERS IN SEATTLE, SO SOMETIMES IT WAS MEMBERS OF A GANG MOVIN, AND SOMETIMES JUST ONE MEMBER THAT STARTED HIS SHIT INFLUENCED BY HIS ORIGINS. SO THE LATIN KINGS ISSUE, IS THAT, SINCE U CANT SHOW A PIC OF SOMEBODY REPPIN LATIN KINGS IN EAST LA IN 1975, AND NOBODY ACKNOWLEDGES A GANG CALLED LATIN KINGS IN THE 70´S, THE MOST LIKELY THING IS THAT SINCE LATIN KINGS IN CHICAGO ARE SO BIG (25000 ONLY IN CHICAGO), ONE OR MORE MEMBERS MOVED TO LOS ANGELES, AND STARTED THERE OWN THING, BUT I THINK THEYRE RECOGNIZED, ANYWAY IF THEY CLAIM SURENOS, ITS COMMON SENSE, CAUSE ALL THE SURENOS WOULD GO AFTER THEM , AND BEING A SMALL GANG WOULDNT BE SMART.
IN CHICAGO THE SURENOS, NORTENOS ARE JUST SUBURBAN WANNABES, THEY CANT STEP A FOOT IN THE CITY, WHILE THE BPS OF LA HOLDS TWO HOODS IN THE CITY, AND THEY REP 5X,ASK URSELF WHY? REALLY IT AINT IMPORTANT IF YOU CLAIM SURENO,NORTENO, CRIP OR WHATEVER, BUT IM STATIN THAT CHICAGO HAS MORE INFLUENCE IN LA THAN THE OTHERWAY AROUND.

[MENACE18]

I don't feel like going thru the same stuff over & over again. Some of just need to really read threads. Check out this foto:

It's an 18 drawing, but it also has LK with 5 dots & a crown. Maybe this was done by 1 of those dudes that banged LK some where like in Chicago, but when living in So~Cal banged 18?

dis site is made by vatos who claim 18st and say there cool with lk when 18st we got beef with them

[MMRbkaRudog]

OF COURSE I AINT BEEN TO OCEANSIDE, BUT HAVE YOU BEEN TO WATTS WHEN U TALK ABOUT A CRIP GANG FOOL ? TO SAY THE BPS OF LA AINT RELATED TO CHICAGO IS BS, CAUSE A BPS FROM CHICAGO STARTED THEM MAYBE WITHOUT PERMISSION, BUT HOW THE fu-- U THINK ALL THOSE CRIP SETS POPPED UP IN THE EAST COAST , WHEN MEMBERS STARTED GANGS WITHOUT TELLIN THERE HOMEBOYS OF THE ORIGINAL HOOD. WHAT YOU DONT UNDERSTAND ITS THAT THIS GANGS EXPANDED IN THE 90´S, JUST THINK HOW MANY GANGS WILL HAVE STARTED JUST AFTER SEEING COLORS, AND REPPIN CRIPS, THEY FAKE ? WHY ? OTHER LA GANGS START REPPIN CRIP LIKE THAT, THERES NO CENTRAL AUTHORITY OF CRIPS , LIKE NOT OF SURENOS. SO WHAT HAPPENED IS GUYS FROM DIFFERENT HOODS CHANGE OF CITY AND THEY TOOK THERE GANG WAYS, MANY GANGS OF LAS VEGAS STARTED LIKE THAT, THATS WHY U HAD HOOVERS IN SEATTLE, SO SOMETIMES IT WAS MEMBERS OF A GANG MOVIN, AND SOMETIMES JUST ONE MEMBER THAT STARTED HIS SHIT INFLUENCED BY HIS ORIGINS. SO THE LATIN KINGS ISSUE, IS THAT, SINCE U CANT SHOW A PIC OF SOMEBODY REPPIN LATIN KINGS IN EAST LA IN 1975, AND NOBODY ACKNOWLEDGES A GANG CALLED LATIN KINGS IN THE 70´S, THE MOST LIKELY THING IS THAT SINCE LATIN KINGS IN CHICAGO ARE SO BIG (25000 ONLY IN CHICAGO), ONE OR MORE MEMBERS MOVED TO LOS ANGELES, AND STARTED THERE OWN THING, BUT I THINK THEYRE RECOGNIZED, ANYWAY IF THEY CLAIM SURENOS, ITS COMMON SENSE, CAUSE ALL THE SURENOS WOULD GO AFTER THEM , AND BEING A SMALL GANG WOULDNT BE SMART.
IN CHICAGO THE SURENOS, NORTENOS ARE JUST SUBURBAN WANNABES, THEY CANT STEP A FOOT IN THE CITY, WHILE THE BPS OF LA HOLDS TWO HOODS IN THE CITY, AND THEY REP 5X,ASK URSELF WHY? REALLY IT AINT IMPORTANT IF YOU CLAIM SURENO,NORTENO, CRIP OR WHATEVER, BUT IM STATIN THAT CHICAGO HAS MORE INFLUENCE IN LA THAN THE OTHERWAY AROUND.

You boviously don't know how Cali gang operate.

[fiveone]

All this shit is funny. As for the student essay above, you can try to rationalize and theorize your way out of acknowledging the Latin Kings and black Stones in Los Angeles as being representative of the same gang, BUT THE FACTS REMAIN: there are latin Kings and stones in Los Angeles and chicago does have a stronger influence than LA when it comes to the national spectrum of gang culture! Los Angeles had it's shine back in the 80s, when they were truelly the murder capital of the US. But in the 90s and 2000s Chicago has taken on that title. The fact is that the murder rate is chicago has topped LA for many years now. So you can continue to sit there like a dried up and diminishing hood that's still trying to keep the block alive by making mandatory "bustout" days for the remaining members, but when it's all said and done...los Angeles will never be the most gangster city ever again. Every single year that passes, LA becomes less and less violent--the same is true for Chicago as well, but it always has more killings than LA.

Check out this article for last year:

[fiveone]

Let's just stick to the facts:

Total Violent crime Murder rate Forcible rape Robbery Aggravated assault Total Property crime Burglary Larceny-theft Motor vehicle theft Arson
580.3 6.3 10.7 265.9 297.6 1,797.3 238.1 1,410.2 149.1 - NEW YORK
689.5 10.0 24.6 348.5 306.4 2,618.1 512.2 1,518.4 587.5 51.1 LOS ANGELES
- 18.0 - 588.6 602.0 4,632.0 920.4 3,041.1 670.4 22.5 CHICAGO


Chicago is almost twice as murderous thanm Los Angeles. Think about this also. For half of the year chicago is cold as hell due to winter weather conditions. Los Angeles enjoys one of the warmest climates in the US. What does that tell you about chicago crime? Gangs in Chicago are far more serious when it comes to the banging: rain, sleet or snow...gangsters never rest in the city of Chi-raq.



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Sta ... crime_rate

[MMRbkaRudog]

I don't see what murder rates have to do w/a city being the most gangster, or what that even has to do w/the thread

[fiveone]

I don't see what murder rates have to do w/a city being the most gangster, or what that even has to do w/the thread

That stupid statement doesnt even deserve a serious response, LOL

[fiveone]

I don't see what murder rates have to do w/a city being the most gangster, or what that even has to do w/the thread

All this LA vs Chicago thing is a matter of subjectivity. Everyone has an opinion. But when you look at the facts, it isnt hard to figure it out. Chicago has a more violent and gangster culture...either that or the gangmembers in Los Angeles are just suffering from radioactivity and it is impairing their vision--which means they dont have good shooting aim. LOL

As far what this has to do with this thread...it's all the same: violence, power, influence, gang sofistication and organization etc..etc...

But the truth be told, there are other cities throughout the world that are far worse.

[fiveone]

I don't see what murder rates have to do w/a city being the most gangster, or what that even has to do w/the thread

And finally, I am a Latin King!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Whatever the fuck I say in a forum that is titled "Latin Kings" is completely relevant.

[MMRbkaRudog]

LOL & oh, your posts are exaggerated btw..

[MMRbkaRudog]

I don't see what murder rates have to do w/a city being the most gangster, or what that even has to do w/the thread

That stupid statement doesnt even deserve a serious response, LOL

You say that, but responded to it quite a few times. LOL What makes a city the most gangster is how many things or people are gangster. A city could be the murder capital from having non-gangster serial killers & that wouldn't make it the most gangster, but that ain't even what this thread is about..

[fiveone]

I don't see what murder rates have to do w/a city being the most gangster, or what that even has to do w/the thread

That stupid statement doesnt even deserve a serious response, LOL

You say that, but responded to it quite a few times. LOL What makes a city the most gangster is how many things or people are gangster. A city could be the murder capital from having non-gangster serial killers & that wouldn't make it the most gangster, but that ain't even what this thread is about..

Well all of our serial killers were either executed or died in prison already, LOL. I am not exaggerating about my city. If you want to understand why chicago is the most violent just do a little research.
Let me help you. Let's just look at 3 cities: Chicago, New York and Los Angeles. Read this article and you will see how Chicago topped L.A. and New York in the murder rate (remember this means murders per 100,000 people) between 1992 and 2002. This says alot considering that New York is three times the population of Chicago and Los Angeles is twice the population of Chicago.

http://qrc.depaul.edu/djabon/Articles/C ... 030101.htm

Then when you look at all cities in the U.S. between 2003 and 2007 these were the murder capital results:

2003 - Chicago
2004 - Washington D.C
2005 - Gary Indiana
2006 - New Orleans
2007 - New Orleans

And guess who was the murder capital in 2008. That's right, CHICAGO.

I cannot remember the last time L.A. had the highest "murder rate". As you can see, the Motherland of the ALKN is the real gangster city!!!!!

[MMRbkaRudog]

Well all of our serial killers were either executed or died in prison already, LOL. I am not exaggerating about my city. If you want to understand why chicago is the most violent just do a little research.
Let me help you. Let's just look at 3 cities: Chicago, New York and Los Angeles. Read this article and you will see how Chicago topped L.A. and New York in the murder rate (remember this means murders per 100,000 people) between 1992 and 2002. This says alot considering that New York is three times the population of Chicago and Los Angeles is twice the population of Chicago.

http://qrc.depaul.edu/djabon/Articles/C ... 030101.htm

Then when you look at all cities in the U.S. between 2003 and 2007 these were the murder capital results:

2003 - Chicago
2004 - Washington D.C
2005 - Gary Indiana
2006 - New Orleans
2007 - New Orleans

And guess who was the murder capital in 2008. That's right, CHICAGO.

I cannot remember the last time L.A. had the highest "murder rate". As you can see, the Motherland of the ALKN is the real gangster city!!!!!

I think you were a lil, but you were right about some stuff (got to give that). Like you said: everybody got their own opinion, but some of these facts stand out. The size don't really matter tho.. Just look how GI took the title in '05, but if you want to go even lower just look at East Palo Alto in 1992 (pop. of 20 something thousand at the time).

[MMRbkaRudog]

Is Chicago the gang capital now? LA held that title for a long time. Plus just cause Chicago got more 187's, don't mean it's more gang killings or that something is wrong w/LA. If anything it's good that LA calmed down & I don't see what's so kool about being the murder cap.. What if that was all your loved 1's dying? Would it be so kool then?

[Apollo12]

PLK was the first Latino gang I heard about in Pasadena and that was in the early 80's so they pre-date that. I grew up in the area and none of the established Latino gangs in Dena is from the 90's. I got homeboys from ABC and LK's always been up there around them. They was probably before them and the ABC's got started in 80-81. The PLK's aint affiliated with the Chicago ones.

This guy on Topix claims that they formed in the early 80s:

[I am the last of the originals od the "Pasadena latin kings"!
Snapper and Trigger, we formed this shit in Dena.
My repects to all others by the same name, this is not what we intended to hate each other..
you dont believe go on and visit Resurection Cemetary in San gabriel, This is were Snapper lies, My great friend.
I still live in Dena on woodbury and lake.
Dont hate stand proud. were all from the same raza.
933 weimar was the house where it all started, in the early eighties. Thats in altadena for those who dont know!!!!!!
http://www.topix.com/forum/who/the-lati ... 9GK5LJO/p2

I don't remember them prior to 83, and they aren't listed on a comprehensive gang list that was published in 82, so yeah they're from 83, 84.

[Apollo12]

Also:

"PASADENA LATIN KINGS" was formed in a street in Altadena in 1987 by two Chicanos who grew up together on Weimar St.

http://www.topix.com/forum/who/the-lati ... PVMCT836AU