Blue Force Gear Quote of the Day: Conservative Where it Counts


“Obviously, as a gay man, I have to have some liberal views socially. But on this one point, I have very conservative views. The reality is what it is — the world is a violent, terrible, scary place, and people do wish me harm based on who I love.” – Pink Pistols Utah chapter President Matt Schlentz in LGBT Gun Group Membership Spikes After Florida Shooting [via]



  1. avatar FedUp says:

    I agree with everything he said.

    Now, the mainstream “activists”, who want to disarm everybody except those determined to break laws, I have zero respect for, they’re the declared enemies of my freedom and my country.

    My next door neighbor is homosexual. It just now occurred to me that I don’t know his views on guns. I don’t talk about his sexual inclination and he doesn’t talk about my guns. I do wonder if he even gives much of a thought to ‘gay bashing’. He’s over 6′ tall, over 250lb, and I don’t hesitate to call him when I need help with something that requires physical strength.

    1. avatar Ralph says:

      Hahah! I had gay neighbors who were a couple. One was in his seventies. The other was twenty years younger and weighed maybe 145 soaking wet. He was a cool guy and helped me move furniture several times.

      I think they owned guns and they knew I did, but we never talked about it.

  2. avatar the ruester says:

    Bigger, better guns. Bigger better bullets. The best guns, with the most bullets possible, for the American people to defend themselves. Laugh all you want, call me a troll, but if there is one thing this group has taught us, it is surely that there is great power in just coming out and saying it, if that’s what you really think. And I do.

    1. avatar uncommon_sense says:


      I think the sole factor contributing to advancement of homosexual behavior and “alternative lifestyles” is a decline in commitment to traditional Judeo-Christian values. Saying it another way, declining Judeo-Christian values means less and less sanctions for anyone who openly advocates for homosexual behavior or “alternative lifestyles”, so more and more people are openly advocating.

      That is the true cause-and-effect relationship in my opinion. Advocating for homosexual behavior is not the primary driver for advancing that position.

      1. avatar Ed Rogers says:

        Your inference that my advocating freedom is advocating a sexual preference is insulting.

        I don’t care who worships what or what someone’s orientation happens to be. Not my business…or yours.

      2. avatar Karl says:

        The right to self-defense is universal. Deal with it.

      3. avatar Dev says:

        The idea that homosexuality cause amorality is as laughable and ludicrous as the idea that gun-free zones make us safer. History and the modern world is littered with religious but amoral people.

        1. avatar ThomasR says:

          Sigh. There is history of how civilizations come to an end. There is no culture that has survived without a cultural imperative that there is an expectation that a man and a woman is to be married and to raise children.

          Even the Greeks, with their general cultural acceptance of an older man having a sexual relationship with a younger man, was expected to get married and raise children.

          Even the Spartans, with their separation of young boys from their families into military barracks with the cultural and societal imperative that they would develop an intimate relationship with a fellow Spartan male warrior, was expected to get married and raise children, and they would face public ridicule if they did not.

          Any culture that does not expect a marriage between a man and a woman that has children as the end result, dies. Even if that culture also accepts same sex relationships.

          And any culture that accepts behavior that leads to it’s own demise, is not just immoral or even amoral, they are just suicidal.

        2. avatar ThomasR says:

          So liberal/regressivism in it’s totality would fit this definition. Not just it’s acceptance of same sex relationships, but it’s overall attack against traditional marriage, it’s attack against the authority of the parents over how they raise their children, the attack against indiduual rights and attempting to make the state as god with the judiciary as the new priest class that interprets the will of the state (god).

          yep. Liberal/regressives are suicidal, and want to bring all of us with them into thier descent into chaos, mass death and tyranny.

        3. avatar Stinkeye says:


          Can you give us a couple examples of cultures that died out as a result of their lack of promotion of “straight” marriage? You already gave us two examples that disappeared in spite of their support of the “traditional family unit”. So far it looks like marriage doesn’t have a lot to do with whether a society prospers or dies out, and that maybe other factors might be at play.

