"Women are more likely to have their handguns used against them"

[RavenVT100]

While setting aside the blatantly sexist overtones of such a remark, none of us can really ignore the fact that it's an extremely common statement that one hears when engaged in gun control debates. In fact, it seems to form one of the primary cornerstones of the case that people make who are against concealed carry or even possession of a handgun by private individuals.

When I get into arguments with those who have an anti-gun slant, I typically hear the same old "cooperating with a robber is the right thing, after all he will shoot you if you resist, and possessions aren't worth anyone's life." Okay. What about rape? Is it a safer move to allow an attacker to rape you?

When I ask this question, I'll invariably get the response that women should just learn martial arts because they're more likely to be disarmed or shot if they have a handgun. The response isn't accompanied by a reference to any study or other evidence. These types of statements will typically come from people who consider themselves to be very pro-women's-rights in all areas, except for (apparently) self-defense.

This section of the debate has frustrated me somewhat, because it's hard to get anyone to address the points I bring up without reverting to the whole "armed women are a liability" argument. I would like to know how martial arts are going to fend off a determined rapist who is armed with either a firearm, knife, blunt object, or a chemical or electonic incapacitating device. Second, I would be interested in hearing about any studies that address the situation I'm describing.

 

[ballistic gelatin]

Great question. I too, would like to see/hear some substantiated responses.

 

[strambo]

When it gets to that point say "Oh, so you don't think women should be police officers?" "If women just get their guns taken away easily wouldn't that put the public in great danger, with all the criminals running around with female cops guns?"

That will cause great cognitive dissonance with the feminist/social equality streak present in liberals (I'm not implying those are bad things per se) and the response should be interesting. I'm sure they will mention police training..."Ok, I agree, women (and men) should recieve training as well as a handgun!"

 

[Calhoun]

I'm betting that you are not going to get any responses with proof of this. 2 reasons: 1. I doubt that anyone that would say this is going to post here, and 2. It's not true. As you said in the beginning you your post, RavenVT100, it's just something that people say when they are trying to make an argument against private ownership of handguns.

For what it's worth, I have had people tell me that I'll have my gun taken away and used against me in a confrontation. I'm male (not that it matters), 5'11", 185lbs., and have enough experience to watch out for myself. It's just something people say b/c it sounds good to them.

Calhoun

 

[RavenVT100]

Yeah, I recognize that it's an ideological barrier that people develop in their heads, especially when they've had no situational awareness or combat handgun training themselves.

The martial arts thing is what throws me for a loop, though. If you've already let a person with a weapon get within an unsafe radius, what makes you think that any martial art, with the exception of sheer luck, is going to help you at that point?

There have been a huge number of movies recently, none that I'll name but that will no doubt be obvious, which demonstrate martial arts as well as firearms use in a completely unrealistic context. It's hard not to think that some of this hasn't resulted in these completely incorrect assumptions about martial arts somehow being able to trump a handgun outside of a certain radius.

 

[Reno]

I remember seeing some statistics, possibly from the DOJ, showing that an armed woman is much less likely to be the victim of a successful violent crime.

 

[Barbara]

I've always heard it from stupid people.

 

[pax]

Awhile back I was talking with one of the women regulars at a local jujitsu dojo. This lady had gotten her green belt, rarely missed a class, and was most interested in the self defense possibilities of knowing a martial art.

Our conversation wandered around to the subject of self defense, and she told me she wouldn't ever carry a gun because she knew she wouldn't use it. She didn't want to hurt or kill anyone, she just wanted to be able to defend herself. *

Being somewhat stealth at the time, I didn't say much of anything, just listened to her explain this to me.

Then I watched her get on the mat and learn how to throw a man down, break his arm, crush his windpipe, and get away.

She didn't see the contradiction.

Worse than that, she had absolutely no clue that she was learning the use of deadly force: "That degree of force a reasonable and prudent person would consider capable of causing death or grave bodily harm." Because she didn't know in her gut that it was deadly force, she had almost no internal safeguards; she hadn't thought through the legal, ethical, and moral implications of what she was learning and why she was learning it.

And I think she was a fairly typical type of martial arts student. These folks want to learn "something" to defend themselves, but haven't and won't think it through the rest of the way unless someone takes the time to walk them through it.

