Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Register to Vote: Rock the Vote, powered by Working Assets Wireless
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Pink Pistols: Gay Gun Rights Group Is Ready to Fire

By Sarah Klein, Alternate 101. Posted April 3, 2007.


An LGBT pro-gun organization that helps queer people fight back against hate crimes is challenging liberals and conservatives alike.
Advertisement

On a crisp Sunday morning, Nicki Stallard closes one mascara-coated eye and focuses intently on her target. Her long fingers are wrapped around the handle of a Colt .45; black go-go boots hug her muscular legs, which are firmly set in shooting stance. As she rapidly fires off rounds of ammunition, shells fall to the ground, rolling under her stacked platform heels.

Nicki Stallard isn't your average lady.

She was born a man.

Stallard, who has been living as a woman for the past year and a half, is the coordinator of the San Jose chapter of the Pink Pistols -- a national organization that encourages gay, lesbian and transgender people to arm themselves to prevent hate crimes. Part social gun club, part political platform, the group's slogans are, "Armed gays don't get bashed" and "Pick on someone your own caliber."

Founded in 2000 in Boston by libertarian activist Douglas Krick, the Pink Pistols have since grown to more than 40 chapters across the country. Not surprisingly, the group has garnered its fair share of controversy, both locally and nationally.

The Pistols unite two traditionally opposite ends of the political spectrum over one incredibly hotbed issue -- particularly in the state of California, where the Bay Area has been in an uproar over proposed gun control. The San Francisco chapter recently earned national attention during its campaign against the city's controversial proposed gun ban.

Certain members of both the pro-gun rights community and the gay community consider the Pistols to be a thorn in their side. But Stallard says the Pink Pistols just want what every American should be entitled to: the right to walk down the street without fearing for your life.

For Stallard, her individual right to carry a weapon isn't just a fundamental principle -- it's life insurance.

Strange Bedfellows

During a breakfast meeting at a Denny's in San Jose, Stallard is dressed in a tasteful gray pleated short skirt and black turtleneck. She pushes around a veggie omelet with her fork as the rest of the restaurant stares. She either doesn't notice or doesn't care, as she rattles off rapid-fire stats on hate crime incidents and studies that indicate homophobic discrimination among authorities.

"And you choose to be unarmed?" she asks, her blue, neatly made-up eyes wide with astonishment and indignation. "To me, that just doesn't make sense."

Stallard is in the middle of reciting statistics about gun control and personal safety when she's approached by an older man in a security guard uniform, his gray hair shorn in a military cut.

"I'm sorry, I don't mean to interrupt," he says, and looks directly at Stallard. "I agree with everything you say."

The man is an instructor with the National Rifle Association and spends several minutes discussing the finer points of gun control laws with the transgender woman sitting before him. He says to Stallard, "People need to be able to defend themselves against lawless acts," shakes her hand and leaves.

"That's pretty much the reaction we've gotten from conservatives," Stallard says, returning to her omelet.

It's a poetic illustration of the issues that cut to the heart of the Pink Pistols: uniting divergent political interests over one hugely controversial topic.

"We support a reasonable balance between individual rights and legitimate public safety concerns," Stallard says.

Jeff Soyer of Vermont, a self-described "gay gun nut" and blogger, is a longtime proponent of the Pistols.

"They're trying to get urban gays and lesbians to not be afraid of the one instrument that, when used properly and legally, can save their lives," Soyer says. "They take the mystique and scariness out of guns and show that a firearm is simply a tool."

Yet the Pistols have become something of a political hot potato, handled with caution -- or not at all -- by both gay rights organizations and pro-gun groups.

Michael S. Brown, a member of Doctors for Sensible Gun Laws, has written about the controversy for the politically conservative website Enter Stage Right.

"The leaders of the NRA are well aware of the growth of the Pink Pistols and it presents them with something of a dilemma," Brown writes. "On one hand, they are happy to see a traditionally anti-gun segment of the population swinging over to the pro-gun side. However, if they embrace this new group, they risk alienating some of their current members who actually do fit the right-wing stereotype." Stallard echoes this sentiment.


Digg!

See more stories tagged with: guns, queer, lgbt, hate crimes

Sarah Klein is the editor-in-chief of Alternate 101.

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from AlterNet! Sign up now »


Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
I guess I fall on the "conservative pro gun" side of things
Posted by: ateo on Apr 3, 2007 3:55 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I like how so much anti-gun propaganda was slipped into this story. Since when do armed citizens present more problems than those that are not armed? Maybe when the government moves to seize all firearms from the hands of citizens legally possessing them as per the constitution of the United States. I also like how a law enforcement officer says armed citizens presents a problem for law enforcement. Oh yes, clearly what we need is a defenseless citizenry. "Those who want to use firearms should join the police or military." Who was it that said that? Oh yes, Heinrich Himmler. A disarmed citizenry is that much easier to run roughshod over when it comes to their rights and freedoms. The only guarantor of freedom is force, never forget that. Our founding fathers wanted the people of the United States to be armed against the oppression of their own government as much as against foreign powers.

A gun is the ultimate survival tool. Further, a handgun and a concealed carry permit is the ultimate urban survival tool. The police cannot protect you and in fact that really isn't their job. Their job is to show up 10 or 20 or 40 minutes after the call and take pictures of your corpse then try to catch the person who did it. You can get a pizza delivered faster than you can get a police officer out to your residence in many U.S. cities.

Life is random enough as it is. I hope I never have to use my weapon in anger but if the time comes I'll be glad I have it. Why take additional chances unnecessarily. An unarmed person is betting their survival entirely on the good will of strangers. Frankly I don't trust you with my life and you shouldn't trust me with yours.

There is nothing "vigilante" about it. This is about self defense - a basic human right. Full support to anyone who chooses to defend themselves against those who would do them harm.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Hmm Posted by: ateo
» RE: Hmm Posted by: yoursfaithfully
» RE: Hmm Posted by: ateo
» RE: Yea, you get it. Posted by: ateo
Bravo! Here's another angle
Posted by: scott.gregory on Apr 3, 2007 4:03 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
YES, the liberal/left needs to get over it's gun phobia. The reason I can give is from a recent Orson Scott Card novel "Empire" where a right-wing, Christian fanatic using (using, not a believer at all, a cynic) General coup-leader takes over the U.S., or tries. And when an ADC questions that the citizenry won't follow his junta and will resist, the General says"Yes, maybe, but it doesn't matter. We've got the guns"

The liberal/left needs to arm to the fullest extent of the law. The Christain nazis, James Dobson, Falwell, et.al. have a plan well in place to take control of major institutions. I know of a Christian fundamentalist family with 5-6 children; the males are all in the military or metropolitan police (of course, the females are having babies as fast as they can pop them out). They're being infiltrated as a covert conspiracry against our constitutional republic.

And it may come down to who has the guns.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I'm not in favor of guns, but...
Posted by: nopuppy on Apr 3, 2007 4:41 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I've been advocating for quite some time that gays/lesbians/etc. should reclaim the word "gay-bashing," and make it mean "gays beating the living crap out of stupid redneck idjits who go 'round beating up on them." Are they afraid of us? Well, give them something to be afraid of!

I know that answering violence with violence isn't any sort of answer. In fact, violence on both sides will only escalate the problem. But when a gang of homophobes is surrounding you, a .45 would be a lovely thing. Sometimes you have to stand up and say "Enough." And the "reverend" Fred Phelps and his incest-ridden clan would be a great first target.

Of course, while Phelps and his ilk keep advocating the deaths of homosexuals, the proof that we're better than him is that he's still alive.

Ah, the conundrums of morality and righteous indignation...

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Pink Pistols
Posted by: sbgatl on Apr 3, 2007 5:54 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I would like more information on this, and possibly setting up a group here in Atlanta, Ga where I live. Orginally from Savannah, Ga we have had many gay bashings, we need to take up arms and let the people know we are strong, and we are not going to take this anymore. I was raised with arms, and know how to use them, and am always armed, and I think more of our community needs to join in on this.

Stephen in Atlanta, Ga

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Pink Pistols Posted by: Xynyx
Gun Crazies
Posted by: NoPCZone on Apr 3, 2007 6:13 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I do not have a problem with Guns. They are morally neutral- neither bad or good. I also realize that there are more firearms in circulation in the US than there are people in it, effectively ruling out any kind of real gun control. The real issue is the legal standing and consequences that govern the possession and use of firearms.

I am not in favor of widespread issue of concealed permits or the sale of any kind of automatic weaponry. It's not the concept. but the type of people who seem to want/need either of them. Who do you want shooting or brandishing firearms on the streets and in the homes of our nation?

After 20 years of medical work I have a pretty good understanding of how bullets can destroy human flesh, end human life or leave someone a mere shell of their former self. I do not want to see large numbers of people carrying firearms for whatever good reason. This nation is far too violent as it is.

I clicked on the link to check out the site and it lost me with the cheesy GIF animation of a pistol firing. It's pretty obvious what we are dealing with- gun nuts. When push comes to shove it comes down to the gun- not sport or protection. No thanks.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Gun Crazies Posted by: Domokun
» RE:you are safer for it... Posted by: NoPCZone
» RE: Gun Crazies Posted by: alicelillie
Libertarian garbage
Posted by: yoursfaithfully on Apr 3, 2007 6:13 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This is simply libertarian garbage. Yes, we know homosexuals can be just as conservative as heterosexuals. Who cares?

This is part of the right's divide and conquer strategy - create in-fighting amongst liberals on contentious issues such as gun control. I propose that this be applied to the right as well - create in-fighting amongst Republican-Libertarians and Republican-Total-Social-Control-Fascists. Force the NRA's hand. If the NRA lets gay groups participate at rallies, I suspect that will hurt NRA rally attendance (and donations) in the long-run. If it doesn't, perhaps it will lead towards increased tolerance (although I doubt it).

A divided NRA would be a beautiful thing. It only has power as a mega-money monolith.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Libertarian garbage Posted by: freeda'all
» AK-47s Posted by: YogiBear
» RE: Libertarian garbage Posted by: alicelillie
» RE: Libertarian garbage Posted by: yoursfaithfully
my weapon of choice
Posted by: freeda'all on Apr 3, 2007 8:02 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Well if I ever find myself at the point where I would want to carry a weapon I'd pick a nuke and blow this whole shebang back to the stoneage. After all it's the rock throwing that got us into this mess in the first place.

And ya know, if this author was writing about a woman rather than a tg everyone would be all over her for her sexist writing about this person's appearance & grooming. Ugh, alternet should just do everyone a favor and dump itself in the trash.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: my weapon of choice Posted by: AlienSlave
Nitpicker
Posted by: patvic1405 on Apr 3, 2007 8:04 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Men, even men who are now women, don't "bear" children; they father them. If anyone cares, I am an extremely liberal lesbian who owns a handgun (and a couple of dildos). Stereotypes are made to be broken.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Nitpicker Posted by: Joshua Holland
» Josh Posted by: famouspipeliner
» RE: Nitpicker Posted by: karma_ran_over_dogma
So what?
Posted by: QuestionAuthority on Apr 3, 2007 8:34 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The only thing that surprises me is that it took this long to happen. It's a logical response to gay bashing. A lot of gay-bashing bullies would think twice about attacking a gay person that was openly carrying. Or even better, might be carrying concealed.

You can only bully someone that is weaker than you or is defenseless. If there's a good chance that the victim might blow the bully's pathetic a-- away with a .357....Well, it's a good deterrent.

Hey, isn't that what the Conservatives say about carrying a gun? LOL Get out of the logic of that one, Carrying Christian Conservatives, if you can without torpedoing your own NRA!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» The Reality.... Posted by: CatDad
Preying on the weak
Posted by: secretchief on Apr 3, 2007 8:48 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I totally understand the obvious idea between Pink Pistols, but I certainly don't like the prospect of everyone carrying a gun.

