Listen Up, Gays: They're Coming to Recruit You


Convincing gay bashers they need to be armed and ready to shoot sounds like a great way to reduce violence. Fewer gays means less gay bashing!
It's best to continue to emphasize the way in which guns are unlike anything else that can injure or kill people (guns are designed for that purpose, while cars, gasoline, kitchen knives, alcohol, crowbars, chainsaws, rope, and anything else you can name, are not).
I am more disturbed by them using art and photos geared towards father/son and mother/daughter gun rights as Husband/Husband and Wife/Wife gun rights. There is something very wrong going on there.
Dale Nixon is a pseudonym used by more than a few people, i.e. nobody wants to take responsibility for that cartoon.
Cascadian flag on the second poster.

@4, "I don't get out much," that was your namesake's problem too, no? *poke poke*
These posters are tone deaf to the point of being offensive. I don't appreciate my rights and concerns being exploited to make a ham-fisted point about gun laws.
@2: That's a simple fact that gun nuts can't refute, so they just change the subject or deflect instead. It always bears repeating, if only for that reason

@6: I noticed the flag right away as well. No doubt it was included as a red herring to make the totally reasonable and level-headed Cascadians look foolish by including it on such a laughably ridiculous* poster! False flag! False flag!

*Seriously, take a look at that bandolier belt she's wearing.
Slog commenter Cascadian Bacon?
Everyone forgot the pink pistols already?
@2 How does the intended use change the end result? Yes, a gun is intended to hurt/kill and a pool is inteded to be swam in: But they both hurt a lot of people every year and mostly through operator error.

If my kid dies at your house because you're an irrisponsible idiot, I don't care if it's because they were accidentally shot with your gun, accidentally hit with your car while you were drunk driving or accidentally drowned in your pool. It doesn't change the fact that you're an irresponsible idiot and my kid is dead as a result. You, and not the object, are culpable.
Yeah, it's Cascadian "Five Large" Bacon.

I love these posters. They're like our own local Ted Nugent. Money in the bank for

More posters, Five Large. More. Do one where you explain the "race problem". I love that bit.
@ 11, I'm something of a helicopter parent when it comes to child safety. Your kids will be safer at my house than at yours, even if you didn't own a gun.

That said, keep in mind that murders and suicides committed with guns are the result of "operator success."

My point isn't that we should "do anything about it;" it's simply that guns are unlike any other widely available everyday product that can maim and kill because that's what they are designed to do. Therefore all such comparisons are invalid.

That's all.
@2, 8 I'll partially refute that: The only truly generic statement about guns is that they are designed to launch a small metal projectile at high velocity.

SOME guns are designed primarily to injure people. Some are clearly designed more to kill animals, and others mainly for shooting targets or empty beer cans. Given time, I make find a list a hundred guns that would not appear, by design or marketing, to be "for" use on people.

To give just one example, the best-selling rifle in the US is the Winchester 1894, at over 7 million copies. These were designed and purchased pretty much entirely for shooting deer.
It's not that strange when you remember that the "traditionally conservative movement" in question is not in fact an organic movement but an industry lobby group with a lot of deeply emotionally invested fans/customers. These aren't campaign posters; they're advertising.
Safety Posters!

Seriously - take a look at their trigger fingers. See how they are pointing down the length of the barrel and not inside the trigger guard? That's how you are supposed to do it. If more people did this we would have fewer accidents.

@ 14, I'm aware of that. But because the debate is about handguns and assault rifles, the distinction hardly needs to be made.
I also would just like to put this out there: that false equivalency argument is bad enough, but "We should not base our laws based on personal dislikes" is one of the most pathetically insipid things I've ever read. Whoever's copywriting these things, if you're out there, your verbal skills are bad and you should feel bad.
@17 No, I still dispute that. While most Evil Black Rifles were designed as anti-personnel weapons, there are several > 6 mm cartridges that seem to exist primarily to put better deer-shooting loads in the trendy EBR format, because there's a big market these days that would no sooner buy a wood-stocked rifle than a Buick station wagon. (And fantasies of personal defense or rebellious "freedom" aside, most civilian 5.56 mm EBRs are really bought for recreational purposes or, distant second, varmint shooting, regardless of what they were *designed* for.)

