# 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:** 22
**Author:** ![Zeriel](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/z/58956e/32.png) [@Zeriel](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Zeriel)\ **Post date:** [October 15, 2009, 3:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gun-toting-soccer-mom-dead/513115/421 "2009-10-15T15:45:06Z")
> [@Euphonious\_Polemic](#): > > Well, it happens with some frequency. Disagreement + Gun = dead guy. It’s not something that occurs only in my violent imagination. People HAVE been shot over a parking space. Guns HAVE been fired in the street over an insult. > > You say I am imagining these things, as if they have never happened; they are imaginary. > > They are not. > > I do differentiate between guns as tools (shotguns, rifles for hunting, etc, and handguns that are specifically designed to kill other human beings. And yes, handguns are occasionally used to kill others that the gun owner disagrees with. Sorry you don’t like it, but it is factual. It’s true, certainly, but I’d draw a distinction as us licensed CCW holders are statistically equivalent to the general population in terms of overall felonies and violent felonies committed. Seems to me, therefore, that the primary focus of regulation ought be on the gun holders who have no particular permits or registration. But then again, I’m specifically in favor of licensing handguns and home-defense style shotguns (defined by barrel length, if we wanted to be specific and I do want to be usefully specific) differently than long arms, so we are probably pretty closely in agreement in principle at least. I wonder if there’s ever been a comprehensive study on the motivations of gun vs. non-gun violent assaults and homicides–that is, whether the presence of a gun exacerbates the likelihood of a violent action or simply increases the potential harm inflicted but not the base likelihood. Especially in snap violence moments like the ones Euphonious is discussing here–does the presence of a gun make a person more likely to attack a guy over a parking space, or would the violence happen with a tire iron or fists in the absence of a gun? Data like this would go a long way toward crafting intelligent firearms policy that would infringe less on law-abiding classes of gun owners while reducing violence and severity of violence with targeted, specific, sensible regulation. ---
**Author:** ![DanBlather](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/f4b2a3/32.png) [@DanBlather](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DanBlather)\ **Post date:** [October 15, 2009, 4:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gun-toting-soccer-mom-dead/513115/422 "2009-10-15T16:11:41Z")
> [@Fake\_Tales\_of\_San\_Francisco](#): > > People in Hiroshima and Nagasaki were not killed by nuclear weapons. They were killed by Harry S. Truman. He used nuclear weapons. People with the Black Plauge were killed _with_ the plaugue, _by_ a flea. I was hit _with_ a car _by_ a driver. People are killed as a result of drive-_with_ shootings. Conservatines were defeated _with_ a large margin, _by_ the voters. ---
**Author:** ![Euphonious\_Polemic](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/euphonious_polemic/32/3002_2.png) [@Euphonious\_Polemic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Euphonious_Polemic)\ **Post date:** [October 15, 2009, 4:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gun-toting-soccer-mom-dead/513115/423 "2009-10-15T16:19:44Z")
Very good points **Zeriel**. I especially agree with > [@](#): > > Data like this would go a long way toward crafting intelligent firearms policy that would infringe less on law-abiding classes of gun owners while reducing violence and severity of violence with targeted, specific, sensible regulation. There is certainly room for targeted, specific, sensible regulations. I suspect that not every gun owner would agree though. (eta - the problem is that people will have different definitions for “targeted”, “specific”, and “sensible”) ---
**Author:** ![devilsknew](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/4da419/32.png) [@devilsknew](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/devilsknew)\ **Post date:** [October 15, 2009, 4:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gun-toting-soccer-mom-dead/513115/424 "2009-10-15T16:33:13Z")
> [@Argent\_Towers](#): > > I don’t think that military training lead to “careless familiarity with guns.” It leads to _careful_ familiarity with guns. Someone who was trained in the military is far more likely to practice good firearms safety - something that prevents accidental firearm deaths. Ok, well let’s put it this way… when I pick up a gun, I am highly aware of gun safety, and my training, to ensure that I **never** shoot somebody, accidentally or intentionally. When somebody in the military picks up their gun they are highly aware of gun safety to ensure that he/she can **positively** , quickly and efficiently, kill somebody while minimizing collateral damage. ---
**Author:** ![Zeriel](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/z/58956e/32.png) [@Zeriel](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Zeriel)\ **Post date:** [October 15, 2009, 4:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gun-toting-soccer-mom-dead/513115/425 "2009-10-15T16:40:49Z")
> [@Euphonious\_Polemic](#): > > There is certainly room for targeted, specific, sensible regulations. I suspect that not every gun owner would agree though. (eta - the problem is that people will have different definitions for “targeted”, “specific”, and “sensible”) This is precisely why I like statistics–I’m in favor of permissive licensing regimes since they don’t produce an undue burden on me (in a shall-issue state with similar regulations to PA, I’d characterize them as “no burden whatsoever” although there are those who would say that even being listed as a known firearms owner is “undue”) but statistically the mere fact I’m willing to do the process and put my name on the record as saying “I own or intend to own a handgun, can certify to my local sheriff that I do so safely, and intend to haul it around with me at least part of the time” means I’m (provisionally, based on my post earlier and no comprehensive studies) statistically equally or less likely to commit a felony as the entire men-women-children population of the U.S., which seems like a good benchmark to me. ---
**Author:** ![Zeriel](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/z/58956e/32.png) [@Zeriel](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Zeriel)\ **Post date:** [October 15, 2009, 4:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gun-toting-soccer-mom-dead/513115/426 "2009-10-15T16:41:54Z")
> [@devilsknew](#): > > Ok, well let’s put it this way… when I pick up a gun, I am highly aware of gun safety, and my training, to ensure that I **never** shoot somebody, accidentally or intentionally. When somebody in the military picks up their gun they are highly aware of gun safety to ensure that he/she can **positively** , quickly and efficiently, kill somebody while minimizing collateral damage. Target identification, threat assessment, and conforming to Rules of Engagement (aka “When is it and is it not OK to shoot someone?”) are also parts of military firearms training, though. ---
**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 15, 2009, 4:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gun-toting-soccer-mom-dead/513115/427 "2009-10-15T16:46:55Z")
> [@Zeriel](#): > > … but statistically the mere fact I’m willing to do the process and put my name on the record as saying “I own or intend to own a handgun, can certify to my local sheriff that I do so safely, and intend to haul it around with me at least part of the time” means I’m (provisionally, based on my post earlier and no comprehensive studies) statistically equally or less likely to commit a felony as the entire men-women-children population of the U.S., which seems like a good benchmark to me. No offense to you or to **Una Persson** , and I laud you both for your preference for empirical consideration of the issues and your efforts to obtain the data, but I’d prefer not to hold these up as established statistical relationships based on your efforts. In the big picture of the manner in which empirical analyses are reviewed and disseminated, your stats are calculations on a napkin. ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [October 15, 2009, 4:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gun-toting-soccer-mom-dead/513115/428 "2009-10-15T16:50:35Z")
Seems only fair to let **Una** ’s stats in since she went to all that trouble. I mean, it’s not her fault there aren’t any good studies on this topic. ---
**Author:** ![Zeriel](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/z/58956e/32.png) [@Zeriel](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Zeriel)\ **Post date:** [October 15, 2009, 4:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gun-toting-soccer-mom-dead/513115/429 "2009-10-15T16:52:50Z")
> [@Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](#): > > No offense to you or to **Una Persson** , and I laud you both for your preference for empirical consideration of the issues and your efforts to obtain the data, but I’d prefer not to hold these up as established statistical relationships based on your efforts. In the big picture of the manner in which empirical analyses are reviewed and disseminated, your stats are calculations on a napkin. Obviously conceded, but unfortunately, they’re the best basis we have until someone who has an actual data collection team gets out there and does it. I do make reference in my later posts to preferring there be more formal/rigorous collections of statistics in general in order to better craft legislation/regulation. Your position is understandable to me, as I feel the same way as to unrestricted and/or unlicensed firearm ownership. Where we differ is that I think that licensing, registration, and mandatory training would do as much to lower firearm violence as outright banning would, while enabling me to keep the arms that I have for recreation, hunting, and (in theory, although I do not currently own a weapon with any specific capability for this) self-defense. I would like to thank you for addressing the problem respectfully and with attention to the studies on the matter (including an understanding that those of us on the “regulate but allow” side of the argument are in the minority and don’t have a lot of good peer-reviewed data to go on since no one in academia or the think tanks wants to grind our axe since it’s seen as a slippery-slope position by both “sides”) rather than the knee-jerkery that’s seen on both sides of this topic in typical discussions. Perhaps we can serve as an exemplar for how this should be carried out in general. –Z, who can’t justify a handgun purchase for any reason right now anyway, even if he did just pick up a .22LR target rifle on sale to go with his trap-shooting/deer-hunting shotgun ---
**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 15, 2009, 4:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gun-toting-soccer-mom-dead/513115/430 "2009-10-15T16:56:31Z")
> [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](#): > > Seems only fair to let **Una** ’s stats in since she went to all that trouble. I mean, it’s not her fault there aren’t any good studies on this topic. I’m not suggesting otherwise, only that they must be regarded for what they are, rather than considering them as established and equivalent to findings from a peer reviewed journal article. I’m confident that she (or he) would say the same. And I agree with **Zeriel** , in the sense that I prefer them to pulling things out of one’s ass, and without anything better, there is some value to them. ---
**Author:** ![devilsknew](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/4da419/32.png) [@devilsknew](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/devilsknew)\ **Post date:** [October 15, 2009, 5:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gun-toting-soccer-mom-dead/513115/431 "2009-10-15T17:00:10Z")
> [@Zeriel](#): > > Target identification, threat assessment, and conforming to Rules of Engagement (aka “When is it and is it not OK to shoot someone?”) are also parts of military firearms training, though. Yea, sure. So they can “legally kill” someone. That’s an ironic oxymoron, keeping to the theme of this thread. It’s the means to the same end. ---
**Author:** ![Zeriel](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/z/58956e/32.png) [@Zeriel](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Zeriel)\ **Post date:** [October 15, 2009, 5:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gun-toting-soccer-mom-dead/513115/432 "2009-10-15T17:12:34Z")
> [@devilsknew](#): > > Yea, sure. So they can “legally kill” someone. That’s an ironic oxymoron, keeping to the theme of this thread. It’s the means to the same end. Well, at this point, without statistics it’s a moot discussion. I’ve certainly known a tiny minority of military guys who’d be more likely to open fire with insufficient provocation, but the majority of 'em that I’ve known are the same as anyone else–hell, many of them don’t even own handguns and several stopped hunting/shooting when they got out because the act of killing “legally” in war caused them to lose their taste for hunting. ---
**Author:** ![FoieGrasIsEvil](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/foiegrasisevil/32/16638_2.png) [@FoieGrasIsEvil](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FoieGrasIsEvil)\ **Post date:** [October 15, 2009, 5:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gun-toting-soccer-mom-dead/513115/433 "2009-10-15T17:54:14Z")
> [@bup](#): > > That’s not the difference. > > I know that you know guns don’t make you immortal. The difference in our beliefs is that **you think a gun makes a well-trained person safer than not having a gun. I think you’re kidding yourself.** > > If I had a hammer simply to increase my personal safety that’d be stupid. If I had a car for the purpose of increasing my personal safety that’d be stupid. > > If a person wants a gun to go target shooting or hunting, OK, calculated risk. **If the person has it for protection they’re deluded**. Wait a minute, what? A well-trained person having a gun _is safer in certain situations where one might suddenly become very handy_!!! Are you trying to create the perception that all situations one might encounter during the course of a day are equally fraught with peril? She was killed _in her own home_ by her obviously mentally disturbed husband, a scenario where, unless she knew her husband had become a dangerous psychopath _a priori_, she was unconcerned about having her gun right there on her hip, and even if she had, it wouldn’t have saved her, apparently. But there are many, many other scenarios aside from the very extreme and rare circumstance of being murdered by surprise in your own home by a loved one where a gun could become the difference between your life and your death. Like at a… …wait for it… …little kid’s soccer game!!! ---
**Author:** ![devilsknew](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/4da419/32.png) [@devilsknew](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/devilsknew)\ **Post date:** [October 15, 2009, 6:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gun-toting-soccer-mom-dead/513115/434 "2009-10-15T18:49:17Z")
> [@FoieGrasIsEvil](#): > > Wait a minute, what? A well-trained person having a gun _is safer in certain situations where one might suddenly become very handy_!!! > > Are you trying to create the perception that all situations one might encounter during the course of a day are equally fraught with peril? > > She was killed _in her own home_ by her obviously mentally disturbed husband, a scenario where, unless she knew her husband had become a dangerous psychopath _a priori_, she was unconcerned about having her gun right there on her hip, and even if she had, it wouldn’t have saved her, apparently. > > But there are many, many other scenarios aside from the very extreme and rare circumstance of being murdered by surprise in your own home by a loved one where a gun could become the difference between your life and your death. > > Like at a… > > …wait for it… > > …little kid’s soccer game!!! Okay, a Pascalian wager for a million dollars… I’ll go to 100 kids soccers games around the country unarmed and anonymous as a spectator. If I get shot, you win the million. If I don’t get shot, I keep the million. ---
**Author:** ![Jimmy\_Chitwood](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/f475e1/32.png) [@Jimmy\_Chitwood](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jimmy_Chitwood)\ **Post date:** [October 15, 2009, 6:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gun-toting-soccer-mom-dead/513115/435 "2009-10-15T18:55:54Z")
> [@Zeriel](#): > > 1. Gun ownership and having a firearm accessible to me when I choose to are not qualities that make me a paranoid whackjob or any more dangerous. It’s certainly possible ( **Hentor** ’s cites suggest that it is) that gun ownership in general attracts people more likely to use firearms irresponsibly, but it’s equally likely ( **Una** ’s cites suggest that it is) that those of us with enhanced firearms licensing (such as a CCW) are less likely to be in the cohort of “perpetrators of illegal or accidental gun violence” by a fairly significant margin. (this being one of many reasons why I support enhanced licensing and photo ids and registration of all firearms, same as cars and driver’s licenses–both are tools that carry a significant risk of being deadly if misused (not even going to debate that guns are a tool primarily designed to put large holes in things on an ad-hoc basis, even if I personally use mine for target shooting)) Furthermore, I’m not sure that I’d agree that someone who is using open carry as a political statement is statistically more or less likely to be a whackjob. But if you want to think I, as a concealed-carry permit holder, am more likely to be a “demented, dangerous fuck” against the evidence, that’s on you and not me, which is why… I didn’t say anything about your gun ownership or about my personal level of comfort with guns, though. I’m not a gun person, and frankly I wish nobody was, that’s true. But that wasn’t my point. I just said that the spare tire analogy is demonstrably insufficient. Unless you disagree that a machine gun could be useful in the same way, but to a different extent, than a more culturally innocuous firearm, I’m not sure how you can take that as a commentary on your own choices. If I wanted to carry a bazooka around with me everywhere, you’d think there was something wrong with me, wouldn’t you? Yet I could argue that I’m just as entitled to do so as I am to carry a handgun – “shall not be infringed.” Most accept that a strict reading of the 2nd Amendment isn’t really called for, and OK, some infringement of the right to keep and bear arms is all right. Now we’re just negotiating over the price. > [@](#): > > 1. If I am carrying a firearm, you won’t know unless I want you to know, I’m legally/ethically obligated to tell you outright, or you’re in a position where I’m willing/legally obligated to let you frisk me. Because I _personally_ don’t think the fight for open carry and cultural normalization of carried weapons is worth scaring a bunch of people in an context involving children just yet–that’s needlessly provocative compared to making the same political statement in a primarily adult-populated and more general-access area, IMHO. > I’d leave it in the car when entering a private residence if the owner felt the way you do about gun owners–although if they had so little respect for me I’d find it hard to be friends with such a person–but that’s not the same as a public park, and I wouldn’t bother there. And that’s fine, and we agree. And if somebody somehow discovered that you had a gun in the car and was trying to roust you for it, I’d be there calling them a lunatic. I don’t think it’s wrong to have a gun. I think people have the right to have guns. I just don’t think “it might be useful, like a spare tire” is a very compelling argument why, normatively, one _ought_ to open-carry one to a soccer game. There are plenty of things that people are allowed to do but that I really wish they wouldn’t do. When they do them, I prefer that they not have really crazy and absurd reasons to do so, because then it’s hard to tell them from the crazy people who do the same kinds of things. ---
