midmkt.shooting.still.6.25.jpgJust a few blocks from the Civic Center SF Pride celebration, the festive atmosphere of Market Street Pink Saturday night was punctured with the sound of gunfire. When the dust settled, five people (including a 76-year old San Francisco resident) had been injured and, for the second year in a row, San Francisco’s iconic LGBTQ celebration was violence-scarred by association.

Two suspects,18-year old Terrell Blay and a 16-year old whose identity police are withholding since he’s a minor, were arrested shortly after the shooting. Like the fatal shooting that marred last year’s Pink Saturday celebration in the Castro, neither the shooters nor their intended victims apparently had any connection to Pride; in both cases, the attacks reportedly stemmed from conflicts between San Francisco-based gangs. Prosecutors are expected to announce what charges the suspects will face today.

Like virtually everything else that happens in these times, a portion of the event was captured on video. David Wilton recorded the shooting’s grisly aftermath and posted it on YouTube. Wilton titled the video San Francisco / Civic Center Shooting at Pride 2011 – Sat 6-25-2011, “based on the direction of the people coming and going in the area, the way these people were dressed and the close proximity of the incident to the parade route and the festival,” Wilton said.

Shortly after posting the video, Wilton was bluoz reports, contacted by Brooke Oliver, SF Pride’s General Counsel, who said the videographer “simply chose to sensationalize your posting by wrongly associating a violent tragedy with the safe and peaceful, SF Pride.”

Wilton, Oliver said, had three options:

1. Take down the above referenced video.

2. Replace it with an affirmative public apology to SF Pride for wrongly associating it with violence, and clarifying that the shooting on Market Street had nothing to do with the SF Pride festival, and was blocks away from it;

3. Pay SF Pride $10,000 in damages and costs. Any delay will certainly see this amount increase.

Wilton, a lawyer himself, says “I am very sorry if Ms. Oliver and SF Pride misinterpreted the captions…the public deserves to see what’s on the video and happening in their city close to events like the Pride festival.”

Instead, Wilton retitled the video with no mention of SF Pride and put in the YouTube description an explanation of everything that had happened up to that point, posting Oliver’s letter in its entirety. Embedding was also disabled on the new, reposted video.

That SF Pride is being especially proactive in the way the organization is working to distance itself from the shooting is no surprise. After last year’s Castro shooting left one dead and two others injured, the event’s organizers, The Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence, clamped down on the event’s historic booziness in an effort to stem the tide of, as Eureka Valley/Castro Neighborhood Association President Alan Beach-Nelson puts it, “[the event becoming] less gay and more looky-loos.” He added that, “it’s the looky-loos [who are] looking for trouble.”

This is the third shooting in the mid-Market area in under a month. While police insist there is no direct connection between the incidents, continued reports of violence cannot be welcome news for Twitter and the slew of other firms recently enticed to move into the area with a bevy of tax breaks. A new police sub-station is scheduled to open a few short steps off Market, on 6th Street, however a significant number of officers won’t be based there–instead it will serve as a check-in point so that officers won’t have to travel all the way back to the Central Station to make reports.

Another possible reason for SF Pride’s response to Wilton’s video: money. A city audit last year revealed the historic organization’s finances to be in shambles, which might be why Oliver says that the verbiage Wilton used in his video “harms SF Pride’s ability to attract attendees and sponsors for future events by creating the false impression that the event and festival were the site of a violent shooting.”

Since the audit, SF Pride went though an internal shake-up that saw its full-time staff cut in half. The non-profit has since reduced its debt load from $225,000 to $138,000 while managing not to scale back the festivities from previous years.

Want more news, sent to your inbox every day? Then how about subscribing to our email newsletter? Here’s why we think you should. Come on, give it a try.

Please make sure your comment adheres to our comment policy. If it doesn't, it may be deleted. Repeat violations may cause us to revoke your commenting privileges. No one wants that!
  • Akit

    If the video was re-titled saying the words “near SF Pride 2011” would that constitute the over protectiveness and legal threats from reps of Pride?

    Also asking for 10K is just stupid. Pride should be ashamed and should fire whomever demanded legal action be taken.

  • Akit

    If the video was re-titled saying the words “near SF Pride 2011” would that constitute the over protectiveness and legal threats from reps of Pride?

    Also asking for 10K is just stupid. Pride should be ashamed and should fire whomever demanded legal action be taken.

