Thursday, August 15, 2013

Firearms As Equalizers

Pistols, in the 19th Century, were called “equalizers” because they made the tiniest woman equal to the biggest man. I’m not even going to say I’m a believer, because I don’t “believe” it’s true, no more than I believe 2+2=4. It just is true.

I have known three women who were murdered. I did not know them personally. One was strangled by a serial killer about a week after I left my job and she was hired. She was a small young woman, and for that matter, the guy who killed her wasn’t that big. I could have taken him, which is why these guys kill the weaker, such as women.

In fact, when the police came to the serial killer's house, merely to question him, he hid behind his wife. He no longer lives with his wife, since he's spending his life in prison. His name is Dale R. Anderson, in case you're interested.

The other two women were sisters, and I did meet their mother. They were raped and thrown off of a bridge by four teenagers. They were, I believe, 19 and 20.

So far, only one of the murderers has been executed, and to his dying breath he claimed he was innocent. He wasn't.

In each case, if these women would have had a pistol, or even a knife, they would have survived. Even a two-shot, .22 derringer would have saved their lives, just with the threat of it, if nothing else.

I once wrote an article about the two sisters, and made a silent bet with myself that at least one imbecile would tell me young people should not carry guns. I responded, “So you’re saying it’s okay that these women were raped and murdered, then?” and got no response.

I am reminded of the classical definition of a liberal: someone who would rather see a woman raped and strangled with her own panty-house rather than defend herself with a handgun.

I think it should be a law that everyone has to carry a concealed handgun. Sure, there would be an adjustment period in which those genetically and character-deficient were eliminated, but in the long-run (meaning a few weeks) society would be much more peaceful.


lowly said...

I was living in the St Louis area at the time. I'll always remember that.

Unknown said...

So now you know where I am from.

Anonymous said...

"I am reminded of the classical definition of a liberal: someone who would rather see a woman raped and strangled with her own panty-house rather than defend herself with a handgun."

That is one of the best lines I've ever read. If only it were a saying everyone has heard.

Kent McManigal said...

I have known, personally, three people who were shot by aggressors. One survived, and one of the others was a supposed "accidental shooting". None of my shot friends were armed at the time of their shootings.

The first was a friend of mine who went to an ATM at 2AM, in a "not good" part of town. He was shot after he had returned empty-handed to his car to retrieve the ATM card he had forgotten. He was shot in the back when he says he tried to elbow the mugger in the face. Being unaware of his surroundings, and using some bad judgement (and knowing him), I doubt a gun would have helped him much. He survived with a big scar and a bloody shirt.

The next friend who was shot may have been involved in some unsmart activity with some unlovely folks. The shooter claimed that "the gun went off" as my friend handed it butt-first back to the guy. Everyone fled the scene, leaving my friend bleeding out on the floor, until one girl who had been there at the time got a twinge of conscience an hour or so later and called an ambulance. He died on the operating table.

My third friend was dating a guy who turned out to be a frequent escapee from a mental facility. When she dumped him, the lawyer she worked for helped her get a restraining order. (I had moved away a few months before or I would have had other advice for her.) The guy pulled up alongside her car at a stop light and shot her in the head. I don't believe she even knew he was there. A gun probably wouldn't have saved her life, unless the guy had known she had one and stayed away due to being afraid of facing an armed target.

Now, regardless of whether a gun in the right hand would have saved any of my friends, I do believe everyone should carry a gun with them all the time, everywhere they go.

I am, however, not in favor of making that a "legal requirement". A "law" dictating this is just as evil as a "law" regulating guns in some way. But it would still have better results than the current situation.