GN'R vs. NWA: Who was the REAL most dangerous group in the world?

[Sakib]

GUYZ! I AINT A LONDONER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 2ND, I CAN RYT ENGLISH CORECT BUT 2 SAYV TYM, I MAKE IT SHORT AS POSSIB. btw, roots=Pakistani

[jarmo]

Ok, you want to save time. But don't complain when people just skip your posts because they're actually harder to read than "normal" English.


Now, back on topic.



/jarmo

[slash4ever]

GNR 

[HK-47]

Reading this thread I've noticed that NWA seem to carry an expectation of "dangerousness" simply because they're a bunch of black guys from compton, as if that in itself is enough to prove the point - which smacks of racism.

But to take the silly topic seriously for a moment; I'd have to base my answer on how quickly and easily these alledgedly "dangerous" bands were tamed. In fact, let's fast-forward and look at a few of the members today: Ice Cube of NWA is now a minor moviestar, generally appearing in very broad comedies aimed predominently at his own ethnic group. Dre is a well-respected, highly successful producer responsible for acts like Eminem, D12, 50 Cent and a few other arguably tame pop acts.
In the other corner, we'll look at Axl and Slash. Slash now "masterminds" a rock band not entirely dissimilar from all the other bands he's been involved in over the years. They've had a few little successes in the charts and have landed a replacement spot at ozzfest. Their album was also voted one of the five worst of 2004. Axl does. . . something, we're not sure what, we'll find out when he releases chinese democracy. In the mean time, we can only speculate that he's still working on the album, out of his own pocket, and oweing his label $13 million.
So, in short, Ice Cube and Dre are mainstream icons in their chosen industries with Hollywood and the music industry, respectively, willing to gamble huge amounts of money on them. Slash and Axl are, to varying extents, cultural curios and much derided figures, neither of whom poses much of a threat to anyone right now (with the exception of Universal's Chief Financial Officer). So, placed in proper context, we can say that neither band was able to live up to the name of "most dangerous", but then again, who else has?    All I know is this, I'd feel safer loaning Dre or Ice Cube a million bucks than betting $10 on GNR/VR being a force to be reckoned with any time soon. 

[Mama Kin]

Enough already with people saying shit like Take That and the Paul Schaffer Band were the most dangerous groups in the world.? The joke is done, Done, DONE already.? I thought once was enough.? The question asked simply, which was the most dangerous group in the world between Guns N' Roses and NWA??

And after thinking about it, I think that even though I dig the music and image of GN'R more, NWA were much more realistically "dangerous".? Saul hit the nail on the head with his example.? While both groups were into low-rent theft and criminal acts, NWA were more likely to carry guns and use excessive force.? And I think that the group provided a far more oppositional message to mainstream America, almost militant in its decrying of the shit they suffered under racist institutions.? Sure, the guys in both groups had it rough.? But I think that members of NWA came out of a far more dangerous environment (Compton).

It's not a joke, that was the band's name "The World's Most Dangerous Band".

[Saul]

Reading this thread I've noticed that NWA seem to carry an expectation of "dangerousness" simply because they're a bunch of black guys from compton, as if that in itself is enough to prove the point - which smacks of racism.

Umm , no. Not in my case anyways. I think they were more dangerous cause they used to beat people up. carry guns and shoot at people. Not to mention walking in record offices with baseball bats and demanding money for studio costs etc etc. Eazy E was selling crack cocaine out of the back of his truck along with NWA records. I dont care if they were white guys from inglewood , the fact that they carried guns and baseball bats and USED them made them dangerous.

[HK-47]

Umm , no. Not in my case anyways. I think they were more dangerous cause they used to beat people up. carry guns and shoot at people. Not to mention walking in record offices with baseball bats and demanding money for studio costs etc etc. Eazy E was selling crack cocaine out of the back of his truck along with NWA records. I dont care if they were white guys from inglewood , the fact that they carried guns and baseball bats and USED them made them dangerous.

Not in your case then, congratulations.
I think that someone inciting thousands of people to riot ranks higher on my 'danger' scale than a few guys with bats and guns, but neither of those examples has much to do with being a band and everything to do with being pretentious assclowns/gangbangers. As I said previously, it's a silly topic. Most dangerous band in the world? Military marching band of the Nazi party. That's my vote.

[Saul]

Most dangerous band in the world? Military marching band of the Nazi party. That's my vote.

Lil Gnr. Thats my vote!   

[Mattman]

I don't even think you can compare the two groups.? They each posed a different kind of danger.? NWA coming straight outta Compton, they grew up w/gangbangers, drug dealers, the possibility of being shot dead if for no other reason than for looking at somebody wrong.? GNR on the other hand incited violence, (i.e. riots), were heavy into the drug scene, etc etc.? At the end of the day though I would feel safer hanging out with GNR than NWA.