  • shinzon

    Are you sure those figures on the debt are up to date? I think the amount is much less now due to the leadership of Brendan Behan. I volunteered for SF Pride three years ago, and found Brendan to be the only competent person I met the entire week. If SF pride is smart, they will keep him as the permanent director, although I’m afraid Brendan might be too smart to stay.

    As for the legal action, I say good for them. There has been a lot of sloppy reporting on both the shooting last year and this incident, including by SF Appeal. I left a comment on another story you did on Pink Saturday (http://sfappeal.com/news/2011/06/pink-saturday-bans-booze-in-effort-to-re-focus-on-lgbt-community.php), where you said that the murder victim last year was a Pink Saturday spectator, when there is no evidence that it was in any way related to Pink Saturday, or that he was a spectator, even according to the SFPD.

    Although I know the violence in SF is much, much lower than it was in the early 1990s, the recent spike in violent crime along Market St. is extremely disturbing not only for the human suffering brought on by the violence, but the potential economic impact to not only SF Pride and the Sisters, but San Francisco in general.

  • shinzon

    Are you sure those figures on the debt are up to date? I think the amount is much less now due to the leadership of Brendan Behan. I volunteered for SF Pride three years ago, and found Brendan to be the only competent person I met the entire week. If SF pride is smart, they will keep him as the permanent director, although I’m afraid Brendan might be too smart to stay.

    As for the legal action, I say good for them. There has been a lot of sloppy reporting on both the shooting last year and this incident, including by SF Appeal. I left a comment on another story you did on Pink Saturday (http://sfappeal.com/news/2011/06/pink-saturday-bans-booze-in-effort-to-re-focus-on-lgbt-community.php), where you said that the murder victim last year was a Pink Saturday spectator, when there is no evidence that it was in any way related to Pink Saturday, or that he was a spectator, even according to the SFPD.

    Although I know the violence in SF is much, much lower than it was in the early 1990s, the recent spike in violent crime along Market St. is extremely disturbing not only for the human suffering brought on by the violence, but the potential economic impact to not only SF Pride and the Sisters, but San Francisco in general.

  • renegade

    Because Wilton’s an attorney, he knows he didn’t have to change the title and Pride would lose the case if they would really sue. Perhaps Wilton just wanted to call it a day. SFGate et al always refers to the June 25 shooting as being at Pride, then always mentions the violence at the previous Pride.

    Pride organizers have a big challenge ahead of them, financially and logistically. Somehow Pride needs (imo) to be in-house and keep the looky-loos away. Also to see who’s behind the shooting (anti-gay moles?) Why isn’t there gang violence at pro-life rallies? At anti-war rallies? At tea party rallies? At DREAM rallies? Why do bangers only shoot at Pride?

  • renegade

    Because Wilton’s an attorney, he knows he didn’t have to change the title and Pride would lose the case if they would really sue. Perhaps Wilton just wanted to call it a day. SFGate et al always refers to the June 25 shooting as being at Pride, then always mentions the violence at the previous Pride.

    Pride organizers have a big challenge ahead of them, financially and logistically. Somehow Pride needs (imo) to be in-house and keep the looky-loos away. Also to see who’s behind the shooting (anti-gay moles?) Why isn’t there gang violence at pro-life rallies? At anti-war rallies? At tea party rallies? At DREAM rallies? Why do bangers only shoot at Pride?

  • Greg Dewar

    Pride has had issues re: finance, well documented in the SF weekly and other publications. Fine, we get it.

    It seems, however that there’s a sense that it’s “open season” on Pride and everyone’s taking pot shots at it that are really meritless. Yesterday the Examiner tried to smear Pride by suggesting it was doing something wrong by allowing elected officials to participate (they aren’t) and insinuated that anyone who brought a placard with their name on it was “skirting” the rules (they were NOT). Now this guy comes along and says a gang shooting is part of the Pride celebrations? Sorry, but that is a journalistic fail on the part of the videographer, and anyone else who says so.

    If a shooting that happened that was nearby, but had nothing to do with say, a Juneteenth celebration, would we not agree that would be maligning a Juneteenth celebration when the shooting had NOTHING TO DO WITH IT? You bet.

    Anyway, pick on Pride for the reasons based on facts. Don’t pick on it with bullshit to get more youtube hits.

  • Greg Dewar

    Pride has had issues re: finance, well documented in the SF weekly and other publications. Fine, we get it.

    It seems, however that there’s a sense that it’s “open season” on Pride and everyone’s taking pot shots at it that are really meritless. Yesterday the Examiner tried to smear Pride by suggesting it was doing something wrong by allowing elected officials to participate (they aren’t) and insinuated that anyone who brought a placard with their name on it was “skirting” the rules (they were NOT). Now this guy comes along and says a gang shooting is part of the Pride celebrations? Sorry, but that is a journalistic fail on the part of the videographer, and anyone else who says so.

    If a shooting that happened that was nearby, but had nothing to do with say, a Juneteenth celebration, would we not agree that would be maligning a Juneteenth celebration when the shooting had NOTHING TO DO WITH IT? You bet.

    Anyway, pick on Pride for the reasons based on facts. Don’t pick on it with bullshit to get more youtube hits.

  • Eve Batey

    Hi, Shinzon! Thanks for your comment, I’d like to address it point by point:

    Are you sure those figures on the debt are up to date? I think the amount is much less now due to the leadership of Brendan Behan.

    According to an SF Examiner story dated June 19 of this year:

    “the nonprofit organization has since whittled its $225,000 debt to $138,000, said Brendan Behan, Pride’s new executive director. By month’s end, he said, the organization plans to trim the shortfall by another $56,000.”

    If you have more recent figures, we’d love to see them, but those are the most current ones we could find.

    There has been a lot of sloppy reporting on both the shooting last year and this incident, including by SF Appeal.

    Please, if you have corrections for us regarding last weekend’s shooting, we’d love to hear it. I was the reporter covering the story as it broke, and I do my best to be accurate as possible.

    I left a comment on another story you did on Pink Saturday

    I hear where you’re coming from — , Powell was shot after the event barricades were removed, so arguable, he and his shooter weren’t at the event at all, as the event was over.

    That said, even the estimable BAR refers to the incident as the “Pink Saturday shooting,” and police quoted in the article I linked to above appear to associate the event with the shooting.

    But was Powell at the event, a spectator, or did he just happen to end up at Castro and Market 15 minutes after the event ended?

    That’s a great question, though reports from one independent journalist suggest Powell was indeed at the event.

    But in any case, when organizers like Sister Sharin’, city officials, and SFPD specifically say that they are taking the event dry because of the Powell shooting, it is then difficult to report that the shooting and the decisions made this year by organizers are unrelated.

    Again, thanks for your comment then and now, they certainly informed how I edited this report.

  • Eve Batey

    Hi, Shinzon! Thanks for your comment, I’d like to address it point by point:

    Are you sure those figures on the debt are up to date? I think the amount is much less now due to the leadership of Brendan Behan.

    According to an SF Examiner story dated June 19 of this year:

    “the nonprofit organization has since whittled its $225,000 debt to $138,000, said Brendan Behan, Pride’s new executive director. By month’s end, he said, the organization plans to trim the shortfall by another $56,000.”

    If you have more recent figures, we’d love to see them, but those are the most current ones we could find.

    There has been a lot of sloppy reporting on both the shooting last year and this incident, including by SF Appeal.

    Please, if you have corrections for us regarding last weekend’s shooting, we’d love to hear it. I was the reporter covering the story as it broke, and I do my best to be accurate as possible.

    I left a comment on another story you did on Pink Saturday

    I hear where you’re coming from — , Powell was shot after the event barricades were removed, so arguable, he and his shooter weren’t at the event at all, as the event was over.

    That said, even the estimable BAR refers to the incident as the “Pink Saturday shooting,” and police quoted in the article I linked to above appear to associate the event with the shooting.

    But was Powell at the event, a spectator, or did he just happen to end up at Castro and Market 15 minutes after the event ended?

    That’s a great question, though reports from one independent journalist suggest Powell was indeed at the event.

    But in any case, when organizers like Sister Sharin’, city officials, and SFPD specifically say that they are taking the event dry because of the Powell shooting, it is then difficult to report that the shooting and the decisions made this year by organizers are unrelated.

    Again, thanks for your comment then and now, they certainly informed how I edited this report.

  • dinaB

    Because gang bangers know that people who attend Pride will, have, or are, using drugs or drinking. Those kinds of witnesses are very unreliable and their eye witness accounts usually get dismissed by the police. Most folk’s don’t go to the Pro choice rallies or protests to party.

  • dinaB

    Because gang bangers know that people who attend Pride will, have, or are, using drugs or drinking. Those kinds of witnesses are very unreliable and their eye witness accounts usually get dismissed by the police. Most folk’s don’t go to the Pro choice rallies or protests to party.

  • dinaB

    Hmm, very interesting. Shots rang out last year at the Pink Saturday event and I was standing right next to the gang and the alleged shooter. I posted pics online here http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2010/06/28/18652067.php. As you can see my posts annoyed a lot of people; however I stood by it. I did stand up to a lot of people though, which did make some folks mad. I think the videographer should have kept the video online, and stood up to Pride officials. There is nothing Pride officials can do. It is public domain, and a public event. However I would also like to add, that I do still post pics of dead or injured people online http://www.flickr.com/photos/rebelgirl/5846949223/in/photostream, but there is a practice or adopted unwritten code amongst photogs and videographers to reduce harm and cover up faces and license plates. Also it is considered uncouth to videotape or photograph badly injured people when in car accidents, plane crashes, shootings, fires etc.
    The videographer is brave because by choosing to uplaod the video he is showing a truth most people are a scared of, which is, those events are magnets for violent people and that guns and bullets are nothing to play around with. Pride is about drinking and having fun, gangbangers know that because witnesses or victims who have been drinking alcohol and using drugs are very unreliable. So they go to the City during Pride and seek their revenge.
    There impact on us must be shown to the whole freaken world everyday. It would be a stark reminder that shootings and gang violence kill, and maim people and destroy our social lives.
    SF Pride officials should feel lucky they have people video-taping at those events. I believe those events should be videotaped by videographers or law enforcement because there are a lot of crazies out there. However the videographer should be doing some post production blocking of faces, objects and blood. Blood should be covered up.(period)
    This is my advice for the videographer, stand up to SF Pride(officials), do some blocking on the video and re-post it. People need to see somehow that gun violence is bad for our society. Also how is it Pride can demand a monetary payment, sounds like a crime has occurred somewhere amongst their demands.

  • dinaB

    Hmm, very interesting. Shots rang out last year at the Pink Saturday event and I was standing right next to the gang and the alleged shooter. I posted pics online here http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2010/06/28/18652067.php. As you can see my posts annoyed a lot of people; however I stood by it. I did stand up to a lot of people though, which did make some folks mad. I think the videographer should have kept the video online, and stood up to Pride officials. There is nothing Pride officials can do. It is public domain, and a public event. However I would also like to add, that I do still post pics of dead or injured people online http://www.flickr.com/photos/rebelgirl/5846949223/in/photostream, but there is a practice or adopted unwritten code amongst photogs and videographers to reduce harm and cover up faces and license plates. Also it is considered uncouth to videotape or photograph badly injured people when in car accidents, plane crashes, shootings, fires etc.
    The videographer is brave because by choosing to uplaod the video he is showing a truth most people are a scared of, which is, those events are magnets for violent people and that guns and bullets are nothing to play around with. Pride is about drinking and having fun, gangbangers know that because witnesses or victims who have been drinking alcohol and using drugs are very unreliable. So they go to the City during Pride and seek their revenge.
    There impact on us must be shown to the whole freaken world everyday. It would be a stark reminder that shootings and gang violence kill, and maim people and destroy our social lives.
    SF Pride officials should feel lucky they have people video-taping at those events. I believe those events should be videotaped by videographers or law enforcement because there are a lot of crazies out there. However the videographer should be doing some post production blocking of faces, objects and blood. Blood should be covered up.(period)
    This is my advice for the videographer, stand up to SF Pride(officials), do some blocking on the video and re-post it. People need to see somehow that gun violence is bad for our society. Also how is it Pride can demand a monetary payment, sounds like a crime has occurred somewhere amongst their demands.

  • dinaB

    Sorry for so many comments, but I would also like to publicly state that I hope the innocent victims recover and are okay.

  • dinaB

    Sorry for so many comments, but I would also like to publicly state that I hope the innocent victims recover and are okay.

  • shinzon

    1. With all due respect, you must not have looked very hard, and using the Examiner as a source, come on. From an article published on 6/24 the debt has been reduced to $77,000: http://articles.sfgate.com/2011-06-24/news/29697622_1_pride-weekend-new-treasurer-pink-pistols

    2. There is nothing in the post you linked to that says that the shooting victim was a spectator, it only says that he was part of a group that was arguing with other people around the area of the Castro. I don’t have time to find the quote right now, but officials at the time said that the shooting last year was”totally” unrelated.

    3. “But in any case, when organizers like Sister Sharin’, city officials, and SFPD specifically say that they are taking the event dry because of the Powell shooting, it is then difficult to report that the shooting and the decisions made this year by organizers are unrelated.” Both that quote, and what you say earlier about the BAR referring the the event as the “Pink Saturday shooting” are more examples of being sloppy. The truth is that there is so much violence in the City right now, and officials and some residents are so caught up in the “war on fun” that it is almost impossible to have an event or own a club without it being associated with nearby violence. As far as the Sisters’ reaction, there was already a lot of pressure not to have the event even before the shooting last year (remember the money the SFPD was demanding from them), and it all came down to a quote from Groucho Marx: “Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong remedies.” If a shooting or a fight is within 100 yards of a club or an LGBT event it is associated with the clubs or the event, even when the clubs are closed or the event is over (as in the case last year when a man was shot elsewhere and ran to the already closed Eagle). From now on I want to know how close every shooting or fight is from the nearby Starbucks.

  • shinzon

    1. With all due respect, you must not have looked very hard, and using the Examiner as a source, come on. From an article published on 6/24 the debt has been reduced to $77,000: http://articles.sfgate.com/2011-06-24/news/29697622_1_pride-weekend-new-treasurer-pink-pistols

    2. There is nothing in the post you linked to that says that the shooting victim was a spectator, it only says that he was part of a group that was arguing with other people around the area of the Castro. I don’t have time to find the quote right now, but officials at the time said that the shooting last year was”totally” unrelated.

    3. “But in any case, when organizers like Sister Sharin’, city officials, and SFPD specifically say that they are taking the event dry because of the Powell shooting, it is then difficult to report that the shooting and the decisions made this year by organizers are unrelated.” Both that quote, and what you say earlier about the BAR referring the the event as the “Pink Saturday shooting” are more examples of being sloppy. The truth is that there is so much violence in the City right now, and officials and some residents are so caught up in the “war on fun” that it is almost impossible to have an event or own a club without it being associated with nearby violence. As far as the Sisters’ reaction, there was already a lot of pressure not to have the event even before the shooting last year (remember the money the SFPD was demanding from them), and it all came down to a quote from Groucho Marx: “Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong remedies.” If a shooting or a fight is within 100 yards of a club or an LGBT event it is associated with the clubs or the event, even when the clubs are closed or the event is over (as in the case last year when a man was shot elsewhere and ran to the already closed Eagle). From now on I want to know how close every shooting or fight is from the nearby Starbucks.

  • Brock Keeling

    With all due respect, you don’t know what you’re talking about. Period. Too intrenched in your own fetishism and bias to see the forest through the trees. I get this. Far too common in SF. Depressingly so. But I respect your effort, however blinded.

    Great job, Appeal, on getting this story straight… so to speak.

  • Brock Keeling

    With all due respect, you don’t know what you’re talking about. Period. Too intrenched in your own fetishism and bias to see the forest through the trees. I get this. Far too common in SF. Depressingly so. But I respect your effort, however blinded.

    Great job, Appeal, on getting this story straight… so to speak.

  • shinzon

    Brock, an editor should know the phrase is “unable to see the forest for the trees” not “through the trees”, and you’re attacking me and not refuting my points because you know I’m right.

  • shinzon

    Brock, an editor should know the phrase is “unable to see the forest for the trees” not “through the trees”, and you’re attacking me and not refuting my points because you know I’m right.

  • Eve Batey

    Against my better judgement:

    1. With all due respect, you must not have looked very hard, and using the Examiner as a source, come on. From an article published on 6/24 the debt has been reduced to $77,000: http://articles.sfgate.com/2011-06-24/news/29697622_1_pride-weekend-new-treasurer-pink-pistols

    Yes, we opted to use a number supplied to an Examiner reporter by Behan, as opposed to an unattributed number cited by the Chron. We noted that the specific number cited was expected to decrease.

