stats for wordpress

Are you on Facebook?

Would you please click "like" in the box to your right, or

Visit us on Facebook!

Anti-Gun Is The Same As Anti-Gay, Says NRA News Commentator

by David Badash on September 23, 2013

in News

Post image for Anti-Gun Is The Same As Anti-Gay, Says NRA News Commentator

Is the NRA taking a stance on gay rights? Not exactly, but Colion Noir, whose work regularly appears on the NRA’s NRA News website, says that being anti-gun is the same as being anti-gay and being against interracial marriage. In his latest video, Noir takes Starbucks to task for what he says is their new anti-gun position. Last week, Starbucks’ CEO Howard Schultz asked people to not being their guns into Starbucks restaurants, following a wave of gun owners conspicuously taking advantage of their open-carry permits.

LOOK: 14 People Who Brought Guns To ‘Starbucks Appreciation Day’

“In the wake of Starbucks coming out of the proverbial anti-gun closet — yes, I said anti-gun — because when you request that I don’t bring my gun with me into your store, that’s an anti-gun stance. Think about it. If you said, ‘We’re not pro- or anti-gay but please all gay people — we respectfully ask that you not bring your ‘gayness’ into the store. I mean, we’ll still serve you, but, if you can leave the gayness at the door, we would much appreciate it.’ Now if that’s what they said I highly doubt Tom Ford would go start designing a black Tuscan coffee signature cologne in support of this stance.”

Noir, on his blog, the Urban Gun Enthusiast, calls Schultz’s request “the most meticulously choreographed dance, of neutrality, by a corporation, regarding a volatile political issue.”

“Starbucks took an anti-gun stance. Not an anti-open-carry stance, but an anti-gun stance,” Noir claims in his video.

“That’s like saying, hey you — interracial couple — could you please not bring that ‘jungle fever’ into our store? Some people have a problem seeing interracial affection in public.”

Noir says instead of asking “responsible gun owners” to not bring their guns, Starbucks should ask thieves to not steal people’s laptops from their restaurants. “I know what goes on in a Starbucks. The least of your concern is me and my concealed Glock, or a group of guys carrying AR-15′s.”

But Noir doesn’t realize that he already refuted his own analogy, however clever it might be, in his profile on the NRA’s website.

The reality behind a firearm is, “It doesn’t have a soul, it isn’t evil, it’s just an inanimate object.”

And people do — which is why you cannot compare being anti-gay to being anti-gun.



Hat tip: Towleroad


NOM’s ‘Dump Starbucks’ Campaign So Successful Starbucks Just Posted Record High Profits

Santorum: Starbucks CEO Wants All Shareholders Who Don’t Support Gay Marriage To Sell Their Stock

Watch Starbucks CEO Tell Anti-Gay Activist That LGBT Equality Matters: ‘You Can Sell Your Shares’

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...


We invite you to sign up for our new mailing list, and subscribe to The New Civil Rights Movement via email or RSS.

Also, please like us on Facebook, and follow us on Twitter!


Rhino September 23, 2013 at 11:58 am

An interracial marriage can't accidentally go off and kill you. Dumbass.

paxdsowner78 September 24, 2013 at 12:50 pm

And neither will a gun. "Accidentally" firing a gun is a huge myth. You have to take certain actions that you allowed to happen for that gun to be fired. My gun has never "accidentally " fired. You, as the operator have to let your actions allow that gun to fire. Also was there a reason for the name calling?

Rhino September 24, 2013 at 3:39 pm

Firearms accidents happen all the time. You can google it, go ahead, there are a million examples. Regardless, a gun is much more likely to hurt an innocent bystander than an interracial marriage or a gay person/couple, simply by design. Guns are meant to shoot people.

And the reason for the name calling is because he's a dumbass.

paxdsowner78 September 24, 2013 at 4:20 pm

Guns weren't designed to shot just people. They were designed to shot things, anything. It's amazing how willing you are to buy into the "violent gun" stereo type. It's an object and nothing more. You are right about one thing there are accidentally deaths every year from fire arms, and it is sad, but the fire arms didn't "accidentally" go off. They were fired by a person. They weren't in a closet, drawer safe or where ever just laying around and fired themselves out of some sort of magic. It is sad that people die from these shootings, but it isn't the guns fault it's the persons. People are killed more every year by hammers, bats and fist were is the out cry and the ban on those objects.

Rhino September 24, 2013 at 4:50 pm

Accidental discharge isn't just something your wife complains about. And your 'guns aren't really meant to shoot people' argument is just daft.

I am a gun owner, too, but I don't need to carry it around with me to feel like a tough guy. Will I wish I had it outside my home if I am presented with a 'bad guy with a gun'? Maybe, but I'd rather take my chances than accidentally shoot someone's kid.

Llantha September 23, 2013 at 8:10 pm

But is it anti-black? That's what I need to now.

SoulCrusher420 September 24, 2013 at 2:56 pm

why make distinctions when discussing civil rights? gun rights are a matter of civil rights, as is gay marriage. I 100% support people's 2nd Amendment rights just as I 100% support gays' rights to marry. In that sense, yes, he's right…gay rights and gun rights fall under the same umbrella – civil rights. This article is shallow and horribly thought out. A person's right to protect oneself is every bit as important (if not moreso than) their right to marry who they please. The minute you can guarantee my safety by getting all violent criminals off the street, I will stop carrying my gun in public.

Comments on this entry are closed.

{ 4 trackbacks }

Previous post:

Next post: