I'll need to check my files to give you my exact sources, but it will be later today because of an appointment. I should get back to you this evening!!!

I also agree that official sites are not trustworthy in all cases....which leads to my questioning snopes.....if I question one, it stands to reason, I'm skeptical of all.

I had the same info on those sites, but thanks. I was only trying to see how they rose above the others.

Longevity doesn't always mean wisdom or best product.

I respect they have been around the longest, but as someone that knows AOL from my first computer in '94 and have walked my mother through it this year.....I find that they didn't get better, they just are more user-friendly for newbies.

I am asking a trivia type question about any errors anyone can prove. Your answer doesn't address that but thanks.

Well, I found my files which were outdated (LAPD link dead for instance) but actually it disproved two of their findings after I tried to get the updated info for you.

http://www.snopes.com/crime/gangs/chased.asp
http://www.snopes.com/crime/gangs/tshirt.asp

Now FACTS are called urban legend because of minor discrepencies (i.e. white shirts and emails that named wrong location...but I question that with the spread of gangs, if they tried it in one city, why not another?). With the amount of gangs, it is easy to believe this one has spread to other parts of the country like many others.

Members of F13 were convicted or plead guilty and they had set out to kill any black man on their turf. Period.

My babysitter's African American father was killed in LA, not Charlotte after he'd been shoved off the road. I met him. He was not a banger, dealer or criminal....he had the luck to live in the home he inherited in LA. He was helping his youngest daughter move out. She missed it since he was following him but his nephew and brother saw the indicators that it was a Hispanic gang and appeared to be initiation.

People who live near gang addled areas know the signs all too well!

The family had asked everyone to not say much more as much to not impead the investigation as fear of retaliation for talking. They were afraid then, I'd only imagine that it is worse now that people have gone to jail.

So, I wasn't talking about random fact, I attended the funeral, I saw the impact on an innocent family and knew where the investigation was going. My sitter kept working for me until I left in 2006 at which point I lost track of her and what happened in court.

I called a mutual friend and found out what happened.

That caused my question.

Here's what I had and have found tonight. The LAPD site wasn't helpful. I've used everything from NPR, the Department of Justice, USA Today, The Free Republic, newsweek, blogs, college professors, and people who have infiltrated.

All are to be discredited?

http://articles.latimes.com/2007/nov/08/local/me-gangs8

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=17994084

http://www.newsweek.com/id/61950

http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2007-12-30-gang-murders_N.htm

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/01/05/AR2008010502838.html

http://losangeles.fbi.gov/dojpressrel/pressrel09/la011209usa.htm

http://www.usdoj.gov/usao/cac/pressroom/pr2007/134.html

http://www.fbi.gov/page2/feb09/ngta_020609.html

http://www.splcenter.org/blog/2007/10/18/latino-gang-members-indicted-for-%E2%80%9Ccleansing%E2%80%9D-operation/

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1946007/posts

http://www.policemag.com/Channels/Gangs/2007/09/12/History-of-the-Florence-13-Gang.aspx

http://www.policemag.com/Channels/Gangs/2008/02/29/Los-Angeles-Gangs-and-Hate-Crimes.aspx

http://bitterqueen.typepad.com/friends_of_ours/florencia-13/

http://www.streetgangs.com/topics/2007/110807citybeat.html

http://www.insidesocal.com/sgvcrime/2009/01/florencia-13-gang-members-guil.html

http://faculty.missouristate.edu/M/MichaelCarlie/what_I_learned_about/gangs/join_a_gang.htm

Your example of real life events doesn't disprove these stories dissemination as urban legends.

As far as the "chased" url - it was deemed a case of road rage, and not gang related. There was no proof of the alleged weapon, and they don't even know the race of the occupants of the second car, not to mention the victim both caused the accident and initiated any negative response from the other car. (Heck, the whole story could have been made up in a CYA attempt to explain why they crashed their car.) In addition the whole "pass it on to everybody you know" is practically an automatic key for "this is an urban legend."

