Slog: News & Arts

RSS icon Comments on Shooting Outside Tommy's in U-District


Hmm, a black guy looses it and starts shooting people for no reason. How, well, expected.

Posted by Jerry | June 22, 2007 7:28 AM

So this is the second recent shooting outside Tommy's -- when the hell is Mayor Gridlock going to shut that place down? Or does a member of a local major league sports team have to be involved in the altercations for that to take place?

Posted by Louise | June 22, 2007 7:30 AM

Hmm, a bigot who doesn't know how to spell "loses." How, well, expected.

Posted by bitch on heels | June 22, 2007 7:36 AM

@3. anonymous internet personality refutes statistically accurate portrayal of gun violence with name calling. how, well, expected.

thugs will be thugs, I don't see how shutting down tommy's is going to put an end to gun violence.

Posted by seattle98104 | June 22, 2007 7:43 AM

Yum, a hot steaming bowl of vibrancy.

Posted by jimmy | June 22, 2007 7:43 AM

If Tommy's is such a problem, why aren't the police there to patrol the area?

Posted by police | June 22, 2007 7:47 AM

But shutting down Tommy's will put an end to gun violence THERE. Just because you can't solve all the world's problems at a stroke doesn't mean you can't solve one of them.

Posted by Fnarf | June 22, 2007 7:49 AM



Posted by Mr. Poe | June 22, 2007 7:51 AM

#7: Don't be so sure. The U-District has a long history of gun violence that dates back to before Tommy's.

Posted by well | June 22, 2007 7:54 AM

Incidents like these is the reason I became a hermit. That and the old, fat, and bald thing.

Posted by elswingere | June 22, 2007 7:55 AM

Um. OK.

And "thug" isn't calling someone a name? And statistics aren't easily interpretable according to your own biases and personal slants? And #1 was quoting statistics?

Posted by bitch on heels | June 22, 2007 7:59 AM

@1: If you had an embassy, I'd totally burn it down.

Posted by Ziggity | June 22, 2007 8:02 AM

Anyone know where all the cops cars were heading around 7:45 last night. I saw at least ten speeding down 12th Ave around Cherry street last night with full lights and sirens. It seems like it was something big given that many cops in rapid succession but I haven't seen anything in the news.

Posted by Giffy | June 22, 2007 8:04 AM

I'm with #13. There was a police helicopter too, but no mention of anything this morning.

Posted by kid icarus | June 22, 2007 8:07 AM

IF club owners were allowed to hire off duty SPD to work outside of nightclubs this shooting probably would not have happened. IF SPD were to arrest people who get into fights outside of nightclubs and prosecute them for assault on a regular basis, this may have been avoided. IF there was a nightlife advisory board that could have been working with Tommy's to help them implement 'best practices' to deal with problem nights, this might have been avoided.

These are things the nightlife industry has been asking for for two years that the city has refused to adopt. Instead of putting programs into place to help deal with these things before they happen, the city wants to implement a new level of bureaucracy in the form of yet another business license for nightclubs (they already need several licenses to open) that is purely reactive and only serves to close a club like this after a series of bad events.

We don't know all the facts in this case, but it seems like Tommy's has been promoting a night that brings in a crowd with it a lot of problems. But this night they removed some of the problem folks. Those people then tried to fight the bouncers. If off duty police were working outside, these dudes would have been arrested. Instead one left, got a gun he probably had in his car, and came back. No nightclub license would have stopped this. Good policing could have, off duty cops could have, a nightlife advisory board working with Tommy's to have better security, etc, might have helped.

Let's hope now the council will pass the recommendations of the SNMA quickly.

Posted by Meinert | June 22, 2007 8:11 AM

Sing it, Meinert. When are you going to run for City Council? You have my vote.

Posted by bitch on heels | June 22, 2007 8:15 AM

Who bets last night was hip hop night at Tommys?

Posted by curious | June 22, 2007 8:20 AM

No law will save us from useless loosers.

Trash begets trash.

The point is, stay away from places like this.

If you live around there, move away.

You wouldn't want to live/play around a toxic waste site, these places are no better.

The useless will always be with us.

Posted by old timer | June 22, 2007 8:21 AM

Meinert, you beat me to it.

And as far as running for city council goes, I love you, but not yet.

Posted by It's Mark Mitchell | June 22, 2007 8:24 AM

@1 Unlike white guys (or boys) who lose it, plot the murder of (insert here(parents, classmates, young girls, women in general), although most likely those of the female gender, sometimes in multiples and the stastics of these alarmingly frequent incidents are rarely spoken of, never called out related to gender (Amish shooting and the guy in the other school), and never linked together, which is um to be expected.

All that said, regardless of race or gender, hauling off and shooting people as a means to work through your own issues/weaknesses/perceptions is fucked.

Posted by stone | June 22, 2007 8:31 AM

guns and alcohol: the answer to, and the cause of all life's problems.

Posted by brad | June 22, 2007 8:31 AM

@1- I agree with the thought behind his comment. Unfortunately the spelling kinda makes it less valid...? A hip- hop night (I'm assuming here) with baggy- clothed "ethnic" folks + alcohol= violence. And since all their heroes/ idols are gun- toting macho fools....Gee, wonder why he did that?

Posted by ol' jibblers | June 22, 2007 8:36 AM

Since the nightclub licensing ordinance is effectively dead, I have had the Central Staff develop an African-American licensing ordinance, applicable to all African-American club patrons who frequent establishments after 11:00 p.m.

The license, which will cost $300 and be administered by the Department of Executive Services and Seattle Police Department, will establish background checks and rigid rules for African-Americans wishing to partake of Seattle's vibrant nightlife, while ensuring the safety of the surrounding community.

Posted by Gregg Nikkkels | June 22, 2007 8:41 AM

Did Eli oversleep? Where's the morning news?

Posted by It's Mark Mitchell | June 22, 2007 8:48 AM

I'm with Fnarf...shut that place down. I've lived in the neighborhood for a couple years now and it's obvious to me that Tommy's is marketing directly to rowdy and violent people (of all colors by the way, asshole @1). If Tommy's is going to continue to deliberately attract the ugly element of our community to that bar, fill them full of liquor and turn them loose on the street, then fuck Tommy's. I'm tired of putting up with that place - I don't see the same problems from other bars in the area (for now at least).

Posted by Hernandez | June 22, 2007 8:50 AM

If you hear a lot of sirens, you can usually figure out where/what it's all about by looking here:

Posted by Medic | June 22, 2007 8:50 AM

It is interesting how criminal behavior tracks with race and gender in often surprising ways.

For example historically white men have set themselves up as the rational stable sector of humanity, yet almost every single serial killer and most spree killers have been white. Blacks, especially black men, on the other hand have been cast as the irrational crazies of humanity. However most black violence seems to be centered around the pursuit of power, influence, and goods, which, while not legal or moral, is at least somewhat rational. Woman have been humanities nurtures, yet it is often women who decide to kill all their children.

