Not to just own one no but to carry it anywhere it is required. At least where I am it is required to go to classes and learn things from handling them, laws for them, and how to handle situations where a gun might be required.
Our server costs ~$56 per month to run. Please consider donating or becoming a Patron to help keep the site running. Help us gain new members by following us on Twitter and liking our page on Facebook!
Current time: April 28, 2024, 6:24 am
Thread Rating:
|
LGBT Srike Back ~ The Pink Pistols
|
Holy shit really? No no no no, gays having more guns is not good anymore than Christians or Muslims or mentally ill having access to guns is the solution.
I understand the anger, but no, why the fuck do humans stupidly thing that responding to guns and violence means adding more guns will work. How is this different than saying "If more nations had nukes we'd all be better off". No, not good for gays and not good for humanity. Of course gays didn't deserve it, but taking the same bullshit Dirty Harry religious "I love weapons" attitude in response is bullshit. Humans don't need more guns, we need less, just like we need less nukes, not more. 
I understand it, but I don't agree with it.
I'll be real, I feel less threatened by openly gay/trans people (and straight women) carrying guns than I do straight and/or religious men. Nobody should be carrying guns really though.
"Adulthood is like looking both ways before you cross the road, and then getting hit by an airplane" - sarcasm_only
"Ironically like the nativist far-Right, which despises multiculturalism, but benefits from its ideas of difference to scapegoat the other and to promote its own white identity politics; these postmodernists, leftists, feminists and liberals also use multiculturalism, to side with the oppressor, by demanding respect and tolerance for oppression characterised as 'difference', no matter how intolerable." - Maryam Namazie 
Don't like guns? Don't carry one.
(June 21, 2016 at 3:57 pm)Yeauxleaux Wrote: I understand it, but I don't agree with it. I do too, but more guns is not the solution. Like war will bring peace is like fucking for virginity. I get the anger, and I get the desire to defend yourself, but the problem in our entire species history has always been the same. We protect our group, what is local, what we are familiar with, and in the process of responding to violence on our group, our species has far too much of a tendency to respond in the same manor. No, this is not a call for political correctness one bit. It is a call to my species to put our priorities in order. To put problem solving above labels and greed. To know that no matter how much we cuss and bitch, we are not a separate species. But at the same time, we cannot be afraid to challenge what is clearly compartmentalization to justify individual, political or tribal power. I think the best starting point any human can have in approaching a disagreement, is to know our species and planet is much older. To know our universe will be around with no record of our fighting that we partake in currently. I will never hate any human who advocates non violence, even if I hate the logic of the positions they may hold. It isn't enough to say, "I have a human right". Nobody should disagree to your human right to make any claim you want. But to say a position deserves blind value, by proxy of position, economic view, race, religion, nationality, in a 13.8 billion year old universe is absurd. (June 21, 2016 at 4:11 pm)Bella Morte Wrote: Don't like guns? Don't carry one. You know I love you but that is not anywhere near the same as "Don't want gay marriage, don't marry the same sex". The difference between gay marriage and our flooded market of guns, is that gays getting married isn't affecting heterosexuals. Even if gay couples outnumbered heterosexuals they would still not cause any harm to any health issue Guns are objects, gays are living human beings. Gays have rights, objects are not human beings. That is the difference. 
Even at the height of the Save Our Children clusterfuck, I do not recall any general suggestions for gays to arm themselves. AFAIK, all the legislative and judicial accomplishments have been achieved without armed conflict. The Dan White Riot, while pretty disruptive (burning police cars as I recall, and sadly the ornate brass doors to City Hall being destroyed), was done as far as I know with out gunfire.
I also don't recall anything besides vigorous civil protests during the AIDS crisis, regardless of the provocation. I was in a march of 250,000 (all my closest friends) in Chicago in '79 and it was entirely peaceful. Worst anyone had to deal with was sunburn since it was a long march and the sun was fiercely bright. I was at another 'demonstration' in Dubuque. It was planned and announced far in advance, so not a spontaneous 'uprising'. I recall being there early and when the police arrived I realized the police were only there to search the area for bombs. Had there been any, it would have been from the 'other side' obviously. A march/'parade in Iowa City was well attended, I even remember the chant we used, "Our liberties we prize, our rights we will maintain", and that is the motto for Iowa. Tough to argue with, although some local preachers tried. And that was as nasty as it got. I don't know this has been remarked upon, but I'd be hard pressed to note any other enormous political/civil/judicial gains such as the gays achieved in as little time (in my adult life time nearly, I was 12 when the Stonewall Riot occurred), and with as little actual bloodshed. Perhaps the rationale to not granting those advances being more based on religious ideas was why it went so fast? If all an objector has is ancient scriptures backing up his prejudice, it doesn't (eventually) carry the same gravitas as actual evidence. I recall a judge tasked with ruling on same-sex marriage early on noting the lawyers addressing the 'hell no' side had given excellent arguments in ruling against allowing divorce, not in banning same-sex marriage, he even told them that. When that level of faulty reasoning is the best arrow in your quiver (along with Godsedso), your side is going to have huge problems in fairly administered courts. As we saw. Jesus fucking christ, I've been a closet peacenik all along ?? 
The granting of a pardon is an imputation of guilt, and the acceptance a confession of it.
 (June 21, 2016 at 3:22 pm)mlmooney89 Wrote: Not to just own one no but to carry it anywhere it is required. At least where I am it is required to go to classes and learn things from handling them, laws for them, and how to handle situations where a gun might be required. You think the majority will go through the rigors of obtaining a carry permit? Think again.
I don't have an anger problem, I have an idiot problem.
The majority of law abiding citizens? Yes I do. I don't know a single person that has ignored the law when it comes to guns and permits. The whole point of this post and the group of people was to have a group of people protecting themselves with guns legally. It actually talks about the training and such on the site. So I'm not sure why you are bringing up illegal things.
(June 21, 2016 at 4:55 pm)mh.brewer Wrote:(June 21, 2016 at 3:22 pm)mlmooney89 Wrote: Not to just own one no but to carry it anywhere it is required. At least where I am it is required to go to classes and learn things from handling them, laws for them, and how to handle situations where a gun might be required. I am sick of humans getting stuck on labels. There is no such thing as majority or minority. There is only geography that sets up those constructs. Of course a local majority is going to ignore a minority. Jews in Israel want their population well defended. Muslims also want their populations well defended, and Christians want their populations well defended. The problem with all of humanity is that the planet isn't expandable. Guns and war do not reflect morality in our species, they reflect our impatience. |
|
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »
|
Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)
