Jump to content
little_old_man

Disaster averted in another night club shooting by concealed weapon holder

Recommended Posts

So the main stream media is still buzzing over the horrible night club shooting in Florida with nearly 50 dead, but another night club shooting happened a couple days ago that is being ignored by the media. Why you ask? In this case, the shooted was stopped before he could kill anybody because there was a conceal carry permit holder in the bar who shot the criminal and stopped him from killing. Most states don't allow people with permits to carry in bars, but where this happened in South Carolina, it is legal. 

 

http://www.fox4news.com/news/u-s-world/167924304-story

 

5776a06563334_Single20Mugshot_1467333108

 

A South Carolina man is in jail after police say he opened fire outside a nightclub over the weekend.

Spartanburg County Deputies arrested Jody Ray Thompson, 30, after they say he pulled out a gun after getting into an argument with another man outside the Playoffz nightclub early Sunday morning.

 

Officials say Thompson fired several rounds toward a crowd that had gathered out in front of the club.

 

"His rounds struck three victims, and almost struck a fourth victim, who in self-defense, pulled his own weapon and fired, striking Thompson in the leg," Lt. Kevin Bobo told WHNS.

 

Bobo said the man who shot Thompson had a valid concealed weapons permit, cooperated with investigators, and won’t be facing any charges.

 

Thompson was charged with four counts of attempted murder, possession of a weapon during the commission of a violent crime, and unlawful carrying of a weapon.

 

Snopes.com which is often taken by so many as the final word on whether something is true or false released a statement just hours after the incident became known.

 

"Some might argue that the suspect's intent in the Lyman nightclub incident is irrelevant; all that matters is that a legally armed citizen was able to intervene in a shooting in progress and thereby prevent additional injury (or even loss of life). That may be true, but in the absence of additional details about the incident, what might have happened is difficult to assess."

 

It isn't difficult to see who's agenda Snopes follows. Especially when it normally takes them weeks or months to release an opinion. 

 

As far as I'm concerned the concealed weapon holder saved lives.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites


So the main stream media is still buzzing over the horrible night club shooting in Florida with nearly 50 dead, but another night club shooting happened a couple days ago that is being ignored by the media. Why you ask? In this case, the shooted was stopped before he could kill anybody because there was a conceal carry permit holder in the bar who shot the criminal and stopped him from killing. Most states don't allow people with permits to carry in bars, but where this happened in South Carolina, it is legal. 

 

http://www.fox4news.com/news/u-s-world/167924304-story

 

5776a06563334_Single20Mugshot_1467333108

 

A South Carolina man is in jail after police say he opened fire outside a nightclub over the weekend.

Spartanburg County Deputies arrested Jody Ray Thompson, 30, after they say he pulled out a gun after getting into an argument with another man outside the Playoffz nightclub early Sunday morning.

 

Officials say Thompson fired several rounds toward a crowd that had gathered out in front of the club.

 

"His rounds struck three victims, and almost struck a fourth victim, who in self-defense, pulled his own weapon and fired, striking Thompson in the leg," Lt. Kevin Bobo told WHNS.

 

Bobo said the man who shot Thompson had a valid concealed weapons permit, cooperated with investigators, and won’t be facing any charges.

 

Thompson was charged with four counts of attempted murder, possession of a weapon during the commission of a violent crime, and unlawful carrying of a weapon.

 

Snopes.com which is often taken by so many as the final word on whether something is true or false released a statement just hours after the incident became known.

 

"Some might argue that the suspect's intent in the Lyman nightclub incident is irrelevant; all that matters is that a legally armed citizen was able to intervene in a shooting in progress and thereby prevent additional injury (or even loss of life). That may be true, but in the absence of additional details about the incident, what might have happened is difficult to assess."

 

It isn't difficult to see who's agenda Snopes follows. Especially when it normally takes them weeks or months to release an opinion. 

 

As far as I'm concerned the concealed weapon holder saved lives.

It goes against their narrative. Gun owners are bad period and any story that does not align to that thought is ignored or played down. 

 

Politics as usual. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites


I will give you a couple of other reasons why.

 

He isnt a muslim extremist or it would be everywhere. Just another black guy with a gun. It doesnt fit the current gun rights narrative politically. At the moment its supposed to be all about muslims and they are scary indeed. It could happen to you anytime anywhere. Something must be done. Certainly conceal carry must be allowed in all 50 states to protect us. But in an election year they are also agreeing to some gun control laws against people on a government controlled watch list. They want to show they are doing 'something'. Just only to muslims not law abiding gun owners. So its in the name of national security and its ok. And for some, its so scary that it might include mass surveillance, taking away constitutional rights (not just guns) or even war.

