Gays willing to do what it takes/If gun owners were gay (merged threads)

[NewShooter78]

Now what could we do if we had the Pink Pistols as major reps for the RKBA movement? They certainly can't be put into the many sterotypical ideas of who gun owners are (ie bubba, or the crazed militiaman, et al.). But we gun owners, as a group, are certainly devided into at least two camps. Hunters vs. firearms enthusiasts (for lack of a better word at the moment). The anti's don't like either of us, but we still bicker over fundamental ideas in our movement. The same person that thinks an EBR should be outlawed probably thinks that no one "needs" to hunt either.

Gays aren't necesarily one united group that all share the same ideas politically, or otherwise, but they can still act together to accomplish their goals. Yes the media has warmed up the gays as an equal group in our society, but I see nothing wrong with that. We SHOULD learn from what they have and are currently accomplishing.

 

[Trisha]

Being very, very careful. . .

If the 2A/RKBA community would reach out to target demographics, really active outreach instead of the bunker mentality of "They can come to us anytime," I think we'd see dramatic results. I know I've mentioned this before, so I'm treading lightly - but I just couldn't stay quiet any longer. . .

If entire shooting clubs would volunteer at AIDS hospices, at teen crisis centers, at LBGT community centers, et cetera, we'd connect to groups who only see the bunker stereotype and dismantle the myth - but I believe it has to be done on a large scale accross the Republic, and done consistently.

With the almost inherent Alpha personality common to shooters and gun enthusiasts though, that'll require some real commitment to growth, both on the individual level, as well as changing entrenched policies and behaviors in national organizations - but I believe it would result in us seeing a more demographically equable cross section of Americans active in all facets of the 2A/RKBA movement, because they don't have to be separate and isolated - that's one success of the 'Divide & Conquer' strategy the Liberal Socialists & the media have created that has to go.

Will you ( as a general population) do it? The footholds already exist, as evidenced by groups like Log Cabin Republicans, and Pink Pistols.

Here, on THR, I've read of some disgruntlment about the failure of the 'Melting Pot.' Now, we have the opening to really do something about it, because the right to keep and bear arms is the common thread connecting all Americans - but to the national perception, I don't think it's a visible and vigorous reality - YET.

What would be good first steps? 'Gay Friendly' Pride stickers, prominent in the window of every gun shop, and on the gates of every gun club. The 2A community standing up locally to defend and support gay marriage (everybody really is seen as being created equal, right?).

I know I'm probably really on thin ice here, but I have another step or two to take. . .

Govenrment has only been in the business of marriage as a way of collecting revenue IMO. You may be falling into another trap of divide and conquor if you support some 'Protection of Marriage' legislation - and implicitly embolden bigoted and homophobic scum to commit acts of violence. I see it as directly working against both the 'Melting Pot' and the inherent equality and inherent rights of any American - regardless of race, creed, religion, gender, etc.

You have a wonderful opportunity here, now.

Act.

Because otherwise, I believe the 2A/RKBA community may end up learning another LBGT slogan that expresses so much pain, agony, and ignorance:

"Silence = Death"

Trisha

 

[fix]

What would be good first steps? 'Gay Friendly' Pride stickers, prominent in the window of every gun shop, and on the gates of every gun club.

Not a terrible idea. I could probably support that, considering that discrimination against gays is very real.

The 2A community standing up locally to defend and support gay marriage (everybody really is seen as being created equal, right?).

I know I'm probably really on thin ice here, but I have another step or two to take. . .

Actually, you're treading water.

You may be falling into another trap of divide and conquor if you support some 'Protection of Marriage' legislation - and implicitly embolden bigoted and homophobic scum to commit acts of violence.

And you just went under. Having one thing in common is not enough to get me to support your pet issue.

Nice try though.

 

[TechBrute]

Trisha, I don't really see what gays as a group have to do with RKBA. Being gay or straight has nothing to do with RKBA.

 

[Trisha]

Oh, well.
To me, 2A/RKBA can, and in my mind, should be the catalyst to make the 'Melting Pot' a reality, to the demise of the Liberal Socialists.
Thanks for listening, & considering the concept.
I'll try and refrain from espousing this in the future.
Trisha

 

[fix]

I'll try and refrain from espousing this in the future.

Nothing wrong with making the case. Heck, I have a lot of ideas that others don't agree with. The gun culture is open to all, and it should be. Self defense is a human right. Gays have that right too. Although I totally disagree with the gay lifestyle on religious grounds, I have gay friends who I associate with from time to time. I also have friends who cheat on their wives. Both are the same in my view. Gays are no different from any other sinner. I have a terribly foul mouth when I lose my temper, so in the strictest sense...I'm on the hotseat too. I think the gun community should be more welcoming to gays and all others who have non-traditional views/lifestyles. We can share one issue while agreeing to disagree on others. That doesn't mean the issues we disagree on shouldn't be brought up from time to time. Often, these issues are distantly related. Without bringing them up, that might not be noticed. It just so happens that I don't feel the two issues in question on this thread are related.

 

[Gray Peterson]

Unfortunatley all of this fighting and arguing that's been going on over marriage has been really detrimental.

My opinion is that government should get completely out of the "civil marriage" business, since it has religious overtones, and give civil unions to everyone. However, the problem comes in when it comes to general international recognition. It would literally have to become recognized nationwide in order to get it done. Plus remember that the gay rights groups have compromised before, and attempted to, with no effect on the vociferousness of the anti-gay rights groups out there (just like anti-gun groups out there).

Gun owners and gays are much maligned minorities.

That being planned, me and my partner are getting a civil marriage from Multnomah County, Oregon now. Hee hee.

 

[Ironbarr]

Jeff Thomas & Trish...

Jeff - all it takes is for the first edict of the next president is "Kill the 2nd A". Which one of the expected two will be more apt to do this? And then, there is VP Clinton - in line as VP, and the tie-breaker in even votes. And please don't tell me that she isn't - won't seriously consider(ing) the office.

RKBA "looks good now" is teetering on the not too distant future. Let's see if the AWB dies, maybe the I can feel a bit better.

...........

Trish: I think you have a reasonable idea of how "our side" can proceed in one of our necessary efforts to gain support. You state pretty well what some of the problems are - changing hard-set attitudes is always difficult. Frankly, I don't know how many folks would react to suddenly seeing the decals/posters, etc. that you suggest in/on their familiar "digs" - but I see no reason why there can't be an overt warm welcoming to fellow gun owners and 2nd A believers. Maybe the advertising will grow of it's own weight.

The question is - how do we get started? As far as THR, I believe it is open to all now, limited to reasonable decorum. Maybe we could strike up some posts on other boards, invite the gun types over (if they are not here already). Maybe they'd invite us to drop a few lines in their forums.

It's a start... but where are these boards... and are they interested?

Who knows... maybe you have just started a bi-lateral RKBA relationship.

-IB

 

[Sergeant Bob]

Just an observation here.
The Pink Pistols set up a booth at a Gay Pride? event here in Mi. last year along with of a major Mi. RKBA group.
IIRC they only signed up one person. Even though the Pink Pistols chapter was newly formed, I would think that they would have gotten greater support than that.
Is it because the GLBT community is not generally RKBA friendly?
Or is it that the RKBA community is (or is perceived to be) anti GLBT?
I visited the Mi. Pink Pistols website and traffic is very low. It appeared that about half of it was members of another Mi RKBA group (newly started).
Is there just a general lack of interest?
It appears that the Pink Pistols have the same problems promoting RKBA within the GLBT community as mainstream gun enthusiasts have do in this country in general.

 

[Mulliga]

GLBTs haven't been any more "successful" in getting rights than gun owners. Sure, you can say they are more accepted when people see stuff like "Will and Grace" and "Queer Eye for the Straight Guy" on TV, but don't you also see action heroes using guns on the silver screen?

The only possible harm that I can think of that homosexual people can do to a straight person by being gay is by expressing affection (i.e. making out) in front of that person or their kids. But since I don't see many gay or lesbian makeout sessions (in real life, anyway ) happening in public, I see no immediate need to legislate against them.

