Bowling? It can be a right pain in the.. er stomach?

IvySlayer · 09-02-2010 01:24PM

mikom wrote: »

It's hard to believe the guard went so spare.
Not a permanent employee I reckon, I'd say he was just ten Pin.
Anyway, in solidarity the whole bowling alley is on strike until this mess gets sorted out.

I heard there were riots so the police had to get the bumpers out. :pac:

mikom · 09-02-2010 01:26PM

IvySlayer wrote: »

I heard there were riots so the police had to get the bumpers out. :pac:

Fuckin' gutter snipes the lot of them.

jackiebaron · 09-02-2010 02:09PM

Keenan Moldy Memory wrote: »

The funny thing about this is your probably serious!.

Two attackers -V- one man with a gun is pretty even odd's I'd say, and fair play to the guy for having the balls to squeeze off a few.

Whoa!! Just back up there for a minute and put this in some kind of perspective. This situation didn't involve a guy walking home late at night through a dodgy neighbourhood and being set upon by two muggers brandishing knives and demanding his wallet or else they'll carve him up.

Let's just say this incident never happened. Are you getting the picture yet? You have a security guard at a BOWLING ALLEY...you know where families go to have a laugh. Where teenage kids go to flirt with each other and where middle aged guys in ugly shirts go to engage in the incomprehensible art of rolling a ball at 10 wooden bottles. His duties would include telling bratty kids to stop throwing popcorn at each other or to keep their sodas off the pool table. Once in a while he might have to break up a scuffle between two punks vying for the attention of the same guidette.

Why in the name of blue blazes is this guy packing a .38 cannon in a job like this?

It's not like this is a venue that attracts vicious skinheads, psychopathic soccer hooligans or the kind of Francis Begby characters from Glasgow pubs.

Do shopping mall security guards carry concealed firearms in case Beth and Robin get rowdy in the Food Court? Do stewards at basketball games (where alcohol and emotions can generate some heightened tensions) swan around with Glocks strapped to their thighs? Do security staff at funfares walk around with shotguns?

You must live in a perpetual world of paralyzing fear if you think that it's reassuring to have an armed rent-a-cop at a bowling alley.

Dartz · 09-02-2010 02:13PM

Yet another bowling related shooting....

TPD · 09-02-2010 02:22PM

You'd think shooting them in the thigh would have been equally effective and less dangerous.

Stercus Accidit · 09-02-2010 02:31PM

The Perfect Drug wrote: »

You'd think shooting them in the thigh would have been equally effective and less dangerous.

"Hold still lads please and refrain from attacking me, while I just aim this shot at your thigh"

He shot as he was trained to in self defence, at the centre of mass, and I'm impressed he was able to keep cool enough to hit them each once, if he was being attacked.

It is dependant on whether he was being attacked or not whether or not he will be convicted, and that alone.

jackiebaron · 09-02-2010 02:40PM

[QUOTE=Stercus Accidit;64388906
He shot as he was trained to in self defence, at the centre of mass, and I'm impressed he was able to keep cool enough to hit them each once, if he was being attacked.

QUOTE]

Yet another person who sees NOTHING out of the ordinary in a security guard at a bowling alley carrying a concealed lethal weapon. Would you like to see movie theatre ushers armed with Barettas along with their flashlights?

Stercus Accidit · 09-02-2010 02:43PM

jackiebaron wrote: »

Yet another person who sees NOTHING out of the ordinary in a security guard at a bowling alley carrying a concealed lethal weapon. Would you like to see movie theatre ushers armed with Barettas along with their flashlights?

He had it legally, deal with it.

The issue is whether or not he was defending himself, nobody should be obligated to be beaten up while on their job. He had the gun for defence, legally, if he defended himself in accordance with the law; rather than some other possibility, he is in the right.

AnonoBoy · 09-02-2010 02:46PM

He's going to be charged with assault, the Irish lads are facing small misdemeanour charges.

That's it.

Stercus Accidit · 09-02-2010 02:51PM

AnonoBoy wrote: »

He's going to be charged with assault, the Irish lads are facing small misdemeanour charges.

That's it.

I was charged with assault before, and it was thrown out of court as soon as I arrived, assumed guilt is nonsense.

Of course they will charge, the cctv will be analysed, a decision will be made.

