Oh, so guns are the answer then? oh, no, just “one possible way to protect oneself” - and everyone in this thread is not advocating this, oh, no - they are.
Why do you think my head is up my ass? You are being quite obnoxious Catsix.
Well, you’re striking me as rather obtuse in this thread.
It’s been explained several times that having and knowing how to use a firearm is a way to protect yourself.
Why are you continuing to make it out like people have said things they didn’t?
Wow, interesting thread.
Well, first of all, Airman Doors: I would not necessarily think you’re a loony man simply because you pack a gun around. I might well decide you’re a loony man if you yank it out and start waving it around in my presence, or blazing away at things that aren’t there. I mean, I wasn’t planning on lifting your wallet or anything.
Especially now that I know you’re packin’ heat.
Attitude. Proper attitude is everything.
A gun is not a magic wand. It will not make you safe, and even if **Airman Doors ** pulls his out and points it at me, it will not necessarily make me obey his every command. A gun is no more than a stopgap solution, and if you are not willing to murder me with it, then it is the next best thing to useless against me… as some have already pointed out.
If the woman in question feels that a gun would work, then it’s up to her to obtain one, get the necessary permits and licenses, and learn how to use the thing… and be aware that it might not be where she needs it to be UNLESS she’s willing to pack it around with her everywhere…
…and that if taken by surprise, she might STILL not be able to use the thing to defend herself…
…and … most importantly… every time she fires the thing at the practice range, field-strips it, cleans it, and looks at it… she considers the fact that if the bad guy gets it away from her, that it may well be the object that kills her.
Thoughts to consider. There is no real safety this side of the grave, folks. All you can do is buck the odds.
Perhaps he is (mis)interpreting the earlier statement that it’s “irresponsible” not to own a gun" as the statement that supports his POV?
Well, I can see how that’d be easy to do.
I do think, personally, that a gun is the best available tool for the job, but saying it’s irresponsible to not have one is going a bit far.
carimwc,
This girl’s story breaks my heart. I wish her a full recovery, mentally and physically, and I hope her mother and the rest of her family are doing okay.
A little off topic, but anyway - I think a more accurate statement would be: If someone feels the need to pull out a gun and point it at someone, they think they’re already fucked…
Certainly you’re familiar with the Amadou Diallo or Yoshi Hattori (the Japanese exchange student in a halloween costume) cases. The people who did the shooting honestly thought they were threatened, and the people who were killed didn’t even have guns.
I don’t have a cite for the frequency of use of a gun that was stolen from a victim of an attack. My point was extrapolated from the fact that police officers, who are highly trained in self defense and weapons usage, sometimes lose their weapons to criminals. How many guns make it back to the police department and how many make it into circulation I do not know. I can offer this, though:
http://www.theneworleanschannel.com/news/3337340/detail.html
A police officer killed with her own gun, an employee wounded by the officer’s gun, a car stolen using the officer’s gun, a critically wounded good samaritan shot by the officer’s gun, and the officer’s gun…who knows?
Now, is it so “contrived to the point of being outright tortuous” to conclude that if police officers, with all of their training and experience, can be killed with their own weapons, then average citizens with minimal to no training and no experience can have the same thing happen to them?
Anyway, saying “tell her to get a gun and shooting lessons” is facile. Owning and carrying a gun works for you. It could also work for her, or it could not. It depends on a multitude of factors that only she knows.
You’d be surprised how little firearms training most police officers have compared to those who have a personal interest in firearms and self defense.
How wonderful!! :rolleyes: :rolleyes:
We’re all so busy sounding off about our gun laws views that the poor girl herself has been forgotten!!!
How is is she? Is she well? Have they ID-ed the attacker?
Have any of the unfeeling partisans on either side of the gun issue developed enough compassion to care?
WHOOPS! SORRY! I didn’t mean to interrupt the self-absorbed dickhead fanatics with my insolent suggestion that the welfare of a human being was more important than your motherfucking dimwit argument!
Swine. :mad:
I would imagine the reason she got away from the assailant was because she was able to scream. The assailant was undoubtedly familiar enough with the house to know that other people were in the house. That means: a) he thought someone had called the police; and/or b) he imagined that they MIGHT have a gun. It is for the latter that I support citizens’ rights to own guns. You don’t even have to have one in order for it to be an effective deterrent. That doesn’t mean I advocate your average citizen walking around with a loaded gun at all times. That to me is as alarmist as building a bomb shelter in your basement. However, if it makes her or you feel safer, you won’t get an objection from me.