Personally I think that socio-economic and cultural pressure can explain all of this as, well there just isn't any biological basis for these kind of behavior differences, but it is interesting that they do turn our historical prejudices on their heads.

Posted by Giffy | June 22, 2007 8:56 AM

From KIRO (the only channel that's covered it so far:)

SEATTLE -- A man wounded in a shooting in Seattle's University District early Friday morning suffered life-threatening injuries, police said.

Shell casings marked the street and the sidewalk outside Tommy's Nightclub and Grill in the 4700 block of University Way Northeast where the shooting happened at about 1 a.m.

Police said they found a weapon and arrested two men.

The victim, who is in his 20s, was taken to Harborview Medical Center

Posted by Newsie | June 22, 2007 9:01 AM

@13 & 14:
The majority of "high incident" (the ones where they bomb along with lights and sirens) go unreported in the media.

*ANY* call involving any type of physical violence means they flip the lights on.

If the 911 caller even thinks they see a gun or a knife the response protocol is changed and every available officer should be on the way to the call.

If the call turns out to be bs, then everyone ratchets their adrenaline down to more functional levels and goes to work. It's usually not reported in the media because nine times out of ten it's just two people hollering and screaming at each other.

I've been following the slog opinions on the Police accountability issue, and most officers (and by most I mean all but the smallest percentage) are honest when it comes to evidence. They hold the same opinions of their jackass coworkers as the rest of the public. But their careers and their safety is jeopardized when they speak up. That's just how it is. What would you have them do?

Posted by former pd | June 22, 2007 9:03 AM

Thanks for the link. I am thinking it was one of these

6/21/2007 7:46:06 PM F070057606 A5 3rd Av / Yesler Way Aid Response

6/21/2007 7:30:07 PM F070057605 E13 M10 1534 Cherrylane Pl S Medic Response

Though it seems odd that that many cops would respond and one right after the other. The was an assault with weapons around that time, but in the opposite direction.

Posted by Giffy | June 22, 2007 9:07 AM

@25 - it might be that Tommy's needs to be closed. Under the SNMA proposal there would be an commission that people could complain to about a problem venue. The commission would investigate. If they found the venue could improve their business practices, they would first try to work with the venue to implement best practices, etc. If the venue refused to work to solve their problems, the commission would recommend to the city that the city ask the liquor control board to suspend the venues license. Under a new state law, the liquor board needs to act on this. This is a tool for the city to deal with problem venues. We know they exist and the majority of venue owners want the bad operators to go away - but only with a fair system that works towards solutions, not punishment of all nightlife venues. In addition, there needs to be other tools, like off duty police, that venue owners can use to deal with the problem. Other businesses - the Mariners, The Paramount, Bite of Seattle, are allowed to hire police to help with crowd control. It's an effective tool. Nightclubs used to be allowed to do this about 2 years ago this was stopped. All of this combined with more officers on the beat assigned to busy areas at busy times actively enforcing current laws would probably cure this problem without putting a system in place that threatens the health of the whole industry. And we need the SPD to arrest violent people on the street, not just get them out of the area. And fools like the one in the video should be ticketed for disturbing the peace. But that takes Police being there and actively enforcing current laws.

Seems simple.

Posted by Meinert | June 22, 2007 9:08 AM

Meinert wrote:

But this night [Tommy's] removed some of the problem folks. Those people then tried to fight the bouncers. If off duty police were working outside, these dudes would have been arrested. Instead one left, got a gun he probably had in his car, and came back.

At what point did the bouncers call the police? How many bystanders whipped out their mobile phones and called the police? How long was it from the time the police were called until the shooting started? Who sold the handgun to this murderer?

I don't think we should have private police forces. I believe that even hard-core libertarians will tell you that law enforcement should remain a public service. Let's not privatize it.

It seems like a bad idea to set up a system in which those who need policing pay for it, because that will easily become a system in which those who don't pay for policing don't get it.

Also, I'm not completely settled on this, but I don't think I like the idea of people working as security guards -- people whose other job happens to be police officer -- wearing their police uniforms while working as security guards.

We seem to have a relatively non-corrupt police force in Seattle, and yet we have officers planting evidence, using excessive force, and falsifying police reports. Even when it is caught on video, we have a police chief trying to cover-up the incident, exonerating those officers, and strong-arming the press and local government into ignoring his overriding of the only check on his authority that exists.

Imagine how much worse that situation could grow if we had police doing police work -- exerting the authority of their uniforms -- off-duty and under even less scrutiny. No thanks.

I do not wish to live in a police state.

Posted by Phil M | June 22, 2007 9:09 AM

Slog commenters make me so sad sometimes. White man pride week is every week.

Posted by jamier | June 22, 2007 9:14 AM

Thanks former pd,

That makes sense I had just not seen that many in a row in some time. Maybe they were all at a meeting or at the station for some reason and it was just a coincidence that they were in a row opposed to coming in form different places. Possibly they all responded to the weapons call that came in before the call that lead them past SU.

As for police accountability. I have to agree with you completely. Most people are cops its a decent job and they want to serve the community. However as you say there are the small minority that are there for the wrong reasons. I think we have to figure out a way to get them out and empower the good comps to speak out becasue well a trusted and effective police force keeps us all safe.
I would add that getting rid of the crimes of use and possession i.e. drugs would make abuses harder to perpetrate.

Posted by Giffy | June 22, 2007 9:15 AM

Giffy wrote:

Anyone know where all the cops cars were heading around 7:45 last night. I saw at least ten speeding down 12th Ave around Cherry street last night with full lights and sirens. It seems like it was something big given that many cops in rapid succession but I haven't seen anything in the news.

Anyone know what happened on 14th a block or two east of Union Sunday afternoon? I was driving westbound and saw three police cars parked on side streets and one blocking the entire westbound lane. I parked and asked an officer who was walking down the street why 14th was blocked. He said it was there because the officer who drives it was inside the house. This didn't make sense, so I questioned him further. He said there had been an incident to which the entire East Precinct responded, and that a few minutes earlier there had been 20 cars there. When I asked what happened, he said, "We were doing police work," and walked away.

Posted by Phil m | June 22, 2007 9:16 AM
Posted by stinkbug | June 22, 2007 9:26 AM

How 'bout next time you put that video camera down and call the police yourself. Bunch of looky-loos. This is what's wrong with people. Everyone's so passive-agressive, afraid to do something. If anyone of those bystanders or the guy video taping the fight would've called cops to report it as soon as it happened, maybe it would've ended up different. Especially if they got numerous calls...and especially if it was from the club themselves since this guy was a repeat offender (been bounced out in the past).

Posted by FS | June 22, 2007 9:27 AM


The fresh sign lit up @ Krispy Kreme.

Posted by Mr. Poe | June 22, 2007 9:27 AM

At the risk of baiting the racists even more, what exactly is meant by "Tommy’s has been promoting a night that brings in a crowd with it a lot of problems"?

