Should every woman have a gun?

[Jordsindia]

Lol, idk, they both consent?

Then it wouldn't be rape then, would it?

Nope. I just put 'illegally' for emphasis, I guess.

[Big Jim P]

Then it wouldn't be rape then, would it?

Nope. I just put 'illegally' for emphasis, I guess.

And if I were not half-dead tired, I probably would have assumed that.

Goodnight.

[Jordsindia]

Nope. I just put 'illegally' for emphasis, I guess.

And if I were not half-dead tired, I probably would have assumed that.

Goodnight.

Ha, okay brotha.

[Soselo]

Oh Rosy, you card.

[Belique]

No, but this is mostly because I believe that the problem is better combated through a change in societal attitudes. Creating fear for misogynists on the streets is only treating a symptom, not the disease.

It's creating a inoculation for curing the disease. May hurt at first. Mistakes and whatnot, but eventually, creeps freaks and rapists will be too scared

[Freemopia]

All females should have guns as long as they didn't commit a crime like murder/abuse/neglect/kidnapping/pointing a gun at an innocent person.

@ the video: lol. that was not harassment. That was males trying to be friendly.

[New Rogernomics]

Should every woman have a gun?

Usually rapists, sex predators, and other people harassing or abusing women have guns on them.

Even if you were to hypothetically give all women a gun, complete with arms training, women would still be at risk - and why should they have to be safety conscious 24/7?

Misogyny is not easy to deal with, especially when it has existed since early civilization was born and decided men were somehow 'superior' to women.

Unfortunately large parts of the world and some religious groups, still view women as objects (not as human beings deserving of dignity of person and human rights).

You can promote education, push for pay-parity between men and women, and donate to charities taking care of women who suffer rape or violence directed towards them.

But it really begins at home, and in your community. If people accept casual misogyny - then it can perpetuate.

But if, people publicly go to the defense of women and outright condemn bad attitudes or bad treatment of women - then it instills in the home and in the community that such bad behavior and attitudes are unacceptable.

Then these positive values will spread to other communities, and hopefully to the next generation.

[Spoder]

1. All females should have guns as long as they didn't commit a crime like murder/abuse/neglect/kidnapping/pointing a gun at an innocent person.

2. @ the video: lol. that was not harassment. That was males trying to be friendly.

1. What if they don't want one?

2. The woman clearly minds. The men are making creepy compliments. It's harassment, no matter what the men want to do.

[Donut section]

Women with guns?

No to "should"
Yes to "could" as long as they are mentally sound.

Same for women as for everyone else i guess.

[Cascadeland]

Should every woman know how to a use gun and be armed with one?

Absolutely. If they choose to for self defense.

Every human being has an inherent right to self defense, and firearms ensure that a 120 lb woman can protect herself from a 200 lb rapist.

[Nadkor]

You don't know anything about guns, do you?
Let us see your opinion change when someone is pointing a gun at you.(or in the case of the OP, when someone is trying to illegally rape you)

Guns aren't just for killing people! They can also be used to coerce people into having sex with you! Wait until someone threatens you with a gun, then you'll see!

[Nadkor]

How would one go about legally raping someone?

Lol, idk, they both consent?

Hang on, are you a parody account?

If it turns out that you're Jesussaves then I'll be delighted.

Not that anyone else here would remember him, I don't think, but he's part of NSG legend.

Go on - tell me you're not a parrot.

[Imperializt Russia]

Without the gun, the woman would still be assaulted and hurt, yes, but the point is the rates of assault would be less. The gun makes the problem worse by increasing the rates of domestic violence against women. Taking the gun away doesn't make the domestic violence go away, but it sure reduces it by a significant amount.

That is only if men will assault their partners less if their partners lack a firearm, and unless you can prove that, your argument is false.

His argument was actually that women are less likely to be shot by their abusers by handguns they acquired to defend themselves from their abuser than women who don't.

[Papait]

I've seen how this stuff happens in real life, i've been drugged and robbed once too.
When you're not watching they put something in your drink, but you're too drunk to notice and don't see any problem with the slight taste difference,
you slowly start feeling tired, you leave the club, you walk home, but you get more and more woozy, then they come to you to 'help' you out, they help you walk to a dark corner where you're unable to do anything while they rob you, or possibly rape you.

Watch your drink. It's not that difficult.

Obviously every variable cannot be accounted for, but a gun minimizes the risk.


I don't even understand what we're arguing over; it is not as if women aren't allowed to own guns.

In most countries they aren't...
either countries where they have less rights or where gun ownership is prohibited

[Papait]

No, civilians should not get guns because they don't like societial courtship rituals. Should kindergartners be given guns just in case their teachers are a little eccentric? No, no they shouldn't. Guns are bad, I try to ignore loudly polarized issues (like feminism) which is why I'm sticking to the gun control aspects associated with the question asked by OP.

So, no. No, civilians should not be given tools whose only purpose is homicide, and they shouldn't be given instructions to shoot anybody acting impolitely. That's dumb, OP.

Homicide is rarely the intended purpose of a gun. Self defense, hunting and target shooting are the most common intended purposes.

when you use it for self defence or hunting your sole purpose is to kill.
either to kill somebody who may or may not pose a threat to you or when hunting to kill an animal. Guns were made to kill. You cannot possibly claim anything else, all guns are meant to kill, but some people may use them for other things but its core remains the same

[Imperializt Russia]

Homicide is rarely the intended purpose of a gun. Self defense, hunting and target shooting are the most common intended purposes.

when you use it for self defence or hunting your sole purpose is to kill.
either to kill somebody who may or may not pose a threat to you or when hunting to kill an animal. Guns were made to kill. You cannot possibly claim anything else, all guns are meant to kill, but some people may use them for other things but its core remains the same

Guess that means the hundreds of millions of firearms in the US are just being constantly misused, huh?

[Papait]

Should every woman know how to a use gun and be armed with one?

Absolutely. If they choose to for self defense.

Every human being has an inherent right to self defense, and firearms ensure that a 120 lb woman can protect herself from a 200 lb rapist.

Every human has a right to shelter, food, education and sanitary. And in a certain sense to self defence but not to carry a gun, we made the social contract where we give up our right to act with violence to the ggovernment for our own safety. This includes firearms.

[New Socialist South Africa]

If you can afford a gun and want to buy one, and don't have a violent criminal history or documented and dangerous sociopathic tendencies, go for it.

[Papait]

If you can afford a gun and want to buy one, and don't have a violent criminal history or documented and dangerous sociopathic tendencies, go for it.

Yes but people who have dangerous tendencies will not admit that. Guns can also turn misunderstandings into tragedies

[New Socialist South Africa]

If you can afford a gun and want to buy one, and don't have a violent criminal history or documented and dangerous sociopathic tendencies, go for it.

Yes but people who have dangerous tendencies will not admit that. Guns can also turn misunderstandings into tragedies

Sure, but that's kind of just a hassle of life. Guns can also protect people from would be murderers or rapists. Very limited gun regulation is the option that saves the most lives. Truly dangerous people will probably find a way of getting a gun anyway, all you can do is try make it harder for them while making it easy for law abiding citizens.

[Ifreann]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_law_of_holes

But I am not. I am defending myself. I'm sure tons of y'all have slapped a least one random person's butt before.

Why are you defending yourself? You are completely in the wrong. How do you not see that?

[Valkalan]

It's impractical to force every women to own a firearm. Every adult, regardless of gender, should be encouraged to purchase firearms and to learn how to properly use and maintain a firearm.

[Settrah]

I think it's good to teach everyone how to properly use and maintain a firearm.

Oh no wait, sorry, I forgot that we're not living in a science fiction film, and the aliens aren't about to attack and steal our TV.

My bad.

[Imperium Sidhicum]

I think everyone capable of holding a gun should know how to use one. And not just use it, but use it as part of a team employing tactics. A safe nation is one where every able-bodied citizen is willing and able to take up arms against enemies foreign and domestic.

That said, I don't think guns are appropriate means of self-defense in casual circumstances, not if you're a civilian without special training. Being consistently able to hit targets on the range does not equate to drawing and effectively firing a piece when attacked on the street by one or multiple opponents, and I dare say that most gun owners of America or anywhere else in the world would find their firearms useless when faced with a sudden attack by a determined foe, because:

1) Stress - unless you are extensively trained in stress management under extreme circumstances, a training normally reserved for military and law enforcement, chances are you might even forget you are armed and freeze in terror or run instead of fighting back, especially if you are attacked by surprise. Every soldier and policeman can attest the importance of element of surprise that can often resolve situations without firing a single shot. Also, even if you manage to pull your piece on the opponent, you might not necessarily have the willingness to fire it, or the skill to fire it quickly and accurately enough, giving him a chance to disarm you.

2) Legality - there exist plenty of laws regulating the use of force and proper escalation of it. If you are not properly trained in stress management and escalation protocol, you might easily end up breaking any number of these laws and end up doing more time than your assailant would have for his crime, for example, by shooting a guy who was only threatening you verbally or poping seven caps in a lad who pulled a knife on you, hitting an innocent bystander in the process because you were too scared of the knife to consider other options or take proper aim. In any scenario, use of lethal force (i.e. firearm) must be your last resort, when a clear and imminent danger to your or someone else's life or limb is present and there are no non-lethal means to disarm the opponent.

3) Availability - you never know when you might be attacked. It might happen on the street, in your home, anywhere, really. So unless you intend to keep a loaded gun under your pillow and in the drawers of every room in your house (which in itself would present an obvious safety hazard), count on it that you will most likely have to handle an attack unarmed and prepare yourself accordingly. You will not always have a gun, knife or other weapon at hand, but your hands and feet will always be there at your immediate disposal.

4) Retaliation - in most cases of street assaults, the attacker has no intent of taking your life. He is most likely after your valuables and knows it can earn him some serious prison time as it is, so the attacker is obviously not interested in upgrading his potential sentence for murder. That, however, may easily change if you pull a gun on him and he also happens to have a lethal weapon at hand. Never forget that the criminals are human beings just like yourself, with the same responses to fear and stress. For this reason, an unsuccessful attempt to kill or incapacitate the criminal with armed force might provoke lethal retaliation that could otherwise have been avoided.

5) Value - a firearm itself is a valuable possession, especially for people in the dangerous business of crime. Your gun itself, while intended to be a deterrent, may become a tempting prize for a would-be assailant, especially if you don't look very confident in your close combat abilities.

6) Safety - any weapon, being a tool designed for the explicit purpose to cause lethal injury, presents an inherent safety hazard, especially when you are stressed and cannot think adequately. Unless you have proper training, you're better off without it.

Simply put, guns in inadequately-trained hands are more trouble than they are worth, so studying martial arts for self-defense is a much more practical investment, since there's obviously no way every citizen concerned for personal safety could undertake a full military/law enforcement CQB course.

[Big Jim P]

Homicide is rarely the intended purpose of a gun. Self defense, hunting and target shooting are the most common intended purposes.

when you use it for self defence or hunting your sole purpose is to kill.
either to kill somebody who may or may not pose a threat to you or when hunting to kill an animal. Guns were made to kill. You cannot possibly claim anything else, all guns are meant to kill, but some people may use them for other things but its core remains the same

In self defense, the purpose is not to kill but to end and attack. If the attacker is killed in the process, that is merely collateral damage.

Not all guns are meant to kill. Target pistols and rifles for instance.

In any event, not all killing is wrong. Killing for food is not wrong. Killing in self defense is not wrong.

Edit: and I specifically said Homicide, not killing. There is a difference.