Female hotel clerk NOT raped, robbed or murdered.

[drpepper67]

http://10togo.wistv.com/autojuice?targetUrl=http%3a%2f%2fwww.wistv.com%2fstory%2f15140008%2ffemale-motel-clerk-kills-robber


Investigators say the robber entered the hotel at 133 Plumbers Rd. near I-20 and North Main St. and put an unknown object to the clerk's throat and said "this is a robbery."

Deputies said the female clerk shot the robber in the upper body and when authorities arrived on the scene, he was unresponsive. The coroner pronounced the suspect dead on the scene.

[RC]

1. Well, alrightie then. Let's arm every woman. Free or cut rate guns. That'll lower the crime rate.

[ileus]

2. 38 Rossi's for every lady...not a bad plan I suppose.

[Upton]

4. delete

wrong spot

[ProgressiveProfessor]

3. Firearms for personal protection is indeed a good thing

Now if we can only get the racist and classist repressive laws in some of our major cites (NYC, Chicago, Wash DC...) overturned.

[Upton]

5. It would certainly lower the rate of sexual assaults..

and other crimes perpetrated upon women. Firearms even up the odds...criminals don't like that.

[iverglas]

17. really?

Once again, I have no clue how you people managed to drag sexual assault into a commercial robbery.

What evidence do you have for your statement that women carrying firearms would "certainly lower the rate of sexual assaults"?

Do you know anything at all whereof you speak?

[Upton]

48. This woman knows of what I speak..

As reported, a rape victim shot and killed an attacker in Cape Girardeau, MO when he broke into her home to rape her for a second time this week. The 57-year-old woman shot 47-year-old Ronnie W. Preyer, a registered sex offender, in the chest with a shotgun after he cut the power to her apartment and then broke through her locked basement door. Preyer had previously broken into the woman’s home, punched her in the face, and then raped her in her bedroom. The county prosecutor has stated that the woman acted properly in defending herself, and will not face charges.

http://www.learnaboutguns.com/2008/11/03/woman-shoots-rapist-who-came-back-to-rape-her-for-a-second-time/

Yet you and your fellow antis would deprive women such as this of the fundamental right of self defense...I don't know whether to believe you lack empathy, are misinformed, or just don't care..

[iverglas]

71. 2008

Dig deep, and you might find a tale that has not been told in this place several dozen times already ...

[redgiant]

75. It's not about reducing assault rates

It's about one real person having the ability to make choices about personal safety and whether or not to be a helpless victim.

My daughter lives alone. Several years ago she asked me for a pistol, which I got for her. She knows how to use it and handle it safely. She knows all about the legalities and what you do and don't do when things go "bump in the night." But, if all that has failed, and if someone comes through her locked bedroom door, it's going to be his blood on the floor, not hers.

Statistically, we know the chances of her having to use the gun in such a situation is extremely small--but it is not zero. And, there *is* peace of mind in knowing that gun is at hand when all else has failed.

[DWC]

82. Just read the OP article

"Richland County Sheriff Leon Lott said Carson's intent was not only to rob the motel, but also to rape the clerk. "There's no doubt that was his intent," said Lott. "Not only was he going to rob her, but he was going to sexually assault her. Now what was he going to do after that assault was over with, we don't know."

This lady's defensive handgun definitely lowered the rate of sexual assaults and possibly murders by one (1) which is the only one she could affect.

Violence in any form, perpetrated against innocent, law abiding citizens is the enemy not the tools selected to perpetrate or defend against that violence.

Semper Fi,

[drpepper67]

6. Well, everyone knows

That a woman found dead, raped and strangled with her panty hose, is morally superior to a woman explaining to police how her attacker got that fatal bullet wound.

[ileus]

10. plus it deprives the womans family of her insurance money.

[iverglas]

18. you "know" some weird shit

Some weird, ugly and disgusting shit.

Please don't presume that anybody else has such shit floating around in their heads.

[bellcrank]

8. Or just make all guns illegal...that's sure to be obeyed by robbers and rapists.

:eyes:

[spin]

9. Many women are buying firearms and getting concealed carry permits ...

Ladies Lock and Load: American Women Buying More Guns
Women are gaining on men in the purchase of firearms for hunting and personal defense, according to the NRA and others. Thousands of women are learning how to shoot—and going hunting together, reports Shushannah Walshe.
Mar 11, 2011 4:38 PM EST

When Gina York married an avid hunter six years ago, she tried going out with him, but said it “just wasn’t fun,” because men “are so serious about getting the buck, getting the prize,” and she didn’t learn the skills she needed to enjoy herself. That all changed last year when she joined DIVA...WOW (Women Outdoors Worldwide), a shooting and hunting group for women only.



“The first clinic I had attended was last fall and I had never shot a shotgun before,” York said. “When you are starting to do some of these shooting sports, it’s very frustrating, and they are very good with support and teaching you the proper way to use your firearms.” On her first big hunt with the Divas, as she calls them, she bagged not one, but two deer. She said the DIVA women were happy and supportive and her family ate the venison she brought home. Her husband, she joked, was “jealous.”

Hunting isn’t just mostly for men anymore. Gina York is just one of the many women flooding the firearms market, including some picking up a hunting rifle for the first time. It may seem surprising to the non-gun-toting women in America, but women are packing heat in increased numbers—for personal defense as well as hunting. The market is focusing on the female demographic in a way it never has before. And it’s working: In addition to buying firearms, more and more women are purchasing accessories made specifically for them, and going out with other female hunters in record numbers.
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2011/03/11/number-of-us-women-buying-guns-for-hunting-and-personal-defense-spikes-sharply.html

Conceal and carry permits for women increasing
Page Last Updated: Tuesday August 11, 2009 6:55pm PDT



It's a growing trend in Northern Nevada with more and more women arming themselves and getting concealed weapons permits. Kelly Main, a local CCW instructor with Armed and Safe, says her company taught more women than men last year, and the trend is across the country.

Main's classroom echoes the changes the Washoe County Sheriff's Office is seeing as well. The number of CCW permits issued to women more than doubled between 2007 and 2008.

According to the data, 592 permits were issued to women last year. That's up from 247 in 2007 and 239 in 2006.
http://www.mynews4.com/story.php?id=3998

In Florida a significant number of women have concealed weapons permits. My daughter is one.



source: http://licgweb.doacs.state.fl.us/stats/cw_holders.html

Of course, I am in no way recommending that every woman should own a firearm. Firearms are not for everybody. Owning one is a serious responsibility that requires a lot of forethought and training.

[iverglas]

19. women and the right wing agenda

There certainly are a lot of women in that Tea Party thing, aren't there?

One can have trouble understanding how so many people can be persuaded to act contrary to their own interests in so many ways ... but it sure is one of those facts of life.

[spin]

27. My daughter is a Democrat and had a concealed weapons permit ...

long before the Tea Party came into existence.

About two years ago she attracted the attention of a stalker. My daughter had no relationship with this individual. Originally he was stalking one of my daughter's friends and when this lady left the country for several months to take care of a business she owned in the Caribbean, the stalker focused his attentions on my daughter.

My daughter filed a restraining order. The stalker broke it on a daily basis and the police did little or nothing despite the fact that my daughter notified them of every violation.

The stalker did have a criminal record that mainly involved arrests for alcohol abuse and one resisting arrest with violence.

My daughter who is 5' 2" and weighs 100 lbs had some concern that the stalker might physically attack her. She was prepared to use her concealed handgun to stop his attack if necessary.

Fortunately for all involved he never did attempt to attack my daughter. After six to eight months he finally was arrested for violating the restraining order. He spent several weekends in jail with a warning from the judge that if he was caught violating the restraining order again, he could receive a prison sentence. He has apparently learned his lesson and no longer bothers my daughter.

I believe this person simply loved to terrorize women. My daughter viewed him as a "pain in the ass" but was never overly frightened of him unlike her friend who he had originally bothered and was terrified of him. This lady was afraid to even put a restraining order on the stalker for fear of what he might do.

[iverglas]

29. I'm missing the moral of your story

Your daughter acquired a handgun and carried it around to protect her against a threat that did not materialize, let alone exist.

[Blown330]

31. Well that's obviously a personal problem....

....seeing as the message is quite clear. Threat didn't exist you say? Reading comprehension: go find you some.

[iverglas]

33. no effort to make physical contact was ever made

Threat?

Really, not every bogeyman in the world is out to kill you.

[Blown330]

39. Physical contact...

...is not the sole qualifier in what justifies perceiving a threat. The fact that you even consider such a standard proves your understanding with such dynamic situations is lacking in the extreme. You are not well equipped to discuss this subject on any intelligent level.

[iverglas]

50. hahahaha

You are not well equipped to discuss this subject on any intelligent level.

I'm sure someone will enlighten you. Not worth my time. ;)

[Blown330]

72. Not within your capability.

Seeing as you have plenty of time to make yourself look childish. You do seem to throw a tantrum when your BS is thrown back at you.

[PavePusher]

40. Glad your prognostication works so well. Perhaps you can teach that. n/t

[spin]

37. The moral is that she might have been terrorized had she not had a carry permit ...

and the experience and training necessary to use her weapon if necessary. My daughter's friend was extremely afraid of this man.

I find your comment especially fascinating considering some of your previous posts. For example, this except from one of your recent posts:

"The killing of women by men is an expression of misogyny, the misogyny of the offender and the misogyny of the society that tolerates the violence women are subjected to throughout their lives.

There is very seldom any organic or psychiatric illness in these men. Personality disorders, damn right: sociopathy, psychopathy, narcissism, the whole gamut of ugly stuff."

I also find it interesting that you would so easily dismiss the threat this stalker posed to my daughter without knowing more details about the situation. Many people who know this individual, including several police officers, feel that while he is extremely intelligent he has serious mental issues.

edited for clarity

[PavePusher]

41. Yeah, at this point, I'm pretty confused.

Men are a threat... but they aren't enough of a threat to take defensive measures... but they do kill women... but guns aren't needed...

O.K., I give up. Who wants popcorn?

[iverglas]

51. "defensive measures"

CARRYING A FIREARM is NOT a DEFENSIVE MEASURE.

I'm waiting for somebody to produce examples of women who were assaulted or killed whose injury or death would not have occurred if they had been carrying a firearm.

Enough numbers, with enough certainty of the probably outcome otherwise, that we have some meaningful subject matter for discussion.