Posted by wf | June 22, 2007 9:30 AM

Meh, this stuff happens. boohoo.

Posted by Bellevue Ave | June 22, 2007 9:34 AM


I knew I forgot something in that post....
So shift change for early swing shift and briefing for graveyard shift is right about that time (7:45), they could have all cleared briefing for the call. More likely is the possibility that the early swings officers were finishing up on their reports for the day and had to get back in their cars and go to the call.

Honestly, I'm at a loss how to deal with the bad cop issue. It's an impossible task. Most of the good ones just don't associate in any way with the bad ones because they don't want to go near any of the shit they pull. Bad cops write bad reports, get too arrogant and eventually get caught. Eventually. For me, that word eventually sticks in my throat. Eventually is too long to wait for protection from the people who are supposed to be the protectors.

It's an issue that every law enforcement officer has battled and struggled with.

Posted by former pd | June 22, 2007 9:36 AM

What the hell does being white have to do with it? You think that shooter was a "black man"? Bullshit. He was an asshole, and a pathetic excuse for a black man or any other kind of a man. I don't think very many black people want people like that representing THEM. It's not about being black or white, it's about meeting the standards of a civil society.

Most black people don't shoot up nightclubs like that. Most black people don't GO to nightclubs like that. To suggest that that shooter, or that club, is representative of any kind of black culture is sad and offensive.

Meinert is correct that no license could have stopped this. But not having the nightclub in the first place would have.

Posted by Fnarf | June 22, 2007 9:42 AM

Thanks for all the info PD. That's all good stuff to know.

Posted by It's Mark Mitchell | June 22, 2007 9:42 AM

fnarf - 'no nightclubs' is not a solution. The kid who did the shooting was violent, had a gun. For all we know he's used it before, and if it wasn't here, he most likely would have used it somewhere.

Thing is, nightclubs, music, dancing, culture - these are good things. The city wants them. They add to the city's cultural landscape, vibrancy, draw young professionals to Seattle, and the industry brings in millions of dollars per year to the city coffers. And there is a demand by people to have places like these to go. Responding to a complex situation with a legislative sledgehammer like a nightclub license, or just 'shutting it down", is lazy policymaking that will harm the good venues while not solving the problem of people behaving badly. Responding to last nights shooting at Tommy's by closing Tommy's would be a Bush-esque whack-a-mole solution. We need more intelligent policy. It's not rocket science, it just takes some creative thought and requires the politicians to work with the industry to come up with real solutions. The solution has been presented to the city many times, it is time for the city to take it seriously and act on it.

Posted by Meinert | June 22, 2007 9:53 AM


Yes. Let's get rid of the nightclub. From this point on, any nightclub with episodes of violent acts will be shut down. After we get used to shutting nightclubs down, we'll start shutting down everything else that was the host for any violent acts. From Tommy's to High Schools, from High Schools to your home.

If it could save one life!

Posted by Mr. Poe | June 22, 2007 9:54 AM

Fnarf, you're assuming that another club wont just spring up and cater to these people.

Posted by Bellevue Ave | June 22, 2007 9:59 AM

Ok, I used to work @ Tommy's and here's the thing. I know the cops that patrol the U. District, I know them well. We are on a first name basis, I saw them almost every night. They are NOT bad cops, they do their jobs well and arrived quickly whenever they were called. And they were called often. I dialed the 911 at least six times in my two years of employment. That should say something right there. It is the environment... Too much testosterone + loads of alcohol= BAD NEWS. Any Bartender will tell you that. I can't explain violence and shootings, but it happens, it happens everywhere. Closing the bar and blaming cops is not the answer. The bouncers at Tommy's work hard, they see when things are out of hand and their #1 concern is to get the problems outside. They do their jobs well. They know when to call the cops, and they do. Added security may help the situation, but when it comes down to it, if someone has a gun and wants to use it, no amount of security can prevent that. Was the gun inside the bar? No. Shit Happens.

Posted by robin | June 22, 2007 10:12 AM

No, the city does not "want these things". And that guy was not preprogrammed to blow off his gun last night; he blew it off because he couldn't handle his emotions in that setting. To suggest that he would have gone out shooting regardless is just ridiculous. No nightclub, no shooting.

Mr. Poe, I do hope you and Bellevue Ave will make the time to go visit this guy's victims and explain your "so what" philosophy to them. I'm sure they will be very understanding. It's just one life -- mustn't let that get in the way of clubs like this's mandate to exist. After all, they do SO MUCH for the city.

One of the problems I have with apologists for the nightclub industry is their continued insistence that there's no way anyone could possibly tell beforehand what kinds of clubs are going to have violence. Bullshit. You can tell. And it's not a "black" thing either; I've unfortunately been around plenty of lily-white clubs that had the same problems with fights (no shootings, though). I'd love to see them all shut down as well.

Do they bring money into the city? So what? Lots of things that are illegal are lucrative. Should we legalize murder for hire because it's good for the economy?

No sympathy at all for this club or any other like it, sorry. I'm sure we'll get lots of promises and "working with the community" chin music, but I'm not listening.

Posted by Fnarf | June 22, 2007 10:14 AM


I have sympathy for the victims. Nobody asked for that to happen. Nobody wants something like that to happen.

To strip down a place that provides entertainment to many to prevent any possible violence is absurd. Violence occurs everywhere, for many reasons. Shit happens. All of the time. To start banning things and closing down establishments because you feel they provide nothing to the city (whatever the fuck that means) is ridiculous.

"A man was shot last night."
Uh, he wouldn't have been shot if there were no gun. Dumb dumb dumb dumb dumb.

"A man was shot last night at a nightclub."
Uh, he wouldn't have been shot at the nightclub if the nightclub weren't there. Dumb dumb dumb dumb dumb.

"A man jumped off the roof of a building today."
Uh, he wouldn't have jumped off the building if the building weren't there. Dumb dumb dumb dumb dumb.

Posted by Mr. Poe | June 22, 2007 10:23 AM

oooh, fnarf is trying to win this debate on emotion alone! "Go talk to the victim." HA!

The thing is Fnarf, you dont legalize murder for hire because it's good for the economy because there is a 100% risk of someone being murdered in that industry. Thats not good. Also, you dont give out hyperbolic logically leaping suggestions that no one agrees with to make a point.

If you really cared about saving one life you wouldnt be chasing clubs and bars around. the ratio of death in benefit is fairly low for bars and clubs. Youd be going after cars, low income areas, etc etc.

You just did the human thing and looked and let your emotions guide your appraisal of risk. We forgive you for being human fnarf.

Posted by Bellevue Ave | June 22, 2007 10:24 AM

I live across the street from Tommy's, and as regular as clockwork, Thursday and Sunday nights have violent arguments and screaming matches you can hear on the 6th floor. I won't blame it on hiphop- I love lurid tales of macho violence as much as the next guy. But I do think Tommy's is run by irresponsible jackoffs who intentionally draw the worst out in humanity by throwing cheap liquor down the throats of disgusting-ass gangsta wanna-be fratboys and their local drug dealers (of all races). Thursday night? I don't know much about it, but I do know there's no cover charge at the door. Sunday night? Cheaper alcohol... I've heard very believable rumors that Tommy's intentionally ups the alcohol contents of its drinks and is relaxed about checking IDs, in an effort to bring in more college kids. Also that Tommy's and a few other U District places have crazy high rates of roofie-slipping pervs, and that a girl was raped IN THE BAR a few years ago. I'm surprised no one slogged about the last shooting there. Yes, no one got fatally hot, but there were TWO gunmen, one of which had a larger calibre handgun. I could tell by the booms. Neither of those fucks got caught. One of them was IDed, but only after he ditched the evidence. C'est lavie. The point: Burn Tommy's, kill the owners, and firebomb frat row. Not seriously, but still. Fuck these toxic freaks.

Posted by christopher | June 22, 2007 10:27 AM

Yeah, those hip hop nights, causing problems. Oh wait, I guess not:
Every Thursday College Night
featuring DJ Element
Free with student I.D.


Posted by just the facts | June 22, 2007 10:29 AM

Sure, nightclubs are bad.

But people shoot at cops/security in Green Lake, too. In fact, they did so last night.

Obviously, we need a community dialogue and an advisory council to facilitate a compromise regarding the lake situation.

Posted by frederick r | June 22, 2007 10:45 AM

At Tommys we poured cheap drinks for cheap students. If they had too much we cut them off. We carded regularly and fastidiously. Sometimes maybe a few youngsters may have slipped in. But the occasional minor in the club is not the issue. A 19 year old Sorostitute is not going to shoot anyone.

Posted by robin | June 22, 2007 10:45 AM

I remember there being a shooting not over a year ago in the U-District on 50th. I was riding the bus home late at night and saw all these cop cars.

Apparently it was a house party and things got heated and someone was shot. Now I think we can say that house parties arent sources of violence but how can you be so cold towards the victim(s)? We should ban house parties because saving one life is worth it!

Also one of my co-worker's relatives (baby's daddy's brother) was shot and killed in a fast food parking lot in March. Obviously we should close down fast food establishments that are open later than 10 to save one life.

are you getting it?

Posted by Bellevue Ave | June 22, 2007 10:49 AM

Thank God Denny's closed. That establishment was just waiting to kill someone.

Posted by Mr. Poe | June 22, 2007 10:51 AM

Violent frat/testosterone cases can be discouraged from visiting a bar or club. Ownership or management decides what kind of place they're going to have, and they set about to create it. That's how it works. Some assholes don't give a fuck about who their customers are as long as they have money to spend.

Bad example: Tommy's, apparently.
Good example: The War Room

Posted by It's Mark Mitchell | June 22, 2007 10:52 AM

Mr. Poe, your logic is flawed. In America, it is not a freedom to go to a nightclub. It's a benefit. That benefit must be taken away if it could save hope for someone.

Posted by jeff g | June 22, 2007 10:53 AM

i can't wrap my head around a lot of these comments. so much is running through my mind right now i can't begin to write any kind of coherent response.

current mood: disappointed :(

Posted by shelbis | June 22, 2007 10:54 AM

in fact i think all women over the age of 18 should be let in free of charge. The more women at a club the less reason to fight.

Posted by Bellevue Ave | June 22, 2007 10:57 AM

I think it's telling that their "all-ages" night is 18+ only. Fools. It's 18+, not "all-ages", they shouldn't falsely advertise.

I checked their drink menu. Holy cow, those pitchers are cheap. $2 from 9-10PM on Thursdays!

Posted by dum | June 22, 2007 10:58 AM

Apparently, shelbis, neither can Jeff G.

Posted by Mr. Poe | June 22, 2007 10:58 AM

Mr. Mitchell, I can't really argue w/ you there. The owner of Tommy's owns the bar b/c he wants to make money. Should we close everybar in the U. District b/c it's to close to UW and the frat boys??? That's where they go...It's walking distance. Should there be a rule at the frat boys, no hip hop lovers?? Sounds like discrimination to me.

Posted by robin | June 22, 2007 10:58 AM

How about some accountability? If a nightclub can't or won't prevent violence, it should be shut down. Two shootings and, according to christopher @ 51, one rape are more than enough reason.

Posted by keshmeshi | June 22, 2007 10:58 AM

jeff, theres a lot of things like that in america that are freedoms and not rights, but we dont take away from everyone because one bozo fucked up.

Posted by Bellevue Ave | June 22, 2007 11:02 AM

As a former bar manager I know it is imperative to establish a no-tolerance attitude when it comes to assholes. It would be interesting to know why these guys were bounced. My guess is they were cut off. That was the number one cause of trouble in my club. There is nothing worse than telling a drunk he can't have another one.

Posted by crazycatguy | June 22, 2007 11:02 AM

It's not discrimination. It's called "running a clean joint". Fratboys are welcome if they don't get shitfaced and start fights. Wanna-be gangsters are welcome too, as long as they don't fight and shoot into crowds with their pathetic stand-ins for self-confidence.

I am a gay man and have been discriminatedd against my whole life. Do not try that shit with me.

Posted by It's Mark Mitchell | June 22, 2007 11:03 AM

Sorry robin, I lost my cool for a second there. Nothing personal intended.

Posted by It's Mark Mitchell | June 22, 2007 11:05 AM

shutting down bars left and right with every fight is definitely the solution for all our problems

Posted by Bellevue Ave | June 22, 2007 11:06 AM

I can't get over how retarded Jeff G is.

Save hope? What the fuck?

Posted by Mr. Poe | June 22, 2007 11:09 AM

@66 And many bars purposely overserve.

Posted by It's Mark Mitchell | June 22, 2007 11:10 AM

@54: Why is it unsurprising to hear a Tommy's employee compare sorority girls to prostitutes? It's good to hear you have as little respect for your clientele as your neighbors do, anyhow.

Posted by christopher | June 22, 2007 11:18 AM

To lower testosterone levels, the drinks at Tommy's and other bars should be spiked with estrogen.

Posted by elswingere | June 22, 2007 11:19 AM

I know I'm saving my hope for marriage.

Wait a minute. Gay people aren't allowed to get married.

Posted by It's Mark Mitchell | June 22, 2007 11:23 AM

No offense taken, I understand your passionate response, it's a touchy subject. But here's the thing, how do you decide who's ok and who's not?

Sad news, I've just heard it was one of my bouncers who got shot.

Posted by robin | June 22, 2007 11:24 AM

Well Poe, apparently jeff g and i aren't disappointed over the same topic

Posted by shelbis | June 22, 2007 11:24 AM

You decide who's OK and who isn't by having an intelligent door policy. Don't cater to people who behave aggressively at the door because if they're rude and surly with the staff how are they going to treat the other patrons? Don't let them in, or if they're in the bar already, remove them in the most calm and non-threatening way possible considering the situation at hand.

I've worked in clubs and bars for many years, and have dealt with door policy made by people who were fantastic bar owners and people who weren't. I learned a lot from working with all of them.

Posted by It's Mark Mitchell | June 22, 2007 11:32 AM

I don't think race is important here, but I think the music might be. Most hip-hop glorifies violence, so you can't be surprised when the fans act violently.

Maybe if the clubs played nothing but the Sugar Hill Gang and Missy Elliot, things would be okay, or no one but fifty year olds and lesbians would show up.

Posted by Gitai | June 22, 2007 11:33 AM

I'm talking to the bartender right now, the shooter was denied entry into the bar. That's what pissed him off. So it's not about door policy. He was DENIED ENTRY. Got it?

Posted by robin | June 22, 2007 11:37 AM

He was denied entry after being bounced! The incident began when he was allowed in the FIRST time.

Posted by It's Mark Mitchell | June 22, 2007 11:41 AM

Oh, and as for my lack of respect regarding the clientele. I find it very difficult to respect women who hang all over guys to get free drinks, get drunk, grind on eachother and everyone else, vomit on the bar and have sex on the pool tables and in the restroom. Call me old fashioned.

Posted by robin | June 22, 2007 11:44 AM

@robin: but why'd he want in so bad that he had to go get his gat and kill a guy? Because his friends got in. And looking at him staggering around, and his friend who was trying to dissuade him staggering around, it seems they were already good and wasted. Was he not let in in the first place, or just turned out that night? Tommy's patrons see it as a place for bad-boy types to hang out. Where did they get that idea from? The point at which you start discouraging ruffians is too little, too late.

Posted by christopher | June 22, 2007 11:47 AM

Tommy's sounds like a real class joint.

Posted by It's Mark Mitchell | June 22, 2007 11:47 AM

shutting down a bar that has violence without consideration of the circumstance can lead to unintended consequences;

Imagine sending people you know over to a bar to cause trouble so that they will get shut down and you will gain all their business.

Posted by Bellevue Ave | June 22, 2007 11:51 AM

What's the deal with wearing t-shirts so big that they resumble a mumu?

Posted by xxl | June 22, 2007 11:51 AM
Posted by christopher | June 22, 2007 11:52 AM

xxl; ask people in baltimore

Posted by Bellevue Ave | June 22, 2007 11:53 AM

Now you know why I don't work there anymore. I never said I liked my job there. But I'll be quite's all about the money. It always is, that's the only reason I lasted 2 years. That's the only reason the owner bought the bar, and the reason he runs hip hop nights and 18+ nights.

Posted by robin | June 22, 2007 11:54 AM

It's great to have Robin on here. So far we know little about what happened so casting blame is really about unfounded assumptions. It's great that the dude wasn't allowed into the club. What we do know in general is that certain promoters, certain clubs, promote to certain crowds. One person being shot once can be explained away. When it happens again, and there is a rape, and other complaints of violence and bad behavior, something needs to be fixed. It's a struggle to come up with what. The solution needs to be fair, practical, and pro-active. A nightclub license is not that. The solutions the SNMA have presented are. Clubs do at some point have to take some kind of responsibility for what happens with their customers. If you're serving super cheap drinks to an aggro crowd fueled by aggro music, we all know what happens. So make adjustments. The city should right now have a system in place to be working with Tommy's to stop future problems. Then, if Tommy's won't work with the city, they lose their liquor license. But in the meantime, the area near Tommy's should get more police. I'm sure the issues in the neighborhood aren't all about Tommy's. And Tommy's should be allowed to hire a couple of off duty cops to work on certain nights. Let's get a plan together to really solve these things.

Posted by Meinert | June 22, 2007 11:56 AM

my gf says to me: "arrest all dudes in baggy white t shirts, I says" ... profiling works! Obviously the issues here are more complicated than I've been making them out to be. The solution is bound to be a complicated one. But there is no doubt in the minds, even of people that go to Tommy's regularly, that that place is fucked up like a football bat. Apparently, there's a big demand for that. I say go the UW campus, find everyone who likes to "party" like that, and put em in a giant bulletproof hamster habitrail, with alcohol dispensing water bottles mattresses for 24-hour fuckfests.... Man. I just can't take this seriously for two sentences, can I?

Posted by christopher | June 22, 2007 11:59 AM

I'm going to go get drunk. Right now.

Posted by Mr. Poe | June 22, 2007 12:01 PM

dave meinert, i love you and agree with so much of what you have to say but, for the love of mike, please start using paragraphs to break up your text!

see, it's easy.

Posted by kerri harrop | June 22, 2007 12:07 PM

I never knew how many flaming racists there were in this city until now. It makes me very sad. Thanks for showing your KKK faces on the SLOG and teaching us that all baggy jean and white t wearing black men are evil murdering devils, especially in or around college campuses. Time to go watch Higher Learning again!

Posted by WOW | June 22, 2007 12:11 PM

"Clubs do at some point have to take some kind of responsibility for what happens with their customers."

Meinert, you know I'm with you on most of these issues, but "at some point" should be pretty early on in whatever part of the process we're talking about, whether it's deciding to open a bar, or deciding whether or not to let in the guy who muttered something nasty under his breath when your doorman asked him for his ID.

Posted by It's Mark Mitchell | June 22, 2007 12:11 PM

You calling my gf racist, WOW? Suck my balls, homes. The over-sized mumu-tee is de rigeur for shitheads of all colors.

Posted by christopher | June 22, 2007 12:15 PM

I'm on the phone w/ the bouncer. He was never allowed in the bar. He had caused trouble on a previous occasion so he was denied at the door last night. I'm not saying that Tommy's has never had problems w/ violent people in the club, but last night lack of security or lack of judgment was not the issue.

Posted by robin | June 22, 2007 12:15 PM

Glad to hear the victim is in good enough shape to speak.

Posted by christopher | June 22, 2007 12:19 PM

@ 95

I'm guessing you're in the 26% that still supports Bush and the war too. To answer your question, yes, I WAS CALLING YOUR GF RACIST! I think you and your racist gf should be sent very far far away.

"Suck my balls" WOW. Who's the shithead?

Posted by WOW | June 22, 2007 12:22 PM

Everyone needs to get the semantics right.

This is not about "race". It's *never* about "race".

It's *always* about "Bad management practices."

Posted by NapoleonXIV | June 22, 2007 12:27 PM

No, I'm talking to the other bouncer. The one who was hit is still in very critical condition, but they've stopped the internal bleeding.

Posted by robin | June 22, 2007 12:27 PM

Robin - good to hear your security dude is doing ok, or at least talking. I hope he recovers fully, quickly. Sounds like he was doing a good job. True bummer he's suffering for doing the right thing. He's got a tough job.

Posted by Meinert | June 22, 2007 12:28 PM

Jesus, you're retarded, WOW. I'm as lefty, pro-affirmative action, and anti-war as they get. Btw, does WOW stand for "Wonder of Worship," the ever-so-delightful Christian bubble tea place the lefties avoid because it creeps 'em out? You can still suck my balls, shithead.

Posted by christopher | June 22, 2007 12:30 PM

If he was white it would be blamed on bad management practices.

Posted by WOW | June 22, 2007 12:36 PM


"Sometimes maybe a few youngsters may have slipped in."

A few??? A know large groups of under-aged girls who get into Tommy's every week without even bothering with a fake. Believe it or not, but your club has a well-known reputation of allowing in under-aged females. Hmm, maybe that has something to do with all the scumbag predatory fucks that are patrons of yours?

I know like any club Tommy's is out to make as much money as possible, but in the process they've built an environment that attracts predatory and violent people. Bottom line. Every week the drunk mob mentality is played out in front of that club and to say Tommy's is doing everything they can to prevent that is completely ridiculous.

Posted by M. Sandison | June 22, 2007 12:43 PM

This wouldn't happen at a hash bar.

Posted by elswingere | June 22, 2007 12:46 PM

I'll end this on a positive note,bowing out of my juvenile exchange with fucktard WOW... To Robin, I hope the bouncer pulls through OK, and I bet he does. Good luck to everyone who deserves it, and here's hoping the guilty get plenty of prison time. Adios!

Posted by christopher | June 22, 2007 12:47 PM

I love this argument that discrimination or thought is impossible, that if you shut Tommy's down, that means you'd have to shut every club down. I'm not suggesting shutting down every club. I AM suggesting shutting down Tommy's, because Tommy's attracts violence. It's a nuisance to the community.

I can arrest this gunman because he's a gunman, not because he's wearing a big t-shirt. I CAN TELL THE DIFFERENCE. Discriminative thought is possible.

But the club defenders feel that they have to defend every club, no matter how repellent. But you don't; just the violent ones. Tommy's is a blight on the community, not a sign of "vibrant night life". Shut it down. Shut the others down the minute it becomes apparent that they are attracting violence.

This isn't hard.

Posted by Fnarf | June 22, 2007 12:49 PM

I couldn't resist. Have to give a "hellz yeah" to elswingere. :-)

Posted by christopher | June 22, 2007 12:50 PM

@ 102
Now you're using slurs against mentally disabled people too? You’re a real class act. Actually I'm not "retarded" but maybe you could use a thesaurus to come up with some more PC alternates Mr. lefty anti-war affirmative action supporter. You and your gf deserve one another because you are both complete idiots. You can't argue with ignorance however so I digress.

As for the WOW, it's for how amazed I am at the bigotry on here. My regrets to all black people.

I'll leave the ball sucking to your shithead racist girlfriend, thanks!

Posted by WOW | June 22, 2007 12:51 PM

Mark @83

Tommy's puts the "ass" in class.

Posted by LT L | June 22, 2007 12:52 PM

I'm with you, fnarf, and I'm bowing out for the day.

Posted by It's Mark Mitchell | June 22, 2007 12:54 PM

I never said Tommy's was doing everything they could to prevent drunken violence. I said that the man who shot the bouncer was not drunk and was never in the club. Drunk 18 year olds are NOT THE ISSUE. A bouncer was shot for denying a KNOWN troublemaker entry. HE WAS NOT ALLOWED IN THE BAR. That is all I'm am trying to say. Who gives a flying fuck about drunk college kids? Let them beat eachother to a pulp in the street, they're idiots, should we call their parents??? Close the bar?? Shut down the entire Ave?? I don't hang out at Tommy's, I never would have if I didn't work there. I choose not to because I don't want to be in that environment. You don't have to either.

Posted by robin | June 22, 2007 12:56 PM

fnarf, you are good at emotional arguments, poor at real world solutions. There is no process where a club can just be automatically shut down. Tommy's is a legitimate business operating legally. The city can't just simply shut it down, especially in a case when they are doing the right thing by keep a known troublemaker out of the club.

Bad clubs should be closed. The nightlife industry agrees. And possibly Tommy's is a bad club. I don't know enough about it to make that determination. I assume you don't either.

What I do think is that nightlife is valuable to Seattle. Shutting down one club isn't closing them all, but how you create the process that allows one club to be closed can, if not done right, create a climate that will lead to many other clubs being closed and new ones do not open. We want to avoid that. I have put forth an actual proposal for this process to happen fairly. If you have experience in running a business, in creating legislation, in working in law enforcement, in running a venue, or in solving similar issues, it would be great to hear your proposal.

Posted by Meinert | June 22, 2007 1:01 PM

unintended consequences; if we shut down clubs with some kind of violence automatic without thought, what is to stop bar owners from stacking the deck and causing problems at other clubs?

Posted by Bellevue Ave | June 22, 2007 1:17 PM

Okay, there are too many comments, and I'll read more of them after posting this.

The SPD cops just don't give a shit about patrolling the U District. Aside from a cop car rolling down the Ave every so often, there is NO police presence whatsoever. There have been multiple violent gunpoint and mugging robberies along frat row near the dimly lit area around 18th/50th, a couple of frat shootings, and of course, the host of drug dealers and thugs that hang out around the Ave and 50th.

The cops just don't care. When rich crackers plan to gentrify the area, then you'll see a police presence for a varity of reasons, some more obvious than others.

But with nothing economically at stake for Mayor Nickels and his interests, and clearly no commerce being lost along the U District due to the crime, the police simply aren't going to waste their time with it if there aren't any black people or bums to pick on out of sight of witnesses.

And don't even mention UWPD. There isn't a more impotent group in all of law enforcement. They can ticket motorists in Wallingford, but apparently, they don't have the weapons or authority to protect students from violent crime in the U District, or even staff on their own campus!

Posted by Gomez | June 22, 2007 1:45 PM

re: Tommy's being a source of violence... No. It's not the nightclub that causes the problems, it's the people who go to the nightclub who cause the problems.

If you shut down Tommy's, those thugs probably just go down the street to Earl's, or to Big Time, or shit, even The District lounge if they'll let them hang around long enough to start a fight. They're looking to go to clubs, be assholes and start shit. If you close one club, they simply take their bullshit down the street. You solve the problem by getting the thugs off the street.

To suggest addressing the problem by shutting the club is like suggesting a doctor cure a patient's disease by shooting the patient dead.

Posted by Gomez | June 22, 2007 1:52 PM

Ok Gomez, Here's where you're wrong...Police patrols have tripled on the Ave. Known drug dealers and troublemakers are picked up or searched and interrogated regularly, and measures are being taken by the city to "Clean up" the Ave. But there's only so much the city can do.

Posted by robin | June 22, 2007 1:53 PM

Another bloody example of why we need licenses.
If we had enforced and enforceable standards more of these incidents would be deterred and prevented.

Also you guys should decide whether you want to destroy police morale or have more cops around. I forget. You want more cops but object to them actually doing stuff.

Posted by Zander | June 22, 2007 2:00 PM

Well, robin, it's obviously not enough, is it?

Posted by Gomez | June 22, 2007 2:07 PM

Also, robin, tripled police patrols on the Ave aren't covering the neighborhoods west and east of the Ave, where violence is proliferating at a far worse clip. Some of that 'tripled' force needs to cover the areas around 17th/20th Avenues so that the now-weekly robberies will stop happening.

Also, your personal relationship with said cops leads me to doubt the integrity of your defenses of said cops. You're taking them at their word, which is never a good call. And I say that having good friends myself who are cops back in Las Vegas.

Posted by Gomez | June 22, 2007 2:10 PM

@73: Adding estrogen to the drinks won't reduce the testosterone. You would need to add a testosterone blocker, such as spironolactone.

Posted by Tiffany | June 22, 2007 2:13 PM

Robin wrote:

Known drug dealers and troublemakers are picked up or searched and interrogated regularly

In the eyes of hte law, that's "suspected" not "known" unless a judge or jury is involved.

The searching Robin describes may be hampered slightly by the fact that, contrary to the beliefs of those who think police are authorized take wahtever action they like regardless of its legality or constitutionality, in this country, police are not allowed to stop us and search us at-will. They need either probable cause or to trick us into consenting to the search by giving up our right to protection from unlawful search. They're good at the latter. Hint: a request is very different from an order.

If you care about your rights, the answer to questions like "May I search you?", "I'm just going to search you; is that okay?", "You don't mind if I do a quick search do you?", should always be "No." regardless of who is asking or what, if anything, you'd like to keep private.

Flex your rights or lose them.

Posted by Phil M | June 22, 2007 2:16 PM

I think you're confusing "license" with "bullet-proof vest."

If someone wants to shoot at you, a license isn't going to stop them.

Posted by NapoleonXIV | June 22, 2007 2:19 PM

Zander wrote:

You want more cops but object to them actually doing stuff.

I don't know whether or not I want more cops, but I abosolutely do not want them doing illegal stuff. They are not above the law.

Posted by Phil M | June 22, 2007 2:20 PM

I am not the first, but I feel like it should be said again. The UD has a very well known thug problem around 50th and the Ave. These are the same handful of kids, and some of them are kids, that go to Tommy's late at night either to start shit or to sell crack. I spent way too many years walking by the block, and you would have to be blind and deaf not to notice it. I've been offered to buy crack many times there by kids who look no older than 17. They are always starting shit. Correct me if I'm wrong but there was a big gang sting by the SPD not too long ago at the same area.

I'm not blaming hip hop or whatever, but
I would definitely bet money that the kid who shot the bouncer was one of those pukes. It just a small number of kids that hang out there every night. To blame all black culture or whatever or pretty stupid. There are stupid white kids too, but in this case it wasn't. At least they caught the guy.

Posted by obvious | June 22, 2007 2:30 PM

You mean arrest the actual troublemakers?

That'd never work. Far easier to blame the club.

Posted by NapoleonXIV | June 22, 2007 2:42 PM

What obvious said. If you haven't noticed the drug and thug problem around 50th and the Ave (in broad daylight, even!), you're either blind and deaf, or you're lying about ever having been there.

Whatever robin says the cops are doing, at best, they aren't doing enough. But more likely, they fed robin a bunch of bull and robin bought it because they're buddy-buddy with robin.

Posted by Gomez | June 22, 2007 2:47 PM

I love suckin' on cock. Mmmm...

Posted by Mr. Poe | June 22, 2007 2:49 PM

So where can you find drug dealers that sell things other than crack in this city? I know where the crack dealers hang out, but I want to find some decent ecstasy.

Posted by Someone | June 22, 2007 2:54 PM

Maybe I'm handed a large dose of bullshit by my "cop buddies", but I sure the hell am glad that they are there at 3 am when I leave work w/ a load of cash in my bag. Why don't you join the police force, Gomez, and make this world a safer place for all of us???

Posted by robin | June 22, 2007 3:17 PM

so your police buddies protect you at three am, but can't be bothered to police your block during operating ours to help fend off shootings?

what the hell was your point in posting that, robin?

Posted by seattle98104 | June 22, 2007 4:10 PM

Seattle 98104, my point is that they ARE there. They ARE bothered. What do you want from these guys???? They do their jobs to the best of their ability is what I'm saying. It's not my Ave. police force that is the problem. The problem is there aren't enough police to go around. One of "my cop buddies" works 2 double shifts a week to make sure the ave is a safer place. Let's not blame this on the police force. My friend wasn't shot b/c there weren't any police in the area, he was shot b/c some idiot was refused entry into the bar. Let's blame him, or how about his parents or how about the education system, or the media, I know, let's blame the whole god damn USA while we're at it, the whole country's going to hell in a hand basket...

Posted by robin | June 22, 2007 4:30 PM

Oh, by the way, these "cop buddies" of mine are my buddies b/c they are there to serve and protect the public (i.e. me), every evening, up and down the wretched ave. That is why we're "buddies". That's how I know them by name. They are there EVERY NIGHT. I never knew them until I started working on the ave.

Posted by robin | June 22, 2007 4:49 PM

They wouldn't admit me, robin. I'm not white and they've already met their minority cop quota.

And yeah, robin, where the fuck are your beloved cops when kids are getting beat up and mugged on 50th and 18th? Oh, they're on the Ave hanging out with you. Right.

Posted by Gomez | June 22, 2007 5:17 PM

Whoa, Gomez, I am so wrong. Wow! I never knew I was so naive!!! I must be crazy to think that there are police out there who actually do want help people. No, you've shown me the light with your brilliant racial quips. Yes, the cops, they're responsible for all our problems!!!

I am leaving this conversation completely shocked by your inability to make any point at all.

Posted by robin | June 22, 2007 5:43 PM

Hey, robin, whether or not cops want to help people isn't the point. The point is that they're not helping people elsewhere in the neighborhood who need it, while tripling their forces in a concentrated area... and still failing to do their jobs there.

You're defending failure.

Posted by Gomez | June 22, 2007 6:59 PM

since it's been almost a couple of hours since the last post i'm thinking the hysteria has died down a little. so i'll stir it up a little by noting that KOMO news was careful to note that the gunmen was 'ethiopian' and belonged to an 'ethiopian ' gang..
now my old black mind reels at the implications of all of this here. there was a decade ( 90 ish ) where the racial identity of a criminal perpetrator wasn't reported in the news much. ( old stranger staffers will remember the heat they got from identifying the race of a person that interrupted a performance by seattle symphony at garfield back in that day ) but it seems to have made a huge comeback. i couldn't stop reeling from the comment at post #1 to flesh this out and i don't really have the energy to flesh it out now except to say that in spite of being on the planet for 50+ years it STILL surprises me that race is a strong subtext for thinking and reacting. especially when it shouldn't really matter. i'm not saying that it shouldn't be talked about, but in this case it seems absolutely extraneous, insignifigant, and mean spirited.
from ethiopian gangs to black thugs in an afternoon...i need a pill.. or a hash bar
and while i'm at it i should confess that when i first heard the report of a shooting at a club on the ave. the first joint i thought of was earl's because that's the joint i get hasseled in front of most often

Posted by reverend dr dj riz | June 22, 2007 7:25 PM


We're hardly living in Chicago. Besides, there'd be a little bit of a risk of the conspiracy being found out.

