Colorado Lawmaker: Women Afraid Of Rape Can't Be Trusted With Guns

Status
Not open for further replies.
What's a safe zone? (Honest question)

Is that like an area where everyone becomes completely impotent and loses all sex drive?
Semi naked men over 400lbs line the perimeter to destroy all potential sex drive of heterosexual rapists.
 
Last edited:
So the meta-narrative of what he is saying seems to be that guns are sufficiently scary to the ruling class in Colorado (or at least this moral imbecile) these days that a certain number of rapes are perfectly acceptable collateral damage in the name of disarming the populace. The obvious upshot is that the issue is not public safety, it is power and control.
 
One thing it would be useful to keep in mind about rape on college campus is that a lot of time it is done by someone the victim knows, whether a boyfriend, friend or a casual acquaintance. I'm not saying students should not be allowed to carry, but a gun does little good if someone slips a roofie into a student's drink at a party, or gets them inebriated to the point where they cannot resist.

Then again, neither do whistles, safe zones, and call boxes.

To really address the issue of sexual violence on campus, we would need to have an open and frank discussion about what drives it and how to prevent it, but that would involve universities admitting the problem comes from their own student body (can you say bad for recruitment?) and taking the time and effort to find a meaningful solution. One that would have to involve changing how men view women, for starters.

Of course, it's easier to ban guns and tell students to wet themselves.
 
This guy won't even get a slap on the wrist from his own party. Little chance it will make news outside Colorado.

The double standard is a fine banner to march under.
 
Emails sent to the CNN, FoxNews, WSJ and The Guardian newsrooms. Remember, these are all market-driven companies: if there is a demand, they'll follow it. Consider giving them a push in the right direction.
 
I thought it was a bit strange that the picture with the artical was an AR. Those darn women shouldn't be allowed to carry anymore then 10/22's for rape defense.
 
The pro-gun side should really push this... about how the anti (mostly Democrat) push is a "war on women" by taking away their right to self protection.
 
I remember going to this domestic a few years ago. The dispatcher was relaying how the call taker could hear the woman yelling "get off me" over and over again. Ok, maybe the call box isn't enough but I bet if she had a whistle or maybe if her bedroom was a designated safe zone that attack wouldn't have happened.

The most adrenaline induced profane language doesn't begin to describe how I feel about that man's comments. I've seen enough beat up women who couldn't run fast enough, dial fast enough, wait long enough.
 
If this is what he thinks are acceptable measure to deter rape, I would like to invite him to have an overnight stay in the Fed with a few wisely chosen cell mates. Lets see if after his unsolicited encounter with "bubba" is deterred by his little whistle.
 
One thing it would be useful to keep in mind about rape on college campus is that a lot of time it is done by someone the victim knows, whether a boyfriend, friend or a casual acquaintance. I'm not saying students should not be allowed to carry, but a gun does little good if someone slips a roofie into a student's drink at a party, or gets them inebriated to the point where they cannot resist.

Then again, neither do whistles, safe zones, and call boxes.

To really address the issue of sexual violence on campus, we would need to have an open and frank discussion about what drives it and how to prevent it, but that would involve universities admitting the problem comes from their own student body (can you say bad for recruitment?) and taking the time and effort to find a meaningful solution. One that would have to involve changing how men view women, for starters.

Of course, it's easier to ban guns and tell students to wet themselves.
How about we use the same fix that will help much of the issues in our country. Teach respect and civility and reduce the entitlement mentality that is being forced upon our society.
 
Why should a woman have to do something humiliating to stop a guy from raping her?
Who comes up with this crap?
That's a list of things to try if your gun malfunctions...
If this guy is married to a woman, I would like her response to this list.
 
Joe, his boss and his party all believe that the media, and the general public will swallow anything they say – without question or thought.

Sometimes I think they might be right. :barf:
 
My thoughts:

{violation of TOS}{violation of TOS}{violation of TOS}

;)

(This message was posted with a great deal of humor, mods.)
 
I voted, we're almost 50/50, but we're still behind.

There was a related article on the front page defending him and calling his attackers "oafish."

http://www.denverpost.com/ci_22624957/rape-comment-by-rep-joe-salazar-reaps-viral

The main argument in this rebuttal article is that we (gun rights activists) are erroneously tying Salazar to the vomit/urinate memo.

Both that article and the wording of the poll itself were worded in such biased ways that it makes me want to vomit.
 
It’s why we have call boxes; it’s why...

Blah, blah, blah. I get the feeling that this guy has never had to use any of those methods personally. Perhaps we should send a 1200 pound gorilla after him who hasn't seen a woman in half a decade. Let's see how well his call boxes and whistles help him. :D

It's hard to use a call box or whistle when you are either pinned to the ground or getting your face bashed in but I guess this putz never considered that angle. Argh! You can regulate safety but not logic.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top