I am not naif enough to think that some people don't need a gun to defend themselves, but I hate the fact that the Pink Pistols send a message that sounds to me like : "Continue preying on the weak. I am not one of them anymore."

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Preying on the weak Posted by: knappster
Nothing like fighting bigotry with firearms
Posted by: sausage on Apr 3, 2007 9:23 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Of course, the way the boys of the Second Amendment crowd like stroking their barrels...?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Sarah Klein is irrelevant.
Posted by: HughScott on Apr 3, 2007 9:54 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I checked the Detroit Metro archives for articles written by Klein before she quit in disgust and moved to San Francisco.

In the past two years, she wrote 25 pieces about Detroit’s cultural underground and not one dealt with victims of Gulf War 2. I guess the Motor City doesn't have any Iraq veterans living in its midst, struggling to survive both economically and psychologically after being used and discarded by the Pentagon.

Sarah Klein deserves the same attention earned by Ann Coulter. ZERO.

Hugh E. Scott, Vietnam vet and the editor of King-George.biz -- the only website with hardcopy proof of White House corruption.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Support ALL of the constitution while it still exists
Posted by: hot karlrove on Apr 3, 2007 10:28 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
All progressives should be armed. All progressives should support the ENTIRE constitution.

The police are under no legal obligation to protect you.

I'd love to get rid of all guns inan ideal world. We don't live in an ideal world, far from it.

History has shown repeatedly that a disarmed population can easily fall prey to despots.

A disarmed citizenry is slaughtered easily.

Be aware tha the Xtian fundies are arming themselves to the teeth and infiltrating our entire security apparatus from your local police to the USAF Strategic Air Command.

Remember the old revolutionaly war flag of "don't tread on me"

We may not fix societys ills but we can assert our constitutional rights so there are consequences when we are stepped on.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Remember the first modern gun control act was racist
Posted by: hot karlrove on Apr 3, 2007 10:49 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Gun control act of 1968, WHY?

Because the Black Panthers were arming themselves.

Armed blacks asserting their constitutional rights scares the powers that be.

The proles/plebes armed scares the powers that be.

Look at what happened in Orleans after Katrina. The cops scattered, left the citizens to fend for themselves. Next, Blackwater goons many of whom were not US citizens started rounding up all of the LEGAL firearms from US citizens in New Orleans.

So I don't understand so called progressives who distrust the evil men running this government yet will disarm themselves to the same government run by the same evil people?

Please explain how this works?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Exactly Posted by: raven200
When you let them characterize you as a "gun nut"...
Posted by: ABetterFuture on Apr 3, 2007 10:52 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
...for standing on the Constitutional principle of the second amendment, you've already lost ground.

The next "nut" will be "freedom of expression nuts" and "anti-slavery nuts"...etc.

Insist on being reasonable about our extraordinary, and insist that whomsoever seeks to defile it is the true "nut", whether they run as Republicans, Democrats, or Pinkies.

Oh, and a grand hooray to the Pinkies for adopting a normalized position regarding our Constitutional guarantee that we may choose to keep and bear arms. I cite this group as further evidence that LGBTetc people are just like you and me. No more, no less.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Missing an important word. Posted by: ABetterFuture
I used to be against all guns...
Posted by: truthteller on Apr 3, 2007 11:13 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Until I realized that the Neo-Con wingnuts are counting on we liberals to not to be armed, so as to resist their subversive fascist takeover. Of course average citizens can't match an army straight up with their heavy artillary, but the insurgents in Iraq seem to be doing quite well with small arms and guerilla tactics against the U. S. Army. That is how you fight an occupying force. It's how we fought the British - twice; it's how the N. Vietnamese won; it's how people defending their homes and ways of life win.

The other thing that changed my mind on gun ownership was my growing realization that our oil dependent way of life is coming to an end. There will be severe dislocations and hardships involved. Those not prepared for the end of civilization as we know it are going to try and take from those who are prepared. I don't consider myself a survivalist loner. On the contrary, I'm looking for an environmentally aware intentional community in which to make a stand in the face of the coming hard times. But I think that within these communities there needs to be serious thought given to having community arsenals readily available, and residents trained in how to use them. Having good relations with others living around you is the preferred way of avoiding violence, but I think various fiction writers over time have shown how events can lead even normally peaceful peoples to spiral down into near total chaos.

I would also advise every intentional community to aquire a battery powered ham radio. Licenses are now much easier to obtain, since the requirement for proficiency in Morse Code has been ended.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Irrelevant
Posted by: yoursfaithfully on Apr 3, 2007 12:26 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
If I'm the only Alternet reader who will criticize this group's endorsement of the NRA and their values, then AlterNet is, more than likely, irrelevant in the liberal community. I accept that there are libertarian elements in on-line left-leaning communities, but they shouldn't dominate this much.

Regardless, for all of you who think concealed weapons can prevent crime - here's a concealed weapon that caused a crime. And the crime took place RIGHT NEXT TO AN ARMED SECURITY GUARD. Clearly this man was not scared of the GUN IN PLAIN SIGHT HELD BY A TRAINED GUARD, so why would he be scared of a white-collar surburbanite carrying a concealed gun?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Irrelevant Posted by: dover23
» RE: Irrelevant Posted by: yoursfaithfully
» RE: Irrelevant Posted by: dover23
» Well, its likely because... Posted by: JoshuaLudd
What a filthy little article.
Posted by: Staggo on Apr 3, 2007 12:54 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
What a cheap excuse for such repetitious stereotyping and bigotry. Don't like it when GLBTs (gay, lesbian, bi, transgendered) make you eat your own s**t, do ya? It's really a matter of kill or be killed. People incessantly fail to see that queer killing is an epidemic and an American sport. As usual, Progressives are neocons when it comes to GLBTs.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Gay men beat up homophobes
Posted by: fanny666 on Apr 3, 2007 1:17 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I dunno about carrying guns, but here is a great story. 2 frat boys called a gay couple "fags" and then started attacking them... then got their asses kicked by the gay guys. The mugshots are PRICELESS!

homophobes get asses kicked

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I understand hate crimes, but guns are not the answer
Posted by: craftne on Apr 3, 2007 2:42 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I am no stranger to hate crimes, even though I am not gay or lesbian, I understand the serious threat hate crimes present. I understand being afraid, wanting to protect yourself. Guns don't do that.

The argument that "guns don't kill people, people kill people" is ludicrous. You haven't seen a broccoli or a squirrel brandishing a gun lately, have you? Guns are not robots designed to work on their own, they are designed to work in the hands of human beings. And human beings IN AMERICA have wreaked more deaths from guns than any other country in the world, bar none, and by a shocking percentage.

Has anyone ever heard of a drive-by knifing? Or a teller held up with a baton? Or a child accidentally killed by finding his father's baseball bat? Or an office or school full of people kicked to death?

Guns offer a quick way to kill many people at the same time from a distance. No other weapon is as capable of destroying human life.

America's report card on our responsibility with guns (eg, the RIGHT to bear arms) should loudly and plainly declare that we do not deserve to bear arms as individuals. Has anyone looked at the statistics of passionate crimes in the past year across the US? Would those school children in Amish Country been able to protect themselves from a madman, someone convinced of doing harm to them, and himself, by being able to carry guns to school? Should we allow schoolchildren to carry guns to protect themselves against would-be attackers? Should we allow postal workers to carry guns?

It is a privilege, not a right. If it were a right, we would be able to buy them without permits.

I returned 16 months ago from living five years in a country where the citizens did not have the right to bear arms. Crime involving guns, or any other crime for that matter, was not an everyday commonplace occurrence. Curiously, crime is very low comparatively.

You say, yes but the criminal element will get the guns... and I am here to tell you that I walked safely in the streets, a woman alone, after dark, going to 24-hour teller machines in a Western country where people were not allowed to have possession of guns. I didn't have to hold my purse so close to my body. I didn't have to be afraid, and I wasn't. I rode public transportation near midnight with no worries.

The argument that the left/liberals are afraid of guns is ridiculous. The argument here is to own guns to protect. I will tell you, that is fear. Gun owners that own guns for protection ARE AFRAID, not the people who rally against guns. The people that rally against gun ownership do so with greater sanity, and perhaps a fair greater amount of working brain cells than those who argue for gun ownership.

While I think guns are reprehensible myself, and do not think sports that involve guns are responsible, and I believe hunting little animals and fish is even more reprehensible (what did that flounder ever do to you, eh?) , I am not suggesting that that has to curtail the bloodthirsty fun you all want. If you want to hunt, rent the gun at the gun lodge. Same with recreational shooting. Gun sports don't need to have individuals owning and keeping the guns.

If people researched the statistics all over the world, I dare say you will not find a country outside America with a worse report card on gun deaths (excluding war).

Shame, America, shame.

regards

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» So what IS the answer? Posted by: kittynboi
» RE: So what IS the answer? Posted by: craftne
William Burroughs was right.
Posted by: Ian B. on Apr 3, 2007 6:44 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
To paraphrase as near as my memory permits: Burroughs stated that gays should be like the Isrealis and arm themselves to the teeth. When you're a minority hated by sensless bigots who represent the majority, the only practicle response is to demonstrate that if they don't leave you alone, you will retaliate. Bigots of all stripes are mere cowards underneath the bravado.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Brava for these courageous & wise words
Posted by: freeda'all on Apr 3, 2007 8:31 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
BRAVA CRAFTNE, BRAVA!!

YOUR WORDS ARE THE ONLY SENSIBLE ONES TO STAND OUT (AND I INCLUDE MYSELF IN THIS) IN THIS MADHOUSE OF IDIOTS WHO THINK BEING ARMED TO THE TEETH IS THE ANSWER TO THREATS.


Thank you for your sensibility & honesty.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Did Gun Manufacturers Sponsor This Article?
Posted by: CatDad on Apr 3, 2007 8:57 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Let's take every disenfranchised group America and give that every member of that group guns...What a great idea!!!!...When that person gets called a (fill in the blank): fag, nigger, spec, grease ball, dwarf, mulatto, white trash, trailer trash...BOOM!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Guns are often used for suicide
Posted by: metrodorus on Apr 3, 2007 9:39 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I have two reactions to this (and I'm gay as a goose).

The most likely use for a gun in your home is suicide. Forget your visions of valiantly protecting yourself. Far more likely is that you get a bit depressed and a gun offers an quick way out of it. And you're gone. For good. Or maybe a family member will kill herself of himself for the same reason.

Next most likely scenario is that someone gets drunk or drugged up or otherwise is impaired. So she or he takes the gun and shoots someone--again a family member.

I live in more fortunate circumstances now, but I lived in urban Chicago at the height of the senseless violence there of the 1970s. My experience then still informs my thinking now. Almost always, the people one least wants to have guns in your neighborhood are the ones who wind up with the most guns. The very fact you want a gun is a powerful reason that you shouldn't have one.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» handguns cause suicide Posted by: metrodorus
» Isn't suicide progressive? Posted by: YogiBear
Gays Protecting Themselves by Being Armed
Posted by: alicelillie on Apr 4, 2007 2:40 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Good.

I am glad someone on the "left" (assumably this includes the Pink Pistols) is realizing that law abiding individuals need to be armed.

The situation right now is that nobody is allowed to carry a gun except for cops and crooks. Crooks are because they are not going to jump through all the hoops to be legally allowed to arm.

The rest of us do have to and this is a disincentive.

I personally believe the Second Amendment is just like the rest of the Bill of Rights: It applies to individuals and is an absolute right. This means that the government has no more business making it a privilege by licensure and registration requirements than it has making speech and press a privilege.

The NRA, in my own opinion, is not an actual gun-rights organization, and Bush is not a pro-gun President. I believe this because they believe you should need government permission to be armed.

Why should you? After all, those bureaucrats who decide who can and who cannot carry are not better that the rest of us.

Who can make the decision as to whether you or your children or young teenagers are qualified to own and carry a gun? The person in the mirror, that's who.

With the encroaching Bush police state, and those on the left seem to agree with the libertarians (which I am) on this, we the people need to be able to protect ourselves, not just from ordinary crooks who victimize people while the police are chasing pot-smokers, but also from the sometimes way-out-of-line militarized police. Remember New Orleans.

Either we use our rights or we lose them.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Are cops' lives worth more than civilian lives?
Posted by: robpower on Apr 4, 2007 5:13 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Am I the only one here bothered by the T-COPS founder opposing our individual right to self defense, despite the fact that she owes her own life to being armed when she was the intended victim of a hate crime?

I guess she's just saying "all queers are equal, but some queers are more equal than others."

Though my husband and I have the financial means to protect ourselves without guns, not all LGBT folks are as fortunate as we are. Some people can't avoid taking the night shift on their job. Some people can't avoid living or working in a dangerous neighborhood. Some people have no choice but to walk alone on the sidewalk at night. Not surprisingly, the wealthy liberal gay Democrats who claim to speak for all us queers on issues like gun control all have cushy 9-5 day jobs in office buildings with security, then they go to their office building's secure garage, drive home (or are driven home) to their secure (sometimes gated) communities in their private cars, where they're protected by card access, alarm systems, and well-paid security staff or suburban police. Of course people like THAT don't need guns. They're already safe.

The guns are for the rest of us.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The absolute silliest thing about pro-gun right wingers?
Posted by: xbj on Apr 5, 2007 10:24 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
How they'll all end up like the crew in Waco, with US military tanks running over their houses like Israeli tanks do in Palestine.

Think your arms caches can stand up to that kind of assault? Good luck, you gun idiots will be the first to go.

Now that's what I call SOME protection...

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Something Was Left Out
Posted by: faultroy on Apr 5, 2007 6:33 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
As one reads this article, one gets the impression that there is difficulty in civilians obtaining concealed carry permits. The last time I looked, at least 43 states had some form of civilian concealed carry permits.
Note that most of the article about self defense and the right to carry centered in the area of California. California, New York, New Jersey Illinois and my state Wisconsin, still do not have the option of concealed carry permits for civilians. Most other states do. In all states that allow concealed carry, there have been very few if any incidents were this right/privilege has caused good citizens any harm--contrary to the assertions of most liberals.
Had the main subject of the article lived in any of other states, the issue of being able to "carry," would not be an issue.
It's an excellent story and hits home the fact that no matter what your gender, political outlook or race, every American has the right to live his life without fear of physical reprisals. I've been a life member of the NRA, and I have never heard anyone make any comment otherwise. I would strongly disagree with the writers comments that supporting the Transgered in their right to protect themselves is not fully and openly supported by the NRA. As a matter of fact, even though I am a staunch supporter of the NRA, I would drop them like a hot potato if it ever came out that they discriminate against gays and transgenered people the right to defend themselves.
As a matter of fact the NRA has gone in the opposite direction and has focused almost its entire efforts on bringing women and minorities under the NRA banner. The current president of the NRA is a woman, Sandy Froman who is smart, likeable and one of the most effective leaders the NRA has ever had.
Regardless what liberals have said, the NRA has never waivered in its focus and comittment to empower all Americans the right to defend themselves from lawless activity. Having said this, I will certainly concede that I have "winced" many times on the candidates that they have supported. Like any family, one takes the good with the bad.
It is also a fallacy that the NRA backs only arch conservative republicans. The NRA will financially support any candidtate that takes a strong pro gun/personal right of protection position. Unfortunately in the majority of cases, these have been Republicans. Having discussed this with the NRA management, they complain about the fact that there are not enough liberal candidates that support right-of-self- defense positions and would be more than happy to support such candidates.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Brute force
Posted by: YogiBear on Apr 6, 2007 7:56 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Until human beings quit acting like animals, I'll defend the right to bear arms. Oh wait, we are animals.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]