**Author:** ![bup](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/6bbea6/32.png) [@bup](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bup)\ **Post date:** [October 15, 2009, 6:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gun-toting-soccer-mom-dead/513115/436 "2009-10-15T18:59:46Z")
> [@FoieGrasIsEvil](#): > > Wait a minute, what? A well-trained person having a gun _is safer in certain situations where one might suddenly become very handy_!!! Of course. Certain very specific situations. > [@](#): > > But there are many, many other scenarios aside from the very extreme and rare circumstance of being murdered by surprise in your own home by a loved one where a gun could become the difference between your life and your death. > > Like at a little kid’s soccer game!!! Bullshit. Name one time that having a gun prevented a murder at a little kids’ soccer game. If you find one, your next task is to find more instances of a gun preventing a murder at a little kids’ soccer game than there are of people being murdered in their own home by a loved one. Or, you could pipe down, admit you’re an idiot, and I’m brilliant. ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [October 15, 2009, 7:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gun-toting-soccer-mom-dead/513115/437 "2009-10-15T19:04:05Z")
> [@devilsknew](#): > > Okay, a Pascalian wager for a million dollars… I’ll go to 100 kids soccers games around the country unarmed and anonymous as a spectator. If I get shot, you win the million. If I don’t get shot, I keep the million. You better hope it doesn’t occur to him to go to one of the games and shoot you himself. Or that he doesn’t read this post, of course. ---
**Author:** ![Fake\_Tales\_of\_San\_Francisco](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/8491ac/32.png) [@Fake\_Tales\_of\_San\_Francisco](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fake_Tales_of_San_Francisco)\ **Post date:** [October 15, 2009, 7:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gun-toting-soccer-mom-dead/513115/438 "2009-10-15T19:09:28Z")
Well, my goodness. I am quite glad I live in Britain and Australia (not at the same time of course, although that would be handy). Running away from bullets sure seems a lot more tricky than running away from knives. Not that I’ve had to deal with either situation, mind. That picture of the ‘football mum’ looks incredibly bizarre to my Across The Various Ponds sensibilities. ---
**Author:** ![Zeriel](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/z/58956e/32.png) [@Zeriel](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Zeriel)\ **Post date:** [October 15, 2009, 7:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gun-toting-soccer-mom-dead/513115/439 "2009-10-15T19:14:46Z")
> [@Jimmy\_Chitwood](#): > > And that’s fine, and we agree. And if somebody somehow discovered that you had a gun in the car and was trying to roust you for it, I’d be there calling them a lunatic. I don’t think it’s wrong to have a gun. I think people have the right to have guns. I just don’t think “it might be useful, like a spare tire” is a very compelling argument why, normatively, one _ought_ to open-carry one to a soccer game. I’m curious as to how you’d react to another of my statements upthread–that someone open-carrying in a place like a soccer game for political purposes ought at very least be open to fielding complaints and criticisms calmly and without irritation, and should ideally make it clear that it IS a political statement and that they are PREPARED and HAPPY to discuss their reasoning, qualifications, etc. ---
**Author:** ![Dag\_Otto](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/439d5e/32.png) [@Dag\_Otto](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dag_Otto)\ **Post date:** [October 15, 2009, 7:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gun-toting-soccer-mom-dead/513115/440 "2009-10-15T19:22:24Z")
> [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](#): > > You better hope it doesn’t occur to him to go to one of the games and shoot you himself. Or that he doesn’t read this post, of course. Seeing how **devilsknew** would be anonymous at the game, \*\*FoieGrasIsEvil \*\*would have to play the numbers game and shoot a hell of a lot of people at these games (I recommend the 20 round magazines). \*\*devilsknew \*\*would eventually get mowed down, as the only woman brave enough to defend little kid’s soccer games is dead. Just pay FoieGrasIsEvil his million now. But wait, if **devilsknew** gets shot, it’s unlikely he’d pay up on his bet. I suggest you guys let me hold the money for you. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gun-toting-soccer-mom-dead/513115.md?page=21) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gun-toting-soccer-mom-dead/513115.md?page=23)