Excellent Point…
May 28, 2009
If you can’t make it out, it says:
“Gun Control: The theory that a woman found dead in an alley, raped and strangled with her own pantyhose, is somehow morally superior to a woman explaining to police how her attacker got that fatal bullet wound.”
I couldn’t agree more. So I forwarded this to a liberal, female friend of mine who is very engaged in the antirape cause, in hopes of broadening myself with an, I presumed, opposing viewpoint. I was not disappointed, about the viewpoint being opposing, anyway. I’m not sure I have been broadened.
She: “Protection issues aside.. where’s the work directed at stopping rape in the first place? Let’s get some of the positive MALE role models out there trying to stop rape instead of spending their efforts equipping us w/ guns. Guns are not the answer. Violence as an answer to aggression is not the kind of solution I want to advocate for!”
My reply: “Wake up. You think a positive role model is going to convince a would-be rapist to not do it? What, Morgan Freeman in a commercial during the Super Bowl? C’mon. By the way, what you call violence, I call self defense. Justifiable homicide. If a rape is about to occur, it’s best for everyone involved.”
So…have I been broadened? Am I overlooking the influence that a “positive male role model” can have on whatever demographic it is that is predisposed to rape a woman?
To me, the reply is a microcosm of the liberal agenda on national security: Rogue nations? Let’s engage them. Let’s have a dialog with them. Let’s sit down with them unconditionally and not be such, yuck, cowboys. And let’s unilaterally toss out our most effective deterrent, while the opponent improves theirs.
I’m not saying we don’t use preventive measures—diplomacy in the case of nations, and education in that of crime—but you must recognize this:
No matter what you do, there are always going to be people out there who want to harm you. If you are not physically and emotionally equipped to meet them head-on, they will succeed. “Violence as an answer to aggression?” Goddamn right. Yes, please do everything you can to prevent the aggression. But if it occurs, violence is the only answer. What is it about this that is so difficult to understand?
Thanks to dick Weber for the pic.
May 29, 2009 at 18:14
If you kill the attacker with 1 shot to the head, that’s fine and dandy. But if the 1st shot doesn’t kill, so you shoot again, it’s murder.
I’m heading to the pistol range.
May 29, 2009 at 16:44
So the argument there is that he was justified in shooting the guy, but not finishing him off? What a crock. He did society a favor, and should be praised for having done so.
I’ll tell you this: if it’d been a woman being raped who shot the guy and then put 5 more rounds in him, there’s no way she’d be charged.
May 29, 2009 at 10:27
This is no attempt to dilute the worthiness of the anti-rape cause; however, I have to agree that if you’re faced with aggression, the anti-rape, anti-murder, anti-burglary, anti-violence lesson has already missed its target, so deal with it in kind.
The reality is that someone with the mindset to commit violence was molded by the influence (or non-influence) of their parents and peers than any positive role model could hope to be, *unless* that role model is introduced during a child’s formative years. Once that opportunity is missed, it’s an absolute waste of time. Then face it, the only thing that will prevent you from becoming yet another maimed, raped or dead victim is the degree to which you can debilitate your attacker.
Oh, interesting news I read yesterday:
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,522461,00.html?sPage=fnc/us/crime
Discuss?