    We appreciate the respect, thank you, but I am not sure what “using the Examiner as a source, come on” is intended to indicate — I’m well acquainted with the Ex, and think it’s an solid paper, with quality reporters. No publication’s perfect, but I think the folks who work there are definitely committed to getting the story right. If you have information on the Examiner that we do not, I’d love to hear it.

    2. There is nothing in the post you linked to that says that the shooting victim was a spectator, it only says that he was part of a group that was arguing with other people around the area of the Castro. I don’t have time to find the quote right now, but officials at the time said that the shooting last year was”totally” unrelated.

    I said “suggested.” Interestingly, the author of that post was the commenter immediately below me (I promise that was unplanned), perhaps she has more insight. But I don’t have a dog in the “was Powell at Pink Saturday or not” fight, I said that it’s a good question.

    3. (edited for space, scroll up to reread!)

    These are all interesting points! Perhaps every single publication in town, as well as city officials and event organizers are “sloppy,” and you’re the one person who has it right, fighting the good fight by posting comments on websites (for which I again thank you).

    Or, perhaps, and I suspect this is what Brock was implying, you, like many folks on many topics, are frustrated to see reporting that does not align with your views.

    And I know how people like that feel! I’m an animal lover, and when I see reporting on “humane slaughter” I privately grumble about the quality of the reporting in a far nastier way than you have commented. But I’m self-aware enough to know the issue is not the reporting, the issue is that I don’t agree with the tack that’s being taken, because it fails to align with my views.

    But perhaps everyone is getting the story wrong, and you’re the only one with the right take. If so, we’re even more honored to have you on the site, and are thrilled at your insights. Thank you.

  • Eve Batey

    Against my better judgement:

    1. With all due respect, you must not have looked very hard, and using the Examiner as a source, come on. From an article published on 6/24 the debt has been reduced to $77,000: http://articles.sfgate.com/2011-06-24/news/29697622_1_pride-weekend-new-treasurer-pink-pistols

    Yes, we opted to use a number supplied to an Examiner reporter by Behan, as opposed to an unattributed number cited by the Chron. We noted that the specific number cited was expected to decrease.

    We appreciate the respect, thank you, but I am not sure what “using the Examiner as a source, come on” is intended to indicate — I’m well acquainted with the Ex, and think it’s an solid paper, with quality reporters. No publication’s perfect, but I think the folks who work there are definitely committed to getting the story right. If you have information on the Examiner that we do not, I’d love to hear it.

    2. There is nothing in the post you linked to that says that the shooting victim was a spectator, it only says that he was part of a group that was arguing with other people around the area of the Castro. I don’t have time to find the quote right now, but officials at the time said that the shooting last year was”totally” unrelated.

    I said “suggested.” Interestingly, the author of that post was the commenter immediately below me (I promise that was unplanned), perhaps she has more insight. But I don’t have a dog in the “was Powell at Pink Saturday or not” fight, I said that it’s a good question.

    3. (edited for space, scroll up to reread!)

    These are all interesting points! Perhaps every single publication in town, as well as city officials and event organizers are “sloppy,” and you’re the one person who has it right, fighting the good fight by posting comments on websites (for which I again thank you).

    Or, perhaps, and I suspect this is what Brock was implying, you, like many folks on many topics, are frustrated to see reporting that does not align with your views.

    And I know how people like that feel! I’m an animal lover, and when I see reporting on “humane slaughter” I privately grumble about the quality of the reporting in a far nastier way than you have commented. But I’m self-aware enough to know the issue is not the reporting, the issue is that I don’t agree with the tack that’s being taken, because it fails to align with my views.

    But perhaps everyone is getting the story wrong, and you’re the only one with the right take. If so, we’re even more honored to have you on the site, and are thrilled at your insights. Thank you.

  • patrick

    Who is the nudie in the thumbnail?

    The headline should have read: Cutie-patootie gets shot!!

  • patrick

    Who is the nudie in the thumbnail?

    The headline should have read: Cutie-patootie gets shot!!

  • KWillets

    Maybe Pride should choose a new name to avoid the association. I would suggest “San Francisco Gay Pride Streisand Effect Shooting Festival Blam Blam Blam”.

  • KWillets

    Maybe Pride should choose a new name to avoid the association. I would suggest “San Francisco Gay Pride Streisand Effect Shooting Festival Blam Blam Blam”.