Rusty Calls for "Common Sense Limits on Freedom of Assembly, Nightclub Control"
233 people killed. 233! The culprit? A semi-automatic carrying crazy thug? Nope, a fire in a nightclub.It kind of puts the whole gun control argument in perspective, doesn't it? Think about the five essential freedoms in the First Amendment: Speech, press, religion, petition, and assembly. When is the "conversation" going to start about limiting the number of people allowed in a nightclub? To get this "conversation" going, let me propose limiting the number to, say, 10. Any nightclub with more than 10 people in it are dangerous. What if there was a fire? If you had 11 people in the nightclub there would be 11 dead. But with 10, only 10 dead. Capiche? And do you really need more than 10 people in a nightclub? Look, I'm not trying to put nightclubs out of business. I'm not saying you can't go to a nightclub. I just want reasonable regulations on nightclubs. I personally go nightclubbing all the time. Nightclubs are part of our heritage, part of the American tradition. I mean, if you grew up and your dad gave you a disco ball when you were ten and that became part of your family's traditions, you can see why you'd be pretty protective of that. No one is going to take away your disco ball. No one is going to take away your glowsticks, your ecstasy, condom machines in the women's bathroom, or your Eurotrash rave music. But why can't you see that no one needs more than 10 people at a nightclub? That's reasonable. With an additional mandatory background check for every one entering the nightclub, we should be able to save millions -- nay, billions -- of lives. Also, we should do away with nightclubs that look like they could hold more than 10 people. You know, scary assault-nightclubs:
A nightclub fire killed at least 233 people in southern Brazil early on Sunday when a band's pyrotechnics show set the building ablaze and fleeing partygoers stampeded toward blocked and overcrowded exits in the ensuing panic, officials said.Now if only the powerful nightclub lobby wasn't so good at mobilizing naive young urbanites, we'd be able to get nightclub control right away.
Yeah, Nana, I'm looking at you!!
Posted by: Jedi Master Ivyan at January 28, 2013 12:27 PM
Posted by: Bubbe at January 28, 2013 12:43 PM
The Fire Marshall there rated the club capacity at 1000. There were 2000 inside. So its not as if new laws will make them obey the old laws?
But again a limit of ten would have meant there would only been 2o people in the club and save 1980 lives!
Posted by: Darth Odie at January 28, 2013 01:06 PM
I know i'm bad. Sorry just read about some more of dear leader & Dumocrat proposels for us.
can I still get Soc. Sec.they are owing me in Russia or China?
Posted by: Kafiroon at January 28, 2013 02:31 PM
Think like a Democrat, Bubbe: limiting them to 10 patrons would actually increase employment in the hospitality industry because those 2000 patrons would require 200 clubs with a separate bartender, janitor and DJ for each one; the mega club probably only hired a staff of twenty or so.
And if they buy drinks with unemployment checks it'll really super stimulate the economy, right Mrs Pelosi?
Posted by: Storm Saxon's Gall Bladder at January 28, 2013 03:38 PM
Posted by: EROWMER at January 28, 2013 03:45 PM
Posted by: jim at January 28, 2013 08:38 PM
Posted by: Frank at January 28, 2013 09:07 PM
Posted by: Storm Saxon's Gall Bladder at January 28, 2013 10:46 PM
Posted by: twinbubdum at January 29, 2013 04:13 AM
Posted by: twinbubdum at January 29, 2013 04:15 AM
Processing 0.0, elapsed 0.0058 seconds.
15 queries taking 0.0041 seconds, 19 records returned.
Page size 11 kb.
Powered by Minx 0.7 alpha.