By Nicki Stallard

Orlando Florida, the Pulse Nightclub, 2:00 AM, June 12, 2016. Hundreds of club goers were ending what should have been a fun night out when a traitorous radical Islamist entered and attacked. In three long hours, the killer shot 100 helpless victims. Forty-nine of them died.

As word of what happened spread across the country, before the bodies were even cold, gun control advocates began promoting their “victim disarmament” agenda.

They changed the narrative. They placed blame on homophobic Christians, conservative Republicans and the NRA. They called the Pulse massacre a “hate crime,” downplaying its true nature as a domestic terrorist attack. They ignored or whitewashed the fact that the shooter was a registered Democrat, listed on the FBI’s terrorist watch list. A man who pledged allegiance to ISIS during the attack.

To them, it was all about the gun. In a way, they were right: the slaughter was about the lack of a gun — or guns — to defend innocent life.

After the horror of the The Pulse nightclub shooting, many members of the LBGTQ community finally grasped the truth. Membership in Pink Pistols grew by more than 500 percent. Erin Pallette created Operation Blazing Sword, a non-profit dedicated to bringing together LBGTQ Americans who need firearms training with firearms instructors (who donate their time free of charge).

The American gun community — including conservatives, Republicans and NRA members — stepped-up to help meet the new demand. For the last year, they’ve worked, and continue to work, to arm and train LBGTQ Americans.

Meanwhile, the leadership of the LBGTQ community continues to see guns as the problem, not the solution. The continue to promote gun control as the best way to protect our community against attack. In fact, many “marriage equality organizations” have mission-shifted from promoting equal rights to destroying the Second Amendment.

This opposition to armed self-defense reflects the fact that gun rights is still a minority position in the LBGTQ community. But it’s a growing minority position. Just as 16th century Europeans eventually rejected Church dogma that said the world was flat, more and more members of the LBGTQ community are rejecting the idea that they must depend on others for their safety.

All humans have the right of self-defense, and all of us should be ready, willing and able to use it. That’s the lesson many of us have taken from The Pulse massacre. The more of us that do, the better for us all.

Nicki Stallard is a US Navy veteran, a spokesperson for Pink Pistols and a co-director of Operation Blazing Sword.

94 Responses to Pulse Nightclub Shooting One Year Later: LGBTQ Community Arms Itself Against Attack

  1. All humans have the right of self-defense, and all of us should be ready, willing and able to use it.

    That. Right. There.

  2. While I certainly don’t bemoan the LGTQ community for practicing their right to be an armed and free people; we all know its just a temporary measure.

    I firmly believe that alot of them will buy a handgun, go thru the token training sessions and leave it sit on a shelf. They’ve been conditioned to think that jack booted Bible thumpers are coming to take them away, instead of the ‘Religion of Peace’ followers, screaming Aloha Snackbar blowing them up in night clubs or running them over in cars.

    This is a temporary measure to feel secure, and once the political pendulum swings back the other way, they’ll be screaming for more gun control with the rest of the Liberal Establishment.

    • To be fair, the LGBTQ community has had far more people –in this country–attacked and/or killed by Christians than Muslims. Sure this one guy killed 49 people and wounded just as many more, but Christians of various ethnicities have been attacking, maiming, raping, and killing LGBTQ people in this country for a very long time. Many Christians of course are also part of the coalition that has improved life for those people in recent years as well. Just as Muslims are not all bad or all good, neither are Christians. Some are bigoted assholes and some are the kindest people you’ll ever meet and truly live by the teachings of the New Testament which is essentially to love and care for everyone. Nonetheless, angry extremist Christians are the most realistic threat to the LGBTQ community here at home.

      Internationally I have no idea what the numbers are, but I can pretty confidently say that Muslims kill more LGBTQ people in Muslim majority countries and other groups do most of the ignorant assaulting in other parts of the world.

      • Nice presentation of your feelings as facts.

        Do you have literally anything to back up your assertions?

        No, you don’t.

        • Go back and read the threads from a year ago on this very website.

          There are plenty of folks who posted then and still post here today who make it clear that they think whatever happens to gay people is okie dokie by them.

          Edit to add: All of the deleted comments and sanitization notwithstanding.

        • Please remember that TTAG only deletes flames against the website, its authors and fellow commentators. And ad hominem attacks in general.

        • All you need is a decent ability to think rationally and do a small amount of research to figure out that given that there has literally been persecution of the LGBT community in the U.S. since our founding.

          The fact that the vast majority of our population has historically been Christian and that Muslims have made up a statistically insignificant group until fairly recently combined with the fact that there are thousands of hate crimes against the LGBT community every year in this country is strong evidence enough of the involvement of some “Christians” in attacks on the LGBT community. This, combined with any reading on documented cases of hate crimes against this groups will clearly show you that many “Christians” have committed appalling attacks on those people. Roughly 15-20% of hate crimes in this country are attacks on LGBT people, the majority on gay men.

          As I made very clear before, there are also large numbers of Christians who oppose those acts and support our fellow Americans. I in no way suggested people of other religions do not commit these crimes as well, in fact I directly addressed that fellow Muslims clearly commit most of these attacks in Muslim majority countries.

      • I don’t know about that. There isn’t an anti gay Klan, there isn’t a anti gay nazi movement. Infact many of those movements are rooted in an outlet of homosexuals who are suppressing there desires. (Like the SA and the Pink Swastika.) Remember, homosexuality isn’t a race. It’s a “mental condition” if you will. Therefore “homosexuals” are killed by all kinds of people from all kinds of races and religions for all kinds of reasons, and vise versa. Many serial killers are gay and kill Christian’s yet that’s not the motivation of their killing.

      • Umm no, Christians are not the threat, regardless of what they call themselves Christianity does not call for violence and never has.

        Those people you are referring to are bigots and they will mask themselves with any guise that serves their purpose. Please stop trying to confuse people by lumping them in with Christians who actually follow the teachings of the Bible instead of whatever their agenda is

        • Fair enough, but one of those Christian-in-name bigots is now the President, and who put him there?

          It’s not like he made a secret of his bigotry. Quite the opposite, in fact.

        • So America First is now bigotry?

          You have the Progressive Plantation name calling down pat.

          Whatever Swarf.

        • What has Trump said about gays? I think he infact praised the idea they should be armed… I know many lesbians that are very hardcore Trump supporters.

        • That certainly depends on your interpretation of the Bible and whether or not you think the Old Testament is relevant. But it is a historical fact that “bad-Christians” have been a major part of an untold numbers of attacks on gays throughout our history. None of that means most “good-Christians” support that behavior.

        • Duke,
          Are you also saying only modern day Christians are really Christians? Because the “church” in various forms throughout history has done or supported its fair share of death and torment along side its truly good deeds.

          Wouldn’t most American-Muslims who do not think their religion condones violence feel the same way about the “so-called-Muslims” who commit atrocities they do not feel represent their religion or religious views?

        • You say that in a lot of threads I post in, Joe. Good to know you’re keeping an eye out for me.

          I’ve been here since this website started, Joe R.. I’ll be here after you’ve gotten yourself involuntarily committed.

          I don’t agree with a lot of my fellow gun owners on a lot of issues, and they don’t agree with me on a lot of issues, mostly political ones.

          But I own more than a dozen firearms and I participate in the firearms community both online and in meatspace, and I am an advocate for there being an armed citizenry in this country. I do that despite the pushback I get because the business I’m in has a high rate of low information, straight ticket Democrat voters (of which I am not one), but I’ve changed minds, and if I can I will change more.

          So go fuck yourself, Joe.

        • Trump hasn’t really made any anti gay comments I’m aware of. He infact supported the gay community taking up arms after Orlando.

        • Hellofromillinois, the Old Testament doesn’t matter in this discussion, Jesus said let he who isn’t without sin cast the first stone. If you are a Christian without sin then you are allowed to act violently towards all sinners, but we both know that none of us is woyhout sin

          No I’m not saying modern christians are the only real christians. I’m saying only people who follow (and inevitably fall short) the teachings of Jesus are real christians. I don’t care who called themselves priests and acted on behalf of whatever church, Jesus never told the spaniards to burn witches st the stake and he never said to invade the holy land.

          Those people claimed to be acting on behalf of the church but nowhere did they follow Jesus teaching so they are not christians. No one kills or tortures on behalf of Jesus because he doesn’t command it, period. Just like I believe in the second amendment but… means that person doesn’t believe in the second amendment

        • Hellofromillinois, if you want to discuss the relevance of the Old Testament Jesus also said the old law has been replaced with the new law. The new law doesn’t call for violence against sinners for their sins

          The relevance of the Old Testament is the foundation of the commandments and the teaching that god is all powerful and ever present. It’s relevance is that of teaching that our own actions and good deeds can never save our souls from our sin, the only way to the father is through a personal relationship with Jesus.

        • No true Scotsman, eh? You Christians are no better than the Muzzies half the time.

        • “No true Scotsman” doesn’t apply. That pertains to a situation where there is no definition of a Scotsman, so anyone can make their own and declare it to be true. In the case of being a Christian, there’s an objective source for a definition.

        • Considering there are 40 divisions of Christianity or so, it is still applicable.

        • Divisions aren’t relevant; there’s an objective source for defining a Christian, and none for being a Scotsman. That people argue over the definition doesn’t eliminate the objective source material, so while you could object to someone’s definition, you can’t apply the “No true Scotsman” argument.

        • And who are the true Christians? Is it the Christians who believe dancing with snakes is a sign of devotion? The ones who pray to patron saints? The ones who consider pedophilia with the new prophet the greatest of blessings? By my understanding, there are enough differentiations from one to the other for the informal fallacy to still apply. When McVeigh blew up the bomb in Oklahoma, I recall my priest mentioning that while he may have thought himself a devout Catholic, he was no true Catholic, as his actions were a anathema to the teachings of catholicism. Anecdotal, I know, but that’s the beauty of the informality.

        • Any reputable translation. New American Standard is closer to the original wording; New International is easier to read.

          I prefer the Greek, myself.

        • So again we are faced with varying translations by varying interpreters with various often political motivations. Going back to the original point, no true Christian/Scotsman still very much applies.

        • No, because it’s impossible to screw up the basics in a translation unless it’s done on purpose.

          At this point it appears you’re just determined to be intellectually lazy.

        • If you frankly believe that translations were not done with the express intent of furthering agendas, then you are a fool and not one to talk about intellectual laziness.

        • And you say this based on what degree in linguistics?

          Yes, some translations are done with agendas in mind, but the reputable ones have minimal bias. In a field where every last decision by a translator team gets pounced on by hordes of capable scholars, that’s the only way it can be. The field of translation is very much like the field of science: you can’t get away with being dishonest for long.

          So again I conclude you’re just intellectually lazy: the material is out there, and it’s impossible to screw up the basics in a translation except on purpose –and it’s impossible to get away with that because it will get you discredited. You;re just not interested in making the effort.

        • I say it based on a basic understanding of theology and history. And you’d be amazed with how long you can get away with incorrect information in either department. The greatest folly of man is assuming infallibility.

        • LOL

          Sorry, but scholars pounce on translations before they’re even officially out.

          And the criticisms are never on the basics — a fact that tells me you haven’t so much as bothered to look into the matter.

          At this point you’re just derailing with stubborn laziness.

        • This is the last I’ll say on the matter. Are you familiar with Biblical errata? It refers to mistakes and mistranslationsthat that can be one offs or carried through years and years of production. And these are mistakes based on simple translation/transcription issues when there is NO agenda. Nevermind when there is one. Considering the various versions of the Bible were often translated or retranslated at the behest of monarchs and politicians, you are an absolute imbecile for believing they had nothing to gain from it. Call it intellectual laziness all you want, it amounts to naiveté on your end.

      • Really Hellofromillinois? As a baptised Christian, I have never heard of dedicated vocal Christians systematically, physically attacking, raping and killing gay people for being gay. Maybe you could show actual examples of this as an on going problem. I’d be curious to see the evidence of what you speak.

        • In redneck Oregon where I grew up, gays were subject to “accidents” that were merely written down as such and never investigated, regardless of how ridiculous they may have been.

      • After all. Gays are a special protected victim class, just like blacks. I would expect any chronic problem of Christians targeting gay people to be front page news, across the country, like what happened after what’s his name killed the black church goers, or the Duke Lacrosse team being vilified across the country for supposedly raping the black stripper, which turned out to be false.

      • “To be fair, the LGBTQ community has had far more people –in this country–attacked and/or killed by Christians than Muslims.”

        DOUBT IT. Since you have no source.

        Especially when you add in the higher gay on gay domestic violence rate.

        But nice try at bashing non muslim non gays on a thread celebrating gays from getting their heads out of each other’s asses ling enough to join with defenders of the Constitution / Their rights to fight back.

        Now SHOVE IT.

    • “I firmly believe that alot of them will buy a handgun, go thru the token training sessions and leave it sit on a shelf. ”

      Ummm, doesn’t this describe a huge percentage of gun owners, of ANY sexual orientation?

      • Correct. I just don’t know why the Non-heterosexuals get so many special groups and articles. Oh. Funding. Never mind.

    • Armed gays will get bashed, too. Gay or straight, you’re most likely to experience violence at the hands of an intimate partner. If you’re not willing to expel that person from your life, you’re certainly not going to deploy deadly force against them. Absent that, you’re bringing more danger into your life.

      Once all the excitement and faux empowerment of new gun ownership fades, someone really ought to educate these people on what it really means to use a gun. Most of these new owners think they’re wearing a magic talisman.

      • I understand it. It’s their little tag line, and I think it resonates with the culture well. (I’m not in that culture so I can’t say for certain) You’re right though, it does take a lot more than just buying a gun to mentally and physically prepare for a violent encounter.

  3. The year is 2017. Your right to self defense, personal gender, and partner gender preference is your sole responsibility.

    Always has been. Now if only we could lessen or stop the rabid obsession the media, social media, and public have about all three….

    • Your right to … personal gender, and partner gender preference is your sole responsibility.

      A man has no more right to claim that he is a woman than a 24 year-old person has a right to claim that he/she is a senior citizen. It doesn’t matter if that 24 year-old applies makeup/latex to create false wrinkles and age spots, wears 1970s polyester, and hobbles around with a cane: he/she is still a 24 year-old, PERIOD. Likewise, a man who wears makeup, dons false breasts (either with stuffing, implants, or female hormones), wears skirts, and calls himself Melissa is still a man, PERIOD.

      As for partner gender preference: people who choose the same sex for sexual gratification are steeling from the straight population who took on the ginormous expense and effort to raise the next generation … the young people who provide all the critical services that gay and lesbian couples cannot handle in their senior years.*

      So pardon me if I do not embrace the gay and lesbian lifestyle … just like I do not embrace the entitlement lifestyle.

      * Such critical services include heavy manual labor, disaster response, police action, and national defense.

      • Man, for a community that espouses self-determination, you sure don’t seem to follow it. Let people do as they please so long as it doesn’t affect you. And I can assure you, none of the people you mentioned have EVER affected you.

      • Sole responsibility doesn’t equate to automatic acceptance and tolerance. It simply means you owning your choices and being responsible and accountable for the outcome, good or bad. This is where common sense and self awareness should take affect.

        • Responsible for what, your personal metric of worth and responsibility in society? Also, you list terrible examples for what homosexual couples cannot contribute (via offspring,) in their elderly life. Heavy manual labor? Disaster relief/preparedness? Services exist (both private sector and governmental,) that can help with both. Furthermore, your current goal post can also not be fulfilled by childless couples. Are they aberrant as well?

  4. While I do not support the LGBT lifestyle, I was actually concerned that I might be reading a lot of anti-gay postings.

    As far as the gun issue goes, humans are humans and as humans, regardless of their lifestyle, have the same right to defend themselves, their families, their friends/neighbors, and even strangers if they find themselves in a position to render assistance.

    The 2nd Amendment is not my right. It isn’t your right. It is every American’s right. Those who do not wish to avail themselves of that right are well within their 2A rights. Should they decide to change their mind they are free to do so. However, if they help do away with the right to defense, not only do they become defenseless prey, they also throw away their right to change their minds based on their individual life experience (domestic violence, stalking, assault, and other reasons for change of heart).

  5. Nice puff piece full of wishful thinking. Sure, some tiny gun groups gained some members, yielding impressive percentage gains. Those don’t move the needle one bit, unfortunately. These groups revel in their victim mentality. Such is the central purpose of identity politics. They’ll still vote Democrat.

      • Gays will leave. Or at least gay men will. Not all of them ,’just some. Maybe enough to split the demographic. It’s happening in Europe more than here. Same thing with young women. Young women in France supported Le Pen way more than they usually vote right. It’s because they don’t feel safe from harassment by immigrants.

        A couple more muslims kill gays ( we’ve had what 2 anti gay Muslim terror attacks pulse and chelse )will do the trick. The main stream “Legacy” gay activist groups ( mostly ran by lesbians) and publications may not come around. The “Rank and File ” gay men will.

    • Why would any gay person in his or her right mind vote Republican? The party’s platform spews hate against gays.

      • Not really. The GOP was pretty opposed to gay marriage but since the SCOTUS ruling they’ve pretty much dropped it, as they’ve accepted it’s a losing issue.

      • roymond
        It is homosexual hatred of traditional families that has lead elected homosexuals to support the welfare state that has destroyed so many inner city black families. Homosexuals, and anyone else, are the enemy when they support the socialist progressive welfare state. It fits that they support gun control as well.

        • What a pile of mendacity!

          Gays don’t “hate traditional families”, they just want to be able to have their own.

          But even if they did, that doesn’t justify the hate in the Republican Party platform.

  6. I support the rights of gay people to be gay and to arm themselves.

    And when they make common cause with the Islamists who would toss them off rooftops and the leftist punks who would disarm them, I wonder if gay people aren’t totally freakin’ nuts.

    • I’m more or less on the same page. They can be as gay as they like, so long as they remember that the same CotUS that protects their “right” to be gay, protects my right to disapprove.

        • I disapprove just like I would disapprove of a schizophrenic acting as if his delusions are real. Homosexuality is a less dangerous mental illness, but an illness all the same.

        • Pretty sure that being left handed does not affect your ability to reproduce. One of the scientific definitions of an illness is a biological or psychological condition negatively affecting one or more major life functions. Pretty sure that reproduction is about as major a life function as it gets.

          Now not all illnesses can be “cured” and being hostile to someone because they are ill is stupid. However, pretending that something that is an objective evolutionary disadvantage is “normal” is absurd.

        • If you’re wired not to reproduce, you are biologically defective. This isn’t limited to gay people either. Lots of heterosexual people don’t have kids. After four billion years of evolution, their genetic line gave up, and they self-selected out of having children.

        • Actually, gays and childless couples pass on their wealth to (genetically related) family members, resources which bolster their bloodline. How ’bout them apples?

        • Come now Robert, the “gay uncle” theory is pseudo-scientific SJW claptrap and you know it. There is no biological advantage to a species from a section of it being psychologically unable to reproduce. It attempts to apply pack animal models to humans. The problem being that successful human communities have been built around nuclear families (or some close facsimile) since the dawn of recorded history.

        • If the only measure of one’s worthiness were whether or not they chose to reproduce, we would never have evolved past single called organisms.

          Your theory is bollocks you use to justify being dismissive of other humans.

          You’ve probably got similar alt-science reasons to be disdainful of Muslims or redheads or whatever you think is icky, but you’re full of shit.

        • Aww… that’s addorable, you think that’s an argument. I gave you the scientific definition of an illness. Typical lefty, inventing “science” as they go along.

        • For a long time female “hysteria” was considered a disease. As was an imbalance of humors. The difference between dogma and science is that one adapts to change. Guess which one you subscribe to.

        • You gave a mangled version of one possible version of a definition of illness. But that definition does not regard reproducing as an essential life function; it only looks at the functioning of the individual — so you fail doubly.

          By your attempt at reasoning, worker bees all suffer from illness.

      • I assure you, your disapproval of a schizophrenic’s delusions is neither helpful nor relevant in the slightest. The same goes for sexuality. Moreover, your assertion that foregoing reproduction is a clear sign of illness doesn’t hold much water. What of people who willingly choose not to reproduce? The end result is the same (regardless of the biological hurdles,) but you’d be hard pressed to label one ill and the other one not.

        • Simple. Both have something wrong with them. For homosexuals, it is readily identifiable.

      • What is an extended family if not a loosely biologically associated pack that can, in many instances, rear young in the absence of parents? By my estimation, homosexuals would be quite good at fulfilling this role.

        • Admirable as it would be, it’s no different than a barren couple doing the same. Nobody would claim that the barren couple is healthy or normal.

        • Would they not be fulfilling a biological role in the greater pack I just spoke of?

        • There is nothing in medical science that would classify a barren couple as either unhealthy or abnormal.

          But there’s a lot that would point to your attitude being both unhealthy and abnormal, at least for an American. You’re arguing energetically against the very foundation of the Republic, that all people are created equal and endowed with rights — you’re trying to make some more equal than others.

        • The problem is that humans aren’t even pack animals. No higher order primates are.

        • Incorrect. Bonobos, chimpanzees and gorillas all exhibit pack behavior. And that’s just the apes that exhibit it. The list for primates as a whole is much larger. The nuclear family, and by extensions the extended nuclear family is very close to the biological definition of a pack.

  7. Meh…and you’ll still vote for the Hildebeast or feel the Bern. I’m cool with you defending yourself but don’t expect a whit of sympathy from me. The 2A is a big tent…

  8. Such an easy thing to handle. Allow gun check at nightclubs. In lew of that, you get a little braclet. Braclet means you dont get to drink, but you get to stay armed. If you change your mind, you cruise back, check gun and turn in bracelet. Then if some lunatic decides to make a run at the nightclub you are in….there will likely be a fair number of people (who also happen to be the designated driver) who can use careful aim to end the lunatic.

    Oh, you want see anything like that happen of course, but wouldn’t it be nice.

    • No. Just allow people to carry their guns concealed in your club if the law allows it. If the law doesn’t allow it, then change the law to allow it. We don’t need special wrist bracelets outing those who are armed.

      • Seriously. Special bracelets and gun checks? How about personal responsibility? Sheesh. Even checking your gun or getting the bracelet requires voluntary compliance in the first place. How about I’ve lived in three states (WA, ID, TX) where it’s completely legal to drink alcohol while carrying concealed — you just can’t be intoxicated. They all point to the vehicle code for that definition (0.08 BAC) — and in one of those states it’s legal to carry concealed in full-on bars and nightclubs and such as well. Blood in the streets? NOPE. Safer than CA, IL, NY, NJ, etc etc etc…

  9. “Just as 16th century Europeans eventually rejected Church dogma that said the world was flat”

    Completely off topic but this is ridiculous. It is simply NOT true. Since the ancient Greeks, is has been the widely held opinion of most educated folks in Europe that the earth was round. This applied through the dark ages, middle ages, renaissance, whenever. If there was anything resembling debate on the topic, it was regarding the best way to measure the circumference, and what that final value was. Since most of the clergy were themselves well-educated, it was the opinion of almost the entirety of the church that the earth was round (with a few exceptions of some church elders in what would be modern-day Syria). It has never been part of church dogma that the earth is flat. The misconception was fabricated and promoted (originally by protestants against the Catholics, and later by atheists/agnostics against Christianity in general) as a way to paint them as backwards-thinking uneducated rubes.

    • I caught that, too — it’s pretty bloody ignorant. It was never even church dogma that the sun went around the earth; that was just a prejudice of a few in powerful positions.

  10. I have a gay friend who’s (to use an inappropriate phrase) balls deep into guns. Machined an AR-15 out of an 80% lower, he and his husband both have conceal carry permits, avid hunter ect. I think if more of the LGTB community were card carrying gun owners that maybe Democrats would scale back 2A attacks. And maybe more Republicans would reach out to such groups rather than acting like God mandates they use the government to regulate who marries who.

    • Too many Christians seem to put politics over faith, which makes the Republican Party look like the party of hate. Jesus never said, “Go then and pass laws in My Name, coercing others with the power of the state to please yourselves”, yet millions of Christians in thousands of churches certainly act as though He did.

  11. George Lincoln Rockwell and Governor George Wallace were both veterans as well. I think both of then saw combat. And they both never supported civil-rights just as Mr. Nicki Stallard has never supported civil rights.
    The following was posted on April 2016:

    Pink Pistols to Gavin Newsom: Don’t take away our gun rights | The …
    http://www.fresnobee.com/opinion/readers-opinion/article70333992.html
    Apr 7, 2016 – Pink Pistols to Gavin Newsom: Don’t take away our gun rights. By Nicki … He’s a good man who has done so much to support our civil liberties.

    ” He’s a good man who has done so much to support our civil liberties.”
    This statement was part of the original opinion posted in the Fresno Bee. It has been edited out. But there are ways to recover at least part of the original post. Mr. Nicki Stallard is a fraud and a FUDD. Anyone who says Gavin Newsom is a “Nice Man”, is no friend of gun civil-rights or Liberty in General. I have posted the original opinion on TTAG several times in the past. That’s how I know it been altered.

    Homosexuals are socialist progressive in their political orientation. They do not believe in liberty. Honest gay people like Tammy Bruce and the Gay Patriot have spoken about this for a very long time now. They and a few others are the only real liberty warriors in the homosexual community.

    Homosexuals don’t support the 1st amendment. They support gay pride parades. They support protests at military recruiting centers. Many of those have been violent. Homosexuals support KKK marches.
    But they don’t support protests at abortion clinics.

    Milo has gotten ZERO support from the gay community. Its straight Christians who have support Milo. Milo has been physically attacked on his tour. He is a victim of “gay bashing”. No gay “Leader” came to his defense. When his Berkeley speech was shut down, were was the San Francisco bay area gay community????
    I know he has gay supporters. They were attacked as well. I hear crickets.

    Every law abiding american needs Arms and has a birth-right to them. But there are tyrants working to destroy our rights. And on the west coast they are homosexuals in elected leadership positions.
    Tom Ammiano the former California state senate president and Mayor Robert Moon of Palm Springs California are great examples. These two very proud gay white men are just two examples of the gay leadership successfully disarming the civilian population.

    You don’t get a pass when you try and take away civil rights.

    • This is not difficult to parse. Newsom did a lot for the LGBT community when he was mayor of San Francisco. Nicki’s comment that he “has done so much to support our civil liberties,” speaking of gay rights, is completely accurate. At the same time, in that article she’s imploring him NOT to restrict gun rights and making the case for why the LGBT community needs to embrace the Second Amendment.

      After Newsom became lieutenant governor, Nicki took a public stand against his proposed anti-gun legislation, saying, among other things, “If Gavin Newsom gets this passed, how will transgender women like me be able to protect ourselves?”

      Unfortunately, this world isn’t so simple that we get to agree or disagree with people 100% across the board in every case and on every topic. For obvious reasons Nicki is thankful for what Newsom did for LGBT rights while, at the same time, coming down hard against him for his stance on gun rights. This isn’t a conflict. This doesn’t make Nicki soft on the Second Amendment.

      It’s pretty clear that you and Nicki disagree on LGBT-related social issues, but I’d bet dollars to donuts you’d be way more in-line on just about everything else than you’d expect, Chris. You’re ostracizing a staunch 2A supporter and advocate who’s actively working to convert people to a pro-2A position because you can’t get over the transgender thing.

  12. Every person that is won over to believe in gun rights(even if they do not own or practice with firearms) is one more on our side. My father helped to build the A bomb, he was also the top rated sharpshooter in his high school. He did not want firearms around, he was a city kid and did not hunt or fish.
    He always stressed gun safety, told us not to put finger to trigger unless we meant to shoot it. Alway treat it as loaded, not to even think about carrying unloaded.

    Mt mother was hysterical about guns, I couldn’t even have a BB gun. Still, I was taught properly. He supported the 2nd, but he did not see the purpose for him and his family to have one.
    Maybe it was for the best, we lived in a bad area and it was my fault that my brothers and I were getting beat up by multiple kids or another race. I gave more than I got, but a gun would have worked better. I finally beat up 2 so bad that the police came and we did not get bothered anymore.

    I did learn the sling my fists, kids today are broken apart before any pecking order can be established, so maybe that is why the bullied pick up an equalizer. On a jury, I just might vote justified in that case.

  13. Gays and guns seam a natural fit.

    1. Gay men are after all men an demographic that has higher gun ownership.

    2. Gay men are often affluent a demographics that has higher gun ownership.

    3. Gay men are often targets of physical violence just for being gay. They are also commonly targeted for robberies.

    4. Let’s face it , holding a smoking hot , hard, long , semi phallic object might be appealing to some gay men- I’m just saying.

    The 2A community has been fairly welcoming to gays. I think this is a good idea for two reasons. The first being that new should encourage anybody to lawfully own and carry weapons, regardless of who they are. And second because gays punch above their weight politically.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *