Pink Pistols Threatened by Club-Wielding "Official"

Discussion in 'Legal' started by MuzzleBlast, Jun 29, 2004.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. MuzzleBlast

    MuzzleBlast Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    498
    Location:
    Arkansas
    From their website:

    "Ohio Pink Pistols Threatened by Club-Wielding "Official" and Horde of Stormtroopers at Pride Festival, Ordered to Surrender Firearms

    Initially three, then later, four members of the Central Ohio Pink Pistols, a group promoting the safe handling of firearms in the GLBT community, were threatened by the Executive Director of Stonewall Columbus, who wielded a 2-foot club, and up to 30 volunteer security personnel at the Stonewall Columbus Pride Event on Saturday, June 26. The Pink Pistols were repeatedly ordered to surrender their legally-owned and carried firearms by a steadily-growing army of guards. Knowing the law was on their side, the Pink Pistols refused to surrender their property or knuckle under to illegal threats of violence, search, and seizure by Stonewall Columbus personnel. Police were summoned at Pink Pistols request. No firearms were surrendered or confiscated, and no arrests were made, as no laws were broken."

    More of the story at the site:

    http://www.pinkpistols.org/index2.html
     
  2. Henry Bowman

    Henry Bowman Senior Member

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2002
    Messages:
    6,717
    Location:
    Cincinnati, Ohio
    There are bigots of all varieties.
     
  3. Jeeper

    Jeeper Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2002
    Messages:
    1,062
    Location:
    Mesa, AZ
    Glad to see that they didnt cave in.
     
  4. Warren

    Warren Member

    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2004
    Messages:
    2,454
    Location:
    Northern California
    From the rest of the article....


    ***!!!!

    Who the Hell does she think she is?


    To threaten to steal personal property and then to show up with a billy club and 20+ security types and threatens to violence...man what a whack job.
     
  5. El Tejon

    El Tejon Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    18,090
    Location:
    Lafayette, Indiana-the Ned Flanders neighbor to Il
    The Weather Channel just reported that the skies over Columbus, Ohio are about to turn legal-pad yellow.
     
  6. ReadyontheRight

    ReadyontheRight Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2002
    Messages:
    4,337
    Location:
    Minnesota - nine months of ice and snow...three mo
    From the Pink Pistols Link:

    "...Does a woman holding a two-foot truncheon, surrounded by thirty bullies in Security t-shirts, have the right to intimidate a handful of peaceful event attendees, regardless of how you feel about their politics? ..."

    Sounds to me like an excellent example of why the individual right to keep and bear arms is so important.
     
  7. jefnvk

    jefnvk Member

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2004
    Messages:
    4,940
    Location:
    Metro Detroit, Michigan
    Wait. A buunch of security guards armed with clubs were going to take away someone's gun? Doesn't that sound a bit stupid to anyone else?
     
  8. ny32182

    ny32182 Member

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2003
    Messages:
    5,838
    Location:
    Clemson, SC
    I wonder if they had been assaulted by these "security guards" (who are not police), if they would have been justified in doing whatever was neccessary to protect themselves...

    They would be playing right into the anti's hands though.
     
  9. atk

    atk Member

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2003
    Messages:
    423
    Location:
    Massachusetts
    ttbadboy,

    By the "preponderance of force" reasoning, yes. By "attacked with a deadly weapon" reasoning, yes.

    As far as walking into the anti's hands, how do you figure? The antis think that guns cause violence. In this case, clubs are being used for violence, and guns would be used to stop it.
     
  10. jnojr

    jnojr Member

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2004
    Messages:
    1,096
    Location:
    Chandler, AZ
    Can anyone post the text or a link to a mirror? The content filter at work blocks pinkpistols.org for "Lifestyle, Mature, Obscene/Extreme"

    Please, no comments about that... I know, and there isn't a thing I can do about it.
     
  11. Warren

    Warren Member

    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2004
    Messages:
    2,454
    Location:
    Northern California
    Ohio Pink Pistols Threatened by Club-Wielding "Official" and Horde of Stormtroopers at Pride Festival, Ordered to Surrender Firearms
    FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

    Initially three, then later, four members of the Central Ohio Pink Pistols, a group promoting the safe handling of firearms in the GLBT community, were threatened by the Executive Director of Stonewall Columbus, who wielded a 2-foot club, and up to 30 volunteer security personnel at the Stonewall Columbus Pride Event on Saturday, June 26. The Pink Pistols were repeatedly ordered to surrender their legally-owned and carried firearms by a steadily-growing army of guards. Knowing the law was on their side, the Pink Pistols refused to surrender their property or knuckle under to illegal threats of violence, search, and seizure by Stonewall Columbus personnel. Police were summoned at Pink Pistols request. No firearms were surrendered or confiscated, and no arrests were made, as no laws were broken.

