Bree

I caution anyone - women or men - against purchasing a gun simply because it makes them feel "more powerful" - I think if person is purchasing a weapon for this reason only, then they're making the purchase for the wrong reason. A gun doesn't make you more safe (bad grammar, sorry) - it just gives you a leg up in certain situations. If you don't know how to use it, then you might as well be empty-handed.

I have a butcher knife in my car for emergency purposes, and I thought I was relatively safe with that. However, Jek and I were faced with a rather frightening situation early last week and that showed me that knives are woefully inadequate tools. Knives involve letting the creep get close enough to you as to be of some use - perhaps I should invest in a broadsword?

Daleth

That's true, the attacker does have to be close. My thinking (and perhaps it's wrong) is that in the greater number of rape cases, he is already that close by the time the woman knows she's got trouble. Michelle's example of the punch to the face, or BG's example of the woman dragged into the back seat of a car in the paking lot. A knife is not as good as a gun if you can see them coming. But a gun seems pretty ill-suited in the situations described.

Definitely a broadsword. You would look SO COOL!

Bad Kitty

If I had had a gun I would have fallen on top of my purse when he first punched me, in order to get my hand on it, and then I would have used it to the best of my ability. If I had had a gun my entire strategy would have been alot different from the first punch to the last kick. Would I have been successful? Who knows.

Of course, that is neither here nor there. Not every attack will afford the opportunity to use a gun (or a knife or a taser), but some would.

I can tell you that my "body" and my "wits" were barely enough of a weapon (even though I'm 5'10 and physically fit) and I think it was mounting fear of detection more than any good shots I got in that ended the attack.

I would imagine that depends on the woman. I actually don't think that all that many women carry guns for self-protection, not even former victims of assault. But, I know a few who do carry guns, and they picked a gun because they felt it was good for all around defense both out in the world and at home. Also, they might have been pre-disposed to guns because of various ties (relatives) in law enforcement who provided proper training.

I guess my anwser to specific quesitons in the OP:

Is it adviseable: Very dependant on the woman, so I can't give a simple yes or no answer. Some women I would advise "yes" some "no" based on both physical and amotional ability.

Is it justifiable: Certainly.

Is it contemptable : Absolutely not.

Is is immoral: In no way is choosing to carry a gun immoral.

How would you answer the above?

Michelle

Pain Paien

Originally posted by Bree
No, get a fire-breathing dragon, they're good for both close and ranged combat. Same goes for gorgons, basalisks, and, if you're the weird type, throwing knives.

Daleth

However they may be the only weapons you have at your disposal even if you are carrying a gun if you are taken by surprise, which was the case I was addressing. That is why in an earlier post I recommended training in how to use your body against an attacker even if you do decide to carry a weapon. And yes, using your wits can very well mean making enough commotion that the attacker lets you go to avoid detection. Also as somebody pointed out earlier, grabbing away your purse it likely to happen real fast. If you're going to carry a gun, better to carry it on your body somewhere.

Is it advisable: I'm not sure. The risks of injuring yourself with a gun during an attack or having your gun used against you seem, well, risky. To make a clear decision on this I'd need more complete information about how often women are able to avoid being raped because they are carrying a gun and how often having that gun causes an injury or death of the woman herself or some other form of gun accident. My usual position: do the benefits outweigh the risks? If I determined that the benefits won out, then like you said, it depends entirely on the person. At the moment if a friend asked me for advice about preventing rape, I would not suggest a gun. If she suggested a gun, I'd talk with her about the possible risks and not condemn her in any way if she decided to go for it.

Is it justifiable: Definitely.

Is it contemptible: Not unless she's made the choice rashly, doesn't know about proper gun safety, and doesn't want to be bothered with training.

Is is immoral: I don't like living a society where I know the guy next to me on the subway may be carrying a gun, but it's not immoral just because I don't like it. It is immoral if one doesn't bother to handle it safely, as above. It is immoral to shoot someone for vengence when you didn't actually need to for self-defense (the example I can't remember if I gave earlier that it's no longer self-defense if you've already disabled the attacker).

OT-ish, I may have a chance to move to a country where carrying guns is not legal in the next few years. The anti-guns laws are one (but not the first) reason I'll jump at the chance if I get it.

Daleth

They are hard to fit in the car. Just one thing to consider.

keyser_soze

Careful Daleth, you're straying into agreement with me.

Daleth

Which, the broadsword looking cool, the first bit, or both?

edit: Whichever it was I take it back!

keyser_soze

It would be the first bit, which is why I extended the discussion focusing on it. But if you take it back....

Daleth

Well, OK, I'll let it stand. But only because I meant it. But I think I'm dead on about the broadsword, and don't see how any rational person could disagree.