My wifes very good friend has been a victim of a tragic and extremely violent crime. I will start by giving a little back story. She is very tiny, about 5 ft at best, and very skinny, I would say about 100 pounds at best. She is 25 and she can't even pick up a big bag of dog food without straining. Her boyfriend was very abusive. He used to burn her, rape her, punch her and threaten to kill her and her child if she left. He was about 6 ft, and a big boy at around 275 lbs or so. It was hard for her to get her child and leave, he did not work so he was always around. She finaly had got enough courage to leave, so she began making plans. This scumbag found out and the following happened. He grabbed a kitchen knife, one that was longer than she was thick, forced her into the childs bedroom, woke the child up, and started stabbing the mother while the child watched. He stabbed her 7 times, each time the knife went through her and out the other side. The little girl ran and hid, but saw everything. As the scumbag looked for the girl, the mother pulled all of her strength together to crawl to the front door. Luckily, the police had been called before any of the stabbing happened because of intense fighting, but they arrived 30 minutes after they were called. When she got to the door, the police came rushing up. I got there shortly there after, but couldn't get close to the scene, but the first responding officer who I know, (I knew most of the cops back then) had tol me what he seen. The scumbag only got 5 years, this happened 4 years ago. He is up for parole in April, and she once again fears for her life. What do you anti gun people think she should do? If he wants to finish the job, he is more than capable of doing so. How is she to defend herself? I am directly calling those out who wish to see guns dissapear, bowerbird, lolo, godisnotreal, reiver etc. You all believe we should not own guns, how will she defend herself?
Tragic. At least she survived, which is a miracle in itself. I can already see what they are going to say, "she can get a restraining order." What's that going to do, create an invisible force-field that would protect her? I know from experience that restraining orders are too difficult to get and don't prevent anything. I hope she has a firearm now, she probably needs one more than most other gun owners.
Actually she has a lifetime restraining order on him, but she cannot get a firearm in massachussetts because she got addicted to her pain meds, and even though she is clean, she cannot legally own a firearm in Mass. until five years after treatment ended. It has only been about 2. If the scumbag doesn't get out in April, he will get out in december, still too early. According to gun control advocates, she does not have the right to defend herself by any means necesary against a man who was three times the size of her BEFORE he went to prison. I have a feeling antigun drones will not touch this one, because it makes sense for her to have a firearm.
If she wants to get a gun to protect herself, than that is not the issue. It's a safe place. That's the real issue. That's what she needs to be focusing on.
But there are people out there who would condemn her for having such means to defend herself. There is no arguments about safes, only arguments about restricting or banning. Because of current and unreasonable restrictions, she cannot procure the means to protect herself. So my question still stands, what is she to do if he comes to finish the job?
I may have misunderstood you, did you mean a safe place to store a gun, or a safe place to hide and live in fear for the rest of her life? Picking up and running away: does not solve the issue, you are talking about, disconnecting from family and friends and hiding for the rest of her life while this scumbag walks free to do as he pleases, including the ability to attack family members in an attempt for information.
There's a simple reason for that. Lobbiests. If there's a gun ban, what happens? Gun sales go down, aka less profit. That's why this is the issue. It's not about safety, it's just a good old fashion economic one in the closet. - - - Updated - - - Safe place to be for her.
Uncle Joe givin' self-defense gun advice... Biden: Buy a Shotgun February 19, 2013 Vice President Joe Biden advised a woman who asked whether a ban on certain weapons and high-capacity magazines would make people more of a target to criminals to buy a shotgun.
This is a false question. I'm not anti-gun (indeed, I come from a gun background); I'm pro-rational gun control. If someone wants a gun for self-defence then that's jolly good. The reduction in the disutility of fear can be an important aspect for an individual. Of course we shouldn't forget that guns in the household are, according to evidence, more likely to be used against family members than in their defence. Nevertheless, that isn't sufficient to suggest a blanket ban is pertinent. Its just a dreadful cost
Question... Would he being her ex still not constitute as a "Family member" and if they were still together and he did all that to her and she shot him be part of your anti gun statistics? Honestly I would (Younger and dumber) got at the guy with a bat if he did that to a friend or a friend of my ol lady. However now. I would make sure I have a quick route to her place incase something happens and make sure she has a good sturdy door that can get him stable for a few minutes for me (Well you) to get there to assist. Just like you said in the beggining it took the officers minutes. A buddy on a Defensive Carry forum I am on tells me. When you have secounds to live, Cops are minutes away.
Can you show that gun owners are less likely to be victims than non-gun owners? I do know of one study that suggests gun owners have a lower cost from crime, but that hasn't been verified by other studies
Um, yeah, 100lb girl vs. 250lb man, the odds are in the man's corner. 100lb girl with an SR9c vs. 250lb man, the odds are in the girls corner, its not science, its common sence.
Im not sure how that quote is stating the gun owners are less victims. But sure. I did find this but this was intresting to me at least. http://www.justfacts.com/guncontrol.asp#crime This one horrible (at least to me) But only 8% so...not all criminals carried, and my only thought is DAYUM o.0
Can you refer to evidence? The impact on female assault probability is unknown (given, for example, how guns are used in spousal abuse). You should be able to show that a gun owner is significantly less likely to suffer from the effects of criminal activity than a non-gun owner. Basic use of evidence!
You don't need evidence to show that this 100lb girl would be safer with a gun against this 250lb monster coming to finish her off. This is basic common sence. Do you also need proof that the sky is blue?
You always need evidence, particularly as we know the victim effects are ambiguous (e.g. gun ownership can increase the likelihood of being a victim of burglary)
You know, you are right. But doing a cost benefit analysis in this situation is almost a no brainer. Small girl vs large male. What happens if she has a gun and he confronts her? What happens if she does not have a gun and she confronts her? What happens if she has a gun and he never confronts her? What happens if doesn't have a gun and he never confronts her? Each situation requires a cost benefit analysis. The chances of her getting hurt or killed with 1, 3 and 4 are much less than situation 2. It is all conjecture though. Each person has to make the decision on their own.
I'm interested in the overall effect. The 'decision on their own' is quite reasonable and provides a justification to ignore blanket bans. However, could you show- for example- that sexual assaults are lower with more liberal gun control policies?
Are you expecting national statistcs or city/neighborhood/state? I can't find statistics like what you are broadly asking for without parameters. I could show that sexual assaults are high in Africa in war lord areas on women from militant groups that suppress a populations RTKBA, but that is not representative of our society. If you want to compare cities in the united States, that is a little more reasponable, but there will always be more sexual assaults in large metropolitan areas per capita vs a small rural town in Nebraska.
