Topic: Gun Control is anti Women? - page 2. (Read 1356 times)
Gun control violates people's natural freedom of trade, as well as inhibiting people's capacity to obtain a cheap and reliable means of self-defense. It's anti-everybody. It makes us all less safe. I see no reason to single out women in particular.
The girls I know who do martial arts would disagree with you 
while it's true muscle mass wise women are smaller than men anyone who has fighting experience will tell you that muscle strength by itself is never always the deciding factor since there are so many different factors that go off when something happens, never mind the fact that women have been recorded lifting up cars due to adrenaline because a family member or child is trapped underneath. I will agree though that technology has always levelled out the battlefield for the perceived weak When it came to medieval times it used to be knights on horseback that ruled everything, then normal people started developing longbows and the like to take down opponents that otherwise would run them down.
while it's true muscle mass wise women are smaller than men anyone who has fighting experience will tell you that muscle strength by itself is never always the deciding factor since there are so many different factors that go off when something happens, never mind the fact that women have been recorded lifting up cars due to adrenaline because a family member or child is trapped underneath. I will agree though that technology has always levelled out the battlefield for the perceived weak When it came to medieval times it used to be knights on horseback that ruled everything, then normal people started developing longbows and the like to take down opponents that otherwise would run them down.What about in the instance of gang-rape 3-8 men zerg rushing 1 female (trained or not).
Trained, I'd put my money on the woman. Good martial arts classes train how to deal with groups, and several men thinking with their little heads are likely to get in each other's way. But without the training, she's not got much chance. And a gun is a lot easier to learn how to use than tae-kwon-do.
The girls I know who do martial arts would disagree with you while it's true muscle mass wise women are smaller than men anyone who has fighting experience will tell you that muscle strength by itself is never always the deciding factor since there are so many different factors that go off when something happens, never mind the fact that women have been recorded lifting up cars due to adrenaline because a family member or child is trapped underneath. I will agree though that technology has always levelled out the battlefield for the perceived weak When it came to medieval times it used to be knights on horseback that ruled everything, then normal people started developing longbows and the like to take down opponents that otherwise would run them down.
while it's true muscle mass wise women are smaller than men anyone who has fighting experience will tell you that muscle strength by itself is never always the deciding factor since there are so many different factors that go off when something happens, never mind the fact that women have been recorded lifting up cars due to adrenaline because a family member or child is trapped underneath. I will agree though that technology has always levelled out the battlefield for the perceived weak When it came to medieval times it used to be knights on horseback that ruled everything, then normal people started developing longbows and the like to take down opponents that otherwise would run them down.What about in the instance of gang-rape 3-8 men zerg rushing 1 female (trained or not).
Then in normal circumstances you're screwed, it wouldn't matter if you're a man or a women but this is why ranged weapons were invented in the first place, I just think the people who support gun control are just irrationally terrified and naive.
Good point with the longbow discussion.
The girls I know who do martial arts would disagree with you while it's true muscle mass wise women are smaller than men anyone who has fighting experience will tell you that muscle strength by itself is never always the deciding factor since there are so many different factors that go off when something happens, never mind the fact that women have been recorded lifting up cars due to adrenaline because a family member or child is trapped underneath. I will agree though that technology has always levelled out the battlefield for the perceived weak When it came to medieval times it used to be knights on horseback that ruled everything, then normal people started developing longbows and the like to take down opponents that otherwise would run them down.
while it's true muscle mass wise women are smaller than men anyone who has fighting experience will tell you that muscle strength by itself is never always the deciding factor since there are so many different factors that go off when something happens, never mind the fact that women have been recorded lifting up cars due to adrenaline because a family member or child is trapped underneath. I will agree though that technology has always levelled out the battlefield for the perceived weak When it came to medieval times it used to be knights on horseback that ruled everything, then normal people started developing longbows and the like to take down opponents that otherwise would run them down.What about in the instance of gang-rape 3-8 men zerg rushing 1 female (trained or not).
The girls I know who do martial arts would disagree with you while it's true muscle mass wise women are smaller than men anyone who has fighting experience will tell you that muscle strength by itself is never always the deciding factor since there are so many different factors that go off when something happens, never mind the fact that women have been recorded lifting up cars due to adrenaline because a family member or child is trapped underneath. I will agree though that technology has always levelled out the battlefield for the perceived weak. When it came to medieval times it used to be knights on horseback that ruled everything, then normal people started developing longbows and the like to take down opponents that otherwise would run them down.
while it's true muscle mass wise women are smaller than men anyone who has fighting experience will tell you that muscle strength by itself is never always the deciding factor since there are so many different factors that go off when something happens, never mind the fact that women have been recorded lifting up cars due to adrenaline because a family member or child is trapped underneath. I will agree though that technology has always levelled out the battlefield for the perceived weak. When it came to medieval times it used to be knights on horseback that ruled everything, then normal people started developing longbows and the like to take down opponents that otherwise would run them down. Gun control would reduce the suicide rate and women try to kill themselves more than men. So if you wanted to take that route, you could argue that gun control is pro-woman.
Personally I don't think the battle of the sexes enters the picture. Keeping guns out of the hands of lunatics and felons is a good idea; once you go beyond that you need to have a good reason.
Personally I don't think the battle of the sexes enters the picture. Keeping guns out of the hands of lunatics and felons is a good idea; once you go beyond that you need to have a good reason.
The battle of the sexes doesn't enter the picture? Well what about the instance of rape? Where physical domination is key? A woman with a gun, would be more likely to fend off a rapist who is physically stronger than her don't you think? More likely than a woman who couldn't?
Also, suicide is easily done with prescription medication/anything/alcohol. Come on.
Keeping guns out of the hands of lunatics and felons is a good idea; once you go beyond that you need to have a good reason.
Do crazy people and ex-cons not have a right to self-defense?
I'm just curious as to why you would single them out.
Gun control would reduce the suicide rate and women try to kill themselves more than men. So if you wanted to take that route, you could argue that gun control is pro-woman.
Personally I don't think the battle of the sexes enters the picture. Keeping guns out of the hands of lunatics and felons is a good idea; once you go beyond that you need to have a good reason.
Personally I don't think the battle of the sexes enters the picture. Keeping guns out of the hands of lunatics and felons is a good idea; once you go beyond that you need to have a good reason.
The argument is simple. Everyone has a natural right to self defense. However men are stronger by nature than women. Therefore women are at a disadvantage when it comes to defending themselves from a stronger aggressor. Enter in the modern convenience of owning a gun. A gun levels the playing field, it assists a woman in defending herself regardless of physical brawn. As now physical brawn has no longer become a factor in the equation of fending off an aggressor.
Thoughts?
Thoughts?
Jump to: