Transgender Firearms Instructor’s Confusion: IMI Systems Quote of the Day

shooter (courtesy psmag.com)

“When I teach a defense class, the point of the class is to kill someone. If you’re a trans woman, the person you’re killing is likely to be someone society values more than you . . . If I as a trans woman ever shoot a right-wing fascist, the law is almost definitely not going to be on our side.” Kayla Harris quoted in The Trans Women Turning to Firearms for Survival, sub-headed More trans women are taking up arms than before to protect themselves. But even the simple act of self-preservation can be deemed aggression to conservatives. [via psmag.com]

Win IMI Ammo

comments

  1. avatar pewpewpew says:

    Wow, seems like their gender isn’t the only thing they are confused about.

    The point of self defense is in the name… it’s not that difficult.

    1. avatar dwb says:

      Unfortunately, I tend to agree with the notion that some people are more likely to be (attempted to be) prosecuted for a self sefense shooting. Here in Maryland we had a case of a clear case of self defense that Anne Arundel prosector prosecuted. The judge rebuked the prosecutor and threw out the case. But not before tens of thousands in legal fees. Someone else might have had a public defender, and/or had to plead guilty, and ended up in jail. The prosecutor prosecuted because the deceased was a member of the diddunuffin victim class, despite multiple bad deeds.

      Read Massad Ayoob… he covers this in his book: When you shoot someone in self defense, be prepared to be treated like a murderer, esp if you kill someone of a more valued social class. In Texas, it could be a liberal killing a conservative. In Maryland, it could be the reverse. Be prepared to exercise *all* your constituional rights. I think it makes a lot of sense for people to buy legal insurance that covers self defense. Legal fees are huge, and public defenders are overwhelmed, in many cases inexperienced, and under funded.

      1. avatar neiowa says:

        Well Maryland is progtard heaven. An yes place is filled with fascists. What does that have to do with the real world?

        What is a “trans woman”. A “woman” that has a penis but no brain or a woman that wishes had a penis (attached vs inserted)/

        1. avatar Rattlerjake says:

          Considering that trans-things have MENTAL issues, why are they allowed to possess firearms; and yet our service-members, with PTSD are being prevented from possessing arms!

        2. avatar A Transgendered Responsible Libertarian Citizen says:

          @Rattlerjake

          I’m not going to get into what is transgender nor gun legality, however you are unfortunately mistaken.

          If you poke around thee CDC and FBI crime stats PTSD is FAR more dangerous than gender dysphoria to the public (though not to the self), and FAR more prevalent.

          That said neither group should be prevented their right to self preservation.

          Also I think the author plays in the the horrible stereotype of the transgender community. Far left wing radical who forces their opinion on others, though correct in how social structure effects criminal prosecution.

        3. avatar Lost Down Soth says:

          My ex-wife (still friends) live in Seattle where trannies are all but worshiped. She said that pretty much anything a tranny does is OK, and the cis-het-white-non-binnary-left-handed-anything-not-mentally-ill* is doomed in the court of at least public opinion.

          *sorry trannies, I consider you mentally ill, just like someone who claims to be Napoleon and clearly isn’t. you used to have my support, until you demanded extra-equal rights over all others for which *I* must pay. now you’re on your own.

        4. avatar SparkyInWI says:

          Agree with A Transgendered Responsible Libertarian Citizen poster. Every law abiding citizen has the right to mind their own business and be left to pursue their happiness. And especially they have a right to self defense be they a vet with PTSD, and transgender person, etc. Believe in live and let live, and treat others with the respect I would like to be treated with until they prove to not be worthy of that thru their deeds.

      2. avatar Henry Bowman says:

        See Chris Cantwell

    2. avatar Resident ct says:

      Inherent right to self protection, Yes. Other parts of the viewpoint is bigotry, “right wing fascist”? Just saying that reveals a profound bias. Todays fascist movements are leftist using fascist as a label against any opposition and a rally cry to their cause. By the prevailing bigotry of the alt left, if you dont hate Trump you are a fascist, if you are a gun owner you are a fascist, if you live in a red state you are a fascist. If you watch Fox News instead of listening to NPR you are a fascist. Fascism has a definition, but for the alt left it is a expression of their bigotry.

      “I have long been a believer in the idea that if you aren’t harming the rights of others, you should be left alone. My own experience showed that a firearm evens up the odds when brute force is on the side of brutal people.” Tom Palmer, participant in the Heller v DC case. Tom’s comment applies to all Americans and he is to be commened for standing up and being part of the Heller v DC case.

      http://www.washingtonblade.com/2010/07/22/a-gay-perspective-on-d-c-gun-rights/

      1. avatar Gov. William J Le Petomane says:

        ‘Todays fascist movements are leftist…’

        Fascist movements have always been leftist, without exception.

        1. avatar Ing says:

          Yep. Fascism is the right wing of the left.

  2. avatar Rick the Bear says:

    WTF??? Talk about “niche marketing”.

    “If I as a trans woman ever shoot a right-wing fascist, the law is almost definitely not going to be on our side”

    If the jury is made up of trans-woman / left-wingers, you’ve got it made in the shade. Or, and I’m reaching here, if you were actually being attacked with deadly force, you might me OK (not valid in MA, NYC, or NJ).

    Will there soon be classes for trans-gender men shooting misogynists or for left-handers for shooting right-handed assailants?

    1. avatar barnbwt says:

      “He held the gun in a sinister manner, I had no choice”

      1. avatar Guardiano says:

        This made me laugh harder than it probably should have.

      2. avatar Rick the Bear says:

        So, sideways ? 8>)

        1. avatar Guardiano says:

          No, he means he held it with his left hand. “Sinister” in Latin just means “left.” I’m an English nerd, so it made me laugh. I’m assuming you’re NOT an English nerd, therefore you are excused for not getting the joke. ; )

        2. avatar Rick the Bear says:

          No, I got it. I’m a nurse. I just took a different path.

        3. avatar Guardiano says:

          Ah I got you. Thumbs up.

      3. avatar KCK says:

        It may take a lot of “dexterity” to defeat the “sinister”

        1. avatar Rick the Bear says:

          Nice anatomy reference!