    June 28, 2004 (PP NATIONAL) Columbus, OH: On Saturday, June 26, about five members of the Central Ohio Pink Pistols (COPP) attended the Stonewall Columbus Pride Parade and Festival at Bicentennial Park in downtown Columbus. The Pink Pistols had planned upon marching behind the BRAVER contingent, but were invited to march with BRAVER, the Buckeye Region American Veterans for Equal Rights. They assisted in the carrying of the huge 20' x 30' American flag at the front of the group as part of the flag?s honor guard. Several of the Pink Pistols members carried unloaded firearms openly, which is legal according to the Ohio Constitution.

    Exactly two days prior to the event, Kim Rife of the Central Ohio Pink Pistols had received this email from Kate Anderson of Stonewall Columbus, prompted by leaked internal communications sent to her by unknown persons. (Spelling & syntax errors have been included.)

    "Dear members of the Pink Pistols,

    This is official notice and response to the email below that I received today.

    NO FIREARMS, LOADED OR UNLOADED, CONCEALED OR EXPOSED WILL BE ALLOWED IN THE PARADE LINE-UP, THE PRIDE PARADE, NOR THE PRIDE FESTIVAL.

    Should anyone bring a firearm this Stonewall Columbus event, the firearm will be confiscated and not returned and the individual will be rejected from the event. I have notified all Pride Committee members and co-chairs and I will also alert all security personnel and the police.

    I appreciate your group but we at Stonewall Columbus cannot allow any opportunity for violence to occur, intentional or unintentional. There will also be no solicited like you did last year, if so, you will be aske to leave. It is past the deadline for a booth but we will be happy to sell you a booth space. If you want a space to distribute your literature and to sign up members, email Michael XXXXXX at [email protected] (Email address omitted, as he had nothing to do with the letter.)

    This may seem severe to you but it is nothing more than an attempt to keep all people safe and afford them the opportunity to have the most fun they can have on Saturday. I would greatly appreciate all of your members being notified immediately, so that you can make alternative plans.

    Sincerely,
    Kate Anderson, Executive Director, Stonewall Columbus
    [email protected]"

    Ms. Rife seriously doubts the veracity of the statement that says: "I appreciate your group but..." and will be drafting a letter later in the week asking Anderson expand upon this statement. "I think this was simply an attempt to placate us; I think she appreciates our group about as much as she appreciates her belly button lint."

    Ms. Rife forwarded this email to Pink Pistols National Media Spokesperson Gwen Patton, who sent it to Daniel McCaughan, Pink Pistols House Counsel. She also discussed the email with another firearm law attorney friendly with the organization. Both attorneys assured the Pink Pistols that the threats described in the email were spurious, and could not be acted upon, legally. A private citizen cannot legally confiscate the property of another, and certainly cannot refuse to return it. Such an act constitutes theft. To steal a firearm is a particularly serious offense, one with Federal consequences. The event staff could also not search persons not openly displaying firearms without their permission. To do so would constitute assault.

    The parade itself was without incident. But trouble occurred while three of the Pink Pistols were having lunch at the festival site afterwards. According to sources, about halfway through lunch, the first two staff persons, one bearing a 2-foot long, inch-thick truncheon (which she referred to dubiously as a "keychain", by virtue of the split keyring and key at one end), accosted the group with the statement: "I thought I told YOU PEOPLE not to bring firearms in here?" The person in question was assumed from context to be Kate Anderson herself, since she did not identify herself, but seemed to be referring to the email.

    The Pink Pistols did not respond. Then she said, "I'm going to confiscate those firearms, turn them over to me right now!"

    The Pink Pistols responded that they would do no such thing. Ms. Anderson repeated that they must turn over their weapons, and they would get them back after the event.

    The responses she received were variations on "no, we do NOT have to surrender the firearms to you, and no, we're not going to leave either, because we are part of the gay and lesbian community, AND it's legal to open carry in the state of Ohio and we have the law on our side, and you don't. We'll just continue sitting here, enjoying the day."

    Ms. Anderson retreated briefly and returned with 10 security guards. She again insisted they surrender their firearms. Still, the Pink Pistols refused. More guards were called, until approximately 30 security guards surrounded the three Pink Pistols. Ms. Anderson at this time brandished her truncheon and demanded once again that the Pink Pistols either turn over their firearms or she would take them, but the Pink Pistols once again refused.

    Kim Rife recalls: "I have a sense about these things, and I think her 'plan' was to 'subdue' us. So I started informing her that if they so much as TOUCHED us, and confiscated our firearms they'd be guilty of a third degree felony, robbery, assault and anything else our lawyer could come up with." Ms. Anderson said she should call the police, and Ms. Rife and Ms. Lee said that would be a good idea, and suggested she do so.

    Mr. Jones, another marcher and member of COPP, recalls the reaction of Ms. Anderson. "At this point she is obviously taken aback, as it was apparent that she had planed to use force."

    One of their members called the attorney for Ohioans For Concealed Carry, who was on call for their support, to double-check their legal position. This additional attorney corroborated the legality of the Pink Pistols' actions, and was informed the police were on their way. During this entire exchange, the Pink Pistols remained calm, ate their lunches, and chatted amongst themselves.

    According to Sergeant Mull of the Columbus Police Department's Public Information Unit, police were dispatched at 2:56 pm on a possible charge of trespassing. Firearms were mentioned, but also that the weapons were holstered and legally carried.

    When the police arrived, they were polite and professional, for which the Pink Pistols applaud them. The Columbus Police Department entered the situation with a spirit of negotiation and respect for the law and the rights of everyone, for which they should be commended. The intricate nature of the new concealed-carry law was discussed at length, including where the law permitted a firearm owner to carry a weapon, whether a licensee could carry on government property, and whether a parade permit afforded "private property" control to the permit holder. Eventually, after running the chain of police command, a call to the City Prosecutor was made, and the point was still ambiguous. But the Prosecutor felt strongly enough that the police could at least make arrests to clear the scene if necessary, so the Pink Pistols were asked to compromise and depart at that time.

    The Pink Pistols respected the treatment from the Columbus Police Department, and the attention paid to their civil rights, and felt that due process had been adequately served, so they were accompanied to the edge of the event site by two CPD officers, with whom they amiably chatted as they walked. "The police were probably the coolest part...well, and carrying the flag and our firearms," said Ms. Rife. The police cleared the incident "code 4", without filing statements, at 4:04 pm. Since no arrests were made, there was no further report necessary.

    "Pink Pistols National is appalled and disgusted at the actions of Stonewall Columbus, first for making such clearly illegal and downright totalitarian threats, and then for engaging in acts of bullying, intimidation, and flagrantly terroristic bashing to forward their political ideas and goals. The law in Ohio now permits the carrying of firearms for self-defense, and some of the persons who carry them will be GLBT. Stonewall needs to get used to this idea," says Patton. Ohio has been the fastest-growing state in Pink Pistols membership, boasting a full five chapters, more than any other state in the nation. Patton continues, "Stonewall Columbus has no evidence to assume that lawful firearm owners in general, or Pink Pistols in particular, will contribute in any way to disorder or violence of any sort. It is an insult to all lawful firearm owners, and Ms. Anderson's actions are a clear statement of what kind of tactics take over when law abiding citizens hand over their defense to others. Her plan was simple and disgusting: Keep adding guards until our people surrendered from fear and intimidation. Well, it didn't work. We weren't afraid."

    Kim Rife adds, "I find it amazing that I and my members are the ones perceived as violent, given that I was sent an e-mail by Ms. Kate Anderson from Stonewall Union, that threatened US. Grand theft, a third degree felony, assault and possibly aggravated assault as she had a 2' staff that she was wielding. But we had 'evil' guns that never left their holsters. Only two of us at that time were openly carrying -- I was one -- but mine was a soft air gun and the other had NO ammunition and no magazine! We thought this a reasonable compromise to Ms. Anderson's demands of NOT exercising our constitutionally guaranteed rights of freedom of speech, freedom to assemble and the right to carry. I mean, if flag burning is political speech, and I believe it is, then so is carrying a firearm, doubly so if you are an out lesbian."

    Does a woman holding a two-foot truncheon, surrounded by thirty bullies in Security t-shirts, have the right to intimidate a handful of peaceful event attendees, regardless of how you feel about their politics? "Ms. Anderson clearly felt that she had the same mandate as a first-grade teacher confiscating squirt-guns from unruly kids," said Patton. "She felt utterly justified in robbing fellow queers of their legal and civil rights, even by force, simply because she does not agree with the form that right takes. There is a word for that. It is called tyranny."

    Kim Rife interjects, "I've always been under the impression that Stonewall Union is there to protect the rights of GLBT people, but Kate Anderson trampled on them. I think the folks at Stonewall should seriously consider that she has violated several portions of their 'stated purpose' and suggest that she find alternative outlets for her desire for activism, preferably one that involves as little interaction with people and the law as is possible."
     
  12. Foreign Devil

    Foreign Devil Member

    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2004
    Messages:
    507
    someone beat me to it
     
  13. jnojr

    jnojr Member

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2004
    Messages:
    1,096
    Location:
    Chandler, AZ
    Thanks.

    Absolutely disgusting. And, IIRC, Stonewall Columbus is a gay organization, too, isn't it?
     
  14. Warren

    Warren Member

    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2004
    Messages:
    2,454
    Location:
    Northern California
    No prob.


    So if this woman thinks that by being a parade organizer give her the power to disarm people and keep their weapons and threaten them with harm if they do not obey can you imagine what she would be like as an elected or appointed official of the gov?


    I'm sure if she thought it was a good idea she would order people to stich certain symbols onto their clothing or round them up for their own good.


    Freedom for me but not for thee!
     
  15. sturmruger

    sturmruger Member

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2003
    Messages:
    3,055
    Location:
    NW, WI
    That makes me sick that she can get away with that ????!!!
     
  16. R.H. Lee

    R.H. Lee Member

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2004
    Messages:
    7,376
    Location:
    CA
    heh.

    She's lucky she didn't get her big azz shot.
     
  17. Standing Wolf

    Standing Wolf Member in memoriam

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    24,038
    Location:
    Idahohoho, the jolliest state
    Scratch a leftist, and you'll always find a wannbe tyrant.
     
  18. gunsmith

    gunsmith member

    Joined:
    May 8, 2003
    Messages:
    5,906
    Location:
    Reno, Nevada
    I hope the Pink Pistols file a lawsuit

    And that this was taped.
    It is illegal to threaten someone with a club! why didn't the cops arrest her?
    If I was carrying a gun and someone threatened me with a club I might shoot them if they were in striking range.
    Please-some one videotaped this -right?
     
  19. FMarlon

    FMarlon Member

    Joined:
    May 29, 2004
    Messages:
    163
    Location:
    Iowa
    To quote Abraham Lincoln "A house divided against itself cannot stand."

    And to quote Forrest Gump "That's all I have to say about that."
     
  20. Samurai Penguin

    Samurai Penguin Member

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2004
    Messages:
    140
    Location:
    I40
    Hmmm...who, exactly, are the "gaybashers" here? :banghead:

    Who is a "potential source of trouble?" :banghead:

    Yes, the OHPP's probably did have the right to at least draw their weapons, if not possibly use them in defense of their safety. However, I'm extremely grateful that these obviously intelligent and civilized people took "The High Road," and showed themselves to be far more tolerant than those who make such a big deal out of "fighting for tolerance."

    I do believe that taking THR is the way we're going to win. Great article! :D
     
  21. Wildalaska

    Wildalaska member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    5,296
    Location:
    Anchorage, Alaska
    I normally do not approve of open carry. In this case, I applaud it..would be happy to expound why but wht hijack this most excellent thread!

    I am happily married and quite hetero. I intend to figger out some way to support the PP....

    As should we all?......
    Why?

    Becasue GLBT people vote...Deomcratic...the same people that want to disarm them...this is again the situation where the leadership is out of touch with the community. As soon as the GLBT folk recognize that equality can come from the barrel of a gun, perhaps they will work to convince their pet politicos that being alternative lifestyle friendly aint enough, ya got to be able to protect it...

    Bravo!


    WildithinkillgotoagaybartonightifswmbowillgowithmetoprotectmeAlaska
     
  22. Stand_Watie

    Stand_Watie Member

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2004
    Messages:
    1,506
    Location:
    east Texas
    Yes, we should. Because the basic human right right of self defense trancends the issue of gay vs straight. The most prone to physical attack among us, are those who need RKBA the most.
     
  23. Moparmike

    Moparmike Member

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2003
    Messages:
    3,600
    Location:
    Oddly enough, a downwardly-plunging firey handbask
    I hear that PP accepts all people of all sexual orientations, not just GLBT.


    How? Can you imagine the left's tiny brains shorting out when they try to villify gays (whom they ardently support) who carry guns (which are evil) for protection (that the cops are supposed to provide, but the left knows better)? I think they would have a logic error (think 2+2 suddenly equaling "elephant" or something) when they try to put the two together.


    I think the NRA should become an ardently pro-GLBT organization, so that the left cant vilify them anymore. :D
     
  24. Jackthelad

    Jackthelad Member

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2004
    Messages:
    89
    Location:
    Akron, OH
    Bravo to Kim- I am subscribed to your email list. I am a hetero male married with 4 children, and your bravery is an inspiration to me and my family. Good job.
     
  25. griz

    griz Member

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2002
    Messages:
    2,371
    Location:
    Eastern Virginia
    Do you wonder if Kate Anderson considered the irony of her statement (no guns so we can have a safe event) as she was personally threating to assult peaceable and safe people?

    Probably not, but then I can't concieve of why she would need security at an event that was already made safe by prohibiting guns. To be blunt, I think she is a pinheaded tyrant.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice