Gay-bashing attacks on the rise in city

Gay-bashing attacks on the rise in city

There are 94 comments on the New York Daily News story from Aug 18, 2013, titled Gay-bashing attacks on the rise in city. In it, New York Daily News reports that:

The NYPD is on pace to investigate about twice the number of anti-gay incidents in 2013 - from slurs to felony assaults - compared to 2012.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at New York Daily News.

“Together for 24, legal for 5”

Since: Sep 07

Littleton, NH

#73 Aug 21, 2013
BS Detector wrote:
Typical meaningless talking points from a gun nut.
In other words, there is absolutely nothing society can do to make firearms safe, and we shouldn't even try.

“ WOOF ! ”

Since: Nov 12

Coolidge, AZ

#74 Aug 21, 2013
nhjeff wrote:
<quoted text>
In other words, there is absolutely nothing society can do to make firearms safe, and we shouldn't even try.
Correct.

And since motor vehicles have LONG caused for more deaths than guns have, why aren't you working to ban them also ? Or do you believe that motor vehicles are essential for human life, or it might personally inconvenience you if they were banned ?

And since motor vehicles have LONG caused more deaths than guns, and if you don't want to ban them, then I assume that you find all the deaths they cause to be a perfectly acceptable cost to be paid for you rconvenience.

“Together for 24, legal for 5”

Since: Sep 07

Littleton, NH

#76 Aug 21, 2013
Fa-Foxy wrote:
<quoted text>
Correct.
And since motor vehicles have LONG caused for more deaths than guns have, why aren't you working to ban them also ? Or do you believe that motor vehicles are essential for human life, or it might personally inconvenience you if they were banned ?
And since motor vehicles have LONG caused more deaths than guns, and if you don't want to ban them, then I assume that you find all the deaths they cause to be a perfectly acceptable cost to be paid for you rconvenience.
You fail to note that society has invested substantial resources in making driving safer. In fact, gun-related deaths are rapidly overtaking automobile-related deaths. If we applied the same determination to making gun ownership safer that we have applied to making cars safer, thousands of people would be living productive lives today.
Huh

Faribault, MN

#77 Aug 21, 2013
Gay people need to buy guns and carry them and BLOW THE HEADS OFF THE FAR RIGHT HATE FILLED BIGOTS WHEN THEY HURT YOU.

“ WOOF ! ”

Since: Nov 12

Coolidge, AZ

#79 Aug 21, 2013
nhjeff wrote:
<quoted text>
You fail to note that society has invested substantial resources in making driving safer. In fact, gun-related deaths are rapidly overtaking automobile-related deaths. If we applied the same determination to making gun ownership safer that we have applied to making cars safer, thousands of people would be living productive lives today.
I'm all FOR gun safety, and the safer they can design and manufacture them, the better.

One technology they have been working on, admittedly for a long time, would only allow the a single person to operate the gun, by identifying the bearer of the weapon electronically.

Since: Jun 13

Location hidden

#80 Aug 21, 2013
Huh wrote:
Gay people need to buy guns and carry them and BLOW THE HEADS OFF THE FAR RIGHT HATE FILLED BIGOTS WHEN THEY HURT YOU.
Gays are not equipped to handle guns. They are good at decorating and dancing to club music but not violence. They should stick to what they know...random encounters and spreading AIDS.

“Together for 24, legal for 5”

Since: Sep 07

Littleton, NH

#81 Aug 21, 2013
Fa-Foxy wrote:
<quoted text>
I'm all FOR gun safety, and the safer they can design and manufacture them, the better.
One technology they have been working on, admittedly for a long time, would only allow the a single person to operate the gun, by identifying the bearer of the weapon electronically.
That technology is hardly novel. The NRA doesn't want it. A simple idea would be a ring with RFID chip, similar to my key fob. It can open my doors and start my car. It could just as easily release a trigger lock.

BTW: I would not object to the ability to switch off such a device. It's kind of like seat belts: Smart people will use them. Others? Well.... A member of your own family is far more likely to be shot by a gun you keep in the house than an intruder.

“ WOOF ! ”

Since: Nov 12

Coolidge, AZ

#82 Aug 21, 2013
nhjeff wrote:
<quoted text>
That technology is hardly novel. The NRA doesn't want it. A simple idea would be a ring with RFID chip, similar to my key fob. It can open my doors and start my car. It could just as easily release a trigger lock.
BTW: I would not object to the ability to switch off such a device. It's kind of like seat belts: Smart people will use them. Others? Well.... A member of your own family is far more likely to be shot by a gun you keep in the house than an intruder.
All the members of my family in my home are cats, one with only 3 legs. So I doubt that any of them would be able to do that (ESPECIALLY the one with only 3 legs !).

“Together for 24, legal for 5”

Since: Sep 07

Littleton, NH

#83 Aug 21, 2013
Fa-Foxy wrote:
<quoted text>
All the members of my family in my home are cats, one with only 3 legs. So I doubt that any of them would be able to do that (ESPECIALLY the one with only 3 legs !).
You are also more likely to be shot by your own gun--whether by accident or on purpose--than by an intruder.
Dane

Los Angeles, CA

#84 Aug 21, 2013
nhjeff wrote:
<quoted text>
That technology is hardly novel. The NRA doesn't want it. A simple idea would be a ring with RFID chip, similar to my key fob. It can open my doors and start my car. It could just as easily release a trigger lock.
BTW: I would not object to the ability to switch off such a device. It's kind of like seat belts: Smart people will use them. Others? Well.... A member of your own family is far more likely to be shot by a gun you keep in the house than an intruder.
Many police agencies have been using this for a long time now. In case an officer gets into a scuffle and the perp gets the gun it cannot be fired by anyone else but the officer.
BS Detector

Sherman Oaks, CA

#85 Aug 21, 2013
nhjeff wrote:
<quoted text>
In other words, there is absolutely nothing society can do to make firearms safe, and we shouldn't even try.
I never said that. Respond to what I actually DID say and we might continue a rational and reasoned discussion.

“ TRUTH : NOT EXPEDIENCE”

Since: Nov 07

town near Jax, Fl

#86 Aug 21, 2013
nhjeff wrote:
<quoted text>
You are also more likely to be shot by your own gun--whether by accident or on purpose--than by an intruder.
Amen to that! And the best reason to limit the use, kind, and amount of guns one person can own.

“ TRUTH : NOT EXPEDIENCE”

Since: Nov 07

town near Jax, Fl

#87 Aug 21, 2013
BS Detector wrote:
<quoted text> So how does taking guns from law abiding citizens keep criminals from obtaining illegal firearms? Answer: It doesn't. Bad guys will get weapons because (wait for it) THEY'RE BAD GUYS AND CRIMINALS! A different question is how to keep "irresponsible" gun owners from having guns? I might counter with "How do you keep irresponsible/stupid voters from voting and further screwing up the country? The short answer is, you really can't. Apples and oranges? Not really. Point being is that you can't pass a bunch of stupid and unenforceable laws to cover every single possible societal ill. Can't be done as evidenced by how many Democrats are repeatedly elected to office.(Cheap joke.) Harry Reid and Barbara Boxer immediately come to mind.(No joke.) True, you could name some Republicans as well, like Rick Perry.(Another non joke.)
I'm a gun advocate. As far as I'm concerned, you can conduct (and pay for) any *legitimate* research you want. Such finding would, of course, come under challenge depending on who did the research, who came up with the conclusions, and how reasonable such finding might be. As so often happens, the rabid anti-gun types tend to lie a lot.
And did I mention that every single point you raised was anecdotal and not quantitative, even while complaining about contrary, allegedly anecdotal evidence. Yeah, I think I did.
I look forward to your rebuttal, Sir.
I know a Canadian attorney who read our Constitution and Bill of Rights including the Amendments. He says he can't see what all the fuss is about, because it didn't say anything about personal gun ownership. And, don't say SCOTUS supports it because SCOTUS supported slavery and Jim Crow (it makes mistakes).

“ WOOF ! ”

Since: Nov 12

Coolidge, AZ

#88 Aug 21, 2013
Catholic created gay wrote:
<quoted text>
Amen to that! And the best reason to limit the use, kind, and amount of guns one person can own.
I don't recall the Second Amendment limiting the amount of guns you can own. Does it say that ???

Does the First Amendment limit the amount of newspapers you can own ?

As a liberal, you MUST be in favor of that, lest an American read a conservative newspaper. Better guard against THAT !

(And you guys WONDER why people view Dems and Libs as Evil, PURE EVIL ???!!!)

“Together for 24, legal for 5”

Since: Sep 07

Littleton, NH

#89 Aug 22, 2013
BS Detector wrote:
<quoted text> I never said that. Respond to what I actually DID say and we might continue a rational and reasoned discussion.
So I've offered several ideas for increasing gun safety. How about you either respond to those or propose your own? So far, all you've done is whine about how anti-gun nuts want to outlaw gun ownership. While I know there are a few people who'd rather see no gun rights, you are greatly (and willfully) misinformed about the average advocate for greater controls over firearms.

“Together for 24, legal for 5”

Since: Sep 07

Littleton, NH

#90 Aug 22, 2013
Catholic created gay wrote:
<quoted text>
Amen to that! And the best reason to limit the use, kind, and amount of guns one person can own.
The problem with limiting the number of guns is that it would seem to require government to track who owns guns--just as government tracks who owns cars. That idea is a non-starter. Even the fiercest gun control advocates won't touch that third rail.

“ TRUTH : NOT EXPEDIENCE”

Since: Nov 07

town near Jax, Fl

#91 Aug 22, 2013
Fa-Foxy wrote:
<quoted text>
I don't recall the Second Amendment limiting the amount of guns you can own. Does it say that ???
Does the First Amendment limit the amount of newspapers you can own ?
As a liberal, you MUST be in favor of that, lest an American read a conservative newspaper. Better guard against THAT !
(And you guys WONDER why people view Dems and Libs as Evil, PURE EVIL ???!!!)
Believe me! that evil name tag goes both ways. I don't remember saying anything about the 2nd Amendment nor did the person who's post I was commenting on. Go back and reread both.
BS Detector

Sherman Oaks, CA

#92 Aug 22, 2013
nhjeff wrote:
<quoted text>
So I've offered several ideas for increasing gun safety. How about you either respond to those or propose your own? So far, all you've done is whine about how anti-gun nuts want to outlaw gun ownership. While I know there are a few people who'd rather see no gun rights, you are greatly (and willfully) misinformed about the average advocate for greater controls over firearms.
Actually, you did not offer ANY ideas for increased gun safety. I checked. If you'd really like to offer ideas for increased gun safety, I'd be more than willing to consider them. But all you have done so far is ignored most of my raised points, complained that my points were merely anecdotal and rebutted with your own anecdotal points.

As far as me "whining," either you know better than that and are just using that gambit as a cheap snipe, or you're not as intelligent as I had given you credit for.

“ TRUTH : NOT EXPEDIENCE”

Since: Nov 07

town near Jax, Fl

#93 Aug 22, 2013
BS Detector wrote:
<quoted text> I never said that. Respond to what I actually DID say and we might continue a rational and reasoned discussion.
You rational and reasoned?- that will be the day.

“What Goes Around, Comes Around”

Since: Mar 07

Kansas City, MO.

#94 Aug 23, 2013
Leopold wrote:
Hopefully we'll see even more gay-bashing next year!
you and your ilk will be on here next year, no shortage of that.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Gay/Lesbian Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News This Thanksgiving, I'm thankful for being born gay 6 min Rabbis on the Run 43
News What would Jesus say about same-sex marriage? (Jul '15) 13 min Tre H 14,211
News Colo. gay discrimination alleged over wedding cake (Jun '13) 1 hr lado 57,976
News Gay teacher fired by South Coast Baptist Colleg... 3 hr Wondering 6
News Ten Commandments judge faces runoff in Alabama ... 3 hr Sammi 206
News Roy Moore accuser says she was not paid to tell... 3 hr Trump is a joke 28
News Congressman Under Fire For 'Outlaw Divorce' Rem... (Jul '06) 4 hr Rubic Pubes 119
Roy Moore.....Just Another Hypocrite 5 hr Frankie Rizzo 112
The Spectrum Cafe (Dec '07) 5 hr Frankie Rizzo 26,529
More from around the web