# Gun toting soccer mom dead. **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [October 8, 2009, 10:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gun-toting-soccer-mom-dead/513115 "2009-10-08T22:12:49Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 17
**Author:** ![ExTank](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/35a633/32.png) [@ExTank](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ExTank)\ **Post date:** [October 13, 2009, 9:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gun-toting-soccer-mom-dead/513115/321 "2009-10-13T21:07:07Z")
> [@Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](#): > > Two things: How do you know this to be true? You’ve made an assertion, but what is it based on? > > Secondly, the material you elided included findings from studies that used state-wide or nation-wide data, and not just cities and counties. It may be the case that rural areas are different, and it would be interesting to see what would happen if one were to examine rural settings apart from urban settings in terms of the increased risk of homicide associated with owning a gun. Until someone does, all we can do is speculate with no foundation. [DO you mean studies like this one?](http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/rr5214a2.htm) ---
**Author:** ![Carmady](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/f04885/32.png) [@Carmady](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Carmady)\ **Post date:** [October 13, 2009, 9:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gun-toting-soccer-mom-dead/513115/322 "2009-10-13T21:12:08Z")
> [@Jack\_Batty](#): > > The woman didn’t make national news by declaring her marriage to be the most rock-solidest of all time. She made national news by being a gun-nut. Carrying a loaded weapon to a five-year-old’s soccer game, qualifies her. Ah. So you think it is “ironic” because it made the news. Normally you don’t think a husband murdering his wife is “ironic,” because their vows weren’t shown on tv. Otherwise, total irony! She thought this guy would be the one person to honor and cherish her, LOL. Correct me if I am wrong here… why don’t you think all wife-killings are ironic? And normally you don’t think a gun owner getting murdered is “ironic,” because they didn’t make the news for wearing a gun in public. Sorry, that isn’t what “irony” means. You think this woman was absurd for wearing a gun to a soccer game, and maybe (or maybe not) that perceived absurdity made you laugh when you heard she had been shot and killed. But murder is entirely different from wearing a gun. You have to see that. This woman never once said she was invulnerable to guns. She never once said that wearing a gun made her less likely to be killed by her husband. Perhaps she believed that while guns are a serious threat in the hands of would-be murderers, it would make no sense for her to disarm herself. It would be silly to argue that since she was not killed in public while wearing her gun, her wearing the gun was shown to be correct. But it is all the more silly to argue that it is ironic that she was killed by her husband at home. > [@Jack\_Batty](#): > > Then she was killed by a gun. This is ironic. She was not killed **by** a gun. She was killed by her husband. He used a gun. If she had shot herself accidentally while parading around town wearing a gun, that would have been ironic. Getting murdered at home by her husband? Not ironic. Except insomuch as you believe all wife-killings are ironic. ---
**Author:** ![Shot\_From\_Guns](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ccd318/32.png) [@Shot\_From\_Guns](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shot_From_Guns)\ **Post date:** [October 13, 2009, 9:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gun-toting-soccer-mom-dead/513115/323 "2009-10-13T21:16:34Z")
If she had a magical rock to kept tigers away, and her husband had a magical rock to keep tigers away, and her husband’s magical rock attracted a tiger that then bit her head off, would that be ironic? ---
**Author:** ![ExTank](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/35a633/32.png) [@ExTank](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ExTank)\ **Post date:** [October 13, 2009, 9:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gun-toting-soccer-mom-dead/513115/324 "2009-10-13T21:25:50Z")
> [@Shot\_From\_Guns](#): > > If she had a magical rock to kept tigers away, and her husband had a magical rock to keep tigers away, and her husband’s magical rock attracted a tiger that then bit her head off, would that be ironic? Under the scenario you described, yes. But a firearm is not a magic rock. It is an engineered, machined device that works by the known laws of physics. It is an inanimate object with no volitional will of its own to shoot, or not shoot. It doesn’t get hungry, sad, sick, or angry. At worst, it can be poorly maintained, or perhaps bady designed and/or manufactured, and perform erratically (like, firing without having its trigger pulled, or _not_ firing when the trigger is pulled). Even then, it performs as designed, manufactured, and maintained If she had the handgun to protect herself from her husband, it might be tragically ironic, but absent any evidence that she had the handgun as protection from violent family members, then I would say no, her death is not ironic. Just tragic. ---
**Author:** ![VinylTurnip](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/v/b2d939/32.png) [@VinylTurnip](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/VinylTurnip)\ **Post date:** [October 13, 2009, 9:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gun-toting-soccer-mom-dead/513115/325 "2009-10-13T21:28:47Z")
> [@Carmady](#): > > She was not killed **by** a gun. She was killed by her husband. He used a gun. This might have been a mildly clever statement the first time it was made, about a billion repetitions ago. It really isn’t anymore. It’s the “FREEEBIRD!” of gun advocacy arguments, and has become a very old, and _very_ tired joke. I promise you that nobody ever has, nor ever will be swayed to your way of thinking upon hearing _guns-don’t-kill-people-people-kill-people_. Please, please just let it die. Or shoot it to death, if that’s more up your alley. ---
**Author:** ![Shot\_From\_Guns](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ccd318/32.png) [@Shot\_From\_Guns](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shot_From_Guns)\ **Post date:** [October 13, 2009, 9:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gun-toting-soccer-mom-dead/513115/326 "2009-10-13T21:32:03Z")
> [@ExTank](#): > > But a firearm is not a magic rock. It is an engineered, machined device that works by the known laws of physics. It is an inanimate object with no volitional will of its own to shoot, or not shoot. So you think her husband would have found it equally easy to commit a murder-suicide with a toaster oven? > [@VinylTurnip](#): > > It’s the “FREEEBIRD!” of gun advocacy arguments Congratulations, you just won the thread. ---
**Author:** ![Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/8edcca/32.png) [@Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hentor_the_Barbarian)\ **Post date:** [October 13, 2009, 9:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gun-toting-soccer-mom-dead/513115/327 "2009-10-13T21:33:57Z")
> [@ExTank](#): > > [DO you mean studies like this one?](http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/rr5214a2.htm) Actually, no. That report doesn’t say a word about the increased risk associated with having a firearm in the house. It certainly doesn’t look at urban versus rural differences in that risk. That’s twice you’ve posted that link without seeming to have any idea what the linked-to report is about. I’m a bit perplexed. Just FYI, that report summarizes evidence regarding the effects of gun laws on gun violence. It’s kind of a different thing. If you’re still not getting it, I can walk you through the differences in more detail. ---
**Author:** ![CarnalK](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/carnalk/32/486_2.png) [@CarnalK](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CarnalK)\ **Post date:** [October 13, 2009, 9:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gun-toting-soccer-mom-dead/513115/328 "2009-10-13T21:37:16Z")
> [@ExTank](#): > > [DO you mean studies like this one?](http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/rr5214a2.htm) From the summary there: > [@](#): > > The Task Force found insufficient evidence to determine the effectiveness of any of the firearms laws or combinations of laws reviewed on violent outcomes.(Note that insufficient evidence to determine effectiveness should not be interpreted as evidence of ineffectiveness.) It also doesn’t seem to talk about rural vs urban. So all in all, I’m pretty sure he doesn’t mean studies like that one. ---
**Author:** ![ExTank](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/35a633/32.png) [@ExTank](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ExTank)\ **Post date:** [October 13, 2009, 9:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gun-toting-soccer-mom-dead/513115/329 "2009-10-13T21:38:47Z")
> [@devilsknew](#): > > From: [Concealed Carry Legal Question](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=509728&highlight=concealed+carry) (SDMB General Questions) > > This tragic Soccer Mom case is 100 carats of irony, a veritable black diamond of pure soul etching irony, when juxtaposed against that thread. MMMM… I can practically taste the irony! And it makes me want to puke. > > I find it ironic that this statement got me suspended when you were all arguing for your deadly toys (handguns) and apparently nitpicking legal carry a few months after her highly publicized legal case, and as it turns out, I was the only one on this woman’s side. (Was the Soccer Mom reversal your impetus and inspiration for that thread, **Una Persson**?) > I find it ironic that 10 people were shot dead in an [Alabama shooting spree](http://www.cnn.com/2009/CRIME/03/10/shooting.alabama/index.html) the day after I made that post, screaming in frustration for the madness to stop. I find it ironic that truth is silenced with bullshit gunnuttery, around here. > > Isn’t it ironic… doncha think? No. I think you were an asshole in a GQ thread. It had little to do with the substance of your _opinion_, but with the fact that you were odiously expressing an _opinion_ in General Questions, a forum for fact-based questions and answers. I was an asshole in GQ a little while back, and got (appropriately) smacked by the Mods. But at least I had the excuse that I was drunk. You were just a flaming asshole, in the wrong forum. Now you’re just a flaming asshole. Oh, and lest I forget… _ **:mad:BOOGA!:pBOOGA!:mad:BOOGA!😛 :mad:GUNS!:pGUNS!:mad:GUNS!😛** _ ---
**Author:** ![Carmady](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/f04885/32.png) [@Carmady](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Carmady)\ **Post date:** [October 13, 2009, 9:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gun-toting-soccer-mom-dead/513115/330 "2009-10-13T21:39:26Z")
> [@Shot\_From\_Guns](#): > > If she had a magical rock to kept tigers away, and her husband had a magical rock to keep tigers away, and her husband’s magical rock attracted a tiger that then bit her head off, would that be ironic? It would be ironic because the very thing her husband used to keep away tigers instead attracted a tiger which killed his wife. Now, it would be ironic if the husband had asked the devil to enchant his gun so that it would never miss its mark, thus allowing him to better protect his wife, and the devil had placed a single magic bullet in the gun which was preordained to seek out and kill the wife. Is that what you were getting at? ---
**Author:** ![Carmady](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/f04885/32.png) [@Carmady](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Carmady)\ **Post date:** [October 13, 2009, 9:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gun-toting-soccer-mom-dead/513115/331 "2009-10-13T21:41:54Z")
> [@VinylTurnip](#): > > This might have been a mildly clever statement the first time it was made, about a billion repetitions ago. It really isn’t anymore. It’s the “FREEEBIRD!” of gun advocacy arguments, and has become a very old, and _very_ tired joke. I promise you that nobody ever has, nor ever will be swayed to your way of thinking upon hearing _guns-don’t-kill-people-people-kill-people_. Please, please just let it die. Or shoot it to death, if that’s more up your alley. Rest assured, I am not using it in that context. (Which I assume you know, but just wanted to use the “Freebird” line). While its value as a run rights argument may be nil, it is nevertheless the difference between “ironic” and “not ironic” in this scenario. If the woman had shot herself accidentally while parading around town wearing a gun, one might say she was killed “by” the gun, and it would certainly be ironic. Instead, she was murdered at home by her husband. Not ironic, except to the extent that you think all wife-killings are ironic. ---
**Author:** ![bup](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/6bbea6/32.png) [@bup](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bup)\ **Post date:** [October 13, 2009, 9:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gun-toting-soccer-mom-dead/513115/332 "2009-10-13T21:42:37Z")
> [@Carmady](#): > > Ah. So you think it is “ironic” because it made the news. > > Normally you don’t think a husband murdering his wife is “ironic,” because their vows weren’t shown on tv. Otherwise, total irony! She thought this guy would be the one person to honor and cherish her, LOL. I know this wasn’t addressed to me, and maybe people have stopped paying attention to me in this thread, but I’ll try a new way. Two sides are talking across each other here. One side keeps saying, “She never thought having a gun made her immortal!” The other side keeps saying, “It’s ironic because she was an outspoken gun nut and got killed by a gunshot!” Side one seems to ignore that side two never said she thought herself immortal. Side two seems to not explain what’s ironic beyond “gun lover killed by gun.” So I’ll try to address side one’s question directly. What makes the gun death relevant isn’t that she had a gun, or that we think she thought the gun was a force-field. What makes the death relevant is that she believed having guns ‘around’ made her safer. I know it was her husband’s gun that killed her, but she lived in a house that had guns because she and her husband thought guns made them safer. “But he was a parole officer,” you might fairly point out. “He’d have killed her with a gun anyway.” I know parole officers that don’t carry guns. Even if he is required to have a gun at work, why does he keep it on his person when he’s not working? What makes guns unsafe is the immediacy of their availability when somebody flies off the handle. The odds of somebody flying off the handle, who’d shoot you dead if they had a gun for those 5 minutes they’re boiling over with rage, are much higher than the odds of a home invader shooting you. The irony doesn’t have to come from it being a home invader who killed her. It doesn’t have to come from it being her gun, either. She got killed by her husband with his gun. I get it. The irony comes from the lack of communication between the two sides - larger than the SDMB. Somebody could have told her last year that, “hey, you have a right to have a gun, but you have a higher chance of being killed by yourself or your husband now with a gun than if you didn’t keep guns around,” and I \*think \*both sides would agree that she would have disagreed with that statement. Now she’s paid the price for it. That’s the irony. This is exactly what Kellerman and all those other ‘debunked’ studies predict, and when the demonstration comes, the ‘gun advocates’\* see it as not predictable. \*I said ‘gun advocates’ rather than ‘gun \*rights \*advocates’ because I respect all Americans’ \*right \*to have a gun, but am not in the group I’m talking about. Americans have a right to have a gun; I just don’t think it’s smart to own a gun for the purpose of self-defense. ---
**Author:** ![ExTank](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/35a633/32.png) [@ExTank](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ExTank)\ **Post date:** [October 13, 2009, 9:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gun-toting-soccer-mom-dead/513115/333 "2009-10-13T21:51:27Z")
> [@CarnalK](#): > > From the summary there: > > It also doesn’t seem to talk about rural vs urban. So all in all, I’m pretty sure he doesn’t mean studies like that one. So the government-sponsored comprehensive review of 51 studies (at least one from a researcher that **Hentor** is citing) done on the effectiveness of firearms laws, that came to the conclusion that there is insufficient evidence presented in those studies _in toto_ that firearms regulation has had _any_ impact on firearms violence, is excluded because it doesn’t specifically cite an “urban vs. rural” study? ---
**Author:** ![Muffin](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/muffin/32/4341_2.png) [@Muffin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Muffin)\ **Post date:** [October 13, 2009, 10:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gun-toting-soccer-mom-dead/513115/334 "2009-10-13T22:03:06Z")
> [@Shot\_From\_Guns](#): > > So you think her husband would have found it equally easy to commit a murder-suicide with a toaster oven? I was battered with a toaster oven by a fierce Irishman. Aside from a small scar, it had no lasting effect on my well being. Had he had a gun, I expect that I would be dead. ---
**Author:** ![Muffin](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/muffin/32/4341_2.png) [@Muffin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Muffin)\ **Post date:** [October 13, 2009, 10:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gun-toting-soccer-mom-dead/513115/335 "2009-10-13T22:06:31Z")
Remember, kids, _guns don’t kill people, magical rocks kill people_. ---
**Author:** ![chique](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/4491bb/32.png) [@chique](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/chique)\ **Post date:** [October 13, 2009, 10:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gun-toting-soccer-mom-dead/513115/336 "2009-10-13T22:10:01Z")
> [@bup](#): > > …and maybe people have stopped paying attention to me in this thread… **I** am still paying attention to you, **bup** , but I’m running out of popcorn… ---
**Author:** ![Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/8edcca/32.png) [@Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hentor_the_Barbarian)\ **Post date:** [October 13, 2009, 10:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gun-toting-soccer-mom-dead/513115/337 "2009-10-13T22:40:05Z")
> [@ExTank](#): > > So the government-sponsored comprehensive review of 51 studies (at least one from a researcher that **Hentor** is citing) done on the effectiveness of firearms laws, that came to the conclusion that there is insufficient evidence presented in those studies _in toto_ that firearms regulation has had _any_ impact on firearms violence, is excluded because it doesn’t specifically cite an “urban vs. rural” study? So you do need me to walk you through it. Okay. One issue that we’ve been talking about is whether or not the presence of a gun in the household is associated in one way or another with one’s risk for homicide or suicide. A number of studies indicate that it is positively related with both. This is relevant to the incident at hand because it is an example of someone with a gun in the house being a victim of a homicide. I originally said that this incident is not an “argument” but it is an example. A completely separate question is whether one can observe any changes before or after a particular gun law goes into effect, or compare different jurisdictions to draw any conclusions about whether differing gun laws are associated with differing rates of gun violence. The report you keep citing considers that question. Furthermore, researchers do publish more than one paper. They may be on different topics, or different aspects of the same topic. The Kellermann paper in the list you noted is an example of this. I know it’s unfair, but one might come away from this discussion with serious concerns about gun advocates’ ability to comprehend even the most basic elements of how science is conducted. ---
**Author:** ![Captain\_Awesome](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/a698b9/32.png) [@Captain\_Awesome](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Captain_Awesome)\ **Post date:** [October 13, 2009, 10:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gun-toting-soccer-mom-dead/513115/338 "2009-10-13T22:50:11Z")
It’s not [rocket surgery](http://img160.imageshack.us/img160/6283/globalfirearmdeaths.gif) people! ---
**Author:** ![An\_Arky](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/87869e/32.png) [@An\_Arky](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/An_Arky)\ **Post date:** [October 13, 2009, 11:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gun-toting-soccer-mom-dead/513115/339 "2009-10-13T23:10:12Z")
> [@InvisibleWombat](#): > > And what on _Earth_ are you talking about with Foghorn Leghorn? I don’t remember anything about the rooster being a champion of gun rights. For that matter, I’m not trying to be a champion of gun rights, either. I just don’t want whatever laws might be right for _your_ state crammed down the throats of the people living in _my_ state. > > I also feel that “giggling” at the woman in the OP isn’t appropriate, and it isn’t the irony that people see it as. If she’d accidentally shot herself, that would be ironic. If someone had taken her gun and shot her with it, that would be ironic. But being murdered by her husband? I don’t see it. I want to apologize for my idiotic error right now. It was [Yosemite Sam](http://www.joesportsfan.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/YosemiteSam.jpg) that I was thinking of. :o I don’t think of the woman’s death as haha ironic, just a tragic coincidence; an intersection of senselessness and blinkered attitudes about the responsibility inherent in the right to bear arms. I also agree that local control of the issue would be better. ---
**Author:** ![Gary\_Robson](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gary_robson/32/3448_2.png) [@Gary\_Robson](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gary_Robson)\ **Post date:** [October 13, 2009, 11:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gun-toting-soccer-mom-dead/513115/340 "2009-10-13T23:17:11Z")
> [@An\_Arky](#): > > 1. Strawman. I stated clearly that I think people should be free to own guns. Plus, I live in a single-family house. How can it be a strawman when I’m simply explaining that I don’t want your local legislation to determine what I can do under completely different circumstances. Perhaps I should have said “a condo in Connecticut” or “a duplex in Duluth.” > [@An\_Arky](#): > > 1. Y’all started it with your Foghorn Leghorn bullshit, so right back at you. I _still_ don’t understand what you’re talking about with Foghorn Leghorn. He’s the rooster in the cartoons, right? What does that have to do with guns, or with me? And how did I start it? ETA: Ah - after I posted I saw your Yosemite Sam correction. That makes more sense. Still doesn’t apply to me (and I most certainly didn’t “start it,” but at least it connects to guns. > [@Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](#): > > Two things: How do you know this to be true? You’ve made an assertion, but what is it based on? Let me turn my assertion into a question, then: Do you believe that studies of guns in urban areas are applicable highly rural areas (e.g., my county of 9,800 people)? > [@DanBlather](#): > > I don’t know of many people who would want to prohibit you from carrying a gun in grizzly country. At the same time, we don’t want gangs in inner cities to traffic in guns acquired in states with laxer gun laws. Okay. We’re in agreement on that. > [@DanBlather](#): > > And while you are at it you can thank the dirty, crime ridden cities for providing the money that provides your part of the country enough money to have the amenities you describe. MT get’s [$1.58](http://www.taxfoundation.org/UserFiles/Image/Blog/ftsbs-large.jpg) back in federal spending for each dollar paid in taxes, ID gets $1.73, WY $1.11, and AK $1.78. I don’t have a _problem_ with the cities. I will, indeed, thank them for what they’ve done in terms of keeping our highway system in Montana going. I just don’t want to live in one, and I don’t like it when the people who do consider non-city dwellers somehow lesser beings. > [@An\_Arky](#): > > Anyway, **IW** , I’m sorry about cranking up the pejoratives, but my point was that while (again) I believe that people should be free to own guns, I am utterly unimpressed by the demeanor of the people who are on the forefront of the pro-gun side. I agree that the extreme pro-gun people are every bit as annoying as the extreme anti-gun people. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gun-toting-soccer-mom-dead/513115.md?page=16) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gun-toting-soccer-mom-dead/513115.md?page=18)