ADVERTISEMENT

gay couple attacked after pride parade

http://www.miamiherald.com/news/local/community/miami-dade/miami-beach/article208474394.html

unfortunately there is still alot of hate in this world. @bqknight this is why i think you should consider getting a gun to protect yourself

There is a lot of hate and no I will not get a gun to protect myself. However - this is just one reason why I always say that even though the world we live in is much better for us gays, we are still very much discriminated against. This is in Miami Beach of all places too. DURING pride.
 
There is a lot of hate and no I will not get a gun to protect myself. However - this is just one reason why I always say that even though the world we live in is much better for us gays, we are still very much discriminated against. This is in Miami Beach of all places too. DURING pride.

What is your rational for not wanting to be able to defend yourself against bigots? You think the police will do it? Because the supreme court says they don't have to.

Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warren_v._District_of_Columbia
 
  • Like
Reactions: UCFWayne
What is your rational for not wanting to be able to defend yourself against bigots? You think the police will do it? Because the supreme court says they don't have to.

Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warren_v._District_of_Columbia

I personally have no desire to own a gun. I definitely don't want to carry one around with me everywhere. If you want one, cool, enjoy.

Am I not allowed to not want one? I feel pretty damn safe where I am right now. Of course stuff like this can happen but it could happen even if I had a gun.
 
I personally have no desire to own a gun. I definitely don't want to carry one around with me everywhere. If you want one, cool, enjoy.

Am I not allowed to not want one? I feel pretty damn safe where I am right now. Of course stuff like this can happen but it could happen even if I had a gun.
Absolutely . If you aren’t confident in your ability to pull the trigger in self defense a gun will just cause you more problems
 
There is a lot of hate and no I will not get a gun to protect myself. However - this is just one reason why I always say that even though the world we live in is much better for us gays, we are still very much discriminated against. This is in Miami Beach of all places too. DURING pride.
would you consider going to the gun range with someone and learning some basics?
 
would you consider going to the gun range with someone and learning some basics?
This is a good idea, bq. I know you’re saying you’ll never use a gun right now, but you never know when that will change and you should be ready in case it changes at the worst possible time.
 
would you consider going to the gun range with someone and learning some basics?

My wife did this, which was a huge thing because she hates and is terrified of guns. BUT, kudos to her because she went with me and a friend who is a former cop and Army vet, who owns several types of guns and is very experienced. He was great, and at first she impressed me with her calmness and ability to shoot pretty damn well. However, once the range got busier and there were a lot of people shooting all at once she had a total panic attack, turned to me as I was watching through the window and just started sobbing. She had a total panic attack and meltdown.

Guns aren't for everyone. Guns aren't always the answer. And, my wife respects guns and those who know how to use them safely/properly, but has no desire to own one herself and we will not have one in our home. I was damn proud of her that day for REALLY going out of her comfort zone to give it a shot.
 
My wife did this, which was a huge thing because she hates and is terrified of guns. BUT, kudos to her because she went with me and a friend who is a former cop and Army vet, who owns several types of guns and is very experienced. He was great, and at first she impressed me with her calmness and ability to shoot pretty damn well. However, once the range got busier and there were a lot of people shooting all at once she had a total panic attack, turned to me as I was watching through the window and just started sobbing. She had a total panic attack and meltdown.

Guns aren't for everyone. Guns aren't always the answer. And, my wife respects guns and those who know how to use them safely/properly, but has no desire to own one herself and we will not have one in our home. I was damn proud of her that day for REALLY going out of her comfort zone to give it a shot.
i agree they arent for everyone. glad she at least tried it. do you ever go to the range with your friends?
 
This is a good idea, bq. I know you’re saying you’ll never use a gun right now, but you never know when that will change and you should be ready in case it changes at the worst possible time.

I won’t say I’ll never go but no, I have no desire to right now. I very much do not like guns. Probably not as bad as Dingys wife but it’s a pretty big dislike/fear of them.
 
I won’t say I’ll never go but no, I have no desire to right now. I very much do not like guns. Probably not as bad as Dingys wife but it’s a pretty big dislike/fear of them.
if you ever change your mind, let me know. im not the most knowledge person on guns, there are certainly more here in the wc than me, but id be willing to teach you the basics.
 
@bqknight this is why i think you should consider getting a gun to protect yourself
There is a lot of hate and no I will not get a gun to protect myself.
No one should be pressured to carry. I don't. I don't think I'll ever.

Now I'm considering a gun to protect my dog from packs of coyotes that roam the creek along my homestead regularly. Nost people get hurt or even killed when they try to pry their dog(s) from coyotes. But I won't ever carry off my property.

