Previous Post
Next Post

Robert Farago (courtesy The Truth About Guns)

TTAG’s Armed Intelligentsia came down on me like a ton of bricks yesterday. They took me to proverbial wood shed for criticizing a Black Rifle Coffee Company’s video; a production wherein an effeminate gay character offers the team oral sex and refuses to drink “non-hipster” coffee. A “crime” for which he was dragged off and [pretend] water boarded. A reader went so far as to call and warn me against making readers choose between veteran-owned and operated businesses and TTAG. For the record . . .

I hire vets, donate money and services to veterans’ organizations and appreciate their service to this country. And I stand by my criticism. In my opinion, the BRCC video was over-the-line. It depicted homosexuals as weak, deserving scorn and physical abuse. It portrayed gun owners in a negative light.

You’re free to debate that perspective here if you choose. I’m not writing this post to reopen the argument. I want to address personal criticisms leveled against me: that I’m running this website (along with my talented and dedicated team) purely for financial gain. That this “prime directive” colors and directs my editorial decisions.

TTAG is a profit-making private enterprise, owned by myself and two of my staff. We make money from advertising. The company that handles our advertising does so without influencing our editorial content. More to the point, I use the money we earn to pay our staff, cover expenses (e.g., ammunition, travel and accommodation), invest in new projects and . . . that’s it.

Like all brands, TTAG exists in its consumers’ minds. It belongs to you. Without you, TTAG wouldn’t exist. But I will not compromise my personal beliefs to conform – or confound – readers’ expectations. I will continue to tell the truth about guns as I see it – even if it means that the site alienates readers and, eventually, self-destructs.

You may consider my BRCC posts a mischaracterization of their position. So be it. But money’s got nothing to do with my views on this matter. I call it like I see it. Anyone who disagrees with me or any other writer on this or any other subject may comment to that effect, or submit an article presenting their contrary point-of-view.

All I ask is that you do so with civility and respect. The same respect I give you, our Armed Intelligentsia, by honoring the commitment I made one winter afternoon in the privacy of my own home.

Previous Post
Next Post


      • Going to start with BS libtardtalk with “homophobic”, “LBTBXYZ” and all the other identity group politics of the sodomy lobby?

        I, like 98%+ of the adults in the US, was not raped by an adult queer nor subjected to the mindmelt of a radicalized progressive public school system as a confused youth. Therefore I/we did not and will no go queer. The deviants want tolerant? Shut up and quit demanding SPECIAL TREATMENT Aand ENDORSEMENT of their DEGENERATE CHOSEN LIFESTYLE. In other words stay in the damn closet and get on with a productive life. (And stay out of the military it’s not a social club).

        • I think I love you. Can we get married and run off to an organic garlic farm together? I love Vermont, don’t you?

        • And yet YOU, as an ammosexual, demand special treatment. Bizarre attitude. Thankfully your kind is dying out quickly.

        • You sir, deserve the award for the most stupid post on the Internet today.
          Gay people don’t choose to be gay, they are born this way.
          Also you don’t want to give them special treatment, but demand it for yourself? Maybe you get that something isn’t right there.
          Also I have to wonder that a German is more tolerant than a person from the US. Aren’t it the Germans who supposed to be more prejudiced? Maybe you also should think about that.

        • Evidence, el-mac? when i was young and intolerant, i thought the same thing. but why would anyone CHOOSE to be gay in societies where such things can get you executed? And studies have shown that the percentage of gays in those societies is about the same as in free societies. and recently there have been studies showing a genetic link, with the hypothesis for the reason why there would be a genetic link being that the things that make females more fertile in a population also results in a small number of “misfires” (my term) in the form of gays. Apparently it happens to ducks, too.

        • Weird, I read the Constitution front to back and didn’t see anything about homosexuality. 2A defenders don’t demand special treatment, we just want our rights left alone…..and I don’t give a damn what you do in the privacy of your home that’s none of my business.

        • It’s your exact attitude that is why they need special protections. As soon as people who are not homosexual stop caring about what homosexuals do we won’t have any more problems.

        • Special protections? What do you mean “special” protections? They get the same protections everyone else gets. It’s against the law to beat up a heterosexual, it’s against the law to beat up a homosexual. What more do you want? Double secret probation?

        • As soon as people who are not homosexual stop caring about what homosexuals do we won’t have any more problems.

          That’s a big fat lie….just ask the baker, photographer, and florist who just wanted to not care about a homo wedding.

        • >> Weird, I read the Constitution front to back and didn’t see anything about homosexuality.

          Check out the 9th and the 10th.

        • @int19h I have and there is nothing about homosexuallaity, do you need me to read it to you?

        • Do you understand the meaning of “right”, “other”, “reserved”, “retained” and “people”?

    • What’s wrong with sodomy? Or are you not aware that sodomy involves using any other orifice, regardless of gender?

      Or did you just want to get in the first gay-bashing post?

      @RF: The modern gun community is becoming quite libertarian and accepts (but doesn’t necessarily approve of) alternate lifestyles. You won’t lose much support, if you stick to your libertarian-leaning principles.

      • @JasonM, in your world, clearly nothing is wrong with it…sodomy on bro. Watch out for those peanuts though…

        • Are against blow jobs? Personally, I welcome that kind of sodomy anytime my lady is in the mood. Which isn’t as often as it used to be.

      • I agree with what you’re saying but homosexuality is not a lifestyle. People are just born with different sexual palates, much like we’re born with different gastronomical tastes. It disappoints me to see so many people here who proclaim themselves to be champions on unalienable liberty, but can’t respect the the unalienable rights of others simply because they’re too ignorant to comprehend the existence of diversity outside of their homogenous podunk towns they’ve remained in their entire lives. If you truly support liberty, hold your judgements and respectfully let your fellow man live in peace.

        • You roll up blasting others for their ignorance, intolerance, and passing of judgment on others, then toss out this gem?

          “….too ignorant to comprehend the existence of diversity outside of their homogenous podunk towns they’ve remained in their entire lives.”

          Oh that’s rich. F you and the high horse you rode in on.

        • Yeah, Jonathan is right. You can be dismissive and try to assume superiority over those that disagree with you all you want. I find homosexuality vile and putrid. I don’t need to be further educated nor better sensitized to it. I have an informed and reasoned position that it is morally and naturally abhorrent. Unsurprisingly, snarky internet comments made in an attempt to shame or bully aren’t gonna change that. Btw, I live in a metro area (not even in old South!), have a college degree and an upper middle-class lifestyle. Guess your narrow-minded sweeping generalizations aren’t accurate.

        • Their “moral and naturally abhorrent” lifestyle isn’t harming anyone, so why in the world do you care?

          What goes on between consenting adults in the privacy of their own homes is their business and their business alone. It’s not surprising that they view outside interference in their relationships with just as much horror as we do outside interference in our private ownership of firearms.

      • Gay marriage leads to children of that marriage (IVF, adoption, surrogate mothers, etc.). Don’t be a bigot and argue that one mother and one father is best for a child.

        Gay marriage will lead to polygamy. Who are we to interfere?

        Gay marriage will lead to incestuous marriage. Modern medicine can avoid the genetics problems, right?

        Gay marriage will lead to pedophile rights. Heh, they were born that way!

        And we will all be forced to cater to, cooperate with, and accept them all.

      • @Grindstone, ah….and here we have reached the bottom of the TTagger sewer pit. Grindstone aka Grumpy. At least you are as predictable as a morning BM.

  1. Big thumbs up Robert. Kudos to you to call out idiocy from companies that is completely separate from our desire to see the 2nd Amendment upheld for all Americans. I can’t stand a lot of the LGBT agenda, but the answer is not gross stereotypes and the obscenity promoted by BRCC. We must be people of the truth, wherever it may be found, and like you said, disagree with civility.

    • The 2A movement is too much of a hot-topic issue for us to dissuade anyone from getting into it. If gays, blacks, Asians, Latins, women, and people of all stripes get in on it, our arguments will be so much more effective. Right now, we’ve got an image problem where the antis love to paint us all as OFWGs, even though that’s not true.

      • This exactly. Make no mistake, the fight for our right to keep and bear arms is by and large a PR war. Becoming more diverse will swell our numbers and help our image. Bringing anyone and everyone into the fold is the way we win. It pains me to see that some people are too stupid to see that.

      • As an OFWG, I also resent having my opinions stereotyped. I’m as much about liberty in the pursuit of happiness as those groups you might consider to be more enlightened, but just to make my point I’m not going to get all butt hurt about it.

    • Excellent point.

      You don’t have to approve of homosexuality (and I suspect many TTAGers do not, for religious reasons) to accept that gays are people who have rights, including the right to keep and bear arms and the right to basic civility.

      • @JasonM, interesting that you seem to think disapproval of sodomy is somehow always linked to religion. Every stop and think that some people whether religious or not just simply disapprove of it because it is disgusting?

        • So don’t do it.

          You don’t want to be negatively judged because you own guns, yet here you are flinging invectives merely because you think being gay is icky.

          Or so you say.

        • I’ve yet to see any kind of disapproval of sodomy from somebody that didn’t also include something about the bible / god / abomination.

        • @El Mac believe me, I hear about it every time I log into certain gun-related forums and websites that I like to read up on.

