The Guns & Ammo Network



Gay Pride, Gun Pride

There was rumor going around the SHOT Show this year that the Pink Pistols, a gay 2nd Amendment group, would have a stand. That proved not to be the case, so far as I could tell, but it did raise a question.

What do gay rights and gun rights have in common? More than you might think, I would say.

Gay activists and gun activists have, in a similar time frame, both piled up a long list of notable legal and political victories.

We won the Heller v. D.C. (2008) case before the Supreme Court, striking down the District of Columbia handgun ban. Similarly, the high court struck down laws against consensual sodomy in Lawrence v. Texas (2003).

Every state but Illinois now has some level of legal concealed carry, and concealed carry rights are continually being expanded. The list of states that recognize gay marriage or civil unions continues to grow, and no realist can deny that ultimately, the whole country will have them. Homosexuals can now serve openly in the armed services, and in most places can adopt children.

Whether all that’s good or bad you can argue deep into the night, but you can’t fail to notice that gun rights and gay rights have burgeoned at the same time. And that’s not an accident, though I am confident it has been a big surprise to many.

To use a pompous academic term, homosexuality and gun ownership were both until recently “transgressive” personal choices that challenged established social norms. Being gay may have been more transgressive in Yazoo City, Miss. and owning a gun more so in Cambridge, Mass., but both were on the fringes 50 years ago.

Social norms, whether about race, marriage, sexuality, childrearing, dress, language or workplace relations, have been demolished since those days, and that demolition has been regarded as a great thing by those of progressive mindset.

What they failed to appreciate was that social norms are of a piece, and if you demolish them in the area of personal sexuality, you’re tearing them down just as much when it comes to personal defense. You can’t let some people off the chain and keep others chained.

If you say that gays have the right to seek personal fulfillment, you can’t then say that gun owners have no such right. Personal possibilities can’t be expanded in just one direction; they spread out unpredictably, like paint surging out of a spilled can.

Somewhere along the line, gun owners decided to get loud and proud. I can promise you, having worked there for 20 years, that idea didn’t come from the NRA. It also didn’t come from the gun industry, which until very recently, didn’t really want black guns at the SHOT Show.

Gun owners got loud and proud quite on their own, one bumper sticker or T-shirt or viral video at a time, and they may have learned how, at least in part, from guys cavorting on parade floats, dressed like the Village People.

Just as there are flamboyant gay icons like Elton John or the ice skater Johnny Weir, we have our own outrageous figures like Ted Nugent or Toby Keith. A society that tolerates the one has to tolerate the other. We worry a lot about political correctness, but the truth of the matter is that popular culture has probably never been more wide-open, at both extremes of the political spectrum.

TV fare like Modern Family features homosexual characters, portrayed in a positive light, while cable TV is full of gun-related shows like Sons of Guns or Top Shot. Were either of them imaginable in the 1960s, or even the 1980s?

So I would argue that the general expansion of personal possibilities has expanded possibilities for us, too. And that’s a good, thing, no matter how you may feel about Liza Minelli. It may not be easy to see or accept, but there’s a straight line connecting the guy in the assless chaps to you in your “Infidel” T-shirt. Both of you drive some people nuts, and both of you are freer to be who you want to be than ever before.

  • https://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100000480224486 Dale Paris

    Gun Rights are Civil Rights.
    The Pink Pistols have supported the 2A for a very long time and they know how to work the system. We can use their help and professionalism in the fight for our Civil rights.

    • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1312996789 James Singer

      Being Gay has nothing to do with Civil Rights. As human beings, we ALL have certain rights. I personally don't consider the "GAY" community any more special than anyone else. Being gay doesn't offend me…well, certain members/groups DO offend me with their public displays and "In your face" attitudes.
      I welcome anyone to be invovled with Our Constitutional Rights, I just don't to go to the range and see a Gay Pride parade or inapprpriate behavior. A lot of range days are in fact family activities.

  • C.C. Calkins

    Hey, I'm straight, not narrow. Freedom means freedom, equality, equality, period.
    #1 and #3.

    • Rancott

      This is where I stand….not gay, but if I try to control your life then you can do the same. Live, love and shoot all you want.

    • Trooper Lowe

      Same here!!

  • http://www.facebook.com/brettboukather Brett Boukather

    This was a simple way to keep in touch with friends and now is getting too complicated. Someone wants to promote at Facebook with their great idea, just blow the boss already and get it over with.

  • http://www.facebook.com/brettboukather Brett Boukather

    If you are gay, then WHY do you need to start a club or group. Just be yourself, live your life and go on. I am straight and dont see the need to start a club or group function. Thats the problem here, they still see the need to shove it in our faces. Just be who you want to be and STFU. Thank you.

    • F.F

      Oh I don't know, maybe strength in numbers to protect individual rights? You seem kind of threatened by the fact these people are doing something to fight bigotry; maybe you sir are in fact a bigot? Just sayin' bro.

    • creekside

      As soon as people stop beating up gay people in the street in a city where it is literally impossible to get a concealed weapons permit and the open carry of a firearm is also a crime, no problem, I'll be happy to STFU.

      A lot of other gay folks won't until teens stop killing themselves because of prejudice and bullying.

    • Paul

      chances are, you're a straight, white, male. just as i am. if you haven't experienced bigotry and discrimination directed at you *for being who you are*, then i can certainly understand how easily you would think it is to 'just be yourself', and not need organizations to help you end the bigotry and discrimination – and for moral and emotional support.

      every person who isn't harming you is deserving of respect, dignity, and a fair shake in life. african americans were strung up and hung – just for being themselves. young gay men have been strung up and hung just for being themselves. this is not right. it is immoral.

    • Laszlo

      If you like guns, the WHY do you need to start a club or group? Just be yourself, live your life and go on.

      I mean really, why do you need an NRA? Or a GOA? Or heck, even an SAS? So you like guns. Why do you have to throw your gun-nut attitude in ourt faces? That's the real problem here.

      We all know the answer. I don't understand why YOU feel the need get so upset that you have to use profanity to try to stifle other people, who are really just pursuing happiness, same as you.

      Perhaps you feel you are "more equal" than them f<bleeep>g f<bleeep>s or something. _shrug_

      No, no, thank YOU! Really.

    • David B

      Finally, someone has joined the band wagon. Unlike CC above, we are created equal, but the gays seem to go out of their way to impress upon the rest of the world their insecurities. Be gay, but keep your personal life to yourself. I can't stand the way these people and those who side with them to think everything is fine. We have black history month, no white month. There is gay week, no straight days. Is America's population now saying that we have to have specific days because they don't go out the other 364 days of the year, or that we don;'t recognize blacks the other 12 months. Damn people, its getting out of hand. I'm on your side Brett. I'm not racist, I'm sick of hearing this shit. David B

  • Gary

    I will not be paying Shotgun News for any new subscriptions because of this stupid story.

    Keep up the great writing

    • sakovkt

      Agreed!

      This article in Shotgun News is like a safety shoe sale in Victoria's Secrets.

      I enjoy firearms as a diversion from all the fetid political debates going on, especially about this subject, and the remedy is just too easy.

      • Guest

        Closing your eyes…great remedy. Just close your eyes and go back to sleep. That way you won't notice when they start taking your rights away. But by then, they'll have already taken everyone else's and you'll have no more allies.

    • Darthsmokey

      If you are too narrow minded to see that if you want the freedoms
      That YOU hold dear and consider important to be respected by others who may, or may not, agree with you, the YOU have to be willing to defend the rights of our fellow citizens – whether they are your beliefs or not.
      We defend the 2nd Ammendment – not becaus "they might take away
      OUR rights, but rather because if no one stands up for any
      Rights, there will be no opposition when they try to take away ANY right.
      Like it out Lump it – when it comes to our Constitutional Rights – we all have a right to have those rights, and a DUTY to defend the rights of our countrymen.
      If you doubt that – unsubscribe, shut up, and stop being an obstacle to the rest of us who are trying to defend ALL of our freedoms.

  • Baddbu

    Please go away.

  • vishnu

    I don't often participate in online forums, in part because so many of the people who comment have clearly either not read, or not understood, what they are commenting on, as in this case.
    The article was not written to approve of or promote homosexuality, something which should have been clear. For all I know, the author could be a homophobe himself! The point was that their are similarities in the way that both gay rights and gun rights have been defended, how society's views of these quite different movements have changed in the recent past, and how people in both movements might learn from the successes of the other.
    In this last case, I'm reminded of the scene in the movie "Patton" where, after having defeated Panzers he believed were commanded by Rommel, Patton (played by George C Scott) say something like "I read your book, you magnificent bastard!"

    • R.W. Hunnicutt

      What a pleasure actually to be understood and effectively summarized. Well done, sir!

      • vishnu

        The pleasure is mine. Keep up the good work!

  • Bob

    I have had a number of gays work for me, some have become friends. I don't care for the gay life style but it's their life. If we deny them rights someone could justify denying us our rights. Any way if our sex life is approximately 4 or 5 % of our lives, and thats the part I don't like but Ilike the other 96-95 % thats damn good. As one of our founding fathers either we stick together or we will swing seperately, from the gallows that is.

  • MrBlackCat

    This is a touchy subject…
    The only parallel I see is two groups struggling for what they want.
    I don't care for the "shock comparison" crap… but that was the intent. (agenda?)
    Besides that, "gay rights" can't be used to overthrow a corrupt government, or protect you from harm.

    In a loner world, all of this "let me be me" freedom works… in a society, with cities, and houses atop each other, it does not apply. There is no direction you can step and not get on the toes of others. If you want to be you, and I don't know about it, and I don't have to see it if I choose, then ok, feel free(dom) to be yourself.

    In a city, where I can see you, hear you and can't escape you should I need to, there IS no you, there is only us. You have your parades where only the invited know of it, not on streets I paid for too. It is about respect as opposed to "forced toleration" of others who you know do not think as yourself. I don't shoot next door because laws don't allow me to… how about if I have to put up with your parade, you have to put up with my shooting next door. :)

    Comparing a social or psychological behavior to a sport-hobby-self protection means is pretty reckless in my opinion anyway.

    And for those who might be getting some forehead wrinkles relative to this post, I am not "anti-gay" any more than I am "anti-gun" I am "non-gay" and "pro-gun", so that is clear.

    Having pride in anything is completely unrelated to shoving your beliefs in the face of others…

    Lets have an example… once I was in an internet chat room for one of my favorite video games of the day. A person came in an asked if anyone had an issues with gay people. I responded with "If anything about your sexuality comes up while typing about a video game, then I have a serious issue and you will be kicked from the channel." I had to close it anyway from the lashing out of that jerk. I can get along with just about any Christian, homosexual, gun owner and most others, that doesn't feel the need to bring what they believe in, into every conversation regardless of subject.

    Sexual preferences or practices need not enter a conversation about sighting in that new scope.

    This article doesn't sit well with me… it just wasn't necessary or appropriate to compare these two things.

    MrBlackCat

    • heavy trucker

      I agree with you….

    • vishnu

      Because it would seem from some of you comments that you understand the crux of the article we are supposedly commenting on, that you also seem to think that it equates gay rights and gun rights is curious, as it clearly does not.
      Furthermore, consider your statement that "Having pride in anything is completely unrelated to shoving your beliefs in the face of others… " I agree with you, but can you not see why anti-gun or anti-hunting advocates feel that we are shoving our beliefs in their faces when we show up at a public meeting openly carrying firearms, or even just wearing camo?

    • Kowpie

      I am not "anti-gay" any more than I am "anti-gun" I am "non-gay" and "pro-gun" and I agree "Sexual preferences or practices need not enter a conversation about sighting in that new scope". Well said,Sir

    • Will W. (NJ)

      I think you are narrow minded and a bigot.

  • sakovkt

    The 'Pink Pistols", huh?____Why not something with a little more panache, like the "Sex Pistols"?____Politics is a means to and end, and these peoples' agenda seems more like making caricatures of themselves.____We already have a great pro-Firearms, Second Amendment and Constitution Team in the NRA and affiliates and don't need to branch it out into irrelevant issues that, frankly, are not at all as Consitutionally grounded as this anti-Gun administration would have us believe, given its flagrant disregard for the democratic process and its proclivities for homosexuals.____You mihgt even say, that there's a conflict of interest, there.____If you want on the NRA Team, it's a "come as you are" type organization.____No problem.____But I'm not here to hear about homosexuals any more than anti-Semiticism, anti-Christianity or even anti-Nazi or Communism or anti/pro anything else, and that means especially the homosexual marraige issue.____We've got enough problems protecting our Second Amendment Rights to Free Nation, so let's just stay focussed on that and let the Pink Pistols find another outlet for their agenda, eh?

    • creekside

      The Pink Pistols existed long before this article. Politically, it is a crucial piece of leverage because it links self defense with personal liberties. The sign I carried in the Gay Pride Parade asked, "What's in your night stand?" The state has no more right to tell us we can't have a firearm in our homes than it does to tell us who we can love or what _else_ we might have next to our beds. In California, the support of Calguns and CPRA working with NRA has been critical — and every bad gun law we stop here doesn't spread like a virus elsewhere in the nation. "Armed gays don't get bashed . . ." and neither do armed straights or armed anyone else.

  • Baddbu

    Being anti-gay and anti-gun are extremely similar in mindset. Both position come out of wanting to control somebody else's life for some bizarre self-satisfaction. Do you feel "more moral" because you hate gays or want to ban sodomy? Anti-gunners feel the same masturbatory delusions when they pass a gun control law.

  • Guest

    Is this some kind of epidemic of ignorance? This is the second person in the gun press who has fallen to the tolerance lie. Let's be plain about this. You are associating the battle for Constitutionally protected, God given rights, enumerated in the Bill of Rights over 200 years ago with morally repugnant, deviate, sexual practices. It is because of people like them that we need to assure that we retain our 2nd Amendment Rights. I suggest that the author do some research and some soul searching.

    If you want to be a politically correct puppet you may find it easier to write for Newsweek. Since you seem to be entirely too wrapped up in the latest Beretta to come out of the factory to be keeping tabs on the Homosexual movement. Try this associated post at a gay website: http://www.thegaymanifesto.com/arm-yourself/. Maybe you need to educate yourself further about your ":Gay" friends in the Pink Pistols. Try Here: http://www.massresistance.org/index.html There are plenty of things to inform and enlighten you there. But you should read this FREE E-book to find the full story. http://massresistance.org/docs/gen/09b/Redeeming_…

    The form of the arguments that the Gay lobby uses are very similar, if not identical to, the arguments the anti-gun lobby uses. You want to see a way to legitimize these people, and they enjoy your efforts, but as you might see from the first post listed they will not stand up for you unless you're one of them. Is that an inclusive society to you? I can think of other more apt "Societies" to compare them to, but I don't want to go outside the bounds of this discussion. I'm already going to be called some derogatory names by people here, and I ask you to judge based on the replies. Better yet go to every legitimate Gay rights website, and every legitimate Pro-family website and decide for yourself based on the tenor of their arguments who is more reasoned and trustworthy, because you are the only one who can change your mind.

    • vishnu

      You are entitled to your opinions, and the right to express them. I only ask that you read my comment above relative to the article we are supposedly commenting on, and reconsider your thoughts that the article somehow equates gay rights and gun rights. It does not, it only suggests that the tactics used, and the gains achieved by the two movements are similar.

    • Fortis

      Just so you understand, Mr. Guest. I will be there, standing with my gay friends when you come for them, and you will eventually come.

      I will be standing there, and I will be armed, and I guarantee my aim is better than yours.

    • Guest

      Mormons are about as anti-gay as they come. Romney can't be both Mormon and pro-gay.

    • https://www.facebook.com/graycpeterson Gray Peterson

      "The form of the arguments that the Gay lobby uses are very similar, if not identical to, the arguments the anti-gun lobby uses."

      You would be greatly incorrect. The arguments the folks in the anti-gun movement is very similar to the ones in the anti-gay movement. This is why am I allied with both. Both the anti-gay lobby and the anti-gun lobby want one thing: Control over both something we cannot control, and control over choices that we make. They both use fake statistics that when being put on the witness stand and put under oath, it adds up to nothing more than bumper sticker sloganeering…

    • Bryan in KS

      I find your position indefensible. Quite repugnant, in fact. How do you claim to want the government out of your life, want the government out of your rights and want the government out of your wallet when you immediately follow it up and tell a disadvantaged group that they do not deserve the same rights as you?

      Tell me, where in http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/declara… does it say anything regarding one's sexual orientation? Where does it say anything about one group being favored over another? It doesn't.

      We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.–That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, –That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.–Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government. The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world.

      All men are created equal. They are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights. Life. Liberty. Pursuit of Happiness. Where's the "no gays" clause? Did the Continental Congress drop a page when they faxed it over to the Queen?

      Since you'll probably ask, I am not now, nor have I ever been, a homosexual. I have worked in the same office as homosexuals; ate, drank and shopped in the same restaurants, bars and stores and otherwise gone about my business while they went about theirs. I'm a white, heterosexual male who has been married to my beautiful and tolerant (and only) wife for nearly 16 years. A woman who has given birth to two of the greatest children in the world. I have taught my children about nature, stewardship and sharing the precious natural resources we've been blessed to have, a gift from [$your favorite benevolent creator]. I've taught my children that these are their rights and that nobody can take them away. I've taught them that nobody has the right to tell them how to live their lives and they have no such right with respect to others. Nobody. I've taught them that they have the right, more accurately, the duty, to protect their family, friends and loved ones. They've known how to shoot a gun since before Kindergarten. I'm proud to say that I'm proud of my kids. They're turning out to be more than I've ever imagined possible and I have no doubt that they'll continue to achieve for the benefit of their family and mankind long after I've turned back to dust.

