Concealed Carrier Prevents Mass Shooting At SC Nightclub

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: abe froman

if what Judicial Watch uncovered holds weight

IF.

JW is a Right Wing nutter operation that has no credibility, unless they can prove what they claim.

They have no proof and their assertions are based on unnamed sources.

As compared to the left wing nutter sources most the Liberals us on ATS?

And of course all those "unnamed" source the MSM uses are 100% correct? Opps forgot about the rising number of these reporters that have ben busted making it all up for their career.

originally posted by: Sremmos80
What I learned in this thread is that it is ok to distort the story to push your agenda and then talk about how this will be ignored by others because they can't push theirs.

I am glad this man was able to defend himself, I don't care that he had a gun on him at the time but lets not act like that changes what this was. It was a argument/fight out in front of a sportsbar that was closed that turned into shots fired. That is not preventing a mass shooting, that is preventing everyday gun violence.

4 people shot per the story. That constitutes a mass shooting. (3+ people)

The fact that the CCL carrier was able to stop it constitutes preventing further escalation of a mass shooting.

Everybody complains about cherry pickers. So if this fits you have to count it.

Of course if we dropped the rule for counting 3+ that was started a couple years ago, we would not have to count this. OF COURSE if we did that how many of that 182 "Mass Shooting" in 2016 would also drop away?

Can't have it both ways.


EDIT:

Just did a little quick research if you used the old limit of 5 you would be down to a total of 67 "Mass Shooting" for 2016.
AND if you used 6+ then you would be down to 24.
AND if you changed that to 10+ you would have ...... 3.

I guess it is much better for the agenda if you set the count at 3+ shoot, so you get 182.
If you set it at 10+, only 3 really does NOT give you much of a media impact now does it?

And of course don't include if it was gang related or not, because that would also screw the results.
49 of the 182 are in the LA, Miami or Chicago area. I would bet a good part of those are gang related.

originally posted by: Shamrock6
a reply to: one4all

There's no law against carrying a rock around.

Why don't you watch the millions of hours of video of people losing gunfights because they didn't bring a gun to it.

So again, you may proceed with your less lethal response to lethal force.

Just make sure it is not a black assult rock.

That might get you in trouble.

a reply to: one4all

You're clearly an expert on firearms and carrying rocks around. Perhaps you should come up with a plan and submit it to your state legislature in regards to how you're going to train people to carry paintball guns and rocks around. I'm sure oodles of people will be lining up to learn how they can carry a rock around and stop a mass shooting one day.

You've found your niche!

originally posted by: neo96
a reply to: DAVID64

By the way, where are all the anti gun folks?

They are over in that Japan thread saying how racist they are.

COMMENT OF THE YEAR SO FAR

originally posted by: In4ormant

originally posted by: one4all
a reply to: In4ormant

I like the one where it plays out that we see a plane full of drunk passengers armed with egg-sized rocks and bad intentions drooling at a terrorist with a boxcutter and a single stewardess.....lol....because I for one am a big fan of Spocks and believe that the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few so I shall be launching my rocks godspeed my aim but those suckers are already in the air or I am hammering them into your skullbone in close Stewardess be darned after all I am trying to save her soul.All terrorism does is make people MORE RESOULTE IMHO.

Let's all just start carrying ninja stars

Bad idea. You'll put someone's eye out.

a reply to: dismanrc

be gone with this tool of the devil you have brought. "LOGIC" "FACTS" those are simply not allowed here!!!
Great post.

originally posted by: In4ormant
How else would one defend themselves from this behaviour.

Some would have us scrounging for rocks to throw.

Stoning a person...sounds like something Muslims would do...just sayin~

a reply to: TheAmazingYeti

It's usually those that are less civilised and uneducated that account for those ridiculous numbers. What's even more unfortunate is that people like that refuse to get a proper education. Even when handed to them, because gang banging and making fun of those that actually try is all they know.

a reply to: AlexandrosTheGreat
well they had a guy in new york who was attacked and he wounded guy instead of killing him and he had to a crap load of money because he wounded perp instead of killing him . the victim was named bernie something or other but he got stuck paying billss for a guy robbing him.

originally posted by: TheAmazingYeti
a reply to: NoCorruptionAllowed

Ha! Really? I don't see how this is Obama's fault...