They weren't as different as you make it out.  After all, both GN'R and NWA originated in Los Angeles.  They both were involved in drug dealing (I know Slash and Duff dealt drugs, and Steven at least once gave a guy oral sex in exchange for crack).  Both bands were involved in violence, although GN'R probably got into more street brawls, whereas NWA lived in an environment in which guns were very commonplace.  The only big difference between the two groups' environments is that in Compton, gun violence was more widespread.

To people who say that neo-Nazi groups are more dangerous - yeah, of course you're right.  But we're not talking about any violent wacko on the planet who just happens to play music in his downtime.  We're talking about two of the most popular musical groups in America in the late 80s/early 90s, both of which were marketed as being the most dangerous group around.  I saw a lot of parallels between Guns N' Roses and Niggaz With Attitude, so I thought it would be interesting to compare them.  Sue me.

And please don't use this thread to get into long personal arguments about who speaks English or not.

[SLCPUNK]

nwa

[ppbebe]

They weren't as different as you make it out.  After all, both GN'R and NWA originated in Los Angeles.  They both were involved in drug dealing (I know Slash and Duff dealt drugs, and Steven at least once gave a guy oral sex in exchange for crack).  Both bands were involved in violence, although GN'R probably got into more street brawls, whereas NWA lived in an environment in which guns were very commonplace.  The only big difference between the two groups' environments is that in Compton, gun violence was more widespread.

To people who say that neo-Nazi groups are more dangerous - yeah, of course you're right.  But we're not talking about any violent wacko on the planet who just happens to play music in his downtime.  We're talking about two of the most popular musical groups in America in the late 80s/early 90s, both of which were marketed as being the most dangerous group around.  I saw a lot of parallels between Guns N' Roses and Niggaz With Attitude, so I thought it would be interesting to compare them.  Sue me.

And please don't use this thread to get into long personal arguments about who speaks English or not.

So, you mean, in short, this thread is only for who lived in America during that Era?

Whatever, as I said before neither of them were the REAL most dangerous. My vote still goes to take that.
A good quarter of girls in my class looked as if they were brain damaged by them.

[Saul]

  I saw a lot of parallels between Guns N' Roses and Niggaz With Attitude, so I thought it would be interesting to compare them.  Sue me.

I thought it was a very interesting and original thread topic! Fuck the haters! hats off to you. 

[killingvector]

how did easy e get AIDS? it is relatively difficult for a man to contract HIV from a woman unless of course he has sores in his mouth or on his manhood. Did easy share needles? was he into drugs like that?

[jarmo]

What does that have to do with GN'R? 



/jarmo

[badintentions]

What does that have to do with GN'R??



/jarmo

how does that not have to do with the topic? we are discussing what is most dangerous about each band, it was stated before that the drug culture and drug scene is dangerous. he was asking about easy's drug use? keep up with the conversation!

[jarmo]

Who's more dangerous is one thing, how one of the band members got AIDS is another.

How does the way he got AIDS make them more/less dangerous?

I thought the question was about which band were more dangerous as a whole. I'm sure a gang of four guys with automatic assault rifles are more dangerous than five guys with cans of hairspray.

But was that the real question?

NWA never had an army of security when they played Colombia. NWA never had the influence on young people world wide that GN'R had. GN'R "fans" were still rioting in 2002.




/jarmo

[Dr. Blutarsky]

If a man in NWA with AIDS bit me, Id say they were more dangerous than GNR.   

[badintentions]

once i again i will mention that his question about aids pertained to whether he may have gotten the virus through drug use. it was stated before that drug use/drug culture is "dangerous". its fun repeating myself.

[AxlsMainMan]

Id have to say NWA. With Appetite, GnR's image wasnt anything new or fresh, far from it. It combined multiple images from rock acts of that time period. Look at Adler and Duff, the long haired blondies, Slash the Joe Perry/blues rock n roll icon, Izzy who was the reflection of Keith Richards, and Axl who was the centre piece of the band with the Robert Plant-ish voice and mysterious aura to go along with it. To me there is nothing "scary" or "dangerous" to the Illusion lineup at all, I mean what is there to fear? Teddy Zig Zag knifing you?

[mrsaxlrose]

I still say NWA is more dangerous cause if you took GNR(and I love GNR more than anything), they wouldn't last a day on the mean streets of compton, whereas NWA knew it, lived it, and survived it.  and yes I know Eazy died of AIDS but he got it from being sexually promiscuis, not drugs.