PDA

View Full Version : Women & Guns


Logansdad
10-11-2003, 06:55 AM
Homeland Security 101
Gary Aldrich
Friday, Sept. 26, 2003

By the end of this week, more than 120 women from Virginia, Maryland, Washington, D.C., Pennsylvania and Tennessee will have completed a simple and unique firearms safety training course that enables each to legally carry a concealed handgun for self-protection.

For as long as anyone can remember, interest in guns has been pretty much a man’s “thing.” But all that is changing, if interest in the Patriettes program is any indication. Women from all walks of life, from all political persuasions and of all ages are Patriette graduates, and without exception they express positive emotions, ranging from excitement to joy to relief, when they learn how easy it is to protect themselves.

Safe gun use by women is a closely guarded secret. Some want to discourage or withhold gun rights from women, because they prefer women to remain vulnerable to would-be attackers. As perpetual victims, women need somebody or some organization to protect them. In other words, they’re dependent.

But if women are empowered by the knowledge of self-protection, they are no longer viewed as easy targets, and represent an independent force that gun control advocates just cannot and will not tolerate.

Housewives, working moms, stay-at-home moms, students, grandmothers, interns, heads of large organizations, Capitol Hill and White House staffers and public relations professionals have attended and easily passed the class. Each graduate leaves with targets of her newfound proficiency as evidence, along with a certificate from the National Rifle Association. The certificate enables Patriettes grads to immediately apply for a concealed-carry permit from the state of Virginia and any other state that recognizes this comprehensive yet simple program.

Three organizations have joined hands to offer and support Patriettes. First, The Patrick Henry Center for Individual Liberty located in Fairfax, Va., organizes and hosts the program. Joining the Center is the Law Enforcement Alliance of America, dedicated to the protection and promotion of Law Enforcement Officers, as well as the Second Amendment. Finally, The Second Amendment Sisters, who became famous as the counter to the Million Mom March several years ago, lends support and encouragement to the program.

The Patrick Henry Center has purchased 9 mm semi-automatic handguns for training, so the women are not intimidated by the mysteries and high costs of purchasing their own guns prior to class. All they have to do is buy the ammunition – the Center and the NRA Certified Instructors do the rest.

A unique aspect of the program is that no men are allowed. It is specially designed training geared to the kinds of issues and special concerns that women naturally have about the use of guns. For example, most women express fear of having a firearm in their home, especially if they have children and are worried about easy access. Their fears are put to rest when they are made aware of the many firearms security devices now on the market.

The ladies also learn about a specially built gun safe that fits in their car, and another that bolts to their bed frames. The safes are made of high-tensile-strength steel and have unique locking devices that can be activated only by the owner. This ensures that kids can’t get their hands on the guns and also prevents easy theft, but gives the user quick access in the event of a threat.

The training is accomplished in less than eight hours, including time for a hot meal supplied by The Patrick Henry Center. Having spent time together in the classroom learning a new skill, these ladies become part of a rather exclusive club. They bond as they review what they have learned while enjoying all-American barbecue supplied by a popular nearby restaurant.

Little do they know the best is yet to come. Patriettes also receive one-on-one assistance on the firing line from an NRA instructor. As they plug the silhouette targets with neat round holes, these newly empowered women suddenly realize that they always possessed a constitutional right that could have put many of their fears of being a victim to rest.

Some even become angry when they discover they have needlessly lived in fear for many years because unfounded intimidation of guns and somebody’s political cause have discouraged them from ever considering self-protection.

The firearms instructors tell them that women are more accurate in their shooting than men and actually make better students in the classroom. Said one NRA Certified Instructor: “Most men come to our classes convinced they know everything there is to know about guns. This makes them harder to train. Men resist unlearning their preconceived notions – including erroneous notions about gun safety. But the women listen carefully and learn the correct safety rules. That’s very important.”

And that’s what makes the Patriettes program unique. Women learn about gun safety while they are taught how to protect themselves from becoming just another victim of crime. But they learn in an atmosphere free from the natural intimidation they would feel if men were present. Everyone assumes most guys are likely to snicker at the notion that the “pretty little thing” sitting next to them is “packing heat.”

And yet, ironically, women benefit most from the concealed-carry permit laws now enacted in 36 states, Missouri being the latest to join this overdue movement. Men have the presence and upper body strength that usually make them less attractive as victims. And sexual predators seek to humiliate and injure women and rob them of their dignity and possessions, and perhaps their lives.

Women know a call to 911 will be little help if and when they fall victim to a sexual predator. But a locked and loaded 9 mm handgun will certainly get the creep’s attention, and in the hands of someone who knows how to use it, it’s highly likely he’ll back off instantly. If not, some would opine, maybe this human garbage will finally get what’s coming to him.

MikeG
10-11-2003, 07:31 PM
Neat - where did you find this?

