Religious exemption from having photo on gun license? Really?

If they are at a gay nightclub, they aren't in the closet.

 

Simple: you assume gays are neither strong nor willing nor able to protect themselves.
Any and every negative stereotype - like this one - with regard to gays is homophobic.
Just ask them.

 

I always ignore "gun free zone" signs. Illegal? Hey, I have to be alive to be sued or prosecuted. I also know how to carry a firearm so that even someone with a trained eye wouldn't be able to tell I have it. If they had metal detectors outside such a business it would be different, but without those carrying a defensive firearm everywhere you go is essentially effortless.

 

That's what I thought, but I would assume that not everyone is as brazen as you are and I would assume that it was indeed the case that nobody was carrying in the Pulse Nightclub that night. I would assume that nightclubs are a risky place to carry given the security presence. Speaking of security, do we know if the pulse nightclub security were armed?

 

You think I said all gays?

 

That's what I'm saying, I don't think there would have been many big macho ones.

 

Why would you think this?

 

I wouldn't call myself "brazen"; just fully cognizant of what I'm doing. Most law enforcement and former law enforcement choose to be armed at all times; there are exceptions, but they are in the extreme minority. And it's easier to carry a firearm concealed sufficiently to be essentially invisible than most people think.

Admittedly, I'm not a big nightclub guy, and I don't go to bars for the most part (unless the food is good; there's a bar and grill near my home that makes astonishingly good steaks); if I choose to do any consumption of alcohol it's at home and after the firearms have been locked away. The last time I went to a nightclub it was to pick up a friend who'd had too much to drink and didn't want to try driving herself home.

There was armed security there, and they did engage the shooter, but not effectively. From what I understand, they fell back once he had gotten in among the patrons as they feared hitting an innocent bystander. As I wasn't there, I won't second guess that decision; though for myself I've actually undergone training in what some call "hostage rescue" scenario training, which includes evaluating the situation to decide whether taking a shot into a crowd of innocents might be the better option than doing nothing when it is likely that inaction would cost more innocent lives.

 

I also tend to ignore "no carry" signs. Mostly in movie theatres, where I take my family. My understanding is that it is private property, and if discovered carrying, all the property owner can do is ask you to leave. You can't be charged with anything, unless you refuse to leave. then you can be charged with trespassing.

 

One of the best pistol shots I've ever met is a dramatically "not macho" gay man. He grew up in a small town in the South and faced the threat of severe gay bashing on more than one occasion... until he went off to college and started carrying a defensive firearm with him wherever he went.

Actually, I still laugh when I think about his story of walking into the local shooting range in his home town when he went back after college. Several of the beer-swilling rednecks who had tormented him as a kid saw him come in, and they started making crass and mocking comments among themselves. He walked up to the line, set a target up at 10 yards and pulled out his carry pistol and ran a series of lightning-fast holster presentation drills with double taps, shooting a fist-sized group in the chest of the target. He then slowed down and shot for precision, shooting two dime-sized groups; one in the head, and one at crotch level. He reloaded, holstered his pistol, and turned to see his tormentors standing silent, a couple of them flatly open-mouthed.

"Bash this queer, b*tches!" he said firmly, and walked out.

No one troubled him after that.

 

My philosophy exactly.

 

Irrelevant to my statement.
You assume gays are neither strong nor willing nor able to protect themselves.
Any and every negative stereotype - like this one - with regard to gays is homophobic.
Just ask them.

 

this is called a strawman

 

No it isn't. How is it irrelevant that I didn't say "all gays" but you're saying that I'm saying "all gays?"

When did I say that?

 

So there was armed security that wasn't able to do anything, but yet you're saying that the unarmed patrons should have taken out the gunman? Don't you see how ridiculous that is?

 

Because of what I've previously said. I would think that they're more likely to be closeted.

 

Why do you presume that once the armed security left the premises leaving the shooter alone with the 300 patrons that none of them could have had a better opportunity to end the shooting? Until the last shot was fired there was a better chance than no chance.

 

They were in a public gay club. Closeted gays don't do that.

 

Is a gun free zone basically any building? Basically anything other than the streets?

 

I don't think you understand what I'm saying. I'm saying that I don't think 'macho' guys would go to a gay nightclub.

 

I don't assume, I just think that it wouldn't have been very likely for someone to have taken him on with their bare hands.

 

Like these guys?

https://www.advocate.com/sites/advocate.com/files/2014/1898841_746410798704379_589947137_o_0.jpg

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_Bingham

You really know nothing about the diversity of the gay lifestyle.

 

Oh, that's likely true. Gun free zones are full of easy targets, straight and gay.

 

Sure, but if you took a sample of 100 straight guys and 100 gay guys, which group do you suppose would have the most amount of killing machines?

 

In addressing such a question, it must be noted that the homosexual community has a significantly higher concentration of HIV and/or AIDS than any other category of individuals. According to the CDC, fifty five percent of the total homosexual community has been diagnosed as being infected with HIV and/or AIDS. Since the disease is incurable, and destroys the immune system of those infected with it, it too is qualified as a killing machine.