Results 1 to 25 of 25

Thread: Helping at risk communities

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Utah
    Posts
    9

    Helping at risk communities

    Due to hate crime attacks against the LGBT community, I have been motivated to provide discounted Utah CFP Classes at the Utah Pride Center. The classes are held at a safe and familiar venue for the community. Since announcing these classes in the media, there have not been any further reports of hate crimes that I am aware of. Not saying these classes have anything to do with that, but it’s a nice thought!

    The amount of support from fellow instructors has been fantastic! One of the additional classes a fellow instructor will be bringing in will be the Refuse to be a Victim class. Are there any other suggestions for classes that we can bring to at risk communities to help show our support?

    The next Concealed Carry class at the Pride Center will be January 21st from 9 am - 1pm. The class is $40.00 per student. The class is open to anyone interested learning about the Utah laws, gun safety, concealment & non-lethal self defense tactics. Please sign up at scott@utahccwtraining.com to reserve your seat in the class.

  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Granite State of Mind
    Posts
    4,508
    I'm not a member of that community, but I salute your offer.

  3. #3
    Regular Member sraacke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Saint Gabriel, Louisiana, USA
    Posts
    1,222
    Good for you. In case you didn't know, there is a GLBT gun rights group called Pink Pistols which has a chapter in Utah. Check them out... http://www.pinkpistols.org/ .
    President/ Founding Member
    Louisiana Open Carry Awareness League
    www.laopencarry.org

  4. #4
    Regular Member okiebryan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Director, Oklahoma Open Carry Association
    Posts
    449
    This thread is more evidence against the stereotype that everyone in the RKBA community are hateful, right-wing bigots. Thanks for doing what you are doing.

  5. #5
    Regular Member Dreamer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Grennsboro NC
    Posts
    5,358
    I am not a "member" of the GLBT community, but I heartily salute your efforts to reach out to them with CC training. You should also contact the folks at "Pink Pistols"--a GLBT Gun Rights website.

    Self defense is a human right, and EVERY human being should have access to quality training. Hate crimes are an especially wicked form of personal attack, and training people in the GLBT community to defend themselves AND promoting 2A Rights with their community is a GREAT tactic to expand the ranks of folks who support RKBA. Many GLBT folk have unfortunately been made all-too-familiar with the SERIOUS need for instantly available self defense. Kudos to you for helping them take personal responsibility for their personal safety!
    It is our cause to dispel the foggy thinking which avoids hard decisions in the delusion that a world of conflict will somehow mysteriously resolve itself into a world of harmony, if we just don't rock the boat or irritate the forces of aggression—and this is hogwash."
    --Barry Goldwater, 1964

  6. #6
    Regular Member sraacke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Saint Gabriel, Louisiana, USA
    Posts
    1,222
    Quote Originally Posted by Dreamer View Post
    I am not a "member" of the GLBT community, but I heartily salute your efforts to reach out to them with CC training. You should also contact the folks at "Pink Pistols"--a GLBT Gun Rights website.

    Self defense is a human right, and EVERY human being should have access to quality training. Hate crimes are an especially wicked form of personal attack, and training people in the GLBT community to defend themselves AND promoting 2A Rights with their community is a GREAT tactic to expand the ranks of folks who support RKBA. Many GLBT folk have unfortunately been made all-too-familiar with the SERIOUS need for instantly available self defense. Kudos to you for helping them take personal responsibility for their personal safety!
    Dreamer,
    See the third post in this thread.

  7. #7
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Utah
    Posts
    9
    Thank you for the support! As an instructor and as a veteran, I think its important for us to pass the skills we have learned to those who need it most. My wife and I started Utah CCW Training to pass on our joy of shooting as well as the 2nd Amend rights. After reading the news reports of the attacks on people in the LGBT community in Salt Lake City, I couldn't sit by and do nothing about it. It would be great to see fellow instructors continue this in other states as well. Its easy for people to stereotype us for the gun nuts we are, but I take it as a compliment.

  8. #8
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Utah
    Posts
    9
    I forgot to post the most recent article about the training classes:

    http://www.slugmag.com/article.php?id=3191&page=1

  9. #9
    Regular Member SFCRetired's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Montgomery, Alabama, USA
    Posts
    1,769
    Outstanding!!

    I am not a member of that particular community, but have known quite a few. Almost all of them were just like the members of this forum in that they wanted to be left alone to pursue "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness." Some of them, for what it is worth, were some of the finest soldiers I ever had the privilege of serving with.