    2. avatar Resident ct says:

      If a trans shoots a “Right wing fascist (RWF)” for that reason only they should go to jail as in any case of murder or attemmpted murder. Is a trans shoots anyone, under legal conditions of self defense then, no they shouldn’t go to jail. Pretty simple

  3. avatar Cloudbuster says:

    This individual doesn’t sound mentally stable. The point of a firearm self defense class isn’t to kill, it is to protect and defend. That this person is going into it with a chip on his shoulder speaks poorly of his ability to fairly and prudently impart legal standards for self-defense and prudent use of a firearm. Criminal law does not have special exemptions, positive or negative, for mentally ill (trans) people, except that it may benefit them if they are found incompetent to stand trial for their actions, or that it may disqualify them from owning a firearm at all if they’ve ever been involuntarily committed to a mental institution — something far more likely for trans people, who have a suicide rate of more than 40%.

    Usually the person most dangerous to a trans person is himself.

    1. avatar barnbwt says:

      A person with a mental delusion seems prone to instability? No….

    2. avatar Dyspeptic Gunsmith says:

      The levels of hormones many male-to-female transsexuals are on (as part of the gender re-assignment process) can make them mentally unstable.

    3. avatar Alexander says:

      You’re using the wrong pronoun. The person most dangerous to a transgender is itself. Here, fixed it for you.

      1. avatar Cloudbuster says:

        He was born with a penis. He’s not an it or a she, he’s a man.

    4. avatar MontieR says:

      This is why ALL of the iterations of sodomy are mental illness. Transgender is a serious mental illness and should be barred from weapons ownership until they recieve treatment for said illness. If you can’t figure out whether you are male or female you don’t need to be arround guns.

      1. avatar Klause Von Schmitto says:

        Ahhh it starts to make sense now. This is why my wife tells me I’m crazy whenever I suggest a BJ would be nice.

        Thanks for clarifying.

    5. avatar California Richard says:

      There is kernel of truth to what he/she(xhe?) is saying…. Bradley (Chelsey?) Manning only went to jail because xhe was a tranee. If xhe was strait like Hillary Clinton, it would have been brushed under the rug… (sarc off)… I’m so confused

      1. avatar Chris T in KY says:

        Navy sailor Kristian Saucier is in prison for security violations just like Manning. This has nothing to do with sex. Unfortunately that is the single focus of Californian gun owners. And that why gun owners in California will all be disarmed. In California sex is more important than gun civil rights. The sexually liberated , who are in power, and are very dangerous, are the ones responsible for disarming the California civilian population.

        Clinton is not is prison because SHE IS A CLINTON. If president Trump can send a clinton to prison then he will have proven we really to have equality under the law.

      2. avatar JJ48 says:

        I was under the impression that transitioning was what got Manning out of prison. I’m not sure if President Obama would have even taken any further notice of him if not for that.

        1. avatar Chris T from KY says:

          Manning is a proud gay white man who betrayed his country over gay sex. So he committed treason because the army wouldn’t let him have open gay sex. I believe he was also up set because the military wouldn’t give him a free sex change.

          Supporters of Manning, most of who were homosexuals, made gay sex as the “true” reason he was put on trial. Their protests tied up traffic on Ft Meade when I was there.

          There was a time when homosexuals were considered a security risk. But today gay sex is more important than national security. And gay sex is more important than gun civil rights.

          Tom Ammiano a proud gay white man who wrote the California law making people wait an extra ten days to get a hand gun.

          I wonder how many stalking victims have been raped or murdered because this white homosexual law maker thinks he is smarter than a woman????

          Years earlier Ammiano was responsible for getting rid of the high school rifles teams in San Francisco public schools.

          In California it is elected open homosexuals who are in the leadership working to disarm the state civilian population. White Homosexuals have never supported civil rights.

        2. avatar Chris T from KY says:

          Correction
          The one hundred members of the Log Cabin Republicans, my favorite lesbian Tammy Bruce, and the Gay Patriot blog are all pro gun pro second amendment.

          The Pink Pistols are a compromised “gun rights” group. They support the anti civil rights Gavin Newsom for gov of California.

  4. avatar Gov. William J Le Petomane says:

    I’d say he’s got it backwards. I’m assuming that by ‘right wing fascist’ he means white guy. White guys aren’t a protected class, trannies are. If you shoot a tranny you’re probably going up on a ‘hate crime’ with ‘enhanced penalties’.

  5. avatar Nanashi says:

    Mostly because crazy people who take drugs and mutilate their bodies while making repeated suicide attempts are prohibited persons.

    Also attending this instructor, who wants people shot over their political views, is a fantastic piece of evidence for any prosecutor that you weren’t acting in self defense.

  6. avatar Shawn says:

    This person has it wrong from the very beginning. The point of a self defense shooting is to get someone to stop trying to kill you, not to kill them. Of course it’s an acceptable result if the attacker dies as a result of your defensive actions. But this is an important distinction.

    1. avatar Ing says:

      That made me wonder if this…person…is any kind of firearms instructor at all. To me, this sounds a lot like those “I’m a real gun owner and I hate guns” screeds the leftists trot out every so often. You know, some would-be Comintern apparatchik pretending to be one of those icky gun-toting plebes.

  7. avatar Dan Joye says:

    You meant to say Left-wing fascist.

  8. avatar Bob Watson says:

    Dear Little Kayla,
    “When I make noises with my mouth or produce gibberish with my keyboard, my intent is to confuse the hell out of anyone who is paying attention, so I will be taken seriously and not be locked up. Also, I do not own a dictionary or even know what a dictionary is.”

    FIFY

  9. avatar Hank says:

    Sounds like this person has some strange fantasies of shooting people. Does he think that waves of oncoming right wing fascist skin heads are going to appear out of nowhere, and try to strip him of his virginity?

    1. avatar barnbwt says:

      Granted, such fantasies are hardly unique to this wierdo (hordes of armored thugs or UN troops, for example)

  10. avatar Shire-man says:

    Sounds like trans Yaeger. Definitely not well.

  11. avatar Hank says:

    Speaking of such strange things, Wienstine is reportedly lurking around the golden globes for another victim to rape.