Carrying a firearm everywhere you go is not a reasonable response to unwanted attention from someone with "mental problems". The problems in issue were presumably delusional, and people with delusional illnesses very rarely commit crimes of violence.

Personality disorders, to which I referred in the context of men who abuse women, are not "mental problems".

[TPaine7]

59. Carrying a firearm is a defensive measure--if it is carried for defensive purposes,

no matter what you say in all caps.

What else would it be, an offensive measure? A neutral measure?

I'm waiting for somebody to produce examples of women who were assaulted or killed whose injury or death would not have occurred if they had been carrying a firearm.

I bet you are. And I'm waiting for someone to tell me the course of German history if Hitler's parents had never met. What do you imagine the odds are of someone qualified to satisfy our curiosity--that would be God--actually doing so?

What drivel.

[PavePusher]

61. You remind me of Diane Sawyer.

"We couldn't find any verifiable instances of self-defense with a firearm."

Because the lying media diva didn't look.....

ETA: Personality problems are not mental disorders? What are they, kidney problems? Failure of the liver? Related to a skin rash?

[iverglas]

73. if you can't spell it right

you won't be able to find it when you google.

Personality DISORDERS, not "personality problems".

Do look it up.

I'm not remotely interested in Diane Sawyer, unless perhaps you have something you actually want to say rather than just spewing noise.

Carrying a firearm is not a defensive measure because the person toting the damned thing around IS NOT DEFENDING THEMSELF AGAINST ANYTHING, for crissakes.

[Kennah]

65. The FBI would disagree with you

... no law enforcement officer should ever plan to meet an expected attack armed only with a handgun. The handgun is the primary weapon for defense against unexpected attack.

FBI Academy
Firearms Training Unit
Handgun Wounding Factors and Effectiveness
http://www.firearmstactical.com/pdf/fbi-hwfe.pdf

[spin]

66. I understand that legally carrying a concealed weapon in Canada ...

is very unusual.

It is effectively illegal to carry concealed handguns in Canada. There is a permit that allows people to carry if they can prove they need to protect their lives but the permit is very rarely issued. Only about 50 permits had been issued in all of Canada as of 2000. In the same year there were approximately 1 million hand guns in Canada, compared to 77 million in the United States.<6> However, defensive use of firearms in Canada is much more common than many would like to believe.<7>
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crime_in_Canada#Guns

Therefore, I am not surprised that you would feel that "CARRYING A FIREARM is NOT a DEFENSIVE MEASURE."

A handgun is primarily a defensive weapon. That is exactly what a handgun was originally designed for. Some handguns serve more specialized tasks and are used for target shooting or hunting and while they could be employed for self defense, better choices exist. Unfortunately, criminals have found handguns useful for committing crime as they are concealable.

Many people in the United States do have concealed carry permits and while not all carry on a regular basis, many do. We can have an interesting discussion on whether such people are excessively paranoid and some people will agree with you and some with me.

Perhaps you are far more qualified then I am in judging if a person is dangerous or not. I grant that you are very intelligent and educated but I wonder if you have to ability to judge a person's motivations when you have no personal knowledge of the individual. Most psychiatrists are hesitant to express an opinion on a person's mental state without examining him. Perhaps you have some truly unusual abilities.

In my unprofessional opinion, an individual who has a long record of arrests for DUI and has also been arrested for resisting an officer and a history of stalking women is potentially dangerous. Other people who also know this individual also feel he might be dangerous. Obviously, my daughter's friend, who was absolutely terrified of this man, might have been overly paranoid. However two police officers that we know feet he may be a threat. Of course, officers tend to dislike people who physically resist arrest.

It was fairly obvious from his arrest record that he had little respect for the law. The fact that he violated the restraining order on a daily basis and followed my daughter everywhere indicated to me that he also had no respect for the judge that warned him not to violate the order and not to even "fly over the woman's home in an ultralight aircraft." The judge also warned the stalker, "I wouldn't bother this woman anymore as her husband may decide to handle the situation himself." (I seriously suspect that this is the way justice works in north Florida. If my son in law would have beat the shit out of this asshole, the law would have probably given him a light slap on the wrist.) I personally prefer a non violent solution and it was my idea to get a restraining order. The only reason my son in law did not attack this fool was he was concerned that he might lose his carry permit. This backs up the Heinlein quote that "an armed society is a polite society." Let me assure you that my son in law is a bad dude to mess with, he used to ride bulls in competition.

You commented:

Carrying a firearm everywhere you go is not a reasonable response to unwanted attention from someone with "mental problems". The problems in issue were presumably delusional, and people with delusional illnesses very rarely commit crimes of violence.

The reality is that my daughter legally carried a firearm before the stalker and still carries one. Like me and her husband, she went trough the expense and effort to get a concealed weapons permit in order to be able to carry a firearm. We didn't get our permits to proudly show them to people which would be foolish. None of us ever expect or desire to ever have a reason to legitimately use our concealed firearm for self defense, but if we ever do we will have it with us. My daughter did not start carrying her revolver because she was concerned about the stalker's mental problems. She was, however, glad that she had the permit. It takes as long as three months to get one in Florida.

You also say"

"I'm waiting for somebody to produce examples of women who were assaulted or killed whose injury or death would not have occurred if they had been carrying a firearm."

Obviously that is impossible. Having a concealed weapon is absolutely no guarantee that a person will survive a violent attack. A person with a concealed weapon may well end up dead if:

1)They are not practicing "situational awareness" and are caught by surprise.

2)Are able to assess their handgun, but hesitate and the attacker disarms them. Shooting another person is not natural.

3) Shoot and miss. Handguns are not easy weapons to use with accuracy and the flow of adrenaline can cause the skills learned on the range to deteriorate dramatically.

4) Shoot and hit the attacker but not in a vital area that causes incapacitation. Handguns are not extremely lethal weapons.

However, in many instances a person can effectively use a handgun to stop an attack if:

1) The attacker sees the weapon and runs. (If you have ever faced a person with a handgun, it is absolutely amazing how big it looks. A .22 caliber looks like Dirty Harry's .44 magnum.) Note: I talk from personal experience.

2) The fact that the person is willing to shoot and does. Even though the shots miss, the person decides to run.

3) The person is shot and falls down even though he is not seriously injured. (This happens because that is what people do in the movies when they are shot.)

4) The person is hit in a vital area the causes instant incapacitation or death.

Of course, if I took the time to post such stories, you would argue that the victim would have survived without a firearm. I refuse to play the game of "Down the Rabbit Hole with Alice" which you excel at.

Out of curiosity, have you watched the 2010 remake of the movie True Grit? For some reason, I feel you might enjoy it. I loved the character of 14-year-old farm girl Mattie Ross who was stubborn, intelligent and independent.

edited to add comment about movie

[TPaine7]

69. Hey iverglas, have you read the latest update of THIS story?

As Tejas points out below, The sherrif says there is no doubt rape was on the agenda. The thug was preparing to tie her up--which is a common preparation for the most horrific crimes.

Now I know the woman didn't die, and the sherrif is fallible, but this did happen in a commercial setting. Will the Gun Control Reality Distortion Field allow you to recognize this case?

Or will you studiously ignore it?

[iverglas]

87. the sheriff may be a mind reader, eh?

Who knows?

[TPaine7]

99. Of course not. No human or group of humans can answer your challenge. As intended. n/t

[TPaine7]

117. The Goddess of Lies and Bullshit is most definitely a mindreader.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=118&topic_id=440356&mesg_id=441130

[DWC]

83. I am really confused

You wrote:
"I'm waiting for somebody to produce examples of women who were assaulted or killed whose injury or death would not have occurred if they had been carrying a firearm."

Did you read the OP?

Was this lady's assault or death not prevented by the defensive handgun she was carrying?

What did I miss?

Semper Fi,

[TPaine7]

85. She was assaulted but not injured or killed, so technically, the conditions weren't met.

There's a reason I address iverglas as "Your Sophistry"; I wouldn't be at all surprised to see that argument made. Also, we don't know for certain that she would have been raped, even if the perpetrator had condoms, lube and a written notes describing his intentions. The sherrif isn't absolutely sure (as in to a mathematical proof level certainty) either.

The way the challenge is worded, only God could answer it. And it would probably have to be done personally--no using signs and wonders or sending angelic messengers.

And, to be fair, while iverglas was quoting the thug's declared intentions as authority the story hadn't been updated to the place it is now (see Tejas's post below and the reply regarding the change). I tried to point out that the word of a guy with a weapon to your throat is worthless, but to no avail. Then more facts came out.

Facts and evidence are very inconvenient to devotees of the Gun Control Reality Distortion Field.

[iverglas]

89. disgusting

My comment was and always has been directed to the author of the opening post.

The author of the opening post had NO REASON to insinuate "rape" into this thread, other than to exploit the atrocities of which women are victims, and the women who are thus victimized, in the service of the gun militant agenda.

But you keep up your charming pretence of whatever it is you're pretending this time.

"Let's pretend" is, after all, a common game among juveniles.

[TPaine7]

114. You are so confused.

You love to condescendingly tell people to follow the dots and keep up with the conversation, but you seem at a loss to follow your own advice. Let's see if I can help you.

My comment was and always has been directed to the author of the opening post.

Well let's see:

PavePusher (1000+ posts) Mon Jul-25-11 11:52 AM
Response to Reply #37

41. Yeah, at this point, I'm pretty confused.
Men are a threat... but they aren't enough of a threat to take defensive measures... but they do kill women... but guns aren't needed...

O.K., I give up. Who wants popcorn?
Alert
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top

That's the post that got this little sub-thread going. It's author was PavePusher.

iverglas (1000+ posts) Mon Jul-25-11 12:58 PM
Response to Reply #41

51. "defensive measures"
CARRYING A FIREARM is NOT a DEFENSIVE MEASURE.

I'm waiting for somebody to produce examples of women who were assaulted or killed whose injury or death would not have occurred if they had been carrying a firearm.

Enough numbers, with enough certainty of the probably outcome otherwise, that we have some meaningful subject matter for discussion.

Carrying a firearm everywhere you go is not a reasonable response to unwanted attention from someone with "mental problems". The problems in issue were presumably delusional, and people with delusional illnesses very rarely commit crimes of violence.

Personality disorders, to which I referred in the context of men who abuse women, are not "mental problems".

