Skip to main content

View Diary: Abbreviated Pundit Round-Up (149 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Guns are dangerous (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    salmo, emmasnacker, DavidMS

    Just today, we see a case where the author of American Sniper, Chris Kyle, was shot dead at a shooting range.

    Still, gun control measures have to account for the fact that guns do, often, afford people the ability to protect themselves. Statistical data do not override individual needs.

    The test case here is the woman who is being threatened by her ex-partner. The ex says "I'm going to kill you and the kids." Maybe he uses those words, or just hints at it.

    No restraining order will stop him.

    If he shows up, no 911 call will stop him.

    She either defends herself and her children or is slain.

    Whatever gun control measures are suggested should not, I argue, prevent this woman from harm.

    Every day's another chance to stick it to the man. - dls

    by The Raven on Sun Feb 03, 2013 at 05:53:47 AM PST

    •  In the real world, in your case (12+ / 0-)

      he is much more likely to simply grab the gun and kill her, than to utter the words that will allow her to defend herself.

      Her only real chance to get out of that fight alive is to have no gun in the house whatsoever.

      When the union's inspiration /Through the workers' blood shall run /There can be no power greater /Anywhere beneath the sun /Solidarity Forever!

      by litho on Sun Feb 03, 2013 at 06:03:37 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  So instead he can beat her to death? (0+ / 0-)


        Under capitalism man exploits man, under communism the roles are reversed.

        by DavidMS on Sun Feb 03, 2013 at 06:24:58 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  Scenario where it might help (0+ / 0-)

        If the woman has escaped to a friend's home, and the ex tracks her down, bellows threats and breaks the door down -- I've heard a 911 tape of that happening. She didn't have a gun. Bad things happened.

        Decent human beings don't like to think about situations like that. There's certainly room to put more work into prevention. A safe house, if available, would have been better. But until events like the one above never happen, there are times when things get so upside down that a gun can actually improve the situation.

      •  too often he hits while she is at work (0+ / 0-)

        killing a few coworkers in addition.

        Think what adding a 30 round gun into that mix would do.

        I'm asking you to believe. Not in my ability to bring about real change in Washington ... *I'm asking you to believe in yours.* Barack Obama

        by samddobermann on Sun Feb 03, 2013 at 07:37:09 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

    •  Dangerous and not sensibly/effectively regulated. (8+ / 0-)

      No one is advocating that this woman you present should not be able to arm herself - we are talking about regulations NOT prohibition.  In any case, just about any regulation will more likely make it hard for the ex-partner to get his hands on a gun than for the woman. On top of that, it is more likely that this woman (and her children) will be shot by the ex-partner if there is a gun in the household - even if it is hers.

      Then they came for me - and by that time there was nobody left to speak up.

      by DefendOurConstitution on Sun Feb 03, 2013 at 06:04:17 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  Who do you report to? (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Dogs are fuzzy

      When I kill a rabid raccoon, chase off an aggressive bear, etc. there is no report of the use of my pistol in what is essentially a self-defense situation.  Similarly, trespassers who respond to direction to leave with veiled threats of violence, and comply after being told that they are drunk, and I am not, and I am armed, and they are not, don't get a report (I should point out that from time to time, a conversation is impossible, and that it has been less than a decade since one of those confrontations involved me being strangled by two large young men, whose buddies eventually pulled them off before I had to shoot them - the pistol in my pocket was cocked and pointed at one of their chests while I waited for what I hoped would be an intervention to allow this to return to a stand-off awaiting the arrival of the police.  That event was prosecuted as an assault, and would not show up on a search for firearm use.).  

    •  And then we have this good neighbor: (7+ / 0-)

      "This gun rights backer, armed with his Glock and his blog, is always on alert" quoted:

      He bought his first gun a week before the debut of He took a firearms class. He filled out the paperwork and went through the background check to get a permit to carry a gun. He now owns 18 guns.

      “Once you put a gun on, you gain situational awareness,” he says. After he bought his first gun, he says, “I felt grown up. It was like a coming-of-age thing. I felt like an adult.”

      Personally I'd say he "grew up" to be a teen with too much Red Dawn.

      The only foes that threaten America are the enemies at home, and those are ignorance, superstition, and incompetence. [Elbert Hubbard]

      by pelagicray on Sun Feb 03, 2013 at 06:33:05 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  I read a similar story on FB (7+ / 0-)

        the other day. A guy went out target shooting with a friend and within a week, he owned a gun. Then his wife bought one after going target shooting with her husband (neither one of these people had owned or used a gun previously).
        They took a safety class and now they both have concealed carry licenses, and carry a pistol on them all the time.
        They both claim they feel safer, even though their gun experience totals up to a few times at a range, and a week long safety class.
        These are the people more likely to shoot themselves or each other with a gun in the house.

        “We are not a nation that says ‘don’t ask, don’t tell.’ We are a nation that says ‘out of many, we are one.’” -Barack Obama

        by skohayes on Sun Feb 03, 2013 at 07:12:50 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  If you read that full article you will note a teen (7+ / 0-)

          like "Oh boy! I'm aware now!" in that story about the bank alarm.

          Now the guy is "packing" he has a "plan" for every situation, so, sitting in a Starbucks, he is ready to "respond" to the alarm over there. With a couple hours of instruction and his "awareness" we can expect a couple of bystanders to be hit by his response and him gunned down by either the "bad guys" or "cops." I've known some of these types, usually not so impressive in experience or presence, that suddenly get self esteem because they are armed. Even with hours of training and some experienced armed police know shit has hit the fan once firing starts and lots of bad unintended consequences tend to happen. With bunches of wannabes packing and full of amateur "situational awareness" shit is more likely than less. Just check with police records.

          The only foes that threaten America are the enemies at home, and those are ignorance, superstition, and incompetence. [Elbert Hubbard]

          by pelagicray on Sun Feb 03, 2013 at 07:23:19 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

    •  Anecdotal (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Urban Owl

      The problem with anecdotal arguments, as opposed to statistical, is that the position can be posed as a false dichotomy.  This is a similar point to one made below.  The options are not limited to possession of a gun or death.  Second, for every story like this, there are almost thirty stories of guns being used for negative, tragic purposes and consequences.  If the emotional, compassionate, and logical imperatives of protecting this hypothetical woman are balanced against the imperatives of protecting those who are injured or killed by accident, assault, and suicide, the clear priority should be increased gun control.

      •  Anecdata is not proof of anything (0+ / 0-)

        Or, to quote someone I am too lazy to look up,

        The plural of "anecdote" is not "data."

        We can safely abandon the doctrine of the eighties, namely that the rich were not working because they had too little money, the poor because they had too much. JK Galbraith, 1991

        by Urban Owl on Sun Feb 03, 2013 at 10:37:57 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

    •  This is not hypothetical (0+ / 0-)

      I can't find a reference online, so feel free to disbelieve me, but an arthritic woman in Florida could and did shoot the ex who, at their next to last meeting, had strangled her and left her for dead.

      Yes, there should have been a better solution.

      Yes, she would still have been able to defend herself under a strict permitting system. That was a clear case of being in unusual danger.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site