A Brooklyn friend once told me a story about the time she rented a house in the country: As she was standing outside in the middle of nowhere, a stranger pulled up, got out of his car, and started making conversation in a way that made her uncomfortable. The man eventually drove away and nothing bad happened, but she found it unnerving, even terrifying. Along with many of my other city friends, she thought I was crazy to move upstate.
They weren’t entirely wrong. One of the big differences about living in a rural area is you feel as if you are on your own here, in a way that you don’t in the city. Your neighbors will help you out, of course, but they don’t share a living room wall with you; they can’t, well, hear you scream. Our water comes from our own well, we manage our own septic tank, and we pay for our garbage removal. The town doesn’t provide these things for us. We have never had a break-in, and our local police blotter is mostly about domestic violence or drunk driving—very rarely stranger-on-stranger crime. Emergency responders can get to our house quickly, but we can go days without seeing an authority figure. This changes how the world looks. I feel the need to be self-sufficient, to prepare for the worst. Lately there’s also part of me that thinks, I have a right to bear arms, and I want to exercise that right.
The seeds of this feeling were planted after Donald Trump was elected in 2016. Shocked and confused, I heeded the exhortations to “get out of your bubble,” and began reading conservative news outlets, where I quickly discovered how differently so many stories were reported—including those about guns. Accustomed to reading left-leaning media, I had absorbed the idea that using a gun for self-defense all but guaranteed the gun would be apprehended by the aggressor and used against the victim. Now I learned that there are actual instances of a “good guy with a gun” stopping a crime—like the dad with a concealed-carry permit who used a handgun to incapacitate a man who opened fire in a busy McDonald’s. They happen all the time but are virtually never reported in certain outlets.
But I still didn’t think about getting a gun for protection myself—not until the dogs died. In their absence, especially on the nights when my husband is out of town, I feel exposed and vulnerable. My house has many ground-floor windows, and my kids are grown up and out of the house. I could get more big, loud dogs, of course—but they are a liability. Ours were daunting enough that we advised friends not to bring their pets to our house, as it was too much trouble, and too risky, to introduce their dogs to our wolf pack. My huge livestock guardian loved to roam, and we were constantly upgrading our fences in an attempt to keep him in. As much as I miss my big dogs, it’s a relief not to worry about them anymore; I can go away for the weekend, or just out for the day, more easily. But the fact remains that I don’t feel secure without them.
At the same time, I haven’t been able to shake the feeling that handguns are guaranteed to cause death and misery to everyone in their vicinity. So I decided to look at the statistics. I learned that the vast majority of American gun owners have never been involved in a criminal shooting, an accident, or a suicide; that safe storage is a critical factor in preventing them; and that women are more likely to follow safety protocols. According to one study, about 82 percent of all firearm victims in St. Louis are male, most of them between the ages of 12 and 18. As a white, middle-aged female, the only significantly elevated risk I’d encounter from keeping a safely stored firearm would be suicide. But with no history of mental health issues, that likelihood approaches practically zero. If I got a gun, it would be locked up except for occasional target practice. I’d almost certainly never feel the need to use it. …
And yet, I haven’t purchased a gun, or signed up for more classes.
Why? Because I remain torn. Perhaps it’s the partisan fog still clouding my judgment. But as invigorating as I found it to shoot a pistol, it was also sobering to remind myself how much death and damage these small, potent objects can inflict. We really do need a rifle on the farm. We’re going to get one. As for something more than that, a handgun for protection and peace of mind, well, that remains to be decided.
— Larissa Phillips in Should I Get a Gun?
Why does she feel less safe when her husband is out of town?
Women and men are the same. Assuming you can identify them.
Or so that’s what I’m told.
She can do all the same no-gun things he can do. Call 911. Wait. Hide. Or is he supposed to sacrifice his body so she may live to spend his money with her next guy?
“Why does she feel less safe when her husband is out of town?”
because she lacks the self-confidence and self-esteem to be her own first responder.
The Cultural Revolution of the ’60s left society pretty confused. The Cultural Revolution of 2020 didn’t help either.
This left winger will be one of those that lock the gun in one safe and the ammo in another, then not he able to get to either if someone breaks in because she is online in another room pontificating for more gun control.
Anyway … I’ve encountered these types of left wingers before. She is in, what we call around here, ‘belief system twilight zone shock’. She has discovered that the anti-gun and left wing media have not been truthful with her, her belief system on guns was based upon the deceptive obscuring fog they kept her in. In short she has discovered that reality on guns was not what she was led to believe but she is not ready yet to part with that deceptive fog that has fed her belief system on guns.
But she is still in that fog, trying to hang on to it because that’s where her belief system on guns feels more less-challenged still. For example, she says this > “As a white, middle-aged female, the only significantly elevated risk I’d encounter from keeping a safely stored firearm would be su* icide.”
1. A person at risk of su* icide is always at an elevated risk of su* icide even if there is no gun around. Being “a white, middle-aged female” has nothing to do with it and neither does the gun, because no matter the race or age a person at risk of su* icide is always at an elevated risk of su* icide even if there is no gun around. Basically the difference between ‘risk of su* icide’ and ‘elevated risk of su* icide’ is only in the timing – to ‘do it later’ or ‘do it now or very soon’ – this is why a person at risk of su* icide is always at an elevated risk of su* icide also, its just a matter of timing.
2. She got this line from left wing studies prompted by and paid for by anti-gun sources and cited by left wing media and left wing sources with their ‘trust the science’ BS, and their data was bogus. They purposely cherry picked data from homes where “a white, middle-aged female” had already attempted su* icide but failed because they did not apply their method correctly to cause the desired outcome, and had done more planning and selected another more assuredly fatal method and was going to carry it out BEFORE A GUN WAS INTRODUCED TO THE HOME. Then the gun got introduced and they used that instead and voila! STUDY REACHES PREDETERMINED CONCLUSION THAT A GUN IN THE HOME CREATES AN ELEVATED RISK OF SUI* CIDE FOR “white, middle-aged females” – in reality, the gun made no difference, the “white, middle-aged females” were already at an elevated risk of su* icide before the gun and would have committed su* icide anyway and had planned and was going to carry it out by another method even if there was no gun.
3. Look at her excuse for it too, this > “…from keeping a safely stored firearm…” > think about that for a second then look at #1 above…how the firearm is ‘safely’ stored makes no difference to a person at risk or ‘elevated risk’ of su* icide, when they get ready to do it they will do it with anything they can use, a gun ‘safely’ stored away does not keep them from using something else. But then she turns around and says she is not at risk of Anyway … I’ve encountered these types of left wingers before. She is in, what we call around here, ‘belief system twilight zone shock’. She has discovered that the anti-gun and left wing media have not been truthful with her, her belief system on guns was based upon the deceptive obscuring fog they kept her in. In short she has discovered that reality on guns was not what she was led to believe but she is not ready yet to part with that deceptive fog that has fed her belief system on guns.
But she is still in that fog, trying to hang on to it because that’s where her belief system on guns feels more less-challenged still. For example, she says this > “As a white, middle-aged female, the only significantly elevated risk I’d encounter from keeping a safely stored firearm would be su* icide.”
1. A person at risk of su* icide is always at an elevated risk of su* icide even if there is no gun around. Being “a white, middle-aged female” has nothing to do with it and neither does the gun, because no matter the race or age a person at risk of su* icide is always at an elevated risk of su* icide even if there is no gun around. Basically the difference between ‘risk of su* icide’ and ‘elevated risk of su* icide’ is only in the timing – to ‘do it later’ or ‘do it now or very soon’ – this is why a person at risk of su* icide is always at an elevated risk of su* icide also, its just a matter of timing.
2. She got this line from left wing studies prompted by and paid for by anti-gun sources and cited by left wing media and left wing sources with their ‘trust the science’ BS, and their data was bogus. They purposely cherry picked data from homes where “a white, middle-aged female” had already attempted su* icide but failed because they did not apply their method correctly to cause the desired outcome, and had done more planning and selected another more assuredly fatal method and was going to carry it out BEFORE A GUN WAS INTRODUCED TO THE HOME. Then the gun got introduced and they used that instead and voila! STUDY REACHES PREDETERMINED CONCLUSION THAT A GUN IN THE HOME CREATES AN ELEVATED RISK OF SUI* CIDE FOR “white, middle-aged females” – in reality, the gun made no difference, the “white, middle-aged females” were already at an elevated risk of su* icide before the gun and would have committed su* icide anyway and had planned and was going to carry it out by another method even if there was no gun.
3. Look at her excuse for it too, this > “…from keeping a safely stored firearm…” > think about that for a second then look at #1 above…how the firearm is ‘safely’ stored makes no difference to a person at risk or ‘elevated risk’ of su* icide, when they get ready to do it they will do it with anything they can use, a gun ‘safely’ stored away does not keep them from using something else. But then she turns around and says she is not at risk of suicide but still uses the risk of suicide as her excuse for safely storing the gun because she is a “white, middle-aged female” – its anti-gun brain washing, not that a gun should not be safely stored but rather its the scare tactic brain washing – she is not confident in her own abilities.
She is still clinging to that deceptive fog.
Anyway … I’ve encountered these types of left wingers before. She is in, what we call around here, ‘belief system twilight zone shock’. She has discovered that the anti-gun and left wing media have not been truthful with her, her belief system on guns was based upon the deceptive obscuring fog they kept her in. In short she has discovered that reality on guns was not what she was led to believe but she is not ready yet to part completely with that deceptive fog that has fed her belief system on guns.
There are things one can do to “fix” stupid – this young woman, sadly, cannot.
Don’t Walk, Run! Productions: Kamala Harris Reveals Project 2028! [the lies and deceptions she spews]
ht* tps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z6VMK8zq1e4
As Eowyn said in the Lord of the Rings, “Those who do not have swords can still die on them.”
To answer her question. No she should not get a gun. Since she can’t even seriously consider taking a life in self-defense. Then no. She will have it taken from her by her rapist.
You are more than half way there by talking about it. You have already come to the conclusion it is necessary, now make that decision come to fruition. Yes, a firearm is a potent tool, just like any other farm implement you use to steward your farm. A tractor, pitchfork, fertilizer, or insecticide, if used improperly can be very damaging, even life threatening.
Don’t listen to the denigrating comments, just do what you decide is best for you, what you can live with if you ever have to use a firearm to protect yourself, a loved one, a farm animal, whatever.
Take a tip from Nike and just do it!