        • I used to be religious, and also anti-gay. When I stop believing in god I soon stopped caring what other people do with their private parts. I actually do think that buttsecks is gross, but I also think papayas are gross. I do not think that what I find gross should be the basis of policy. Therefore I don’t have a problem with gays, gay marriage, papaya distribution or consumption, or gay people eating papayas.
          I support gay marriage because I think it’s wrong to deny people the benefits such as power of attorney, I nheritence, etc. because of who they chose as a partner.

        • Anyone that cares aw much as you do about how other people get off clearly has deep rooted issues.

        • @clickbroom, I could care less how someone chooses to get off. As you would know if you had read my posts before farting stupidity out of your keyboard.

        • While there are non-religious homophobes, when you look closely, their perception is always shaped by their culture. And in Western culture, including US, homophobia is undeniably historically linked to religion.

        • Nothing much. I don’t care why you’re a bigot. Just pointing out that you’re wrong as to the reasons.

    • Ditto.
      Whatever one’s sentiments might be on any other issue, they ought to have little-to-nothing to do with enumerated civil rights.
      We should be doing whatever we can to attract support for the 2A; offending anyone doesn’t support our cause. All it does is drive away someone who might have been willing to listen to our message.

      The gays have a group – Pink Pistols – who supported the cause of the 2A in a Heller Amicus brief. They promote the RKBA among their constituents. We ought to welcome them to the community of PotG.

      • I think if the NRA or one of the other big organizations had a huge “diversity” blitz of testimonies, range trips, and so on that featured LGBT folk, blacks, Asians, Latins, and so on, that’d help enormously. Noir is a huge step in that direction but more is needed.

    • Same here. If you exist, prepare to be made fun of, period (myself included). I’d take a fun world where some people might get offended (myself included) over a dreary existence where everyone has to apologize for everything they do.
      I don’t care that they made the video, and I don’t care that Robert was offended and demanded an apology out of them.

      • Exactly…this thin skinned bullshit paranoia circa 2015 is just flat sickening. Friggin high school all over again.

        • Meanwhile, we all freak out (and rightly so) when the antis say we’re all a bunch of angry, OFWGs with tiny penises.

          But it’s ok if ‘tards with affiliations to both veterans and the second amendment (and be extension representing both) make something public that can be construed as hate speech (I hate that term) and pro-gay bashing. Yeah.

          Makes perfect sense.

          How about we advocate that everyone just not be a-holes to each other instead of picking and choosing who can be angry little trash to whom?

        • “How about we advocate that everyone just not be a-holes to each other instead of picking and choosing who can be angry little trash to whom?”


        • @TheBear, yep…..shonuff…his name was TheBear…..hey, wait a minute! That’s you!!!!

      • I think RF’s original point is that this sort of humor makes the gun rights movement look like a bunch of homophobes.

        Remember when he banned misogynistic comments about Shannon and her crew? It wasn’t because he didn’t think you have a right to make sexist jokes, but because MDA searches for those comments, blows them out of proportion, and pretends they represent the entire gun rights community. Same idea here.

        • Waitaminit. No, nonononono. RF posted the BRCC commercial. If he was overly worried about MDA, et al picking up on this stuff he would have not brought it up. Most people probably would have never even heard of BRCC otherwise. I think he knows some of those groups troll this site.

  2. Fairly simple. Freedom of speech, and freedom of choice. Read TTAG or don’t. I certainly don’t agree or even care about some of the postings, but I read the site anyway.

  3. I must have missed that post, not that it would have interested me.

    I don’t condone either gay-bashing or glamorizing that particular segment of society.

    I suppose the company that produced the video is aiming at a specific target audience. Let ’em have it.

    I say stick to your guns 😉

  4. Yeah, there was a lot of judgmental intolerance being thrown around in the comments to that article yesterday; reminded me of the usual tones and presumptive assertions I usually expect from the anti-gun crowd.

  5. I hate that P.C. culture has divided people so sharply about so-called “offensive” humor that we have to reflexively defend even shit that isn’t really humorous just because someone complains about it. I’m not offended by the content of BRCC’s ads, because whether it’s a good or bad one, I can recognize a joke when I see it. However, I do think the ads are very childish and unfunny, because I’m also not a twelve-year-old.

    • I think it’s less about the ad and more about the fact that those who made the ad are representing groups that will be tangled up with the backlash.

      It’s like… imagine how pissed off and flipped out half the readers here would be if some trans, greenpeace person made a commercial featuring hunters and gun owners getting tortured.

      • Oh, I get that part. What needles me is that every time someone tries to make that very salient point, several people will always admonish them to “get a sense of humor,” as though were all obligated to laugh at stupid, juvenile bullshit.

        Again, I know the guys at BRCC are kidding, but they have no cleverness or wit to their approach, and when you try to mock something without wit you just end up looking like a bully. It’s been pointed out that black or white, gay or straight, religious or secular, it doesn’t matter; People of the Gun are all in the same boat, and divisiveness within the ranks hurts us all equally. We either hang together in the fight, or we’ll end up hanging separately on a gallows.

        • I tend to agree with you.

          Wit and satire are generally the dividing lines between poor taste and humor just not landing if/when people get offended.

  6. Good for you. If gun rights aren’t decoupled from the religious right we will lose them. There is no place in an armed society for bigots.

    • @Aerindel, it has nothing to do with the “religious right” (whatever the fk that is) and everything to do with a mental abnormality…two dudes cornholing is just nasty.

      • Here’s the thing: Why do you keep thinking about “two dudes cornholing”? That doesn’t generally cross my mind. Homophobes seem obsessed with the intricacies of homosexual behavior. Why is that?
        To me, obsessing about a sexuality that you vehemently claim to NOT be a member of is what’s “abnormal” here.

        • @AndyNC, well see, here’s the thing…Cornholing…that’s kinda what sodomites do. See that? Scratch the surface and you will see the truth.

        • Why do you keep thinking about “two dudes cornholing”? It doesn’t generally cross my mind.

          That’s the difference between you and El Mac.

        • @AndyNC, I reckon because RF and TTAG keep bringing it up….Like I’ve said, it’s excellent click bait. Right?

        • I’m pretty sure “homophobia” is a phony little made-up term, along the lines of “ammosexual”, “gun fetishist”, and “assault weapon”, meant to marginalize opponents and lend a mantle of legitimacy to one’s own bigotry.

          Turns out the self-loving PC POTG are not above sinking to antis’ tactics in discrediting others. How shameful.

      • So, something being nasty is wrong? So your plumber, garbage man, septic service man, etc are wrong for participating in their chosen lifestyle?

        Am I to assume you believe in forcibly trying to punish and prevent their behavior?

        Your authoritarian is showing.

      • Your statement seems to infer that you think all relationships are only about sex. If that were the case, marriage becomes pointless. Loving relationships are not just about sex. I am attracted to my wife for more than just her sexual organs. She thinks and acts in a manner that I find attractive.

        Do you think that maybe homosexuals are so different that men only like men because PENIS!? Complete nonsense. Love is a much deeper emotion than physical attributes alone.

        I sometimes wonder what the perfect woman would be like for a person who makes statements like yours. She must be the most dull and boring person alive if all you care about is where you’ll put it next.

        Offense intended to those offended.

        • +1K^ Marriage is a promise to love and care for each other long after sex has become a difficult workout, and in the sad event that one half of the couple is debilitated (which can happen at any age) [i.e., YOU PROMISE TO TAKE EACH OTHER OFF OUR HANDS AND OUT OF THE NECESSITY FOR OUR CARE] even if the pairing is or is not blessed with children. They whole point of the coupling is to bind pairs in Society. Those bound as a pairing in Society create stability in détente, hold our faces up to the light, fix our gaze on the horizon, and allow us to move into tomorrow [loosely paraphrased; TERMS, J.M. Thomas R., 2012]

      • If you think it’s nasty, then don’t do it and don’t watch other people do it. Otherwise, shut up about what consenting adults do in private.

      • Mac, according to Dan Savage, one of the most famous militant homosexual rights activists today, 80% of homosexual men “cornhole” at least once. That means that 20% of them never, ever cornhole any more than you do (maybe even less?)

        Do you support acceptance for gay men who cornhole? Do you believe that straight men and women who engage in “cornholing” should be shunned or treated differently? Should people be required to disclose what sexual acts they engage in the privacy of the bedroom?

        • @Marco, I pity men that cornhole each other. That said, I’m not for bashing them or treating them badly per se…unless of coure they want to shove that cornholing shit in my face or my kid’s face or forcefeed that sickness to kids in school, etc. Taking people to court to enforce “cornholioism” on bakers and the like, no. For that, they are exposed for the sick fks they are.

        • We’re not talking about the bedroom, we were talking about a commercial where the activity engaged in was in a coffee shop.

          Can’t we all just agree that homosexuality isn’t new, that every way to garner greater acceptance has met with push-back when acceptance has led to homosexuals finally coming around to the notion that their quest for “Equality” forces the other half of the equation to equate themselves with homosexuality and there will forever be push-back there because of basic human nature and physics. I.E., the needs of one countermand the goals of the other. Do what you want, just don’t demand that I equate myself with it.

          Those requesting “gay marriage licenses” do so under the guise of requesting “equality” however, “Equality is the formula for sameness on either side of short, horizontal, parallel lines. It is, by itself, a formula that creates the same solution regardless of the direction of the calculation across it, and has its own Value apart from the things that are being equated.Equality, however, can only be achieved. It cannot be given or granted. Something is either equal to another or it can become equal to another. Something or someone cannot make something else its equal, nor does such a declaration make it so. Equal treatment can be attempted, but it cannot be exempt from bias, for this too is a request to be made equal.” [TERMS, J.M. Thomas, R., 2012, pg. 109]

          Those requesting equality with “marriage” can only achieve equality if Marriage is somehow lessened in stature to the position that the former occupies, because if they were equal, equality would not have to be asked-for. Man and Wife (male/female partnered marriages OBVIOUSLY simply do not want to be equated with the opposite). The reason is simple too. The needs of the one negate the goals of the other. Being confused with a ‘gay’ member of society, hampers a person finding a desired heterosexual SPOUSE and mate.

          Further, if “gay marriage” were an enviable position, if it were worthy of emulation by those taking part in Marriage (as previously and currently defined), those taking part in Marriage would be seeking equality the other way. This is just not so, and there is no label of “bigotry” that can stick to that. If what homosexuals had (were offering Society) was somehow “better” we would be beating down their door to get it.

          Homosexuals should instead, attempt, in whatever way they can, to create some immutable and lasting value worth emulation, and develop their own name for it. Anything else only forces Marriage to move-off to some other “term” where again homosexuals are not equal, or the Term becomes hyphenated to represent the same disparity [loosely paraphrased: TERMS, J.M. Thomas, R., 2012, pg. 109]

      • “two dudes cornholing is just nasty.”
        Duh….that’s why someone would have to be born that way…christ…you just proved the point.
        Have you ever seen an uncircumsized penis (and don’t lie…we all know you watch gay porn)? It’s pretty gross (sorry for those with one…but you know it’s true. 😉 ). No one would ever choose to touch that….so you can just admit you were born that way and no one will continue judging you. Let your fears rest. The world won’t care if you just admit it.
        Sidenote…sodomizing my wife is my favorite past-time….not hers, but that’s neither here nor there.

        • @Me, no one is born that way. So I guess the next thing you are going to tell me is that pedophiles are born that way, rapists are born that way, car thieves are born that way, bank robbers are born that way, astronauts are born that way, presidents are born that way, bloggers are born that way….no…no one is born a certain way. People make decisions that put themselves on the road to be a certain “way”. Now, true, some gays are raped and sodomized early on in their lives that may set the stage for them to go gay. But ultimately, they make the decision to walk down that road. They have a brain. They have free will.

        • I like evidence. got any?

          or is your idea of evidence to conflate things that are not analogous and then tell yourself that you proved your point, even though no ine else is buying the crap you are selling.

        • @Aaron, I like evidence too. So, you got any to the contrary? Or are you just into conflating things? As to whether someone “buys” something from me, I couldn’t care less really. Roaches don’t dig the light, but that shouldn’t prevent someone from turning on the lights when they walk into a dark room.

        • it’s not possible to know currently what causes it in all cases. There does appear to be a genetic link that explains some, but not all, instances. maternal hormones may also play a role.

          however, what is known is that many gays state that they did NOT chose to be that way.

          since you call them liars, the burden of proof is on you.

          as far as I know, there is ZERO evidence supporting your claim. The best you can come up with is that a direct genetic cause has not been found – that doesn’t prove your assertion at all.

          and frankly, i don’t really care about gays. i just don’t like to see people get blasted for “lifestyle choices” by other people who don’t have a clue what they are talking about.

        • El Mac, can you sight any reliable research that shows that they aren’t born that way? Free will? There are animals that are homosexual, so do you think that they have free will? Do you feel like you could decide at this moment to get an erection looking at a man? You can’t. Or are you arguing that they can “just say no,” despite their nature, just so you can personally feel comfortable in the world?

        • @Gary Schulze, …uh, well…no evidence has ever been found of the “gay gene” they so longingly want to find. So, can you cite any evidence that they are born homosexual? I didn’t think so. As for the animals that are homosexual, where are they? I’ve not seen any…but giving you the benefit of the doubt, do the animals that kill and eat their own babies mean that humans can and should be understood when and if they do the same? Yeah…free will. The ability to think and discern right from wrong. The ability to control emotions and desires. Otherwise, hell, let’s release all the animals in prison…cuz you know, we can’t hold them accountable for their actions. Afterall, they were born that way.

        • why would you want to “hold people accountable” for actions – aka “choices” – that don’t hurt you and don’t concern you?

          people in prison presumably caused some sort of harm to others. what is the relevance of bringing up people in prison on this topic and equating them to gays?

    • @ Aerindel, – it has nothing to do w/religion

      ‘if it were [homosexuality was] worthy of emulation by those taking part in Marriage [heterosexuality] (as previously and currently defined), those taking part in Marriage would be seeking equality the other way. This is just not so, and there is no label of “bigotry” that can stick to that. If what homosexuals had (were offering Society) was somehow “better” we would be beating down their door to get it.’ [loosely paraphrased; TERMS, J.M. Thomas R.,2012]

      Further: I can’t wait until someone convinces me to chuck my Christianity because then I can hunt people.

      • Homosexuals should instead, attempt, in whatever way they can, to create some immutable and lasting value worth emulation, and develop their own name for it. Anything else only forces Marriage to move-off to some other “term” where again homosexuals are not equal, or the Term becomes hyphenated to represent the same disparity [loosely paraphrased: TERMS, J.M. Thomas, R., 2012, pg. 109]

      • Funny how its only religious people who try to say their racist or bigoted views are not about religion. Or all the ones who say how good religion is because without they would be terrible people. Maybe they are just terrible people to begin with.

        • It’s not funny how the argument goes round and round until YOU (not me) get hi-centered on labels of racism or bigotry. I am permitted discernment, I have expressed the fact that homosexuality is not new, that it is a self-minoritzing proposition in comparison with heterosexuality (a function of which is required to propagate the former). That human history has not elevated homosexuality to the point of equality with [at least] heterosexuality, as it does not garner the same value to Society, does not garner the same Equality with heterosexual people as it is a hindrance to heterosexual people to be confused with homosexual people for the heterosexual people’s life’s agenda, and life is short. None of what I have stated has included anything of my religious beliefs. My comment about my abandoning my Christianity was merely a warning that, YES, absence my FEAR OF MY LORD, MY SHRINKING AWE OF HE WHO IS, THE ONE GOD, WHO’S SON IS NAMED JESUS AND WHOSE SPIRIT IS CALLED “HOLY,” absent that, I am not certain what other proclivity my person would be inclined to, and if I were you I would then hide.


          “Human life does not exist apart from Physics and Human Nature, and neither of these ingredients will evidence discernible change within any amount of human generations that you can readily fathom.” [TERMS, J.M. Thomas R., 2012, Pg. 16]

  7. Funny how those crying freedom of speech, chastise you for doing the same on YOUR site. I don’t care either way, I thought the video was funny. (And is still uploaded to their channel btw) I’ve said this before RF, it’s your site, do what you want. If it comes to the point one day when I no longer care for the content, or it makes me uncomfortable(highly unlikely) or “offends” me, I’ll quit visiting.

    How’s that old quip go? Those who mind don’t matter, and those who matter don’t mind?

    • People were chastising the government for not suppressing RF’s freedom of speech? I must have missed that.

      Or did you misuse the concept of freedom of speech as protection from all forms of criticism, rather than protection from government suppression?

  8. When did that post roll through? I missed it and can’t find anything that mentions “Black Rifle” other than today’s post.

  9. I’m with Robert. To promote your brand (BRCC) at the expense of other people is wrong. They mocked a whole group of people so that they can profit from it. If they think they’re so funny they should take their act on the road so they can discover what people think of their crap.

    And there is no reason why TTAG shouldn’t make as much profit as they want. If you don’t think so, then you must think that TTAG should just sacrifice themselves for the good of others. Read Atlas Shrugged.

  10. I don’t like gay-bashing (physical or verbal). I had a gay nephew by marriage (which is why I expressed it in the past tense), and the stuff that he said when he was with his gay friends was absolutely hideous, and absolutely funny. So I admit that as a straight guy, I don’t always know what will offend gay men.

    We have gay guys who comment on TTAG frequently, and I’d like to know their thoughts on this matter.

    Meanwhile, I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again now — armed gays don’t get bashed. Straight or gay, we are all in it together.

    • the stuff that he said when he was with his gay friends was absolutely hideous,

      I don’t know your relative, but I know whereof you speak and that ain’t the half of it. The other half is very hateful (and often gross) stuff.

    • “Meanwhile, I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again now — armed gays don’t get bashed. Straight or gay, we are all in it together.”

      That’s the fundamental message that should be uniting everyone here instead of causing in-fighting.

    • Hi I’m gay. I saw the video, thought it was retarded, put my credit card away and went to the store to buy the coffee I usually buy instead of trying something new.

      That’s about it.

    • Yup, there are readers here who aren’t straight. Doubt many will be jumping to comment after all this though.

      Am kind of glad that RF didn’t relent and just say “OK fine, gay bashing goes with guns like peanut butter goes with jelly.”

      We need more pro gun people, I guess some folks have the addendum of “…So long as they’re exactly like me.”

      • Why? There’s ONE extremely noisy, extremely immature/insecure semi-regular poster here on the gay-basher side. He shows up when homosexuality is the topic, and otherwise rarely posts. (Of course, he doesn’t care about what they do in private, he’ll say so.) Almost everyone who is a regular has been arguing against him.

        I’d say that on the whole, it’s a site fairly welcoming of differences of opinion on matters not having to do with 2A; even there we argue, but over how best to fight for it, not whether it’s a good thing.

  11. Non issue to me. If we all thought/felt the same way, life would be pretty boring.

    One thing that has become really irritating as of late, is the false headlines and info submitted by your writers.

  12. Watched the video. Laughed…clever, funny.

    Robert can disagree, even (gasp) write that he disagrees on TTAG.

    I think he is wrong, but still read TTAG anyways…even (shock) appreciate the time and effort such an undertaking as TTAG takes.

    It’s called being an adult. I suggest more (not(double gasp)all) of you taking time to write in the comments try it. It might even become addictive.

  13. Well as far as I’m concerned there’s ffaarr too much focus on opinions in American society. I fully blame this on the ‘progressive’ left (more like the regressive left…) and their obsessive mindset and tactic of publicly attacking anyone with an opinion they disagree with. Of course the fact we’re even having this discussion kind of points towards other people starting to get on board with being ideological fascist too.

    Robert Farago has an opinion that not everyone agrees with. Also the water is wet, the sun is warm, and The Regressives sling BS like it’s fact. Raising this level of stink over an OPINION is completely useless.

  14. “even if it means that the site alienates readers and, eventually, self-destructs.”

    That line gave me chills. I don’t know what I would do without TTAG. Keep doing what you are doing, I don’t agree with every article so I either skip those article or enjoy a different point of view.

  15. Once again (just like yesterday and the day before AND the day before) no one cares. No one cares your got offended, or thought it was rude, or whatever you want to call your hurt feelings RF. The only thing that the THREE articles you have written has driven business to BRCC. Note they never said your name in the video.
    If only you would have kept your hurt feelings to yourself you would have saved yourself this whole thing.

        • RF they may have, but maybe they did not read the article (I’m guessing not) but one thing is for sure. You can’t make every reader happy. Just ignore the ones that think you are making a fortune off of “click bate.”

          Obviously issues of police misconduct and this BRCC thing are of personal interest to you. So as long as it is something you are genuinely concerned about and not just “click bate,” keep the articles coming. But as far as brcc is concerned, lets drop this subject if possible.

        • “Just ignore the ones that think you are making a fortune off of “click bate.” “

          And ban ’em, too, so the really will be ignored.

          Don’t like suggesting banning users, but signal-to-noise is a thing…a very important thing for sites like this one with very active comment sections.

  16. I definitely don’t agree with every single thing I read on this website. Sometimes I take breaks after reading one too many articles about how evil the police are. But I still log in here first for a review before I run out a buy a new gun.

    Let’s drop the bull for a second: a large amount of gun owners are conservatives who love their freedom to own guns and control their own money, but hate the idea that people are free to have abortions or get gay married. It’s a hypocrisy of the right, the same way the left wants the freedom to burn through massive amounts of marijuana and yet still wants 35% of my paycheck.

    Political systems are biased. Don’t be political. Don’t hate homosexuals. Don’t stop people from doing whatever it is that they want to do. It really is super, super simple: IF TWO GAY GUYS ARE HAVING GAY SEX AND GETTING GAY MARRIED, IT HARMS ABSOLUTELY NO ONE! The same way that if a law abiding citizen buys a two stamp AR rifle, he isn’t harming absolutely anyone. Gun owner’s bigotry, at large, is alienating our allies in the LGBT community and preventing us from getting the votes we need to guarantee our second amendment rights. Let it go.

    • … a large amount of gun owners are conservatives who love their freedom to own guns and control their own money, but hate the idea that people are free to have abortions or get gay married.

      Now that’s rich. Somehow it is wrong for “conservatives” to criticize abortion advocates and homosexuals. But somehow it is okay for you to criticize “conservatives”.

      How about we stop smearing any and all demographics and simply focus our discussion on firearm rights, equipment, and best practices?

    • “a large amount of gun owners are conservatives who love their freedom to own guns and control their own money, but hate the idea that people are free to have abortions or get gay married.”

      Well, gee, when you straw man it like that, it all makes perfect sense!

      The problem conservatives have with abortions isn’t that they hate the idea that people are free to have them. Rather, it’s that conservatives view an unborn child as being a person, with all that entails, while the more liberal on the issue view the unborn merely as a potential person. I hope you can see, then, why one group could support the practice and one could oppose it, without either group necessarily being hypocrites based on that alone.

      As for gay marriage, it becomes a question of what exactly is marriage, and who gets to define it? On the liberal side, marriage is simply a manmade term to define a specific type of relationship, and being made by man, it can be changed by man. The more conservative view marriage as an institution established by God (well before even the institution of state), and as such man has no authority to change it.

      Individual beliefs and motivations will vary. In general, however, neither side is being hypocritical or inconsistent on these issues, but rather each side is approaching these issues consistent with their own worldviews.

      • But people Married long before Christianity, and people who had no exposure to Christianity still married. It became a state institution the moment they started selling marriage licensing and giving tax credits for it. We can all compromise and let’s just say marriage is between 2 consenting adults, no animals, no cars, nothing else anyone else has dreamed up.

        • Okay well marriage existed before God, and existed within people outside of a Judeo Christian God. It’s my understanding though that God and Jesus are one and the same.
          I’m not against your opinion or the way you feel, and I don’t say you should approve, appreciate or accept, however this is a group of Americans who are having their rights rejected do you religion, which has no place in our Government.

        • Thanks, Mr. Griffin, that was good; I busted a gut laughing. “marriage before God.” Indeed. And someone else stipulating that God and Jesus were two entirely different divine entities. Or something. Yikes.

        • The God and Jesus comment was me. I didn’t say they were two different entities, my point was that there was God Jehovah before “Christianity”, and that Christianity as a religion came after Jesus the Christ was born on this earth, crucified, and resurrected. Before that you either believed in and worshiped the God Jehovah (Hebrew or not), or you didn’t.

        • Got it; sorry for the misunderstanding on my part. I’m an amateur Roman Catholic theologian and I should be far less snarky. Pax vobiscum.

        • Because the world existed before Genesis was written and we made a new God to replace the old ones, and marriage existed before Moses put the first letter to text. Marriage existed in tribes all across the world before the Bible existed.

        • The clue train just rolled by and the conductor told me that God actually existed before the world did.

        • Only if you believe in magical beings who did lots of cool, flashy stuff back in the day when bronze age sheepherders were telling each other stories but mysteriously stopped doing anything dramatic once people were more educated and had video cameras.

      • What’s the other option believe in a big invisible guy in the sky? Believe the world is 6,000 years old? Believe all the evidence pointing towards evolution is fake because a book written thousands of years ago tells me it is?

        If God created Marriage why could the Egyptians, who did not worship a Judeo Christian God marry? Or the Nords who worshiped different gods, or the Romans and Greeks who were polytheists, how did they marry?

        • Maybe it’s because marriage has been used to unite tribes, form land deals, and create peace long before it was about worshiping one god or another. The origin of marriage is less about love and more about politics.

        • @TravisP, hmm…yeah, well….It’s not quite that simple brother. But, I’ll take God, who is far from invisible over the invisible dude that light the fuse on a “big bang” and amoebas crawling out of their own shit and piss and replicating…of course, that begs the question, which came first? The amoeba or their shit/piss muck and mire?

        • First of all, “all the evidence” does not point towards evolution. The best one can say is that it is consistent with evolution’s account. However, since it is also consistent with the Biblical account, this is hardly proof one way or the other, and people will only reinforce whichever one the person was inclined to believe, anyway.

          As for why other cultures marry, it is important to remember that for those of us who believe Biblical Creation, we believe that God instituted marriage, not Moses. Moses merely recorded the account. If that account is accurate, then Adam and Eve were the first married couple, and would have passed the institution to their kids, and so on and so forth to Noah and beyond to Babel, where people groups were scattered. We believe that all nations, then, are descended from Adam and Eve, and thus all would have known of marriage.

          Now, if you don’t believe the Bible is accurate, then I can certainly understand why you would view this account as a myth. However, it certainly does not contradict observations like you seem to think it does. Further, for those who claim that we can not use an unproven belief to guide policy, I would ask that they prove the claim marriage is a man-made concept before using THAT belief to guide policy.

          Finally, if you would like to learn more about what Biblical Creationists actually believe, rather than what caricatures claim they believe, I recommend you check out the resources at sites such as and

      • [q]The more conservative view marriage as an institution established by God (well before even the institution of state), and as such man has no authority to change it.[/q]

        When the Church invited the State into the marriage business, they lost ALL power to argue this point, in my opinion.

        By the power invested in me by the state of XYZZ….

        The hypocrisy of it all kills me.

    • Well said. I really fear gun rights are doomed because of the horrible hypocrisy of conservatives. We need more libertarians and less god pounding republicans.

  17. It depicted homosexuals as weak, deserving scorn and physical abuse.

    So does the television show Modern Family, and it is one of the most popular shows on TV.

  18. I back you 100%. Don’t let the small-minded push you around. They will chase the next set of shiny keys they see.

  19. Robert’s house Robert’s rules. My worthless/unwarranted/possibly-wrong critique would be that the “armed intelligentsia” flavor has weakened a bit over the years. A lot more of the standard internet media “sensationalization” approach lately, quote of the day stuff, grab attention and explain later kind of stuff, ask a question to get some arguments brewing in the comments, etc. Frankly, these techniques obviously work because the stats on the blog are good. Just not what I like. Given that I read for free it doesn’t really matter what I like however. I feel like I used to learn a lot of things here and less so lately, I remember being exposed to really different ideas or thinking about the gun world. Frequent clicks pay. That’s the reality, and that’s fine.

