Brady Campaigners are excited

imported post

i thought the dailey show discussion on OC went well for the movement.

in fact, i didnt know much about the OC movement untell i watched that show. so if you want to know if the Dailey show helped or hurt the cause... well i joined thanks to the Dailey show. (i joinedright after watching the show)

-matt

imported post

Now their are getting all riled up about something in Cali on the 20th

http://www.bradynetwork.org/site/MessageViewer?em_id=40481.0


Yay, Also they are done with us and starbucks here fora few

Boo, they are off to Colorado with their "DEMANDS".

http://www.bradynetwork.org/site/MessageViewer?em_id=40581.0

imported post

amzbrady wrote:

WTF

John Piercedid an awesome job, although I feel there was not a need to compare Open Carry to a gay lifestyle, one has nothing to do with another, seems like a second agenda there. Why did they use the gay pride rainbows to mark the states showing Open Carry?And did I miss something? Thereare only 12 states that allow open carry, and we're not one of them?I think this would have been better with Jon Stewart, I do understand them using race for a camparison on discrimination,but what we do is a choice, not something we're born with. Leave it to the Daily Show. (do we really all have about the same body type?)

Click to expand...

The Daily Show is meant to be humorous. Also, it's the perfect analogy. You have a lot of LGBT folk out there who are living in areas which are very anti-gun (DC, SF) or living in a place like Portland or Seattle. Some of those people who happen to be that way also open carry, like myself.

imported post

3/325 wrote:

I have to admit that tying OC to OG (openly gay) was a bit of brilliance considering it was delivered to a mostly liberal audience. Of course, anti-gunners will counter with the idea that "gay" didn't kill four officers in a coffee shop but if we compare the body count of STDs vs. Firearms, I'd be willing to bet that criminal pistol use is only a little more lethal than irresponsible (i.e., promiscuous, unprotected) sex.

Click to expand...

That's not a response you'll want to make in an argument against the anti-gunners, as it makes you out to be someone who thinks of all gays and lesbians to be disease ridden and makes you look like a bigot. Perhaps on a local scale sexually transmitted infections may be a little more "prevalent" among gay men in urban locales (that certainly is not the case for lesbians), in suburban and rural areas and especially on a worldwide scale, HIV is a very much primarily a disease spread by heterosexuals. There's a reason why if you've even stepped foot in Africa for any longer than an airport layover you get a large amount of scrutiny if you ever try to donate blood.

imported post

Gray Peterson wrote:

3/325 wrote:

I have to admit that tying OC to OG (openly gay) was a bit of brilliance considering it was delivered to a mostly liberal audience. Of course, anti-gunners will counter with the idea that "gay" didn't kill four officers in a coffee shop but if we compare the body count of STDs vs. Firearms, I'd be willing to bet that criminal pistol use is only a little more lethal than irresponsible (i.e., promiscuous, unprotected) sex.

Click to expand...

That's not a response you'll want to make in an argument against the anti-gunners, as it makes you out to be someone who thinks of all gays and lesbians to be disease ridden and makes you look like a bigot.  Perhaps on a local scale sexually transmitted infections may be a little more "prevalent" among gay men in urban locales (that certainly is not the case for lesbians), in suburban and rural areas and especially on a worldwide scale, HIV is a very much primarily a disease spread by heterosexuals.   There's a reason why if you've even stepped foot in Africa for any longer than an airport layover you get a large amount of scrutiny if you ever try to donate blood.

Click to expand...

+1



Anyway, I think John Piece knew exactly what he was doing when he brought up the "in the closet" analogy.

He knew it would be played for chuckles, but that some folks are going to see that there's actually a lot more truth there than in anything Helmke said. The first step is laughing, the second step is tolerance, and the final step is acceptance.

Also, I think it benefits us that Helmke was asked if open carriers are "an abomination", and after an incredibly awkward pause he declares that there is simply no way we are "normal human beings".

Like I said in another thread, if that's not ignorance and hate, I don't know what is.

It's one thing to disagree over a matter of debate. It's another to simply decide those you cannot agree with are inferior human beings. Helmke's views are little different than "I don't understand those gays and their sexual proclivities, they must be NOT NORMAL!"

This will play nicely into what Pierce said, I suspect.

For the record, I personally do not consider Paul Helmke to be "not a normal human being". He is a normal human being, who happens to have neurotic paranoias and be wrong about a great many issues. But plenty of "normal" people are paranoid and incorrect on certain issues.