At the Mexican Bars in San Jose, they pat everyone down for weapons before they are let in. I think this is wise, when history shows it as needed.
But then if they do have armed security, they have to be licensed and they carry openly.
I am not so sure what the situation was at this place in Indianapolis. Untrained and unlicensed security carrying concealed could be provoking problems. Want to know more about this before drawing any conclusions.
I don't see that as being clear from the article. Having one nut waiving a gun around is bad. But having several nuts waiving guns around is worse.
These situations should be looked at more closely. There must be reasons why there are all these "2AMers" and other troubles. I think it has something to do with thug bouncers.
"According to Indianapolis Metropolitan police, a man and his relative were being disruptive and were asked to leave around closing time, but ONE OF THE MEN CAME BACK WITH A GUN." [emphasis mine]
SJG, it's perfectly clear from the article. This isn't the fault of "thug bouncers." This is the fault of a drunk with a gun. And if it wasn't for the bouncers having guns, there probably would've been a lot more injuries, even some deaths.
Can't we just get rid of ghetto people. I'll gladly pay $5 for an apple, $30 at Mikey D's if I could go into any neighborhood I wanted and not have to deal with the likes of ratchet peeps.
"...CAME BACK WITH A GUN." Does not necessarily mean he actually left the building and then came back with a gun. And why would any rational person do such a thing anyway? The very best possible outcome would be a long sentence in the State Prison. And to get what?
The way it is worded it sounds almost like a fight was already in progress and blows were being exchanged. But the truth is, we weren't there so we don't know.
Isn't it strange, all of these people function just fine any other day of the year and they must not get into too much trouble, or they would be locked up. And probably they drink other times and at other places too. So why then is it that at SC's around closing time strange stuff happens? People who otherwise stay out of trouble, are all of a sudden using guns and motor vehicles as offensive weapons.
Could it have something to do with the fact that at least some SC's hire belligerent thugs as bouncers, and that these thugs act even stupider because they are carrying concealed firearms and because they feel authorized to use them, and so they provoke people? And could the fact that the other parties often end up dead influence how the stories are reported in the news papers? And could the fact that some SC customers, some of them being on this TUSCL forum, seem to think it should be like this be actually perpetuating the problem?
Here in Sunnyvale, I would say that the Brass Rail and the Hip Hugger ( tragically now closed ) never had thug bouncers. They were always really cool and mellow. But Sporty's Bar ( formerly Candid Club and formerly Richard's Lounge ) did often hire belligerent creeps as bouncers. Thank god they weren't armed, or who knows what might have happened. Some of the dancers complained about them to me, because with the way they handled situations, they often did disrupt the ambiance, and that cuts into a dancer's cash flow right there. If I could trade one for the other, I would certainly trade Sporty's Bar to be able to get the Hip Hugger back. And oh yes, he one who first called some of the bouncers creeps was not me, it was the pretty bar tender Heidi.
Line 1 of the article: Two people were shot at Pure Passion Night Club early Friday morning after an unruly patron was kicked out of the club.
Second to last paragraph: “In no way is it acceptable to come inside of a business, brandish a weapon, make threats forcible felonies at people, point firearms at people and expect them not to retaliate,” said IMPD public information officer Christopher Wilburn.
He left the club. He then came back with a gun, and he started shooting. It's perfectly clear to any normal person reading the article.
And we're talking about a drunk, someone who was already acting disorderly and irrational, so much so that he was ejected from the club. Why would you even try to ascribe "rational" to this person?
These were not belligerent thug bouncers. Considering how frequently you fault the bouncers and call them "thugs," I'm guessing you've had some problems with them in the past and now you have a pretty big chip on your shoulder about it.
I've been to this club before. Granted, it was only once and it was a few years back, but these were good bouncers, very relaxed, laid back, and personable. There wasn't a thug thing about them. Nuts, they treated me like I had been going there for years, like I was just another regular joe monger.
The article says the guys "were asked" to leave the club. It never anywhere says that they did leave the club. Then it says one of them "came back with a gun". Came back with is often a way of describing what happens in a fight. Something like that happened at the hells angels funeral for Jeffrey Peticrew. Steve Tausan punched this guy Luis, and Luis "came back with a gun" and shot Tausan dead.
Now it also says what you quote, "In no way is it acceptatable ..." But the article does not actually say that the deceased did this. It is an interpretative quote, out of context, from a non-witness source.