If I could recommend one thing to @bqknight, it's have friends who do carry when you go out. The Pink Pistols are a consideration, and are active in Florida. I personally hang around with people who carry for a reason.

I personally have no desire to own a gun. I definitely don't want to carry one around with me everywhere. If you want one, cool, enjoy. Am I not allowed to not want one? I feel pretty damn safe where I am right now. Of course stuff like this can happen but it could happen even if I had a gun.
You should never have to feel like you should carry. But be warned, a lot of people feel the way you do, and think no one should carry around them.

Until an event happens, and then they realize why people should be able to carry. Hence why I recommend you hang around people who carry.

That's what I do, because I'll never carry. But I do not ever "feel safe" unless I'm around people who do carry. That's the only thing I would point out.


What is your rational for not wanting to be able to defend yourself against bigots? You think the police will do it?
In all honesty, whenever you post about guns, you make me cringe.

Here you are, pressuring someone to carry. Sigh ...

But when people state complete falsehoods about firearms, like @sirdingydang , you're going to ignore them, and argue with someone over me on whether energy always kills fast like it can wound greatly.

I honestly give up on you. Because when a person like @sirdingydang basically proves what's wrong with the entire view of guns in the Progressive media, and their sheep, you are going to argue with me instead.

Handguns kill in close ranges, and they are just as fast as rifles (even faster full auto).
 
Last edited:
No one should be pressured to carry. I don't. I don't think I'll ever.

Now I'm considering a gun to protect my dog from packs of coyotes that roam the creek along my homestead regularly. Nost people get hurt or even killed when they try to pry their dog(s) from coyotes. But I won't ever carry off my property.

If I could recommend one thing to @bqknight, it's have friends who do carry when you go out. The Pink Pistols are a consideration, and are active in Florida. I personally hang around with people who carry for a reason.

You should never have to feel like you should carry. But be warned, a lot of people feel the way you do, and think no one should carry around them.

Until an event happens, and then they realize why people should be able to carry. Hence why I recommend you hang around people who carry.

That's what I do, because I'll never carry. But I do not ever "feel safe" unless I'm around people who do carry. That's the only thing I would point out.


In all honesty, whenever you post about guns, you make me cringe.

Here you are, pressuring someone to carry. Sigh ...

But when people state complete falsehoods about firearms, like @sirdingydang , you're going to ignore them, and argue with someone over me on whether energy always kills fast like it can wound greatly.

I honestly give up on you. Because when a person like @sirdingydang basically proves what's wrong with the entire view of guns in the Progressive media, and their sheep, you are going to argue with me instead.

Handguns kill in close ranges, and they are just as fast as rifles (even faster full auto).


Dude, you have no clue what you're talking about. As much as you want me to, I don't speak for the imaginary (((Progressive Media))) or (((MSM))). You don't even know my view on guns. You don't know my knowledge-base on guns, nor my experience with guns. So, STFU and stop talking out of your ass as you've done time and again. Libertarians may be the worst people to try and have a conversation with. Right up there with stupid Bernie Bros.
 
Dude, you have no clue what you're talking about. As much as you want me to, I don't speak for the imaginary (((Progressive Media))) or (((MSM))). You don't even know my view on guns.
BS! You directly responded to the thread where @NinjaKnight and I, along with @UCFWayne, were arguing over killing v. wounding.
Other than that, you proved Ninja and my point that type of gun matters in these shootings. If she had used a gun firing a 5.56 or similar, rapid fire, she'd likely have killed people instead of wounding them, and possibly killed MORE than just a few.
^^^ That's 100% Progressive media sheepism for you, my continued point.

You don't know my knowledge-base on guns, nor my experience with guns. So, STFU and stop talking out of your ass as you've done time and again. Libertarians may be the worst people to try and have a conversation with. Right up there with stupid Bernie Bros.
Yes, we Libertarians call out both parties and their lackeys!

@NinjaKnight refused to also say you were 100% wrong, just exposing how subjective he is.

For the last time @NinjaKnight , how much more "rapid fire" is a semi-auto AR-15 than an semi-auto pistol? You have a chance to finally redeem yourself.

Or am I the only one allegedly 100% wrong?! And no, this hypocrisy is going to follow both of you 2 until you recognize why I made a big deal about this!

It's because this "rapid fire" 100% Progressive media sheepism has to die, because it's 100% false! It's an argument purposely designed outlaw all semi-auto pistols with "assault weapon" rifles!
 
Last edited:
I personally have no desire to own a gun. I definitely don't want to carry one around with me everywhere. If you want one, cool, enjoy.

Am I not allowed to not want one? I feel pretty damn safe where I am right now. Of course stuff like this can happen but it could happen even if I had a gun.
Exactly, you could use mace or a stun gun.
 
Because they have next to zero repurcussions for killing people, unlike the rest of us.
So what you're saying is ...

Law enforcement could incapacitate people with mace or stun guns just as effectively? From various ranges and in various situations?
 
So what you're saying is ...

Law enforcement could incapacitate people with mace or stun guns just as effectively? From various ranges and in various situations?

lmao you are so pathetic.

Did I fuking say that? It's hilarious how transparent you are being, trying desperately to prove that you are right and I'm wrong. 85 does the same thing every time after I embarrass him.
 
lmao you are so pathetic.
Did I fuking say that? It's hilarious how transparent you are being, trying desperately to prove that you are right and I'm wrong. 85 does the same thing every time after I embarrass him.
First off, I used a question mark (?) at the end.
Secondly, it was not aimed at just you ... you're not the only person in this thread.
You were just the last that responded, before I did.

Secondly, as a Libertarian, I fully question authority. I question law enforcement regularly when I read something. Don't confuse me with a Conservative that always backs law enforcement.

Third ... key point so listen up ...

People are asking why police don't use mace and stun guns by default. This goes to my greater issue of people being ignorant of their effectiveness. They are not, not remotely. But that won't stop people from questioning why they aren't used by default.

It's just like when people ask why cops shoot through the windshield instead of at the tires.
 
BS! You directly responded to the thread where @NinjaKnight and I, along with @UCFWayne, were arguing over killing v. wounding.

^^^ That's 100% Progressive media sheepism for you, my continued point.

Yes, we Libertarians call out both parties and their lackeys!

@NinjaKnight refused to also say you were 100% wrong, just exposing how subjective he is.

For the last time @NinjaKnight , how much more "rapid fire" is a semi-auto AR-15 than an semi-auto pistol? You have a chance to finally redeem yourself.

Or am I the only one allegedly 100% wrong?! And no, this hypocrisy is going to follow both of you 2 until you recognize why I made a big deal about this!

It's because this "rapid fire" 100% Progressive media sheepism has to die, because it's 100% false! It's an argument purposely designed outlaw all semi-auto pistols with "assault weapon" rifles!


Do we have to go back to this? You just quoted from another thread to again prove how wrong YOU were in that thread. smgdh. Type of gun matters. I never mentioned firing speed/rapid fire/whatever you're talking about here. Where I have claimed gun matters is in bullet size and velocity, and magazine size/capacity. Where firing speed may actually matter more is when you leap from something like a revolver to semi-auto, or from semi-auto to fully auto by using things like bump stocks, or an actual machine gun. jesus christ man.
 
  • Like
Reactions: NinjaKnight
Starting someone on live fire is a terrible idea. It can scare people off quickly. I can recommend range programs that use one of our non lethal products that relocates live fire, but with less recoil and way less sound. It’s a great way to introduce people to firearms.

I taught my wife to shoot using this product
 
Exactly, you could use mace or a stun gun.
You could but it’s a trade off. Stun guns and mace are close proximity weapons, meaning you’re already in close contact to employ. Stun guns and tasers need skin contact, good luck if the attacker is wearing baggy clothes. Stun guns work on pain tolerance, someone drunk or high may not even feel it. Mace will just as easily incapacitate you as the attacker. And some people aren’t affected by mace. And the effect is temporary, meaning you might not be able to get away.

Lots of issues with less lethals.
 
  • Like
Reactions: UCFWayne
Do we have to go back to this? You just quoted from another thread to again prove how wrong YOU were in that thread. smgdh. Type of gun matters. I never mentioned firing speed/rapid fire/whatever you're talking about here.
Again ... note the QUOTE equals @sirdingydang !!!

You don't know my knowledge-base on guns, nor my experience with guns. So, STFU and stop talking out of your ass as you've done time and again. Libertarians may be the worst people to try and have a conversation with. Right up there with stupid Bernie Bros.

Again ...

Where I have claimed gun matters is in bullet size and velocity, and magazine size/capacity.
So semi-auto pistols, like the Glock with a 33 cartridge magazine, don't count the same as a semi-auto .223 rifle with a 30 cartridge magazine? How are they less "rapid fire"?

Also, there are even extended options beyond 33 cartridges for semi-auto pistols, just like semi-auto rifles -- but just like the ones for rifles, they usually jam far more.