It remains the case that he either was acting in self defence or not, I have more sympathy for this yank if he was acting in defence than the lucky guys who survived being shot. But thats if, idle hypothesis makes for great AH, but we don't know how things actually happened, so I don't buy this criticism of the man and assuming his guilt.

Dyr · 09-02-2010 03:08PM

General Zod wrote: »

OVER THE LINE!

This isn't nam smokeys, this is bowling..there are rules

pickarooney · 09-02-2010 03:23PM

Winty wrote: »

He was smoking against the law in a public building how is this the wrong place at the wrong time?

Is this a rhetorical question? in a public building in 21st century America is the definition of the wrong place at the wrong time to be smoking.

AnonoBoy · 09-02-2010 03:44PM

Bambi wrote: »

This isn't nam smokeys, this is bowling..there are rules

Let me tell you if that security guard pulled any crazy **** with me, flashed a piece out on the lanes. I'd take it away from him, stick it up his ass and pull the f*cking trigger 'til it goes click.

jackiebaron · 09-02-2010 04:02PM

Stercus Accidit wrote: »

He had it legally, deal with it.

The issue is whether or not he was defending himself, nobody should be obligated to be beaten up while on their job. He had the gun for defence, legally, if he defended himself in accordance with the law; rather than some other possibility, he is in the right.

He may have had a permit to carry a concealed firearm but I'd be VERY interested to know if the proprietors of the bowling alley knew that their security guard was armed. I'm quite certain that they would have told him not to carry his gun while working on their premises or else go find another job. You're missing the point when you're arguing the legality of this guy carrying a weapon. A bowling alley is no place for an armed guard especially a 54 year old ex-prison guard with a chip on his shoulder and probably an axe to grind against anyone who doesn't show him "respect". If you need to have a security at a bowling alley to get rid of rowdy drunks then employ one or two heavies who work out at the gym, don't lose their tempers and can handle themselves in a brawl.
If I owned a night club or beach-bar or some family joint like a local amusement park and needed security in case there was ever any trouble and the security company sent me some guy armed with a gun or bat or samurai sword I'd send him packing straight away no matter what kind of permits he had.

Just because the guy holds a permit to legally carry a weapon doesn't mean he is allowed to bring it to, and wear it at, his job.

You seem to think that just because it's "legal" then it's justifiable. If a mentally retarded or autistic kid flips out, breaks away from his mother and runs over and starts slapping me I'm not going to beat that kid to a bloody pulp or kill the poor, troubled soul even though according to you I would be legally defending myself from attack.
Barmen and bouncers deal with drunken upstarts all the time. They don't pull out a gun and shoot them. They sling them out on their asses.

The bowling alley guy followed them outside after he threw them out for smoking. Why? Did he want to provoke a fight further? Did he actually want them to make a go for him? Two soft targets, nicely drunk, easy to provoke...and off the boat too...very easy to wind up with a few anti-Irish jibes. Maybe, maybe not...but this guy could easily have just locked the door after dumping these guys out but he chose to take it further.

Either this guy wanted to be macho by bringing his gun to his dead-end job hoping to use it on some punk and the owners didn't know he was tooled up or they DID know he was armed and ought to now be contacting the best lawyers they can find.

AnonoBoy · 09-02-2010 04:06PM

jackiebaron wrote: »

He may have had a permit to carry a concealed firearm but I'd be VERY interested to know if the proprietors of the bowling alley knew that their security guard was armed. I'm quite certain that they would have told him not to carry his gun while working on their premises or else go find another job. You're missing the point when you're arguing the legality of this guy carrying a weapon. A bowling alley is no place for an armed guard especially a 54 year old ex-prison guard with a chip on his shoulder and probably an axe to grind against anyone who doesn't show him "respect". If you need to have a security at a bowling alley to get rid of rowdy drunks then employ one or two heavies who work out at the gym, don't lose their tempers and can handle themselves in a brawl.
If I owned a night club or beach-bar or some family joint like a local amusement park and needed security in case there was ever any trouble and the security company sent me some guy armed with a gun or bat or samurai sword I'd send him packing straight away no matter what kind of permits he had.

Just because the guy holds a permit to legally carry a weapon doesn't mean he is allowed to bring it to, and wear it at, his job.

You seem to think that just because it's "legal" then it's justifiable. If a mentally retarded or autistic kid flips out, breaks away from his mother and runs over and starts slapping me I'm not going to beat that kid to a bloody pulp or kill the poor, troubled soul even though according to you I would be legally defending myself from attack.
Barmen and bouncers deal with drunken upstarts all the time. They don't pull out a gun and shoot them. They sling them out on their asses.

The bowling alley guy followed them outside after he threw them out for smoking. Why? Did he want to provoke a fight further? Did he actually want them to make a go for him? Two soft targets, nicely drunk, easy to provoke...and off the boat too...very easy to wind up with a few anti-Irish jibes. Maybe, maybe not...but this guy could easily have just locked the door after dumping these guys out but he chose to take it further.

Either this guy wanted to be macho by bringing his gun to his dead-end job hoping to use it on some punk and the owners didn't know he was tooled up or they DID know he was armed and ought to now be contacting the best lawyers they can find.

Or maybe the bowling alley did know he carried a gun and you're just speculating wildly....

jackiebaron · 09-02-2010 04:40PM

AnonoBoy wrote: »

Or maybe the bowling alley did know he carried a gun and you're just speculating wildly....

The employers of armed guards are legally responsible for any use of force. I'm only speculating here but I'm guessing that this guy was not employed by the bowling alley as an armed guard, per se. Why would you need an armed guard at a bowling alley? Instead he was employed as a bog-standard security bod who happened to have his own private weapons permit. If that's the case then this guy is in serious trouble since he used his own personal weapon in the conduct of his work duties where a firearm was not required.

Armed guards are for one thing only at that is to protect against the very real threat of deadly force such as celebrity assasination, armed robbery, etc. You don't need an armed guard patrolling the science museum or department store. You just need a guy to watch out for petty theft or vandalism or in the case of the bowling alley a guy who can throw out drunks much like a bouncer.

arybvtcw0eolkf · 09-02-2010 04:46PM

jackiebaron wrote: »

You must live in a perpetual world of paralyzing fear if you think that it's reassuring to have an armed rent-a-cop at a bowling alley.

Yup, I'm terrified of everything :rolleyes:

First off its not unusual to see armed security in the USA.

Secondly, and to me, more important. What in all reality do people think the security guy should have done - not acted, get beat up and possibly be disarmed and shot dead by his assailants with his own weapon?.

The guy acted in self defence, and I know we have a reputation as 'the thick Paddy', but these two went out to prove it ffs!. Smoking in an area they know is illegal, get chucked out, attack the security - the man produces a weapon & shouts a warning (at this stage most people would back off) and our hero's attack him a second time!.

They're lucky to have escaped with flesh wounds, bet they don't pull that crap again.

There's no smoke without fire!.

EMMA DEE · 09-02-2010 04:46PM

what kind of jump up yank!!!bring s a gun, to what is mean t to be a family set enviroment!!!! and for smoking, people that think that the two lads deserved this, seriously need a reality check!!!to get shot for smoking is a JOKE. the man was a retired corrections officer obviously on a power trip, he deserves everything he gets and more, he could have killed them two young lads!!!murderers and sex offenders don t get a bullet!!but for smoking!!!yeah everyone that is on this forum that is against these young lads has a brain!!! i mean brain dead!!! and also they don t know the full story!!!!but and the end of the day, they had to deal with an america, and what does the majority of the world think of american s , dumb as ****!!!! go back and eat yourselves happy!!!!

arybvtcw0eolkf · 09-02-2010 04:48PM

EMMA DEE wrote: »

what kind of jump up yank!!!bring s a gun, to what is mean t to be a family set enviroment!!!! and for smoking, people that think that the two lads deserved this, seriously need a reality check!!!to get shot for smoking is a JOKE. the man was a retired corrections officer obviously on a power trip, he deserves everything he gets and more, he could have killed them two young lads!!!murderers and sex offenders don t get a bullet!!but for smoking!!!yeah everyone that is on this forum that is against these young lads has a brain!!! i mean brain dead!!! and also they don t know the full story!!!!but and the end of the day, they had to deal with an america, and what does the majority of the world think of american s , dumb as ****!!!! go back and eat yourselves happy!!!!

