The NRA is pushing a concept that is more likely to result in the rape victim dying

thinking once a few frat boys or a star sports player gets killed, he will be changing his mind. Of course the legal system will prove to be an advocate for the no-longer-a-victim because I killed my abuser. I mean, law enforcement has a stellar reputation for believing a rape victim as it is. No way would they charge a woman who said the frat guy was trying to rape her, so she shot him. Or my ex who has a restraining order because of his abusive history, was threatening me. So I fired a warning shot to get him to back off, giving me time to flee. Nor would a prosecutor ever say something like, stand your ground laws are not intended for a victim of domestic violence to shoot her abuser. Oh, and BTW, the NRA does lobbies against a law that removes a gun from the hands of a person with a restraining order against them.

Most rapist rape someone they know so how exactly does this work? Does this mean a woman should always be armed? And especially in places where she is bound to be around a lot of men she already knows, like at work, college campus, on dates, and when socializing?

I guess her parents were irresponsible because she didn't know how to handle a weapon.

campus to stop rapes. Funny, that he thinks a rapist with a gun wouldn't be a threat to a young woman. Or that if both have guns, the crime might be murder instead.

gawdamn, the stupidity makes my skin crawl.

how about the seducer, coercer....

am i only allowed to shoot the one i do not know hiding behind the bushes?

how violent before i get to shoot? do i need bruises, or just suspect he will not stop when i say no

i get to shoot the college boy?

frat, athlete, all of 'em and i can trust i will not be slapped with murder?

87% of the rapes are NOT... the stranger behind the bushes.

that soldier raping his fellow soldier.....

i can say i am raped and our people, media, cops, judge will call me a liar.... but, these people are suggesting i can murder, and a thumbs up to them.

no one ever really thinks.... with this stupid mentality.

"Men! Beware! There are feminazi harpyies out there who literally want to kill you! This is a war on men!"

i needed it.

OK guys - I am wading in - and thought my post may not be popular I ask you to hear me out.

First off, I think you are misunderstanding the NRA guy due to some semantic issues.

He isn't saying "the woman is at fault." He is saying (quite pragmatically), that when you are being attacked, crying out "Damn this evil patriarchy!" won't help you. When he says, "the burden of stopping the attack is on the woman", he doesn't mean it in the "burden of proof" sense; he just means that the attacker isn't going to stop his own crappy self - either the woman finds a way to stop him, or she gets victimized. Make sense? The burden - the crushing horrible work, the unwanted job - falls on her. And he's right.


Now, a proposal about women and guns.

Men are much stronger than women,, mostly. A man attacks a woman knowing he can win the fight. Think how much confidence you have that you can pin your ten-year-old. That's the confidence a man has when he picks a woman to attack.

What if women fixed things so men were no longer confident?

What if lots of women started carrying guns?

I think what WOULDNT work is to wait until a man is grabbing you - if you draw your gun then, he'll twist it out of your hands.

So a better way is this: Any woman who feels threatened (say there's a guy walking behind you in the park) calls out loud and clear and confidently, "I have a gun, and if you come any closer, I'm going to have to shoot you before you can put your hands on me. You're bigger than I am, so I'll have no choice. I can't let you get close."

Most of the time, these incidents will end peacefully. The attacker (if he's an attacker) will gape and fade away and think twice before he attacks another "easy mark" (maybe she's packing too? Bitches are gettin' nuts!). An innocent guy will be frightened of being shot at and will stutter and put his hands up, and you can talk things out and go your separate ways.

Once in a while, the guy will move in on you and you'll yell, "Back off; last chance!" and if he keeps coming, you'll shoot him. (Which will feel terrible. I'm not a cowboy.) If he turns out to be a known rapist, you saved yourself and made the evening news and rapists everywhere will sit up and take notice. (Bitches are getting REALLY nuts!) If he turns out to be innocent, well, too bad of course. But for fuck's sake, sisters - how many women are killed by men, have been killed by men, will continue to be killed by men? How about we accept that no prince is going to save us, but we can save ourselves?

If this were a widespread movement, men would stop seeing women as the easy meal we have always been. And there would be far fewer stranger-in-the-park type attacks. I believe this.

I know this trend would not stop date-rape and marital rape and roofie-rape. But ladies, wouldn't it feel good? I am so freakn tired of being little and helpless and trying to stay out of harm's way because I'm the "weaker sex" and males everywhere attack females everywhere and we can never win the fight. I'm just tired. And yet it's my choice to stay helpless. A concealed-carry permit is legal and within my grasp.


(Confession - I have never fired a gun except a couple times at a range. I'm not a gun person and I doubt I'll change. But I'd love to see a next generation of women take their protection into their own hands and even the playing field. Maybe we'll still die, but at least we'll have fought.)

BTW, this gun idea came to me after a rape in the garage of my workplace. For six months afterward, a big sign was posted by the main elevators, from the security dept, where no one could miss it. Every damn day I read: "ATTENTION. On May 8, a woman was assaulted and raped in the East Garage after work. The assailant has not been caught. For your safety, women should not walk alone to the garage or around the campus, even with another woman. Women should always lock your home and car doors immediately once you're inside. Women are advised not to go out alone after dark. The Security Department will escort you."

Every damn day I imagined all the people who were reading this sign. The rapist was reading it and smirking, "Hah, the pathetic females are locking themselves inside in fear of me!" And my male coworkers were getting the message that I am weak and vulnerable -- can't step outside, poor thing! - and not their equal. And all women were having it pounded into them day after day, that a threat hung over us and we must creep around like mice, trying to avoid it.

So I developed a fantasy of posting a bigger sign over the first one. "ATTENTION. On May 8, a woman was assaulted and raped in the East Garage after work. For your safety, women should obtain a concealed-carry permit and learn to use deadly force. If a threatening person approaches you in the garage or elsewhere, warn him off, and if he doesn't listen, you should shoot to kill."

I think the rapist, my male coworkers, my female coworkers, and myself, would have found that far more empowering.

The statistics show over and over again that women who carry guns die from gun violence at a higher rate than women who don't. Women with guns in their homes die from gun deaths at a higher rate. It's really that simple. Guns are often used against the very women who the NRA thinks can be protected by them. They're much more likely to die from them than be protected by them. And if guns are allowed on campus, duh, rapists will be carrying them. In addition, most sexual assaults aren't of the stranger surprising a woman in a back alley type - they're mostly acquaintance rape or a date that goes wrong. He's as likely to grab for her gun in a situation like that as she is. If a man can overpower a woman in order to rape her, he surely can overpower her in order to get hold of her gun. Duh.

And the NRA's stance absolutely puts the responsibility on "don't get raped" rather than "don't rape." That's the WRONG MESSAGE.

More guns = more gun deaths. It's been proven over and over and over again.

...that if a woman lets a man get close to her he can likely pull the gun out of her hands. You and I agree on that. Except I didn't say "duh". Perhaps read my post.

I am against guns on college campuses because the combo of drunk young adults and lethal weapons is frightening.

But I would like to see the studies you mention: please give citations. I can think of lots of reasons why the studies turned out that way, some due to cause-effect relationship (woman waits too long to draw and has the gun used on her), some associative (the kinds of women who carry guns tend to be members of more dangerous niches in society, causing selection bias). Or maybe women with guns tend to move in the world more freely instead of locking themselves inside. If you give yourself 100 percent more freedom
In exchange for a ten percent higher death rate, that would be a worthwhile trade-off for some.

And the eventual offputting effect to oppoetunistic rapists, after enough 'easy targets' prove themselves to be less easy than the attacker suspected, may save lives and change society in the end. Though you won't see it on any study unless concealed-carry becomes widespread among women.

I disagree with your belief that the gun argument tells women the rape is their fault. Obviously rape is the fault of whoever commits it. I believe in fighting for a world in which rape never crosses anyone's mind because we have all been raised to respect each other. But a two pronged strategy (let's try to teach people not to rape, and for those that don't listen, be ready to teach them the fatal way) doesn't negate that.

Of course I hope you will always be free to NOT carry a gun. No means no! But I am glad we all have the other choice too.

Please do post those citations to the studies you mentioned.

"I disagree with your belief that the gun argument tells women the rape is their fault. "

I didn't say this. I said the responsibility to not GET raped is put on women, not the responsibility to NOT RAPE on men. It is not my responsibility to keep you from raping me, as if rape is a default or a given.

Does that make it clearer?

Here is a buttload of links showing the statistics that women are far more at risk of violence with guns in the home. A lot of studies have been done - all you have to do is google.

and getting it out before a potential rapist can get close enough to grab you?



i have no time for this level of nonsense.

Frankly, you brought the subject up to shoot any man that gets "too close" and if he is innocent, well that's too bad. Supposedly, we live in a nation of laws.

thank you. I do see anger in your replies when challenged and do not understand why you say "too bad" if you shoot a man who was innocent.

1) you posting that not only carrying a gun, but taking it out whenever someone you see gets too close, then shooting them after a warning...is not only beyond the pale for discussion, it's advocating something that is illegal. you probably can be banned from DU for recommending people do things which are illegal, especially if they are violent actions.

2) calling out your post as nonsense does not make a person anti-gun, it makes them anti-nonsense, or anti-violence or whatever, but nice try.

3) being criticized for your idea doesn't make you a persecuted feminist, it makes you a person who advocated something dumb and illegal and someone who was criticized for advocating something dumb and illegal.

4) if you choose to stop posting in this group because an extremely bad idea you posted was criticized, then I'm pretty sure you seem a bit mislead on the purpose of internet discussion boards.

5) finally, when you post something as bad as you posted and then say, "oh but I'm a feminist!", reasonable people will question whether you truly are a feminist or perhaps a person who is attempting to make feminists look as dumb as the idea you posted while claiming to be one.

you're saying that women should shoot men who come within an arbitrary distance and that this is justified by simply warning the person to be shot that they will be shot if they come any closer.

and you're recommending this in public places.

this sounds a lot like "Stand Your Ground" and you are not suggesting any requirement that there be an actual threat which warrants shooting a person.

the idea that you are posting that guns and shooting people in this manner as the solution to rape would seem to make you a poor fit here, in this group and on DU.

although he couches it in a guns-are-impowerment message while poo-pooing that there is too much emphasis on women being responsible for their rapes through their actions or, in this case, their inactions by not walking around packing heat.


That premise is fundamentally bankrupt to most feminists I know.