I was not there so I don't know, and you don't either. But the way these stories are being presented, it sounds like anywhere you go at any time some nut might start pointing a gun at you, or they might start trying to run you over with a minivan.
I don't go along with this. I feel that in some places bouncers are provoking problems. And no I don't have a chip on my shoulder. Don't try to put something like that on me. But I do take offense when people start exonerating bouncers when they don't know the facts, because the story is very sketchy and they were not there. And I take offense when someone like you tries to legitimate thug bouncers by saying that a dancer could have them beat you up. If people like you contribute to the problem, then it will always be like this, violence at strip clubs. I for one will not sit still for this. If it happens within my view, I will put a stop to it, as I have with not unrelated problems at other local businesses.
Again, first line: "...kicked out of the club." No room for interpretation. The drunk customer was outside of the building and he returned with a gun.
And I take offense to people like you, people whose kneejerk reaction is to proclaim a person guilty because he cherry-picks a story to fit his own skewed worldview.
Now quit sounding so all high and mighty and noble. You're not. With all of your indignant self-righteousness, you're just a thug yourself, your weapon being the keyboard instead of a gun. Someone who talks like you do, I have no doubt that your first reaction to these situations would be one of two things: 1) a gun or 2) peeing yourself.
If a judge says, "The Defendant is remanded", this does not mean the Defendant is instantly in jail, or even instantly in handcuffs. When someone gets kicked out of a retail business, it is a status change from welcome to unwelcome. It does not necessarily mean that they are immediately out the front door.
Neither you nor I were there, so we cannot vouch for what did or did not happen. I for one do not find newspaper accounts to be completely reliable about such matters either.
But there is a more important issue underlying this. Why was someone angry enough, or crazy enough, to produce a gun and start shooting up the strip club?
Geoffrey Canada grew up in gangs in New York City. He progressed in his preparedness for violence, moving from Fist, to Stick, to Knife, to Gun. He always rationalized this as having a need to defend himself against demonstrated threats.
So there he was making his rounds carrying a concealed gun. Then finally he realized something. As he was carrying his gun, he was going into situations he otherwise wouldn't go into. The gun was giving him a sense of security. He was no longer trusting his instincts and avoiding danger. Because he was carrying a gun, concealed, he was suspending his instincts because he knew he could always pull out his gun. Because of how carrying a gun was effecting him, he was putting himself into situations where he would eventually end up using it.
At that point he realized that he had gone the wrong way, and so he stopped. Now he works with former gang members and he writes about it.
I feel that these bouncers, carrying concealed guns, are handling situations differently, because they know that they are armed. I feel that they are handling situations in excessively confrontational and belligerent manners. And this is just where it starts. Where it ends is with thugs who are clearly instigating violence and who are extorting money out of people. The posts about such situations on TUSCL have been sufficient to convince me of this.
Now no, that does not give someone else a justification to start shooting at them, or to try and run them over with a minivan. But you also have to consider that the club and its bouncers are probably influencing how the newspaper reports the story. So we have to suspend judgment on it. We can't go by just what the newspaper says. If that is all we have, we have to stand back from it some.
As I have explained, of Sunnyvale CA's three bikini bars, two of them hired bouncers who were very good. And I am sure they were not armed. Brass Rail and the Hip Hugger ( tragically now closed ) were always really laid back places, and the bouncers did not do anything to damage this.
One of the clubs, in the view of dancers and the bar tender, as well as in my own view, did hire some bouncers who did ruin the environment. There were stories about excessive violence as well.
Thank god these bouncers were not armed, and even more so that they were not carrying concealed.
If you are going to have armed bouncers then they should be trained and licensed, and carrying out in the open. This is how it is at some of San Jose's Mexican Bars, and mostly these guys are just there to prevent armed robberies. They usually stand outside on the sidewalk in front, not inside the club.
If you have bouncers carrying concealed, and if because of this they are inflaming situations, then eventually they are going to be setting up situations where they can justify shooting someone.
So yes, I do act proactively. I have engaged in sustained campaigns and gotten businesses closed. When needed, I have issued very strong warnings to business owners about the conduct of their bouncers and about other matters. Once I felt that bouncers were inflaming a situation with the people waiting in line to get into a disco. I suggested to the owner that police might be needed as his bouncers are behaving in an unprofessional manner. The guy acted and solved the problem.
It is important that we all watch out for places where thug bouncers terrorize people. When something happens like this shoot out, it is already too late. But we should not be fooled into thinking that this shoot out justifies the carrying of concealed weapons, especially by untrained people. And we TUSCL members should not be making excuses for even hypothetical situations where bouncers are physically injuring people.
When a bar kicks someone out, it doesn't mean that the person is put on detention. It doesn't mean that he's on probation. It means the person shown out the door, not to return. I work in a pizza place. We've had one drunken, belligerent customer threaten to bomb our store and to cut the throat of one of our drivers. He's not welcome in our store any longer, and we do not deliver to him any more. Last week, I went to a strip club in Fargo. The girl at the door asked for my ID, then searched from my name on a long list of names of guys who are banned from that club -- who were kicked out for one reason or another.
Hmm. Can you explain Columbine? Virginia Tech? Sandy Hook? Fort Hood? Any of dozens other shootings with absolutely no rational reason? People are irrational creatures by nature, and drinking just makes them all the more irrational, not to mention all the more stupid. Why are you trying to defend the drunk customer, trying to say that he was in a rational state of mind?
As far as bouncers carrying concealed weapons, I very much prefer that. One, for me, out of sight, out of mind. I'll be able to enjoy my drink and the show, and feeling apprehensive and watching for guns. Two, again, drunks by their very nature tend to get not only stupid but cocky and macho. The last thing anyone in a club needs is for some drunk to try to go for a bouncer's very visible gun, just to see if he can do it.
Agreed, neither of us were there, but you're applying such an irrational and twisted logic to this, it really boggles me, not to mention just plain pisses me off. I know you're not this stupid, but you just seem bound and determined to prove otherwise.
When did that area get so dangerous? Forty years ago my sister had an apartment about a mile from 38th and Latayette Road and I spent a lot of time there. I guess a place can go downhill in 40 years.
Yes I know that there are dangerous people out there. And I have never tried to defend these drunken, gun wielding, minivan attacking customers.
I am simply saying that I believe that these bouncers are playing a role in provoking these crazies. This does not excuse the crazies. But I am saying that there are many SC bouncers who are a real problem. In these cases, maybe there is no cause to discipline the bouncers as the customers went so very far out of line. But I believe that in lots of other situations which don't get into the news papers, these bouncers are being real jerks and should be fired. If the club owner won't do it, then outside citizens need to step in.
Yes, I know that retail businesses, like pizza parlors and SC's do sometimes need to banish people.
I am surprised though that there are places which need to have written lists of those banished. I have never seen a place where the problem is that serious.
As far as these asshole bouncers having concealed weapons, I feel that that is encouraging them to escalate situations.
17 comments
The patron was shot several times and is in critical condition at IU Health Methodist Hospital."
Guns work.
But then if they do have armed security, they have to be licensed and they carry openly.
I am not so sure what the situation was at this place in Indianapolis. Untrained and unlicensed security carrying concealed could be provoking problems. Want to know more about this before drawing any conclusions.
SJG
Read the article. Sounds like the guy got thrown out and then came back with a gun and opened fire. Then the bouncers returned fire.
Sounds more like ghetto black guy involved.
These situations should be looked at more closely. There must be reasons why there are all these "2AMers" and other troubles. I think it has something to do with thug bouncers.
Bouncers should need to be trained and licensed.
SJG
SJG, it's perfectly clear from the article. This isn't the fault of "thug bouncers." This is the fault of a drunk with a gun. And if it wasn't for the bouncers having guns, there probably would've been a lot more injuries, even some deaths.
"...CAME BACK WITH A GUN." Does not necessarily mean he actually left the building and then came back with a gun. And why would any rational person do such a thing anyway? The very best possible outcome would be a long sentence in the State Prison. And to get what?
The way it is worded it sounds almost like a fight was already in progress and blows were being exchanged. But the truth is, we weren't there so we don't know.
Isn't it strange, all of these people function just fine any other day of the year and they must not get into too much trouble, or they would be locked up. And probably they drink other times and at other places too. So why then is it that at SC's around closing time strange stuff happens? People who otherwise stay out of trouble, are all of a sudden using guns and motor vehicles as offensive weapons.
Could it have something to do with the fact that at least some SC's hire belligerent thugs as bouncers, and that these thugs act even stupider because they are carrying concealed firearms and because they feel authorized to use them, and so they provoke people? And could the fact that the other parties often end up dead influence how the stories are reported in the news papers? And could the fact that some SC customers, some of them being on this TUSCL forum, seem to think it should be like this be actually perpetuating the problem?
Here in Sunnyvale, I would say that the Brass Rail and the Hip Hugger ( tragically now closed ) never had thug bouncers. They were always really cool and mellow. But Sporty's Bar ( formerly Candid Club and formerly Richard's Lounge ) did often hire belligerent creeps as bouncers. Thank god they weren't armed, or who knows what might have happened. Some of the dancers complained about them to me, because with the way they handled situations, they often did disrupt the ambiance, and that cuts into a dancer's cash flow right there. If I could trade one for the other, I would certainly trade Sporty's Bar to be able to get the Hip Hugger back. And oh yes, he one who first called some of the bouncers creeps was not me, it was the pretty bar tender Heidi.
SJG
Stones
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gKOjhv2f…
includes all electric version of Street Fighting Man
Line 1 of the article: Two people were shot at Pure Passion Night Club early Friday morning after an unruly patron was kicked out of the club.
Second to last paragraph: “In no way is it acceptable to come inside of a business, brandish a weapon, make threats forcible felonies at people, point firearms at people and expect them not to retaliate,” said IMPD public information officer Christopher Wilburn.
He left the club. He then came back with a gun, and he started shooting. It's perfectly clear to any normal person reading the article.
And we're talking about a drunk, someone who was already acting disorderly and irrational, so much so that he was ejected from the club. Why would you even try to ascribe "rational" to this person?
These were not belligerent thug bouncers. Considering how frequently you fault the bouncers and call them "thugs," I'm guessing you've had some problems with them in the past and now you have a pretty big chip on your shoulder about it.
I've been to this club before. Granted, it was only once and it was a few years back, but these were good bouncers, very relaxed, laid back, and personable. There wasn't a thug thing about them. Nuts, they treated me like I had been going there for years, like I was just another regular joe monger.
The article says the guys "were asked" to leave the club. It never anywhere says that they did leave the club. Then it says one of them "came back with a gun". Came back with is often a way of describing what happens in a fight. Something like that happened at the hells angels funeral for Jeffrey Peticrew. Steve Tausan punched this guy Luis, and Luis "came back with a gun" and shot Tausan dead.
Now it also says what you quote, "In no way is it acceptatable ..." But the article does not actually say that the deceased did this. It is an interpretative quote, out of context, from a non-witness source.
I was not there so I don't know, and you don't either. But the way these stories are being presented, it sounds like anywhere you go at any time some nut might start pointing a gun at you, or they might start trying to run you over with a minivan.
I don't go along with this. I feel that in some places bouncers are provoking problems. And no I don't have a chip on my shoulder. Don't try to put something like that on me. But I do take offense when people start exonerating bouncers when they don't know the facts, because the story is very sketchy and they were not there. And I take offense when someone like you tries to legitimate thug bouncers by saying that a dancer could have them beat you up. If people like you contribute to the problem, then it will always be like this, violence at strip clubs. I for one will not sit still for this. If it happens within my view, I will put a stop to it, as I have with not unrelated problems at other local businesses.
SJG
Again, first line: "...kicked out of the club." No room for interpretation. The drunk customer was outside of the building and he returned with a gun.
And I take offense to people like you, people whose kneejerk reaction is to proclaim a person guilty because he cherry-picks a story to fit his own skewed worldview.
Now quit sounding so all high and mighty and noble. You're not. With all of your indignant self-righteousness, you're just a thug yourself, your weapon being the keyboard instead of a gun. Someone who talks like you do, I have no doubt that your first reaction to these situations would be one of two things: 1) a gun or 2) peeing yourself.
Neither you nor I were there, so we cannot vouch for what did or did not happen. I for one do not find newspaper accounts to be completely reliable about such matters either.
But there is a more important issue underlying this. Why was someone angry enough, or crazy enough, to produce a gun and start shooting up the strip club?
Geoffrey Canada grew up in gangs in New York City. He progressed in his preparedness for violence, moving from Fist, to Stick, to Knife, to Gun. He always rationalized this as having a need to defend himself against demonstrated threats.
So there he was making his rounds carrying a concealed gun. Then finally he realized something. As he was carrying his gun, he was going into situations he otherwise wouldn't go into. The gun was giving him a sense of security. He was no longer trusting his instincts and avoiding danger. Because he was carrying a gun, concealed, he was suspending his instincts because he knew he could always pull out his gun. Because of how carrying a gun was effecting him, he was putting himself into situations where he would eventually end up using it.
At that point he realized that he had gone the wrong way, and so he stopped. Now he works with former gang members and he writes about it.
http://www.amazon.com/Fist-Stick-Knife-G…
I feel that these bouncers, carrying concealed guns, are handling situations differently, because they know that they are armed. I feel that they are handling situations in excessively confrontational and belligerent manners. And this is just where it starts. Where it ends is with thugs who are clearly instigating violence and who are extorting money out of people. The posts about such situations on TUSCL have been sufficient to convince me of this.
Now no, that does not give someone else a justification to start shooting at them, or to try and run them over with a minivan. But you also have to consider that the club and its bouncers are probably influencing how the newspaper reports the story. So we have to suspend judgment on it. We can't go by just what the newspaper says. If that is all we have, we have to stand back from it some.
As I have explained, of Sunnyvale CA's three bikini bars, two of them hired bouncers who were very good. And I am sure they were not armed. Brass Rail and the Hip Hugger ( tragically now closed ) were always really laid back places, and the bouncers did not do anything to damage this.
One of the clubs, in the view of dancers and the bar tender, as well as in my own view, did hire some bouncers who did ruin the environment. There were stories about excessive violence as well.
Thank god these bouncers were not armed, and even more so that they were not carrying concealed.
If you are going to have armed bouncers then they should be trained and licensed, and carrying out in the open. This is how it is at some of San Jose's Mexican Bars, and mostly these guys are just there to prevent armed robberies. They usually stand outside on the sidewalk in front, not inside the club.
If you have bouncers carrying concealed, and if because of this they are inflaming situations, then eventually they are going to be setting up situations where they can justify shooting someone.
So yes, I do act proactively. I have engaged in sustained campaigns and gotten businesses closed. When needed, I have issued very strong warnings to business owners about the conduct of their bouncers and about other matters. Once I felt that bouncers were inflaming a situation with the people waiting in line to get into a disco. I suggested to the owner that police might be needed as his bouncers are behaving in an unprofessional manner. The guy acted and solved the problem.
It is important that we all watch out for places where thug bouncers terrorize people. When something happens like this shoot out, it is already too late. But we should not be fooled into thinking that this shoot out justifies the carrying of concealed weapons, especially by untrained people. And we TUSCL members should not be making excuses for even hypothetical situations where bouncers are physically injuring people.
SJG
Hmm. Can you explain Columbine? Virginia Tech? Sandy Hook? Fort Hood? Any of dozens other shootings with absolutely no rational reason? People are irrational creatures by nature, and drinking just makes them all the more irrational, not to mention all the more stupid. Why are you trying to defend the drunk customer, trying to say that he was in a rational state of mind?
As far as bouncers carrying concealed weapons, I very much prefer that. One, for me, out of sight, out of mind. I'll be able to enjoy my drink and the show, and feeling apprehensive and watching for guns. Two, again, drunks by their very nature tend to get not only stupid but cocky and macho. The last thing anyone in a club needs is for some drunk to try to go for a bouncer's very visible gun, just to see if he can do it.
Agreed, neither of us were there, but you're applying such an irrational and twisted logic to this, it really boggles me, not to mention just plain pisses me off. I know you're not this stupid, but you just seem bound and determined to prove otherwise.
I am simply saying that I believe that these bouncers are playing a role in provoking these crazies. This does not excuse the crazies. But I am saying that there are many SC bouncers who are a real problem. In these cases, maybe there is no cause to discipline the bouncers as the customers went so very far out of line. But I believe that in lots of other situations which don't get into the news papers, these bouncers are being real jerks and should be fired. If the club owner won't do it, then outside citizens need to step in.
Yes, I know that retail businesses, like pizza parlors and SC's do sometimes need to banish people.
I am surprised though that there are places which need to have written lists of those banished. I have never seen a place where the problem is that serious.
As far as these asshole bouncers having concealed weapons, I feel that that is encouraging them to escalate situations.
SJG