      This is why I have such a problem with today's Republican party. You'll scream from the top of Capitol Hill about "getting the government out" of religion, education, health care, banking, business and anything else that you feel imposes on your way of life but then turn around and support DOMA, oppose abortion (using political maneuvers that are no different than those you scream about when they come from the left side of the aisle) and believe that it's your right to tell people where they can live and how they can live out their lives.

      So, what does that mean for you and others that think like you? It means that you don't get to choose! If you believe in the roadmap to freedom was laid down and paid for with the blood of our ancestors so many years ago you don't get to choose! You don't get to choose!

  • Joseph

    The way I see it, rights are rights. You aren't always going to agree with what someone else does with their rights, but that's why they're rights. Rights by definition protect behaviors even if most people don't like those behaviors. Rights aren't always popular and we aren't ever going to agree on what should be a right or what shouldn't. I'll exercise my right to bear arms to protect your rights, but that doesn't mean I'm always going to agree with how you use them. I'm okay with that. I may not like what you do in your bedroom, but as long as it doesn't involve children or unwilling participants, I believe it's your right to do it. I think the point is that a more expansive view of individual liberty benefits both the gay community and the gun community even if there is currently very little overlap between the two. Rights are easier to take away one at a time and piece by piece. I'd prefer we keep them all rather than see even the unpopular ones put in danger.

  • HiCapAuto

    Mr.Robert W. Hunnicutt,_I've always been amazed why any business would ever want to wade off into the pit falls of politics that doesn't directly affect their business. For the ones that do I don't believe they’re that stupid as to not realize they are dividing their customers.

    I contend that the management of these companies have been taken over by agenda driven radicals. I say radicals because they have no regard or concern for the business nor their customers. When I shop and spend my money I don't want to be assaulted by the politics of these agenda driven companies._I was shocked to see an article such as this coming from Shotgun news. When I subscribe to Shotgun News I only expect to see/read articles on guns or ammo. That's it. No articles on cars, no articles on sports and most of all, no articles on homosexuality._Your comparison of gun rights to gay rights is nothing but a veiled attempt to promote the Gay Rights Agenda. _After 25 years of subscription to SGN, I'll be cancelling it after I've had the opportunity to call and talk to SGN about my displeasure with your article and make clear that this is the reason for my cancellation._

    • Guest

      He isn't pushing the gay agenda. He just said there were similarities between the movements and that it's possible increased societal acceptance of one thing might be somehow related to increased societal acceptance in another. It was food for thought, not an endorsement of gays or gay politics.

    • https://www.facebook.com/graycpeterson Gray Peterson

      Hey HiCapAuto,

      I'll be subscribing to SGN now that you're going to cancel yours. 1 for 1 swap…

      • Will W. (NJ)

        Me too!

  • Max

    I don't think anyone disagrees that having more people aware of and supporting gun rights is key to maintaining those rights. Despite the claims of a lot of folks there are liberals, gays and people of all sorts of backgrounds and stripes who own and enjoy firearms and are potential allies in these struggles. That said, a lot of the comments and sentiments I've seen online and at gun shows almost invariably equate the complete platform of the Christian right with RKBA. The folks whose politics and lifestyles so obviously repel you do vote and do have money to spend (on guns and even organizations like the NRA). If you don't like the political polarization that has dominated (if not crippled) civil discourse in this country then stop perpetuating it and lead by example by finding some common ground with those who might not obviously be in a demographic that is traditionally associated with gun ownership. You might even be surprised.

  • rangerK7

    The difference between gun rights and gay rights is the first is transcendent of the law, indisputable and indispensable. The second is fiction. There are no gay rights, woman's rights, or "going bald guy" (guilty) rights. There are HUMAN rights. Treat everyone the same and it just works. So, while there may be similarities in legal or political strategies, one is legitimate and essential to freedom and one is a farce perpetuated by the militant who cannot tolerate disagreement with their choices (Do I detect a bit'O irony?) and the just plain ignorant.

  • eric

    this is crap for one the bible says nothing against owning guns at all but it definitely says plenty about homosexuality. homosexuality makes me sick to my stomach. i dont care who i piss off or offend its an abomination and that will never change no matter how liberal the democrats want to make the country. this spells the end of my shotgun news subscription.

    • John White

      Yup I agee 110%. But I think Jesus actually did talk about guns to John the Baptist, when they met at the river. I forget the exact verse but it was about defending your country and how a rifle in the hand was worth more than gold in the pocket.

      Maybe someone remembers the exact quote.

    • John

      And I don't care about your mythical book. Do you want me to try and make laws about your life based on what it says in Harry Potter? Just as real as your "bible".

    • CainesWife

      It doesn't say anything against guns, because they hadn't been invented yet. Please use a more logical and constructive argument when you post discriminating opinions. This is a piece about similar tactics and history of two political fights not a religious debate.

    • Big Gay Al

      The bible also says that slavery is ok, and that you shouldn't eat pork.

      • Guest

        Quite right. Eating pork is also listed as an "abomination". Abomination didn't mean the same thing back then, either. Fortunately, eating pork and homosexuality are much less risky than they were in biblical times.

    • Baddbu

      Why do you bring religion into gun rights advocacy?

    • John

      Sorry, but the bible is not an acceptable reference as its vailidy has yet to be proven factual Try again! :)

  • Tavi

    "eric" is a moron. I will happily pick up his Shotgun News subscription and give it to someone more worthy,

  • Gay_Cynic

    Well, crud.

    Let's get it over with. I'm gay (for good or ill, that was the way I was made – is there ANYONE silly enough to believe that someone would volunteer for the "extra bundle of bigotry and crud" that comes with the package?

    I'm also a gun-owner and have been for 26 years and counting – I made a *choice* to exercise my Second Amendment rights, spending my own hard-earned dollars on licenses, ammunition, and various firearms.

    I've put up with my fair share of narrow-minded bigotry on BOTH fronts. Pink Pistols has made slow inroads, but even now many in the LGBT community regard the "default" setting of members of the Second Amendment community as a bunch of hate-filled knuckle-dragging bubba's only slowed in their hostility towards the LGBT community by their inbred laziness.

    I've also met, as we've seen in the comments above, those who hold views of folks in the LGBT community that are every bit as charming.

    I've been an activist in both communities. I've co-chaired and run security for a large Pride Parade (think "herding cats that each individually believe they have the one true path on how to do it, and all others are heretics"), participated in voter education groups in the LGBT community, and served on various and sundry boards. I currently serve on two committees of a regional gun group, work for a gun organization, and was founding President of Pink Pistols in my area.

    I've seen both sides, and having said relatively nasty things about both – they both have their saints and virtues, and each has tactics the other would be well advised to consider emulating. And there are quite a few "cross-over" folks who belong to both groups or have friends, brothers, sisters, parents or other family that can claim membership in both.

    Finally, both communities *are* in a struggle to be "let the hell alone" by those who would try and grind them under their heel…and both can benefit from shattering a few stereotypes and working together to bring about more freedom for all persons. Both communities need allies, not just folks talented at preaching to the choir.

    • Bryan in KS

      Your sexual orientation should not be something I need to even take into consideration. You support the foundation laid down by the Founding Fathers? You believe in the RKBA? I think you're fine. I'd rather have you standing next to me than someone who claims to believe how I believe unless you don't meet certain criteria concerning something that's none of my business.

    • Guest

      Well said. The problem in the U.S. today is that we have people on both sides of the aisle who want to promote one set of rights while trampling another. The only thing they disagree on is which rights are the ones that need trampling. Government does do some good things, but the two party system currently means I'm torn between two groups of politicians who want to dictate how I have to live my life. I spent most of my life in a red state, where I frequently wrote to my leaders to tell them to stop trying to legislate morality and that public education was not a bad thing. Now I'm in a super liberal state where I'm constantly reminding my legislators that I don't appreciate their fanatical attempts to keep me from owning and carrying arms. The only thing that will change politicians on either side of the aisle is if we keep telling them we want more rights, not simply a different set of them.

  • no one special

    I guess I just don't understand the need to bring their sex life into it. Can't ya just have a gun club with out having to point out that you are gay? Personally I couldn't care less what you do in your personal life but it is just stupid to always have to point out sexual orientation. You don't see heterosexuals with a "straight shooters" club. It just gets annoying when that is the focus of everything in their world. I'm gay and a writer, I'm gay and a cop I'm gay and what ever…. You are never going to get people to accept gays if they don't want too but you wind up getting the ones that don't care against you with having to point out every second that you are gay. We get it why can't they?

    • waylon

      Here, Here!!!! well said!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    • Fortis

      Why can't you understand that being gay has little to do with ones sex-life. Can a virgin be gay?

      When some new friend asks you if your married, which everyone does, your gayness is revealed. When people see a picture of your family on your desk, your gayness is revealed. When you show up to parent/teacher night with your partner your gayness is revealed. When you sit together in church your gayness is revealed.

      Gay isn't about sex, it's about who you love and who is in your family. Saying it is just about sex allows people to dismiss their family.

      When gays don't have to worry about being beat up or killed for holding their partner's hand in public, or checking into a motel together, then they can just join the "gun club" and not the "gay gun club".

    • Gay_Cynic

      For one thing, when you *perceive" the gun community as a *hostile* crowd (never mind reality, that's a different day) and it's been years since you bothered to lie about who you were or try to hide it…a group like Pink Pistols serves a purpose as a "safe" place to get your feet wet and discover <GASP> that a lot of those times, all those stereotypes are untrue (on both sides).

      Think of it this way. You buy a motorcycle and you want to learn more about riding. Do you go to the baddest biker bar in town, where the regulars are known for disliking outsiders? Or do you go to the "Suburban Newb Biker Group"?

      It's not that different, given the image of the 2A community sold by the more progressive sorts that frequently lead (and thus set what's "normal & acceptable") in the LGBT Community. "Gun-owner=Social Conservative=hostile/ignorant=neat way to get beat up today."

      The *other* side of Pink Pistols is to *break* that stereotype in the minds of the LGBT community. Shatter, by preference. In other words, in a very real sense there's a dimension where it's about being pro-gun in a largely anti community and trying win hearts and minds amidst that community.

      Another priority is to make gay(LGBT)-bashing *much* more hazardous for the perpetrators. And for us political wonks, it's to get some of the institutional knowledge that each group has accumulated shared back and forth.

      Now, that's not all-inclusive. But I will quietly point out that, more often than not, I've found the gun community more accepting and inclusive of LGBT folks…than I've found the LGBT community accepting of gun-owners in their midst.

      I'd like to fix that. To get a few more voters on our side. And to open a few minds along the way.

      • Big Gay Al

        HERE, HERE!!!!! EXTREMELY well said. :)

  • Chris

    Shot Gun News & Homosexual's Rights ! ? I won't Renew . . .

    • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1252214182 Gene Du Bose

      I will cancel my subscription of Shotgun News. I don't need you to attempt to force me to believe in something that is WRONG. The 2nd Amendment is something I believe in. Being gay is a choice of life style. If being gays was right and good for America, the liberal government would outlaw it.

      • Jacob

        Your ignorance is astounding. Where in the article does the author say ANYTHING about homosexuality being right or wrong? [He doesn't.] Where does he "attempt to force" you to do anything (other than think)? [He doesn't]. Do you only stand up for the rights of people you agree with? If so, please move to the middle east. You'll fit right in. My country was founded on freedom, not whatever it is you're selling. Freedom doesn't mean the freedom to do what you want only as long as your nanny (or church) agrees with it. You're just as bad as the extreme liberals who want to tell everyone what they can and can't do. Having a nanny who says boys can't kiss boys is no different than having a nanny who says guns aren't safe and you can't play with them. You don't want freedom. You want a nanny who agrees with you. Freedom isn't freedom unless it applies equally to everyone (including people you don't like). I don't want the government interfering with my ability to enjoy life unless that enjoyment somehow damages the life, liberty, or freedom of another human being. What I do with my guns and in my bedroom harms nobody. What homosexuals do with their guns and in their bedrooms harms nobody, either.

  • Johnny Rico

    Interesting piece, kudos to the Shotgun News, and I hope the members of the Pink Pistols carefully consider their vote this coming November. We don't need another anti-gun-slanting judge on the Supreme Court. Two was enough. Perhaps they can have a joint meeting with the Log Cabin Republicans to discuss the issues at hand…

    • Big Gay Al

      When I vote, I vote Conservative 99.9% of the time. I will always vote for those that will do their utmost to help me keep my 2A rights. Without those rights, none of the others will exist.

  • vishnu

    I posted to this forum a day ago, trying to get people to comment on what the article was actually about, not about their opinion of homosexuality. Later on, at least one other person tried the same, but I continue to see posts about the readers' views on "fags". Everyone is entitled to his opinions, but there are plenty of other places for that discussion.
    It's also sad to see so many people stating that they will cancel their subscription to SGN, some after many years, because of one (misunderstood) article in one issue. What do they expect to see next…"Guns of the Village People"…"Queer Eye for the Straight Shooter"?
    Right now we are facing, with the possibility of Obama's re-election, the toughest fight ever to preserve our Second Amendment rights. Having more people, more money, and more organizations on our side can only aid the cause. Regardless of your feelings about homosexuality, would it not be to the advantage of gun rights to have gays as allies? Gays have always been courted as Democratic voters, so every gun-toting gay or lesbian could be considered a Republican vote!
    Remember the old adage: "The enemy of my enemy is my friend".

  • Laszlo

    These people who are claiming they'll cancel the subscription or whatever, because of this one article, are both hilarious and sad, for the same reason: That's really how easy it is to manipulate you into choosing to stop listening to a pro-gun source for news and information? Really?

    So you're going to change a part of your life and restrict yourself from something good, just because someone presented you with one story of how much closer we all are to one-another than many of us thought? That's all it took?

    Wow! Too bad. :(

    Have a good life!

  • Bpw

    Way to go shotgun news… What on earth does homosexuality have to do with guns. That is certainly reaching.. We have a right to bear arms protected under the constitution. The right to pop another dude in the keister is not really in there is it… You want to talk about freedom? Fine what about a mans right to screw a sheep… Or a dog.. Why is that wrong? It just is… It's unnatural it is sexual deviancy just like 2 dudes soaping each other up in the shower.

    • Fortis

      Ah yes, a mans right to screw sheep. Nice argument. I'm sure there are a lot of sheep who love being raped. Look at the way they dress, they're asking for it.

      You want to talk about freedom? Fine what about a mans right to own own anti air missiles or a nuclear bomb. Why is that wrong? It just is.

      Once you give a man the right to a handgun, the next step is a nuclear explosion in Dalllas. It's so obvious!

    • Bryan in KS

      Unless it's your shower, why do you care? If it was a liberal complaining about the particular church you attend would you see it the same way? Don't tell people what they can and can't say about the way you live your life and then turn around and make judgmental statements about they way they live. I always thought the concept was pretty easy to grasp but I guess it's not…

      • Will W. (NJ)

        Well said, Bryan. Thanks for bringing some intelligence and logic into this rant!

  • Bpw

    The point I was making using the graphic example of beastiality is that homosexuality is wrong no matter how you try to justify it. Furthermore your implication that an animal would be raped suggests that in your mind if the animal wants it and you want to give it to her/him it's ok? Wow….. That's twisted… Ever had a dog hump your leg? D say it might have wanted it.. Homosexuality just like beastiality is sexual deviancy no matter how you justify it.
    Now… Addressing the comment about explosions near Dallas because of the right to own a handgun. That is one of the most thoughtless illeducated comments on this board. There are millions of handguns in the hands of private citizens and have been for years. Unstable people do unstable things. I'll try to paint a picture you'll understand. Picture a homosexual finding out he has HIV (not that I'm saying all gays get HIV). He, feeling enraged goes out and tries to give it to as many people as he can. In doing so he creates an epidemic in his community and receives media coverage. Do you blame homosexuality or the unstable person? Should there be laws against homosexuality because of this? My answer I'm sure is the same as yours. There should not be laws like that for homosexuality or for guns in responsible peoples hands.
    Now the comment about my shower… Your right I don't care what people do in their own homes or bedrooms. I'm simply stating that I believe it's wrong and is sexual deviency. My problem is this.. I don't need to hear that you are gay over and over. If you are gay fine. Is that who you are? Or is that your sexual preference. It should be your sexual preference and let who you are be determined by the sum of your life.

    • Guest

      The example he gave was his way of pointing out your blatant use of a straw man argument – attacking a position your opponent doesn't actually hold (in this case the position that bestiality is acceptable).

      Bestiality has nothing to do with homosexuality. Animals lack the capacity to consent to things they don't understand. Bestiality isn't appropriate for the same reason sex with children and others who lack the capacity or maturity to consent is inappropriate.

      You consider homosexuality wrong, so you lump it together with sexual behavior that pretty much everyone considers wrong, and hope that your audience will think the two are somehow related.

      Some people consider individual ownership of guns wrong, so they lump gun ownership together with school shootings, taking civilian hostages, and other gun-related behavior that pretty much everyone considers wrong, and hope that the audience will think the two are somehow related.

      See how that works?

      • Bpw

        I'm very sorry that you see it that way. That fact is that both homosexuality and beastiality are forms of sexual deviency. The intended purpose for sex is for procreation. It was intended by God to be shared between a man and a woman. Male and female. Any other form of sex is a deviation from the original intent.I shouldn't need to explain the relationship between the word deviation and deviency. If you prefer homosexuality fine. It's your business. But it is – like it or not, sexual deviency. I'm not saying you are a bad person, and I'm not judging where you are going when you die (that is for God to decide). I'm simply stating that beastiality and homosexuality are both forms of sexual deviency.

        • Guest

          I'm not gay, but I don't think it's my place to tell two adults they can't kiss or have sex any more than it is my place to tell you which (if any) God you have to pray to. I find the idea that sex is only for procreation depressing. A loving God would want us to be happy, not just to make more people. A healthy sex life is part of being happy. If your reason for disallowing sex between persons of the same sex is because they can't procreate, then you should be in favor of disallowing sex with infertile individuals, women who are past menopause, etc. If you're planning to have sex with your spouse after menopause, you clearly recognize that procreation is not the only purpose for sexual activity. As far as deviancy goes, psychiatrists and psychologists no longer consider homosexuality a mental illness, nor is homosexual sex considered deviant behavior. Oral sex used to be considered deviant behavior but it's practiced in most sexual relationships at one point or another.

          • Bpw

            I don't look at sex as merely for procreation but that is obviously it's original intent – you are now using the straw man argument by the way, And I never claimed homosexuality was a mental illness. I original intent was for a male female relationship and that sex outside of those parameters is a deviation. Perhaps you have a problem with the word deviation deviate deviency, but clearly understanding the definition(s) without applying negative connotation should clear that up. And yes oral sex fits in there (as much as I hate to admit it) – with that at least, you bring up a good point.

          • willet

            the term for what he did was reductio ad absurdum which is a valid argument. a straw man is not. r.a.a. is simply pointing out the absurd results that flow from a position/ in this case the position you appeared to take that sex was only for procreation.

          • Bpw

            Why do people on this board have a problem understanding definitions of words? I did not appear to have taken that position unless you were biased against what I was saying already. I said "the intended purpose" that means what it was designed for. Originally….. At the creation of man…. Why is that hard to understand. And yes it was a straw man argument because he was attacking a position I diddnt actually hold in order to try to discredit my argument. Why would I be against sex with infertile women or women past menopause… That is outlandish and was only brought up (outside of the focus) to try to make my agreement seem outlandish.
            By the way I am very glad for this blog. While I am irritated with SGN for this article I am happy because it has made me rethink my stance on homosexuality. It is very obvious to me that homosexual activists have congregated here with the intention of making folks who don't agree with homosexuality look like a minority. My guess is that the vast majority of you don't have a subscription to shotgun news and couldn't tell a M1 Garand from a mossberg. I am rethinking my stance (which was against but somewhat tolerant of) because of seeing that gay activist groups are targeting children to promote their agendas- in middle schools! A guy from Boston on this board pointed out that they were handing out pamphlets to the kids. And "guest" left some website links that I found Very Disturbing! This link I found very shocking. http://www.massresistance.org/docs/gen/10c/youth_… if this is what you guys are doing- gathering 40 year old perverts around our middle school and high school teens…. God help you….. I was under the impression that the man that raped and molested me when i was 12 was just an isolated sicko. Evidently to these activists that type of thing is ok……Stay away from my kids.

          • Will W. (NJ)

            Great arguments. Judging from some of the other commentary, I fear that there may not be sufficient gray matter amongst most of the opponents to understand them though.

          • Will W. (NJ)

            Just for clarity, my comments about great arguments are to Guest, not the simpleminded bpw.

        • Will W. (NJ)

          Dinosaur!

          • Will W. (NJ)

            This is my comment to bpw

  • Tree

    Pink pistols- not very creative huh…. How bout "the 30rd fags gun club" with maybe a slogan like "blowin our member's members since 2011!"

    • Guest

      Well, at least you didn't attempt to contribute to the discussion and fail.

    • Tree

      No, but you sure did! Bpw has make you look like a fool over and over!
      Bpw, I agree with many of your points however, you should read a little more about the activists and their agenda. I n England they are trying to reduce the legal age of consent to 14 years old! Do you have kids? Here in Boston there is a group called bagly that goes to the middle schools to teach kids about gay anal sex (they act as if it is about teaching kids about safe sex, but look at their pamphlets – especially the one about how to use "the reality condom" anally for the greatest pleasure. These activist are targeting our children in a way that is deeply disturbing and if it were heterosexuals doing the same things, they would be considered pedophiles and be arrested. Now for the real shocker Bpw……. Your tax dollars fund this.

      • Will W. (NJ)

        Get some help, dude (or lady). You're a hysteria-junkie and an anachronistic freak.

    • Will W. (NJ)

      I'm guessing that IQ isn't terribly impressive.

      • Will W. (NJ)

        Ooops. Typo! I left out the "Your" in I'm guessing "Your IQ" isn't terribly impressive. :-)

  • http://www.facebook.com/kingogondo Kingo Gondo

    Gun owners are plainly their own worst enemies. Many of the comments here are beyond embarrassing. You are the wrong side of history, losers–just as your racist antecedents (if not yourselves) were. In another generation almost no one will care for your tripe, as any polling of younger people will tell you. So, we just have to wait for you to die off. In the meantime, the rest of us are trying to put together the broadest pro-gun coalition possible, because brother, we are going to need it.

    • Will W. (NJ)

      Right on, Kingo!! These dumb dinosaurs and cavemen just can't see the cave paintings on the wall! Their time is quickly running out. Bravo for your comments.

  • JT68

    Come on people, read the article thoroughly before you get your panties in a bunch over the gay struggle comparison. When you post your angry comment before reading it really makes u look like a fool.

  • Tat2dRich

    If it's any consolation I still think there were more subscriptions canceled over "Zombie Rights" than "Gay Rights".It's pretty obvious why gay folks had to start their own group, it's because ignorant, intolerant types like the guy's canceling their subscriptions would make sure they would be miserable in them by telling their kids or anyone else who would listen to it that: "Joe Jones is a faggot
    , and is going to hell andwe should get him out of the neighborhood before gives us AIDS or seduces our kids or whatever. Unfortunately hate always trumps common sense and ethics.

