Concealed Carrier Stops Nightclub Mass Shooting Just Weeks After Orlando Attack

[Ban Hammer 13,333]

June 30, 2016

A concealed carrier in a Lyman, South Carolina nightclub appears to have stopped what could have easily turned into another mass shooting inside of a nightclub over the weekend. The licensed concealed carrier, who is unidentified, stopped a man who had already shot four people inside of the club.

According to a local media report:

Deputies said 32-year-old Jody Ray Thompson pulled out a gun after getting into an argument with another man and fired several rounds toward a crowd that had gathered out in front of the club.

“His rounds struck 3 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 said. Bobo said the man who shot Thompson has a valid concealed weapons permit, cooperated with investigators, and won’t be facing any charges.

http://controversialtimes.com/news/concealed-carrier-stops-nightclub-mass-shooting-just-weeks-after-orlando-attack/

[The Nature Boy 7,659]

Thank you. I was wanting to post that, but being on a hand held its a pia.

Let the muddy ditch left hysteria begin

[ready4ONE 5,400]

Nothing to be hysterical about. I have to wonder if Jody Ray Thompson was also legally privileged to carry a gun though. I'm sure that would make for a less --removed----- inspiring thread though.

Edited July 1, 2016 by charles!

[The Nature Boy 7,659]

Nothing to be hysterical about. I have to wonder if Jody Ray Thompson was also legally privileged to carry a gun though. I'm sure that would make for a less --removed--- inspiring thread though.

It has begun and no he was not

Edited July 1, 2016 by charles!

[ready4ONE 5,400]

It has begun and no he was not

Yet he had a gun. Very strange.

[The Nature Boy 7,659]

Yet he had a gun. Very strange.

Indeed he did Yet it was illegal for him to have on, You know against the law, banned etc. Yet he had one.

[Ban Hammer 13,333]

2 posts edited. further references to that product (which have a veiled meaning) will receive stronger admin action.

charles
vj moderation

[Jacque67 7,328]

A dangerous precedent has been set....

[Dakine10 5,452]

2 posts edited. further references to that product (which have a veiled meaning) will receive stronger admin action.

charles

vj moderation

It might be helpful if we knew what product we're not supposed to reference.

[The Nature Boy 7,659]

It might be helpful if we knew what product we're not supposed to reference.

It contains water glycerin sterac acid, Concord butter among other things

[Boiler 45,467]

I am sure we can rely on Hillary to ban such stories.

Edited July 1, 2016 by Boiler

[ready4ONE 5,400]

Indeed he did Yet it was illegal for him to have on, You know against the law, banned etc. Yet he had one.

Tell us, swami, from whence you gathered that the initial shooter was not legally privileged to possess a gun. Yes it's clear that he used it illegally.

The OP is quite sparse on the details but it is fairly clear that no 'mass shooting like the incident in Florida' was in progress.

Nope.

And therefore no 'mass shooting like the incident in Florida' was stopped by a licensed concealed carry permit holder. More like the all too common manner in which previously "responsible" gun owners become criminals, after engagement in macho stupidity, is what can reasonably be ascertained from the OP.

[cdneh 3,112]

Tell us, swami, from whence you gathered that the initial shooter was not legally privileged to possess a gun. Yes it's clear that he used it illegally.

The OP is quite sparse on the details but it is fairly clear that no 'mass shooting like the incident in Florida' was in progress.

Nope.

And therefore no 'mass shooting like the incident in Florida' was stopped by a licensed concealed carry permit holder. More like the all too common manner in which previously "responsible" gun owners become criminals, after engagement in macho stupidity, is what can reasonably be ascertained from the OP.

The quote is as follows:

A concealed carrier in a Lyman, South Carolina nightclub appears to have stopped what could have easily turned into another mass shooting inside of a nightclub over the weekend. The licensed concealed carrier, who is unidentified, stopped a man who had already shot four people inside of the club.

We don't know what the incident would have developed into, had he not been stopped. So your assertion that there was no mass shooting incident to be delivered from is disingenuous. Swami indeed.

It was over before it began, and that was down to one man with a permit to carry, a man already shot by the suspect.

I do understand it would have been better fodder for the anti gun brigade and the second amendment haters to have this worked out the other way, but not this time.

[ready4ONE 5,400]

The quote is as follows:

A concealed carrier in a Lyman, South Carolina nightclub appears to have stopped what could have easily turned into another mass shooting inside of a nightclub over the weekend. The licensed concealed carrier, who is unidentified, stopped a man who had already shot four people inside of the club.

We don't know what the incident would have developed into, had he not been stopped. So your assertion that there was no mass shooting incident to be delivered from is disingenuous. Swami indeed.

It was over before it began, and that was down to one man with a permit to carry, a man already shot by the suspect.

I do understand it would have been better fodder for the anti gun brigade and the second amendment haters to have this worked out the other way, but not this time.

There is nothing to suggest that the villain in the OP went to the bar intending to shoot as many people as possible vis a vis the Florida incident. Tossing that assertion into the OP only adds gravitas to the kinds of people who don't question things such as the wisdom of a concealed carry permit holder taking his gun bar hopping.

Since the preponderance of these types of incidents don't end up with a hero concealed carry permit holder I suppose I understand how little thought gun aficionados choose to put into any story that smacks of providing some glimmer of proof in the rightness of their perspective.

[yuna628 9,671]

So what we have is a sensationalist headline which draws people in for clicks.

The patron (probably drunk or whatever) gets into an altercation with another patron or according to one article, members of security. He then pulls out his weapon and begins to fire at the group of persons of which the individual is standing with. Through either his bad drunken aim or perhaps his lack of attention and loving care at using his firearm caused him to strike a few persons in the process.

One of those patrons in the crowd had a CC permit and used his weapon accordingly in self-defense.

There is nothing to indicate thus far that this was an ''attack by an active shooter'', a ''mass shooting incident from someone that intends to carry out a mass blaze of glory attack or mass suicide shooting''. This was an altercation involving guns or a stupid gun owner. In the city we call them drive-bys, gang or bar fights (often carried out by persons with fists, glass, knives, and handguns). No one had life-threatening injuries. We do not know if the person was carrying an illegal weapon, but we do know he discharged it illegally, which fits in nicely with attempted murder. It is nice that the CC holder stopped the disgruntled patron, and as one local publication noted, that all those wounded were either employed or affiliated with the bar, so I can imagine the CC holder may have been the bouncer.

Another individual in another state, shot and killed a man as he attempted to rob a store. Although, we don't know if he actually called police first before he shot or if he was a CC holder at the time. http://www.wistv.com/story/32354537/police-armed-robber-killed-by-armed-customer I'm all for good people using guns in a responsible manner, but not sensationalist headlines.