Homicide is a top cause of maternal death in the United States

Really? In every state?
And it only applies to men FOUND GUILTY.

https://www.healthaffairs.org/do/10.1377/forefront.20210922.688449

So, only 23 states out of fifty - funny you did not know that

https://www.acog.org/clinical-infor...ements-of-policy/2019/gun-violence-and-safety

 

Typo and on John Stewart would probably enjoy

 

You have some interesting points and pity they are not backed by cited research

 

On the internet anyone can claim to be anything - particularly on a board like this. I judge people by how they post. If they back claims with research I accept that they have post graduate qualifications

 

very 'stormy' out there for some

 

Actually it's quite a true statement.

 

It's a shame you don't follow your own rules.

Shall we judge you by that?

 

Once again you are incorrect, that is a federal law and applies equally to all firearm purchases in the US.

 

This quote from your link: ",...twenty-three states had at least one law in effect..." may be referring to state laws. As the quote below from Giffords states, there is a federal law in place with reference to domestic violence and firearms ownership.

Giffords is one of the most prominent and vocal gun control groups in the US.
(my bold in the quote)

https://giffords.org/lawcenter/gun-...d,certain domestic violence protective orders.

Bottom line, I have to agree with you that people with a history of violence should be prohibited from owning a firearm. One of the biggest problems we have in the US is once a violent person is identified, we do little or nothing about it until they commit a worse crime than the one which first identified them as violent. All one has to do see the trend is read the histories of our mass shooters or our sex offenders.

As an example, here is a link to and quote from the Wikipedia article on Carol Bowne who was murdered in New Jersey in 2015.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murder_of_Carol_Bowne

 

Unfortunately many of these women buy guns to protect themselves from the abusive partner and are then shot with their own guns

https://www.futureswithoutviolence.org/userfiles/file/Children_and_Families/Guns.pdf

 

Idiotic. Criminals funny obey the law.

 

You're going to actually need to provide a source for this claim.

 

Valid point.

I wonder though, how many women not only buy a gun for protection but then use if for protection. We seldom hear about it because it is not considered a head line by the opposing sides in the gun control debate or not considered newsworthy by major networks. The Carol Bowne case in New Jersey made headlines because the state law was changed due to her murder. Had she had a gun and killed Michael Eitel it would have likely been just a note in a regional newspaper.

If we as a society would lock up or exterminate these vile, violent individuals it would significantly reduce the problem. We in the US have failed to make gun safety a priority. By gun safety I don't mean locking up guns or making them harder to obtain to make them "safe". I am suggesting providing instruction in the understanding and safe handling of firearms. In a society with more than one gun per person it only makes sense. Guns in the US are not going away any time soon so let's teach people that they are inanimate objects, tools. Let's teach people how the tools works. A person who had never driven a car would likely obtain some sort of instruction before jumping in to operate one. To buy a gun and have no idea how to use it is not a good idea.

Bottom line, people like the POS who killed Carol Bowne should never be let out of prison once they are locked up. Better yet, execute them!

 

"Instead of conferring protection, keeping a gun in the home is associated with increased risk of both suicide and homicide of women. Household use of illicit drugs, domestic violence, and readily available firearms place women at particularly high risk of homicide at the hands of a spouse, an intimate acquaintance, or a close relative."
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/9125010/

Guns are a net negative for women.

 

While I would agree that the quote has some validity I would have to disagree with the statement that "Guns are a net negative for women". One only has to look to the number of women gun owners in the US and how they use their firearms to realize that statement is false.

 

I see evidence that guns are being to used to kill women. I don't see evidence that guns are being used to save their lives. So I think it's reasonable to say that guns are a net negative for women.

 

So are knives.

 

Because you can't find data?

 

If a court has issued a restraining order against a suspected abuser to protect an intimate partner or her child then his guns can be seized.

"Section 922(d)( 8 ) prohibits the knowing transfer of a firearm to a person who is subject to a court order that restrains the person from harassing, stalking, or threatening an intimate partner or child of such intimate partner, and section 922(g)( 8 ) prohibits the receipt or possession of a firearm or ammunition by such a person."
https://www.justice.gov/archives/jm/criminal-resource-manual-1116-prosecutions-under-18-usc-922g8

But the states are not always good at sharing info about who is subject to a restraining order with the federal government. So the suspected abuser may still be able to pass an FBI background check to buy another gun. The loophole needs to be closed

 

The main reason you don't see evidence that women are using firearms for self-defense is that the information is not deemed newsworthy. Stories about a woman being brutally murdered seem to make the top stories on the evening news. On the other hand a story about a woman who scared off her attacker by pulling a gun doesn't seem to have the "Oh my!" factor that sells advertising space. Often times when the woman is the victor of the situation the incident goes no further than a police report if it goes that far.

And then let's not forget about the millions of women who own and use guns for things other than self-defense; using them for hunting or recreation or competition.

 

Access to guns at home is associated with a higher risk of women being murdered. If women were using guns to save their lives more often then they were being murdered with guns then you'd expect the risk to be lower. But it's higher. Yes, some women use guns for recreational purposes. But guns have little utility in the modern world. Recreation isn't enough to justify a high gun murder rate.

 

Just under half of all adult female homicide victims are killed by non-firearm means. Given that both of firearm and non-firearm rates are fairly equivalent, do you condemn the other uses of knives, bludgeoning weapons and fists because of the rate in which they are used for murdering adult women?

Or are you a hypocrite?

 

"Gun control: The theory that a woman found dead in an alley, raped and strangled with her panty hose, is somehow morally superior to a woman explaining to police how her attacker got that fatal bullet wound."

 

There are approximately 130,000,000 adult females in the US. According to Pew Research approximately 28.5 million, of those adult females own a firearm. In 2019 there were a total of 6,164 homicides of females. Of those homicides, 2,287 were by firearm.

I don't throw these numbers around lightly. It is a sad commentary on how we live and I would very much like to see progress made in bringing those numbers down. I just don't feel the way to address the problem of domestic violence or mental health issues is to place more regulation on firearms.

Some interesting additional death stats from 2019:
7,233 US females died of nutritional deficiencies
3,975 US females died from obesity

I understand that one woman killed by an intimate partner is one too many. A friend I grew up with, lived next door to for 12 years, was killed by her domestic partner. He used his hands.

 

That's because they continue to live with the abusive partner, had they taken their gun and moved on they would still be alive.