Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I was watching the clip and something stuck out in my head. He mentions that only 3.8% of all violent criminals in prison today are women. Meaning the other 96.2% of all violent crimes are perpetrated by men. That is a pretty staggering difference.
A large number of these violent crimes are assaults and rapes of women. So his idea was to arm all the women, to see what effect it might have on the rates of violent crime.
The more I think about it, the more I like the idea. Maybe just a little two shotter. Something they can keep on them at all times, with a lock to keep the kiddies from having an accident.
I think the social stigma of guns deters women from getting a gun for themselves. If it is was common and free, I don't think they would be nearly as frowned on as they are now.
......
The more I think about it, the more I like the idea. Maybe just a little two shotter. Something they can keep on them at all times, with a lock to keep the kiddies from having an accident.
I think the social stigma of guns deters women from getting a gun for themselves. If it is was common and free, I don't think they would be nearly as frowned on as they are now.
In bold: could you possibly be any more condescending?
Social conditioning deters many women from arming themselves. Women have traditionally been the caretakers, the ones to clean up the blood, not to spill it. Therefore many women have difficulty making the mental connection between firearms being part of care taking and defense of their families/children as well as themselves.
Why a projectile weapon? Why not a stun gun or chemical weapon? Women (and many men) might be more likely to arm themselves with weapons less likely to cause the kinds of irreversible outcomes that projectile weapons cause. The argument that guns are more effective weapons is kind of moot when many choose to be completely unarmed rather than arm themselves with guns... ... seems like a TASER or Pepper Spray would be at least an improvement over being completely unarmed?
In bold: could you possibly be any more condescending?
Social conditioning deters many women from arming themselves. Women have traditionally been the caretakers, the ones to clean up the blood, not to spill it. Therefore many women have difficulty making the mental connection between firearms being part of care taking and defense of their families/children as well as themselves.
How was I being condescending?
And you have basically repeated my point. I just find there to be a need for women to be able to defend themselves. But for some reason society puts pressure on the weakest amongst us to stay that way. If all women carried a two-shot .357 in their bra, or on their hip, or strapped to their thigh. Small enough where it doesn't inhibit the ability to walk/jog/run/bike/etc, but a big enough caliber to stop someone. Then it makes me wonder how much of a drop in violent crime against women would occur.
It wouldn't be seen as strange or excessive if all the women were doing it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Leisesturm
Why a projectile weapon? Why not a stun gun or chemical weapon? Women (and many men) might be more likely to arm themselves with weapons less likely to cause the kinds of irreversible outcomes that projectile weapons cause. The argument that guns are more effective weapons is kind of moot when many choose to be completely unarmed rather than arm themselves with guns... ... seems like a TASER or Pepper Spray would be at least an improvement over being completely unarmed?
H
Tasers are unreliable and impractical in most situations, especially if there is more than one attacker. Stun guns require you to be far too close. I mean, can you imagine an 80-year old woman trying to fend off an attacker with a stun gun(and many far younger women for that matter)? They are simply impractical in most situations.
Pepper spray is fairly practical, and it is small enough to be able to carry around with you. I know several women that have pepper spray on their keychain, or on their belt or belt loop. There are a couple issues though with pepper spray, such as overall effectiveness, and the potential to sort of diminish its effects.
Although I don't want people getting shot, I still see a "gun" as being a much better deterrant than pepper spray. I mean, a woman with pepper spray, I might still take my chances. A woman with a gun? No thanks.
And you have basically repeated my point. I just find there to be a need for women to be able to defend themselves. But for some reason society puts pressure on the weakest amongst us to stay that way. If all women carried a two-shot .357 in their bra, or on their hip, or strapped to their thigh. Small enough where it doesn't inhibit the ability to walk/jog/run/bike/etc, but a big enough caliber to stop someone. Then it makes me wonder how much of a drop in violent crime against women would occur.
It wouldn't be seen as strange or excessive if all the women were doing it.
Tasers are unreliable and impractical in most situations, especially if there is more than one attacker. Stun guns require you to be far too close. I mean, can you imagine an 80-year old woman trying to fend off an attacker with a stun gun(and many far younger women for that matter)? They are simply impractical in most situations.
Pepper spray is fairly practical, and it is small enough to be able to carry around with you. I know several women that have pepper spray on their keychain, or on their belt or belt loop. There are a couple issues though with pepper spray, such as overall effectiveness, and the potential to sort of diminish its effects.
Although I don't want people getting shot, I still see a "gun" as being a much better deterrant than pepper spray. I mean, a woman with pepper spray, I might still take my chances. A woman with a gun? No thanks.
A taser is better than nothing. I will take that any day over bare fists. Unfortunately, blue state like NJ don't allow it.
Location: Georgia, on the Florida line, right above Tallahassee
10,471 posts, read 15,830,626 times
Reputation: 6438
Quote:
Originally Posted by forest beekeeper
.
I don't think that any adult should be confined in what type of firearm they choose to carry, which is why I stopped supporting the NRA.
Reminded me of this...
The biggest gun ever built, it weighed a crushing 1344 tons, including its railway carriage. With its breech block, the entire machine stood 4 stories tall, 20 ft. wide and 140 ft. long. Moving, positioning, loading and maintaining this monster required a 500-man crew commanded by a major general.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