For handguns, while I'll agree that snubbie revolvers, pocket automatics and duty guns (whether Glock or the hoary .45 1911) are basically intended to be suitable for hurting people, there are a fuckload of pistols that are not, due to being too cumbersome and either too feeble or too powerful to be a first choice for that. As examples, I present the Ruger Mk III and the Ruger Super Blackhawk. One is good for little other than shooting targets, or maybe squirrels, and the other would be best for hunting large game or simply gratuitous machismo (mostly the latter). Both sell like the proverbial hotcakes.
This is the dumbest poster I've ever seen. Why in the hell would we need guns to defend the right to marry. That implies we would threaten people who disagree. That's right wing bullshit.
I see that a lot.
Yes, it's obvious, they were innovated primarily to kill or threaten humans.
The point in this self defense context is that sometimes that needs to be done to protect the good, and their freedom.
Equivalencies about other things that can harm people don't matter, because the point of having a gun for defense is to cause a crook to back off or tell them they'll die next. It works just because it is lethal and easily employable. (and see the linked article below)

#1 (arming the gay-bashers digression)

I'll ask how many intolerant bashers do you think have no felony records? If they bash or even threaten to do so even once, they'll be prohibited from owning guns, and the signs and the idea of being armed for defense are about those who do so legally.
Another false equivalency is the old canard that allowing guns to exist and be available for those who want to do so legally and for their own defense is the same thing as wanting them to be lying around, for sale on every street for crooks

See also "why the gun is civilization"…
It is a bit of a strange poster to pop up, and I'm a bit uncomfortable with the implied
pedofelia from the author of the article, seems a bit distracting.

"The guy on the right looks a little youthful, no?"
why not
The guy on the left looks a little old, no?
(seriously its a cartoon, why did you even go there?)

But onto the more relevant topic, I am assuming the poster itself is inspired by the rise in violence toward gay folk in the recent past (

I'm a middle aged gay man, and pretty liberal when it comes down to it, but I'm always (legally) armed, I have had a couple of brushes with anti-gay violence in the past, that fortunately ended without much damage done toward anyone involved. But if it comes down to a choice of me or them, I choose them.

I choose to carry a weapon, I'm not advocating you do, simply that have that legal right to, and I choose to...

I have been carrying for going on 13 years, legally and without incident. The last thing I would ever want to do is use my weapon, the legal and emotional consequences of doing so could be very profound, that is not lost on me, or on most people who have made a responsible decision to be legally armed.

Oh, for crying out loud. The joke is on you. This is akin to the anti-gun ads masquerading as pro-gun ads by encouraging women to arm themselves to protect their reproductive rights. The intent here is to point out to pro-gunners that they are arming everyone, not just those who agree with them.

And try Googling "Dale Nixon". Sheesh.
Pink Pistols don't know who is behind this one either -- but this Pink Pistols member likes it. Our strongly held belief is that "armed gays don't get bashed." If one in ten limp-wristed queers is known to carry a firearm, and be willing to use it in defense of self and loved ones, that creates safety not only for themselves but for the other nine. "Is bashing this f-- worth my life?" becomes the question for the would-be gay basher.
This is nothing more than a statement that depicts " a right is a right, is a right".
( Food for thought).......

If I were assaulted while demonstrating my pro gun rights views would I be afforded equal protection?
If I were assaulted while demonstrating my pro gay rights views would I be afforded equal protection?
What if I were gay and openly carrying a side-arm (legal by the way) and was assaulted?
What if I were a private business owner and refused service to you because you were carrying a firearm?

These communities fought very hard for equal protection in the State of Washington, do you think this collective group of people would concede any of these hard won rights?

A right is a right is a right. This has nothing to with with the political circus we call "The Legislature".
Yes, because not wanting to have holes blown in your body is exactly the same as being unreasonably grossed out by the sight of two men kissing. Makes perfect sense!
I think the second flyer posits a false equivalence to try to lure the liberal-minded into confusing gun rights with civil rights for LGBT folk. The "dislike" of easy access to military styled weapons with no background checks through gun shows and other unregulated markets is not "personal", it's communal. Let's ask the unknown author this question: approximately how many schoolchildren can you murder in under 2 minutes with a semiautomatic, fully loaded, legally married lesbian?
Geez. The image of the two women and their weapons has been around for a long time. I've used it as my facebook profile image, even. Seems The Stranger (or at least this voice in The Stranger) is only limitedly Pro-Choice.
Will The Stranger have conniptions if they learn about the annual T-Girls Range Day coming up soon at a shooting range near Vancouver, WA?
Some of you need to chill. I can't believe there are suggestions that these posters are planted by both diabolical conservatives looking to lure unsuspecting liberals into their clutches AND that they are actually planted by subversive liberals looking to scare idiot conservatives "straight" on the issue of gun control (PUN INTENDED).

Is it really so completely foreign that one could simultaneously favor gay rights and gun rights, that the MOST probable explanation is some kind of twisted subterfuge?