    Was told many years ago, don't remember by whom, that those who are angered the most by, and who threaten most frequently, the LGBT community members are the ones most unsure of their own sexual identity and who have, in fact, the strongest latency issues.

  10. #10
    Campaign Veteran
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    El Paso, TX
    Posts
    1,877
    You were told wrong.

  11. #11
    Regular Member SFCRetired's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Montgomery, Alabama, USA
    Posts
    1,769
    Quote Originally Posted by cloudcroft View Post
    You were told wrong.
    Not from what I'm reading on several psychology sites. But, I really don't know as I'm not a psychiatrist, psychologist, nor do I feel threatened by the LGBT community.

  12. #12
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Utah
    Posts
    9
    Quote Originally Posted by SFCRetired View Post
    Outstanding!!

    I am not a member of that particular community, but have known quite a few. Almost all of them were just like the members of this forum in that they wanted to be left alone to pursue "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness." Some of them, for what it is worth, were some of the finest soldiers I ever had the privilege of serving with.

    Was told many years ago, don't remember by whom, that those who are angered the most by, and who threaten most frequently, the LGBT community members are the ones most unsure of their own sexual identity and who have, in fact, the strongest latency issues.


    SFC, Thank you for your service! You have some very good points here and I have heard the same as well.

  13. #13
    Regular Member okboomer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Oklahoma, USA
    Posts
    1,164
    And some of us just don't understand why some folks treat other folks differently just because of their preferance, skin color, religion, etc. I try to base my response to folks on what I OBSERVE of their behavior. If someone wants to "act the fool" I am perfectly happy to let them do that as the entertainment factor for me has grown over the years
    cheers - okboomer
    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
    Lead, follow, or get out of the way

    Exercising my 2A Rights does NOT make me a CRIMINAL! Infringing on the exercise of those rights makes YOU one!

  14. #14
    Regular Member Gil223's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Weber County Utah
    Posts
    1,428
    Quote Originally Posted by SFCRetired View Post
    Not from what I'm reading on several psychology sites. But, I really don't know as I'm not a psychiatrist, psychologist, nor do I feel threatened by the LGBT community.
    Training specifically designed for the LGBT community, along with "hate crimes", implies that the members of that community are "different" from the mainstream population... which doesn't strike me as quite PC. The crime should be in the act itself, as it is for all others protected by our Constitution, not the thought behind it.

    As for the position of practitioners of psychiatry: "The DSM 4th Edition (DSM-IV) was published in 1994, followed in 2000 by the DSM IV, Text Revision, or DSM-IV-TR. These editions include "transvestic fetishism" and "gender identity disorder" (GID) as disorders." The previous full edition, DSM-III, published in 1974 had completely removed homosexuality in all its variations as a "mental disorder". Now, since nobody else has asked, and I was faulted for something similar, is this a thread on OC... or CC for the LGBT community? (And I don't find it necessary to precede my post with a disclaimer of membership in the LGBT... although I'm not.)
    Last edited by Gil223; 01-09-2012 at 02:27 PM.

  15. #15
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Granite State of Mind
    Posts
    4,508
    Quote Originally Posted by Gil223 View Post
    Training specifically designed for the LGBT community, along with "hate crimes", implies that the members of that community are "different" from the mainstream population... which doesn't strike me as quite PC.
    Any effective training is tailored to the audience, and it must take into account more than just physical limitations. Attitudes, prejudices, and political affiliations can vary from one self-identified group to another, and effective communication shouldn't stomp on anyone's toes.

  16. #16
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    America
    Posts
    2,226
    I'm calling BS on the homosexual community being "targeted" any more than the rest of the populace. Unless a good citation can be provided I'll take it as a sign that I'm correct.
    Don't believe any facts that I say! This is the internet and it is filled with lies and untruth. I invite you to look up for yourself the basic facts that my arguments might be based upon. This way we can have a discussion where logic and hints on where to find information are what is brought to the forum and people look up and verify facts for themselves.

  17. #17
    Regular Member Dreamer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Grennsboro NC
    Posts
    5,358
    Quote Originally Posted by Daylen View Post
    I'm calling BS on the homosexual community being "targeted" any more than the rest of the populace. Unless a good citation can be provided I'll take it as a sign that I'm correct.

    I doubt that you have actually done any real research into this topic or you would not make such an easily disprovable statement. It took me less than 15 minutes of rudimentary Goggle-Fu to completely shoot down your biased opinion with stats from our own government...

