|
Post by StonerStudent on Dec 31, 2004 9:53:14 GMT -5
Drive By Shooting Targets Gay Days Office (Orlando, Florida) A volley of shots were fired at the storefront windows of the Gay Days offices in Orlando Wednesday. Police say as many as nine bullets were fired. The front of the building also was splattered with eggs and paintballs. It was the second attack on the office in a month. "I'm glad it was after hours, but it's a shame someone might take the next step and confront one of us out in the parking lot," Gay Days organizer Chris Alexander-Manly told Orland's WKMG. Gay Days officials are offering a $1,000 reward for any information leading to an arrest. No one has claimed responsibility for the attacks. The popular spring event draws thousands of gays from across the country to Orlando. The 15th Gay Days will be held May 31 - June 5. Gay Days began in 1991 when an Orlando man suggested in a gay chatroom that local gays get together at the Disney World park. To distinguish one another they agreed to wear red T shirts. Gay Days has grown into one of the premier attractions on the party circuit tour. Last year more than 150,000 attended Gay Days events. But, it has not been without its critics. The ultra conservative Virginia-based Christian Action Network holds demonstrations at the theme park yearly. Two years ago the group made a video during Gay Days at the park that it said shows "orgies and depravity". The group failed in a bid to force police to lay charges. ©365Gay.com 2004
|
|
|
Post by Kacer on Jan 1, 2005 18:33:37 GMT -5
Gee... sounds to ME like the folks at "Gay Days" need to avail themselves of the Florida CHL... is there an active PP Chapter in FL?
If there IS, this, IMO would be a VERY good opportunity to extend an invite to the Gay Days offices. ;D
|
|
|
Post by StonerStudent on Jan 1, 2005 18:46:40 GMT -5
"orgies and depravity". Ok I'm pissed.......how come when I show up at Pride there never any "orgies and depravity" going on!!!. I miss all the fun
|
|
|
Post by Kacer on Jan 1, 2005 18:51:53 GMT -5
OOPS! I thought that said ORLANDO not "Orland" Virginia... any chapters there??? Do they even have a "shall issue" CHL? :/
|
|
|
Post by Big Gay Al on Jan 1, 2005 20:28:35 GMT -5
Both Virginia and Florida are Shall Issue states.
|
|
|
Post by Kacer on Jan 1, 2005 21:39:07 GMT -5
Both Virginia and Florida are Shall Issue states. Cool. I knew VERMONT was... but Virginia, that's "old Democrat" country... so I wasn't sure. So sounds to me like Gay Days Staff needs to avail themselves of VIRGINIA's CHL Do you know if we have a chapter there, BTW, Al?
|
|
|
Post by Big Gay Al on Jan 1, 2005 22:37:18 GMT -5
Actually, Vermont is "No permit required." Which I guess makes it the ideal state for CCW. :-)
|
|
|
Post by StonerStudent on Jan 1, 2005 22:43:23 GMT -5
Actually, Vermont is "No permit required." Which I guess makes it the ideal state for CCW. :-) I maybe wrong but doesn't Alaska have the same no CCW deal?
|
|
|
Post by Big Gay Al on Jan 1, 2005 22:47:19 GMT -5
You are correct. They just started it last year I believe. You can still get a permit so you will have the reciprocity of other states if you go out of Alaska, but in Alaska, no permit is required anymore.
|
|
|
Post by Kacer on Jan 1, 2005 22:55:07 GMT -5
Actually, Vermont is "No permit required." Which I guess makes it the ideal state for CCW. :-) That's my goal for Ohio... problem here is the Republicans are NOT in ANY way shape or form REALLY Republicans... (the politicians, that is) okay, they TEND to "hate and villify gays" but aside from that
|
|
|
Post by Big Gay Al on Jan 1, 2005 23:55:55 GMT -5
I've thought about the Vermont system, how nice it seems to be. But consider this. Vermont is a small state, with a small population. Alaska is a big state with a small population. I think Vermont style carry laws will work there due to the lack of people.
I'm sure there will be idiots who make stupid mistakes while carrying. But there will not likely be many of them.
Here in Michigan, since we went to shall issue, the number of permits suspended/revoked due to stupidity has remained small. But I have to wonder what would happen if training was no longer mandatory.
Now, I'll grant you that perhaps it shouldn't be mandatory. It's not mandatory in Indiana for instance, and they don't seem to have any problems.
My point is this. In this day and age, where firearms safety training is not handed down within families as it once was, I think in some areas we NEED to have mandatory training for people who want to carry guns. Or maybe at least have a test to see that they do know how to handle a gun safely, and then have a training course for those who don't.
I don't know. Maybe I'm just being too paranoid.
|
|
|
Post by Kacer on Jan 2, 2005 21:09:34 GMT -5
I've thought about the Vermont system, how nice it seems to be. But consider this. Vermont is a small state, with a small population. Alaska is a big state with a small population. I think Vermont style carry laws will work there due to the lack of people. I'm sure there will be idiots who make stupid mistakes while carrying. But there will not likely be many of them. Here in Michigan, since we went to shall issue, the number of permits suspended/revoked due to stupidity has remained small. But I have to wonder what would happen if training was no longer mandatory. Now, I'll grant you that perhaps it shouldn't be mandatory. It's not mandatory in Indiana for instance, and they don't seem to have any problems. My point is this. In this day and age, where firearms safety training is not handed down within families as it once was, I think in some areas we NEED to have mandatory training for people who want to carry guns. Or maybe at least have a test to see that they do know how to handle a gun safely, and then have a training course for those who don't. I don't know. Maybe I'm just being too paranoid. You're being paranoid Al, but that's okay We love ya anyway. I don't think a REASONABLE, rather SHORT test would be totally out of the Q, maybe even a good idea, but IMO, ANY government regulation on the BOR's is WRONG, and that would be Government regulation. And would likely COST as many lives as it SAVED so, better to err on the side of government butting OUT! What part of: "Shall not be infringed" don't they "get" ?
|
|
|
Post by Big Gay Al on Jan 2, 2005 22:46:54 GMT -5
Of course, the problem we have now is that there are already regulations on the BORs, so we're sort of stuck unless we can some how roll back the clock on that.
Yeah, and pigs might fly some day too!
|
|
|
Post by Kacer on Jan 3, 2005 19:42:55 GMT -5
Of course, the problem we have now is that there are already regulations on the BORs, so we're sort of stuck unless we can some how roll back the clock on that. Yeah, and pigs might fly some day too! Eh, call me an optimist, stranger things have happened I mean if I had told you 10 years ago not to worry about the AWB, that in 2004, 46 (47?) states would be carry states, and 37 of THOSE would be "shall issue" and that the Brady Bunch would be loosing it's popularity... you'd probably have said, "Yeah, and pigs might fly someday too!" Right?
|
|
|
Post by Big Gay Al on Jan 3, 2005 20:18:42 GMT -5
No. Ten years ago, it was more feasible that we'd have shall issue states that are willing to hand out a piece of paper saying we can carry than it is feasible that we'd have more than a dozen states that would let us CCW without any paper, other than a DL/ID.
Ten Years ago, I KNEW the AWB would not be renewed. Well, actually 8 years ago, when the Republicans took over both houses of congress. ;-)
|
|