E46m3
Regular Member
www.vpc.org/studies/myth.htm
This is pretty crazy. It seems like some rapist wrote this so he could victomize women easier.
This is pretty crazy. It seems like some rapist wrote this so he could victomize women easier.
-
We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
-
If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
-
Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.
Woman should not use guns!
- Thread starter E46m3
- Start date
What is most egregious is the attempted correlation between the number of women owning/using guns and the number of women harmed by them.
I submit that the more women that own, carry and are trained the safer those women will be. Those women that do not avail themselves of that opportunity will contribute to the litany of those harmed w/o the benefit of an immediate defense capability.
SovereignAxe
Regular Member
wtf, this seem like it was written by a high schooler. How do you draw the conclusion that since so few women own guns, that buying one is going to increase the possibility of ketting killed with one. nowhere in there (I'll admit, I just skimmed over it) does it state that these women were killed with their own guns.
The conclusion makes no sense. The cause and effect are completely unrelated.
edit: the proper conlusion (and as I see it, the only conclusion) one can draw from the data presented is that gun crimes against women are directly related to them NOT owning guns. also, let's not forget that this was published in 2001, so the data and conclusion is more than 10 years old-and especially old considering the recent real surge in gun ownership of women.
The conclusion makes no sense. The cause and effect are completely unrelated.
edit: the proper conlusion (and as I see it, the only conclusion) one can draw from the data presented is that gun crimes against women are directly related to them NOT owning guns. also, let's not forget that this was published in 2001, so the data and conclusion is more than 10 years old-and especially old considering the recent real surge in gun ownership of women.
Last edited:
PistolPackingMomma
Regular Member
I had to stop reading; the ignorance and idiocy made my head hurt worse than a 3 day hang over.
SovereignAxe
Regular Member
lol same. I made it about three paragraphs in and then realized they were misinterpreting the data, skipped down to the conclusion, and then realized the writer doesn't know what they're talking about (or how to interpret data).
1245A Defender
Regular Member
well,,,
It is a report from the,,, VIOLENCE POLICY CENTER,,,, they do not support self defense..
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]In 1998, for every time a woman used a handgun to kill a stranger in self-defense, 302 woman were murdered with a handgun.
302 woman were murdered BECAUSE one woman used a gun for self defense...
if only that one woman had sacrificed her life to her attacker,,, 302 woman would not have been murdered.
this kind of logic is more than my brain can handle.
[/FONT]
It is a report from the,,, VIOLENCE POLICY CENTER,,,, they do not support self defense..
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]In 1998, for every time a woman used a handgun to kill a stranger in self-defense, 302 woman were murdered with a handgun.
302 woman were murdered BECAUSE one woman used a gun for self defense...
if only that one woman had sacrificed her life to her attacker,,, 302 woman would not have been murdered.
this kind of logic is more than my brain can handle.
[/FONT]
Ruby
Regular Member
Made my brain hurt! It makes absolutely no sense at all. It seems to me that they are actually FOR violence against women since they don't want them to have guns. They would really be shocked if they knew how many women own guns and carry them!
E46m3
Regular Member
I think it's weird how they say "women who killed a stranger in self defense using a handgun" was so low. Maybe this would be because some spineless ***** would crap himself when his helpless (or so he thought) victim pulls out her pink snubby. So they rarely ever have to pull the trigger.
MR Redenck
Regular Member
Every woman should have a handgun all the time and ready to use it if necessary!!!
MilProGuy
Regular Member
"In 1998, for every time a woman used a handgun to kill in self-defense, 101 women were murdered with a handgun."
Hey, this quote from the article works against the politically-correct agenda of the writer, and they didn't even have the good sense to realize it.
Why do I say this?
Well, the so-called "statistics" the writer mentioned only serves to demonstrate to women just WHY THEY NEED to carry a handgun! :banana::monkey
Hey, this quote from the article works against the politically-correct agenda of the writer, and they didn't even have the good sense to realize it.
Why do I say this?
Well, the so-called "statistics" the writer mentioned only serves to demonstrate to women just WHY THEY NEED to carry a handgun! :banana::monkey
1245A Defender
Regular Member
well,,,
there is an old story about someone slowly clapping their hands in front of a classroom full of young kids.
as they clapped, they told the kids that every time they clapped, a poor child in africa died from hunger.
soon, one of the kids said,, well, stop clapping your hands!
cause and effect are Not always linked.
there is an old story about someone slowly clapping their hands in front of a classroom full of young kids.
as they clapped, they told the kids that every time they clapped, a poor child in africa died from hunger.
soon, one of the kids said,, well, stop clapping your hands!
cause and effect are Not always linked.
Just a ridiculous conclusion. It's like a story I heard a long time ago about a traffic accident. One vehicle had run into another killing the drivers of both cars. One of the drivers happened to have a gun in the car. What did the media say? "More gun related deaths!" 
:banghead: :cuss:
:banghead: :cuss:
since9
Campaign Veteran
Well, the brothers Smith's stats are sound, but their conclusions are sheer buffoonery, evident in both the oversized and emoboldened BS, as well as the ridiculous consluion.
Using the same stats, I arrived at somewhat different conclusions:
"For all of the promises made on behalf of the self-defense handgun, using a handgun to kill in self-defense is a rare event.5 Looking at both men and women, over the past 20 years, on average only two percent of the homicides committed with handguns in the United States were deemed justifiable or self-defense homicides by civilians. To put it in perspective, more people are struck by lightning each year than use handguns to kill in self-defense."
Conclusion 1: Since the likelihood of being struck by lightening is less than being killed by a handgun in self-defense, then people shouldn't freak out when they see honest, law-abiding citizens carrying a firearm.
Conclusion 2: Since it's justifiable self-defense (again unlawful criminal activity) then honest, law-abiding citizens shouldn't have any fear of armed citizens.
Conclusion 3: Of the 12 women who used a handgun in self-defense, 100% OF THEM LIVED.
Using the same stats, I arrived at somewhat different conclusions:
"For all of the promises made on behalf of the self-defense handgun, using a handgun to kill in self-defense is a rare event.5 Looking at both men and women, over the past 20 years, on average only two percent of the homicides committed with handguns in the United States were deemed justifiable or self-defense homicides by civilians. To put it in perspective, more people are struck by lightning each year than use handguns to kill in self-defense."
Conclusion 1: Since the likelihood of being struck by lightening is less than being killed by a handgun in self-defense, then people shouldn't freak out when they see honest, law-abiding citizens carrying a firearm.
Conclusion 2: Since it's justifiable self-defense (again unlawful criminal activity) then honest, law-abiding citizens shouldn't have any fear of armed citizens.
Conclusion 3: Of the 12 women who used a handgun in self-defense, 100% OF THEM LIVED.
rodbender
Regular Member
This is where it got too stupid for me to continue. Yeah, really early on.
The way this sentence should read: "As these numbers reveal, more women should carry handguns for self defense".
PistolPackingMomma
Regular Member
This is why statistics, polls, what have you, are as believable as unicorns. The data may be there; it may be sound, but it can and will be manipulated every which way. At least, that's what my leprechaun bookie tells me.
Aknazer
Regular Member
I got down to the fourth cite, read the cite information, and had to stop as the "logic" made my head hurt.
since9
Campaign Veteran
There's nothing wrong with statistics. However, when the guy started drawing conclusions, he'd left the fine scientific field of statistics and had begun practicing voodoo magic. If there's a bad name to be had, here, it's his, not statistics.
True. However, statistics if fairly rigorous and doesn't allow one to manipulate things. When one does, it's no longer statistics.
I may have seen him around. Small guy? Dressed in Lincoln green? Ledger tucked greedily beneath his arm?
PistolPackingMomma
Regular Member
Perhaps I should rephrase then. I don't necessarily have an issue with statistics, so much as how people (mis)interpret them.
Actually, he looks a bit more like this: :banana: he just isn't ripe yet and he drinks a lot, LOL
hermannr
Regular Member
As a wise old man told me years ago, "no, the figures don't lie, but liers sure can figure"
okboomer
Regular Member
I had to stop when they cited an "unpublished FBI report" ... seriously??? /major fail
Also, even though I skimmed the rest of the "report" I didn't see any statistics on women who used a gun to protect themselves against a significant other, who were still convicted wrongly due to a strict interpretation of state self defense laws ... another failure to include all relevant data.
Also, even though I skimmed the rest of the "report" I didn't see any statistics on women who used a gun to protect themselves against a significant other, who were still convicted wrongly due to a strict interpretation of state self defense laws ... another failure to include all relevant data.