  12. avatar Felixd says:

    Harris sounds more like a trans-snowflake than trans-sexual. It sounds as if he/she is either preparing a defense or is predetermined to assault a conservative. It would be interesting if we could discover who certified it as an instructor.

  13. avatar TwoJohnsonsAreBetterThanOne says:

    In the tolerant lingo, ‘right-wing fascist’ means ‘a person who happens to disagree with me’.

  14. avatar Fit2BTyed says:

    What a crock of cr@p. These SJW’s have lost their minds. Do we have to listen to this kind of nonsense in the “Truth About Guns” forum? I mean come on. Really?

  15. avatar BLAMMO says:

    Please remind me exactly what a trans woman is. Is that someone who used to be a woman or is it someone who currently “identifies” as a woman?

    Or is the goal of these confused people just to create confusion in the rest of us?

    1. avatar Gov. William J Le Petomane says:

      A ‘trans woman’ is someone who believes they don’t have a Y chromosome even though they do.

    2. avatar Chris T from KY says:

      A trans woman is a liar. They want the rest of society to believe their lie. They are just men wearing a costume that makes them look female. Usually a very ugly one.

      And they are socialist progressive in their political orientation. Guns are for the government only.

  16. avatar Stephen M says:

    I love how these degenerates scream that science is real when it comes to the climate but get all mad when you point out that they’re just a biological defect.

    There is no right to live for defects. Anyone who teaches such people to survive should be shot as a traitor to the human species.

    1. avatar Guardiano says:

      This is a little much even for me. Can’t we just put them in asylums instead of killing them off? Eugenics doesn’t exactly mesh with the American ideal and modern libertarianism.

      1. avatar Chadwick says:

        I agree that a planned parenthood style eugenics approach isn’t American. The mentally ill probably should be in hospitals.

      2. avatar Henry Bowman says:

        Bullshit, survival of the fittest is as American as apple pie.

        1. avatar Andrew Lewis says:

          Apple pie is actually British.

          I’m going to assume you knew that and therefore your statement’s intended meaning was that ‘survival of the fittest’ is not all the American.

    2. avatar Gov. William J Le Petomane says:

      The one thing that everyone who cries about ‘science’ and ‘climate’ have in common is a stunning degree of ignorance about not only the climate but the sciences of fetal development and human sexuality as well.

    3. avatar DaveL says:

      There is, in fact, a right to live, inherent in every person. What they choose to live for may never be known outside the privacy of that individual’s mind, and therefore they have the right to hold those thoughts, there being no power on earth that can stop them.

      What their “true” or “official” gender is, while an interesting question for philosophers, has no bearing on the extent of their individual rights. As someone who recognizes equal rights regardless of gender, the one is irrelevant to the other.

      To me, that settles the question of the rights of transgender persons. How to classify their psychological or medical conditions, and what if anything is to be done for them, is something I leave up to the medical profession. At present, the consensus is to help them “transition”.

    4. avatar Henry Bowman says:

      Bring up race, genetics, IQ. Disgenic effects of communism, and they freak out, it’s awesome!

  17. avatar Uh-hu says:

    Right wing fascist = anyone that Isn’t in lock step agreement with ze’s radical leftist ideology. That quote is both offensive and disturbing; Lamenting that It can’t get away with killing Heterosexual, Conservative, white men. IMO Sounds to me like, To coin a phrase from the Leftist MSM a “dog whistle” or a call to violence by that unhinged extremist.

  18. avatar former water walker says:

    Project much LADY?!? You hate actual men so you fantasize about killing them. You shouldn’t even have a gun gurl…😖😫😡

    1. avatar Guardiano says:

      It’s understandable that you’re confused, but this isn’t a lady, this is a weird dude who dresses up as one. “Transman” = woman who pretends to be a man, and “transwoman” = man who pretends to be a woman.

      1. avatar Chadwick says:

        We can just use the term “mentally ill freak” to make it easier. Or as Bruce Gender’s dog says “meow”.

  19. avatar Em says:

    I’m not sure of the exact hierarchy, but I think Kate Steinle’s murder proved that “sticking it to Trump” is at the top of the list. Shouldn’t be too hard for a trans person to claim “Because Trump” as a successful legal strategy.

  20. avatar HandyDan says:

    I’m pretty sure the media would absolutely gush about a trans person killing a “right wing fascist” (i.e. a white man). It would be in all the national media, and the trans person would probably get “Woman of the Year” award. But, hey, being a bully while playing the victim had been 100% effective so far, they might as well keep using that play until it stops working.

  21. avatar Chadwick says:

    Right wing fascist? Wow you are just a big ball of mental illness aren’t you? Not to mention this leftist daydream where they don’t get special treatment. Good lord I hope I never have to use my gun in self defense because if I use it against one of the left’s protected classes I can be vilified by every pro big government publication under the sun. Hell they might even get a march going with those pink stinky cat hat people. Welcome to equality comrade Orwell.

  22. avatar GeneralZod says:

    “When I teach a defense class, the point of the class is to kill someone…”

    Then you have no idea what you’re doing and your “teaching” is going to get one of your students sent to prison. Which I suppose Is the actual intent, so you can point at the situation and scream that it’s discrimination. What a sociopath.

    1. avatar oliver says:

      Totally agree. Thats the first thing that popped out at me. If the shooter was put on the stand and the prosecutor asked ” Why did you keep shooting” and your response is ” To make sure they were dead because I was trained to kill”, then your guilty verdict is pretty much secured. The person teaching the class is a dangerous idiot with anger issues.

  23. avatar Mike in OK says:

    If she/ he/ it can find an actual example of a “right-wing fascist” I’ll kiss her/ his/ its ass and swear she/ he/ it is completely sane. But she/ he / it can’t, because all fascists are leftists. And she/ he/ it is a total nut job.

  24. avatar Jim Bullock says:

    That read to me like two articles kinda pushed together.

    – Individuals in out groups taking care of themselves
    – Bad, evil neo-fascist…

    It feels like the article’s subject was baited into the over the top quotes.

    The fact is, out groups get less protection from the social system they’re in – by definition. And the organized enforcement arms will exploit out groups – try driving in N J with an out of state license plate, for example. And out-groups get preyed on by opportunists because they get less protection. So, tool up. And be aware of whether the enforcers think you are their tribe.

