seretogis

LINK

I am honestly not at all surprised. Often those who preach "tolerance" of one group are ignorant enough to irrationally fear another group. Pink Pistols is a gay pro-gun organization which encourages gays to be familiar with and carry (where legal, of course) a handgun. To single them out and deny them their right to carry is blatant discrimination against gun owners, and is deplorable.

__________________
seretogis - sieg heil
perfect little dream the kind that hurts the most, forgot how it feels well almost
no one to blame always the same, open my eyes wake up in flames

Lebell

"Irony" isn't strong enough.

As to this:

If anyone but a law enforcement officer tried to take my gun away from me by force, they would be shot in self defense.

__________________
"Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval of their own conscience." – C. S. Lewis

The ONLY sponsors we have are YOU!

Please Donate!

cthulu23

Maybe the problem was their insistence on carrying firearms and not the ideology? Lots of events ban the carrying of firearms. Hell, you couldn't even smoke at the Atlanta Olympics.

j8ear

Were their guns confiscated or were they not permitted to participate? I didn't see the outcome of the encounter in the article.

I kind of agree with you on this Seretogis. Except instead of ignorant or irrational I would have used discriminitory and bigotted. Most ~zealots~ of 'tolerance' of any kind are nothing of sort, imo.

-bear

__________________
It's alot easier to ask for forgiveness then it is to ask for permission.

pan6467

I know at least here in OHIO that if you hold a demonstration or "parade" you have to get seperate approval for there to be weapons at it and you have to list all who will have them. This law came right after Kent State in 1970.

Sometimes before judging a law or criticizing an event, you need to know the past and why that state or city may have that requirement.

Plus, perhaps the Columbus Stonewallers wanted this to be a "peaceful" parade and in which case, in my opinion, guns have no right there. You cannot claim peace while having 20 people marching with guns (with the excepetion of a military honor guard or police officers celebrating). Sorry, but to me there's something wrong there.

Sounds like some people trying to create problems, as there is a pretty big schism between the concealed and non concealed activists here. And again, IMHO this parade is not a forum for those people as they probably had little to do with organizing it.

__________________
I just love people who use the excuse "I use/do this because I LOVE the feeling/joy/happiness it brings me" and expect you to be ok with that as you watch them destroy their life blindly following. My response is, "I like to put forks in an eletrical socket, just LOVE that feeling, can't ever get enough of it, so will you let me put this copper fork in that electric socket?"

Lebell

I cannot even begin to describe how offensive this is to every peaceful gun owner in this country.

So I'm just going to fly off the handle and start shooting while the cop over there won't??

__________________
"Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval of their own conscience." – C. S. Lewis

The ONLY sponsors we have are YOU!

Please Donate!

pan6467

NO to me, I just feel if you are demonstrating in the name of peace you do not need weapons there. To me that's hypocrasy.

I suppose the question from me could be, Why do you need guns at a PEACEFUL demonstration so badly anyway?

I'm not against guns, just don't feel they are needed at peaceful events. To me that shows no respect for people like me, who feel weapons are symbols of violence.

If I held a peaceful demonstration and people chose to want to bring weapons, I wouldn't let them (by not putting in paperwork and in any legal way possible), they can do their own work and set up their own demonstration. It's a matter of ethics, my opinion and morals to me.

That is my opinion, I am sorry you take issue with it, but I am allowed mine and you, yours.

__________________
I just love people who use the excuse "I use/do this because I LOVE the feeling/joy/happiness it brings me" and expect you to be ok with that as you watch them destroy their life blindly following. My response is, "I like to put forks in an eletrical socket, just LOVE that feeling, can't ever get enough of it, so will you let me put this copper fork in that electric socket?"

Lebell

Why do you need to disarm me to feel at "peace"?

Why is it I can carry my gun "peacefully" up to the point I arrive at the rally, but I can't carry it "peacefully" in the rally?

Why is it that I have to justify my right or desire to carry a gun with me when it has already been determined legally that I can?

A walk in the park is "peaceful", should I be disarmed there as well?

The bottom line is this: If I am trusted to carry a gun, the I am trusted and if your rally/parade is on public property, then it really isn't your business if I carry a gun, so long as I am legally allowed to.

__________________
"Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval of their own conscience." – C. S. Lewis

The ONLY sponsors we have are YOU!

