Friday, January 13, 2006

Boomsticks: ...and someone blurts out the obvious.

Zendo Deb found someone accidentally letting the truth leak into reporting: For self defense, nothing beats a gun.

This is a college town, and every Fall we get inundated with the usual foot-stomping, lemon-juice-squirting, key-scratching, kiai-shouting advice that's supposed to equalize a 97-pound sorority sister with a 260-lb serial rapist.

Every day at work I see someone come in looking for pepper spray or "stun guns" because they're afraid of an attacker, but they don't want to actually hurt them.

All this stuff has a place as a defense if you are surprised or can't get to a sidearm, and some of it is useful as a point on a continuum of force, but ultimately it all requires getting into touching distance of your attacker, who is then, by definition, within touching distance of you. Listen to the advice of the guy in the article with the five black belts: Nothing beats a gun for self defense.

Unless, like the students mentioned above, you spend your days and nights in an area where you're forced by law to resort to yelling, car keys, and lemon juice; in that case, look into pepper spray and a good pair of Nikes...

5 comments:

freddyboomboom said...

James over at Hell In A Handbasket has a similar post, only he discusses attackers that are trying to gain entry to your abode...

Earlier this week he had a post about the Ohio CCW law that they're trying to tweak, with a link to a guy who had his gun save him, his wife, and 4 kids...

Firehand said...

What I taught my daughter. When you're in danger, there is no 'fair' fighting or concern for hurting the attacker; there's win or lose, and if it happens I want her to win.

Which utterly horrified the 'peace at any cost' lady I once dated, but that's another story...

freddyboomboom said...

OK, I've been trying to find the video clip of a Nike commercial that shows how Nike shoes can be used in self defense, but all I can find is this tiny one.

Sorry...

Link...

MarkF said...

Seems like whenever a story like this pops up, the chief of police, or the 'womens' services counselor' or some other official is offering cautionary words - "it might be used against you". "More violence is not the answer". "You don't need that evil gun, the police will protect you".
Is it a coincidence that all of these people are in the victim business? If a woman chooses (and in most states, she can) not to be a victim, where does that leave them?
We need a 'Buy a woman a gun' day! Help a woman choose a gun, learn to safely carry, learn to shoot, and get her started on getting her CCW. Especially, help her get the mindset that 'victim' is something she can choose not to be.
Sorry if this sounds too chauvinistic for you, Tam.

pax said...

"Might be used against you" is the one that's always puzzled me greatly.

Howcomewhyisit that a gun can get taken away and used against you, but a fistful of keys cannot?

Are they saying that if a fistful of keys are taken away from you, the bad guy can't use them to do any harm? Why can't he do you any harm with them? Because they're such an inefficient weapon? Then why in the world are we expecting some wimpy little co-ed to fight off a big strong rapist with them?

Or are they saying that a fistful of keys is such an efficient weapon that the bad guy couldn't possibly take them away from said wimpy little co-ed? If that's the case, why can't the same co-ed manage to hold onto a gun, too?

I just don't get it.

pax