NationStates

Posted: **Tue Nov 04, 2014 1:29 pm**

*Sarcasm* No, women should not be able to protect themselves from rapists and other criminals.

Posted: **Tue Nov 04, 2014 1:29 pm**

Nadkor wrote:
Lingang wrote:I think the problem is that there's a good number of self-entitled assholes out there. That can go for both men and women.

No, the problem is ~~men and~~ how society teaches men to view women as objects available for their pleasure for the price of a compliment.

Fixed that for you. You are really coming off as a sexist yourself the way you choose your words.

By including the words I crossed out you are giving the impression that me having a Y chromosome is something I should be ashamed of. Fuck that.

Posted: **Tue Nov 04, 2014 1:30 pm**

T Roosevelt wrote:
Chernoslavia wrote:
1. Why yourself included?

Stay on the topic.

Huh?

Posted: **Tue Nov 04, 2014 1:30 pm**

To put things simply, I don't want little "Judges" running around everywhere, spraying blood all over the sidewalk.

Any woman can have a gun right now. There are many types of firearms that require no special licenses or clearance.

Spend a few months getting a CC license and they have a 1911 in their pocket on the street.

Posted: **Tue Nov 04, 2014 1:31 pm**

T Roosevelt wrote:1. Plenty of people can be taught how to use a gun.

Plenty. Not all.

2. I don't care what everyone wants.

Very unAmerican.

3. Pistols are traditionally American, the men who lived out West used them all the time and disputes were settled with dueling. President of the United States Andrew Jackson won duels, dueling is American as a salute.

Let's not look to men like Andrew 'Genocide' Jackson as role models. We lost one of our best to duels, and the notion of honor is rather unAmerican. It's the long gun which defines us - we are hunters, soldiers, woodsmen. Not thugs and cowboys.

Posted: **Tue Nov 04, 2014 1:32 pm**

Keep them out of the hands of Radical Feminists, and I'm fine.

Posted: **Tue Nov 04, 2014 1:33 pm**

Seno Zhou Varada wrote:
WestRedMaple wrote:
You are mistaken. A wound meant to cause them to bleed out (which is what you claimed was the intent) leaves them adequate time to harm or kill you.

You are confused about the purpose of self-defense, even though I just pointed it out.

Once in actual physical contact, certainly a knife is a very valid choice. At any range beyond that, a firearm is more effective.

Have you had 5 years of training with this? I have and the blood will gush causing them to die in seconds and to max minutes. Oh crap the internet tone I just made... though if I was at a couple feet range my preferable weapon would be a bo-staff as I'm also trained in it better than a knife. And I see the use for a gun but that's preferable 5 feet and further in my opinion and knowledge.

Posted: **Tue Nov 04, 2014 1:33 pm**

Kernen wrote:
Seno Zhou Varada wrote:I do understand your point of view as a firearm does sound less stressful but in these sort of situations with my training a knife would be the most useful as I know how to use it and disarm one effectively.

And that's great. You should use what works for you. Just be mindful that what works for you won't work for the general population because they lack the same skills. I'm pretty handy at defending myself with 3 feet of rope, but I'd never suggest paracord replace guns

3 feet of rope is useful... and of course guns usually work for the general populace because sadly I live in the US gun home of the frickin world so I understand.

Spoder wrote:
Seno Zhou Varada wrote:I do understand your point of view as a firearm does sound less stressful but in these sort of situations with my training a knife would be the most useful as I know how to use it and disarm one effectively.

Not true at all.

A gun will be faster and more deadly. The user's strength has little to no effect on the effectiveness of the firearm (recoil control is still a factor), and it is much easier to successively attack. A gun is also easier to use than a knife.

Strength isn't as important depending on the knife. Sharper one or ones with pointy edges will minimize any need for strength as long as you can cut. Though I see how a gun is easier to learn I've also learned a few ways to disarm one though that usually won't matter for the attacker as they don't have much of the martial arts experience I do.

Posted: **Tue Nov 04, 2014 1:33 pm**

Chernoslavia wrote:1. Why yourself included?

Bipolar. The majority of gun deaths are suicides. Mania might also lead to... impulsive decisions.

Posted: **Tue Nov 04, 2014 1:33 pm**

Tule wrote:Fixed that for you. You are really coming off as a sexist yourself the way you choose your words.

By including the words I crossed out you are giving the impression that me having a Y chromosome is something I should be ashamed of. Fuck that.

Regarding men as a class of oppressors has nothing to do with biological essentialism. It's patriarchy that commits biological essentialism by designating gender identity, expression and roles to people based on their genital shape in the first place.

Posted: **Tue Nov 04, 2014 1:34 pm**

Conserative Morality wrote:
T Roosevelt wrote:1. Plenty of people can be taught how to use a gun.

Plenty. Not all.
2. I don't care what everyone wants.

Very unAmerican.
3. Pistols are traditionally American, the men who lived out West used them all the time and disputes were settled with dueling. President of the United States Andrew Jackson won duels, dueling is American as a salute.

Let's not look to men like Andrew 'Genocide' Jackson as role models. We lost one of our best to duels, and the notion of honor is rather unAmerican. It's the long gun which defines us - we are hunters, soldiers, woodsmen. Not thugs and cowboys.

3. Mind you that a Colt 1873 Artillery revolver was used at the OK Corral shooting by Wyatt Earp, to rid the streets of thugs and cowboys with red sashes.

Posted: **Tue Nov 04, 2014 1:34 pm**

Davinhia wrote:Keep them out of the hands of Radical Feminists, and I'm fine.

I don't think they're a greater issue than bigoted and prejudiced men as a whole.

TERFs, though? Yeah, it'd make sense. If only people supported transgender rights and regarded hate speech against us a crime...

Posted: **Tue Nov 04, 2014 1:35 pm**

Conserative Morality wrote:
Chernoslavia wrote:1. Why yourself included?

Bipolar. The majority of gun deaths are suicides. Mania might also lead to... impulsive decisions.

Oh. Well I respect your honesty

Posted: **Tue Nov 04, 2014 1:35 pm**

New Aerios wrote:
Seno Zhou Varada wrote:Have you had 5 years of training with this? I have and the blood will gush causing them to die in seconds and to max minutes. Oh crap the internet tone I just made... though if I was at a couple feet range my preferable weapon would be a bo-staff as I'm also trained in it better than a knife. And I see the use for a gun but that's preferable 5 feet and further in my opinion and knowledge.

Yeah I know the tone I made for the internet. Love the humor you made though if we had a tipnof the hat smily I would use it.

Posted: **Tue Nov 04, 2014 1:35 pm**

New Aerios wrote:
Seno Zhou Varada wrote:Have you had 5 years of training with this? I have and the blood will gush causing them to die in seconds and to max minutes. Oh crap the internet tone I just made... though if I was at a couple feet range my preferable weapon would be a bo-staff as I'm also trained in it better than a knife. And I see the use for a gun but that's preferable 5 feet and further in my opinion and knowledge.

You. I like you. If I could upvote you, I would.

Posted: **Tue Nov 04, 2014 1:36 pm**

Degenerate Heart of HetRio wrote:Regarding men as a class of oppressors has nothing to do with biological essentialism. It's patriarchy that commits biological essentialism by designating gender identity, expression and roles to people based on their genital shape in the first place.

Regarding men as a class of oppressors ignores in a very real sense the fact that patriarchy is perpetuated by men and women. It may primarily benefit men, but men are not, as a class, responsible for patriarchy. Women suffer disproportionately, but women are also the oppressors. Men suffer somewhat less, but men are also the oppressed.

This class of oppressors bullshit does nothing but blow hot air.

Posted: **Tue Nov 04, 2014 1:37 pm**

So... basically, you're saying that:

Man: "Hey"

Woman: "Rapist!" *gun shots*

I really don't think you've thought this through.

Posted: **Tue Nov 04, 2014 1:37 pm**

Uh... I guess it depends on the circumstances. It seems like this has to be a personal decision based on your assessment of how safe you are and how much of an improvement having a gun would be.

I don't want a gun - I'm an upper class straight white CIS-gendered male (who actually can't have a gun right now because I'm in college), so I'm in a pretty safe demographic group. I don't like guns (don't think they're fun or cool - I think they can be pretty dangerous, I generally associate them with a pretty trashy culture, etc.), so I really don't see a compelling reason to have one.

But, let's take another perspective: 65-year old single, poor black woman in inner city Detroit. She has a pretty strong reason to be scared: she lives in a terrible area in which she's a likely victim of violent and property crime, and the police pose as much or greater a risk of harming than helping her (especially given police response times in Detroit). It makes a ton of sense for her to have a gun.

I'd imagine the average woman is somewhere between us on this spectrum - barring a communist revolution or lynching by anti-Semites, I'm in a pretty safe position (don't want or need a gun). Old lady in Detroit definitely needs a gun. The average woman has more risks than I do (higher chance of being mugged, of being raped, of being generally assaulted, etc.), so perhaps it makes sense for her to have a gun.

This doesn't mean every woman needs a gun: female college students, like male college students, should not be allowed to bring guns to university (just like high schoolers and middle schoolers shouldn't be allowed to take guns to class). Severely mentally handicapped or violently mentally ill individuals should probably not be allowed to have handguns. And women who are just about as safe as I am also do not need them.

There are arguably circumstances in which the potential risk of having a firearm is higher than the potential benefits (a mother living in a relatively safe neighborhood with a low crime rate perhaps has more to fear from her child accidentally shooting himself/someone else due to improper safety procedures than she does of a burglar-murderer-rapist breaking into her house), so that's also a factor.

Posted: **Tue Nov 04, 2014 1:37 pm**

Chernoslavia wrote:3. Mind you that a Colt 1873 Artillery revolver was used at the OK Corral shooting by Wyatt Earp, to rid the streets of thugs and cowboys with red sashes.

Yeah, but Wyatt was a deputy - nearly a cop.

I'm not saying that pistols don't have a place in society. I'm just saying that the long gun is what defines us.

Posted: **Tue Nov 04, 2014 1:38 pm**

Conserative Morality wrote:
Degenerate Heart of HetRio wrote:Regarding men as a class of oppressors has nothing to do with biological essentialism. It's patriarchy that commits biological essentialism by designating gender identity, expression and roles to people based on their genital shape in the first place.

Regarding men as a class of oppressors ignores in a very real sense the fact that patriarchy is perpetuated by men and women. It may primarily benefit men, but men are not, as a class, responsible for patriarchy. Women suffer disproportionately, but women are also the oppressors. Men suffer somewhat less, but men are also the oppressed.

This class of oppressors bullshit does nothing but blow hot air.

All we'll get if everybody is running around with a 1911 in their pants is a huge spike in murder and burglary related crimes.

Posted: **Tue Nov 04, 2014 1:38 pm**

Degenerate Heart of HetRio wrote:
Tule wrote:Fixed that for you. You are really coming off as a sexist yourself the way you choose your words.

By including the words I crossed out you are giving the impression that me having a Y chromosome is something I should be ashamed of. Fuck that.

Regarding men as a class of oppressors has nothing to do with biological essentialism. It's patriarchy that commits biological essentialism by designating gender identity, expression and roles to people based on their genital shape in the first place.

In that case, saying that the problem is how men are taught to treat women would have sufficed. Saying that "men" not "some men" not, "most men" but men is condemning every person born with a Y chromosome, even those aware of and opposed to the patriarchy.

Seriously, wording matters. Reading what Nadkor wrote fucking hurt.

Posted: **Tue Nov 04, 2014 1:38 pm**

Chernoslavia wrote:Oh. Well I respect your honesty

I doubt I'd make any such decisions on the latter, but I understand fully that emotional and mental disorders make me a potential danger to not only myself, but to others as well, and that is unacceptable. Thus, as much as I love guns, I'll never own one.

Posted: **Tue Nov 04, 2014 1:39 pm**

Conserative Morality wrote:
Chernoslavia wrote:3. Mind you that a Colt 1873 Artillery revolver was used at the OK Corral shooting by Wyatt Earp, to rid the streets of thugs and cowboys with red sashes.

Yeah, but Wyatt was a deputy - nearly a cop.

I'm not saying that pistols don't have a place in society. I'm just saying that the long gun is what defines us.

The long gun is what created the U.S.

If handguns were so 'Murikan we would not be using M1s in military funeral ceremonies.

Posted: **Tue Nov 04, 2014 1:40 pm**

Conserative Morality wrote:
Chernoslavia wrote:3. Mind you that a Colt 1873 Artillery revolver was used at the OK Corral shooting by Wyatt Earp, to rid the streets of thugs and cowboys with red sashes.

Yeah, but Wyatt was a deputy - nearly a cop.

I'm not saying that pistols don't have a place in society. I'm just saying that the long gun is what defines us.

Yeah, you are right.

Posted: **Tue Nov 04, 2014 1:40 pm**

Sanctissima wrote:So... basically, you're saying that:

Man: "Hey"

Woman: "Rapist!" *gun shots*

I really don't think you've thought this through.

T Roosevelt wrote: I'm concerned with setting the precedent of a woman shooting some man over something not so bad like a greeting. I think men also should tip their hats or nod downward if they're going to compliment a woman.

Son, I don't think you've read this through.

NationStates

Should every woman have a gun?