Enter your email address to receive our daily LGBT news roundup

You're free to unsubscribe at any time.

Gunman responsible for Family Research Council shooting is charged

Post your comment

Comments on this article are now closed.

Reader comments

  1. David Wainwright 17 Aug 2012, 10:48am

    Fabulous , they had it coming to them .

    1. Who did? The only person injured was a security guard, who for all you know (or for that matter, all the aggressor knew) might have been a pro-gay, pro-equal marriage Democrat voter working on minimum wage in a very difficult economy at a building he would not normally wish to work at because of the kind of narrow-minded people he is coming into contact with.

      Even if he wasn’t, shooting at people whose views we find offensive is unacceptable. Even capital punishment is unacceptable: and that involves killing murderers. Are you advocating capital punishment for bigotry now?

    2. Don’t be an idiot, Corkins has messed up his own life and shot a mere employee a security guard, luckily he wasn’t seriously injured.
      The Family Research Council has a totally revolting and dishonest anti-gay agenda of hateful lies and misrepresentation but violent reactions to it of the sort Corkins attempted must always be condemned, it is not the way forward.
      LGBT organisations should make it clear that they do not condone Corkins actions and also express their concern and hopes for the security guard to make a quick and full recovery.

    3. Too right

      These apologists are happy to accept being treated like crap to fit in I can’t stand them

      1. So you really think shooting a security guard who is, for all we know, completely unconnected to the group in question actually achieved something (other than a possible 30-year sentence for a gay man)?

  2. Quite apart from the fact the guard was just being a guard and presumably had no connection with the political activities of this organisation, this is an example of what anger is able to do to people.

    That young man has wounded another human being, who for all he knows could be very pro-gay. He was there to protect the lives of people working in the building, which he succeeded in doing, and which the people in the building have a right to expect.

    Fierce anger is a very dangerous thing, and it can cause dreadful destruction when it is allowed to do so. Not only has he injured someone, but he now faces years in jail, potentially ruining his own life.

    The anti-gay outfits are a cancer in society: but it is really the beliefs that are a cancer, and not the people holding the beliefs, who might well change their mind one day. Some of them probably will.

    Killing the people, instead of attacking their beliefs, is like killing the patient, instead of attacking the cancer.

    1. So love the sinner hate the sin?

      1. No, not really. That is a Christian expression. ‘Sin’ is a religious concept that I don’t believe in.

  3. As expected FRC, NOM and the rest are making political capitol out of this one.
    “But this afternoon, FRC President Tony Perkins attacked the SPLC, saying it had encouraged and enabled the attack by labeling the FRC a “hate group.” The attacker, Floyd Corkins, “was given a license to shoot an unarmed man by organizations like the Southern Poverty Law Center,” Perkins said. “I believe the Southern Poverty Law Center should be held accountable for their reckless use of terminology.”
    http://www.splcenter.org/get-informed/news/splc-family-research-council-license-to-kill-claim-outrageous
    That is precicely why shotgun diplomacy fails every time.
    The opposing side either use you as a prime example of why ‘those uppity minorities aren’t to be trusted’ and capitolise on the wave of homophobic paranoia that follows in the wake of these incidences, or they come back with a larger shotgun.
    No-one wins…

    1. It is highly revealing that these people assume that calling a group a “hate group” is giving others “license to shoot them”. So, to their twisted minds, hateful people deserve to be shot? Says something about their moral bankruptcy that does.

      1. there is an element of false causality in that press release, but the crucial part of this is FRC are now primed to play themselves as the victims, and will use that as a campaign strategy.
        Context doesn’t come into it, their status as a hategroup has been conveniently swept under the rug now they have a martyr to their cause and their PR machine is already in overdrive.

  4. GingerlyColors 17 Aug 2012, 11:54am

    No doubt and hopefully this violent incident will be an isolated one. People like Floyd Corkins are the mirror-image of the bigots and their actions could easily result in a spiral of violence which will be difficult to stop as people on both sides of the debate become increasingly polarised in their views.
    I thank evrybody for their support of my comments except for one person who seems to find violence in the name of LGBT rights acceptable. I wonder if he will still find it justifiable when innocent people start getting killed.

    1. Spanner1960 17 Aug 2012, 10:40pm

      No doubt?
      Could we have some proof here?
      Nobody has any idea whatsoever what the repercussions of this incident might have. I for one think a country such as USA with its mixture of bigoted religious views, bent justice and weapons available to everyone leaves the game wide open for more of the same. I don’t condone it, but I cannot see any way of avoiding it either.

    2. I think you’ll find innocent people are being killed. Lgbt people are murdered daily and I never see this outpouring of sympathy. you are homophobic but you don’t know it. and you’re spineless

      1. GingerlyColors 19 Aug 2012, 4:11pm

        You call me homophobic because I am not prepared to kill innocent people to further my cause. You obviously cannot contribute to civilized debate and therefore it is pointless in me wasting my time arguing with you.

        1. No doubt and hopefully this violent incident will be an isolated one.

          As I said Lgbt people are exposed to violent incidents daily. the only reason you find it shocking is because it was an attack on the oppressors you must have Stockholm syndrome out something pussy

  5. Well done mate better luck next time

    1. Hopefully more will follow his example.

  6. I do not condone this shooting at all. No one should ever be harmed because of their beliefs. But in response to this:
    “But this afternoon, FRC President Tony Perkins attacked the SPLC, saying it had encouraged and enabled the attack by labeling the FRC a “hate group.” The attacker, Floyd Corkins, “was given a license to shoot an unarmed man by organizations like the Southern Poverty Law Center,” Perkins said. “I believe the Southern Poverty Law Center should be held accountable for their reckless use of terminology.” I have to ask Mr. Perkins – how many attacks against gay people has your group encouraged and enabled by the labels that you place on them? Perhaps your group should also be held accountable for its reckless use of terminology. Just saying it works both ways, buddy.

  7. So, because of how they describe the FRC, it’s the SPLC’s fault that someone tried shooting people.
    But regardless of what words the FRC uses to demonise homosexual people, they should never be held to account when someone takes inspiration from those words and goes around shooting homosexuals?
    I think I get it now, there is one law for them, and another for the untermensch.

  8. I don’t agree with his actions, but the longer this “war” between rational people and religious people is drawn out, the more I suspect incidents like these will occur.

    Excellent news that the security guard is recovering well.

    1. Cardinal Capone 17 Aug 2012, 6:16pm

      Amazing that he managed to restrain the guy after being shot.

      1. The security guard really is a hero, he stopped what would possibly have been a bloodbath, he prevented would have had enormously negative consequences for the progress of LGBT equality had Corkins actually slaughtered anyone.
        I hope this will still be used to highlight the vile, hateful lies and distortions of the FRC that drove Corkins to make such a desperate and crazy attempt at volence, the persistent abusive lies from this anti-gay group proved too much for Corkins to handle and he snapped, very tragic.

        1. Pavlos you have a minority mentality think one man speaks for everyone. and you are do desperate to assimilate right wing anti Gary people you’ll accept anything. shame

          1. Your post makes no sense in the light of what I wrote.
            If you actually read what I wrote at all, you certainly don’t seem to have great powers of comprehension.

          2. topped what would possibly have been a bloodbath, he prevented would have had enormously negative consequences for the progress of LGBT equality had Corkins actually slaughtered anyone.

            So in your world one man can affect Lgbt progress as one man cab possess all the characteristics of every Lgbt . Does anders bervick speak fire every Norwegian man?

  9. I don’t understand the outpouring of disgust here. There are queers being murdered up and down the US every year due to the vitriol that these sh*tehawkes peddle. I’m frankly gutted that he didn’t plan it better. It was a failed attempt to kill fascists.

  10. GulliverUK 19 Aug 2012, 5:47pm

    It was nothing to do with the SPLC, they put the FRC on there in 2010, not last week. The FRC complain about being listed next to the KKK — then why did they pay the KKK for their mailing list? Why did the FRC want to get in contact with KKK members?

    The people responsible for this are the leaders in the FRC, AFA, NOM and other hate groups. They’ve ramped up the hate in response to loosing ground, with so many people swinging towards equal rights, and that level of hate 24×7 is bound to make someone snap. I don’t condone the use of violence, but we should condemn the hate-filled vitriolic and aggressive nature of the FRC and how they’ve whipped up hate – hate which has led to suicides, murders, and violence against LGBT individuals. We need to condemn them first and foremost, without their constant aggressive hate campaigns this would have never happened.

  11. GingerlyColors 19 Aug 2012, 9:37pm

    In the USA the Second Amendment to the US constitution which allows it’s citizens to bear firearms is very dear especially to the religious right wingers who oppose LGBT rights. There are many firearms organisations but I would like to bring you to the attention of The Pink Pistols who’s mottos are ‘Pick on somebody your own caliber’ and ‘Armed gays don’t get bashed’. It shows that other people apart from conservative christian Republicans support the right to own guns. While most of us here abhor violence and wish to retain the moral high ground by not dishing it out in the first place, should we all have the right to carry guns as it will certainly level the playing field? Following the horrific Dunblane Massacre of 1996 when a pedeophile shot dead 16 children and their teacher, the outgoing Conservative government and the new Labour government banned the private ownership of all handguns. This meant that people who owned such weapons legally had to hand their guns in.

    1. GingerlyColors 19 Aug 2012, 9:51pm

      Since Dunblane, however the number of people being killed in shooting incidents in the UK have doubled. The ban on handguns did not stop criminals and gangs owning them. If you want a gun then it is only a short drive from Canal Street to a rougher part of Manchester where you can easily obtain a gun for a few quid. Fair enough, carrying a weapon in this country be it a gun or a knife is illegal but gay bashing is also illegal. Try telling that to the thugs who beat up people who are different to them. Should there be a compromise which will allow us all to carry non-lethal weapons such as pepper sprays or tasers? This is worth a debate.

      1. GulliverUK 19 Aug 2012, 9:57pm

        What is needed is to re-form the Pink Panthers. I think you need to be of a certain age to know what they were tho !

    2. GulliverUK 19 Aug 2012, 9:56pm

      This shooter, if you can call him that, didn’t seem to have his heart in it. From all the things we call shootings those involved a) shoot to kill anything that moves and b) don’t talk. The guard was shot in the wrist, possibly during a struggle, and the person said why he was there, which was because he didn’t like their politics. That’s fairly unusual, and that why I don’t think this was like other shooting incidents. It certainly wasn’t domestic terrorism, since he targeted one single small group. If you want to know what domestic terrorism looks like, it’s NOM, the FRC, the AFA. They target all LGBT people, every day, on all their rights, it’s persecution 24×7, and even when you get married passed in a state, the terrorists are there waiting ready to start a petition to take it away from you. The anti-gay hate group label is well deserved, and I would have used that term whether the SPLC added them to the list or not. I call the Christian Institute an anti-gay hate group 2.

  12. The right place to start is “All violence is wrong”.

    The move on from there.

These comments are un-moderated and do not necessarily represent the views of PinkNews.co.uk. If you believe that a comment is inappropriate or libellous, please contact us.

Top commenters this week

Latest stories

See all