Feminists Ignore The Practical Solution To Violence: Self-Defense
I’m not your typical feminist. In fact, by today’s standards, I’m probably not a feminist at all. The feminist movement was once something inspiring and empowering. The movement today attempts to be so, but they directly ignore sensible solutions to serious problems.
In the shadow of the recent shootings, personal protection is fresh on our minds. The news has been packed with breaking stories of these incidents, and it has created the perfect platform for feminists to push their radical anti-gun agenda on businesses, individuals and lawmakers.
Just today, a gunman entered Reynolds High School, killing one student. A couple days ago, Vegas cop killers, Jerad and Amanda Miller, carried out their insane pipe dream, killing two cops and one other man. Let’s not forget misogynic maniac Elliot Roger who killed six people. Under these circumstances, one would think people would unite to form a practical solution to gun violence. Instead, feminists decided to use the tragedies as their anti-gun political platform to show the danger of firearms.
The same feminists who encourage women to be individualistic, career oriented and self-empowering completely ignore the easy answers to violence.
Moms Demand Action For Gun Sense in America is one of the most senseless campaigns alongside the twitter explosion of Yes All Women. Moms Demand Action has launched a series of anti-gun petitions to many well-known businesses like Chipotle, Jack in the Box and now Target.
According to their “facts” from a 2011 Violence Policy Center report, a handgun “provides no protection against homicide.” That’s definitive.
Compare them with the other anti-gun feminist campaign, Yes All Women. Yes All Women emerged after the psycho Elliot Roger killed six people on his shooting rampage in Santa Barbara. The Yes All Women campaign attempted to focus on female empowerment. They rightfully condemn misogynic behavior and relentlessly called for women to take a stand. Unfortunately, taking a stand literally meant just that. The campaign successfully swelled, generating over one million tweets. Blame was placed on men, workplace sexism and rape culture. Generally speaking, these same women who preached female empowerment failed to mention a very practical solution to violence against women: Self-defense.
As a young woman living in D.C., these issues hit me hard. Although D.C. has the most restrictive weapon laws, they are one of the most dangerous cities in America.
I’ve done my research. In D.C., I can’t carry a pocketknife, concealed weapon or a taser. Even pepper spray is nearly impossible to carry. It has to have certain ingredients, be in a particular type of aerosol can, must have special instructions written in the correct place and it must be registered as a weapon at the local police department.
The “less guns less crime” argument would suggest that this would be the safest area to reside, but a data set from the Guardian (derived from the FBI’s crime reports) suggests the opposite is true. Of the total D.C. murders in 2011, 71 percent are from firearms. Compare this to one of the most “gun friendly” states, Arizona. Their total murders by firearm were 65 percent. Out of 100,000, their total firearm murders were 222, whereas Washington D.C. was a whopping 1,220.
If feminist lobbyists really cared about the safety and mistreatment of women, they would jump on board with the NRA and start an armed women campaign, because as of now, I plan on defending myself with a tightly clenched pen.
Feminists should direct their fury at the incredibly restrictive gun laws in big, dangerous cities. Of course aggressors are going to prey on defenseless women. Why won’t feminists realize that lobbying for more gun laws won’t protect them? It’s impossible to regulate everyone’s behavior. Gun free zones only empower the criminal.
Since when does empowering women involve stripping them of practically every means possible to protect themselves?
The Founders of America would argue that, “a well-armed populace” actually discourages– not only gun related crime– but crime of any kind. Many criminals cower or take their own life when confronted with armed opposition
It might be asking too much, but these activists should take a look at their hypocrisy and make simple amends. Feminism is supposed to be all about female empowerment. What’s more empowering than arming and defending yourself? We’re never going to be able to find every psychopath before they commit a crime, but I guarantee you the tides will turn when you point a gun in their direction.
Gun violence shouldn’t be a partisan issue. We need to unite and think about practical solutions, despite how we “feel” about weapons. It’s totally sensible and most importantly, totally constitutional.
You can’t always count on someone else to protect you. The police are only a phone call away, but who’s to say you have five minutes to wait? In violent situations, every second counts. I realize many feminists have a clear disdain for firearms, and they’re entitled to that opinion. Keep in mind though; aggressors often carry out their evil intentions with more than a gun.
This issue isn’t about “rape culture,” men’s disrespect of women or the evil of weapons. It all comes down to the condition of someone’s heart. If a person with deep-seated hatred decides to take the lives of innocent people, laws won’t stop them.
Anti-gun feminists are only making it more difficult for women to be empowered. In essence, these campaigns are fostering an environment of helplessness, and that kind of mentality will only produce more victims.
Using feminist logic, it would be better to run to an emergency call box, scream for a police officer or blow a rape whistle than to empower potential victims with a firearm. I’m sure Cosmo editor Elisa Benson reflected the attitudes of her feminist allies when she suggested that self-defense was “icky.” Is that female empowerment in the 21st century?
Feminists can pretend that all would be well in their weaponless utopia. The reality is there are twisted people out there who don’t value human life. Making it more difficult for law-abiding citizens to obtain weapons will only make matters worse.