Some people are actually in favor of human freedom regardless of its designated color-coordinated party sponsor.
I personally know a lesbian with military training who could kill a whole room full of schoolchildren with a steak knife in about 2 minutes.

I am amazed at the number of people here who just can't wrap their brains around the idea that gay rights and gun rights derive from the same underlying principle: that each of us owns his or her own life, therefore has the right to live as we chose AND the right to defend ourselves effectively provided we don't harm innocents.
So sad that I didn't think of doing this first.
@13: "That said, keep in mind that murders and suicides committed with guns are the result of "operator success."

Really? So...if suicides use a car and a garden hose, or a rope, or an oven, or a can of gas and a match...are those "operator failures"? If a murderer used a '72 Chrysler, or an axe handle, or maybe screwed-up fugu, is that "operator failure"?

Or is it only the tool's fault if a gun is the tool? Stupid guns. Always floating around, killing people all by themselves...
The Second Amendment, as the rest of the Bill of Rights, is an acknowledgement of our natural born rights, not a granting. The entire Bill of Rights is about keeping the governments in their place. The Second Amendment is about the common person's right to own weapons of war so that we can keep the governments in their place by keeping the 'monopoly on force' in the hands of the people where it belongs, as in 'We the people.' Remember that? It will not be infringed any further and the 'gun laws' in existence will be repealed. End of discussion.
Guns don't kill, governments do. Gun free zones are the problem, they allow armed criminals to kill. Arm the teachers, the administrators and the parents. Don't allow the "Liberal"(commie) trash who control the so-called educational system to teach mindless pacifism that is ensconced in their arrogance of false civility.

If we have violent criminals in prison who have been convicted of a crime and can't be trusted with weapons why is the govt. turning them back out on the street? So they can point at them and say "See, the sheeple can't be trusted with guns." The 'crime' argument is a red herring.

Time to repeal all of the ‘gun laws’ including GCA ‘68 and the NFA; Shut down the evil BATF Nazis and try them for treason, and murder where appropriate and distribute their retirement funds among their victims; Then enforce the Bill of Rights on places such as Commiefornia and New Yawk and Chigawgo and if necessary bring the troops home and have them restore Liberty here and remove Amerika’s natural born traitors in the process.

Millions will dig the ditch they are told to dig then wet their pants when the machine gun bolts slam home and die stupidly wondering “How did this happen to me?” The tiny minority will have to do what will be required.
It’s time to stop arguing over the culture war. It’s time to stop hunkering down for the apocalypse. It’s time to stop waiting to get beamed up. It’s time to start thinking Normandy.
If you sit home waiting your turn you deserve to have your gun taken from your cold dead hands.
The Founders didn’t wait for the Brits to knock down their doors. They gathered at the green and stood up like men and they killed government employees all the way back to Boston.
What will you do when it’s time to hunt NWO hacks, republicrats and commies(“Liberals” and ‘progressives’)?
Don't understand? Go to willowtowndotcom and read the quotes page first. Then read my column "Prepping for Slavery."
I love how the "tolerant" "open-minded" progressive crowd collectively panics when someone takes an issue they appear to agree on (gay rights) and likens it to an issue they do not agree on (gun rights).

If homophobes shouldn't dictate policies affecting gays, hoplophobes (persons afraid of firearms) shouldn't dictate policies affecting guns or their lawful owners.

And I fail to see what is so subversive, shocking, or evil about advocating that a traditionally victimized group be allowed to defend themselves.
"Perhaps being courted by a traditionally right-wing, conservative movement is refreshing and progressive"

They're not conservatives, they're Libertarians you dolt! Libertarians support gun rights AND gay rights.
Yay, gays with guns! Here's an interesting fact for the unaware: one of the four plaintiffs in the D.C. vs Heller case was Tom Palmer, a gay man who had used a handgun to ward off a gang of thugs that threatened to kill him because of his sexuality.

If mere gun ownership was the largest factor in our rates of gun violence (especially mass shootings), then why are mass shootings much more scarce in gun-loving countries like Norway, Finland, Israel and Sweden- some of which even mandate the presence of a fully-automatic firearm in the home?

I would posit that their cultures encourage stronger social and community ties than in America. When someone starts to go off-kilter, people notice and intervene before the situation gets worse. Also, since gun ownership in those countries goes hand-in-hand with military training, the public are familiarized with responsible gun ownership from the outset.