    “But, but, but… eeee-ville fascists, and secret police becuase Trump!” is just lazy. Everything is a sign of The Orange Crush’s weirdness-crushing agenda(*) just like HotColdWetDry confirms global warming. It’s sloppy, emotional non-argument, spun to keep people wee-wee’d up. (Odd term, that. Where did I pick that up, I wonder?)

    Of course, the anti’s need an end of the world wrapper on this, because otherwise they might have to note that citizen arms are particularly valuable to out groups. And that disarming the people you want to exploit n oppress has been part of the formula forever. Like, I don’t know, removing franchise and arms from black people in the post-war South. By law.

    (*) They’re grasping on that one. Have they seen his hair?

  25. avatar Jim says:

    Where I find the confusion is not in the instructors sex, but in how they see conservatives.

    A Conservative could care less how you see yourself. A Conservative believes you have a right to decide for yourself.(period). A Conservative believes in the founding principles, Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness.

    That being said, if being transgender makes you happy, good for you, that’s your thing. It’s just not my thing. Second you have a right to life, a Conservative treasures life, that’s why it’s the first principle. You have every right to defend your life, and a Conservative would never take it. Unless you try to take theirs.
    Finally Liberty means you have a right to do what you want, but I have the same right. So the Conservative may not be the one with the problem perhaps it’s that you do not know what Conservativism is.

    1. avatar Casey says:

      Let me give you an insight from the inside, as it were.

      I am a pro-choice, pro-weed, pro-gay marriage, bisexual anti-theist libertarian. But because my main “thing” is all about being self-reliant and prepared to survive everything from day to day to TEOTWAWKI, the label I am most often called by my non-heterosexual acquaintances is “conservative”, and that usually delivered with a hearty spit in my general direction.

      Then again, it’s not like I expect to get any love from the people posting the “all sodomy is a mental defect and defectives should be culled from the herd” crowd as seen in the comments above, either.

      The “if you aren’t 100% in lock step with me then you should be put in an oven” mentality is pretty rampant on both left and right, so glass houses and all that. A lefty statist and a righty statist are both statists, after all.

      1. avatar Guardiano says:

        How many right-wing statists are there really? I don’t know any personally and I run in some pretty right-wing circles. In fact, I would argue that in the American political spectrum, the further right you go the closer you are to anarchism. An extreme far-right American would be an anarcho-capitalist or perhaps just a straight-up anarchist, because that’s the ultimate expression of rugged individualism, which is what the Right in America is all about.

        1. avatar Mike in OK says:

          The mainstream Republicans are all statists. That’s why it’s so easy for them to vote in favor of warrantless surveillance, national IDs, gate rape, and a plethora of other measures that should surely be a violation of their oath to uphold the Constitution. Both the Ds and most Rs believe that more government is the answer. They just have different ideas about how that expanded government should be used.

        2. avatar Mack Bolan says:

          Anyone who is an ardent Constitutionalist, is by definition a Statist. Since the Constitution established the State.

        3. avatar Rick the Bear says:

          I would say the the Constitution restrained (or was intended to restrain) the power of the State to protect individual liberty. I don’t understand how you got to your conclusion.

        4. avatar Mack Bolan says:

          Americans fought a war of independence, once independence was achieved, the founders felt a need to form a Government and to do so drafted the Constitution outlining the new government, its powers and how it would work. Literally creating the State.

          The BOR came later which is what you are referring to. While in theory the BOR was meant to constrain the new Federal Government, in practice, not so much.

          Constitutionalist=Statist.

      2. avatar pwrserge says:

        There’s a “bit” of middle ground between “in the oven you go” and pandering to mentally ill defectives. I hate to break this to you, but just because I don’t want to humor the psychotic delusions of degenerate freaks, doesn’t mean that I want to round them up and gas them. But please, remind the me last time ANY “right wing” government engaged in a policy of deliberate genocide… I’ll wait.

        1. Pwrserge, first you said, “Fascist movements have always been leftist, without exception.”
          Then you said, “But please, remind the me last time ANY “right wing” government engaged in a policy of deliberate genocide… I’ll wait.”

          Are you a Holocaust denier, or have you completely forgotten about Nazi Germany and that “little” genocide known as the Holocaust?
          That Nazi genocide that killed about 10 million people including 6 million Jews, gypsies, gays, trade unionists, the handicapped, the retarded, and everyone else Hitler thought was subhuman?
          And have you also forgotten the Italian right-wing fascist Mussolini?
          We Americans fought a “little” war against that right-wing genocide of Hitler and Mussolini, if I remember correctly. (The “little” part is sarcasm, because I know it wasn’t little, as my dad fought in WWII in the U.S. Army Infantry in the 10th Mountain Division. My brothers and I also followed in his footsteps and served in the U.S. Army too). The U.S. Army in WWII were the original antfa.

          Fascism is by DEFINITION a right-wing movement. Look up fascism in any dictionary or encyclopedia and you’ll see, e.g. Wikipedia says (3rd sentence), “Opposed to liberalism, Marxism and anarchism, fascism is usually placed on the far-right within the traditional left–right spectrum.[5][6][7][4][8][9]”
          The definition begins with, “Fascism /ˈfæʃɪzəm/ is a form of radical authoritarian nationalism,[1][2] characterized by dictatorial power, forcible suppression of opposition and control of industry and commerce[3] that came to prominence in early 20th-century Europe.[4] ”

          But I think you all know that fascism is right-wing, and you’re just trying to hurl insults.
          Anyone who claims they don’t know that Nazi Germany or Italy’s fascist movement were right-wing is being purposely deceptive.

        2. avatar Guardiano says:

          Yes, but HOW were the Nazis and other fascists right-wing? I realize Wikipedia and everybody else we trust so much in academia (very left-wing institution, interesting) SAY Nazis and fascists are right-wing, but I’ve never seen a good argument how and why that’s the case. Especially in the American context, the further right you go the closer you get to anarchy. I don’t think that’s arguable but I’d be willing to hear a counter-argument. That being said, fascism is very statist and requires a totalitarian central government, which is fundamentally at odds with American constitutional conservatism. At best you could say that fascism is the very right edge of the left wing, since in my estimation you cross the left-right divide (to the right) as soon as you accept the idea that individuals should control their own destiny rather than the government.