    Although the FBI's UCR from 2010 states that in the "hate crime" category, race and religion are the more frequent motivator for hate crimes:
    • 48.2 percent were victims of an offender’s bias against a race.
    • 18.9 percent were victims of an offender’s bias against a religion.
    • 18.6 percent were victims of an offender’s bias against a particular sexual orientation.
    • 13.7 percent were victims of an offender’s bias against an ethnicity/national origin.
    • 0.6 percent were victims of an offender’s bias against a disability.
    http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr...e-2010-victims

    "minority races" make up nearly 40% of the US population, whereas LGBT people are only about 7% on average of the US population.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demogra..._United_States
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demogra...al_orientation

    So if nearly HALF the hate crimes are race-biased (which would include Whites, NOT just "minorities"), but nearly 20% were sexual orientation biased, this means that a MUCH higher percentage of LGBT people are being targeted, on average for hate crimes than any other "target group".

    The statistics pretty much bear this out, and you are incorrect in your assumptions.

    I humbly submit that you need to re-calibrate the "truthyness" of your own personal biases and prejudices, now that you actually have the REAL statistics from a "good citation"...

    Have a nice day...
    Last edited by Dreamer; 01-09-2012 at 09:58 PM.
    It is our cause to dispel the foggy thinking which avoids hard decisions in the delusion that a world of conflict will somehow mysteriously resolve itself into a world of harmony, if we just don't rock the boat or irritate the forces of aggression—and this is hogwash."
    --Barry Goldwater, 1964

  18. #18
    Regular Member Dreamer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Grennsboro NC
    Posts
    5,358
    Quote Originally Posted by Gil223 View Post
    Training specifically designed for the LGBT community, along with "hate crimes", implies that the members of that community are "different" from the mainstream population... which doesn't strike me as quite PC.
    They ARE different, at least with regards to the statistical probability that they will be the victim of a random crime of violence perpetrated by a stranger, compared to the general population. The FBI's UCR pretty much bears this out.

    Due to the fact that LGBT folk are statistically more probable to be violently attacked than the general population, their self-defense training SHOULD be different, because their threat level is statistically MUCH higher. Tailoring a course for the LGBT community is the RESPONSIBLE and sensible thing to do, and any competent instructor would do the research to determine their needs before assembling such a course.

    Of course, armchair bigots aren't constrained by things like facts, the needs of paying clients, or their reputation among the community at large like State-certified CC instructors are...
    Last edited by Dreamer; 01-09-2012 at 09:56 PM.
    It is our cause to dispel the foggy thinking which avoids hard decisions in the delusion that a world of conflict will somehow mysteriously resolve itself into a world of harmony, if we just don't rock the boat or irritate the forces of aggression—and this is hogwash."
    --Barry Goldwater, 1964

  19. #19
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Utah
    Posts
    9
    Dreamer, you've shown a very true statement. The FBI stats do break it down by race, religion and orientation. Most of the hate crimes are not reported or proven and become classified as another crime. From my experince, I cater to the students at the Pride Center more by teaching how to control emotion, anger management, conflict threats/conflict avoidance and I spend more time on non-lethal force and how to apply non-lethal tools in these classes more so than any other class. How many other instructors do you know that recommend small air horn's or multi-stage flashlights to their students to carry instead of their CW when they are out for a night on the town? The issues the LGBT community faces is different from I personally would see day in and day out. I'm not sure who has learned more from the CWP classes I've taught at the center, me or the students.

  20. #20
    Regular Member OC for ME's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    White Oak Plantation
    Posts
    12,269
    Really rough and unscientific ciphering for hate crimes by demographic.

    Based on the 2010 Census, FBI data, and numbers from Gallup:

    http://www.gallup.com/poll/6961/what...ation-gay.aspx

    http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr...e-2010-victims (Table 1)

    Victim’s demographic:

    Sexual orientation: (5.5% population, averaging the 3 to 8 percent used by Gallup)
    male homosexual: 8,347,973
    female homosexual: 8,633,032

    anti-male: 57.3% of 1528 = 875
    or 0.01049% of the estimated male population.

    anti-homosexual (total homosexual population): 27.5% of 1528 = 420
    or 0.00248% of the estimated total homosexual population.

    anti-female: 11.8% of 1528 = 180
    or 0.00209% of the estimated female population.

    sum of the above: 96.6% of 1528 = 1,476
    or 0.00063% of the estimated total US population over 16.

    Race:
    white - 223,553,265: 17.7% of 3,949 = 699
    or 0.000313% of the estimated white population.

    black - 38,929,319: 70.0% of 3,949 = 2764
    or 0.007101% of the estimated black population.

    Asian- 15,214,265: 5.1% of 3,949 = 201
    or 0.00132% of the estimated Asian population.