American culture enshrines individualism, and the right to be left alone- along with no real requirement for people to learn proper gun safety. This is nice for personal freedom, but it also allows people with mental or behavioural problems to fly under the radar until it is too late to stop them- hence why most mass shooters are loners or outcasts with mental issues.
Look at the stances of left activists who advocate more women and minorities in politics when a woman, or a minority decides to hold an opposing viewpoint?
Let's see...
Kathleen Harris - Was called Vampira and other such unflattering names for supporting GWB in the 2000 election.
Herman Cain - Referred to as "Uncle Ruckus" by left leaners (a reference to the reverse racist black character in Boondocks)
Condi Rice - Was accused of everything from "being an oreo" (sic) to having an affair with GWB.

So, what this middle-road self-proclaimed anti-partisan takes from this is as follows. The more venomous side of the left is "Pro Women and Minorities, as long as they agree with us." Now we can lump the LGBT community in there. "We support every one of your rights, except the ones we don't like".

For what it's worth, Oleg Volk has been supporting LGBT, minority, and women's rights for firearm ownership for over a decade now. This is not a new "trend" among conservatives. His belief, which I share, is that self-defense is a HUMAN RIGHT, and his photography and literature expresses such. Google him sometime.
All I can say upon viewing these posters is HAHAHAHAHAHA!

Also, like the previous commenter, I'm annoyed I didn't think of this first.
I am a gay gun owner with lean to the conservative mind set. I love these posters.
Oh libertarianism, the only political stance that makes everyone angry because they don't want to enforce any of their personal beliefs on the whole.
Oh libertarianism, the only political stance that makes everyone angry because they don't want to enforce any of their personal beliefs on the whole.
I am a right-winger who has advocated for both the right of self defense and the right to marry whomever you choose for some time. There are a lot of people like me.

Why does this fact cause lefties' heads to explode?
I am a right winger who has advocated for both the right of self defense and the right to marry whomever you choose. There are a lot of people like me, more than you might think.

Why does this fact cause lefties' heads to explode?
Sorry! Accidentally double posted.
I support the right of consenting adults to marry whomever they choose. I also support the right of people to defend their lives with the most effective tools possible, which with today's technology means firearms. Oleg Volk happens to believe the same.
Just like some people stereotype homosexual males as being some lisping, over the top male with limp wrists and wearing floral print shirts, many stereotype gun owners as being right wing, deer huntin', beer swilling, uneducated rednecks. Stereotypes are usually wrong.
Put aside your preconceived notions and try to understand that most shooters are not puppets of the gun industry, but thinking, rational human beings who have taken the time to study the issue and have made our decision.
My decision is to support human rights. ALL of them.
I support the right of consenting adults to marry whomever they choose. I also support the right of people to defend their lives with the most effective tools possible, which with today's technology means firearms. Oleg Volk happens to believe the same.
Just like some people stereotype homosexual males as being some lisping, over the top male with limp wrists and wearing floral print shirts, many stereotype gun owners as being right wing, deer huntin', beer swilling, uneducated rednecks. Stereotypes are usually wrong.
Put aside your preconceived notions and try to understand that most shooters are not puppets of the gun industry, but thinking, rational human beings who have taken the time to study the issue and have made our decision.
My decision is to support human rights. ALL of them.
Yes folks, because you like cheese, you must also like bacon! for lo, they are both foods - foods that people eat.
Gay rights and gun rights absolutely go together. The government shouldn't mess with our right to keep and bear arms, and the government shouldn't mess with the right of consenting adults to marry or otherwise be together.
How amazingly tone deaf and bigoted most of the first comments are! WOW! How shocking to be supporting the right of a gay couple to defend themselves from homophobes! How twisted to support ALL rights, for EVERYONE, not just pick and choose! How unlikely that maybe a person might not want to be a bit different AND not want to be dependent on cops (who might not like them) for their personal protection!
(end dripping sarcasm)
What a totally victim mentality to assume that something that isn't easily pigeon-holed must be an attack motivated by the basest, most twisted caricature of your political enemies, hate'n on you and trying to keep you down.
Would you be as offended if it was pushing kung-fu for self defense from criminals, rather than gun-jitsu?
Geez, folks, get a grip and exercise your Bing-Fu to find out about Oleg.
Wow the butthurt is strong when a dedicated protected minority victim group wants to use the same tools of the open-season dedicated blame-for-all-that's-wrong-in-the-world group (the white male christian gun owner) .

I guess if having a gun became a "gay thing to do", would the GLBTQ community be "ousted" from the so-called left?

All that's left to happen now is for there to be a "gay gene" discovery and yuppie parents aborting babies for having it, and the alliance between abortionism and the GLBTQ community will collapse.