Gun control (and social engineering in general) has always been about making people powerless and dependent on government assistance.

Logansdad
10-11-2003, 07:37 PM
I wish I could remember..

MikeG
10-11-2003, 08:11 PM
Be sure to quote your sources whenever possible, to avoid copyright infringement.

Thanks for sharing.

kciH
10-11-2003, 08:34 PM
Good article, thanks for posting it. I believe that women who become involved in this type of program, or have legitimate knowledge of firearms and the use of them, hold one of the major keys to retaining or firearms rights.

El Lobo
10-12-2003, 10:20 AM
My wife is a kindergarten teacher..... all 5'3" of her. However, she has no difficulty handling her Colt 1991A1 in .45 ACP. I encourage her to carry whenever possible.

Lobo in West Virginia

Logansdad
10-12-2003, 10:26 AM
Be sure to quote your sources whenever possible, to avoid copyright infringement.

Thanks for sharing.

I posted the author's name too...I just don't remember where I stole his article

Roper
02-09-2005, 10:24 AM
Amen to women and firearms. I have helped women with their questions for 35 plus years with many sucess stories, and many happy husbands and boy friends.

Richard of Oz
02-09-2005, 01:02 PM
Be sure to quote your sources whenever possible, to avoid copyright infringement.
.

http://www.conservativetruth.org/article.php?id=1933

ZackOR3177Y
02-09-2005, 01:32 PM
http://www.conservativetruth.org/article.php?id=1933

women and guns, all i can say is .hot. Sounds like a great class to pick up women in since they share an interest,just dont dump them harshly or you could get shot...

Swany
02-09-2005, 01:33 PM
Biker friend says don't teach your woman to shoot or drive, that way she can't catch you and shoot you.
I've not lived by that bit of wit, I have however taught a goodly number of women to shoot and hunt.

MAINER
02-09-2005, 02:39 PM
Great article! The very last thing some scum bag perpetrator expects is for his victim to have and use a gun.

You know if you just can't convince your wife or daughter to keep a gun with them, those plastic flare shooting pistols required by the Coast Guard remain a great alternative. How you'd like to have one of those suckers down your shirt?

loraksus
02-09-2005, 04:23 PM
Be sure to quote your sources whenever possible, to avoid copyright infringement.

Thanks for sharing.

Actually, he's infringing either way, it doesn't matter if you quote your source.

Sure-Shot
02-09-2005, 04:51 PM
Personally I think the gun training is great, the flare idea is probably dangerous. If it doesn't kill it may enrage them to kill. I prefer my wife be armed as she can make sure nothing happens by making her attacker dead. Oh, she outshot me the first time she ever shot, I was a police officer at the time and it ticked me off at first then made me feel good when I realized she would have no problems putting them where they needed to go. Her preferred carry is a S&W 66 2 inch in 357 mag.

MikeG
02-09-2005, 05:35 PM
Actually, he's infringing either way, it doesn't matter if you quote your source.

How do you see that? Newspapers quote other sources all the time.... so do books, magazines, etc.

loraksus
02-10-2005, 02:48 AM
How do you see that? Newspapers quote other sources all the time.... so do books, magazines, etc.

Short answer,
Getting a wee bit off topic, but the difference is that they have permission from the copyright holder. You have to, everytime you use / copy / repost someone elses's work unless they explicitly say you can. Crediting them is nice but doesn't give you any legal protection (see fair use below).

Long(er) answer
It is sort of like copying all of the Beatles albums over the net and then saying "oh yeah, the Beatles recorded those". I know that analogy is a bit of a stretch, but I'm just trying to show that the actual thing that is copyrighted is the content (i.e. "Yellow Submarine" or an article).

What it comes down to is while linking is ok, copying and pasting technically isn't, regardless of whether you credit the source or not.
Actually, there is another level of complexity, aside from crediting, the whole argument of "fair use", the definiton of which is pretty vague, but basically lets [mostly] everyone use copyrighted works in certain cases for free (satire of a work, commenting on a work, schools can use parts of copyrighted poems to teach students about different types of rhyming, quoting part of an article in a term paper, etc)
It really isn't all that well defined, but if you copy something in its entirety and do it in order to get something in return, then it isn't covered under fair use. Copying "Sgt.Pepper" (I think that is a Beatles album, I'm young :) ) and selling copies at the market isn't covered under fair use, but using a short clip of a Beatles song to show your students how music changed since 1960 would.
Crediting the author gives you a bit more leeway under fair use, but it isn't just good enough to be your only defense.

See this link for more details
http://www.eff.org/IP/eff_fair_use_faq.html

*deep breath*

So, if someone did want to, they could cause some trouble for the owners of the site (you? not quite sure who that is) and the person who posted it.

It doesn't happen very often, especially on the net (it is quite a bit easier to do on a computer though), but since everything from "a scribble on a napkin" is protected by copyright as soon as it is created (including this post, which you can feel free to copy ;) ), you could end up in a wee bit of trouble. If there isn't a (C) or Copyright John Smith 2005, it doens't matter (hasn't since 1989)

One side note, if someone wants to sue, they have to register the work with the copyright office. They can register any time (even after you have copied the work), but if you don't within a certain time of creation, you lose the ability to sue for legal fees, which is the big thing, because copyright lawyers charge an arm and a leg ($300+/hr, they have a seperate bar and everything). Basically, there is almost no point bringing a case if you don't get legal fees reimbursed. The person bringing the suit can pick whether he wants the judge to pick a number between $750 and $30,000 per infringement or sue for "actual damages"

Oh, and the copyright holder isn't necessairly the author. The copyright holder could be the magazine, or company who employs the author. Even if the author allows you to copy it, the company might not (and the author really has no say in the matter).

You're not likely to have any trouble unless you upset a couple newspapers (I think the NY Times doesn't like you reposting their stuff), the RIAA or the church of scientology (I'm not trying to get political, it is just that there are a couple of organizations that are very agressive and visible, the RIAA, MPAA and CoS are probably the most famous for bringing many cases), but just a heads up. People post copies of articles, etc, very frequently on the net, but I suppose it is one of those "better safe than sorry" things.

Stupid, I know, (you'd think the copyright holder should thank you for introducing people to their works),but there are good arguments on both sides.
There are also some legal cases about linking to articles, but that is seen more in cases where you provide links to illegal materials like deCSS (a DVD decryption program), etc.
There have been some cases where a newspaper has sued claiming that direct links reduce their advertising revenue or some bull, but that is really rare nowadays. Of course, you can still get sued, even if you are doing everything legally. 3 cheers for the justice system and all that.

Oh, yes. This is USA only.
/More than you wanted to know.

If you want anything else, PM me, I don't think we should should bother all these folks who just want to hear about women and guns ;)

MikeG
02-10-2005, 07:11 AM
Interesting - thanks - a worthwhile discussion, given the way articles float around on the net. I think Marshall puts copyrights on the tech notes, etc.

Sorry for getting off track!

Luisyamaha
02-10-2005, 08:18 AM
Where are the women? Where are the guns?

loraksus
02-10-2005, 10:26 AM
Where are the women? Where are the guns?

http://journal.khuong.com/ has a leggy blonde with a MAC10 this week along with a couple cool very fast shots of stuff being shot. (Site is basically a bunch of stock photos)
/sorry, you asked. :)

papajohn428
02-12-2005, 01:09 PM
I get offended when women outshoot me, but that doesn't keep me from teaching as many as I can. And most adult women I have coached have outshot me. I guess I'm a glutton for punishment. :rolleyes: But what that article says is true, at least in my experience. Women don't show up at a range full of macho and testosterone poisoning, like most men do. They are there to learn, they readily admit they know little about guns, and they often admit they are scared to death of them. Most guys act like a knowledge of weapons comes with their chromosomes, and go on automatic nod when you try to explain something, like basic safety rules. Women have no qualms about asking valid questions, after all, they're not SUPPOSED to know anything about this stuff.

Some women defy the rules. One I taught couldn't hit the broad side of a cliff with mild 38 loads. I was ready to quit and write her off as a lost cause, but she wanted to keep at it. When I ran out of 38's, I broke out some light 357's, which she shot a bit better. Encouraged, she stayed with it. Soon there was nothing left to shoot but full-house 357's. And wouldn't you know it, she was hitting bottlecaps at 15 yards with the heavy stuff. The next time out, I brought plenty of ammo. Same pattern - sucked with 38's, dead-on with the heavy stuff. A week later she called me, she had bought a four inch S&W 686 and was ordering a case of Magnum ammo. Ten years later she's still so-so with light stuff, but give her a cylinder full of smoke-and-thunder style magnums, and she's lethal to 150 yards. Go figure.

Most women I've coached have preferred the milder stuff, and settled on K-frame sized revolvers, or J-frames, if concealment was an issue. And when they outshoot me, I have finally learned to grin and bear it. I may be a mediocre pistol shot, but I'm a GREAT teacher! :p

Papajohn

M1894
02-12-2005, 08:51 PM
PaPa John: Had a similar situation, where a student (female) coludn't qualify for her Security Guard carry permit with a .38 Special, after I dismissed the class I decided to shoot some .45ACP's out of my 1955 Smith. She asked if she could try a few, so I let her. After 60 rounds, with the largest 25 yard group being 9", all in the center of a B-27 target, I relented and qualified her. She went out and bought a 625 with a 4" barrel, and the next year she was top gun in her refresher class.

Lee L.