It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Women, Not Students, Are The Target Of Most Gun Murder

page: 2
<< 1    3 >>

log in


posted on Jun, 21 2014 @ 04:52 PM
So are you saying it is possible to stop murder?

I'm not trting to sound ruthless, but it really is not that many when you compare the numbers we have in society.

34%, so that means that 66% of the time a woman is murdered by some other means?

Why not pick on the 66% and try to do something about strangulation or kitchen knives?

I'm not saying it is ok, so please don't put that spin on it.

You wull never see murder down to 0%. So will you please stop acting like a crusader.

I could be an arse and say the women power movement has had an effect on the psychological state of mind of the man. But that is politically incorrect.

posted on Jun, 21 2014 @ 04:59 PM
a reply to: liejunkie01

It's not just politically incorrect but just plain ol' incorrect in general as overall violence(and yes violence toward women) has decreased across the board.

It'd be nice to see a topic like this where feminism isn't blamed for all the ills of the earth, including the personal choice of men in regard to being violent toward women.

posted on Jun, 21 2014 @ 05:15 PM

originally posted by: OrphanApology
The law fails many women who report domestic violence.

Violent men don't just pop up overnight. There is normally a long pattern of aggressive behavior toward women that eventually culminates into homicide especially in the presence of alcohol induced aggression.

Instead of focusing on the gun part since a violent and angry man will find a way to harm these women regardless. Focus on catching the early signs and having more efficient means of dealing with abusive men.

This also means potential programs for the women themselves, especially if children are involved. By programs I mean that if a woman is being beat by a husband in front of kids, regardless of whether she wants to file charges there needs to be more efficient ways of putting her through care. Mostly putting her into a "detox" since many domestic abuse victims mental health can be likened to someone with stockholm syndrome.

Domestic abuse is something that changes even the strongest willed of people. To say "well she should just shoot him" means that the person stating such things has never seen the dynamics of these types of relationships. These men tend to be very controlling and very manipulative toward the women in their lives. When that falls apart or when they believe they are losing control the violence sometimes turns into homicide.

Creating more laws in regard to gun control does nothing to address the root causes of this type of violence toward women.

Thank you for focusing on the root of the problem here.

Domestic violence is something I witnessed my father engage in when I was a kid. As a husband and father, looking back at my experience with domestic violence, it is easy to see the ever escalating pattern of violence that takes place in such a situation. When my father was around we didn't have guns in the house. Yet many times he did things that could have killed us all. His favorite method was beat downs with his fists. I think to him, the ongoing beatings were far more satisfying than it would have been to just kill us.

He did not drink alcohol. He was just an A-hole. Gun control would not have stopped him if he had decided to beat us all to death. The focus on the gun is just embarrassingly misguided and does not offer ANY solutions to the root causes of violence in society. Gun controllers act like there was no violence before guns, and that there would be less with no guns.

I keep guns in the house. I have guns, my wife has guns, and my kids will learn to use them when I deem them old enough to handle such responsibility. I will NOT, however, raise them in an environment of violence. No one in my home is violent.
edit on pSat, 21 Jun 2014 17:17:09 -0500201421America/Chicago2014-06-21T17:17:09-05:0030vx6 by projectvxn because: (no reason given)

posted on Jun, 21 2014 @ 05:21 PM
a reply to: projectvxn

Thank you for sharing your experience and also for striving for a non-violent home even though you grew up surrounded by it.

posted on Jun, 21 2014 @ 05:32 PM
a reply to: OrphanApology

I am not the kind of person that believes violence doesn't solve problems.

On the contrary, violence solves many problems efficiently.

Violence in the home does NOT solve problems. It is all about how the use of violence is applied.
The concept of self-defense with any means available, and where the line is drawn.

If a bully punches you in the face, it would be prudent of you to beat the crap out of him.
If a bully is yelling at you, then it would be prudent to ignore him/her and move on.

If a man is trying to rape you, it would be prudent to shoot him dead. So forth and so on.
There is a time and place for legitimate violence. Living in reality and having been on the receiving side of violent crime, abuse when I was a child, and war as an adult today, I believe violence is a very useful tool when properly applied in appropriate situations. But this DOES NOT mean that I promote violence as a means of settle all issues. Violence doesn't settle societal issues, nor does it settle issues at home. Violence isn't meant to settle ANYTHING. It is meant to STOP certain things from happening. A criminal uses violence to STOP the victim from resisting. In turn, a victim of violence would employ it to STOP the criminal from victimizing him/her.

We often discuss violence from emotional and childish view points. Sometimes screaming MORE GUNS or sometimes screaming BAN IT ALL, but never address the roots of problems that led to the violence to begin with. Banning stuff never did anything but create more of what was banned and make the situation much more dangerous. I present prohibition, gangs, cartels and the illustrious mob as examples. Saying that an abused woman would have her problems solved by simply buying a gun is not going to solve the problem either. It may stop an attack in a domestic situation..It may not..But if she doesn't get away from the perpetrator and have access to the resources she needs to get help with her situation, whether she owns a gun or not won't matter.

posted on Jun, 21 2014 @ 05:32 PM
a reply to: OrphanApology

That isn't the issue with domestic abuse victims.

Women who are strong and go to shooting ranges are not the ones who are being attacked and stalked.

Are you going to generalize every victim of domestic abuse in our nation today? Do you know the case histories across 50 states THAT well, to say that is the case? I do know women, personally, who could kick my butt and not break a sweat in the process of doing it ..and have been beaten by their spouses. It happens, and pigeon holing victims into some victimology is taking statistics to real poor extremes, IMO.

The issue runs far deeper and isn't simply a case of "she needs to just defend herself".

Sometimes it does. Usually, perhaps ..and sometimes the woman just needs to shoot the stupid bastard. Twice, if needed.

As far as the rest.. Thank you... As I mentioned, I don't need lecture hour. I absolutely have known battered women. I was working with two of them directly as rendering aid in St Louis as Safety in Occupy. In that case, I was attempting to mitigate a threat they couldn't possibly meet in any physical sense. Period. Full Stop.

Not every case fits in a book's definition..and again, sometimes? The woman just needs to put the man down like the rabid dog many have become by the stage they are physically abusing or even killing their mates. It's evil and demented by that stage, and hey...I cried when 'Ol Yeller was shot. Who didn't?? I also knew the poor thing needed shot. Badly.

posted on Jun, 21 2014 @ 05:42 PM
a reply to: projectvxn

I agree with everything you said.

Self-defensenator- That's the new term for those that have a belief that self defense is really the only moral form of violence as it sets out to protect your own individual unit of human capital. In the case that no one attacks you, you don't set out to harm anyone else either.

edit on 21-6-2014 by OrphanApology because: (no reason given)

posted on Jun, 21 2014 @ 05:49 PM
Better education and healthcare would save alot more lives than less guns, educate people on violence towards woman cause people still dont get it, and better healthcare might help understand mental sickness.

posted on Jun, 21 2014 @ 05:52 PM
a reply to: Wrabbit2000

I left room for the exception to the rule.

Also a strong woman isn't just someone who is physically strong but also emotionally.

Being able to leave someone based on them being either physically or emotionally abusive takes great strength.

While I am a big gun supporter and believe that gun rights and birth control were two of the greatest things to happen to women since the beginning of American history in terms of equality...I also know that women in these types of relationships are being manipulated. It's twisted psychological mind games that keep the person on the receiving end from leaving. They may not admit it but the dynamic is quite messed up.

When they do leave and break themselves from that manipulation that's when guns can become useful but you can't carry a gun with you 100% of the time. For those women who have these men stalking them it really sucks there aren't better resources.

These days you can't even report family members who are violent until they commit a crime and harm someone.

posted on Jun, 21 2014 @ 09:37 PM

originally posted by: beezzer

And again, this is a thread about Domestic Gun Violence. Whether or not those weapons were obtained legally is not at issue and is a distraction from the facts presented and the recommendations suggested.

Don't distract from the subject of the thread, don't go off on helpful trangents; neither is an effective or valid agrument agains anything said.

Think what you like - but don't dismiss my right to expressive my opinions without distraction and a deliberate red herring.

For you eduction:

Red Herring
The red herring is as much a debate tactic as it is a logical fallacy. It is a fallacy of distraction, and is committed when a listener attempts to divert an arguer from his argument by introducing another topic. This can be one of the most frustrating, and effective, fallacies to observe.
The fallacy gets its name from fox hunting, specifically from the practice of using smoked herrings, which are red, to distract hounds from the scent of their quarry. Just as a hound may be prevented from catching a fox by distracting it with a red herring, so an arguer may be prevented from proving his point by distracting him with a tangential issue.

edit on 21-6-2014 by FyreByrd because: (no reason given)

posted on Jun, 21 2014 @ 09:46 PM

edit on 21-6-2014 by FyreByrd because: double post

posted on Jun, 21 2014 @ 09:48 PM

originally posted by: Wrabbit2000
a reply to: FyreByrd

Sounds to me like more women need to join the shooting sports (a traditionally male area) and become both proficient and confident in their abilities.

They may find they not only have a rip roaring good time in competitive or action shooting, but they'll know beyond question that the only way they'll ever go down alone is if they are physically separated from their means of defense.

I can say if my wife ever needed to defend herself against a male, even in her compromised physical condition these days? It would come down to training and endless hours she spent learning to make the actions instinctual and automatic. She may cry for an hour from the pain her hands suffer after just a few rounds...but I have no doubt in my mind, she'd never feel a bit of that while firing to save herself or others.

Wonderful solution (sic) - more armed, angry people.

posted on Jun, 21 2014 @ 09:48 PM
a reply to: FyreByrd

So you believe stricter gun regulation will help in cases where illegally procured firearms were used?


Duke had the best answer, in my humble opinion.

Education and healthcare.

Not more laws and rules and restrictions.

You have your opinion, I have mine.


posted on Jun, 21 2014 @ 09:59 PM
a reply to: beezzer

Rather then addressing the multiple close minded red herrings presented to rebutt the OP, I'll address some simple facts regarding this short thread.

1) Not a sole has disputed the facts that more women have been killed by guns (by their partners) since 2001 then all the deaths in combat in Irag and Afghanistan. No one is disputing that.

2) No one has addressed any of the recommendations make.

All arguments have been distractive and tangential red herring arguments and as such are invalid.

The only suggestion made to correct this 'statistic' has been to arming more women which I think most reasoning people would see as exacerbating the numbers. The murder rate of women and men in 'domestic violence' situations (can it be called murder if it is in the heat of passion - or drug or drink fueled?) would only accerate. I don't see how that is any solution at all - if your goal is less violence in the home and by extention the community, nation and world.

posted on Jun, 21 2014 @ 10:08 PM
a reply to: FyreByrd

We don't have al the information.

You want to make assumptions based on partial information.

What % of guns used were illegally purchased?

No answer.

Neither was there any response when education and healthcare were brought up as a solution to the problem.

It appears that you have an agenda and we aren't playing nice to suit your agenda.

Get over it.

posted on Jun, 21 2014 @ 10:19 PM
a reply to: FyreByrd

thanks for bringing attention to another 'attack on the female'

once again, we saw another recent psycho sitting in his car delivering the predictable diatribe about hatred for women

there is much more going on here.. i've found this to be a multi-faceted study & have been trying to sound off about some of this stuff in this topic

posted on Jun, 21 2014 @ 10:32 PM
Hiya FyreByrd,

originally posted by: FyreByrd

As headline-grabbing as school shootings are, the under-reported daily target and toll from gun violence involves women. More American women have been murdered by their intimate partners using guns since 2001 (6,410) than U.S. troops have been killed in combat (5,315) in the Iraq and Afghanistan wars , the Center for American Progress reports. Guns are involved in at least 34 percent of all murders of women commited by their partners, an average of five a day , CAP found from crime statistics.

Unfortunately, there is a reason Alter is using Iraq and Afghanistan causalities to say this, because using real statistics would show there is nothing significant about this.

Women are nowhere near the main target for gun related homicide in America, and the statistic of familicides is actually quite tiny. To give an idea, since 1976 there have been over 648, 000 homicide incidents in America. Women are around 20% of those but around 40% of mass shooting victims. That is a little more significant, but mass murders account for around 900 of those 648, 000 incidents. That's less than 1% of all homicides by a long way.

Guns being involved in 34% of domestic violence killings is actually way below average. Mass Murderers use guns over 70% of the time. Furthermore, those statistics are being carefully interpreted ...

Five women are murdered with a gun in the United States every day, most often by an intimate partner.
The reason they are saying 'students' is because male victims would take this demographic to the cleaners. School shootings are a tiny fraction of mass shootings never mind homicides, but even in mass shootings men are the major demographic killed by a long way.

The 'intimate partner' statistic is taking the five women that are killed with a gun every day, and then claiming that an intimate partner is the usual shooter. These are two separate unrelated claims! The reason this is the case is not because there is an epidemic of intimate partner shootings but because women are un-involved in the majority of other shooting types. Furthermore, those five women killed were not all killed by intimate partner violence.

Sorry FyreByrd, I know you mean well, but I am concerned these groups that take gun violence and do some Muhammad Ali crazy legs dancing to try and make it all about them do damage to the overall issue. Statistics above are from the FBI's Uniform Crime Reporting Program and the National Violent Death Reporting System; not from any political affiliated website.

Hope it helps.
edit on 21-6-2014 by Pinke because: Typo

posted on Jun, 21 2014 @ 11:00 PM
Here is a link to mutliple reports:

Not the most unbiased source out there.
These are the people who have been hard core anti gun since Reagan was shot

Sources can be found that back up any argument you want to make.

Here are some other facts. The United States has the highest rate of gun ownership in the world — by far. And it has the highest rate of homicides among advanced countries. And yet, gun crime has been declining in the U.S. Firearm murders are down, as is overall gun violence – even as gun ownership increases.
Gun crime has plunged in the United States since its peak in the middle of the 1990s, including gun killings, assaults, robberies and other crimes, two new studies of government data show.

Violent gun crime has dropped dramatically in the past two decades, but the majority of Americans think it's more of a problem now than ever, according to a Pew Research Center study released Tuesday.

edit on 21-6-2014 by DAVID64 because: (no reason given)

posted on Jun, 21 2014 @ 11:32 PM
a reply to: Pinke

Any support for your supposition? Or just want you want to believe?

posted on Jun, 21 2014 @ 11:33 PM
a reply to: DAVID64

Again another distracting and tangential red herring argument.

One responder did make an on-topic argument; unfortunately one without support of any kind.

top topics

<< 1    3 >>

log in