That was your response to PavePusher. PavePusher did not write the OP. You are confused, or at least that is the most generous explanation.

Now here is the post that I answered:

DWC (348 posts) Tue Jul-26-11 08:39 AM
Response to Reply #51

83. I am really confused
You wrote:
"I'm waiting for somebody to produce examples of women who were assaulted or killed whose injury or death would not have occurred if they had been carrying a firearm."

Did you read the OP?

Was this lady's assault or death not prevented by the defensive handgun she was carrying?

What did I miss?

Semper Fi,
www.thepistolpad.com -- Conceived it to be the privilege of every citizen, and one of his most essential rights, to bear arms, and to resist every attack upon his liberty or property, by whomsoever made. -- Roger Sherman 1790 --
Alert
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top

I tried to tell him what he missed.

First I exposed your silly little trick challenge (expanding on my earlier response in post 59).

TPaine7 (1000+ posts) Tue Jul-26-11 12:42 PM
Response to Reply #83

85. She was assaulted but not injured or killed, so technically, the conditions weren't met.

If any part of your statement is not met, no matter how inconsequential to the issues under discussion, you will "prevail." That's standard, garden variety BS used by lawyers, politicians and the like worldwide.

There's a reason I address iverglas as "Your Sophistry"; I wouldn't be at all surprised to see that argument made. Also, we don't know for certain that she would have been raped, even if the perpetrator had condoms, lube and a written notes describing his intentions. The sherrif isn't absolutely sure (as in to a mathematical proof level certainty) either.

The current case can't be cited, neither can any other case in the history of the world. I know how you work, and I'm trying to save others the trouble that comes from honest people not getting your tactics. (Not really for PavePusher--who's been around and knows the score--but for onlookers reading his question.)

OK, one last attempt to warn the unwary of what they're dealing with.

The way the challenge is worded, only God could answer it. And it would probably have to be done personally--no using signs and wonders or sending angelic messengers.

That's the real sophistry. You're getting back into your BS form. It is probably not possible to sufficiently warn people who are reading your sophistries for the first time. The truth sounds like exaggeration to the uninitiated.

Ok, having done what I could for the newbies, I switched gears. As much as I despise your tactics and your agenda--fighting against the right of people to the most tools of self-defense--honesty demands that I defend you. Yes, you read that right. I had to defend the person who despises America, our right to bear arms and our Constitution.

Why? Why would I defend a rights opponent?

Simple. I would defend ANYONE against a false charge, even a false charge innocently made.*

If

1) Stalin's crimes were being discussed
2) Evidence seemed to sustain a charge against him that I knew to be untrue
3) AND, given the above, I undertook to address the charges against him in that discussion

Then my comments could not consist entirely of agreeing with the true charges. I would be obliged--not by loyalty to Manson but by loyalty to the truth--to exonerate him of the apparently true but actually false charges.

You are not worse than Stalin; even if you were, the principle would hold.

And, to be fair, while iverglas was quoting the thug's declared intentions as authority the story hadn't been updated to the place it is now (see Tejas's post below and the reply regarding the change). I tried to point out that the word of a guy with a weapon to your throat is worthless, but to no avail. Then more facts came out.

Facts and evidence are very inconvenient to devotees of the Gun Control Reality Distortion Field.

I pretend nothing, iverglas. I am not Your Sophistry, neither am I confused.

iverglas (1000+ posts) Tue Jul-26-11 02:20 PM
Response to Reply #85

89. disgusting
My comment was and always has been directed to the author of the opening post.

The author of the opening post had NO REASON to insinuate "rape" into this thread, other than to exploit the atrocities of which women are victims, and the women who are thus victimized, in the service of the gun militant agenda.

But you keep up your charming pretence of whatever it is you're pretending this time.

"Let's pretend" is, after all, a common game among juveniles.

You're very confused, iverglas.

There is no pretense, at least on my side of this exchange. I do have a quality that you perhaps had in your youth, back when you were a juvenile. The word you're looking for isn't pretense:

in·teg·ri·ty
    Show IPA
–noun
1.
adherence to moral and ethical principles; soundness of moral character; honesty.

dictionary.com

* I am not implying that anyone made a charge against you--the evidence appeared to sustain a charge against you and an honest question was asked regarding that evidence.

[Tejas]

126. integrity > smoke and mirrors

Well done!

[iverglas]

88. what did you miss?

Oh, the entire fucking point.

I'm waiting for somebody to produce examples of women who were assaulted or killed whose injury or death would not have occurred if they had been carrying a firearm.


Thousands and thousands of women are sexually assaulted in the US every year -- a large majority by intimate partners, family members, acquaintainces.

In those situations, no woman -- no person -- is "armed". Not in their own home, not on a date, not at a party.

If gun militants gave a shit about women, those are the situations they would be thinking and talking about and those are the problems they would be working to overcome.

Gun militants don't give a shit about women. That's why they raise rape only when they think they can exploit it, and women, to advance their own ugly agenda.


Was this lady's assault or death not prevented by the defensive handgun she was carrying?

She was a WOMAN. You have some problem with that word?

And the handgun was no more "defensive" than it was any other adjective you might want to throw at it. It was a handgun.

It's an inanimate object, remember? It doesn't have motives.



typo fixed

[Name removed]

95. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[iverglas]

97. and I daresay

that certain elements have grown extremely bold in my lengthy absence from this place.

No point in alerting on filth like your allegation of "bigotry", I have seen and been advised.

As for your psychoanalytical prowess, do please go peddle it someplace where you might get 10 cents for your 50 minutes. No sale here.

[Name removed]

98. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

101. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[TPaine7]

120. "I daresay that certain elements have grown extremely bold in my lengthy absence from this place"

Do tell?

You don't think, ....

.....oh my, you don't suppose that the two things are related, causally, do you? Really? As in "if the mice is away the cats will play"?

You don't really believe that, do you? It rhymes nicely, like the original it's true, but it doesn't make any sense.

You do realize that there are any number of people here, actually a majority, who can easily dispel your BS once they get past the "I'm waiting for someone to prove a negative" and similar bullshit, right. And there are not a few who can do it effortlessly.

No point in alerting on filth like your allegation of "bigotry"...

Talk about filth:

Post 90:

What the fuck does how many rape victims are male have to do with anything I said? Quite apart from the fact that your figure is nonsense. By the way, men are not raped. Rape is an act of sexual violence committed against a woman, and an instrument used by men throughout time and space to control, intimidate, terrorize and subjugate women. It has nothing at all to do with sexual assaults committed against men.

Glassunion: You are mistaken that the likes of the gun dungeon don't actually give a shit about victims of rape.

No I'm not.

They may all care oh so deeply about their wives, daughters, etc. They're theirs, after all.

There it stops. The proof is in the pudding, friend.

Post 103:

Yes -- what I SAID was: "Had she been a male victim, no one would have embarked on fantasies about sexual assault."
…

Thoughts of men being raped just aren't quite as exciting for the average dungeon denizen, I can only guess.

Post 109:

How about you tell me about the time you spend doing something, anything, that might actually be effective to reduce the incidence of violence against women?

Promoting an agenda associated with guns doesn't count.

(GlassUnion needed to provide evidence of his character to an online character who had already condemned him)

If the mods accept whatever BS rationale you would use to deny the true nature of that drivel, it matters not. I have no need to call it filthy bigotry.

[Name removed]

102. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

106. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Common Sense Party]

123. Here's one. There are many more every month, sadly. Now kindly shut up about it.

http://www.newjerseynewsroom.com/state/estor-molina-of-newark-indicted-for-murder-of-preschool-teacher

[DWC]

129. You ask for examples so here are a few from my neighborhood

Luby’s Cafeteria Killeen, Texas
October 16, 1991

Fatalities from this shooting included:
Name
Age
Home

Patricia Brawn Carney 57 Belton, Texas

Jimmie Eugene Caruthers 48 Austin, Texas

Kriemhild A. Davis 62 Killeen, Texas

Lt. Col. Steven Charles Dody 43 Fort Hood, Texas

Al Gratia 71 Copperas Cove, Texas

Ursula Edith Marie Gratia 67 Copperas Cove, Texas

Debra Ann Gray 33 Copperas Cove, Texas

Dr. Michael Edward Griffith 48 Copperas Cove, Texas

Venice Ellen Henehan 70 Metz, Missouri

Clodine Delphia Humphrey 63 Marlin, Texas

Sylvia Mathilde King 30 Killeen, Texas

Zona Mae Lynn 45 Marlin, Texas

Dr. Connie Dean Peterson 43 Austin, Texas

Ruth Marie Pujol 36 Copperas Cove, Texas

Suzann Neal Rashott 30 San Antonio, Texas

John Raymond Romero Jr 33 Copperas Cove, Texas

Thomas Earl Simmons 55 Killeen, Texas

Glen Arval Spivey 44 Harker Heights, Texas

Nancy Faye Stansbury 44 Harker Heights, Texas

Olgica Andonovsk Taylor 45 Waco, Texas

James Walter Welsh 75 Waco, Texas

Lula Belle Welsh 64 Waco, Texas

Iva Juanita Williams 64 Temple, Texas



Fort Hood, Texas located next to Killeen, Texas
November 5, 2009

Fatalities
The 13 killed were:
Name Age Hometown Rank or occupation
Michael Grant Cahill<43>
62 Spokane, Washington
Civilian Physician Assistant

Libardo Eduardo Caraveo<44>
52 Woodbridge, Virginia
Major

Justin Michael DeCrow<45>
32 Plymouth, Indiana
Staff Sergeant

John P. Gaffaney<46>
56 Serra Mesa, California
Captain<47>

Frederick Greene<43>
29 Mountain City, Tennessee
Specialist

Jason Dean Hunt<43>
22 Tipton, Oklahoma
Specialist
Amy Sue Krueger<43>
29 Kiel, Wisconsin
Staff Sergeant

Aaron Thomas Nemelka<43>
19 West Jordan, Utah
Private First Class

Michael S. Pearson<48>
22 Bolingbrook, Illinois
Private First Class
Russell Gilbert Seager<41>
51 Racine, Wisconsin
Captain<49>

Francheska Velez ‡<50>
21 Chicago, Illinois Private First Class
Juanita L. Warman<41>
55 Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania
Lieutenant Colonel<51>

Kham See Xiong<43>
23 Saint Paul, Minnesota
Private First Class
‡ Francheska Velez was pregnant at the time of her death.<52>

And there are untold thousands more where these came from.

Semper Fi,

[Name removed]

86. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[DWC]

113. II am glad you hold that opinion

It has established a level of delusional I have never before witnessed. You truly have left all others extremists, on both sides of the issue in the dust.

Semper Fi,

[Common Sense Party]

125. Please tell me how, precisely, THESE deaths could NOT have been

prevented had the victims been carrying a firearm for personal defense? Assuming these victims would have received some modicum of training and would have known how to aim and shoot, and shoot, and shoot...



http://www.newsobserver.com/2011/07/27/1371748/death-followed-violent-history.html
http://www2.nbc17.com/news/durham-county/2011/jul/19/durham-mother-stabbed-called-911-hours-her-death-ar-1221445/

http://www.seattlepi.com/news/article/Slain-NY-woman-had-restraining-order-1463814.php


http://www.northjersey.com/news/125184494_Khan_violated_restraining_order__prosecutor_and_first_wife_say.html

http://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/2011/07/12/sf-porn-mogul%E2%80%99s-son-guilty-of-murder-kidnapping/

Are you now going to invent some nonsensical tangent that has nothing to do with your question at hand? Or are you going to pretend that there is no way that these women--knowing of their ex's violent histories and tendencies--could not have prevented their own tragic deaths by arming themselves?

What is it going to be?

[iverglas]

130. okay, one post, one news item, at random

The only link of the four in the post above that I clicked on was this one (and I'm not wasting my time on any more of the posts, including the moronic one claiming that every person who died at the Texas restaurant shooting would not be dead if they had had a firearm):

http://www.northjersey.com/news/125184494_Khan_violated_restraining_order__prosecutor_and_first_wife_say.html

Shazmina Khan was found dead in her bathtub with wounds to her throat this past Monday, July 4, at about 12:30 a.m.

Look, it isn't fair to make me laugh out loud in the face of a genuinely tragic event like that ... but you appear to be seriously claiming that an apparently perfectly normal woman would have had a handgun with her in the bathtub.

(Why didn't she? Why do so many apparently perfectly normal women who are at risk of harm from men in their lives not have handguns in their hands every waking minute of their lives, and under their pillows at night? Are women just that stupid that nothing you all say gets through to them??? If that's the case, why don't you just all give up? Too stupid to live, it would seem. Unless, maybe, you can think of what their reasons might be, and accept that they have reasons even if you don't approve of them, and put an iota of energy into advocating for measures that might actually enhance their safety ...)

I think we can all see why I'm not wasting any more time here.

[DWC]

131. Can't handle the Facts?

You wrote:
"and I'm not wasting my time on any more of the posts, including the moronic one claiming that every person who died at the Texas restaurant shooting would not be dead if they had had a firearm"

Fact is they are ALL DEAD - EVERY ONE. Had some of them been armed they would not ALL BE DEAD - NOT EVERY ONE.

Your Flaming argument and Flaming opinions FAIL.

Semper Fi,

[Common Sense Party]

138. Yes, we can all see that you are incapable of arguing your position logically

or sensible. You have shown this through repeated posts of drivel and meaningless nonsense, through deflection, through logical fallacies ad nauseum.

I'm the one wasting time with you, but I certainly won't make that mistake again.

[ileus]

49. It did materialize...he was arrested. Safety first was her choice.

Good news was she never was faced with having to use her EDC, millions of peaceful but prepared carry daily without incident. Remember trouble doesn't make an appointment...

[redgiant]

76. Wow. You really are clueless.

What's the moral of your response? It's useless to take precautions against threats or risks because they may not materialize? In this case, the threat, luckily, did not materialize, but how do you conclude a threat did not exist in this situation?

[SteveM]

43. Oh, you mean Eleanor Roosevelt? nt

[friendly_iconoclast]

84. Some DUers have a commonality of purpose with those they denounce.

Specifically, gun control advocates and the "racist misogynist right wing".


Both of them expend much time, energy and verbiage claiming that progressivism and gun control are irrevocably welded

together. ER is a perfect example of why that isn't true, but Republicans and certain gun control advocates both want

the idea that "lefties/progressives/Democrats want gun control" to be widely dissemated.


It's worked out great for Republicans- not so much for everyone else. It's long past time to take the auger and bit away

from those who insist upon drilling holes in the bottom of the boat. We can take the moderates away from the Republicans

and the gun control believers that won't go along can go hang with the Greens.

[iverglas]

91. dwelling in the past

It's so much more fun, and serves the agenda so much better, than addressing modern realities.

Now who will channel Eleanor Roosevelt for us and tell us her position, as a progressive woman living in the US in 2011, on firearms control?

I'm sure someone here must have done it.

Eleanor Roosevelt is a perfect example of a privileged white woman living a good few generations ago in a society that has long since ceased to exist.

How come you people can never, ever, ever come up with a modern-day progressive who toes the gun militant line???

As if Eleanor Roosevelt ever did anyway.

[friendly_iconoclast]

111. Too bad. It's more important that the people be able to arm themselves, if they so choose.

Rich and/or connected people can always farm out security.

I'd like it that it's not only white, well off right-wingers (along with carefully vetted others)that are free to do so.

Freedom of choice doesn't mean "free to make a choice that I agree with"....