Please Donate!

pan6467

This is one reason why this country has so many problems.

WHY, if I organized a peace rally do you feel the need to disrupt it and not form your own?

WHY would you feel the need to disrespect my wishes at a rally I formed, and did all the work on?

It's all about respect. The ONLY reason you would bring a gun to a demonstration of peace that I organized would be to make a point.

To me that is very disrespectful. You do your own work and make your point, don't come into my yard and shit and say...."oops, but I'm allowed so fuck you." and to me that is what you would be doing.

I have respect for you, I would not do that to you, why would you feel the need to do it to me.

Simply because YOU want to use my forum, my hard work to make YOUR statement and to me that is very, very wrong and disrespectful.

A walk in the park, go ahead, that is not for me to decide and I truly don't care, but not at my rally or demonstration.

Besides that article is VERY misleading. Yes, in OHIO you may carry weapons but as far as I know you still have to "register" before public demonstrations.

It's all about respecting the people who did the work and went to the trouble of arranging the event. Obviously, the "Pink Pistols" (or the way you talk about our hypothesis) have no respect for anyone but themselves. Not to mention are too lazy to do their own work and organizing.

As for public ground, depends am I paying for the use of it (it then becomes private), am I responsible for the actions of everyone there (if so then by rights I should be allowed to dismiss anyone I want, if I deem them trouble).

We can argue this both ways until eternity end Lebell, you aren't changing your opinion and I'm not changing mine. You feel my opinion to be wrong and arrogant, just as I feel yours to be. It's an impass.

__________________
I just love people who use the excuse "I use/do this because I LOVE the feeling/joy/happiness it brings me" and expect you to be ok with that as you watch them destroy their life blindly following. My response is, "I like to put forks in an eletrical socket, just LOVE that feeling, can't ever get enough of it, so will you let me put this copper fork in that electric socket?"

Lebell

Yes, it is about respect, in this case, respecting each and every person and the choices they make.

I see that you will never see the irony of the original story.

And I see that we will never agree.

__________________
"Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval of their own conscience." – C. S. Lewis

The ONLY sponsors we have are YOU!

Please Donate!

pan6467

You're right I don't see any irony. I see a group (who did none of the official work) wanting to make a statement at the cost of those who did work. How is that respectful of the choices made by Stonewall? Were Pink Pistollers not allowed to sit on the Stonewall board and make suggestions?

Again I ask why did they choose to make a statement at another's expense? Would you want someone doing it to you? (You have yet to answer, perhaps there is something I overlooked.)

Just because Stonewall didn't want them carrying guns doesn't mean they were prejudiced against them. Perhaps they just felt this wasn't the place for that particular statement.

Were the Pink Pistol memebers even from the Columbus area, or were they "bussed in" to make their own statement and create problems? (BTW this made press for the Pink Pistols and got them attention that just being at the event may not have.)

Again, by your statements, I should allow anyone at my rally. So if KKK and Neo-Nazis show up at my peaceful demonstration I should allow them to, when their organization's whole purpose is about hatred?

Should a peaceful Muslim demonstration asking for recognition and trying to educate about their religion allow radicals tied with terrorism to their demonstrations?

__________________
I just love people who use the excuse "I use/do this because I LOVE the feeling/joy/happiness it brings me" and expect you to be ok with that as you watch them destroy their life blindly following. My response is, "I like to put forks in an eletrical socket, just LOVE that feeling, can't ever get enough of it, so will you let me put this copper fork in that electric socket?"

cthulu23

I'm sorry, but this is not a reasonable attitude. Would you carry your gun to funerals, birthday parties or an airport? Guns are not ALWAYS appropriate.

theusername

Guns don't kill people. People kill people.

haha love that. However i think it is pretty reasonable to request that people do not bring fire arms to certain events.

If the pink gun owners want to have a rally in support of gays with guns thats fine but they shouldnt be able to hijack the purpose of the gay parade which is to promote gay acceptance on a wide scale and not just in any certain area.

SLM3

Guns are symbols of violence, regardless of what many pro-gun lobbyists tell us. The stigma attached to guns will forever be one of violence and death, not marksmenship and self defence.

Regardless of the 2nd ammendment, is it that hard to understand why someone wouldn't want a symbol of violence at their parade?



SLM3

The_Dunedan

Ok. I have a net-friend who was involved in this, and this is straight from the Horse's Mouth, as it were.
The Stonewall Columbus people were the ones threatening violence. The woman in charge of the 30-person strong contingent attempting to disarm the Pink Pistols threatened them repeatedly with a 2-foot wooden club ( ostensibly a 'keyring' by virtue of having keys attatched ) and made repeated threats to ILLEGALY disarm the Pink Pisols by force.
Several lawyers were called, and finally the Columbus Police had to be called to prevent the Stonewall Columbus contingent from assaulting members of the Pink Pistols.
Furthermore, Stonewall Columbus officials had repeatedly told the PPs that they were not allowed to recruit, distribute literature, or set up a booth; this on PUBLIC PROPERTY. Their entire attitude towards the Pink Pistols was one of intolerance, bigotry, and irrational hoplophobic hatered.

As a parting note, the P.P.s carry their weapons, and encourage other GBLT persons to do the same, in an effort to prevent the sort of 'bashing' which took the life of Matt Shephard. They are perhaps the strongest and most consistant Gay Rights group out there; how are you supposed to, if needed, prevent being "bashed" to death if you're disarmed? There is nothing "peaceful" about staying alive if some bigot is trying to bludgeon you out of this world, and there is nothing "peaceful" about maintaining and securing your rights. Rent the film "Deacons for Defense" for a good, factual presentation of this.

__________________
"I personally think that America's interests would be well served if after or at the time these clowns begin their revolting little hate crime the local police come in and cart them off on some trumped up charges or other. It is necessary in my opinion that America makes an example of them to the world."

--Strange Famous, advocating the use of falsified charges in order to shut people up.

The_Dunedan

As for "violence:"
Sometimes violence is nessescary. If some bigoted piece of trash is trying to murder you, for instance. In such a case, it is only natural and moral to defend yourself with whatever violence is required to prevail over your attacker. If this means a slap in the mouth or a bullet in the head, fine.
If more bigots and "bashers" were aware that BGLT persons were willing and able to engage in instant, ruthless, and deadly violence in defense of their lives, "bashing" would suddenly become much less of a problem.

__________________
"I personally think that America's interests would be well served if after or at the time these clowns begin their revolting little hate crime the local police come in and cart them off on some trumped up charges or other. It is necessary in my opinion that America makes an example of them to the world."

--Strange Famous, advocating the use of falsified charges in order to shut people up.

cthulu23

This is a fascinating case of "strange bedfellows." Is the NRA jumping on board with this story? If so, that is a surprise. Remember that Bush refused to meet with the Log Cabin Republicans and that their campaign contributions have been returned by Republican candidates. Of course, this just might be a story of opportunity for gun advocates.

I've never heard the term "hoplophobic" before. This is also fascinating, as it smacks of the "identity" politics that American conservatives profess to hate. Has the gun crowd joined the ranks of the cultural sensitivity set?

cthulu23

If more people weren't taught that gay people are an abomination before god, we might see a strong decrease in "bashing."

The_Dunedan

The NRA has ( predictably ) been silent on this. I and most other fairly radical pro-gun people consider the NRA to be an ineffectual crowd of DC sell-outs, at best.
Bush is far from the gun-friendly Republican he purports to be; I couldn't care less what he thinks of the Pink Pistols, and I'm pretty sure the PPs feel the same way; I know my friend does.
Since we can't make people stop thinking that gays are abominations, the best we can do is allow/encourage gays to defend themselves.
"hoplophobic" means "fear of weapons." From the Greek; "hoplon" for 'weapon' or 'shield' and "phobia;" an irrational fear.

__________________
"I personally think that America's interests would be well served if after or at the time these clowns begin their revolting little hate crime the local police come in and cart them off on some trumped up charges or other. It is necessary in my opinion that America makes an example of them to the world."

--Strange Famous, advocating the use of falsified charges in order to shut people up.

cthulu23

I googled the meaning. Don't you think that the phrase evokes the feeling of American leftist politics? Maybe it's just me.

As someone who's been actively involved with leftist politics, I can easily imagine the organizers of the demonstration overreacting to the PPs, but their insistence on bringing weapons into a parade does smack of intentional antagonism, don't you think? What reaction did they expect to get?

While we're talking, how do you feel about the Black Panther Party's belief in carrying arms for self-defence? This is another issue that the NRA wouldn't touch with a ten foot pole.

pan6467

If every splinter group decides to go to peaceful demonstrations and creating problems (bringing guns after having been asked not to = creating problems) keeps happening. We will lose our right to demonstrate at all. Constitutionally or not, no city or state will or has to put up with demonstrations gone awry.

Sounds like the PP's could have done their own thing, instead they chose to try to make a statement.

Let's see, there's a lot of homophobia and prejudice against gays without having crap like this happen. It tarnishes the whole event and there are people now who can point to this as a reason to deny the event the next time Stonewall tries to put on an event.

Sad very sad our country has gotten so pathetic and petty to put their ideas ahead of others and shitting on someone who is making a stance.

Stonewall was making a stance, obviously they felt they didn't want PP's there as that would bring about focus on an issue they didn't want focus on. PP's said fuck you, we want the gay rights but we want things our way, so fuck you Stonewall. Not a civilized way of handling things.

__________________
I just love people who use the excuse "I use/do this because I LOVE the feeling/joy/happiness it brings me" and expect you to be ok with that as you watch them destroy their life blindly following. My response is, "I like to put forks in an eletrical socket, just LOVE that feeling, can't ever get enough of it, so will you let me put this copper fork in that electric socket?"

The_Dunedan

If the Black Panthers want to carry openly, I say more power to 'em.

__________________
"I personally think that America's interests would be well served if after or at the time these clowns begin their revolting little hate crime the local police come in and cart them off on some trumped up charges or other. It is necessary in my opinion that America makes an example of them to the world."

--Strange Famous, advocating the use of falsified charges in order to shut people up.

MSD

They were not disarmed, although I can't recall whether or not they marched. The fact is that they were threatened by someone with a wooden club an 30 or so thugs standing behind her.

When I get my Concealed Carry Permit, I will be carrying my gun anywhere that I can legally carry it unless I feel that there is too much of a chance of it being taken or being off of my person (into a bar where a bunch of drunks could jump me and take it or I might be too intoxicated to safely aim and fire if the need arises, somewhere where I'll be swimming and have to take the holster off,) and in those situations, it will most likely go into a box with a combination lock in the trunk of my car.

A member of the Black Panthers is a prime target for violent vrimes perpetrated by those who do not agree with their message, and they have just as much of a right as every other responsible citizen to carry a self-defense weapon.

DelayedReaction

pan6467, have you ever actually fired a firearm?

I see no reason why anyone should be denied the right to carry a firearm. Stonewall was wrong to deny the Pink Pistols the chance to participate in the rally; sexual freedom is far more important than whether or not someone is armed. Assuming the Pink Pistols acted in a peaceful and legal manner (which they did), then Stonewall should have let them express themselves as they see fit.

Guns are not evil. They are not violent. They are tools. It is extremely easy for a criminal to obtain a firearm; why shouldn't citizens be allowed the same right. I have never met a gun owner who would deliberately disrupt a public event, in fact I have never met a gun owner who wanted to draw attention to the fact that he's armed.

Stonewall brought shame to the event by placing a fear of guns (hoplophobia really is a cool word) above her desire for sexual equality. Just as a person should not be discriminated against because of race or sexual preference, they should not be discriminated against because they're armed.

__________________
If ignorance is bliss, you must be having an orgasm.

cthulu23

Here in Louisiana (and other states, I think), even with a permit you aren't legally allowed to carry concealed in a bar. This is probably not a very controversial regulation.

Do you think that organizers of an event have the right to refuse entrance to those carrying weapons? I'm sure most concert promoters and schools try to bar weapons from their functions. Do you consider this an infringement of your rights?

Right on! Hell, the 2nd amendment is there so that the poor can protect themselves from The Man

DelayedReaction

Assuming it's a private venue, then they have the right to place any legal limitations that they feel are necessary. If a restaurant can keep me out for wearing a t-shirt (dress is considered a form of free speech), then a private entity can bar access because I'm armed.

The problem is that this was a public demonstration of gay pride, and the organizers threatened the Pink Pistols for legally carrying firearms. I find that to be repugnant.

__________________
If ignorance is bliss, you must be having an orgasm.

j8ear

No I don't think so as I saw this a little differently. It seemed to me that the organizers of the event went out of their way to single out and exclude a certain segment (however minority it might be) of the gay community, with peaceful and similar goals, apparently even violently. Essentially they were intolerant of people who wanted to attend an event designed to promote tolerance.

You may be homosexual but your not the right kind of homosexual to be included in our homosexual event...so we will violently and intolerantly try and prevent you from attending ~our~ peaceful tolerance event. That ~is~ a text book example of irony.

I find the blatant bigotry and intolerance of the organizers... directed at members of their own constituency to be rather bizarre. Yet interestingly not all that unexpected.

This is a debate about a group of hypocritical intolerant bigots over stepping their bounds in order to exclude members of their own community from participating in an event designed to forward the common aims of that community. THIS IS NOT a debate about guns, imo...

-bear

__________________
It's alot easier to ask for forgiveness then it is to ask for permission.

Lebell

One "yes" or "no" question:

Would it be appropriate for a plain clothes policeman to carry his weapon to these events?

__________________
"Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval of their own conscience." – C. S. Lewis

The ONLY sponsors we have are YOU!

Please Donate!

cthulu23

This feels lke a gun litmus test to me, but I would prefer that my friends not bring firearms into my house at all. I don't own one nor do I plan on purchasing one.

Surely you can't pack heat into major sporting events in your area. Do you think that this is unreasonable?

SLM3

Barring your statement at the end, you do not mention the word gun at all in your explanation. In my opinion, that's misleading. Perhaps for you guns are bountiful tools that enrich the lives of those who use them, but it isn't that way for all of us. Guns have a stigma attached to them which cannot be ignored. They generate legitimate feelings of unneasiness among many who are exposed to them.

Criticize the way they went about dealing with the gun toters, but don't make this into something it's not. You're equating their disdain for guns at a parade with discrimination based on some sort of inherent part of the person.

They didn't want guns at their parade. This isn't racism or bigotry and should not be placed on the same level.

Of course this is all IMO.


SLM3

cthulu23

Did the PPs show up with no foreknowledge of the reaction that they were going to create? It's a possibility, but I find it hard to believe.

pan6467

As stated here numerous times in other threads, yes I have fired quite a few guns. And may someday own one, I am not anti-gun.

I am, however, supportive of people who want to peacefully demonstrate and choose how to. Stonewall chose not to want PP's there, I am sure if PP's had not brought their guns and tried to get the focus off Stonewall and onto their group (leeching and being predators) then it would not have been a problem.

Instead PP let Stonewall do all the work and pay all the bills (permits, pay the off duty officers, pay to close the streets and what not)
and thought they could make a name for themselves and get free press. THAT IS WHAT THIS ALL BOILS DOWN TO, PLAIN AND SIMPLE.

No guns are not evil, never said they were. I just simply stated my opinion that guns have no place at a peace or peaceful demonstration. And that those who do bring them are doing so to create problems.

Love guns, like guns, hate guns or don't care about guns one thing is true guns are a prime symbol for violence, so why would you take one to a peace demonstration? I have yet to hear an answert to that.

I will reiterate this, Stonewall asked PP's not to come. PP's then had to have come to create problems and get free press from other people's hard work. That is wrong.

If the PP's want to have a rally they can do their own work and pay their own bills.

I'm heading Cols way anyway today so I'm sure I can learn more because I have several friends down there that are heavily active in the community.

It just amazes me, that there are people on this board who yell about zealots and fanatics and taking things overboard yet when it comes to them it's ok for them to be all those things because "damnit they are right and fighting for the right cause." Yet, they don't realize when others do the same on causes they don't approve of. (I don't mean that in a bad way, just find it interesting.)

There is nothing wrong with being passionate about your beliefs, that is what makes us all unique and interesting people. However, it is WRONG to force others to defend or harass about, their opinions. If you expect respect for your opinions and your causes YOU MUST SHOW RESPECT TO OTHERS.

How would you like it if you worked hard for a year to get a parade and rally for a cause, only to have some other group come and try to take over (as I asked before and yet, another question ignored out of fear.)

Why is it I ask legit questions and they get ignored yet have to defend MY OPINION? What you can't defend yours, so you don't have to answer the questions I asked?

Not trying to fight but it is not civil or respectful to ignore questions about your beliefs, yet continue to question and try to show up the opposing side.

__________________
I just love people who use the excuse "I use/do this because I LOVE the feeling/joy/happiness it brings me" and expect you to be ok with that as you watch them destroy their life blindly following. My response is, "I like to put forks in an eletrical socket, just LOVE that feeling, can't ever get enough of it, so will you let me put this copper fork in that electric socket?"

pan6467

Yes, BUT and this is a big but it is their job to have it and if they are off duty and attending those events as a civilian and not in an official capacity, NO. (Although most cities the plainclothesmen are considered "on duty" 24/7 even if not officially, but again it is their job to carry their weapon.)

Are you implying it is OK for anyone to carry a weapon to those places just because a cop can?

__________________
I just love people who use the excuse "I use/do this because I LOVE the feeling/joy/happiness it brings me" and expect you to be ok with that as you watch them destroy their life blindly following. My response is, "I like to put forks in an eletrical socket, just LOVE that feeling, can't ever get enough of it, so will you let me put this copper fork in that electric socket?"

DelayedReaction

The didn't try to "take over," they wanted to march in support of gay rights. Obviously I wouldn't be pleased if a group attempted to overthrow my work, but your question has no relevance to this issue. How would you like it if you wanted to participate in an event that meant a great deal to you, but were denied because of a minor issue?

I walked into the conversation a bit late, so I really don't think that's either deserved or necessary.

You seem convinced that the PP were being "predatory" and attempting to "leech" attention away from the purpose of the rally. How can that be when the main purpose of the PP is to promote the same goals as the rest of the marching gay community? Had Stonewall not made such an issue about the right to bear arms, nobody would have noticed or cared. The only person responsible for this mess is the organizer who denied them access for a foolish reason.

__________________
If ignorance is bliss, you must be having an orgasm.

Lebell

While you didn't answer my question, I will answer yours.

Yes, I think this is unreasonable.

Why am I trusted to carry a gun in traffic but not while watching baseball?

But I also respect that property owners may wish to restrict people on their property (such as your own example).

Of course, then it is my choice to enter your property under your restrictions or not.

__________________
"Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval of their own conscience." – C. S. Lewis

The ONLY sponsors we have are YOU!

Please Donate!

Lebell

No, I am not implying that.

What I am trying to establish is if it is the gun or the person carrying the gun you object to.

If the former, then you should object even to police carrying.

If the later, then it is not logical to me why you would object to my carrying presupposing that I am licensed, have had training, etc.

__________________
"Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval of their own conscience." – C. S. Lewis

The ONLY sponsors we have are YOU!

Please Donate!

analog

Well said, I agree.

This is becoming a very heated debate in here, just be sure we all keep it peaceful.

Speaking of peaceful- no one has explained exactly how having a gun on me makes me less peaceful. You've all done a decent job of dancing around the subject, but I find it equally ironic to the story that the supporters of this irony can't explain how this is so. It wasn't an anti-gun parade, it was a gay pride parade. Also, it was not on private property, as in a sporting event or some similar place, but out in the open on PUBLIC property.

When the law is observed, and allows a person to carry a weapon, you have no right to infringe on or abridge my right, simple as that.

Xell101

Guns have nothing to do with Gay Pride but only the organizer of the event. It is for Gay Pride, not him, it's silly.

BigGov

What would be the problem if they carried legal firearms in the parade when they are legally licensed to carry them? They're not going to be shooting their guns in the air for gay pride, if anything it probably makes them feel safer because they know walking in a gay pride parade puts a target on their back to many people. Knowing that they'll be unarmed doesn't help much either.

__________________
One day an Englishman, a Scotsman, and an Irishman walked into a pub together. They each bought a pint of Guinness. Just as they were about to enjoy their creamy beverage, three flies landed in each of their pints. The Englishman pushed his beer away in disgust. The Scotsman fished the fly out of his beer and continued drinking it, as if nothing had happened. The Irishman, too, picked the fly out of his drink but then held it out over the beer and yelled "SPIT IT OUT, SPIT IT OUT, YOU BASTARD!"

splck

How many gays get shot in the back while parading?

__________________
nice line eh?