Where firing speed may actually matter more is when you leap from something like a revolver to semi-auto, or from semi-auto to fully auto by using things like bump stocks, or an actual machine gun.
So, indirectly, you admit a semi-auto Glock pistol is just as "rapid fire" as a semi-auto .223?!

And before you answer ... keep in mind that "bump" and "binary" and other "assists" are just as available for recoil systems as they are gas systems, pistol, carbine, rifle, etc...

Which is my entire point ...

We are banning semi-auto pistols as "assault weapons" right along with semi-auto rifles, because Americans see the AR-15 silhouette shown, when an "assault weapon" is used like a Glock, because they are all just as capable!

Blowback systems in pistols and carbines go back over a century. In semi-auto, they are no slower and have just as many cartridges in a magazine. Unrestricted, they are more "rapid fire" than gas systems (some even have even larger magazines).

jesus christ man.
Yes, JC indeed!

This is what we're talking about! It's about banning all guns, by selling people on "AR-15 and 5.56 is rapid fire," and then they can say, "oh, yeah, Glocks and semi-auto pistols are just as fast, and have similar sized magazines."

This is how it all started in '68 and '86 as well ... one thing leads to another. That's why "assault weapons" bans end up banning semi-auto pistols as well. People think "rapid fire" is what anyone can own.

Guess what? The same people who can turn an AR-15 into a machine gun can turn a Glock into a machine pistol! And with blowback ... it can actually be faster! And there are the same sized magazines!
 
Last edited:
Because they have next to zero repurcussions for killing people, unlike the rest of us.
This is a wildly ignorant erroneous opinion.
Lol triggered.
And no it's not.
^^^ This is yet another example of @NinjaKnight undermining his position, and pulling a MSM/Progressive media'ism.

Do police officers often get charged with a crime as much as law abiding citizens? No argument, they don't.

But what @sk8knight is trying to point out is that they still have to deal with Internal Affairs, reprimands, firings and, in some cases, even similar criminal charges as citizens -- before we even look at civil lawsuits against both the department (and their government), as well as the officers.

This is why your absolutist, fast-food, 3rd grader responses get old.
 
Last edited:
So the US military doesn't kill people? They should be held to the same standard that local LEOs are.

In case FNB is actually seriously this level of stupid, can someone else explain how the roles of the US military differ from those of the police? I have neither the patience nor the crayons to explain it in a way he will understand.

You are just pretending to be this stupid, right bob?
 
In case FNB is actually seriously this level of stupid, can someone else explain how the roles of the US military differ from those of the police? I have neither the patience nor the crayons to explain it in a way he will understand.

You are just pretending to be this stupid, right bob?

Can you explain the difference? Both are paid the protect US citizens.
 
FFS people, Fox news bob actually doesn't understand the difference between the US military and the police.

It's terrifying people like you are allowed to elect the government for the rest of us.

Can you explain the difference? Both are paid the protect US citizens.
 
FFS people, Fox news bob actually doesn't understand the difference between the US military and the police.

It's terrifying people like you are allowed to elect the government for the rest of us.

Can you explain the difference?
 
@NinjaKnight why are you replying to other threads but ignoring this one now. Break out the crayons and explain why a LEO should face more scrutiny in a shooting than someone in the military.

What's the point if trying to argue with someone who obviously has zero morals and has to lie to make his points
 
What's the point if trying to argue with someone who obviously has zero morals and has to lie to make his points

Why do you believe the military deserves the benefit of the doubt but not the police? It's such a simple explanation it can be written in crayon.
 
Why do you believe the military deserves the benefit of the doubt but not the police? It's such a simple explanation it can be written in crayon.

How do you not understand the fact that you are a lying piece of shit and will straight up lie about me to try and prove a point. I never said china has a free market economy and I never said we should kill all black women. Yet your pathetic lying self keeps growing about these things thinking you are winning the argument.
 
How do you not understand the fact that you are a lying piece of shit and will straight up lie about me to try and prove a point. I never said china has a free market economy and I never said we should kill all black women. Yet your pathetic lying self keeps growing about these things thinking you are winning the argument.

Deflect deflect deflect!

Why do you believe you are better than LEOs?
 
There is a lot of hate and no I will not get a gun to protect myself. However - this is just one reason why I always say that even though the world we live in is much better for us gays, we are still very much discriminated against. This is in Miami Beach of all places too. DURING pride.
Stay strong. I've known about the discrimination against gays and lesbians for some time but I have only just now in the last few weeks been informed of the discrimination against white males that is running rampant in America. I read all about it on R/The_Donald. I can't imagine how hard it must be to be both gay and a white male, the 2 most discriminated against classes in America. You could be attacked in the street the same day liberal Twitter takes down your account.
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT