Mass shooting in Britain....a little late, but is about average time for a mass shooting in Britain...

[Crepitus]

Before they confiscated guns in Britain, they had a mass public shooting about every 10 years.....this one is a little late, but isn't unexpected.......see, it isn't access to guns, it is the decision of the mass shooter to commit the mass public shooting that determines the rates of mass public shootings...

According to the FBI here across the pond...a mass public shooting is the murder of 4 or more people...unrelated to the killer.....so, the mother being murdered gets taken out, that leaves 4 others.......

LONDON (AP) — A young man who killed five people, including his mother, and then took his own life in Britain’s first mass shooting in over a decade had complained online about difficulties meeting women and being “beaten down” by life.

https://www.usnews.com/news/world/articles/2021-08-13/uk-police-say-man-who-shot-and-killed-5-had-gun-license

He did not hurry and, according to witnesses, hardly spoke except perhaps to tell one local: “Nothing to worry about, mate.” Yet within the space of 12 minutes on a warm August evening, the 22-year-old Jake Davison had murdered five people.

The first was his 51-year-old mother, Maxine Davison. He shot her dead in the home he had shared with her in the suburbs of Plymouth. He then walked out of the front door on to the quiet cul-de-sac, Biddick Drive, and began opening fire, apparently at random.



Davison, an apprentice at the international aerospace, defence and security company Babcock, killed a three-year-old local girl, Sophie Martyn, who happened to be passing by with her 43-year-old adoptive father, Lee Martyn. Next he turned his weapon on a man, 33, and woman, 53, who were injured but survived, before striding into a small park at the end of the cul-de-sac and shooting another man, 59-year-old Stephen Washington, dead.

By now police marksmen were on the scene but Davison had time for one more murder: Kate Shepherd, 66, outside a hair salon. Before police could get to him he had shot himself dead.

âShocked to my coreâ: Plymouth reeling after 12 minutes of gun horror

Gunman reportedly told a witness ‘nothing to worry about mate’ as he quietly went about his killing spree

www.theguardian.com

And typical mass public shooter end.......when the police arrive........with guns.....he killed himself....

One in ten years?

We have one every ten minutes.

 

[2aguy]

The first mass murderer over the past decade in the UK was a Trump supporter!

The man suspected of killing five people before turning the gun on himself in a mass shooting in England on Thursday night was an incel Trump supporter who posted about “devil worshipers” in government.​

U.K. Mass Shooter Said He Was American, Trump-Supporting Virgin

Jake Davison raged on Facebook and YouTube for years before carrying out the worst shooting in Britain for over a decade.

www.thedailybeast.com

Look at these Trump-supporting mass murderers!

You mean like the bernie Sanders, liz warren, democrat party supporter who tried to murder the entire republican baseball team, or the democrat party, blm sympathizer who murdered 6 police officers in Dallas?

You mean like them?

 

[Tommy Tainant]

The trump fan was legally allowed to obtain a shotgun license.. It was taken off him at some point but he got it back a few weeks ago.
They are unlikely to ban shotguns but it just got a lot harder to get a shotgun license. They are now going to trawl through social media to decide if you are fit to own a gun.
I would rather ban all of them but its a start.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Before they confiscated guns in Britain, they had a mass public shooting about every 10 years.....this one is a little late, but isn't unexpected.......see, it isn't access to guns, it is the decision of the mass shooter to commit the mass public shooting that determines the rates of mass public shootings...

https://www.usnews.com/news/world/articles/2021-08-13/uk-police-say-man-who-shot-and-killed-5-had-gun-license

Such is the reprehensible right: seeking to exploit death and tragedy for some perceived partisan gain.

 

[Vagabond63]

You mean like the bernie Sanders, liz warren, democrat party supporter who tried to murder the entire republican baseball team, or the democrat party, blm sympathizer who murdered 6 police officers in Dallas?

You mean like them?

No, I suspect he means the RWNJs who shot Gabby Giffords while slaughtering 6 other innocent bystanders, or who murdered Jo Cox MP.

 

[2aguy]

No, I suspect he means the RWNJs who shot Gabby Giffords while slaughtering 6 other innocent bystanders, or who murdered Jo Cox MP.

Moron.....the Giffords shooter wasn't a Right winger, he was infatuated with giffords and believed she had slighted him, you moron.

The democrat party, blm sympathizer who murdered 6 police officers in Dallas...the bernie sanders supporter and liz warren supporter and democrat party supporter who tried to murder the entire republican baseball team.....

 

[2aguy]

The trump fan was legally allowed to obtain a shotgun license.. It was taken off him at some point but he got it back a few weeks ago.
They are unlikely to ban shotguns but it just got a lot harder to get a shotgun license. They are now going to trawl through social media to decide if you are fit to own a gun.
I would rather ban all of them but its a start.

Still ducking these questions....

A woman is grabbed by a violent serial rapist at a bus stop, a train platform or in her apartment...he plans on beating, raping and murdering her. She has a gun, and can stop the rape with the gun......

Do you want her to use that gun to stop the rape?

You are given the ability to travel in time......knowing this woman is about to be brutally beaten, raped and murdered.....do you go back in time and take that gun away from her before the rape?

 

[Vagabond63]

Moron.....the Giffords shooter wasn't a Right winger, he was infatuated with giffords and believed she had slighted him, you moron.

The democrat party, blm sympathizer who murdered 6 police officers in Dallas...the bernie sanders supporter and liz warren supporter and democrat party supporter who tried to murder the entire republican baseball team.....

"Giffords had been named as a political campaign target for conservatives in last November's mid-term elections by former Alaskan governor Sarah Palin because of her strong support for Obama's health reforms. Palin had published a "target map" on her website using images of gun sights to identify 20 House Democrats, including Giffords, for backing the new healthcare law.

While the motive for the shooting was not immediately clear, Giffords is one of 10 Democrat members of Congress who were the subject of harassment over their support for the healthcare overhaul. Giffords's Tucson constituency office was vandalised last March after she voted in favour of Obama's controversial health bill, which has been bitterly opposed by the American right.

In an interview after the vandalism, Giffords referred to the animosity against her. "We're on Sarah Palin's targeted list," she said, "but the thing is, the way that she has it depicted has the crosshairs of a gun sight over our district. When people do that, they have to realise that there are consequences to that action." US congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords shot as six die in Arizona massacre

"Jared Lee Loughner, the 22-year-old resident of Tucson identified by police as the gunman in Saturday's rampage, left a series of indications revealing the mentally unstable state of his mind and the extreme rightwing causes he supported in the run up to the tragedy." Jared Lee Loughner: erratic, disturbed and prone to rightwing rants

Oh, OK, if you say so.

 

[2aguy]

"Giffords had been named as a political campaign target for conservatives in last November's mid-term elections by former Alaskan governor Sarah Palin because of her strong support for Obama's health reforms. Palin had published a "target map" on her website using images of gun sights to identify 20 House Democrats, including Giffords, for backing the new healthcare law.

While the motive for the shooting was not immediately clear, Giffords is one of 10 Democrat members of Congress who were the subject of harassment over their support for the healthcare overhaul. Giffords's Tucson constituency office was vandalised last March after she voted in favour of Obama's controversial health bill, which has been bitterly opposed by the American right.

In an interview after the vandalism, Giffords referred to the animosity against her. "We're on Sarah Palin's targeted list," she said, "but the thing is, the way that she has it depicted has the crosshairs of a gun sight over our district. When people do that, they have to realise that there are consequences to that action." US congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords shot as six die in Arizona massacre

"Jared Lee Loughner, the 22-year-old resident of Tucson identified by police as the gunman in Saturday's rampage, left a series of indications revealing the mentally unstable state of his mind and the extreme rightwing causes he supported in the run up to the tragedy." Jared Lee Loughner: erratic, disturbed and prone to rightwing rants

Oh, OK, if you say so.

Dipshit.....that had nothing to do with the nutjob who shot her....you dumb ass...

this is the problem with you anti-gun extremists.....

1) You lie

2) you don't understand the issues

3) you don't care about facts, truth or reality...

You didn't bother to actually look at the giffords shooting, you just pulled crap out of your ass and posted it....

He had a fixation on her since his highschool days, you moron...

Records show that Loughner was registered as an independent and voted in 2006 and 2008, but not in 2010.[37][38]

Loughner's high-school friend Zach Osler said, "He did not watch TV; he disliked the news; he didn't listen to political radio; he didn't take sides; he wasn't on the Left; he wasn't on the Right."[18]

Jared Lee Loughner - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

The FBI records also indicate that Loughner may have met Giffords while he was in high school several years before the shooting. One person interviewed by agents said Giffords came to the school to talk to students, and that Loughner asked her, "If words could not be understood, then what does government mean?"

"Giffords could not answer the question the way Loughner liked, and it blew his mind that she not could not answer his question," the FBI wrote, according to the witness.

Tucson gunman before rampage: "I'll see you on National T.v."

Newly released FBI documents show Jared Loughner made expletive-filled Internet rants in the months before deadly shooting

www.cbsnews.com

His internet postings, including bizarre YouTube videos, suggested a mental breakdown. Friends described him as a weird guy with "alternate realities" and "dream worlds."

Personal papers revealed an obsession with Giffords that may have dated to when Loughner confronted her during a visit to his high school, asking, "If words could not be understood, then what does government mean?"

FBI releases Jared Loughner records 5 years after Tucson shooting

The records released by the FBI provide insights and details about the case, but no startling new revelations.

www.azcentral.com

 

[Vagabond63]

A woman is grabbed by a violent serial rapist at a bus stop, a train platform or in her apartment...he plans on beating, raping and murdering her. She has a gun, and can stop the rape with the gun......

Do you want her to use that gun to stop the rape?

Oh dear, you still asking theses fallacious non-questions? OK, If the rapist has already grabbed her, there's every chance that his "superior strength" as you keep posting, would prevent her from using the gun to stop the attack.

You are given the ability to travel in time......knowing this woman is about to be brutally beaten, raped and murdered.....do you go back in time and take that gun away from her before the rape?

Well after speaking nicely to the Guardian of Forever, it sends me back in time to just before the attack. I arrive to either beat seven shades of sh*t out of the rapist, or act as an "escort"/"witness"/"general spanner in the works" and prevent the attack happening; either way the gun is superfluous.

Happy now?

Of course, now I've meddled with the space/time continuum, so we're off on an alternate timeline that includes Tom Cruise in Minority Report...

 

[2aguy]

Oh dear, you still asking theses fallacious non-questions? OK, If the rapist has already grabbed her, there's every chance that his "superior strength" as you keep posting, would prevent her from using the gun to stop the attack.

Well after speaking nicely to the Guardian of Forever, it sends me back in time to just before the attack. I arrive to either beat seven shades of sh*t out of the rapist, or act as an "escort"/"witness"/"general spanner in the works" and prevent the attack happening; either way the gun is superfluous.

Happy now?

Of course, now I've meddled with the space/time continuum, so we're off on an alternate timeline that includes Tom Cruise in Minority Report...

So.....you would rather she be raped than she use a gun...

Yes or no.

She uses a gun and stops the rape, or you can take the gun and allow the rape to happen....

Which is it?

What I want you to know on Gun Violence Awareness Day

I correctly listened to my instincts; I had a feeling that my life was in danger in that elevator and prepared myself mentally for what was potentially to come.

I ran to my car in an attempt to escape and, before I could even get my entire body in my car, I was tackled by my attacker.

This man quickly overpowered me, stabbed at me with a knife, clamped his hand over my mouth multiple times, and repeatedly tried forcing me in the passenger seat of my car while telling me, “We’re going.”

The entire time this was happening, a rusted, serrated knife was being stabbed towards my abdomen and held at my face.

I had been hit in the face, thrown over my driver’s side console, and had rips in my tights from his hands trying to force my legs up and over into the passenger seat.

There are some individuals that think gun owners are “trigger happy” and wanting to pull their weapons out at the first opportunity. There is nothing further from the truth.

The night I was attacked, I fought like hell for my life before reaching for my gun. I kicked, I screamed, I had all ten fingernails ripped off and bloodied from scratching and trying to fight my way out of a literal life and death situation.
Ultimately, I accessed my gun, shot my attacker multiple times, and saved my life. He will be spending years in prison for what he did to me.

Using a gun in self-protection is not a decision one makes lightly; in fact, I never dreamed that I would be forced into a situation where I would have to do so. However, I also never imagined such evil existing in the world so that I would be powerless, wounded, on my back and unable to physically force my attacker off of me.

I owned a gun and had been trained on how to use it. I know how to safely carry and that a gun is a serious and significant weapon; it is not to be used carelessly. Naysayers and people with opposing opinions may try to undermine my situation with hypotheticals. I cannot answer these questions. All I can do is tell the facts of my story and the true account of how I saved my own life.

What I want you to know on Gun Awareness Day is that a gun in the hands of a potential victim is not improperly placed; it can be the only thing keeping her from being brutally raped and murdered.

Without my gun, I would not be alive today.


Guns are not the problem in America; men like my attacker -- who are willing to violently change one person’s life for no reason except for pure evil – are the problem.

Be safe at all times. Be aware of your surroundings. Trust your instincts. Always be able to protect yourself. Refuse to be a victim, and instead be a fighter and a survivor. Live to tell your tale and make a criminal regret the day he chose you as a “soft target.” My gun saved my life, and one could save yours too.
===============

Waking up to an armed intruder in your house would be any home owner’s worst nightmare. If you’re a single mother with two young kids in the house, finding a man wielding a machete in your bedroom closet immediately kicks you into “momma bear” mode.

That’s what happened to a California woman who woke up to the sound of a man rummaging through her walk-in closet. The thief — Ocean Burger (his name, not a restaurant) — was armed with a number of knives and a machete when the un-named woman grabbed a handgun and confronted him.

From ksbw.com . . .


[Investigators] say Burger ignored orders to leave and when the homeowner fired several warning shots he allegedly advanced towards her, that’s when the mother fired at the accused burglar hitting him in the leg. And California law may be on her side.

Warning shots are never a good idea and could even put you in legal jeopardy in many jurisdictions. In this case, they not only wasted perfectly good (and expensive) ammunition, but probably led Burger to believe she wasn’t serious about actually shooting him.

After advancing on the woman, the round in his leg apparently convinced Burger that he was wrong.

The good news is California actually has a castle doctrine law on the books. The woman had no duty to retreat and was legally justified in using deadly force to defend herself and her children.

“There is a presumption that favors the homeowner they’re presumed that the person is in imminent fear of either death or great bodily injury,” said Ellen Campos, assistant district attorney for San Benito county. …

California Woman Shoots Machete-Wielding Burglar She Found in Her Closet - The Truth About Guns
=============
LANCASTER, Ohio - It happened along a walking path in Lancaster.

Dinah Burns is licensed to carry a concealed gun, but she'd only recently started taking her weapon while walking her dog.

Based on what happened, it looks like she'll make a point of carrying from now on.

"I think if they'd gotten any closer, I probably would have fired,” said Burns.

It was Monday when Burns was on a footpath near Sanderson Elementary School.

"Two gentlemen came out of the woods, one holding a baseball bat, and said 'You're coming with us'."

The men weren't deterred by Dinah's dog Gracie.

"I said, 'Well, what do you want?,' and as I was saying that I reached in to my pocket and slipped my gun out, slipped the safety off as I pulled it out. As I was doing that the other gentleman came toward me and raised the baseball bat. And, I pointed the gun at them and said, 'I have this and I'm not afraid to use it.'"

The men took off and so far have eluded police. Dinah posted about the incident on Facebook to alert friends and neighbors, to criticism by some.

"Most of the males' opinion was, 'Why didn't you shoot them?'"

Easy to second-guess a decision made under pressure, based on her concealed carry training, and police agree.

"To get out of a situation, back out, get out of it as much as you can without having to discharge your firearm."

"I will say it's a good thing to go from a place of danger to a place of safety, however you get that done,” said Sgt. Matt Chambers, Lancaster Police.

"Very thankful that it turned out the way it did, and hope it doesn't happen again, but I will be prepared."

 

[2aguy]

Oh dear, you still asking theses fallacious non-questions? OK, If the rapist has already grabbed her, there's every chance that his "superior strength" as you keep posting, would prevent her from using the gun to stop the attack.

Well after speaking nicely to the Guardian of Forever, it sends me back in time to just before the attack. I arrive to either beat seven shades of sh*t out of the rapist, or act as an "escort"/"witness"/"general spanner in the works" and prevent the attack happening; either way the gun is superfluous.

Happy now?

Of course, now I've meddled with the space/time continuum, so we're off on an alternate timeline that includes Tom Cruise in Minority Report...

And you are not part of the rescue......you simply get to decide if she has the ability to stop the rape with a gun....or you take the gun away from her before the rape......

Which is it?

 

[2aguy]

Oh dear, you still asking theses fallacious non-questions? OK, If the rapist has already grabbed her, there's every chance that his "superior strength" as you keep posting, would prevent her from using the gun to stop the attack.

Well after speaking nicely to the Guardian of Forever, it sends me back in time to just before the attack. I arrive to either beat seven shades of sh*t out of the rapist, or act as an "escort"/"witness"/"general spanner in the works" and prevent the attack happening; either way the gun is superfluous.

Happy now?

Of course, now I've meddled with the space/time continuum, so we're off on an alternate timeline that includes Tom Cruise in Minority Report...

To be clear, the woman is on her own........you are not there.

Do you want her to have the ability to stop the rape with a gun.....?

If you can go back in time before the rape, do you take that gun away from her...knowing she will be defenseless when the rape happens?

The research.....

Guns Effective Defense Against Rape

A woman using a gun is less likely to be raped and less likely to be injured during the attack....

Guns Effective Defense Against Rape


However, most recent studies with improved methodology are consistently showing that the more forceful the resistance, the lower the risk of a completed rape, with no increase in physical injury. Sarah Ullman's original research (Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 1998) and critical review of past studies (Criminal Justice and Behavior, 1997) are especially valuable in solidifying this conclusion.

I wish to single out one particular subtype of physical resistance: Use of a weapon, and especially a firearm, is statistically a woman's best means of resistance, greatly enhancing her odds of escaping both rape and injury, compared to any other strategy of physical or verbal resistance. This conclusion is drawn from four types of information.

First, a 1989 study (Furby, Journal of Interpersonal Violence) found that both male and female survey respondents judged a gun to be the most effective means that a potential rape victim could use to fend off the assault. Rape "experts" considered it a close second, after eye-gouging.

Second, raw data from the 1979-1985 installments of the Justice Department's annual National Crime Victim Survey show that when a woman resists a stranger rape with a gun, the probability of completion was 0.1 percent and of victim injury 0.0 percent, compared to 31 percent and 40 percent, respectively, for all stranger rapes (Kleck, Social Problems, 1990).

Third, a recent paper (Southwick, Journal of Criminal Justice, 2000) analyzed victim resistance to violent crimes generally, with robbery, aggravated assault and rape considered together. Women who resisted with a gun were 2.5 times more likely to escape without injury than those who did not resist and 4 times more likely to escape uninjured than those who resisted with any means other than a gun. Similarly, their property losses in a robbery were reduced more than six-fold and almost three-fold, respectively, compared to the other categories of resistance strategy.

Fourth, we have two studies in the last 20 years that directly address the outcomes of women who resist attempted rape with a weapon. (Lizotte, Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 1986; Kleck, Social Problems, 1990.) The former concludes,"Further, women who resist rape with a gun or knife dramatically decrease their probability of completion." (Lizotte did not analyze victim injuries apart from the rape itself.) The latter concludes that "resistance with a gun or knife is the most effective form of resistance for preventing completion of a rape"; this is accomplished "without creating any significant additional risk of other injury."

The best conclusion from available scientific data, then, is when avoidance of rape has failed and one must choose between being raped and resisting, a woman's best option is to resist with a gun in her hands.

 

[Vagabond63]

this is the problem with you anti-gun extremists.....

Erm, I've lost count of the times I've stated I'm NOT ANTI-GUN, nor am I an extremist. Before 1997, I was a member of two gun clubs and owned three handguns.

1) You lie

2) you don't understand the issues

3) you don't care about facts, truth or reality...

1) I don't lie, I leave that to you.
2) I understand the issues very well as they appertain to the UK, unlike youself, who just uses any tragic incident to promote your GUNZZZ agenda.
3) Clearly you are projecting your own flaws and biases on to others.

 

[Vagabond63]

And you are not part of the rescue......you simply get to decide if she has the ability to stop the rape with a gun....or you take the gun away from her before the rape......

Which is it?

Ahh, so now you move the goalposts. Sorry, that's not what you asked.

 

[Vagabond63]

To be clear, the woman is on her own........you are not there.

Do you want her to have the ability to stop the rape with a gun.....?

If you can go back in time before the rape, do you take that gun away from her...knowing she will be defenseless when the rape happens?

The research.....

Guns Effective Defense Against Rape

Ah yes the researcher who was fired for sexual assualt. Figures.

 

[2aguy]

Ahh, so now you move the goalposts. Sorry, that's not what you asked.

No.....My questions are clear.....you tried to dodge them by becoming the hero of the question......that isn't part of the question...

Let me repeat..

A woman is grabbed by a violent serial rapist at a bus stop, a train platform or in her apartment...he plans on beating, raping and murdering her. She has a gun, and can stop the rape with the gun......

Do you want her to use that gun to stop the rape?

You are given the ability to travel in time......knowing this woman is about to be brutally beaten, raped and murdered.....do you go back in time and take that gun away from her before the rape?

Then....after your dodge because you don't want to actually answer the question, I narrowed it so your dodge is more difficult...

To be clear, the woman is on her own........you are not there.

Do you want her to have the ability to stop the rape with a gun.....?

If you can go back in time before the rape, do you take that gun away from her...knowing she will be defenseless when the rape happens?

Then, I cited the actual research on guns as the best tool for a woman to survive a rape...

I wish to single out one particular subtype of physical resistance: Use of a weapon, and especially a firearm, is statistically a woman's best means of resistance, greatly enhancing her odds of escaping both rape and injury, compared to any other strategy of physical or verbal resistance. This conclusion is drawn from four types of information.

First, a 1989 study (Furby, Journal of Interpersonal Violence) found that both male and female survey respondents judged a gun to be the most effective means that a potential rape victim could use to fend off the assault. Rape "experts" considered it a close second, after eye-gouging.

Second, raw data from the 1979-1985 installments of the Justice Department's annual National Crime Victim Survey show that when a woman resists a stranger rape with a gun, the probability of completion was 0.1 percent and of victim injury 0.0 percent, compared to 31 percent and 40 percent, respectively, for all stranger rapes (Kleck, Social Problems, 1990).

Third, a recent paper (Southwick, Journal of Criminal Justice, 2000) analyzed victim resistance to violent crimes generally, with robbery, aggravated assault and rape considered together. Women who resisted with a gun were 2.5 times more likely to escape without injury than those who did not resist and 4 times more likely to escape uninjured than those who resisted with any means other than a gun. Similarly, their property losses in a robbery were reduced more than six-fold and almost three-fold, respectively, compared to the other categories of resistance strategy.

Fourth, we have two studies in the last 20 years that directly address the outcomes of women who resist attempted rape with a weapon. (Lizotte, Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 1986; Kleck, Social Problems, 1990.) The former concludes, "Further, women who resist rape with a gun or knife dramatically decrease their probability of completion." (Lizotte did not analyze victim injuries apart from the rape itself.) The latter concludes that "resistance with a gun or knife is the most effective form of resistance for preventing completion of a rape"; this is accomplished "without creating any significant additional risk of other injury."

Guns Effective Defense Against Rape

Use of a weapon, and especially a firearm, is statistically a woman's best means of resistance, greatly enhancing her odds of escaping both rape and injury, compared to any other strategy of physical or verbal resistance.

www.tysknews.com

 

[Vagabond63]

Your question is quite clear,

You are given the ability to travel in time......knowing this woman is about to be brutally beaten, raped and murdered.....do you go back in time and take that gun away from her before the rape?

I am clearly allowed to interfere.
Problem is your question is total BS in any event.

 

[Vagabond63]

No.....My questions are clear.....you tried to dodge them by becoming the hero of the question......that isn't part of the question...

Let me repeat..

A woman is grabbed by a violent serial rapist at a bus stop, a train platform or in her apartment...he plans on beating, raping and murdering her. She has a gun, and can stop the rape with the gun......

Do you want her to use that gun to stop the rape?

You are given the ability to travel in time......knowing this woman is about to be brutally beaten, raped and murdered.....do you go back in time and take that gun away from her before the rape?

Then....after your dodge because you don't want to actually answer the question, I narrowed it so your dodge is more difficult...

To be clear, the woman is on her own........you are not there.

Do you want her to have the ability to stop the rape with a gun.....?

If you can go back in time before the rape, do you take that gun away from her...knowing she will be defenseless when the rape happens?

Then, I cited the actual research on guns as the best tool for a woman to survive a rape...

I wish to single out one particular subtype of physical resistance: Use of a weapon, and especially a firearm, is statistically a woman's best means of resistance, greatly enhancing her odds of escaping both rape and injury, compared to any other strategy of physical or verbal resistance. This conclusion is drawn from four types of information.

First, a 1989 study (Furby, Journal of Interpersonal Violence) found that both male and female survey respondents judged a gun to be the most effective means that a potential rape victim could use to fend off the assault. Rape "experts" considered it a close second, after eye-gouging.

Second, raw data from the 1979-1985 installments of the Justice Department's annual National Crime Victim Survey show that when a woman resists a stranger rape with a gun, the probability of completion was 0.1 percent and of victim injury 0.0 percent, compared to 31 percent and 40 percent, respectively, for all stranger rapes (Kleck, Social Problems, 1990).

Third, a recent paper (Southwick, Journal of Criminal Justice, 2000) analyzed victim resistance to violent crimes generally, with robbery, aggravated assault and rape considered together. Women who resisted with a gun were 2.5 times more likely to escape without injury than those who did not resist and 4 times more likely to escape uninjured than those who resisted with any means other than a gun. Similarly, their property losses in a robbery were reduced more than six-fold and almost three-fold, respectively, compared to the other categories of resistance strategy.

Fourth, we have two studies in the last 20 years that directly address the outcomes of women who resist attempted rape with a weapon. (Lizotte, Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 1986; Kleck, Social Problems, 1990.) The former concludes, "Further, women who resist rape with a gun or knife dramatically decrease their probability of completion." (Lizotte did not analyze victim injuries apart from the rape itself.) The latter concludes that "resistance with a gun or knife is the most effective form of resistance for preventing completion of a rape"; this is accomplished "without creating any significant additional risk of other injury."

Guns Effective Defense Against Rape

Use of a weapon, and especially a firearm, is statistically a woman's best means of resistance, greatly enhancing her odds of escaping both rape and injury, compared to any other strategy of physical or verbal resistance.

www.tysknews.com

Yup, this is an article that quotes Kleck, et al. Which has been debunked time, after time, after time, in mainstream academia. He's only believed by rabid gun nuts now. You've got nothing.

 

[2aguy]

Yup, this is an article that quotes Kleck, et al. Which has been debunked time, after time, after time, in mainstream academia. He's only believed by rabid gun nuts now. You've got nothing.

He hasn't been debunked.....they have made claims about his research that aren't correct, and then idiots like you parrot those false claims.....

Then, the Centers For Disease Control did the same research to "debunk," Kleck...came out with the same numbers and didn't release the data....the Department of Justice, under bill clinton, used two anti-gun extremists to also debunk Kleck....and they also came out with the same numbers.....

You guys lie.....and then expect people to just accept it...

Here is Kleck and the other 16 studies that looked at gun self defense numbers....notice the CDC, both in the 90s and under obama, and the clinton DOJ research...you idiot.


A quick guide to the studies and the numbers.....the full lay out of what was studied by each study is in the links....

The name of the group doing the study, the year of the study, the number of defensive gun uses and if police and military defensive gun uses are included.....notice the bill clinton and obama defensive gun use research is highlighted.....

GunCite-Gun Control-How Often Are Guns Used in Self-Defense

GunCite Frequency of Defensive Gun Use in Previous Surveys

Field...1976....3,052,717 ( no cops, no military)

DMIa 1978...2,141,512 ( no cops, no military)

L.A. TIMES...1994...3,609,68 ( no cops, no military)

Kleck......1994...2.5 million ( no cops, no military)

CDC...1996-1998... 1.1 million averaged over those years.( no cops, no military)

Obama's CDC....2013....500,000--3million

--------------------


Bordua...1977...1,414,544

DMIb...1978...1,098,409 ( no cops, no military)

Hart...1981...1.797,461 ( no cops, no military)

Mauser...1990...1,487,342 ( no cops,no military)

Gallup...1993...1,621,377 ( no cops, no military)

DEPT. OF JUSTICE...1994...1.5 million ( the bill clinton study)

Journal of Quantitative Criminology--- 989,883 times per year."

(Based on survey data from a 2000 study published in the Journal of Quantitative Criminology,[17] U.S. civilians use guns to defend themselves and others from crime at least 989,883 times per year.[18])

Paper: "Measuring Civilian Defensive Firearm Use: A Methodological Experiment." By David McDowall and others. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, March 2000. Measuring Civilian Defensive Firearm Use: A Methodological Experiment - Springer


-------------------------------------------

Ohio...1982...771,043

Gallup...1991...777,152

Tarrance... 1994... 764,036 (no cops, no military)

Lawerence Southwich Jr. 400,000 fewer violent crimes and at least 800,000 violent crimes deterred..