 

[Ironbarr]

I wonder how many Pink Pistoleers hang out here - maybe we should dialog some, huh?

In numbers there is strength, right?

-IB

 

[FNFiveSeven]

The reason for the difference in "boldness" is obvious, it's a matter of consequences. What happens if you get married and it's illegal? Nothing, slap on the wrist. What happens if I break the law with respect to the NFA... hmmm.. how bout several years of my life down the toilet in federal prison. What's not to understand here? If I knew that maximum penalty for illegally possessing silencers and machine guns was just an infraction, I'd have a safe full of them next week!

 

[dpsychs]

Pink Pistol here...

Well, I wasn't going to comment on this thread, because I found some of the attitudes expressed a bit disconcerting, but someone said "How many Pink Pistols here?" so I figured I'd better speak up...

Regarding Pink Pistol participation, our Sacramento Chapter is up to 50+ members, and we shoot twice a month. Turnout for the shoots ranges from about 10 - 25. Although those numbers include some straight supporters, the majority of our members are GLBT. (GLBT = gay, lesbian, bisexual, or transgender) Given that we've been in operation less than a year, I think that's a pretty amazing interest level, and of course, it's primarily a result of having a (gay) friendly, non-intimidating forum.

I note that some of the posters on this thread seem to be actively supporting "defense of marriage" initiatives, and I do find that somewhat disconcerting. You say that your belief that marriage for gays is wrong is based on religious considerations, and I certainly support your freedom to worship/believe as you choose. However, do understand that the same portion of the bible that condemns homosexuality also condemns eating shellfish, and cutting your hair, while slavery, bigamy, and animal sacrifice are condoned. If you think that politicians shouldn’t “pick and choose†which laws to abide by, I would have to think that you would hold your religious leaders to the same standards. The point here is, unless you can really embrace all of these issues, you can’t logically claim that the source of your belief is the eternal and unchanging word of God – you have to think about it for yourself and take responsibility for what you choose to believe and support.

In a more practical sense, this is not a religious issue at all – I don’t want to get married in your church – I just want the government to recognize my union so that I can, for instance, visit my lifetime partner in the ICU if she were seriously ill or dying; or automatically inherit the home I’ve shared with her for the past several years, or any of [literally] a thousand other rights that are granted via the legal status of civil marriage. These, by the way, are NOT granted by “civil unions,†in part because civil unions are not recognized by interstate commerce laws – that is, married in one state is married in all, but this is not so for civil unions. This won’t change your life, but it will dramatically change mine. Note that marriage also confers a number of responsibilities, as well. (Any of you who have ever gotten divorced are well aware of this, I'm sure!!)

Finally, for those of you bemoaning the success of the gay rights movement (as contrasted to the RKBA movement), my perspective, with a foot in each, is that the gains we have made in both camps are *eternally* tenuous. Although I think both are moving in the right direction, it is easy to imagine going backwards rapidly in the “wrong†political climate. My dilemma, of course, is that no matter who is elected – Democrat or republican – it will be the “wrong†climate for one of the issues dearest to my heart. So I say, if republicans want more support from the GLBT community, they need to stand down from their anti-gay rhetoric – “less†government is definitely better in this arena. And conversely, Democrats who want the support of gun-owners need to eliminate their anti-2A perspectives. And both of those things start with us.

Last thought. As you compare the success and stance of the two “rights†movements, consider: when was the last time you or one of your friends was bashed, raped, or killed just for being a gun owner?

 

[Bainx]

Trisha, I don't really see what gays as a group have to do with RKBA. Being gay or straight has nothing to do with RKBA.

But then again, it may have everything to do with it IMHO.

 

[nualle]

TechBrute wrote:
Trisha, I don't really see what gays as a group have to do with RKBA. Being gay or straight has nothing to do with RKBA.

At the basic level, both are about refusing to submit to the tyranny of the majority. The majority does not have the moral right and ought not to have the legal capacity to make a minority live publicly according to majority beliefs.

 

[Trisha]

Let me give a pair of anologies, if I may:

Here in Colorado, local media has been giving some attention to the recovery of a college football player who survived a severe car accident. As I understand it, his entire family (including aunts, uncles, etc) has been by his side through everything he has faced since first arriving at the hospital. Broadcast from his hospital room, a reporter asked the young man's mother why everyone was always there. The answer feels apt to this discussion:

"You mess with one of us, you mess with all of us."

The 2A/RKBA movement has often proclaimed the Second Ammendment insures all of the Constitution is safeguarded - yet when some application of the Constitution is slighted, avoided, trampled, the RKBA community has not been showing up en-masse to right the wrong, heal the wounds.

Without consistent, persistent, large-scale proof (non-violent, and resolute) of the highly held value and personal priority of the Second Amendment in its role as the glue, the safety net for all of the Constitution and hence all of the Republic, the Second Amendment and the entire Constitution continues to be eroded, ignored, bypassed and broken with nigh impunity regularly.

Yes, GLBT rights are completely relevant to gun rights - just as are the rights of any to cherish and practice the religion (or not) of their choice, and so on.

Peoples of the RKBA community, to my way of thinking, should have always been and should now be the first, always in the forefront as guardians of this wonderful Republic - whether the issue is one you believe in, or not. When communities voted to reject PATRIOT, where were the hundreds, and the thousands of cheering gun owners dancing in the streets? I think you get the point.

I fear that RKBA and all gun owners will taste the bitter reality of "And when they came for me, there was no one left. . ."

'Molon Labe' is stirring, something that I believe intuitively connects all who cherish the inherent rights we celebrate.

Let's demonstrate another one:

"You mess with one of us, you mess with all of us."

'We' are "The People." We are the absolute owners and hence the absolute keepers of this Republic, created by the word and spirit of the Declaration of Independence and our Constitution - inclusive, without exception, down to the simplest phrase. It's a gift of incredible greatness - so failing to live up to those responsibilities as our first priority everyday lessens all of us, I think.

Diversity is our strength, if we, the people, are all Americans equally.

My second analogy: Colorado has seen and endured devastating wildfires (as have so many other states). People fled, and others were evacuated, relying on someone else to stop the flames, to feed and protect them - and it was done. Had some stayed and tried to bunker down and protect their individual homes in the face of a firestorm they would have perished.

In such a crisis, people look to emergency services to save & protect them.

With other crises, are we (generically) resting on our laurels, only using harsh language while writing checks to organizations to do our work (such as is comfortable) in our stead - and no more? Isn't that just another flavor of the 'paternal' mindset, so derided on these boards?

When the Mississippi broaches its banks, all hands turn out to man the sandbag lines. . .

(shrugging, sighing quietly)

Maybe all hands will try and finally appear only when catastrophy laps at the door.

I need more coffee. This has gone long, far more so than I intended when I set out. I guess I just can't leave well enough alone?



Trisha

 

[fix]

Trisha,

If someone was threatening your right to keep and bear arms(and they are!!!), it would be a clear cut case of "mess with one of us, mess with all." If they were doing it based on your sexual preferences, it would be the same deal. However, that is simply not the issue. Just because you are a gun owner does not mean that I should have to support you on every issue. Again, nice try. We agree on one thing (probaby many others), so lets just stick with what we have in common and avoid the issues that divide us.

 

[Trisha]

fix;

Considering the ground 2A/RKBA has lost in the last 40-50 years, can we afford 'issues that divide us?'

It sounds like the Socialist "Divide & Conquer" strategem has reaped a spectacular harvest. It sounds like the Melting Pot dream is a failure because of the Conservative Curtain.

Gun owners could & should be the healers of our Republic - the Minutemen. All threats, both foreign and domestic are the purview of all those who keep and bear arms. That the 'enemy' has changed guises is glaringly obvious - the tactics are both gross and subtle - and we don't get to face them on a field of honor - except in our hearts. Our weapons are our minds, our courage to grow and make new friends, our indomitable belief in the necessity for our inheritors to touch and take charge of a renewed truth we deliver to them. . .

Trisha

 

[Chris Rhines]

Trisha -

Sadly, you're seeing the problem right here. Gun owners, while they certainly talk a good game about freedom, are perfectly willing to advocate the initation of force against other people who have habits they dislike.

I wish I knew how to fix this problem, because if it doesn't get fixed, we're going to lose the fight.

- Chris

 

[fix]

Considering the ground 2A/RKBA has lost in the last 40-50 years, can we afford 'issues that divide us?'

That's exactly the point I'm trying to make. I'll stand shoulder to shoulder with you and fight for the RKBA, but not if you attempt to tie the issue of gay marriage to RKBA. So why don't we drop the issue and focus on where we do agree, because I'm no more likely to change my views on gay marriage than I am on RKBA. There are plenty of folks out there with pet issues that I'd wager are repulsive to every single member of THR, whether gay, straight, Christian, Muslim, Atheist, Pagan, or Buddhist. NAMBLA comes to mind. If NAMBLA suddenly embraces RKBA, should we all be expected to support their views just because we share one issue? I think not. I feel that the attempt to get all RKBA supporters on the same page politically will most likely be our downfall. We don't need to do that. RKBA should not be open for debate at all, regardless of whether you are liberal or conservative. If we can put the RKBA issue to rest, then we can all sit down and argue about the other issues without concerning ourselves with the other side trying to disarm us so they can force their views on us. RKBA should be as obvious as the right to breath...but sadly it is not.

 

[seeker_two]

Before I go farther, let me clarify my views...

1. Homosexuality is a sin in the eyes of God.
2. All sin is equal in the eyes of God. This includes lying, sex outside of marriage, and murder.
3. The sins you commit will be judged by God when you die.
4. You & your sins are matters b/t you & God---& none of my (or anyone else's) business.
5. Sin & earthly laws are two separate issues. You can break the law & not sin. You can sin & not break the law. You can even sin while following the law.
6. God will forgive you of sin when you ask Him.
7. It's not the business of ANY government to decide who can marry & who can't--but the government and the people can have a say in what is legally recognized in court cases.

That said, here's my opinion on the current situation....

The whole gay marriage issue isn't about homosexuality or morality. It's about how the Full Faith & Credit Clause of the US Constitution affects the laws of each state. If California or Massachusetts decides to legalize gay marriage, does Texas or Montana have to accept it as valid--even if that state's legislature & population don't want to? And, if TX & MT are forced to accept gay marriage, should MA & CA be forced to recognize TX & MT's CCW permits?

Bush is right about pushing for a Constitutional amendment, but he's pushing the wrong one. He should push for an amendment clarifying the FF&C clause to exclude marriage--making it the venue of each state to decide the qualifiers that it recognizes. Or (my preference), the amendment should say that the FF&C clause is absolute & that every state should recognize every other state's legal documents: marriage license, driver's license, CCW license--EVERYTHING.

All or nothing--that's what it has to be...

 

[Braz]

I don't care about personal views on homosexuality,

We've avoided that in this thread till now. It has nothing to do with the subject, which is how gays are making gains in public opinion, and how we might learn from their movement.

 

[Beetle Bailey]

The only possible harm that I can think of that homosexual people can do to a straight person by being gay is by expressing affection (i.e. making out) in front of that person or their kids. But since I don't see many gay or lesbian makeout sessions (in real life, anyway ) happening in public, I see no immediate need to legislate against them.

While you are certainly entitled to your opinion, please keep in mind that "gay and lesbian makeout sessions" happen everyday all over this country. And some of it publically. It's nothing to be worked up about (at least, nothing to be worked up about in a bad way). And while we may all have our own ideas about PTA, the very idea of attempting to enact legislation against a perfectly healthy activity simply because we feel uncomfortable about it is appalling to me. (This is assuming that you mean kissing/hugging/other forms of PTA that is considered okay for heterosexuals when you refer to "making out." If you mean more than that by "making out" - no Clinton jokes necessary here - then there are already laws like that).

BTW, correct me if I am wrong here, but isn't RKBA and specifically the 2A specifically about freedom? Isn't that what makes gun ownership more than just a sport or hobby?