        4. avatar ThomasR says:

          Sure Stinkeye. The point that I was making was that the early Greek an Roman republics did support traditional marriage,ie (the focus of marriage with the intent have children) even with the addition of the homosexual aspect in Greece. But when one studies the end of the Greek and Roman republucs, one sees the same pattern as we do today of the rejection of “traditional family values” , the embracing of infanticide, the rejection of marriage with the intent to have children, along with the growth of the welfare state.

          It was rather bizarre, reading the “intellectuals” of the day in ancient Greece at the end of thier republic. It is exactly like listening to the same nihilistic, self hating and tradition destroying mind games that we hear from our “intellectual elite” of today.

        5. avatar Dev says:

          I’m pretty sure that is was conquest that caused the demise of the classical Greek societies and the Roman empire. Oh, wait, yeah, is WAS conquest. It had nothing at all to do with marriage.

        6. avatar ThomasR says:

          Dev. Wow! Ok. So what allowed what was once the greatest military power of the time, to be invaded and taken over by barbarians?

          Because they were already rotten to the core with collapse into degeneracy, corruption, perversion, and debasment of thier money system as those in power tried to stay in power by paying for a welfare state, as they used foreign troops because the Roman citizen no longer saw it as their duty to serve as citizen soldiers in defense of thier own civilization.

      4. avatar anonymoose says:

        *Christian values

        Judaism (at least since Christianity became widespread) is pretty accepting of homosexuality, and they are the big money that allowed LGBT activists to get the media spotlight.

      5. avatar Matt says:


        I know plenty of gays who are more Catholic than I’ll ever be, and I’ve gone through the whole rigamarole of Sunday school and confirmation.

    2. avatar Desert Ranger says:

      Spot on, Ruester!

  3. avatar JR_in_NC says:

    “Obviously, as a gay man, I have to have some liberal views socially.”

    Why is that obvious? There are plenty of homosexual men that reject “liberal social views.”

    Progressivism is a mental disease. The first step to healing that disease is to realize that and that other worldviews are not only possible, but make more rational sense.

    1. avatar uncommon_sense says:


      I am reluctant to characterize Progressivism as a disease. Many advocates for Progressivism don’t even understand what they are supporting. On a totally different plane, many advocates align with Progressivism on an emotional basis regardless of how knowledgeable or ignorant they are of true Progressivism. Finally, I believe many people advocate for Progressivism because they think they stand to gain as either the recipients of the “fruits” of Progressivism or as members of the ruling class who dole out the “fruits” of Progressivism.

      So, I believe pretty much all Progressive advocates are either:
      (1) ignorant
      (2) emotional
      (3) evil (Progressivism requires stealing from productive people)

      Of those three categories, I would only begin to consider (2) to possibly be a mental disease.

      Regardless, I have no obligation to support someone’s actions based on ignorance, emotion, nor evil.

      1. avatar JR_in_NC says:

        (1) Ignorance

        If it is willful ignorance, it’s not ignorance it is stupidity.

        The efficacy of Progressive policy is easy to discover. Chicago? Oakland? DC? It’s no real secret where Progressivism leads.

        To choose to ignore blatant evidence is the work of a “diseased mind,” so to speak.

        (3) Evil could be called a “disease,” especially when it is chosen as a worldview.

        Whether we classify Progressivism as ‘disease’ or not, even colloquially, the fact remains that it is destructive as diseases are destructive. If the term does not work in the literal, it certainly works as a metaphor.

        1. avatar ThomasR says:

          Disease? By definition, no. It’s not a bacteria or virus.

          Mental disorder? Insanity? A sub-conscious suicidal death wish by a self-loathing and self-hating induvidual that ends in the destruction of a culture that embraces such a disfunctional, totalitarian and brutal belief system?


        2. avatar JR_in_NC says:

          I’m not sure where you get the notion that the term “disease” refers only to something caused by bacteria or virus.

          Let’s see (from

          disease (dih zeez)

          a disordered or incorrectly functioning organ, part, structure, or system of the body resulting from the effect of genetic or developmental errors, infection, poisons, nutritional deficiency or imbalance, toxicity, or unfavorable environmental factors; illness; sickness; ailment.
          any abnormal condition in a plant that interferes with its vital physiological processes, caused by pathogenic microorganisms, parasites, unfavorable environmental, genetic, or nutritional factors, etc.
          any harmful, depraved, or morbid condition, as of the mind or society:

          His fascination with executions is a disease.
          decomposition of a material under special circumstances:

          No mention of disease equating to virus/bacteria as a criterion.

          And, lest we question if as not being “medical,” I asked an MD who basically agreed with the definition’s take that virus/bacteria is not a prerequisite for use of the term.

          The example offered by this MD was that the term “heart disease” is in common usage.

        3. avatar Marcus (Aurelius) Payne says:

          I’ve often wondered if it’s not a form of addiction to the brain chemicals that accompany the emotional state/release/whatever from espousing a feel-good progressive belief.

          At least for the super hardcore folks.

    2. avatar Katy says:

      Because, like it or not, there are those that would deny him the use of public accommodation.

      A conservative worldview would argue that orientation/preference is not a protected class and businesses should have the right to discriminate.

      A liberal worldview would argue that orientation should be protected and such discrimination should not be permitted.

      As he is a gay man attempting to participate in commerce, I can’t fault him for the latter position

      1. avatar neiowa says:

        May be a male homosexual but certainly is not a man. He opted out of that category.

        1. avatar Dev says:

          He’s probably more manly than you. He’s willing to put his face out there for his beliefs.

    3. avatar ThomasR says:

      Liberal/regressives as a disease? Not by definition of it being a virus or bacteria.

      As a mental disorder? Yes. As a denial of basic human nature, fact, logic, example and history? Yes. As a belief system that encourages a sense of being powerless, helpless and defenseless, that then creates a sense of self-hatered and self-loathing, that then ends up destroying a culture, causing mass death, starvation and tyranny? Yes.

      1. avatar JR_in_NC says:

        Since you posted this “defintion” idea several times, here’s my reply again (with additional examples given at the end).

        I’m not sure where you get the notion that the term “disease” refers only to something caused by bacteria or virus.

        Let’s see (from

        disease (dih zeez)

        a disordered or incorrectly functioning organ, part, structure, or system of the body resulting from the effect of genetic or developmental errors, infection, poisons, nutritional deficiency or imbalance, toxicity, or unfavorable environmental factors; illness; sickness; ailment.
        any abnormal condition in a plant that interferes with its vital physiological processes, caused by pathogenic microorganisms, parasites, unfavorable environmental, genetic, or nutritional factors, etc.
        any harmful, depraved, or morbid condition, as of the mind or society:

        His fascination with executions is a disease.
        decomposition of a material under special circumstances:

        No mention of disease equating to virus/bacteria as a criterion.

        And, lest we question if as not being “medical,” I asked an MD who basically agreed with the definition’s take that virus/bacteria is not a prerequisite for use of the term.

        The example offered by this MD was that the term “heart disease” is in common usage.

        MD added common examples not caused by bacteria or virus:

        osteoporosis (considered ‘disease’ in the medical community), Huntington’s Disease, chronic liver disease and Parkinson’s Disease.

        1. avatar ThomasR says:

          Fair enough. Part of my objection to calling something like a political stance or belief a mental “disease” is that it gives a perception that it some how is not a choice by the person holding that particular belief.

          The same way that some people call being an alcoholic is a disease. No, it’s a choice.

  4. avatar Mr. 308 says:

    The word liberal has been perverted by the statist, statism is not liberal in any way whatsoever.

    Conservatism and libertarian political though are very close, in fact almost identical.

    This is done to confuse the soft thinking into believing that the progressive statism believes in individual rights enough to be able to vote for them. It is a lie and a great one. Statism and individual rights are diametrically opposed. But any lie supported by the media and the educational system for so long like this one has, will obviously work to some degree, and thus you end up with people who can say things like this man does, and really believe what he is saying makes sense.