      • I read your post, and I agree with Don to some extent. However, please keep telling the truth about guns – as you see it.

      • Yeah, and I agree with your convictions.

        Some things that you already do/have done but would be cool to see more of are:

        – RF or Nick debate anti gun people. (Podcast, video format)
        – RF or Nick do an interview of anti-gun people (interview transcript format)
        – Debunked anti-gun argument/talking point of the day.
        – What gun owners need to know about (Insert a different State Representative or Senator).
        – Review of gun laws by state
        – Informational/review of gun rights organizations
        – Legislation watch/review
        – Gun industry inside scoops (I actually liked the Nick/Remington debacle).
        – Statistics!
        – Follow an investigation surrounding a DGU event from start to case closed. Who were the bad guys, what precipitated the event.
        – Periodic interviews with other high-profile internet gun people (Hickok45, MAC, 22 plinkster, etc)
        – Taunting of dead-tree gun rags.
        – Interviews with convicts or police experts about how convicts select victims.
        – Self-Defense Tactics.
        – Host debates between pro-gun people with varying degrees of absolutism on different gun sub-topics.
        – History lessons (Like in-depth regarding gun laws, civilian disarmament in other places and how it happened)
        – Technical stuff
        – Reviews/explanation of various gun sports (IDPA, 3 Gun, Metallic Silhouette, ruger rimfire, steel challenger, ICORE, CAS, USPSA, Olympic style shooting, Bullseye, F-class, bench rest, skeet/trap/sporting clays/5 stand, Bianchi cup, etc)

    • Not yet. I think they’re still in a marathon prayer session. I think that’s the next episode in the series.

  20. The anti-gay sentiment in these comments reminds me why I never read comments.

    RF, thank you for standing your ground on this one. I’m with you.

    I’ve rescindinded memberships from local ranges for discriminatory policies, and I’ve abandoned several communities online and IRL for the same.

    There is no reason for the vitriolic hate speech that a very vocal minority espouse. Those hateful people, whatever their other views, deserve neither countenance nor solace. Period.

    • You better lock yourself in a shack and unplug the internet, because you’re never going to find a group that’s completely free of all the personalities you don’t like.

      • You’ll note he said “policies” not people. He left because of the way the owners were running the range (or site) not because of the other people visiting.

  21. As a hard core gun owning constitutionalist old school Gen X ‘f*ck you if you pull the “I’m offended” card’ kind of guy AND the father of a gay child, whom I love unconditionally,would die for and kill for, I find all this amusing. I wasn’t offended with BRCC’s video. I saw part of it, lost interest, decided that their brand of humour isn’t mine and decided not to support them financially in the future. Moved on.

  22. I’m with you RF. If Archie Bunker and Rob Reiner did it, it would be a completely different thing. BRCC has no comedic timing. For that, they should apologize.

  23. If you like peanut butter on your stick, so be it……. Same goes for those who like their peanut butter stirred by a stick… Just STFU about it!!!!!!!!

  24. ” by honoring the commitment I made one winter afternoon in the privacy of my own home ”

    What the hell does that mean? RF are saying that you are gay? Kindof makes sense now…

  25. Hey, it’s your site, RF, if you don’t want to be a gay-bashing dickhead living up to and reinforcing the stereotypes of gun owners as mouth-breathing troglodytes, that’s your perogative… I guess.

  26. I totally agree with you RF. That video was stupid, and had the intellectual quality of a 6th grade locker room. It did NOT paint us in a good light, and all these other yay-hoos, who think otherwise don’t realize the degree to which they are confirming so many negative stereotypes of our community. If the racist, sexist, neo-confederate, fundamentalist, homophobic labels stick, then we lose. Plain and simple. This needs to be a big tent, and you guys are not helping.

  27. I did not look at the article/ad in question. I dislike gay-bashing and I dislike identity politics/gay proselytizing. I have come to the conclusion that the libertarian solution is the only solution compatible with responsible gun ownership — live and let live. States should issue certificates of tax-favored civil union to any combinations because the only valid issue for the State is tax, inheritance, and similar law; religious institutions can issue or deny marriage certificates to those same couples based on the beliefs and biases of the various religions, because those beliefs and biases are the essence of religious freedom codified in the first amendment; and no-one issues licenses. But I originally came to the site for the gun and ammo reviews and made quite a few buying decisions partially based on them, and would hate to see all that useful information jeopardized by this type of fighting. Let’s have more product reviews and gun how-to’s and hopefully tone down some of the political bashing (except concerning gun-grabbers.)

  28. Remember when homosexuality was a behavior and not a politicized identity? Pepperidge Farm remembers.

  29. I’d prefer my firearms non-sexualized, thank you. Cars too. For that matter, lets leave sex out of everything except marriage and we’d all be better off for it. I’m not judging you. It’s not my job.

  30. Aaaah, lighten up. You get water boarded just to join the Catholic Church! Look down at your feet. The only place you control and should judge is the area above them.

  31. I support Robert. All of us here might be “people of the gun”, but that should be the only relevant thread that unites us. I don’t give a solitary damn about anyone else’s beliefs, and I especially don’t care if anyone shares mine. But I do wholeheartedly respect the right for everyone to have their beliefs, whatever they might be. There is no place here for hate, of any kind.

  32. Those that seem to think we can preserve our 2A right better by “coexisting”, really need a reality check. Being PC, and forcing ourselves to accept things we don’t like, isn’t going to make one damn bit of difference. Silencing ourselves, and others for a perceived benefit, is just as bad as being an anti-gunner.

  33. Man, I really don’t even want to comment on this one at all, but guess I will (sigh)…

    To me, it’s all about Freedom. You can be gay all you want, grow boobs, do whatever you wanna, as long as it doesn’t deprive others of their life, liberty or pursuit of happiness.

    But the same goes for me. I also have the freedom not to really enjoy being exposed to all your gayness, or want to play along with your little fantasies and call you Caitlyn and act like your a she now. Heck, I don’t expose you to my bull-hetero sexual activities.

    But I also accept there will be situations where I’m a little uncomfortable either way (people being virulently anti-gay, and people being virulently gay) and I have to deal with that without crying like a baby.

    Ultimately though, it’s all about Freedom. Freedom to be anti gay and freedom to be gay – as long as no one deprives the other of their life, liberty or pursuit of happiness. And to hell with political correctness. I want the right to be politically incorrect. I should have that. I don’t deprive anyone of anything in doing so, so all the sensitive people can kiss my ass 🙂

    Just my .02c

        • TheBear is right, El Mac. To me, you are one of those people that makes me uncomfortable being (at times) virulently anti-gay, and acting childish with all the sexual references. We get it already.

        • @JQPub, I am not violently anti-gay. I do not in any way, shape, fashion or form advocate violence towards gays. I do advocate standing firm against their militantcy and thuggery when it comes to being forced into accepting their chosen deviant lifestyle to the point that it alters our culture. Do what you want in your own bedroom or dungeon…you will have to live with that choice (or perhaps die of AIDS), but to borrow line from TOJW, “don’t piss down my back and tell me it’s raining”.

      • El Mac – I said ‘virulent’ (as in toxic), not violent. I understand your POV and accept your right as such. I just think some of the ‘aids’ and ‘cornhole’ stuff is cringe-worthy and not helpful.

        • @JQPub, it is cringe worthy…and it’s the truth. And that is what this blog is all about, ya? Sadly, people tend to clamp their hands over their ears and scream “la la la la…” to drown out the hard bitter facts.

  34. Why do some people here think the BRCC commercial reflects bad on gun owners? If anything, doesn’t it reflect bad on the military? The two owners of BRCC are both career military/special forces. One owner has 27 years with the US Army 19th Special Forces, with numerous operational deployments to Afghanistan and Iraq, and was even a special agent with the DEA. He’s still with the 19th.

    They are the ones saying it’s strong coffee for strong men and making fun of homosexuals. Not regular PoTG guys, but military (and federal LEO). Go bash on the military.

  35. All I see in these posts are free marketing for BRCC.

    I had forgotten about them a few days after the first post (and juding by some of the comments, others had as well) and would have faded into obscurity if not for these (repeated) posts.

    But I guess e-peen battles are serious business.

  36. Fail.

    BRCC coffee rocks (as does 19th SFG). TTAG was alway just sort of meh. Lots of sites to choose from, moving along to others now.

  37. Personally, I never finished watching the BRCC commercial. Why? I recognized those dude from their youtube videos and don’t dig their d-bag humor.

    Life, Liberty, Pursuit of Happiness and all . . .

  38. I will never understand why people can’t be personally opposed to something without wanting to be mean-spirited about it, or why so many people on this site would rather be right than politically successful as a pro-gun lobby. The antis want to paint us all as mean, angry rednecks, and even if you’re none of those things, you play right into it and help them make their point.

    If you’re an atheist, then ignore the next paragraph if you wish. It’s entirely possible to be a far-right, fundamentalist, evangelical Christian who believes all kinds of things that are sinful and wrong ought to nonetheless be legal, and that everyone should be allowed to make their own choices without a societal “attack” from the other side. And to do so is 100% intellectually consistent. Some people sanctimoniously say “hate the sin; love the sinner,” and then proceed to say all manner of things that indicate they pretty much hate the sinner, too.

    How does any of this help advance either your religion, or the pro-gun cause? The truth is it does neither, but in some of the posts it’s pretty clear acting like some of you are makes you FEEL more manly. And aren’t we supposed to laugh at liberals reasoning with feelings instead of logic? How is feeling more manly by acting a grumpy, mean, internet badarse any better than the leftist, “but people would FEEL safer” garbage?

    • +(a large number)

      FWIW I am an atheist and saw no reason to ignore your second paragraph. (It’s not even remotely critical of atheists in general or of me personally) Sure, it doesn’t apply to me because I’m not a Christian, but I am glad to see one Christian calling out others on their asshattery, in the language that they might understand. It’s talking to the people who are the problem, and they could sure use a talking-to IMHO, not that they will ever listen to anyone but their fellow-bigot “pastor.”

  39. I’m with you RF… your blog-your opinions. I in no way accept/approve of happy “marriage” but I found the coffee boys video disgusting. I’m also a Christian and believe everyone can be redeemed. We also sell antiques and a lot of dealers are happy boys-and they ALL know where my wife and I stand. AND just because you are a VOLUNTEER/veteran doesn’t mean you can do no wrong. My own son is a vet-he’s been to Iraq,Kuwait,Jordan,Egypt and God knows where with DoD. And he told me he disagrees 97% with me politically(and about 2A). Which is really bad…and pardon me but I have way more sympathy for the poor drafted guys from Vietnam,Korea and WW2(and 1). I could have done the Vietnam thing. Thank you everyone for your service. AS an aside I was just paying my cable bill over the border in Indiana and standing next to me was a young manopen carrying a Glock 17. We had a friendly conversation until some OFWG commented”aren’t you afraid yur gonna’ shoot yerself wit yer clip” and similar drivel…I love Indiana- I hope to move but can’t until I can match Illinois(free right now)…

    • We had a friendly conversation until some OFWG commented”aren’t you afraid yur gonna’ shoot yerself wit yer clip” and similar drivel…I love Indiana-
      Most people in Indiana are not like that and most would ignore an open carrier. Of course up in the liberal North West corner=who knows?

      • Although I live in MI, I am from NW Indiana and OC there often when I go back home. I’ve never had a problem. I’ve read of some cops hassling OCers in Gary, though. A couple of cops even tried to get a restaurant to throw one OCer out. The restaurant refused and the cops got pissed.

        The cops in South Bend used to be anti-OC, but they’ve come around I guess. They’re not Lake County, though.

      • Ok this a 2fer-my son thinks everyone should NOT have agun-elitist drivel-FWIW I left when he was 3(he’s 40 now)-a gun for me but not for thee-especially poor dumb rednecks. And the OFWG was friendly but grossly lacking in intelligenceLOL…and yeah this was in Hammond,Indiana. No anti-gun signs on ComCasts door…

  40. The only place I have ever heard of Black Rifle Coffee Company was on TTAG. If they want to run controversial advertisements, that is their business. Quite frankly, I think they are trying to be controversial just so they can get the public’s attention.

  41. In reading the comments, I’d have to say that most people don’t have any issue with a person’s sexual preference and didn’t take it all so seriously, even the few gay folks that weighed in. Ultimately, we have that freedom, to be gay or not. To get offended or not. To patronize a business or not. But we’re all people of the gun, which by nature means we all cherish freedom. And we should treat each other with respect, regardless of our beliefs. I’m a Christian hetero dude, but if someone wants to be gay, it aint none of my business. I’ve known plenty of cool gay people. But they also know that sometimes I get uncomfortable around them in some situations, as they do around me and other non-gay folks. Uncomfortable should never turn to wickedness or beyond that. I don’t think we as a group (the “A.I.”) should be ashamed of the comments overall, in general. Sure there are some on the extreme ends of the spectrum, but I think most of us agree that RF had a right not to dig that vid and say so (on HIS blog), just as some of us had a right to say big whoop, and some laugh and say it was funny. Now let’s move on shall we?

  42. The problem with being a libertarian is that you’re ALWAYS right, ALL the time, but those to either side think you’re ALWAYS wrong.

    I say if a democrat and a republican BOTH think you’re wrong, you must have stumbled into some kind of Truth Oasis.

    • What if a communist thinks that you’re right?

      One of the first countries in the world to decriminalize homosexuality (after having it illegal) was Soviet Russia!

      Clearly, homosexuality is communism! ~

      • They decriminalized male homosexuality in 1993. (Female on female was always legal apparently.) That’s post Soviet. (Even if 1993 were earlier than anyone else, it still wasn’t the commies who legalized it. However, Turkey (of all places!) legalized it in 1853!)

        ETA: It was briefly legal from 1922 to 1933, I’ve discovered. Still doesn’t make them first, and for the most part the soviet regime was quite repressive to LGBT, loosening up only under Gorbachev, even if the law wasn’t repealed under him.

        • @SteveInCO, “Soviet agents were told to encourage homosexuality in capitalist countries in the belief that it would rot their moral fiber and weaken them.”

          And they are right.

        • >> They decriminalized male homosexuality in 1993.

          Soviets first decriminalized it in 1917, immediately after the revolution. It was re-criminalized under Stalin in 1933, to be used in the sham trials of that era. Quite a few communists (esp. trotskyists) believe that Stalin was a fascist in disguise point this out as one of the proofs – that Lenin promoted “revolutionary morality”, while Stalin turned 180 and resurrected the original conservative morality of the Imperial era.

          >> However, Turkey (of all places!) legalized it in 1853!)

          I have to admit that I didn’t know that. More power to them 🙂

          >> Soviet agents were told to encourage homosexuality in capitalist countries in the belief that it would rot their moral fiber and weaken them; the same exact belief that many homophobic conservatives share today. So many gays were of the impression that the Socialist International was on their side, when in fact their motivations were quite cynical.

          Soviet propaganda thugs did a lot of ugly things. For another example, they have invested heavily into AIDS panic (which had obviously hurt gay rights significantly in US):

  43. Robert, you’re overthinking it. You run a great blog that provides a great service. Be proud of that.

    The truth of mass communication is that if you’re really saying anything important, it’s always risky. When you take risks, sometimes you lose. Learn from it.

    This site is about guns. Stick to that. Criticizing a coffee company for gay-bashing may have some merit, but it was not about guns. If you veer too far from your brand and start using your gun blog as a bully pulpit for any social cause you want, we can’t stop you, but you are diluting your brand in your audience’s mind. You are also taking a risk that does not further the mission of your site.

  44. Being gay is a sin to be sure, but so is promiscuity. Last time I checked we are all sinners in need of Christ so…….

    Sorry that morons called you at home, that is a jerk thing to do.

    Anyhow gays have the same rights as anyone else, sure they can’t get married (in some places) but that is because in those places marriage is defined as one man + 1 woman, this definition does make sense to me but……

    Why is it the government’s business to run marriage at all?

    Sure some will say “but what if you can’t visit people in hospitals or have them on insurance”? The true solution is to decouple those things from marriage, not change marriage to something it is not (imho)

    And sure married couples may get better financial perks from the on taxes .gov, but that I think is because the stable nuclear familly tends to produce childeren and that is encouraged for economical reasons…..

    What does this have to do with guns? idk tbh when it comes to guns its “you don’t infringe my rights, I won’t infringe yours.”

    God Bless.

    • There are important non-economic protections as well. One of the most important is spousal privilege. That’s the law of evidence that privileges communication between spouses and protects a someone from being compelled to testify against his or her spouse.

      Imagine if you and your spouse took a vacation to another state, and while there, you were attacked and killed the attacker in self-defense. Unfortunately for you, the prosecution see you as the second coming of George Zimmerman. Even more unfortunately, the state doesn’t recognize your marriage. This means anything you’ve ever told your spouse is fair game, just as if you told some stranger. It also means your spouse can’t be privy to any aspect of your defense, because you’d be throwing out your own attorney-client privilege by sharing the information with a non-privileged party.

      I don’t know about you, but that sounds pretty hellacious to me.

      • Didn’t think of that kind of stuff, but I imagine that could be decoupled from marriage somehow or not idk.

        • It can be decoupled, but virtually all married privileges are of that kind. So you’re basically proposing renaming civil marriage to something else, while retaining its nature intact. What’s the point?

          As far as children go, homosexual couples usually adopt. Which is also a socially beneficial policy, as there’s always a shortage of families willing to do that, and children who don’t get adopted live a rather miserable life.

    • >> Being gay is a sin to be sure

      Being gay is something people are born with. Are you saying that God has created those people inherently sinful?

      Or did you mean to say that homosexual intercourse is sin, as opposed to merely being gay? (which is the Catholic and Orthodox position, at the very least – I don’t know much about how Protestants treat this distinction)

      • Are you saying that God has created those people inherently sinful?

        All people are created inherently sinful. Homosexuality has nothing to do with it. I’m inherently sinful.

        • There is a difference between being created with a tendency towards sin (aka “sin nature”), and being created in a state of sin. If the latter were the case, it would remove any responsibility for such a sin from the person in question, because their free will was not involved in it in any capacity whatsoever.

        • Free will is not enough to overcome sin. And even if it were, it would not be enough as any sin separates us from God and there there would be no way to erase previous sins. Fortunately Jesus’ blood takes care of that.

        • I didn’t say anything about overcoming sin. This was about committing sins. A sin that is not committed of free will cannot reasonably be a sin (otherwise you might as well start treating animals as sinful for murder etc).

          The notion that being gay is sinful means that people who are born gay are born sinners (as opposed to merely born predisposed to sin). In other words, God made them sin without any action on their part, just by virtue of them existing. It is obviously a preposterous notion (well, maybe less so if you’re a hardline Calvinist and believe in predestination, and hence no free will – but then that is a preposterous notion, as well).

        • @int19h (and I still don’t understand how you can have that name and be so clueless that it means a BIOS reboot in the olden days of pieces of crap computers).

          You wrote, “God made them sin without any action on their part, just by virtue of them existing. It is obviously a preposterous notion…”

          What’s this “them” stuff? Them is no more sinful than us. Homosexuals are no more sinful than heterosexuals.

          And you telling God what determines sin, whether it is preposterous or not, is laughable.You understand that, right?

        • What makes you believe that I’m clueless about what my name means? I came up with it, after all.

          >> What’s this “them” stuff? Them is no more sinful than us. Homosexuals are no more sinful than heterosexuals.

          Did you not see the comment to which I was replying specifically? It started with “Being gay is a sin to be sure”. Being a gay! So of course I disputed that assertion. And it sounds like you’re in agreement with me here – if homosexuals are no more inherently sinful than heterosexuals, then, obviously, being gay is not a sin in and of itself.

          Now as to why I said that particular interpretation to which I had objected is preposterous. If a God can decide that being something, without having a choice in the matter at all, is a sin, then that is a horrible, monstrous God. It is preposterous that such a God would be considered the absolute Good or worshiped in any way – why would you worship an entity that has created you flawed, only to torture you for being flawed?

      • @int19h, that is leftist bullshit. People are born with free will. They choose to poke their junk into whatever they choose to poke their junk into. That is a decision. Its also a decision not to. No different than any other lifestyle choice.

        • Do you understand the difference between “being gay” (i.e. feeling attracted to people), and “engaging in homosexual sex” (i.e. “poking their junk”)?

        • I’m sorry, I do not offer dictionary services. But you can use any of the free online ones to do your research.

  45. RF, your blog, your rules !!! No problem with that, even if you were just a paid shill for every advertiser on the planet. Keep on keepin’ on.

    Often wondered if you read all the postings. Your last para here tends to make me think not. That is because you ask for civility and respect from a population that daily demonstrates a galactic lack of both. A sample of about 5 articles (maybe reading half of the comments) would be sufficient to let anyone know TTAG is a breeding ground for trolling antis to cherry pick POTG as reckless and dangerous based on their own words and treatment of each other.HOWEVEr…..there is so much good about TTG and its followers I still read the blog every day.

  46. ahh, geez, can we get back to guns now please?

    i don’t give two shiites what consenting adults do in their private lives. i don’t even need to hear about it.

  47. Hey… cool gun site. Oops… morality forum. Jesus hung out with lepers, whores, and outcasts. Crucified between thieves. I don’t care who the guy (or gal) next to me at the range goes home to as long as they stay in their lane and mind the BIG FOUR rules. Pew pew… gun stuff… brought it back around… so… 9mm or .45? Glocks are boring. MOVING ON.

  48. Mr. Farago,

    As someone relatively new to guns (MA born and raised) your site has been invaluable over the 3 or so years I’ve been reading it. It has met every criteria you set for it, from being informative to engaging. I have watched my own beliefs evolve from the “statist” teachings of my schooling to a much more independent and libertarian world view, due almost exclusively to your website. I dont always share your beliefs, or those of your writers and commenters, but I can at least say I have beliefs that are my own. And for that I thank you.

    Can TTAG be better? Definitely. Can’t we all? Maybe that involves going back to basics, or moving on to something completely innovative; I dont know. But I for one, support your right as a business owner to make whatever decisions you deem best for TTAG. And I support your right to so shamelessly.

    This time, Mr. Farago, I believe you were wrong on just one point; TTAG does belong to you. Without us bickering idiots, it would still exist. It did that afternoon in your home, didn’t it? You’ve made mistakes in the past, and will most certainly do so in the future, but they’ll always be nothing compared to the successes of educating and fostering involvement in our community. Keep up the good work.

  49. I used to come for the gun stuff but recently things have shifted and I don’t think Robert is out to make a profit but rather convince readers to accept queers…or another theory is that Robert wants to convince the anti gunners that pro 2A members are just as tolerant and open minded.

    So we go from TTAG to TTALBGTGO.

    It isn’t that I am not tolerant… the other gun site I went to went down the same path…. gay gun owners, then beastiality gun owners, gun owners who dress up a furries, gun owners in NAMBLA. ….push the envelope Robert, how tolerant can you show your readers you are? Is anything off limits?

    Again myself… I view myself as pretty tolerant … Guy wants to put his pecker in his cat or a couch cushion or a vacuum then that is his business. I came here for the gun articles…best thing I have read on here is the news about the belt fed FNH. Belt fed rifles have nothing to do with where your pecker is and I imagine the rifle will still go bang even if you put it in all sorts of odd places so you don’t need to add pecker location into your gun reviews.

    • “It isn’t that I am not tolerant… the other gun site I went to went down the same path…. gay gun owners, then beastiality gun owners, gun owners who dress up a furries, gun owners in NAMBLA. ….push the envelope Robert, how tolerant can you show your readers you are? Is anything off limits?”

      Oh, you are intolerant alright—no doubt about that. But to make matters worse, you go on to make the kind of embarrassingly pathetic moral equivalence argument that is typical of the most unskilled internet trolls. I guess you were trying for irony, but the above is a good example of what happens when even a prosaic reach exceeds one’s grasp.

      • @Garrison Hall……you sound like the voice of intolerance here. In fact, I’m sure you could give lessons on the subject.

      • Garrison now your bringing “moral equivalence” into the discussion so I assume you have issues with one of my boundary pushes and then go as far as to call me a troll.

        Someone I know just recently had to put his dog down due to liver failure. The story goes that after 2 bad marriages over 14 years those 2 became best friends, dog would wake him up for work, watch TV on the couch together, and the dog would remind him when it was time for bed. In the last year or so the dog was sick and in pain. He spent every dollar he had to save his dog who was more a partner in life than his 2 ex wives and the end he just put the dog down. Now the dude is depressed and on suicide watch. If only they could have gotten married as the guy has excellent insurance.

        Then there is a lesbian girl I play poker with who is in her 30s made a very compelling argument why she should be able to date a 14 year old and how the two are perfect for each other and she (the 14 year old) is more mature than any of 25-40 year olds in the dating pool.

        YOU brought morals into this, myself I don’t care about any of that and genuinely don’t judge. I spent 3 years in Chicago living in recycling bin dumpsters and built my way to where I am now. I care about putting food on the table for my family, keeping my family safe (hence my love for 2A), roof over their head, making sure they have a better future than me. The path that got me here may have also been morally gray but I got here on my own without government assistance.

        To conclude you missed the point, I am tolerant…I will hear someone out open minded, I won’t bash their head in till they believe what I believe. I understand what you do in your home is nobody’s business but yours. I am a cat person and you are a dog person…not saying you can’t have a dog but rather I don’t want a dog in MY house. I won’t judge you for stepping on surprise land mines in your yard, I hope you don’t judge me for a pile of miniature turds in my laundry room.

        Why are we talking about sh!t on a gun site… one that has a great name like the TRUTH ABOUT GUNS? I genuinely have no idea. That was the point, we can talk morals and rights and anything else till the cows come home but than the site title starts to become misleading. history channel offering up Honey Boo Boo.

  50. I have not seen the Ad in question. Nor will I. The real problem is the anti 2nd amendment movement in the greater homosexual community. The five or ten members of the pink pistols do not count. The pink pistols have been denied the opportunity to march in homosexual pride parades. After a pink pistol open carry event in California homosexual law makers banned the open carry of guns.

    Owning firearms is seen as a white christian heterosexual activity by the godless progressives. The only pro 2A homosexual I hear or see is the great Tammy Bruce. Even she refers to the “gay mafia ” when speaking about the anti freedom actions and statements made by homosexuals who hate freedom.

    This is the pink elephant in the middle of the room no one wants to talk about.

  51. Disappointing that RF even felt the need to write this post. Lots of unnoticed irony here. Freedom for all, free speech for all, the right to bear arms for all, respect for all… even if your gay, black, female, transsexual, unpopular, a bad shot, a liberal, an atheist, a cult member, a Presbyterian, a Jenner, etc… The commercial was middle-schoolesque garbage on many levels and RF has a right (and a duty) to point it out. Even if it’s veteran owned. The reason this site is doing as well as it has (compared to the average gun blog) is, in part, due to the fact that the content is written by live people who feel free to express their somewhat unsanitized opinions and don’t write the same homogenous blather that 99% of us OFWGs like to hear on repeat. It ain’t The Comfortable Warm Fuzzy Sponsored Template Article About Guns… Keep up the good work.

  52. I agree with you RF. But you know the comments are full of far-right so-con trolls. Just ignore them and keep doing what you’re doing. You’ve got the most-read gun site on the web. Who gives a crap what these fossils say? They’re going the way of the anti-abolitionists.

  53. A very vocal minority in the comments here seem to be mistaking TTAG for Stormfront.

    You know, it’s possible to not be wearing rainbow clothes, even not care for the gay lifestyle… and also not be some sort of threatened, self conscious, self righteous, pitiful little world’s hall monitor-wannabe troll.

    The vitriol I see spewed by a small number of commentors here looks awfully similar to the types of comments anti gunners leave about POTG.

    • “The vitriol I see spewed by a small number of commentors here looks awfully similar to the types of comments anti gunners leave about POTG.”

      +1000 Well said.

  54. i will continue supporting you robert. we need more people that arent afraid to speak their minds even if it goes against some group that is out there voicing.
    ive seen you work in person. i was in the barrett line on saturday at the first texas international firearm festival. you handled that situation perfectly and we could see how much you care about what you have chosen to do. btw i was the one that answered your question about when beretta was founded.

  55. Nothing like The Gays to flush the peckerwoods from the underbrush. There’s decidedly an element in the Second Amendment community that wants to maintain an OF(hetero)WG club. BRCC is just a symptom of that mindset. Perhaps for their next ad they can dress up in black face and do a minstrel routine.

    In 20 years the number of people in the US that care about homosexuality won’t be able to fill a conference room at the Howard Johnson’s in a one stoplight town. Entangling Second Amendment advocacy with other contentious social issues is just a stupid idea.

    • @Sprocket, hmmmm…I wonder then why TTaggers constantly do it? (BTW, now is the time on Sprocket when we dance!)

  56. I will keep this succinct and to the point.

    I rue the day that you can’t post your own thoughts and opinions on your own blog. Please keep doing your thing RF. I have a deep respect for you because you call it like you see it and are fairly consistent. The world has enough cowards. I may not agree with you always, but I always find your criticisms thoughtful and fair. And you admit when you are wrong. This is no small thing in the “journalism” of today.

    Anywho. Just wanted to show support.

  57. You say you’re gonna run your business the way you want, and that’s fine with me, but you fail to realize BRCC is doing just the same. By saying they shouldn’t do something, you’re hypocritical. Especially since they’re not hurting anyone. 1A

  58. RF,

    First off, Bravo for calling out stupidity. Discrimination has NO place in the firearms community. The only politics that should concern this community are those related to firearms.

    People are free to hate gay people in the USA but if you express your stupidity to the world you really should expect some well deserved criticism. When people unintentionally release insensitive content, as the BRCC may have done (i don’t know because they deleted the video, suspect), they should take down the content and apologize.

    Instead we got another video of whining, moaning and overcompensating vis-à-vis humor with the message “we served to protect your rights, leave us alone!”. Do they want a gold star? Is that any excuse to bash gay people? You have the right to bash but the world also has the right to point out your eat-the-paste mentality.

    Its funny that while the BRCC was tells people to leave them alone they were also mentioning the right to express one’s self. I think the BRCC should understand the rights and freedoms they claim to have fought for.

    When you do stupid shit in the public forum people have the right to say something about it; that is how these rights and freedoms work. (ref[1]: US Constitution) 😛

  59. Sir, you are spot on. While I see some humor in the ad you mentioned, I have a particularly brutal sense of humor that enjoys a little sadism in all directions, including pointed at myself and people who look like me.

    That being said, I have gun owner buddies who happen to be gay. They laughed, because well they are veterans like myself who enjoy some insulting humor. And they don’t like overly effeminate gay men. And they hate bullish lesbians who obviously aren’t comfortable with themselves. Come to think of it, one is really racist and a little bit of a redneck, who happens to like dudes. Hey, wait a minute! They are just like the rest of us!

  60. Let the bigots be bigots somewhere else. If they don’t like the fact that you are against gay bashing, they are free to leave.

    • I agree. I see the gay bashing in other gun websites, typically from hardline, RHINO loving conservatives and it sickens me. Not every conservative or gun owner is that way, but the bad apples have the loudest voice. Very sad……

  61. Well, that does it. Guns are not the problem in America. We should be banning religion. It’s for the children.

    • You are free to believe what you want and bash who you want in the public forum. Other people are free to express their opinions about your discrimination if you do so. You don’t have the right to come to my house and gay bash. You don’t have the right to post your gay bashing on anyones’ website without permission. This is how free speech works. This has nothing to do with religion.

      In any case, such bashing has no place in the firearms community, we should keep the community focused on firearms and not partisan politics.

  62. “In my opinion, the BRCC video was over-the-line. It depicted homosexuals as weak, deserving scorn and physical abuse. It portrayed gun owners in a negative light.”

    What you saw is a glance of what the military culture looks like once it leaves the military. I watch that video and was immediately reminded of many a conversation while I was in the military. It was crass, juvenile, and homophobic in a middle-school kind of way – more often than not it wasn’t serious but then again, more than once i saw it turn hostile when someone manhood was question for some cultural infraction. With all of these vets returning to civilian life, that culture often comes with them, particularly if they continue to engage in their civilian life with veterans infused with the same cultural attitudes.

    I’m not endorsing it – it chaffed me when i was exposed to it and (among other things) turned me off of the idea of a military career. I think you are right to call them out on it. I am not simple-minded enough to believe you are “not sapportin’ da troops” just because your think they should clean-up their rhetoric. And not should an other reasonable PoTG.

    • Real warriors understand the distinction you are making and are able to make the change. The rest . . . not so much.

  63. Meh. With Da Farago on thia one. Except for the part about his ever collectivist “so and so makes US look bad.”

    True, in the PR biz, perception is reality, but you’re always gonna look bad to individuals who’ve apriori made up their own minds: got Shannon Twat & Bloomfcukpansyberg much??

    That said, hilariously, the MBest11x dude in the video is the most latent closeted homosexual of the bunch; most of his ‘parody’ as him drag queening and making an effeminate mimicry.

    Talk about “she doth protests too much.”

    But as far as whether being a State-trained #FLaggot killer has any bearing on ‘toughness’? Just ask the Jenner before Jenner: the now infamous former SEAL Team 6 member turned tranny.

    And, really Farago, you shouldn’t have to start with the most Madison Ave #FrancisBellamy-salute #EdBernays-ianPropaganda #FLaggotry: thank you for your service.

    What service? Let’s talk service if they actually upheld their constitutional oath and learn how to say no to unconstitutional orders, illegal wars, torture, stop the domestic policestate, and clear out 99% of #MordorOnThePotomac and arrest the traitors who steal, defraud, lie and violate the rights of Americans daily.

    But seeing as how this is a 2A start, you can thank them for their service, if they arrest and try everyone at ATF & IRS for treason and daily UNconstitutional violations of Americans’ Bill of Rights, daily.

  64. I have no idea what this whole brouhaha is about but thanks for a photo showing what a typical mall ninja warrior looks like.

  65. I don’t know about all gays but my brother was born homosexual. The fag or fairy as most of you would call him spent 8 years in Army Intelligence. He resigned just prior to Tet due to injuries received in areas we did not operate officially in. Bronze star with cluster, purple heart with 2 clusters, 4 unit citations, and finally a silver star when he was released from the hospital. Then moved to the murder capital of the U.S. at.the time, Washington to consult with government in various jobs before working for a law firm. He was openly gay after the Army, but the RVN finally got him with cancer from various chemicals we never officially used. No other gays in the family except for him so somewhere along the line his DNA had to be corrupted, if he had been made gay my other brother or self would be the same. Neither of us are anywhere close neither are our children or wives.

    • The fag or fairy as most of you would call him

      That’s an unfair statement. Most people here, and even most people in general, would not and do not use those words. The people who do most of all are the homosexuals themselves. Maybe it’s like the ‘n’-word, only they can say it.

      • Danny, 99% of the homosexuals I’ve been around use Gay or LGBT.
        Only ones that use the other have been non-gay or closeted. I realize that’s a generalization but since he brought friends home for holidays, birthdays etc… I never heard it used by anyone other than people on the street non-gay. Walking in a neighborhood in Newark where my wife’s family lived from picking up a pizza from 3 blocks away. As the area had been purchased by majority gays (unaware me) has a a car straight out of Saturday Night Fever pull up & car of youths jump out call me a fa****t, & sucker. If I hadn’t had a pistol under LEOSA. likely the pizza would have been [email protected] hospital or morgue. Generally the only ones lately using ni etc..are the outside agitators. Visit; BLACKBIKEWEEK.US give you an idea about outside agitators. I get e-mails from them as part of in tell.
        Anyone that sends out an e-mail that reads in it’s. entirety:

        This was sent out post shooting from a gang banging in 2014.
        Apparently it’s troublemakers that want to use epithets. Even the KKK uses other phrases usually

  66. This comment isn’t even about the video per se; I am just continually amazed that people can claim they want freedom to live and be left alone then turn around and hate on gays, democrats, blacks, etc. and start speaking doom and gloom with religious reference or how behaviors and attitudes make them uncomfortable.

    Stop being hypocrites! You are using the same damn arguments the antis use to damn guns! Wake up and smell the coffee! Why do you care so much about what someone does or doesn’t stick in their butt or vagina? It makes no sense!

  67. Maybe RF’s point was that they are not in the military but the “real world” and to act civilized? Just a guess.

    For it’s Tommy this, an’ Tommy that,…

  68. “I will continue to tell the truth about guns as I see it”

    So this should really be called Opinions About Guns or TTAG*

  69. I’ve said for years that BRCC is not, nor have they ever been conservatives. They wouldn’t know a conservative principle if it bitt them in the butt. What they are are foul mouthed ex-military. I’ll give them kudos all day long for serving our country. Too bad, they’re more interested in pleasing the MSM than knowing and following the principles on which this country was established.


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here