There aren't a lot of perps that would still attack a woman who is holding a gun. The appearance of a gun is the great preventer. A perp, thief, rapist, etc are not stupid to keep on attacking if they knew/saw that the victim is armed.

In YOUR situation above, it is kinda dumb to think that having a weapon is a bad thing. Without a weapon, she would be killed/raped anyway! At least with a weapon, she has a chance to either kill the perps or scare them away. And if she has her weapon turned on her, then she won't be any worst than not having anything at all...she is either a raped victim or dead. Because any perp who actually attacks her despite her holding a gun is already determined and experienced enough to kill/rape/kidnap her to the FULL extent of matter, no matter if she has a gun OR not!! Really, you actually think that having a weapon in the situation above is worst?!! Geez, anti-gun liberals sure have a weird way of thinking!

As for gun control supporters, you may want to read these articles from LIBERAL sources:

Gun Laws and Crime - A Complex Relationship - NYTimes.com

Gun Control Isn't Crime Control - ABC News

Long article: https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/194051.pdf

But, at least, from reading it, it seems like enforcement of existing regulations is what is needed, rather than more laws/regulations. And yes, criminal background check do work if done right (aka enough staffing, etc.).

I carry a Benchmade knife everyday, as a backup or primary weapon if i am not carrying.

As a determined perp, in TRDCal situation above, who still attack/rape despite the woman holding a gun, is NOT likely going to be turned away simply because she is holding a knife instead of a gun!! What, a rapist can't turn the knife around on the victim as he can with a gun??!!

Now, yeah, a knife may turn away a highschool punk looking for a good time, but i can assure you that a gun pointing at his face does the trick far better!

seems to be a touchy subject here...
i have a concealed carry license as well. and I cary no matter where I am going. even if it is to the grocery store to get some cereal. Being a combat veteran along with the conceal carry course, I am more than trained and knowledgable on when to use a firearm and when not to. And if and when a struggle presents itself where I NEED to use my side arm, then i can just double tap two in the chest and put one in the head to ensure that my family or myself does not get injured or hurt.
plus if i fight the perp... i dont want him to suffer. its just not fair game.
lol

Shoot to kill, never to injure.

I say hooah!

i am with you wilson on everything other than the shooting to disable a person, shot them to kill, how many times has someone(overseas) been pumped full of (15+rounds) 556, and still had fight left in them, even if for only 5 or 6 sec...? thats still a lot of time and it less than 2 sec for someone to close the distance between you and them from 10-15'. so if they have a knife, in their last effort they can still fatally stab you. even with the glock, its only a 9mm, there is a reason 95% of all law enforcement has walked away from 9mm, it simply does not have the stopping power, sure you have more rounds but not the stopping power, now for a woman who is yes smaller and not as strong i say the 9 is a great weapon for her, she can easily handle it and control it(especially sense its a 26). im just saying for her to shoot to kill or eliminate the threat or stop the threat is the better option imo than to shoot to wound someone. besides you have less of an issue of the perp turning around and sueing you cause you shot them while they were trying to kill/rape/rob you, and you ending up paying for them to be the scum of the earth for the rest of your days.

if your out numbered then your out numbered, unless you are just a Bad A$$ or get lucky a 2+ to 1 scenario where the attackers/perps are advancing from multiple/different directions, you are at a decided disadvantage. i dont care who you are. and especially if their intent is to do harm it doesnt matter if you are a man or woman if you have one gun or two, you will most likely lose that fight unless you are just ontop of your game and or the perps mess up. but the thing with that is A, most perps look for easy targets and want to avoid conflict/confrontations and dont really set a plan that works(hence they are perps/criminals) so if you pull a gun on them they will most likely think "oh sh!t wrong house/car/person" ect, and split fast. and i think thats what wilson was/is thinking here, as would i and i think most of us who chose to arm our selfs, i dont think there is a one of us who is just itching to kill someone. B, now if you have two+ perps, who are coming after you and have made a good plan and planed it out, gone over the plan, they are probably quasi pros and a gun wont scare them or they will just react accordingly, and say either hay this isnt worth it and leave(we already went over this outcome above) or they adapt to the situation and continue(this is either a sign that they are indeed pros of just severely desperate, either way its now a fight for YOUR life now). if they are pros there is not much you can do against two of them who have a plan, they have already anticipated your moved and have come with a contingency. you will probably lose this fight(man or woman, they can still over power you just by shear numbers), but at least you know you have tryed to the best of your ability to stop/prevent it. and if its some desperate perp/oh one who is high on drugs ect, then again they will not be scared off by a gun they have one goal/drive and you will need to give them the a fight. i have seen several times a guy who weighs 150-160 high on drugs get shot with a taser and it not affect him at all then in turn pick up one or more officers who weigh well over 200lbs(before their gear) who are trying to subdue him and throw them around like rag dolls. that single "little" man will over power all but the biggest guys, and it will take 4-5 officers with some brute force to stop him

bowling for columbine was such a skewed movie made by some very liberal people. as an LEO, i have seen first hand the usefulness of a good thinking, law abiding citizen with a firearm, who have help me do my job, when i was not "there" yet or other wise unavailable.
outlawing firearms will only serve one thing, getting good law abiding people to had over their personal defenses and security measures while keeping the only weapons out there in the hands of the criminals, do you like bank robbers or gangs are gonna turn in their weapons when we(god forbid) outlaw guns? no it will never happen so i say let the people keep them, if they are dumb with them, then sure they can lose their privileges. i know you sated before that you would think twice about cutting someone off next time you drove over the border, great thanks, you will probably be less likely to cause a car accident. but i highly doubt a honest law abiding US citizen is gonna pull a gun on you just cause you cut them off, and if they do, keep driving and call 911 we will come hall them of to jail and take their gun and make the country safer for the rest of us. i dont know about up north, but there are a lot of people here in the US who legally and rightfully carry a fire arm and good for them. i bet you have run into more than one who was carrying and didnt even know it(as it should be for the most part) people who carry are not bad people or lose cannons(thats a perception given by the media and a few bad apples...). its a part of our constitution and rights as US citizens as long as we dont abuse them, and the moment we lose that freedom i will find a new line of work in a new country, maybe ill come be your neighbor

x2.

Not sure about other states, but here in TEXAS, to have a conceal carry permit, you have to attend a 12 hour class plus shooting session...AND have FBI go over your record in detail. In other words, a conceal carry individual is one of the most law-abiding citizen you will find in the state of Texas!

In fact, according to many officers, they prefer that you show them your valid/current conceal carry permit if they do stop you because it tells them that you have been thoroughly background checked already!

Both my wife and myself are CCW permit holders and have been for years (yes, in California) and yes, we carry whenever possible. I pray that I never, ever, ever have to employ lethal force since it means I will be arrested, and likely have to spend significant amounts of time and financial resources defending my actions, possibly lose my job (even if only temporarily) but carrying means that at least I have a choice in the matter.

And for anyone that thinks it's about being "cool" or "macho" etc., I don't know of anyone who actually has a CCW that has this attitude. My experience is that those who go through the hassle and expense of getting and maintaining a CCW are among the most upstanding of citizens in our community. After all, we've jumped through a lot of extra hoops in order to exercise this privelidge (which should be a right).

First of I would like to apologize to you Thai because it seems that I have rubbed you the wrong way which was not my intentions. Sorry if you misinterpretted my posts or my motive for typing those post, I was simply putting those senerios out there to see the train of thought behind carrying guns around/ using them for protection. I'm NOT a liberal, I DIDN'T type them with intent to push anti-gun laws on anyone. I have no issue with using guns to protect yourself and loved ones, again I was merely curious on how people would justify it, that is actually also why I started this poll.

AND i'm NOT anti gun just because I choose not to carry one everywhere I go. I enjoy recreational target practice and skeet shooting and actually plan on getting a gun within the next year, I have just been procrastinating getting my gun license.

Just like "offroadingatc" said, it's our cultural differences. There's no right or wrong.

Yes Michael Moore is bias no doubt about it, but I still think that there are some fascinating facts in the movie that make yah think. But again it's bias information and I would be just as interested in watching a documentary which portrayed the other side.

I couldn't agree more, once you introduce gun rights there's no going back, because like you said the guns that criminals use are illegal anyways so banning legal guns wont do anything but unarm good people. Like I said above, i'm not anti gun, I just put those senerios out there to see the other side of the arguement.

And I would welcome you as a neighbor, especially if you used that gun of yours on my current neighbors just kidding lol...oh and I was kidding about the cutting someone off thing, I cut people off without hesitation lol again j/k lol I have plenty of family members that live in the states and believe me I don't worry about being shot when i go visit them.

If you are not a liberal, then you are a conservative...if you are not anti-gun, then you are pro-constitutional right to carry one. Correct? Well, the fact that you watch that idiotic Moore guy proves to me that you are not telling us the truth about where your beliefs lie....

So, going back to the point that you brought up earlier...you actually think that a woman withOUT a weapon is less a victim against a very determined rapist/attacker or that she will be harm less than a woman who is armed?? So, should she just spread her legs and let the attacker do his deeds...and pray that he won't do more harm to her? Or her infant child that is in the car? So, you want a woman who is submissive and defenseless...and just hope that the attacker is the kindly type??

Why do I have to be either liberal or conservative? FYI I didn't vote last election but if I had, I would have voted for the Green party or NDP, so it's not as cut and dry as liberal or conservative, there's more than 2 choices out there! (you know I'm Canadian right?) AND just becuase I watch something for entertainment doesn't mean thats my beliefs, hell if I watch lesbian porn it doesn't mean I'm gay, it's just entertaining. Just like if I watched a movie on the holocaust it doesn't mean I hate jews...get my point? I just find Mr. Moore and his facts entertaining, nothing more nothing less and as I said above, I know he is bias so it's not like I live by his every word.

And please stop bringing up the women with or without a gun thing, I thought we beat it to death already but I'll try and explain again. I brought that up as an example to help you all understand the question I was gonna ask. "Is it better to have a gun and have it turned on you or just not have the gun in the first place". I asked this question in hopes to spark a debate on that subject, not on the subject of wheither or not i'm a liberal. The reason I used a women in my example was because I didn't want a bunch of male hot heads replying to my statement saying "well I bench press 500lbs so no one could turn my gun on me" (again, just an example, not trying to start a debate on wheither or not bench pressing helps someone handle a gun). Again Thai, i'm not trying to insult you or you believes, I think your misinterpretting my intentions here. I just wanted a friendly debate on wheither people carry guns with them. And with that debate would come side debate like the one I attempted to start above but hasn't gone well so far. Can we not just agree to disagree on our opinions?

Actually, we have not beaten it to death because you have not explained yourself.

Again, you actually think that a woman withOUT a weapon is less a victim against a very determined rapist/attacker or that she will be harm less than a woman who is armed??

You have not answered...you've been jumping around the question, but not answered it yet.

Why have a gun at home? Aren't you scared that a robber will turn it against you too?

The whole point about a gun in a car or home is that it gives you a chance to either kill the attacker or scare them away. The element of surprise is on your side. Most attackers would not proceed if they see that you have a weapon...as stated above, they attack folks that are defenseless because it is safer and easier for them.

Thing is, TRD, you're getting dogpiled because that's a misdirecting question frequently used by anti-gun activists. Not to say that you're an anti-gun activist, just that's where that question comes from.

The reason it isn't a valid hypothetical is because is artificially limits the scenario. Any conclusion drawn by answering it is automatically faulty. Better to ask, "Is it better to be a trained firearms user and have a gun and have risk having it turned on you or just not have the gun in the first place". Of course, an anti-gun activist isn't going to ask that question for obvious reasons, hence the corrupt version you've heard and are asking.

I can't imagine feeling like I need to carry a concealed weapon to ensure my safety or that of my family.

I recently obtained my PAL (possession and aquisition licence), but I don't have any guns yet. When I do they will be for hunting and recreational use, not for protection of any sort. Gun laws here are such that guns need to be locked up, and ammo stored in a seperate part of the house, so that doesn't work very well for home protection either.