As for whether the martial-arts style she was learning is good for self defense or not, I couldn't say. I do know that people I trust tell me it really isn't. All I can figure is, if she did need to use it and it did work, the things she was learning were going to get her into a world of legal hurt that she didn't know she was bargaining for.

pax

* Btw, this is not an invalid point, guys. The time to realize that you wouldn't shoot anyway is before anything happens to you, not when you have pulled the gun out and then freeze on the spot. Such people shouldn't be urged to carry anyway; they should be urged to rethink their priorities.

 

[Barbara]

Ok, not being sarcastic now.

I don't think the argument that women are going to have the gun taken away is true, but that they're more likely to be killed with a gun that was owned by someone in their home than by random violence.

This is pretty much the case. But I believe that as long as a woman feels safe at home, she is safer outside her home if she is armed.

 

[strambo]

Worse than that, she had absolutely no clue that she was learning the use of deadly force:

This is why the first thing I do when I train with new people is explain to them the reasons to learn how to kill with their hands and the legal and psychological ramifications in laymans terms with the instruction to look up the local laws for themselves and do some soul searching about the psych/moral side.

I also start out with teaching some lethal techniques first and fully explain the medical implications and certain situations where you would and would not be justified in using them. If that is too real for them than maybe we shouldn't train together and we can part ways. Either way, I establish that personal protection is deadly serious and it isn't fun or something to do on a Saturday night right off the bat.

I also tell them the first day that the best form of protection bar none according to data gleaned from the DOJ National Crime Victimization Survey (and common sense ) is a firearm and in our State (OR) you can get a permit.

Any instructor who teaches potentially lethal/serious injury techniques without fully explaining the implications is doing their students a serious disservice.

 

[mete]

I've been asked many times by people - "should I get a gun". I immediately get to the point and ask " could you , under appropriate circumstances, kill someone ?" Unless they immediately say yes I tell them don't even think of getting a gun. It's a very serious subject but all too many think if 'scareing' or 'wounding'. Do they really think that a sociopath or psychopath high on drugs and booze is going to scare ??

 

[armoredman]

After working in the prison system for some time, and working with sex offenders, any woman or liberal who advocates just giving in to rape is a lunatic. I have inmates who kidnapped, raped, and torched women, raped and killed children, and infants, and other equally if not more heinous crimes. The incidence of communicable disease among this population is staggering, including AIDS, herpes, syphylis, Hep B and C, and TB. Even if she missed all the STDs, it would be tragic to catch TB from the rapist coughing in her face...
Rapists come in every flavor and color, creed and size. They only have one thing in common - they understand force. Thier force against women is thier power, and when women use force against them, it is only turning the tables against them, or, as the liberals say, it's "leveling the playing field". Ask them if a 5" 90lb 65 year old woman defending herself unarmed against a 6'7" 300 lb 20 year old rapist is "fair", and if something could be done to "level the playing field"?

 

[WT]

I know a woman who was disarmed by a home intruder. She couldn't bring herself to shoot him. He seriously beat and raped her. He then stole her Model 60. It took her years to recover from her injuries.

The BG was later caught and convicted of 14 some odd rapes.

The woman now carries 24/7. She has no qualms about shooting an attacker. I know she would die before she was raped again.

 

[RavenVT100]

Ask them if a 5" 90lb 65 year old woman defending herself unarmed against a 6'7" 300 lb 20 year old rapist is "fair", and if something could be done to "level the playing field"?

This is another question I usually ask when it gets to that point, and the response is either "well, I don't know..." or "it is still not practical to put even more handguns on the street, especially in high-crime areas."

That said, training seems to be the deciding factor in whether or not a personal handgun will solve a scenario like this, at least in the victim's favor.

 

[Lupine]

That's the misconception that kept me from purchasing a self-defense handgun for years and years and years.

I'd always enjoyed shooting--Dad took me to the range as a little girl and taught me how to use his revolvers, and at summer camp I was VERY good with a .22. My dad died in 97 and left me his antique Winchester, his Ruger 357 and Ruger .22 (my uncle got his best shotgun--boo hoo). Last year, I finally picked up the guns from my mother's house, and thus began my journey.

