Premium

When Gun Control Fails Unarmed Women

Gun ownership is important for all Americans. Whether they choose to exercise their Second Amendment rights is up to each individual, of course. But in a free society, the government should not be in the business of preventing people from keeping and bearing arms.

This reality is especially true for the most vulnerable among us, namely, women. For people who claim to care so deeply for women’s safety and rights, the left-wing anti-gunner lobby sure is fixated on keeping them from owning and carrying firearms for their protection, even though it is clear that they are the ones who need it the most.

My friend Kerri Slone, Executive Director for Education at the Crime Prevention Research Center, recently published a piece in Townhall telling the story of Carolyn Williams, who was murdered by her boyfriend in her home in Hartford, Connecticut, while calling 911 for help. After viciously beating Williams and her son, he shot her to death while she was still on the phone with dispatch. He is now facing a slew of charges, including murder:

The case clearly illustrates the limits of protective orders when someone is intent on murdering the victim. If the murderer is willing to risk a life sentence for murder, an additional five years in prison and a $5,000 fine won’t deter him.

It is an important problem. Reportedly, 76% of women murdered by someone who had been an intimate partner were stalked.

Violence prevention advocates recommend a long list of safety precautions. These changes require women to uproot their lives.

Among the advice: women should change jobs, travel routes, the time of day they leave home or work, move in with a friend or family, change the locks on their home, or do their shopping and other chores with friends or relatives.

A few recommend that women practice martial arts such as judo, jiu-jitsu, karate, or boxing.

But the most obvious answer is missing from these lists: women should get a concealed handgun permit and a firearm.

Slone’s last line should be obvious to anyone. Men are physically stronger than women. This means it is easier for a male assailant to victimize a female unless she has the means by which to defend herself. Sure, in the movies, female protagonists like The Avengers’ Black Widow and Kill Bill’s Bride can place a beatdown on even the strongest of male opponents. But in real life, this is rarely the case.

Taking this into account, why would the anti-gunner lobby think it’s a good idea to stop women, especially, from owning guns? Aren’t these the people who decry “rape culture” and support the #MeToo movement?

As far as I’m concerned, there are several reasons why this apparent – and deadly – contradiction exists. The first is simple: These people don’t care about the safety of women despite their virtue-signaling claims to the contrary. Indeed, many on the hard left have a hard time even defining what a woman is, much less how they should be protected.

Despite their constant caterwauling about how horrible men are with their toxic masculinity and violent behavior, they sure are hesitant to acknowledge that women should be allowed to defend themselves. Their ultimate objective is to ensure that only members of the government are allowed to possess firearms – if they have to sacrifice a few women to do this, then they suppose it’s worth cracking a few eggs to make that particular omelet.

Secondly, many of these folks on the hard left have conned themselves into believing that men and women are not significantly different. It’s why they want so badly for biological males to be able to compete in women’s sports. For those who have bought into this delusion, there would be little need for women to own firearms because they should be able to handle a male aggressor on their own or at least hold them off long enough for police to arrive. Admittedly, this reasoning might not apply to most in the anti-gunner lobby, but I’ve seen some make similar arguments.

Lastly, another reason why gun control proponents don’t want women armed is for the same reason they don’t want anyone armed: They want people as reliant on the state as possible. If women understand that their protection is their own responsibility, they might start questioning why they need the government in other areas. In fact, they might have a “Toto” moment in which a little black dog pulls the curtain and exposes the fact that the Great and Powerful Government is nothing more than a meek old man who is impotent to protect them.

When this happens, more females might start questioning whether they should look to government in other areas of their lives. When people, regardless of sex or gender, realize that the state is not their savior, the authoritarian elites will begin losing their power, which is what they fear the most.

Sponsored

Recommended

Trending on RedState Videos