Liberty: you can't cherry pick it, and you look like a royal asshat when you try.
[a traditionally right-wing, conservative movement]

Wow, just wow on some of these comments. You guys might try having an open mind; it's good for you!

So, were the Jews in the Warsaw ghetto, who took on the whole German army for a month, "conservative"?

Actually a lot of these knee-jerk comments have a truly conservative flavor to them.

There is indeed a connection between gay rights and the right to bear arms. Gun owners have (very successfully) taken a page from the gay playbook. We've come out of the closet and gotten in peoples' faces with gun ownership. No more shame guys. That's behind the open carry movement for example.

Gay rights and the right to bear arms are both about liberty, plain as day. Try not to be offended about people living as they want to live!
@everyone: you guys can probably get back on the bus and go home now. I'm still here but I think your real target audience wandered off a while back. I'm just sticking around hoping someone will say 'sheeple' again.
Unless there's a news channel I've completely missed, no one in contemporary American politics is even considering revoking gun ownership rights. Regulating what guns are available, universalizing background checks, and creating a national registry of gun owners- that is what is on the table. Considering that the only thing about the DMV (which houses essentially the exact same information and imposes essentially the exact same restrictions on cars and driver's licenses as what's being proposed for guns and gun ownership) that people bitch about is the customer service, I don't understand what all the Orwellian hysteria is about. And inviting gay people into the paranoia doesn't strike me as progressive.
#41 That would be the Horrible Libertarian Conspiracy Plot -- They want to take over the world, and leave you the Hell alone.
Perhaps instead of stressing the point that you should be armed to the teeth at all times, perhaps the point is that you persecute the person committing the crime, not the tool used int hat crime and others that might use it responsibly?
We Libertarians actually do believe; that ALL persons, gay or straight, should have ALL of their rights ALL of the time. Unlike ideologues who want only the rights that pertain to them, nor just when it becomes convenient for someone else, the propaganda of the day or some other people's versions of their utopia's written in books.
Ms. Madrid, like most Progressives/Liberals, seems to think that gays are so weak, dependent, and swishy that they wouldn't dream of owning anything as brutish and impolite as a gun.

Gay ownership of guns predates the gay rights movement by at least 500 years. Live with it.

Jack Blair
Hoboken, NJ
You all do realize these posters are by a leftist group, right? Calling gun ownership a "traditionally conservative" agenda is false. Pretty sure the Black Panthers weren't conservative, nor are anarchists. The NRA and their ilk used to be pro gun control because they were afraid of black people having guns. I'm about as far as you can get from being conservative and I believe that gun control is wrong.
I don't know how to say this politely, but the hallways of The Stranger are among the last places I would expect to see criticism leveled at May-December relationships. Mmmkay?
You gotta love all the venom and paranoia about this from the "tolerance" set. Either you dig freedom or you don't. Funny that those who scream the loudest about tolerance are the same ones who'd be most likely to run around town ripping these posters down.
Provenance or link to support your statement?
I have seen repeatedly that the NRA was formed to expand upon and improve the martial abilities of *all* Americans for the betterment of the civilian defense. I also have seen that the NRA was instrumental in fighting the KKK at many points in history.…
@59 - The NRA was never really pro gun-control, just before the 70's re-org much, much more willing to accept being screwed over and even facilitate said screwing over as long as it meant lube was used.
@63--No, you don't have to dig very far to find the "Nigras shouldn't have guns" lobbying by the NRA and Ronald Reagan.
I'm a big supporter of gay rights, even though I'm heterosexual. I am also a big supporter of gun rights. I don't want to take away any of the rights of gays (the right to marry, the right to equal treatment, etc.), but I am tired of gays who seem to want to take away my gun rights (the right to self defense; the right not to be treated like I'm in a dictatorship aimed only at gun owners, etc.).
Uhm, I'm gay and a supporter of gun rights but also a strong supporter of gun control. I personally feel that its important to do the proper background checks and anyone wanting to buy a gun should have to have a mental health evaluation. On the other hand as a gay man and a supporter of Bash Back, I feel like this is an EXTREMELY good point. I currently live in Eastern Washington where this sort of thing is more of an issue but I lived in Seattle for 7 years and I have more than a few harrowing stories where my life was in danger because I was gay and I really wish I had had a firearm to protect myself. Especially when you consider that the republicans have been wanting gay concentration camps since at least the '80s, and that gay and lesbians still have their lives threatened even in Seattle on a regular basis, this is something we all need to seriously consider. I don't know if this specific group is on the up and up but I've talked for years about starting a gun association specifically for the LGBT community.