Posted by keshmeshi | June 22, 2007 7:31 PM

@137 they mentioned that he's an ethiopian gang member because that gang has been involved with pretty much every major shooting around this area in the last few years. i'm actually glad that you mentioned that because they were involved with a murder this winter nearby around 18th and 50th, and i'm sure a number of other shootings. they are little pricks that deserve to have their heads unscrewed, but it doesn't have anything to do with their race.

its really more that they are worthless human beings with no purpose or drive, and they feel the need to get some attention drawn toward themselves because otherwise nobody would even know that they exist.

my friend mark would definitely NOT appreciate anybody saying some racist shit about who shot him being that most of his good friends are black.

Posted by bobby digital | June 22, 2007 8:42 PM

how stupid are you people. I lived on the ave for 10 years until I got enough money to move to the suburbs into a 3 story house. You are fucking clueless little shits talking about racism and this and that. the ave was and now to a lesser degree filled with independent hustlers black and white who have seen the ave to be a place not controlled by one particular gang and therefore allows them to do business with little retribution. the black guy who shot up the joint is the kind of guy who would come to the ave. a guy who has no sense in how business is suppossed to be done. he is an independent. No black gang would give the green light to this idiot to shoot up people with no business reason to do so. it would bring unnecessary attention to them. The cops have more or less pushed out the east african posse and the other gangs from south seattle who came to the ave to do business. now the only ones who come there are the idiots who dont know anything. I love the ave because all of my money in my youth came from there. its a dynamic neighborhood.

Posted by ...... | June 22, 2007 10:46 PM

all of your comments are stupid. these so called "thugs" on 50th and this so called ethiopian gang member show how little you understand the street. these dealers are independents and act how independents act.....all showy. they are loud, brash and obvious and young. if any of you see them as a problem it shows what pussies you are. they are simply very heartbreakingly sad. no gang would want them because they would bring unnecessary attention to them and if they get caught, being loudmouths they would snitch in one second flat. they simply buy and sell to make a minimal existance. they are not future pablo escobars by any means. I am sure that most of you would run in fright at the sight of them but they are heartbreakingly sad and at the very bottom of the drug trade. the ones you suburban pussies should be worried about are the smart ones who might live right next door to you in the big house next door. they are the ones who make an impact. you people see things in black and white good and bad and have no street sense and no ability to see market economics. Oh yeah...I live in a three story house in the suburbs and I go home to the ave every week wearing polo outfits and not one of the dealers even bothers or intimidates me. why is this? because I understand the game.

Posted by ....... | June 22, 2007 11:02 PM

also I agree with reverend dr dj who made that comment a few lines above mine about the news. Fuck KOMO news. every time a black guy shoots a joint up they try to pin it on a gang making it look like black people are stupid. no black gang in this day and age would green light a high profile hit....let alone a non business related revenge shooting. this guy may have been a gang member but I bet you he was on the very lowest rung of the gang. he probably was not even a full fledged member. I bet that he was just a hot headed guy that the gang used to run errands and do dirty work that the other gangsters would not touch. then.....when things got tough for him he claimed to be a full fledged member of an ethiopian gang to get some pull later when he gets locked up. KOMO doesnt think of things like this. neither does the general population because they assume the stupidity of gangsters when most of them have more business acumen than the UW business majors who study a few blocks away from them

Posted by ..... | June 22, 2007 11:16 PM

finally, let me end on this who you call worthless human beings you lame fuck. you piece of shit. I bet you still live in the inner city in an apartment dont you. the worthless human being you see now might one day own a mansion in mercer island while you sit in your hipster trashy studio apartment listening to fucking whatever pussy hipster shit you listen to. why? because these ave kids have more of a raw business sense than any business major. all they have to do is channel it in a legitimate direction.

Posted by ..... | June 22, 2007 11:29 PM

yeah, quit trashing our neighborhood you lame fucks. if you don't like it dont come to the ave. fuckers

Posted by ..... | June 22, 2007 11:32 PM

yeah I agree. If you have no street sense don't make comments about street matters or street politics. We are not stupid, uneducated, or speakers of gramatically poor english. Most of us are, as has been commented on above, shrewd businessmen and women. Yeah..I have internet access too. so all of you who have no right to talk about this shooting or don't know what you are talking about, just shut up. this shooter is not in any way gang-related. no gang would ok his stupid non-business related, overly flashy, movie style actions. He is a street level punk.

Posted by tony "slick" | June 22, 2007 11:40 PM

agreed. none of us from the street want to create situations where people are killed and the news is involved and the press makes us look like a bunch of stupid monkeys fighting for bananas. We try to do business like the corporations do now and punks like this guy give everybody from the street a bad name. oh yeah. these names that we are using on here are obviously not the names that any of us really go by so if you know a guy named johnny velvet or tony slick.....don't get on them about making comments.

Posted by johnny velvet | June 22, 2007 11:47 PM


Posted by Mark Mitchell | June 23, 2007 11:13 AM

You gotta underatnd that the Board of Regents, President Emmert, Mayor Nickels, SPD and our state legislature have their hands full in deciding whether to extend the UW Code of Conduct to Greek Row. MIP's, loud stereos and littering simply won't be tolerated. Given that focus, and concomitant lack of vision and leadership at the UW and in Seattle; the Ave, which is outside the proscribed area to which the Code of Conduct will be extended, is and will remain a free fire zone. The root of this problem isn't the UW students, rather it is the abject lack of courage in the leadership of our community over the last 25 years to deal with a handful of gang members and piss-ant thugs who are given free reign on the Ave, while the cops are two blocks away handing out noise violation citations.

Posted by old timer | June 23, 2007 12:51 PM

nsxiuokad lusgx uwlybxtq ecvkxgmfa iujwds byjpfqm aqpmwh

Posted by emozabj hteuspmr | July 2, 2007 3:27 AM

nsxiuokad lusgx uwlybxtq ecvkxgmfa iujwds byjpfqm aqpmwh

Posted by emozabj hteuspmr | July 2, 2007 3:28 AM

crxofz gqtfxru iotuzj rxstpuj eynpjs pswux itucpwzy

Posted by kuwilzv upyfkwvis | July 2, 2007 3:29 AM

Comments Closed

In order to combat spam, we are no longer accepting comments on this post (or any post more than 45 days old).