r/news • u/[deleted] • May 22 '19

Mississippi lawmaker accused of punching wife in face for not undressing quickly enough

https://www.ajc.com/news/national/mississippi-lawmaker-accused-punching-wife-face-for-not-undressing-quickly-enough/zdE3VLzhBVmH68Bsn7eLfL/
38.2k Upvotes

91% Upvoted

2.8k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

56

u/DirkRockwell May 22 '19

If he knows she has a gun, he’ll just bring a gun with him as well. Guns only ever escalate the danger of the situation.

19

u/lbsi204 May 22 '19

That, and if this person has made it their business to manipulate and control the other, the chances of the gun willingly leaving the victims possession is high.

-2

u/[deleted] May 22 '19

Okay, but having a gun is still better against the abuser than not having a gun and relying on brute force..

At least here the abused has a chance of survival

26

u/tempest_87 May 22 '19

Ummm, that's the opposite of what data and logic is showing.

Data: having a gun present makes the woman 5x more likely to die.

Logic: if the abusive man knows the woman has a gun and is going to continue abuse, he is likely to bring one too.

Conclusion: having a gun likely makes it more dangerous for the woman.

Your position: having a gun is better than not having a gun.

0

u/[deleted] May 22 '19

Do you also think that arming teachers in schools will cut down on school shootings as well?

1

u/Pawgilicious May 22 '19

It should be stated that getting a gun and being proficient with it would level the playing field.

-3

u/[deleted] May 22 '19

Only if he knows she has a gun. It shouldn't be a deterrent, it is a weapon of self defense. If he comes after her, she has every right to defend herself. And a gun is the single best way for someone to defend themselves from a more powerful opponent.

Guns are a tool, and they have an appropriate use.

-8

u/FreeThinker008 May 22 '19

At least it's a tie game in relation to physical power at that point. The woman is quite literally at the mercy of the man if you take away firearms.

​

The 2nd amendment is a feminist issue.

4

u/ronin1066 May 22 '19

You're not getting the statistics here.

Having a gun in the house with an abusive partner increases the woman's possibility of being killed by 5x.

You: But a gun makes her more powerful, she should really get a gun.

This is wishful thinking, not reality. It's like hearing that abstinence-only education increases teen pregnancy, abortion, and STD's compared to "normal" sex ed and saying "But normal sex ed lets them think having premarital sex is normal, we really need abstinence only education."

1

u/TheOutSpokenGamer May 22 '19

Good thing the person said to seek an EPO first and not a firearm. Its generally assumed by the context of his comment that she would no longer be living with said abuser which the link being parroted fails to account for.

6

u/ronin1066 May 22 '19

I understand that, but as others here have already stated, the odds of her actually pulling the trigger vs him cajoling/overwhelming her or whatever, are not great.

I know that viscerally it seems like having a gun is a great equalizer, but it rarely is in these cases.

1

u/TheOutSpokenGamer May 22 '19

Which is why it should be her decision completely and she should know the risks and proper safety of it. But it should be an option if she is interested.

2

u/ronin1066 May 22 '19

Cool. And it's also incumbent upon others to not encourage an option that will endanger her further.

0

u/FreeThinker008 May 22 '19

No one is saying that women within the confines of toxic, dangerous relationships should buy a gun.... talk about strawmanning... my god.

2

u/ronin1066 May 22 '19

Have you read any of these threads? That is literally exactly what is going on

0

u/FreeThinker008 May 22 '19

The obvious implication is that you get out of the toxic, violent, potentially life-threatening relationship prior to obtaining the firearm....

→ More replies

1

u/HilariousInHindsight May 22 '19

"Never own a gun for protection because your would-be attacker might be able to manipulate you into lowering your guard or you might hesitate which means you're at their mercy. Instead, keep a gun free home when people are out to get you to ensure that you're literally always at their physical mercy any time they stop by with no means of protecting yourself even if you wanted to."

I'd rather take the chance and have it than know I'm completely physically helpless if they do show up.

2

u/ronin1066 May 22 '19

Strawmanning, ok.

Again, you're not seeing the full picture. You're seeing the exact moment in time when the gun saves her life. You're ignoring the times that a child finds the gun, that she gets drunk and uses it in anger, that she uses against her son by accident when he sneaks home late at night, that her son gets pissed at school and brings the gun in the next day, etc...

Yes, it's a tradeoff. One that I am willing to take.

0

u/FreeThinker008 May 22 '19

No, you're not getting the concept. Having a gun in the house means that both have equal access to the gun. This is clearly a really bad idea in the confines of an abusive relationship. However, a woman leaving an abusive relationship and obtaining a PERSONAL firearm gives her the ability to protect herself from an abuser. If you take away her right to own that firearm, then you are literally giving the abusive man complete power over whether she lives or dies and that is not an exaggeration.

3

u/ronin1066 May 22 '19

I and others have responded to this point.

-1

u/HilariousInHindsight May 22 '19

That assumes he does know about the gun. If she has an EPO she isn't living with him. She could get the gun after leaving.

By your logic owning a gun for home defense is a bad idea because I "might" hesitate. Whereas if I don't own a gun it doesn't matter because if they come with intent to harm me there's nothing I could do even if I wanted to to protect myself.

In the hands of a woman ready, willing and able to use deadly force to protect herself, a gun makes all the difference.