Having had some violent experiences in the past, I began discussing with a neighbor of mine who had told me he carried a concealed weapon. Around that time, I saw Michael Moore's BFC movie and smelled a rat. So I began debating the pros and cons of handguns for protection with the neighbor, my mom's fiance (who'd been horrified to learn that I'd thought of the Ruger Blackhawk as a potential self defense gun--I've learned a LOT since then.) and others. I openly discussed my "education" with my circle of friends, and came across people who were both shocked at me and who shocked me in return by sharing their own CCW permittee status.

I kind of looked at it as a challenge to my existing beliefs--an induced paradigm shift, so to speak. I took the required class in Oregon for a CCW (very basic) and an NRA Home Defense course (much more extensive). Also, I took an intensive women's self-defense course offered through the local PD and taught by women over a period of four weeks.

I've learned a lot through these boards, as well, and read some of the most basic Mas Ayoob books.

So to make a long story short, through learning how guns work, (and how they do not), how to care for and store them, and through challenging the beliefs common among the mainstream that your own guns will spontaneously shoot you when you're not looking, and learning how to assert myself, and learning self-awareness, I went in a short time from somebody who firmly believed that a gun would only exasperate any bad situation to a woman who feels as confident as possible in her firearm and resolve to use it if the need arises.

I'm one of those fortunate people who likes to have her convictions challenged, and who seeks out diverse social interaction...and I'm lucky as hell to have gun nut buddies on my street and in my circle of friends, even though most of the latter tend to be on the liberal side of the fence.

My two cents. And in regards to unarmed defense tactics, it's extremely important to know how to defend yourself when a gun is unavailable or inappropriate. Also, the right course will teach a woman that she is worth defending, and will give her confidence that will improve her life in many ways unrelated to defense.

 

[nualle]

RavenVT100 said: training seems to be the deciding factor in whether or not a personal handgun will solve a scenario like this

Put "martial arts" where you have "a personal handgun" and the statement is as true. Okay... nearly as true. Guns are more versatile than hand-to-hand training. But IMO, the two are complementary rather than contrasting.

What makes the difference is not training in technique but in situational awareness and survival mindset. Survival mindset (aka: indomitable spirit, "never again" determination, etc.) has to be cultivated to be made reliable.

edited for silly typo

 

[goon]

IIRC, there was a study that said a police officer was more likely to be killed with his own weapon than with a gun a perp is carrying.
Does that mean that cops shouldn't carry guns?

What is that quote?
Something like...
"He might take my gun, but it will be empty and smoking by the time he gets it."

SIG P-225. My carry choice. It holds 8 rounds in the mag and one in the chamber. Most armed confrontations take place at less than 7 yards. In my prime, I could shoot smiley faces on a target at more than three times that distance. I am not still that good, but I am still pretty capable with a handgun.
What makes anyone think that I am going to just stand there and let someone take my gun and use it on me, when I could simply just shoot them full of hollowpoint bullets?
I am a 23 year old male. Army vet, hunter and shooter since I was 4 years old. I have been in about a dozen fistfights in my life, and I am willing to resist, armed or not. I learned early that people will prey on you if you look weak, and that even if you can't win it is better to go down with your teeth in their throat.
Give them some scars, bruises, and loose teeth, and they will look elsewhere next time. Drive their head through the mirror on a school bus and they will definitely loose interest. Trust me.
I am not an overly intelligent person. The average person, given any experiences similar to mine, would come to the same conclusion.

So my question is, are women dumb?
Seriously, do you girls lack intelligence? In the face of violence, does your brain take a walk off the map?
I highly doubt it.

 

[bcochran]

Every one has problems

I don't waste my time "debating". Most people have closed minds.

For all those people out there who believe that women training in the martial arts is the answer to safety, I relate the following.

I did Judo at UCLA. There was a bigger, stronger, heavier guy who had a black belt. I trained with him. At the time, there was a masked rapist in the community. He would attack women, stun them by hitting them and follow up.

Yep. You guessed right. He was the masked rapist. At one time, he took on and knocked out two women from sorority row.

This was 30 years ago. I still remember reading comments by female students at the time that by the woman knowing a martial art, she had a good defense.

In reviewing the assertion made in the original posting, you need to bear in mind that someone (the guy) has made a determination to become an aggressor. Once that decision to aggress has been made, it is highly unlikely that the female will be uninjured, if not killed. It would be her lack of skill that results in the firearm being taken away, not the firearm itself.

On one of these boards, there was a video of a female cop discharging her Glock as she reholstered. Of course, she had the trigger finger in the trigger and discharged it as she firmly brought the weapon back to her side in preparation to holstering. I guess that her negligent discharge is only caused by her gender, right?

 

[TallPine]

what makes you think that any martial art, with the exception of sheer luck, is going to help you at that point?

I didn't know that "sheer luck" was a martial art.

Where can I take a class in that ...?

 

[sendec]

I have never seen any research of any quality which indicates that women are any more likely to be disarmed and have their weapons used against them than any one else. I think this is one of those things that everyone "knows" but nobody has ever proved. I could be wrong, though, and if anyone can directed me towards the figures I'd appreciate it.

I will always hold that mere possession of a gun doesnt make anyone safe, no matter the gender. Training and mindset are far more important.

 

[Island Beretta]

Ask my wife if she wants a handgun - she says 'no' she doesn't want to kill anybody.
Ask her if we had a lethal threat against us, say when we were out on the town, what should I do? She says 'Reason with the person, they won't harm us'.
Yet still she wakes me up occassionally at nights to say she heard a strange sound, and I should go and investigate.. her prodding usually includes the statement, 'carry your gun' or 'well, you are the one with the gun'

aah..it's a dirty job but someone has to do it..:banghead:

I think the 'gun' has had the most profound effects in infinite ways on civilisation than any other object or tool. Forget the wheel, this one is way out front!!

 

[goon]

Island Beretta

You are in Jamaica? How are the gun laws down there?

 

[roscoe]

Is there ANY real data out there on this, or is everyone trying to reason from first principles?

 

[noSpeak]

I have taught Martial Arts professionally going on four years. A lot of women come into classes and seminars with the same questions and concerns expressed in this thread. From experience, working with both male and female students, the only difference is mindset. Let's face it… Women are taught that they are weaker and less capable in a self-defense situation from an early age. THIS IS NOT TRUE.

I had a student named Margie; she was in her late 60’s. She went overseas on a vacation, and ran into a little trouble. Three men* in their late teens early twenties attempted to mug her. Margie thinking fast yelled at the top of her lungs, and struck one of them in the throat with a Shuto strike. (Thrusting of the knife edge of the hand) The bewildered attackers fled, effectively getting their asses kicked by a 60 year old woman.

Margie could not have taken all three of them in a knock down drag out fight, but that action saved her from being mugged. Over the years I have collected a few more stories like this. It all boils down to mindset. Attackers pick their victims based on how easy they think it will be. If you are walking down a dark street with your head down looking afraid, chances are you’re an easy mark. Martial principals are as much about looking confident and avoiding potentially bad situations as they are about learning how to inflict damage.

Basically, the old saying, “There are no guarantees.†Still applies here. Being trained in Martial practices does not imply that you will not be harmed, but it adds a degree of possibility. (Including owning a gun) By learning how to throw your opponent off with something as simple as a well placed slap or a pinch you can give yourself enough time to escape the situation. As for what it can do against an armed rapist, they have to be in extremely close proximity to the victim to inflict damage. That distance favors the martial artist. I agree in that while in a normal scenario I would gladly hand over my wallet to forego the violence, rape is different. Anything that can give an edge to the victim should be explored. Look at it this way: If your car blows up your seat belt won’t help much, but you wear it anyway. The reason being, it will help through 99% of other accidents.

The only statistics I have on effectiveness is that to my knowledge none of my female students have ever been raped after training with me. The others are not that good. According to a study, only 20% of rapes are reported in the US. Based upon the REPORTED rapes one happens every four minutes. That means in the time that I wrote this somewhere two girls were raped.

In the end, I have to say that women are capable of defending themselves. Also, that the stupid archaic thought that they are weak is what leads to a lot of violence. If martial training, carrying a knife, or keeping a gun in the house decreases the likelihood of a woman becoming part of those brutal statistics why should it not be explored? AND because I am secure enough, yes I have gotten my ass kicked by women in the ring before.

*I reluctantly call them men… However, the Etiquette of the board dictates I substitute the word for what I would normally use.