[RogueIsland]

So much inanity, so little time.

After taking self-defense courses with simulated attacks at The Empower Program Inc., a Washington non-profit, my younger sister and I felt more confident walking down the street. We were aware that at any time, anywhere, we knew how to fight back.

Yeah, that sense of confidence and empowerment will last long enough to get you in big trouble when you go up against a 250 pound street brawler. Sorry, but I'll go with Sam Colt's "great equalizer" myself.

[11th Earl of Mar]

Kimberly Shearer Palmer is a graduate student at the University of Chicago

Another person obviously educated beyond their intelligence.

[tbpiper]

according to a new study by the University of California at Davis

Big clue to the credibility deficit in this article.

[ought-six]

Why even work up a sweat by engaging in hand-to-hand combat, or risk being overpowered by a stronger opponent, when you can easily dispatch your attacker with a well-placed shot? Me, I'll take the shot every time.

[Modernman]

Umm.... Why not take self-defense classes AND learn how to shoot a gun? Why limit your options? My mom is 5'3" and 110 pounds- she's not going to fight off a 200 pound attacker. She will, however, nicely ventilate him with the .38 she carries in her purse.

[lavaroise]

We know, we need to be malleable flexible unarmed marshmallows so the world can trample on us (sarcasm)

[ko_kyi]

Thanks RI, an amusing post.

I make it a rule when discussing anything of importance: The first person to use a movie to prove a point loses. The other rule is that if you have to use Hitler or Nazi Germany to prove your point, you lose.

[white trash redneck]

I suspect that the writer may have a point, but it's not the one she thinks she is making. Simply owning a gun that you're not familiar with, and shooting it once or twice a year at a bullseye target is not going to be much use to you. Practicing often, competing in practical shooting events, and getting instruction will help a lot.

[fawn796]

"...women who own handguns are more than twice as likely to be murdered with a firearm by their partners than those who do not..."

My husband already owns MANY guns. Why would MY owning a gun make him shoot me? Well anyway, sweetie, you feel safe your way, I'll do it my way.

My way: Full grown male German Shepherd "Mauser" to slow attacker down (while he is being pet), giving me time to retrieve my firearm. As my favorite dog trainer told me, "if an assailant is willing to take on a German Shepherd, you need a gun!"

[votelife]

"according to a new study by the University of California at Davis, women who own handguns are more than twice as likely to be murdered with a firearm by their partners than those who do not."

Statistics like these are meaningless. Women who own handguns likely feel threatened...if those same women DIDN'T buy handguns, they might have been even MORE likely to have been murdered.

[A. Patriot]

The real false sense of security is that a woman without a weapon can fend off an attack from a determined large man.

Sure, it can happen, but not likely.

A woman with a gun is an entirely different matter.

[Pastor of Muppets]

"Like Jennifer Lopez's character in the 2002 movie Enough, in which she learns to fight to protect herself and her daughter against her abusive husband, we had reclaimed our right to feel safe while depending only on our own bodies."

Yeah, well I have a Lightsaber, sweetie.

Let's see if your knowledge of J-Lo-Do beats the power of the Force.

And if there are any Klingons around, feeling all uppity, I'd be happy to b--chslap them as well, ugly b--tards.

[Eagle Eye]

Training in how to yell and scream agressively is good, but training on how to use deadly force is bad?

[asformeandformyhouse]

Like Jennifer Lopez's character in the 2002 movie Enough, in which she learns to fight to protect herself and her daughter against her abusive husband,

Oh by all means, if it worked in a movie it must be true. Hey, Charlie's Angels (the movie) didn't need guns to fight. /sarcasm

[asformeandformyhouse]

Instead of buying a gun, I'm sticking to basic street smarts that will always be there when I need them most.

I see her plan, get more women hurt and killed and then we can yell for more gun-control laws. I wonder if Ms. Kimberly Shearer Palmer realizes that she has just told everyone who reads the article that she lives in a 'gun-free' residence. Stupid, real stupid.

[Centurion2000]

Guns seemed uncontrollable objects that could inflict death at any moment; I preferred to avoid them.

With an illogical statement as this ... what the heck is this idiot a graduate student in ?

[PatrioticAmerican]

Another liberal, "I tried guns, but they really are abad thing. See, I tried them."

As someone who has played in the arts for years, I carry. No punch, no block, no kick, and no throw has ever stopped a bullet nor a shooter from 10 feet. My arms don't reach 10 feet but my bullets do.

The writer is a stupid liberal who thinks that movies portray reality. Reality is that a rapist doesn't screw with a woman pointing a snubby anthing at him.

[Atlas Sneezed]

The facts (from guncite.com):

Florida State University criminologist, Gary Kleck, analyzed data from the Department of Justice's National Crime Victimization Survey (1992-1998). Describing his findings on defensive gun use, in Armed: New Perspectives on Gun Control, New York:Prometheus Books (2001), Kleck writes:

"In general, self-protection measures of all types are effective, in the sense of reducing the risk of property loss in robberies and confrontational burglaries, compared to doing nothing or cooperating with the offender. The most effective form of self-protection is use of a gun. For robbery the self-protection meaures with the lowest loss rates were among victims attacking the offender with a gun, and victims threatenting the offender with a gun. For confrontational burglarly, attacking with a gun had the second lowest loss rate of sixteen self-protection measures, bested only by another mode of armed self-protection, threatening the offender with a nongun weapon." (p. 291)

"[W]hile defensive gun use is generally safe, it does not appear to be uniquely safe among self-protection methods as data from earlier NCVS data suggested. Nevertheless, there does not appear to be any increase in injury risk due to defensive gun use that counterbalances its greater effectiveness in avoiding property loss." (p. 292)

http://www.guncite.com/gun_control_gcdgeff.html

[Just another Joe]

So much inanity, so little time.

So well said about this article.

[Petruchio]

Kimberly Shearer Palmer is a graduate student at the University of Chicago

There is your answer! She lives in Chicago. She don't need a gun, She has Mayor Daley to rape errrr, save her!

[G Larry]

Who can argue with such a study at UC Davis?
</sarcasm>