Gay rights and gun rights - Washington Blade: Gay and Lesbian News, Entertainment, Politics and Opinion

NOVEMBER 23, 2009


Login or create a new account ?

Washington Blade - ‘Violent criminals are already armed,’ Tom Palmer, a gay libertarian activist and scholar, told the Blade last year. ‘The mayor seemed to be surprised that the criminals don’t obey this law. It’s the law-abiding people who are disarmed by the law, not the lawless.’ (Blade photo by Henry Linser)

‘Violent criminals are already armed,’ Tom Palmer, a gay libertarian activist and scholar, told the Blade last year. ‘The mayor seemed to be surprised that the criminals don’t obey this law. It’s the law-abiding people who are disarmed by the law, not the lawless.’ (Blade photo by Henry Linser)

MOST VIEWED

Gay rights and gun rights
Supreme Court case over D.C. gun control law has important implications for GLBT Americans

HOME > VIEWPOINT > EDITORIAL

Feb 15, 2008 | COMMENTS

continued...

respect.

I do not own a gun. Frankly, I don’t much like them and have never felt I needed one for protection. But for many other gay people, especially the ones living on the margins of life in crime-prone or anti-gay areas, owning a gun is one important part of a comprehensive plan for protecting life and property.

Gun ownership might at the very least give them peace of mind. And widespread knowledge that many gays are packing might give their would-be attackers second thoughts. Gun rights are gay rights.

COMMENTS

Please review and follow Washington Blade’s current Comment and Discussion Policy. Guidelines updated as of August 22nd, 2009. You are fully responsible for the content that you post.

Beckygrrl
North Brunswick, NJ

0

"...where the Constitution itself protects an individual right, it is not for the government to say the citizen may not enjoy the right simply because she may not make effective use of it." What an utter crock. That's exactly the argument commonly used in the courts to deny gays the right to marry, the inability to procreate. Guns = death. The best thing that could happen in this country is if guns were made completely illegal and inaccessible all but police, military and other government personnel who require them to their jobs effectively.

Posted 2/15/08 - 5:41 AM

jeri .

0

Becky, please explain how was that phrase construed to deny rights to anyone, much less support an argument to deny gay marriage? Our Founding Fathers passionately defended all personal rights, particularly the most basic one, the right to live. The supported the personal ownership of firearms. Jefferson stated that they were our only safeguard against tyranny from our own government. i know, it can't happen.***”This year will go down in history. For the first time, a civilized nation has full gun registration. Our streets will be safer, our police more efficient, and the world will follow our lead into the future!” Adolf Hitler

Posted 2/15/08 - 10:27 AM

kdogg36
Hanove, Md

0

Beckygrll - two things: (1) I think you have misunderstood the passage you quoted, which says precisely that the State *cannot* violate the right just because it isn't always exercised effectively. Although the situations aren't really related, this doesn't at all aid any argument against marriage equality - quite the opposite, if anything. (2) The overwhelming evidence of history (including recent history) shows that it is agents of the State who cannot be trusted with deadly weapons. They have always and everywhere done far more damage with guns than private citizens ever could.

Posted 2/15/08 - 10:40 AM

justjohn
Piedmont, SC

0

One of most liberal countries in Europe, Switzerland, supplies every male citizen with a fully automatic, NATO assault rifle to take home after their compulsory 2 years of military service. Every single (male) citizen owns a gun. What they don't seem to have a lot of is murder, crime, or bullets.

Posted 2/15/08 - 12:44 PM

TonyJazz
San Francisco, Ca

0

This is an interesting, but a tragic point of view. Guns are weapons for attack and provide no defensive value. Even more importantly, bullets need to be removed from nearly all segments of society. A civilized society has no need for these items, except in the hands of law enforcement. (The collegiate killing yesterday was yet one more example of why personal ownership of weapons and bullets is illogical.) Thankfully, the Pink Pistols only represent a handful of people on the fringes of the gay community (like gay republicans). It's a shame that they are not more rational...

Posted 2/15/08 - 5:42 PM

jeri .

0

tony, violence is ugly and hateful. there are ugly and hateful people that practice violence, and they will always have guns. making guns illegal only tips the scale in their favor. i don't like it, but i'm not going to pretend it isn't true. and of course, there are the accidents. you probably don't know the tragedy firsthand...i do. i hate that, too. but there are automobile accidents, industrial accidents. most do not have to happen. training and education comprise the answer - not outlawing work or automobiles - or personal ownership of firearms.

Posted 2/15/08 - 10:24 PM

kdogg36
Hanove, Md

0

TonyJazz: "A civilized society has no need for these items, except in the hands of law enforcement." How can you believe this when, as I noted below, the overwhelming evidence of history shows that guns in the hands of agents of the State are far more dangerous than in the hands of private citizens? And I don't exclude very recent history -- the present actions of our own federal government alone would be enough to make the point. Folks who believe we can make a better world by taking guns off the street should really start by breaking up the concentrated firepower of the State.

Posted 2/15/08 - 10:25 PM

mexicanamericanadonis

0

I know this will come to a shock to many of you europhiles, but countries with strict gun bans also have the highest incidents of violent crime. Now let's get something clear right away, I'm not talking about murder rates, I'm talking about OVERALL violent crime rates, including armed robbery, rape, street violence, even hate crimes. According to the UN and several other independent studies, Britain and Australia, which happen to have very strict gun bans, have the highest overall violent crime rate in the Western world. London currenlty has a crime rate 18x higher than New York City.

Posted 2/16/08 - 9:01 AM

mexicanamericanadonis

0

"Switzerland, supplies every male citizen with a fully automatic, NATO assault rifle to take home after their compulsory 2 years of military service. Every single (male) citizen owns a gun. What they don't seem to have a lot of is murder, crime, or bullets." Ummm... Do we really need to ask that question?

Posted 2/16/08 - 9:03 AM

uccellobello

0

To the guy who said that Switzerland does not see gun violence. This is not true. There have actually been a few incidents of gun massacres in Switzerland, the most recent in 2001 in which a man stormed a regional parliament hearing killing 14 people and wounding 12 more. The US media rarely reports on things that take place in other countries. Do not assume no news is good news. Google school attacks and you will be surprised what you read, especially knife attacks. Check out China's national problem with this.

Posted 2/16/08 - 4:57 PM

uccellobello

0

Here is one such link about China's school violence. Unfortunately, mentally ill individuals who target schools is not that uncommon: http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/2004-09-20-china-school_x.htm

Posted 2/16/08 - 4:59 PM

3fgburner

0

I have a suggestion, for those who are afraid of guns. Come on out and try them! There is a PinkPistols chapter in Northern Virginia, where DC's gun ban doesn't apply. While not as active as some other PP chapters, we do get out occasionally to shoot at the NRA range. Before those three letters cause you a case of the vapors, I would point out that NRA's range officers are the most fanatical about safety in the region. Dex, NoVA coordinator, Pink Pistols.

Posted 2/20/08 - 5:49 PM

jeri .

0

Dex, most are not afraid of guns. They only hate what they stand for. Violence. And of course there are the accidents. I wish the world was a place where weapons were no longer necessary. Don't you? In any event, I know that it isn't. And the right to defend yourself and your own life is the most basic right. DC has outlawed firearms for private citizens. It remains a city plagued with crime and violent assaults, often perpetrated by criminals with firearms. Law abiding citizens obey laws. Criminals do not. No brainer. The DC law undermines the intent of the 2nd amendment. It's a disgrace.

Posted 2/20/08 - 7:33 PM

3fgburner

0

Jeri, a gun is just a tool. Where it's different from a sword, or spear, or sharp rock, is that it doesn't require massive strength to operate. Longbows and crossbows helped the commoners to stand up to the knights, as did pikes. They still required strength to operate. A gun lets a 90-pound citizen defend him or herself against a 300-pound assailant. Incidentally, martial arts have the same drawback as swords. The mighty will beat the weak. Accidents, thanks in large part to the "eevil" NRA, are rare and have been declining for a century. And, if wishes were fishes, we'd all eat seafood.

Posted 2/21/08 - 11:28 AM