        3. avatar Casey says:

          Well, I mean, you DO understand why someone like me doesn’t really want to have a conversation with someone like you, right?

          It’s not because we disagree on guns, because based on your comment history I’m pretty damned sure we’re both on the same little end of the “shall not be infringed means exactly what it says” spectrum.

          It’s not because you’re straight and religious, or because I’m neither.

          It’s entirely because you’re calling me and my friends “degenerate freaks”.

          Remember your reaction to “basket of deplorables” and “bitter clingers”? Well it’s just like that, except I’m fairly sure you and I actually want the same thing, to whit: “Leave me F*<K alone and don't tell me how to live my life." It's just that I'm not particularly inspired to invite you over to watch a game, now.

  26. avatar DaveL says:

    When I teach a defense class, the point of the class is to kill someone.

    Holy crap.

    1. avatar Dog of War says:

      Yeah no kidding. The point isn’t to just kill someone, it’s to deescalate any positional violence as soon as possible before you have to kill someone.

      Honestly, if this person does NOT need to be teaching people if that’s their sentiment.

  27. avatar Dog of War says:

    Firearms freedom is for everyone, regardless of your sexuality, gender identity, or weather you have an identity disorder or not.

    And more to the point the way the writer of this tripe framed the statement shows more of their bias more than any sort of pro or anti trans sentiments. They literally think the entire legal system is anti-whatever just because the state gives equal legal protection to everyone, instead of legally codifying special rights for whatever group the regressive left thinks is more important today.

  28. avatar Specialist38 says:

    The goal of self defense is to stop the threat.

    If they die… so be it.

    The goal is not to kill but to defend and protect.

    1. avatar Cubbie says:

      My thoughts exactly. If she thinks the point is to kill, she should be an instructor.

  29. avatar pwrserge says:

    Ah… they mythological “right wing fascist”… I’m sure we’ll find one some day… right next to the libertarian socialist, Bigfoot, and the Roswell aliens.

    1. avatar anonymoose says:

      I know lots of them on 4chan, 8chan, and Discord, but all they do is hide in their mom’s basement and post frog memes.

      1. avatar Dog of War says:

        Hey now, frog memes are funny. And it really gets the normies panties in a twist. Which is the same people that like to make up innate claims about gun owners genitals and screech racism everyone time some armed thug meets his maker. Hardly people who are worth consideration at all.

      2. avatar pwrserge says:

        I hate to break this to you, but the “alt-right” are basically SJWs for white people. They are only “right wing” in the sense that they are slightly to the right of Joseph Stalin.

    2. avatar Mike in OK says:

      “right next to the libertarian socialist”

      Apparently that’s really a thing. Of course, it’s just a name some socialists gave themselves since it is impossible to be both a libertarian and a socialist, but there are actually people who call themselves “libertarian socialists”. The cognitive dissonance is very strong in that crowd.

  30. avatar Anonymous says:

    It’s funny to me that this trans person who is an obvious democrat, advocates self defense with firearms, all thanks to republicans, libertarians, and the like.

  31. avatar anonymoose says:

    Obviously not one of those “Traps for Trump.”

  32. avatar Ace says:

    This article is full of fail. Especially this quote: “pursuing training and licensure for the purpose of accessing conceal carry permits”. In California? LOL.

    Also, the person in the photo appears to be wearing fashion sunglasses, useless for eye protection.

    1. avatar TrappedInCommiefornia says:

      …. I have a conceal carry permit in Commiefornia. It wasn’t even hard to get >_>

  33. avatar TwoJohnsonsAreBetterThanOne says:

    A right-wing fascist is what every left-winger sees in the mirror.

    1. avatar Joe R. says:

      It’s called

      P R O J E C T I O N

  34. avatar Warlocc says:

    Stupid article producing stupid comments here. How about that.

    1. avatar Joe R. says:

      Hits close to home?

      1. avatar Warlocc says:

        Stupid attracts stupid, is all.

  35. avatar Maxi says:

    Well, what should i say?
    Does ever person have a right to live and defend this life? Yes.
    Should some people rather seek the security of a mental health institution to get the most out of their life? Most definetly yes.

  36. avatar AZgunner says:

    I’m generally pretty conservative, but as far as the whole trans thing- I just don’t care. As long as you’re a productive member of society, you do you. And everyone should have the right to defend themselves. A trans person who’s not a criminal isn’t bothering me in any way. Leave me and my rights alone, I’ll leave you and yours alone. I think that’s fair.

  37. avatar neiowa says:

    shoot a right-wing fascist

    That will occur AFTER you find a unicorn and a sasquatch to unload upon. Leftist/progtard fascists are everywhere. Please do shoot some.

  38. avatar LHW says:

    Right wing fascist= the left’s boogeyman

  39. avatar Shosa says:

    What type of carbine is she shooting in the photo?

  40. avatar Joe R. says:

    I thought I was inappropriately swayed from antipathy toward hate.

    Nope.

    Not inappropriate.

    They’re [???] just another unequal person I don’t want to equate myself with.

  41. avatar rc says:

    This person is just messed up…and reading the entire article didn’t help my opinion of ‘her’.

  42. wheather or not that a person has a birth defect that wired them for the same sex or both sexes is nil, they still have the same rights to protect themselves that we do. and instead of mocking those that understand it we should help all those who believe in their right to defend themselves, and insist that they get equal justice under the law. ( even though not all of us do) the more we have on our side the stronger we will be. and it is not their fault they were born that way. it is now a scientific fact that gays became gays because of what happened to them inside their mothers womb. after the psysical sex was decided they get doused with chemicals ( like we all do) from the mother to wire the brain to be that sex, but in their case they also got an extra dose, but for the opposite sex. and that is why they are like that. it is a birth defect .

    1. avatar Guardiano says:

      Citation, please

    2. avatar Sprocket says:

      Helping to arm and train leftists does not make us stronger. America has been sorting itself into two camps that have no fondness for each other. Let’s keep theirs unarmed.

  43. avatar PeachesSabrina says:

    Ok, here is my take on this article as a TS POTG, she doesn’t know what she is talking about conservatives (BTW, some of you might remember my article here). Yes some people might have issues with who I am, however with that being said generally they are in the minority. Most of my friends are conservative or at the very least independent. I don’t fear conservatives, because once you get to know them and once you talk to them about being a TS, they actually listen.

  44. avatar Chris T from KY says:

    I’m very grateful for this article. It really goes to expressing the dangerous thought process of the sexually liberated. These are morally bankrupt people. And their moral bankruptcy has very little to do with sex.

    Only a morally bankrupt person believes only the government should have guns. That is also anti American. That’s ok for Japan, England, Australia, France. But not for America.

    They are socialist progressive in their political orientation. That is what makes the sexually liberated so dangerous.

  45. avatar 33Charlemagne says:

    I am a right wing conservative and opposed to much of the LGBT agenda. But as a former prosecutor I focused on behavior not group identity. Any innocent person has the right to defend themselves against an unprovoked attack!

    1. avatar JJ48 says:

      I agree. I may dislike the guy’s politics, and I may disagree with the idea that thinking you’re a lady or man is what makes you one, but that doesn’t change the fact that he’s still a human being made in the image of God, and therefore has rights just like any other human being.

  46. avatar Jross says:

    “If you’re a trans woman, the person you’re killing is likely to be someone society values more than you ”

    Uhhh….who cares? All that should matter is that you value your own life enough to kill to preserve it.

  47. avatar Chris Morton says:

    You want to be in it up to your neck?

    Shoot an islamist who’s trying to shove you off of the top of a building.

    The levels on the “victimhood pyramid” have gotten shuffled sweetheart.

    The Democrat reaction to the Pulse Nightclub shootings made it clear that in the victim sweepstakes, you come a VERY distant second to Omar Mateen. Don’t believe me? Ask Keith Ellison and Linda Sarsour.

  48. avatar Seizure doc says:

    What if the person attacking the transgender woman is a Muslim ? Which of those two does society value more ? Is there a formula for this like for up or down angle shooting to help me sort it out ?

  49. avatar Martin says:

    Okay, I do undestand some of the logic behind the article. We do live in a world where everybody has their prejudices. Trans women do become targets of unjustified violence, and it happens more often than with cis women, so they need efficient self-defense tools just as much as OFWGs do. And I fully support the idea that gun rights should never be restricted based on one’s gender.

    So yeah, I’m perfectly willing to take a trans person to a range and help them understand and learn, assuming that said person is civil and sane. No, being trans doesn’t prove one insane. Sure, being trans is a defect, to use a word that’s likely to be properly understood on this forum. But it is an illness that trans people are not responsible for and one that is often best mitigated by transitioning. I don’t care what anyone’s religion says about this, as this is about science and human rights, pure and simple. The world is not just black and white, it is uneducated to say that there’s nothing but male and female. Some people are born with no feet, or with six fingers on each hand, and some do not fit the simple male/female tickboxes. But this is not a place for a biology lesson, what’s important is the fact that being trans (or something else on the LGBTQ+ spectrum) makes one neither intrinsically crazy nor less of a human, so trans people do have their gun rights and we should be willing to fight to preserve them, the same as for any other POTG. Every armed and sensible trans person is a potential ally.

    However… The article speaks volumes about how disconnected from reality too many people are. It shows that too many people on the so-called progressive side of things suffer from highly delusional notions of what and how other people think. They see enemies even where there are none. It shows that too many people have been brainwashed into semi-automatons who way too often don’t bother to think or question. It shows how much irrational fears we will have to deal with when we try to open a dialogue.

    So I’d give the article a B for intent and E for execution.

    1. avatar Guardiano says:

      Could you cite your sources that prove “transitioning” is the best way to treat their mental illness?

      1. avatar Martin says:

        First, you might notice I never said transitioning is the best option for all cases.

        Second, I guess it should be mentioned that the current version of Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders no longer considers gender identity disorder a mental illness.

        Third, UTFG. But in case using google is something you’re too lazy to bother with, try say this: http://www.fertstert.org/article/S0015-0282(08)03838-7/fulltext
        And I guess I better expalin that since we’re unable to actually “cure” GID, the best we can do is mitigate the negative effects it has on those diagnosed with it.

        1. avatar Jake says:

          I read that article, and it says pretty specifically that transitioned patients had a lower quality of life than an untransitioned control group. Not sure why you used that study to support your claims.

        2. avatar Martin says:

          Jake, you read the article wrong. The control group is not untransitioned people with GID, it was a specific segment of female medical staff. So the result is not that transitioning makes the problem worse, it is that even after transitioning, trans patients are worse off than cis women. To quote from the study: “To conclude, the current study shows 15 years after sex reassignment surgery quality of life is similar to controls except in the domains general health, role limitation, and physical and personal limitation. Physical and personal limtations were extremely significant lower compared with controls.”

          And those lower scores in certain areas are no surprise, considering the number of surgical interventions and the social stigmas that go with transitioning.

        3. avatar Guardiano says:

          First, I asked you very politely for citations. If you took it as snide, that may say more about you than me, but either way there was no need for a snide response from you. Second, it’s not “lazy” to ask for citations when my opponent is espousing a view that is far outside the mainstream of society, and is also not even close to being mainstream scientific or medical theory. The burden of proof is on you to prove the sky is green instead of blue, not me.

          I know the left-wing propaganda machine of the media-entertainment complex, and the left-wing indoctrination organ of academia, are telling you that “transitioning is the only treatment,” but that doesn’t make it true. And as another poster already pointed out, the article you cited actually shows the OPPOSITE of your argument.

  50. avatar Joseph says:

    When a man cuts off his pecker it doesn’t make him a woman, it makes him a man without a pecker.

  51. avatar Milton says:

    come on man , if this site is going tranny or homo then I will have to drop it,I thought it was for firearms news.

    i

  52. avatar Freezy says:

    Well yeah, if you just shoot a “right wing white fascist” then the law WON’T be on your side. Technically even if you are attacked the law STILL isn’t on your side. Self defense is an affirmative defense in most states.

    Just a whiny progressivist loser wanting to push its agenda.

    1. avatar Martin says:

      Technically, if you just shoot a “right-wing fascist” who’s attacking you, the law *is* on your side. You do have the right to self-defense, no matter how derranged you are. You simply have to stop shooting once you’ve stopped the attack and you’re good.

      Sure, just shooting someone simply because you *think* he is a right-wing fascist should land you in jail. Shooting someone who’s down and no longer a threat should land you in jail. Shooting someone because you think that using a wrong pronoun is violence should land you in jail. But if someone actually attacks you, no matter his or your ideological leanings, getting killed is the attacker’s fault, not yours.

  53. avatar Muhammad says:

    I am going to make sure I stay away from Tranny’s. (Not that I hang out with them now), but statements like that make me think that a NICS form needs to add another disqualifying question: 15: Are you sexually confused?

  54. avatar JJ48 says:

    “When I teach a defense class, the point of the class is to kill someone.”

    So every time you teach a defense class, someone dies?!

    Seriously, though, when I took my CC course, our instructor emphasized multiple times that the purpose of drawing and firing your weapon at another person was to end a threat, not to kill. Killing may be required in order to stop the threat, but if simply drawing the gun causes someone to give up, or if my first shot is non-fatal but otherwise incapacitates them, then I have accomplished my goal and there is no reason to pursue death.

    I agree that we should work to fix injustices in the courts, but let’s not add fuel to the fire by claiming that the purpose of defending ourselves is to kill.

    1. avatar Gunr says:

      In my case, I feel that if I draw my gun and it does not stop the threat, and I have no choice but to shoot, I will try for a kill shot, simply because if a person tries to rob me at knife or gun point, he really has no good to be on this earth. Not only that, but remember, a dead man cannot testify against you in a courtroom.

      1. avatar JJ48 says:

        Oh, I’m not at all saying you shouldn’t shoot center-of-mass (since killing someone is certainly a very effective way to end the threat as quickly as possible). I’m just saying that the motivation is the end of the threat, not the person’s death. And if my center-of-mass shot doesn’t kill them but otherwise removes them as a threat, then I don’t need to “finish the job”, as it were.

        I guess what I was driving at is that motivation can mean just as much as outcome, especially if the incident goes to trial.

  55. avatar Martin says:

    I’ve just realised there’s two questions I feel I should ask of all those who feel that simply being trans makes one crazy, dangerous, criminal or otherwise deserving a prohibited person status in regards to guns.

    My first question is, how many cases of trans people going funny in the head and actually killing someone simply for being a conservative (or for a similar reason) can you prove?

    I know, the lady from the article definitely has some issues. Well, many conservatives have issues too, and the amount of keyboard patriots one meets here is proof enough that both sides of this problem have their crazies. But how many trannies have actually gone and started shooting? When some Joe Random or Jane Random kills some people, we’re quick to point out it would be wrong to punish law-abiding gun-owners for the actions of the criminals. So why treat trans gun-owners any different?

    My second question is, do you really think that insulting people who never asked to suffer from not fitting the male-or-female simplification is going to help? Sure, many of them are so “progressive” that talking to them makes one wonder how they’re able to lace their shoes. But some are gun-friendly libertarians or other sensible people who already have to take sh*t from the progressives. Do we really wish to appear as crazy and hateful as the progressives?

    Let us assume that gender dysphoria occurs in 0.005% of men, which is about the lowest estimate you’re likely to find. That’s more than 7000 patients in the US alone. Most estimates are significantly higher, and going with the Massachusetts estimate of 0.5% (not the highest one, but high enough), we’re talking about more than 700000 people. Most people here would scream murder if we were to talk about restricting gun rights of people based on things they have no control over, like their skin color. Well, being trans is something that one didn’t chose and it doesn’t make one inherently dangerous to others. So if you think that being black should never be a reason for anyone being denied their gun rights, and I hope that we can agree on that, the same should hold true for trans people.

    1. avatar JJ48 says:

      I get what you’re saying, and I don’t personally think that gender-identity issues themselves should invalidate someone from owning firearms, but I think you go a bit too far in likening it to skin color. It’s not about the physical reality; it’s about the reaction the reality. In the vast majority of babies born, physiology alone will reveal whether the child is male or female. In the very few cases it doesn’t, genetics can reveal whether or not the person has a Y chromosome. This is natural and testable.

      However, there are some people who believe they are of a different gender. In this case, the body says one thing, but the mind says something different. For some reason, many in our culture assume that the body must be the part that’s wrong, and the mind is 100% correct, while others (including many of these commenters) argue that it is, in fact, the mind that is mistaken.

      Of course, saying that that level of false belief is enough to have someone declared mentally unfit for firearm ownership is stretching things a bit far, and could open the door to discrimination based on worldviews (e.g. atheists having Christians declared mentally unfit or vice-versa). But it’s still a very different issue from someone simply having a different shade of skin.

      1. avatar Martin says:

        And I get what you’re saying, and you’re correct that this is not exactly the same as skin color. No metaphor is perfect. But the principle remains the same. Sure, we can debate the details and statistics and philosophy and so on, but the fact remains that there are people whose gender identity doesn’t match their bodies.

        And while gender dysphoria can become one of the causes of a whole host of mental problems, the dysphoria itself is not a mental illness and those suffering from it have no control over the fact itself. Therefore, judging people because of it *is* on par with judging them based on skin color. We can argue about who deserves what diagnosis but that doesn’t change the simple fact that some people do deserve the gender dysphoria one.

        I think that one of the reasons for some of the confusion regarding this topic is visible in something you mention. You wrote about either the mind being wrong, or the body being wrong. However, if I might be allowed to simplify a bit, the problem is often that neither are wrong, they simply do not match. To use another metaphor, neither the .22 is wrong in itself, nor is the AR-15, but one inside the other is a bad combination.

        There are scientific studies that show that MRI brain scans of pre-therapy transexuals are often measurably different from those of “reference” males or females. And when we can prove this even now, with still relatively primitive diagnostic tools, there’s little doubt that transexuality exists. Human biology is more complicated that our ancestors thought. What we have to do now is figure out how to better react to the reality that has always existed.

        Oh, and there’s also the whole another can of worms that’s intersex people. For example, most “men” with complete androgen insensitivity syndrome develop into seemingly heterosexual “females”, with boobs and female-looking genitalia and interest in men, even though they’re genetically male and posses the XY chromosomes and lack the uterus. There are likely thousands of people with CAIS in the US alone. And I wonder how many posters here would call them names.

        In the end, someone taking medication, wearing skirts and makeup and likely undergoing multiple surgeries is no skin off my nose, so why shouldn’t I treat them with decency?

        1. avatar Gunr says:

          Well said.

        2. avatar JJ48 says:

          Treating someone with decency and saying that their beliefs about themselves are correct are two completely different things.

          And I think your example sort of misses the mark. If I put .22 in a .223 rifle, then either I intended to shoot .22 and have the wrong rifle or else I intended to shoot .223 and have the wrong bullets (or perhaps I intended to shoot 7.62x54R, and am just completely wrong in all regards). Neither may be wrong in itself, but together at least one must be wrong. Why do these people assume the body is wrong and must be fixed?

          And personally, I’ve never found the “it’s natural” argument to be all that convincing. Whether it’s natural or not doesn’t really matter to whether it’s right or wrong. It’s natural for kids to be selfish with their own stuff and take other people’s stuff that they like, yet we try to teach them to share and respect ownership. It’s natural to want to strike someone who irritates you, but we learn to control our tempers. Similarly, it may be perfectly natural for a woman to feel and earnestly believe she’s a man. Why don’t we help her to accept who she really is rather than bending over backwards to dress her up and treat her like something she’s not?

        3. avatar Martin says:

          JJ48: We do not “assume” that the body is wrong. We accept the fact that while out current medical technologies can reshape the body to better conform with brain-based gender identity, they are incapable of reshaping the brain into a gender identity in line with the body. The only choice is between changing the body to better match the brain, or not changing the body and keeping the brain mismatched with said body.

          I don’t think the ammo metaphor fails. A transgender person didn’t chose their condition. Metaphorically, they get handed the .22 ammo and the .223 rifle and they have to make the best out of a bad situation. The only way you can make the damn combo shoot is change something, and we’re still at the point where medicine is unable to change the brain side of things.

          I don’t recall making any “it is natural” argument. However, I’m willing to reply to your argument. You see, we can agree on the fact that we should do what is right, not what is wrong. However, my opinion is that when a transition improves the life of the patient and doesn’t actually hurt anyone else, there’s no reason to consider it wrong. I can call it right when it helps someone without harming anyone else, at least unless we count hurt religious beliefs or other such imaginary hurts as real harm. Can you show us real harm that someone’s transition alone causes to other people and that’s greater than the harm that would result from not allowing the transition to occur?

        4. avatar JJ48 says:

          “The only choice is between changing the body to better match the brain, or not changing the body and keeping the brain mismatched with said body.”

          I guess trying to help the person feel comfortable with the body they have isn’t an option, for some reason.

          “The only way you can make the damn combo shoot is change something, and we’re still at the point where medicine is unable to change the brain side of things.”

          Except that we’re not changing the rifle, either. They still have the same genes they were born with. So really, we’re taking the .223 rifle and just making it LOOK like a .22, and then demanding that the rest of society also treat it like it’s a .22, just because we don’t even want to ATTEMPT to find .223 ammo, because that might come across as insulting.

          “Can you show us real harm that someone’s transition alone causes to other people and that’s greater than the harm that would result from not allowing the transition to occur?”

          Well, we were discussing right/wrong, so not sure why we’re suddenly switching gears to discussing harm. Honestly, sin is sin, and everyone does it, so on the one hand I don’t disagree with letting people be. However, I would argue that it does do harm to folks when people start insisting that everyone else has to bow to their whims and use a specific pronoun or else face a huge fine. Or what about the harm done in wasting tax dollars paying for nonessential, cosmetic surgery for inmates, or driving up insurance costs when insurance gets forced to cover it? Most of all, what about the harm we’re doing to the people themselves by claiming to offer a solution that doesn’t even fix the issue?

          As an honest question, how should we react if, for instance, a white man identified as black (not just claiming it, but fully believing it)? Would we get him a melanin transplant and demand that all of society treat him as black, or would we try to help him understand and come to terms with the fact that he’s not black (and do so in a loving manner)?

  56. avatar Gunr says:

    I have known transgender folks, those who are transsexuals (no pecker), and ones that that still have their “man hood”.
    In no case have I seen any unusual, or unwarranted aggression. Why on earth would anybody feel a person is unfit to own a firearm, just because they would rather take on the aspect of being a different gender.

    1. avatar Casey says:

      ….because hateful bigots who can’t be seen to agree with people who aren’t 100% in lockstep with their ideology?

      To paraphrase Michael Jackson, it don’t matter if you’re left or right.

      1. avatar zebra dun says:

        Black or white OOh OOh!

    2. avatar zebra dun says:

      A lawsuit over a cake is aggression.

  57. avatar zebra dun says:

    Holly jeebus…..what was that?
    There is a list of folks and furries who rate higher than others.
    White, southern, veterans, conservative gun owners who are straight are at the bottom of the list.
    Lucky actually not to have a season, no bag limit and tags sold each year LOL!
    Fact is if all these hyphenated humans shut up about their specialness no one would notice or care BUT that is the problem with a lack of attention which these human/furries crave.

  58. This does beg the question of why trannies would be more susceptible to violence than bulimics.

  59. avatar Wzrd says:

    “But even the simple act of self-preservation can be deemed aggression to conservatives.”

    But even the simple act of procuring or possessing the means to self-preservation can be deemed aggression to liberals.
    FIFY

  60. avatar Kanye West says:

    It’s staggering how many people here are suddenly supporting gun restrictions because shes a tranny and ignoring the very relevant truth here. Some people are more likely to get put in jail for self defense than others, especially marginalized people, and that concerns you too. The idiots here whose hate for trannies outweighs their care for the second amendment are the same people who price gouge before a gun ban. If you don’t respect the right of every person to be able to defend themselves, you’re not a real American, and pretending that youre just concerned isnt fooling anyone when you arent concerned about very violent groups of people who are currently able to legally own firearms without any odd restrictions. If the second amendment stops applying once someone you don’t like starts exercising it, you have the same common sense gun restrictions in mind as anti gunners.

Write a Comment

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

button to share on facebook
button to tweet
button to share via email