    This man is a conservative, and he should reject statism at all levels. I hope he starts to wake up to that fact.

  5. avatar Mikele says:

    Pink Pistols have been around for a while and have chapters all over the US. Since Orlando their membership has seen a huge spike. Do we see anything about them in the media? Nothing except a quick article or interview. Now comes Gays against Guns, the brand new anti-gun movement by the LGBT community. Their membership is small and is based on misinformation about guns and the second Amendment.
    Can you guess which group has had high profile articles and interviews with CNN, CNBC NBC ABC and CBS?
    Hint- it wasn’t the Pink Pistols.

    1. avatar Mr. 308 says:

      Ding ding ding. Anti-gun is liberal, see how that works? The statist gets to conflate the word liberal – freedom – with taking rights away from individuals, and most of the people in this country nod their heads and say to themselves ‘that damn Bush, is there anything he didn’t screw up?’.

      And they will stick their heads back in the sand until it’s time to vote for Hillary, for liberalism, and freedom.

      Freedom from thought, that is to say.

    2. avatar FedUp says:

      Generally, you’re correct, but ABC News is responsible for the content linked on this page, so there has been SOME attempt by the MSM to cover Pink Pistols.

  6. avatar mk10108 says:

    Its simple, Liberals, Progressives, what ever you called them…want people to die. They are willing to accept culling the herd to further their cause of disarmament of law-abiding citizens. The morbidity of their position is they work to create laws denying lawful self-protection, then complain when people are killed due to those laws.

    The solution to mass murders is an armed population, the second amendment guarantees American citizens the right to lawfully protect themselves. Should government employ this one change, the society liberals crave would exist.

  7. avatar Karl says:

    Mr. Schlentz,

    There are myriad reasons someone who doesn’t know you at all might wish to do you harm. You have the inalienable right to defend yourself regardless of their motivation. Being homosexual is not an exception. The 2nd Amendment is an individual right meant to enable you to defend yourself, your loved ones and your community however YOU choose to define that.
    Spread the word.

    1. avatar Katy says:

      Of course. But when the story is discussing growth of the PP since Orlando, the specification in his quote makes sense.

  8. avatar Chadwick P. says:

    As a straight, male, Utahn, I approve this message!

    1. avatar Disthunder says:

      Count me in on that!
      Rainbow colored Gadsden flag….that’s a “pride” flag I can get behind.

      1. avatar Geoff PR says:

        I’m het in orientation, but I do admit, that is a gorgeous rendition of the classic Gadsden flag.

        I would be proud to fly it…

      2. avatar Ing says:

        I totally want one of those.

  9. avatar TX-HogHntr says:

    Welcome to the cause.

    I could care less about your lifestyle so long as you support freedom, the constitution, and the Republic you are my brother.

    1. avatar SouthernPhantom says:


  10. avatar Indiana Tom says:

    Oh, don’t worry, the Muzrats are equal opportunity killers.
    Of course I consider it interesting that the homosexuals and liberals were so obsessed with Christian Cake Bakers that they did not see the PC Religion Of Peace coming at them.
    Yeah, Christianity condemns homosexuality, but the verses are not near as severe as Islam.
    I hope all the PC people have fun with their new found buddies from the Mid East.
    You poured the wine, now you drink the cup.

    1. avatar ThomasR says:

      Not as severe? No, not even close. There a number of sins in the bible, homosexuality is only one, along with adultery and drunkeness, as examples. Then The Christ said he who is without sin, cast the first stone.

      Islam, on the other hand demands death for the sin of homosexuality, and currently 10 Islamic countries enforce the penalty of death for this particular sin.

      1. avatar Mr. 308 says:

        Islam demand death for not believing in Islam, and by the way that means the flavor of Islam that those near you with the most guns demand.

        Not very far off from statism too, so there’s that.

        1. avatar ThomasR says:

          Also demanding death for those Muslims that convert to another religion, or deny Allah and become an athiest.

          Fits much of the definition of a cult. Or a criminal orginization. You know, “blood in, blood out”

        2. avatar Mr. 308 says:

          “ThomasR says:
          Fits much of the definition of a cult. Or a criminal orginization.”

          It is a complete social and political system with a spiritual component, it is not a religion as is meant in the freedom of religion first amendment sense. And thus should be criminalized.

          No society will survive if it allows Islam into it. At a large enough population density they will kill and subjugate the remaining population into Islam and outlaw all others – they even tell us that this is their plan!

        3. avatar ThomasR says:

          I agree. So our western civilization is under two threats to it’s existence. It can be destroyed by the death cult of liberal/regressivism, or taken over and turned into the blood soaked , homicidal, tyrannical theocracy of Islam; either way, we are faced with the absolute choice of slavery or the fight to death for freedom, I believe we will be faced with this choice with in our life time.

  11. avatar Priest of the center mass says:

    Looks like alot of folks are gonna show to the next party, dogs of war are starting to howl.

  12. avatar Jonathan - Houston says:

    Foreseeable consequence of decades of big government liberalism. Let the descent into full fledged authoritarianism accelerate.

    In the long run, consider this a salutary crisis. Don’t let it go to waste, California.

  13. avatar FormerWaterWalker says:

    Sure get some guns. But please understand being gay was not the main thing in Orlando. Omar also spied out Disney world looking for a soft target…Muslim terrorist being the key phrase. Not “assault weapons”,not gayness and certainly not the NRA.

    1. avatar Geoff PR says:

      Yep, he did scope out ‘King Rat’.

      And I was quite pleased that Disney’s security picked up on the fact that he wasn’t behaving like a typical Disney tourist.

      Disney did what Israel does, *behavior* screening.

      Honestly, it wouldn’t surprise me in the least if Disney has a very well-armed private fast-response team in the park, like ex-SEALs…

      1. avatar VaqueroJustice says:

        It wouldn’t surprise me if he wasn’t scoping it out for himself.
        How many other radicals have made scouting runs through Disney
        and not been noticed ?

    2. avatar the ruester says:

      Just because he scoped out Disney doesn’t mean he wasn’t targeting gays. Disney invites “gay days” to organize parades, pool parties, etc., all throughout the year;

      And basically all of the survivors claimed to have seen him trawling for men in weeks prior, with one infamously claiming to have been his lover.

  14. avatar Ralph says:

    “Obviously, as a gay man, I have to have some liberal views socially.”

    As a straight man, I have some socially liberal views. Not because I’m straight or a man, and not because I have any social pressure to conform to any particular groupthink. It’s just that I believe in leaving people alone and letting them make their own decisions whenever possible.

    I’m sorry to hear that Pink Pistols Utah chapter President Matt Schlentz is trapped into the mindset that his orientation forces him into his ideology. But maybe, by becoming a gun owner, he’s taking the first step toward being able to think for himself.

  15. avatar Jonathan - Houston says:

    Even this guy’s pro-firearm views are filtered through the prism of his sexuality, group identity, and victim mentality. That’s not merely some obligatory, incidental social views based on homosexuality. That’s statist-soaked, typical liberal ideology masquerading as firearms freedom. If this guy had a realistic expectation, or even a firmly held delusion, that the police could protect him fromviolent, then that pro-firearm illusion and pseudo individuality would fade away.

    You can arrive at a firearms embracing stance via many routes. However, any route that arrives there indirectly, that did not expressly set out to reach that Individual-oriented redoubt, is more likely to be just an expedient path passing through, and a purposeful journey to that place for its own sake.

    If this guy genuinely believes in freedom and extends that view just his own personal firearms ownership, then that’s great. I’m just saying don’t pin your hopes on it.

  16. avatar Naz says:

    A previous comment said countries fail because one man, one woman raising children is neglected, or some such thing.

    Other than the 200 or so governments that exists now, every country eventually fails.

    There are a lot of reasons countries fail, and that is why we have guns, so in the process of regime change we survive.

  17. avatar docduracoat says:

    The Roman Empire fell because of extreme xenophobia. Not any religious reason.
    They hated barbarians. After the death of the Emperor Valens during the battle of Adrianopole in the Gothic War, Goths were allowed to serve in the Roman Army as Gothic units.
    Used as cannon fodder, they were killed in battle by the thousands so that Roman soldiers would not have to die
    After anti immigrant riots broke out in Constantinople, thousands of the serving Gothic soldiers’ families were slaughtered.
    This led Alaric, king of the Goths to mutiny. All the Gothic units and thousands of barbarian slaves joined him to attack Rome and finally sack it in 410 AD.
    Rome never recovered even though it lasted another 75 years

    1. avatar ThomasR says:

      Interesting theory, docduracoat. So the Roman civilization was destroyed because of “xenophobia”. They “hated” barbarians, so the Romans enrolled these hated and despised barbarians as the first line of defense as Roman legionaries in defense of the Roman empire. Right.

      The Roman Republic grew in the beginning around 500BC because the regular Roman citizen saw it as their duty to be the first line of defense as citizen soldiers.

      By the time of 300+ AD, the Roman population was shrinking because of low rates of marriage and infanticide. (My main point) One law of nature is that nature hates a vacuum, so this low birth rate led to mass migration of “barbarians” into the Roman empire and into Italy. The common Roman citizen also no longer saw military service as desireable , so foreign troops were hired to fill the ranks of the Legions.

      So a corrupt civilization that no longer wanted to have children and no longer wanted to put their life on the line to defend their own civilization allow a dynamic, war like , vibrant culture that still saw marriage and children as of prime importance immigrate into their empire and fill their military ranks. I know if I was a barbarian seeing a corrupt, degenerate and effeminate culture, that only made time for death games in the coliseum and orgies, and left the defense of that empire in the hands of my fellow barbarians and myself, I would do the same as what was done, toss out the cowards and perverts and place ourselves as the ones in power.

      1. avatar ThomasR says:

        In the end docduracoat, we are going the same way as the Roman Empire.

        We grew as a republic with a strong christian belief, vibrant, with marriage and child as the primary focus. Where being a citizen soldier in defense of ones community was the norm.

        And with immigrants from around the world, with a confidence in the “American Way” , and the melting pot, we built the greatest, freest and most properous country in all of history.

        Now, with liberal/progressives promoting a nihilistic, self- hatibg and self-loathing as being the most racist and tyrannical country in the world, that promotes the idea that human beings are a virus, a disease on the face of the planet, that says not having children is admirable and that marriage is slavery, that tells new immigrants that being a proud American is racist and bigoted and only be proud of the culture you came from, don’t integrate, be “multi-cultural”.

        A culture can not last that hates marriage, hates children and hates itself as the liberal/progressives are promoting. Unless we come to our senses and really understand that following liberal/progressivism is cultural suicide, we will go the way of the Roman Empire.

  18. avatar Tarrou says:

    I’ve written this many times. I should probably save it so I can copypasta rather than retyping every time.

    The litmus test for belonging to the group of 2A supporters is support for the 2A. Nothing else.

    Guns are not gay marriage.

    Guns are not taxes.

    Guns are not foreign policy.

    We must always have room for those who disagree with us on all the things that aren’t the second Amendment.

  19. avatar Chazbo says:

    Go over to Zerohedge and read the more complete text of this guy’s statements.

    He says that “When you think about supremacist groups, a gay bar is an easy target. And the shooter knew that. It was like shooting fish in a barrel.”

    Excuse me? The shooter was a “supremacist”? I believe there are more accurate terms that describe what he was, but somehow this dude puts on a pair of shades that turns everything into OFWG’s, or something akin to that.

  20. avatar LHW says:

    Welcome, now drop the victimhood mentality.

Write a Comment

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

button to share on facebook
button to tweet
Blue Force Gear Quote of the Day: Conservative Where it Counts" title="Email to a friend/colleague">
button to share via email