OH my eye's!.

biko · 09-02-2010 05:08PM

EMMA DEE wrote: »

what kind of jump up yank!!!bring s a gun, to what is mean t to be a family set enviroment!!!! and for smoking, people that think that the two lads deserved this, seriously need a reality check!!!to get shot for smoking is a JOKE. the man was a retired corrections officer obviously on a power trip, he deserves everything he gets and more, he could have killed them two young lads!!!murderers and sex offenders don t get a bullet!!but for smoking!!!yeah everyone that is on this forum that is against these young lads has a brain!!! i mean brain dead!!! and also they don t know the full story!!!!but and the end of the day, they had to deal with an america, and what does the majority of the world think of american s , dumb as ****!!!! go back and eat yourselves happy!!!!

Wooo hold your horses there little missy.

It's easier to read if you use paragraphs, not some many exclamation marks etcetera.
Welcome to boards by the way

Stercus Accidit · 09-02-2010 05:09PM

They got shot for smoking? Ah yeah, best way to quit sure :rolleyes:

prinz · 09-02-2010 05:57PM

jackiebaron wrote: »

The employers of armed guards are legally responsible for any use of force. I'm only speculating here but I'm guessing that this guy was not employed by the bowling alley as an armed guard, per se. Why would you need an armed guard at a bowling alley?..
Armed guards are for one thing only at that is to protect against the very real threat of deadly force such as celebrity assasination, armed robbery, etc. You don't need an armed guard patrolling the science museum or department store.

Sorry Jackie, but seems to me you've never been Stateside :pac: Almost every business in any sort of built up area will have armed guards on site.

You know what they say about when you assume.

Overheal · 09-02-2010 05:57PM

Stercus Accidit wrote: »

They got shot for smoking? Ah yeah, best way to quit sure :rolleyes:

I think I saw that in a movie once...

But no they got shot for attacking the bouncer.

Jackie Baron wrote:

Barmen and bouncers deal with drunken upstarts all the time. They don't pull out a gun and shoot them. They sling them out on their asses.

How many bouncers do you know in their mid fifties that take on sober late 20-somethings at 2:1 odds?

You don't get to decide how much force was necessary - the courts do.

prinz · 09-02-2010 06:00PM

EMMA DEE wrote: »

people that think that the two lads deserved this, seriously need a reality check!!!to get shot for smoking is a JOKE.

They didn't get shot for smoking. They got asked to leave, probably because they refused to stop smoking after having being asked. Then outside they started a physical confrontation with the guard, yeah they were asking for it tbh.

As for all the concerns about it being a "safe family place", it may have been when the reporters visit on a Saturday afternoon, but I wonder how many happy families are doing their bowling at 2 am?

Mrmoe · 09-02-2010 07:36PM

Maybe they pulled one of these on the security guard when lighting their cigarette

http://www.zodiacgift.com/cgibin/store.cgi?command=product&item=rp-colt45

It is best to hold judgement as without looking at the CCTV no one has any facts about what went down. Everything else is just speculation. I wonder why he didn't fire a warning shot?

brianthebard · 09-02-2010 07:50PM

Overheal wrote: »

Obviously the investigation would say for sure but at the moment it sounds as though they grabbed him; he pulled the gun; they backed up; he warned them off; they chose to attack him anyway; then he shot in defense.

Sounds nothing like that to me tbh. Were you reading a different article?

Dyr · 09-02-2010 08:11PM

jackiebaron wrote: »

[QUOTE=Stercus Accidit;64388906
He shot as he was trained to in self defence, at the centre of mass, and I'm impressed he was able to keep cool enough to hit them each once, if he was being attacked.

QUOTE]

Would you like to see movie theatre ushers armed with Barettas along with their flashlights?

Absolutely not. They should be mounting a surefire tactical light on the beretta, rather than using flashlights.

dotsman · 09-02-2010 08:45PM

If only we could get that security guard over to Ireland. There's a lot more scum over here that need sorting out that our judicial system is incapable of handling.

Fair play to the security guard.

AnonoBoy · 09-02-2010 09:02PM

EMMA DEE wrote: »

and also they don t know the full story!!!!

You don't either.

(This is the only bit of your attempt at a post I could decipher)

jackiebaron wrote: »

I'm only speculating here.

Yes. Yes you are. And making a whole host of assumptions and statements on that speculation.

Overheal · 09-02-2010 09:16PM

brianthebard wrote: »

Sounds nothing like that to me tbh. Were you reading a different article?

According to the official, words were exchanged and the two men “put their hands” on Mr. Iavecchio. He pulled out a .380-caliber Ruger pistol, but the men “go back at him and he shoots,” the official said.

Bowling? It can be a right pain in the.. er stomach?

Comments