Fast and furious being exposed, which showed an alarming degree of illegality by the Obama administration to find ways to get guns away from law abiding citizens, even at the expense of getting people killed implementing it, which includes federal officers, should have been your first clue that your beloved president actually thinks you're a moron to be spat upon.

Then claiming he found out about it by watching the news was another clue to the extent of his guilt all along. And now whenever any gun related tragedy occurs, and Obama jumps all over it right away before the corpses are in the ground and buried, shows that a very planned out strategy to grab only the legal guns has been unfolding, and Obama has been the key author of it all.

If you are too simple minded to see it, then you are beyond anyone's help at this point. Perhaps we should just allow the country to fall in ruins to these tyrants and just sit back and watch the judgement take place.

a reply to: dismanrc

Yes I understand all of that, but you know as well as I do this was trying to make it sound like this guy stopped something like Orlando, which is no the case.
This was an argument that went bad and someone had a gun and opened fire.

a reply to: rockintitz

Like this?

If you want a perfect example of manipulated bull sh## for political purposes then, yeah? Great I guess? Good job? Did you even look at the claims in those stats, or check the sources? For 1-many of the sources are not even available. 2-they don't make sense. 3-some were done by surveys/polls.

You want to say 1.5 Million uses of guns in self defence every year? Well, in that case America has much, MUCH bigger problems. Are you nuts? do you even realize what that implies? America needs a wide spread mental health check if that's the case. That means supposedly if those guns didn't exist there would've been a crime occur instead, right?!

The numbers are actually higher by political parties pushing this tagline by the way:

Estimates over the number of defensive gun uses vary wildly, depending on the study's definition of a defensive gun use, survey design, population, criteria, time-period studied, and other factors. Low-end estimates are in the range of 55,000 to 80,000 incidents per year, while high end estimates reach of 4.7 million incidents per year.

Let's say its even more than you claim, 5 Million cases of self defense incidents with guns per year. **

You realize what that means though right? By deduction, and a logical conclusion, this means 5 Million (or whatever number you settle on) crimes were prevented with guns. Right? You see, it's a catch 22. The higher number you claim, the higher total crime in the country. If there is seriously 5 Million cases of self defense, with guns, and this is a "good" thing, I'd hate to see what a "bad" thing is.

However, they questioned whether this estimate was credible because the same survey suggests that approximately 132,000 perpetrators were either wounded or killed at the hands of armed civilians in 1994. They note that this number is about the same as the number of people hospitalized for gunshot injuries that year, but that "almost all of those are there as a result of criminal assault, suicide attempt, or accident."

So basically the people doing the "surveys" and coming up with these favourable "stats" are actually, in fact, taking all the gun crime in the US and claiming its all in self defense. And then doing phone surveys to purposely obtain favourable data.

overestimate the number of DGU, including telescoping, the social desirability bias, and the possibility that "some gun advocates will lie to help bias estimates upwards."[13]

In which case that is making a claim that 5 Million violent or theft crimes were diverted or prevented. There's already 10 Million arrests in the US every year. Over 2 million people incarcerated, long term.

That means, the actual crime rate is much higher. That there should be 15 Million arrests or more (some use of defense would not be ruled lawful as well).

The US is already horribly represented in Law & Order and criminality, violent crime and incarceration. But if this statistic is true, it makes the US about the same as a Banana Republic, or a Communist Authoritarian State. Really, Im not sure why anyone would want that stat to be real. It means your country and its people are ####### in the head, screwed up, need help, your society is imploding.

Look at Violent Homicide Rates of numerous countries and see if there's any obvious patterns:

Homicide Rate Per 100k

Ireland 1.3
Germany 0.9
Italy 0.9
Netherlands 0.97
Norway 0.5
Uniked Kingdom 1.0
France 1.0
Canada 1.56
United States 4.5
Russia 13

Congratulations, you are halfway to becoming Soviet Amerika.

originally posted by: DAVID64
a reply to: CX

In Illinois, where I am, you can not carry in an establishment that makes more than 50% of it's profits from the sales of alcohol. No, you don't have to check their books, just use common sense. You can't carry in a bar that just happens to serve food, but you can carry in a restaurant that happens to sell alcohol.