 

But typical crime? Especially black on black? Total gun rights rule and zero gun control of any kind.  Its conceal carry or bust. If you were a 'lefty' cable channel that would be an interesting political story. Except that in this case conceal carry worked. So both sides have a vested interest to avoid it because it is inconvenient to their messages. One side doesnt want to say 'conceal carry is sometimes good' and works even in black areas with heavy crime (that is an assumption). The other doesnt want to say 'gun control but only for muslims is good'.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


The reality is there is little interest in stories like this. The disaster is the news story, the tornado, the shooting that kills innocent lives. For every tornado that kills there must be hundreds of near misses. Hundreds of near pile ups on the interstate, air disasters everted and yes shootings that were prevented.

 

As far as I am concerned this is a great news story. I don't care how we stop mass shootings whether it takes someone else with a gun or stronger gun laws... As long as it stops.

 

Like always, politics has a habit of taking news and twisting it to fit its own narrative.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


I will give you a couple of other reasons why.

 

He isnt a muslim extremist or it would be everywhere. Just another black guy with a gun. It doesnt fit the current gun rights narrative politically. At the moment its supposed to be all about muslims and they are scary indeed. It could happen to you anytime anywhere. Something must be done. Certainly conceal carry must be allowed in all 50 states to protect us. But in an election year they are also agreeing to some gun control laws against people on a government controlled watch list. They want to show they are doing 'something'. Just only to muslims not law abiding gun owners. So its in the name of national security and its ok. And for some, its so scary that it might include mass surveillance, taking away constitutional rights (not just guns) or even war.

 

But typical crime? Especially black on black? Total gun rights rule and zero gun control of any kind.  Its conceal carry or bust. If you were a 'lefty' cable channel that would be an interesting political story. Except that in this case conceal carry worked. So both sides have a vested interest to avoid it because it is inconvenient to their messages. One side doesnt want to say 'conceal carry is sometimes good' and works even in black areas with heavy crime (that is an assumption). The other doesnt want to say 'gun control but only for muslims is good'.

so you think these asshats will go through lagit channels to get there weapons lmfao wake up and smell the coffee

Link to comment
Share on other sites


The post was about how politics and the media avoid dealing with certain events. Not the merits of each. But since you asked, I dont know. However we shouldnt be burying our heads in the sand screaming 'bla bla bla' hoping it will just get better. Nor should we discount doing things that would make it *harder* for them to get weapons because its inconvenient.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


When I was a Prison Guard, the Inmates often would tell me that the best victim is one they know can't fight back.

Furthermore the only thing that kept him from robbing and hurting anyone he wanted was the chance they could be armed.

"If someone has a Bag or Fanny pack, I ain't robbing them"

People who carry and will use a weapon make Scumbags Fear robbing the "Wrong" person.

It is a Deterrent like it or not...

 

57787d790ca50_5711fbea7c901_12509480_102

Link to comment
Share on other sites


The post was about how politics and the media avoid dealing with certain events. Not the merits of each. But since you asked, I dont know. However we shouldnt be burying our heads in the sand screaming 'bla bla bla' hoping it will just get better. Nor should we discount doing things that would make it *harder* for them to get weapons because its inconvenient.

We aren't burying our heads in the sand. However, since you mentioned sand, who was employed by the CIA, and armed by such, who performed the atrocity in Orlando? Don't you think our all powerful g'ment, who should have our best interest in heart, should have a better handle on whom they employ? Just saying, those we should trust, aren't behaving trustworthy.

allah akbar folks, better get used to it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


When I was a Prison Guard, the Inmates often would tell me that the best victim is one they know can't fight back.

Furthermore the only thing that kept him from robbing and hurting anyone he wanted was the chance they could be armed.

"If someone has a Bag or Fanny pack, I ain't robbing them"

People who carry and will use a weapon make Scumbags Fear robbing the "Wrong" person.

It is a Deterrent like it or not...