I’m glad the victim was able to get away from the boil on the ass of humanity who attacked her. I hope they find the sick bastard and lock him away for a long time. And I hope she is enveloped in the love and protection of her family and friends.
I hope the young woman in question is doing well now and beginning the recovery process. I also hope it will be a comfort to her to know that, if not for her own strength and courage, the situation could have been even worse.
Of course, I also hope they catch the guy that did it. Those who said he may have known her or the family might be right, if he was staking out a remote house at that hour of the night. As frightening as it is to think that she was attacked by someone she knew, if that’s the case he may be easier to track down than a total stranger would be.
Because there’s a middle ground which you’ve failed to consider. It’s common logical fallacy. Most often called the “fallacy of the exlcuded middle,” or a “false dilemma.”
Slight update: They have not caught or id’d the attacker as far as I know. They have a general description but that’s all.
She was walking to her car so that means she was on the street. (The area around the house is wooded but neighbors aren’t that far away. It’s suburban NoVa.) It wasn’t a tire iron apparently but a flashlight. Still did the same damage though. The flashlight makes it seem like she interrupted something and the guy attacked so she wouldn’t say anything.
She’s doing ok, still very drugged up so she’s not quite yet in the process of dealing with it all. Her mom is a mess but coping.
My CHL (Concealed Handgun License) instructor put it this way "if you pull the trigger it’s going to cost you $50,000.00 in settlement money and/or legal fees, if you pull your gun and think about the money then you are in a NO SHOOT
(I am not sure what happened there)
Please allow me to continue,
NO SHOOT situation", I took the class and began carrying regularly because a LEO (Law Enforcement Officer) told me “remember, we are not in the crime prevention business, we investigate and try to solve crime after it has been committed, I think it’s the responsability of every adult to protect themselves”.
I carry a Beretta 96 Brigadier (.40) and a spare magazine (all Cor-Bons) with me ALWAYS, it’s my “security blanket”, I spend a lot of time at the range working on “muscle memory” (if your body knows what to do, your mind can be on something else), it’s not a “magic wand” but it makes me feel better.
Now for the standard “canned” responses:
You may find me dead in a ditch one day but I will be surrounded by a pile of hot brass.
I’d rather be judged by 12 than carried by 6.
To get back on topic, the guy who did this is a fucking monster and should not be on the streets sadly he will probably not be caught, I wish a complete recovery for your friend.
Unclviny
Straaaaaaaaaaw man. Straaaaaaaaaw man.
Bosda,
Well-meaning, caring people offered advice in the interest of preventing a future occurrence of this to her and other well-meaning, caring people thought the advice might not be such a great idea for her. Reasons, cites, rebuttals, and tangents ensued.
The victim’s welfare and the welfare of others are at the center of it all. That’s my POV, anyway.
Just because the thread title and OP touch the heart of a sensitive issue (personal safety) doesn’t mean that everybody engaging in the discussion of a question posed by the OP are unfeeling self-absorbed dickhead partisan motherfucking dimwits. Just because people address these issues and post things other than brief sympathies doesn’t mean they lack compassion for the victim. Give it a rest.
Let’s pretend she got in an auto accident. She was ejected from the vehicle and suffered significant physical injuries. We also learn she was not wearing a seatbelt.
If this were the case, I’m confident the discussion would focus on the fact she was not wearing a seatbelt. While we would certainly say she was a victim and feel some sorry for her, we would also point out that she chose to forgo some protection by not wearing a seatbelt.
:dubious: :dubious: :dubious:
That’s a false analogy.
Try—
People dashed over to the scene of the wreck, ignored the victim, never asked if she was hurt, & then started arguing about whether seatbelts would keep you from escaping if the car landed in water.
Now that’s a good analogy!
Mmm, I’d say it’s a very good analogy.
If I heard on the news that someone got thrown from a vehicle and was not wearing a seatbelt, I would think, “Gee, why the hell weren’t they wearing a seatbelt?” I suspect most people would be thinking this. And justifiably so.