    Religion:
    christian - 240,821,520: 7.2% of 1,552 = 112
    or 0.00004% of the estimated christian population.

    Jews- 5,275,000: 67.0% of 1,552 = 1,040
    or 0.00034% of the estimated Jewish population.

    Muslim- 4,000,000 (averaging several estimates): 12.7% of 1,552 = 197
    or 0.00006% of the estimated Muslim population.

    So....a black, male, Jewish, homosexual, 2A supporter....
    "I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it." - Thomas Jefferson.

    "Better that ten guilty persons escape, than that one innocent suffer" - English jurist William Blackstone.
    It is AFAIK original to me. Compromise is failure on the installment plan, particularly when dealing with so intractable an opponent as ignorance. - Nightmare

  21. #21
    Regular Member Gil223's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Weber County Utah
    Posts
    1,428
    Quote Originally Posted by KBCraig View Post
    Any effective training is tailored to the audience, and it must take into account more than just physical limitations. Attitudes, prejudices, and political affiliations can vary from one self-identified group to another, and effective communication shouldn't stomp on anyone's toes.
    I spent 15 years in the training 'business', the last two were as Superintendent of Training for the entire USANG, which, at that time encompassed 82,000 enlisted personnel, and approximately 13,000 officers. So, I do have some familiarity with the principles and techniques of instruction. The only real variable in any successful course of instruction is the manner in which the core material is presented. In training for the lawful use of firearms the laws governing such use are codified by each state. There is no 'wiggle room' in the law. Utah no longer requires 'practical qualification' with a handgun for their CFP; it is strictly a knowledge-based, 'will issue' state. It addresses only the question, "Have you been familiarized with the laws governing the lawful carrying and bringing to bear of a handgun, and the use of deadly force?" Utah law doesn't care what your race, religion or sexual orientation may be. The law doesn't care if you carry a camo'd .50cal Desert Eagle, or a pink .22 Raven... or if you can consistently hit what you're shooting at!

    My point was simply that the members of the LGBT community are governed by the same laws when it comes to the application of deadly force. It has not been made clear to me that since the LGBTs are governed by the same CFP laws, why does there have to be a 'special course' designed specifically for them? They have two ears, two eyes, and one brain for absorbing the instruction, which is identical to the majority of the general population. Since there is no 'qualification training' required, the only reasons I can see for a special course of instruction, would be to accommodate those who are less than comfortable with their sexual orientation, and are still 'in the closet'... and a slightly different avenue for generating a surge in positive cash flow for the instructor(s).

    I'm sure somebody will be yelling "bigot" or "homophobe" over my position, but I am neither. My position is based upon (my) logic. I am sympathetic to the fact that the LGBT community is subject to crimes motivated by 'hatred' (a subjective term), but I don't see the perpetrator's motivation as a crime in and of itself. The crime is when they take physical action against the victim. My 'logical' assumption is that we are all protected under the law from the crimes of murder, assault, rape, arson, etc. However, we have no Constitutional protections from being offended or upset by the actions of others, simply because what offends or upsets a specific person is beyond codification. SOMEBODY, SOMEWHERE. will be offended by the word "HELLO"! If you want to be accepted into the 'mainstream of society', with all the benefits thereof, you cannot do so by requesting and enjoying special accommodations above and beyond those provided to all citizens in the Constitution.
    Last edited by Gil223; 01-10-2012 at 02:12 PM.

  22. #22
    Regular Member Gil223's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Weber County Utah
    Posts
    1,428

    Is The Glass Half Empty or Half Full? It's All A Matter of PERSPECTIVE...

    Quote Originally Posted by Dreamer View Post
    I doubt that you have actually done any real research into this topic or you would not make such an easily disprovable statement. It took me less than 15 minutes of rudimentary Goggle-Fu to completely shoot down your biased opinion with stats from our own government...

    Although the FBI's UCR from 2010 states that in the "hate crime" category, race and religion are the more frequent motivator for hate crimes:
    http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr...e-2010-victims

    "minority races" make up nearly 40% of the US population, whereas LGBT people are only about 7% on average of the US population.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demogra..._United_States
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demogra...al_orientation

    So if nearly HALF the hate crimes are race-biased (which would include Whites, NOT just "minorities"), but nearly 20% were sexual orientation biased, this means that a MUCH higher percentage of LGBT people are being targeted, on average for hate crimes than any other "target group".

    The statistics pretty much bear this out, and you are incorrect in your assumptions.

    I humbly submit that you need to re-calibrate the "truthyness" of your own personal biases and prejudices, now that you actually have the REAL statistics from a "good citation"...

    Have a nice day...
    Kudos to you, Dreamer, for researching the statistics! Another way of looking at those lovely FBI (government) stats:
    · 51.8 percent were NOT victims of an offender’s bias against a race.
    · 81.1 percent were NOT victims of an offender’s bias against a religion.
    · 81.4 percent were NOT victims of an offender’s bias against a particular sexual orientation.
    · 86.3 percent were NOT victims of an offender’s bias against an ethnicity/national origin.
    · 99.4 percent were NOT victims of an offender’s bias against a disability.
    So, the mean average of crimes that are NOT based upon an offender’s bias is an even 80 percent, and the median average is just slightly higher at 81.4%.

    Please don't anybody take this personally (unless there's a reason to do so), but there's an old saying that goes, "Figures can lie, and liars can figure". Governments, among others (scientists, medical researchers, etc.), world-wide seem to share a policy of presenting statistics only in a light that is favorable to their position - in relation to what they want those governed to believe. Our government is not above distorting or manufacturing statistics to suit their purpose, or ignoring statistics that are counter to their position. This they have proven many times since 1776 (i.e. - unemployment statistics reflect only those who are presently drawing unemployment compensation, not those who are physically and mentally capable of working, yet have exhausted their unemployment benefits, and continue the job search. Neither do those statistics reflect those who have given up the job search in despair, nor do they include the 636,017 'homeless' (NAEH stat for 2011) living on our streets.

    Statistics tend to work in favor of the organization compiling them. It's been said before, and I will say it again... "I love my country, but I don't trust my government." (Google "Operation Gunwalker") Pax!

    MOLON LABE

  23. #23
    Regular Member OC for ME's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    White Oak Plantation
    Posts
    12,269
    Facts are stubborn things, but statistics are more pliable. - Mark Twain
    The 'data' I provided above may lead to the conclusion that the problem is not really a problem at all, except to the victim of course. Give your customers a price break, a more flexible schedule, whatever. As long as the training is in accordance with the law and they can get their 'permit'. Individual student characteristics are completely irrelevant, to some folks anyway.
    "I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it." - Thomas Jefferson.

    "Better that ten guilty persons escape, than that one innocent suffer" - English jurist William Blackstone.
    It is AFAIK original to me. Compromise is failure on the installment plan, particularly when dealing with so intractable an opponent as ignorance. - Nightmare

  24. #24
    Campaign Veteran since9's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Colorado Springs, Colorado, USA
    Posts
    6,787
    Quote Originally Posted by Utah CCW Training View Post
    Not saying these classes have anything to do with that, but it’s a nice thought!
    I've made it a point to OC at locations which have been robbed at gunpoint. The employees are understandably a bit on edge for the first minute of our conversation, then they warm right up to the idea honest, law-abiding citizens carry firearms, and for a good cause, rather than to harm them. They inherently understand the deterrent/counter effect of OC.

    A small percentage of store owners have been knuckleheads, saying "We don't allow firearms in this store." I'm itching to ask them, "How well did that rule work for you a couple of days ago?" but I usually just shut my mouth except for a "No worries. I'll take my business elsewhere."
    The First protects the Second, and the Second protects the First. Together, they protect the rest of our Bill of Rights and our United States Constitution, and help We the People protect ourselves in the spirit of our Declaration of Independence.

  25. #25
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Utah
    Posts
    9
    Quote Originally Posted by since9 View Post
    I've made it a point to OC at locations which have been robbed at gunpoint. The employees are understandably a bit on edge for the first minute of our conversation, then they warm right up to the idea honest, law-abiding citizens carry firearms, and for a good cause, rather than to harm them. They inherently understand the deterrent/counter effect of OC.

    A small percentage of store owners have been knuckleheads, saying "We don't allow firearms in this store." I'm itching to ask them, "How well did that rule work for you a couple of days ago?" but I usually just shut my mouth except for a "No worries. I'll take my business elsewhere."

    If its not posted in the store front, how are you supposed to know? I'll alway perfer OC any day of the week! The biggest issue is the knuckleheads that call the police because "there is a man with a gun in the store" or being asked to leave due to an unposted store policy. Most of the 7-11 stores here have police keeping watch at certain times of the day. If the criminal elements saw a person like you with an open carry, they will look elsewhere and the store locations will be safer based on their customers and the police officer can take on bigger issues. I blame the lack of education about guns/2nd Ad Rights is what fuels these type of people and they go by uneducated emotions. Guess that would describe just about any liberal!

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •