More On Negligent Discharge In Clemson Gold’s Gym
BY Herschel Smith
9 years, 5 months ago
In followup to my post on the negligent discharge at Gold’s Gym in Clemson, S.C., Marissa McFarland writes:
Mr. Smith,I came across your article about the shooting at the Gold’s Gym in Clemson. I noticed your thoughts on the “accident” after the article. I, along with several other members of the gym, are angered by what has happened and the lackadaisical response the gym has had over this. I am planning to contact local media sources to try to get publicity, and hopefully force the gym’s hand on doing something about this. Is there anything you can do to assist us with this matter? Thank you in advance for your time. This is a petition that was created to ban concealed weapons at all Gold’s Gym locations that have child care present.
Sorry Marissa, but I cannot condone rules against the carry of weapons, not anywhere or any time. I preach the rules of gun safety to myself and anyone who’ll listen. The boys who perpetrated the negligent discharge were goobers. The Sheriff (and prosecutor) are also probably goobers for not charging them with reckless endangerment.
And you are correct to take your business elsewhere. The market should determine the outcome of the situation. But I will never favor regulations or rules that prohibit the carry of weapons. That’s the wrong approach. It’s like saying that since people have wrecks in cars, automobiles should be illegal. See how stupid that sounds?
|
|
On July 14, 2015 at 12:41 pm, DAN III said:
Marissa McFarland is just another socialist/statist/collectivist who believes people need to be controlled by denying them their rights. Now of course, Gold’s Gym being a private property entity can do anything they choose to do. But once again, the socialist/statist/collectivist mentality rears it’s ugly head with McFarland exclaiming her tyranny with her calls for “banning” and denying folks that which she chooses not to do.
As you stated….the customer if free to take their business elsewhere.
On July 20, 2015 at 11:48 pm, Veritas said:
Everytime I see a no guns sign I turn away. I don’t like entering or doing business at hunting preserves for the murderously minded.
On July 27, 2015 at 4:31 pm, Billy Mullins said:
The problem with the outburst, “There oughtta be a law!” is that the only laws ANYbody obeys are the ones that do not overly inconvenience them. When it suits us, we obey the law; when it doesn’t, we don’t. It’s that simple. Laws – even the alleged “supreme law of the land” – are just words on paper. Words on paper DO NOT modify behavior any more than words spoken out loud do. (How many times have we heard a child being asked “How many times do I have to tell you not to do so-and-so?) It is enforcement – in truth the likelihood of enforcement – that modifies behavior because it makes it less of an inconvenience to obey the law/rule/whatever than not obeying it. This is true however severe the penalties might be for breaking the law/rule/whatever. How often do you see people buzzing through a stop light? Or rolling (however slowly) past a stop sign? After all the sign says “stop”, not “go really slow”. Why do people roll through stop signs? Same reason a hound dog licks himself – cause they can. Irrespective of any theoretical legalities, in the real world NO ACT is illegal (or against the rules) unless the actor is successfully prosecuted for it. Period.