Common sense and law don't go together. Because technically they could easily pin it on you if what appears to be restaurant to you serves mostly alcohol. 51%? You can, and probably will be, held accountable to this law.

a reply to: xuenchen

Hmmmm, wonder why I didn't hear about this until now...

Lemme guess.

This was hardly covered by any MSM, if at all.

Am I right?

I'm surprised they can take firearms into bars there. Here in FLorida you cant, unless you are inside the establishment for your job (like if you're there collecting the money from your vending machines inside there); no booze drinking allowed.

This is just in time following the Mass Media induced Mass Shooting Contagion Effect:
www.abovetopsecret.com...

originally posted by: IgnoranceIsntBlisss
So back to my OP topics:

In July, researchers presented a terrifying idea: mass killings and school shootings may be contagious. Using a mathematical contagion model typically applied to the spread of diseases, the study found that 30 percent of mass killings and 22 percent of school shootings appeared to have been inspired by previous events. One possible reason, says lead author Sherry Towers, is media coverage.

“What we found was, in ones that didn’t get a lot of media attention there was no contagion, and in the ones where we did see a lot of media attention, that’s where we saw the contagion,” Towers says.
www.newsweek.com...

Here's the paper: Contagion in Mass Killings and School Shootings
We find significant evidence that mass killings involving firearms are incented by similar events in the immediate past. On average, this temporary increase in probability lasts 13 days, and each incident incites at least 0.30 new incidents (p = 0.0015). We also find significant evidence of contagion in school shootings, for which an incident is contagious for an average of 13 days, and incites an average of at least 0.22 new incidents (p = 0.0001). All p-values are assessed based on a likelihood ratio test comparing the likelihood of a contagion model to that of a null model with no contagion. On average, mass killings involving firearms occur approximately every two weeks in the US, while school shootings occur on average monthly. We find that state prevalence of firearm ownership is significantly associated with the state incidence of mass killings with firearms, school shootings, and mass shootings.

originally posted by: IgnoranceIsntBlisss
Back on topic, here goes likewise commentary on the latest Orlando shooting:

Whenever there is a mass shooting, the media covers it 24/7, replaying frightening scenes and interviews for days. What kind of psychological effect does this non-stop coverage have on the viewing public? Joseph Haraszti, MD is a renown Pasadena, California Psychiatrist and expert on mood disorders says it can play a role in copycat situations. Are you feeling overly-saturated with non-stop news coverage of mass shootings?

Spot on about the "Contagion Effect".

originally posted by: IgnoranceIsntBlisss
Here goes a complete documentary about it:
Mass Murderers and the Media Outlets That Love Them

Damn, so the filmaker was on campus during the Santa Monica CC Campus shooting, and has first hand account of how callously vulturistic the media crews were at that 'venue'.

So far he shows clips from the US and the UK, where even newscasters are blasting how the other newscasters were handling it.

Where I'm at now he has direct footage of "Wayne Gale's" vulture behavior from Natural Born Killers (I was able to find any proper clips in youtube for the OP).

THIS IS ACTUALLY A REALLY GOOD DOCUMENTARY!

A big thing he does well pointing out is how the coverage is hardly ever about the victims. If they simply covered the victims, instead of celebritize the killers, then the Contagion Effects would hardly be the same.

So what that all means is, now that we have the Contagion Effect going live for night club shootings, if the media goes crazy covering this story for the next week, that is they only report on the hero gunning down the perp, while not glorifying / reporting on the perm himself, we should see a marked end to night club shootings for the most part, instead of an endless news driven cycle of more and more shootings.

originally posted by: IgnoranceIsntBlisss
I'm surprised they can take firearms into bars there. Here in FLorida you cant, unless you are inside the establishment for your job (like if you're there collecting the money from your vending machines inside there); no booze drinking allowed.

I'd say it depends on the Concealed Carry Permit.

Which is state to state. You have to follow the laws of each state.

If you have a Concealed Carry in one state, you might need to register or sign something in any state you go into.

I think Arizona has lifted most restrictions.

I wonder if some government official will target the CCW holder for infringement of civil rights?

a reply to: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

This wasn't a nightclub, it was outside a closed sports bar.