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1714190379 Frank Dilatush

    An excellent article found in an unsuspected place, and as a heterosexual ex-Marine gun loving business owning vote every chance I get American, I'm signing up for a subscription to Shotgun News. Good job folks! Freedom is for all of us, and if we ever forget that, we are done.

    • vishnu

      Forgive me as I'm not a Marine, but may I say, OOH-RAH, Semper Fi!

      • Will W. (NJ)

        I second that OOH-RAH!!

  • Realist

    After reading through much of this blog, it is obvious to me that the homosexuals have gathered here to make some sort of statement and try to make us actual subscribers look like a bunch of closed minded redneck morons. When was the last time you fellas were hanging out at the range putting 5 or 600 rounds through your ak and one of your buddies said something you found "repugnant"…… You didn't because we typically don't talk like that. Not that we are uneducated, or don't know what words like repugnant mean, we just don't talk that that. Fellas, these guys think we the subscribers of SGN are stupid enough to be convinced that believing that homosexuality is wrong is somehow immoral. When the fact is that homosexuality is in itself immoral. The homosexuals are lobbying to reduce or eliminate age of consent laws, feeding propaganda to our impressionable young children, and holding events disguised as "for youth" where middle aged homosexuals are allowed to mingle and "provide guidance to" our young children sometimes not yet 10 years old. If this were happening with strait people they would be arrested and have to report there address every time it changed. If you don't believe me search NAMBLA on any search engine. Then maybe BAGLY…. One of these is in California the other in Boston. So it is happening from coast to coast. Some is even tax dollar funded…Why? Because we are doing nothing about it…….

    • Will W. (NJ)

      You clearly are a closed-minded moron because plenty of gay folks are also gun-toting, 2A supporting, citizens. We are just as much everywhere as dinosaurs like you pal. Some people are gay! Get the F over it!! You're not a realist, you're a passing whiff of fetid gas that will blow away soon enough.

  • vishnu

    In my first comment I mentioned one reason why I don't often participate in online forums, and the path of this one illustrates the other: how the topic gets hijacked by people who want to rant about another, marginally-related (or totally unrelated) issue.__The article was clearly not intended to condone, explain, celebrate, or promote homosexuality. It only suggested that we might learn from the efforts and successes of even groups that – as apparently a lot of you do – we might find offensive. We certainly hated Hitler, but that didn't stop our learning from the WWII German rocket program and other things developed by the Nazi war machine.__Some of you stated that you weren't troubled so much by homosexuality as by gays flaunting their sexuality in public. Doesn't this remind you of how hunters and shooters have been told that we shouldn't wear camo, or openly carry a firearm at a public meeting, for fear of upsetting some bleeding-heart liberals in the crowd?__As has been said before, we've got a tough election coming up. Not only do we need to avail ourselves of effective tactics, but the Democrats count on the gay vote as a given. Every gun-owning, 2A-supporting voter of any persuasion is one less vote for Obama.

  • Liam

    All gun laws have been enacted to control a group of people; the Sullivan Act was done to keep immigrants in NYC from owning firearms. Laws in several southern states were instituted to keep blacks from owning guns. I certainly do not think straight gun owners should denounce gay gun owners. All gun owners regardless of their race, creed, national origin, sex, or sexual preference need to understand the forces that want to separate and conquer the gun owning minority. Remember the Assault weapons ban; many gun owners bought into the rhetoric that 'no one needs those guns' or I don't own one I'm a bird hunter or a deer hunter. Well they want your shotguns, your pistols, revolvers and your hunting rifles too. We will either hang as one or certainly will will hang alone…

  • guido

    Good job Shotgun News…finally an open minded approach to gun ownership, the more allies the better!!

  • Don

    The one thing I've learned in the several years I've been a member of a local shooting range, is that people who like guns, are very welcoming of others who enjoy guns. Most of the talk is about guns, but there is a real camraderie. A real sense of belonging. We all can leave life's many petty issues at the door and enjoy our hobby, and others who enjoy our hobby.

    • Will W. (NJ)

      Ditto and well said.

  • guest

    wow, sexual rights, comparison to gun rights?. Which one of the founding fathers mentioned gay rights?
    SGN,s editors need to quit being offensive by bringing these comparisons to the pages of this paper.
    I guess the next liberated gun rights group will be the persecuted polygamists. Wake Up.

    • Will W. (NJ)

      Grow up!

  • Joe Schmoe

    So, if your deviant support group is for gun rights, you're one of us? I don't think so. How about NAMBLA (North American Man-Boy Love Association)? If they support gun rights are they OK? How about polygamists? Can they form a gun group and spread their deviant behavior via Shotgun News? People into Bestiality? Heroin addicts for gun rights? All OK with you? Before you whine about how all of these types of behavior are completely different than homosexuality, remember that homesexuality was considered to be on the same level with all of them in the not too distant past. Illegal too. You've lost your moral compass and probably shouldn't own a gun if you think any of these behaviors are normal and acceptable, including homosexuality. I've had enough of gay culture shoved down my throat and I won't stand for it in my gun media. This country is doomed with so many of you unable to distinguish right from wrong. Step it up and stop pandering to these deviants.

    • Will W. (NJ)

      The deviants are pimple-brained cavemen like you, Joe Schmoe (appropriate!). You are dumb dinosaur and are simply out of place in the 21st Century. Hurry up and die so we can keep this evolution rolling without ya!!

  • BKing

    Great article, period. No person's rights should be played political football with. I support gay folk's right to marry, and I'm a gun owner, and a firearms instructor. We can walk and chew gum in this country. But there's just one error in this article my gay friends would be quick to point out- "assless chaps" is redundant, as all chaps are assless. Lol.

    • Will W. (NJ)

      Here here, BKing!