 

57787d790ca50_5711fbea7c901_12509480_102

Great pic Sparty...lol

Link to comment
Share on other sites


the media has a list of what they are supposed to report on and what gets the most interest.im sure your not blind to that.

should you have the right to firearms yes but military grade weapons I believe should only  belong to the military  not private citizens or the police.everything is so militarized its fkn crazy-and then one nut gets  ahold of a killing machine and mows down many multiple bodies easily and fast as its designed to do.you dont need an uzi  ak or tactical rifle to hunt with

Link to comment
Share on other sites


if you are going to post about guns please remember that playing COD or BF does not make one an expert.  a semi automatic weapon is a semi automatic weapon, no matter what it looks like.  the military uses automatic weapons.  the only killing machine is the person using the gun.  and before it gets started AR 15 does not stand for "assault rifle".  it is "armalite rifle" design or prototype 15. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Damage... I respect your opinion and belief as protected under the 1st amendment. But let me offer a different poverty. Under the first amendment, you can do all sorts of things. Worship Satan, spew hate of other races, even yell fire in a theater. In fact you can even use your 1st amendment right to scream from the highest mountain of the constitutional injustice of not allowing a women to kill her unborn child, aka abortion. (Thats me exercising my 1st amendment right.) No one will can punish you for doing those things. Unless you cause harm. Should we make you do a background check to be able exercise that right, then wait anywhere from 30 minutes to 7 days before you can say what you want? Then we will also change the rules so that the permission to exercise that right in one state is different in another? No weapon is more deadly than another, it's all about the user! Fact is a hammer can become a deadly weapon but not of its own choosing. Again it's the user! Please stop thinking of the second amendment being related to hunting. It's not! Yes hunting is something that you can utilize your 2nd amendment rights to engage in but that is as far as the 2 are entwined! The 2nd is about personal ownership of Arms so that if needed you can bear them in service to the militia for the common defence and also self defense. No respectable gun owner nor American citizen would every want what happened in Orlando, Newtown, Aurora, or any of the murders that happen daily with weapons to occur! But let's stop holding the object responsible and place the blame where it actually lies, with the ass hat that committed the Violence! As for new laws...here is the problem with liberals...you give them an inch and they will take a mile! I hope I didn't offend you, but I am tired of having to defend my rights everything some asshole does something with a gun!

 

And just remember, Of course I don't need 30 rounds to kill a deer, but the 2nd amendment isn't about killing deer!

 

Regards

Link to comment
Share on other sites


 

Your correct, if it was up to a liberal agenda they would take everything. It is in everyones best interest to have a healthy dialog on subjects like this. That is what makes America great, specially on days like this. You need checks and balances to make a great democracy.

 

A majority of Americans want gun reform at some level. What that is, who knows. The last thing we need is for the liberal media and the NRA to do all the talking for every American who only wants to keep their families safe and prevent tragedies such as these.

 

Great dialog guys...

Link to comment
Share on other sites


the media has a list of what they are supposed to report on and what gets the most interest.im sure your not blind to that.

should you have the right to firearms yes but military grade weapons I believe should only  belong to the military  not private citizens or the police.everything is so militarized its fkn crazy-and then one nut gets  ahold of a killing machine and mows down many multiple bodies easily and fast as its designed to do.you dont need an uzi  ak or tactical rifle to hunt with

Please explain military grade ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Knock on wood here, but this shit doesn't happen in Arizona. Everyone has the right to carry and to carry concealed if they wish. No permit required. Welcome to my State.

2011 Tucson? You know, the one where your congressional representative was shot in the head?

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Please explain military grade ?

There are many options that make a gun military grade vs Civilian grade... For this post I will keep it simple, And explain what the makes a difference here..... The only thing that makes them different is full auto vs semi..  Their is a huge list of other things that make Military grade weapons.. From the type of polymers  used, to the barrel linings to ammo type.... and so on..  But when a gun makes the news and don't quote me, They are not military grade... You can buy guns off the shelf that will operate  as good as military just not be full auto.. I personally can fire 30 rounds through my AR-15  in less then a minute..I'm sure quicker, But you get my point,,, Civilian guns are just as good quality as military, Just not full auto, I have shot full auto and you can buy full auto if you passed and acquired licence... I guess the reason i'm here explaining this is to let people know the difference.. And also tell people that a hand gun in semi auto can be fire as fast 6 to 12 shots in less then 3 or 4 seconds... When a persons Adrenalin is pumping  humans can do crazy things.. So do we ban all hand guns now too...?  Hell its like when you buy a smoke pit for the restaurant to cooks some delicious filets vs me going to sams and buy my new Weber.... :)...

Edited by ANGU5
Link to comment
Share on other sites


Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.