As far as the F13 go, the F13 were targeting a specific rival gang who was infringing on their territory. It was simply a gang war. When they couldn't find who they were looking for they simply shot a few random folks. This does not disprove the t-shirt story. First, it's got that huge honking flag "pass this on to anyone you know who has email"! Anyways, the details that this story are based on are discussed in the posting. A similar story that better explains the concept of how a story such as this is an urban legend can be seen in the "flashing your headlights at cars with their headlights off" gang-killing related story.. http://www.snopes.com/crime/gangs/lightsout.asp

In addition, not to belittle your babysitter's loss, but that also sounds like a case of road rage. In addition, the story has the key elements of FOAF or "a friend of a friend". Since you know their name and the time it happened, perhaps you can look up any actual case, arrest, or conviction that may have taken place, until then all we have is the second (or thirdhand) retelling of the speculation of a witness who was probably in shock.

Anyways their FAQ clearly explains this all, and explains why they are not responding to your insistence that they are wrong: (Without even mentioning that they probably can't possibly respond to all emails.)
From their FAQ:
"Q: Why do you have some true stories listed as "urban legends"?

A: An "urban legend" is not the same thing as a "fictional tale" or an "apocryphal anecdote," although many people mistakenly use the term in that sense (e.g., "That's not true; it's just an urban legend!"). A tale is considered to be an urban legend if it circulates widely, is told and re-told with differing details (or exists in multiple versions), and is said to be true. Whether or not the events described in the tale ever actually occurred is irrelevant to its classification as an urban legend.

For example, the tale about a student who mistakes a math problem thought to be unsolvable for a homework assignment and solves it is an urban legend, even though something very similar did once happen in real life. The tale is still an urban legend, however, because over the years many of its details (i.e., when it happened, where it happened, the identity of the student, the reaction of the student's instructor) have changed as it has spread."

Q: I know something listed on your site really happened (or is otherwise true), but your site doesn't list it as true. Why not?

There are several reasons why this might be so:

* We rate an urban legend as "true" when there is sufficient evidence to indicate that the legend began with a real-life event. If the actions described in an urban legend play out in real life after the legend has begun circulating, that is not an example of what we consider a "true" urban legend; it is a phenomenon known as "ostension" (and when someone deliberately enacts the events described by an urban legend, that is known as "pseudo-ostension").

Many urban legends describe events so general and plausible that they might very well have happened to somebody, somewhere, sometime. But since the origins of urban legends can seldom be traced to specific, identifiable occurrences, we rarely categorize such legends as "true."

* Many of the texts we discuss contain a mixture of truth, falsity, and exaggeration which cannot be accurately described by a single "True" or "False" rating. Therefore, an item's status is based upon the most important aspect(s) of the text under discussion, which is summarized in the statement made after the "Claim:" heading at the top of the page. It is important to make note of the wording of that claim, since that is the statement to which the status applies.

* Many legends present events that may have taken place in real life only a few times (or once, or even never) as if they were frequent and regular occurrences, and we make a distinction between "This once happened" and "This is a common, on-going occurrence." For example, many warnings circulated by e-mail caution readers to be wary of some form of crime or other hazard that is claimed to be a widespread occurrence but actually has taken place only in a few unrelated, isolated cases, possibly in the distant past. Therefore, even though the event described may be "true" in the strictly literal sense that it is known to have occurred at least once, the underlying claim (i.e., that the event is a regular, widespread phenomenon) is not true.

As far as the Mr. Ed zebra thing, they made the Repository of Lost Legends to prove several points..
http://www.snopes.com/lost/lost.asp
http://www.snopes.com/lost/false.asp

I am in complete agreement they do a great job! My question was to see HOW they ended up the most credible and IF anyone found any glaring errors.

Even my question pointed out that.

98% of the time I check out things for myself and find the same answers.

What's the old saying about believing "nothing you hear and only about half of what you see"?

This is a trivia type question, not anything more.