[iverglas]

132. what in god's name are you yammering about?

I said: How come you people can never, ever, ever come up with a modern-day progressive who toes the gun militant line???

Eleanor Roosevelt does not qualify, you see, and I've seen no actual evidence that she would even have toed that line in her day.

Whatever that jabber in your post was, it had nothing to do with anything I said.

[friendly_iconoclast]

139. OK, then: Me.

I am a union member, I have participated in a number of disability related political rallies, some including civil disobedience.

I have been doing this for decades.


I support full equality under the law for all, and am currently boycotting several businesses whose products I would otherwise

enjoy because of their homophobic stances (ChickFilA and L.L. Bean, you're not getting any of my money until you change your

policies.).


My first serious political action was volunteering for Jimmy Carter in a decidedly red state when I was still too young to vote.

I have never in my life voted for a Republican, save for a city councilman that I knew personally and whose opponent was

an 82 year old honest-to-FSM Bircher running as a write in.


So please take your stereotyped view of gun owners down to the nearest Canada Post location and ship it back to the 1980s

where it belongs...

[AtheistCrusader]

12. Why is it that a woman, choosing to arm herself, purchasing a weapon

and then actually using it as intended, when circumstances warrant, always results in some snide bullshit comment about 'arming everyone'?

How about we just keep on letting the people who choose to arm themselves for self protection, do so?

[slackmaster]

13. I've tried putting all of the "arming everyone" twits in my Ignore list

But the world seems to be capable of producing an endless number of twits.

[redgiant]

77. Exactly! n/t

[Hoopla Phil]

14. Penn Jillette had that idea first. He also said that the guns should be pink.

He also said that it would be the woman's choice to carry or not, or to even keep the gun.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IQHLvgCWvcE

[spin]

28. Pink guns have caught on with some women ...

[Euromutt]

124. I have a hypothesis why that is

I find myself more than little repelled by all the pink grips, furniture etc. and I can't imagine why anyone would actively like a pink gun for its aesthetics, but I suspect they're popular because no male family member would covet and try to underhandedly appropriate a pink gun. Nothing says "this is not my husband's/boyfriend's/brother's gun, it's mine" like pink furniture.

[benEzra]

105. I think every mentally competent adult woman with a clean record should have the *choice*.

Many will choose not to exercise it, as is their right. But I think the choice should be theirs.

[bellcrank]

7. Good for the clerk! If more of them would kill thugs, it would cut down on crime.

:thumbsup:

[iverglas]

24. if we're lucky

This one will show up in the progressive international press too. ;)

I'm thinking there was some talk here just yesterday about how this sort of filth isn't common hereabouts ... I must be misremembering.

[AtheistCrusader]

11. Play stupid games, win stupid prizes.

[Hoopla Phil]

15. I hope the hotel chain stands behind the clerk on this. n/t

[iverglas]

16. excuse me

Exactly where did "raped" come into this?

The assailant said "this is a robbery". Do many armed robbers of commercial establishments also sexually assault their targets? I don't actually think so.

Just a little more exploitation of women in the cause of an agenda that is overwhelmingly contrary to their interests. Ta.

[drpepper67]

20. Because it's true.

She wasn't raped.

She wasn't robbed.

She wasn't murdered.

She defended herself against an attacker who held a weapon to her throat.

Do you see a problem with this?

[iverglas]

22. she also didn't fly to the moon

Have a picnic. Women are objects to be exploited for whatever purpose someone chooses. It's not like this isn't a known fact.

[spin]

38. Armed women are often more difficult to "exploit" if a misogynist plans to ...

rape or rob.

In many states in this country many women can own and even legally carry a firearm for self defense. And they do own and carry. For example these charts show just how many women have concealed weapons permits in Florida. Many other women, including several of my daughter's friends do not have carry permits but do carry loaded firearms in their cars which is legal as long as the gun is "securely encased" i.e. in a glove box.

source: http://licgweb.doacs.state.fl.us/stats/cw_holders.html

[iverglas]

52. sez you

I'm waiting for the evidence of efficacy, myself.

I been waiting a long time ...

[TPaine7]

21. A felon who has a woman under his control through the threat of death can always be taken at his

word, right?

At least under the Gun Control Reality Distortion Field.

Here in the real world, once a thug has a woman totally under control, what he chooses to do is unpredictable, possibly even to himself. But you keep trusting thugs. Just don't expect us to.

[iverglas]

23. in your world

an armed robber in a commercial establishment commonly takes time out from making a getaway with the loot to sexually assault a victim.

I'm glad I don't live there. Not because I prefer such things not to happen, but because I dread to think what other weird shit must go on there.

Oh, did you have any facts to support your implied assertion that such things happen -- to any extent that might make them a reasonable expectation?

The woman was in a situation that threatened her personal security and appears to have acted reasonably to avert the threat. Somehow, I suspect that her fear for her life, and not her fear of sexual assault, was uppermost in her mind. (Of course, we have no way of knowing whether her life was in jeopardy; a lot of armed robbers do just rob and leave, y'know.)

Had she been a male victim, no one would have embarked on fantasies about sexual assault.

Odd.

[drpepper67]

25. So then we all agree it was a good outcome.

[iverglas]

26. nope

I said that her action appears to have been reasonable.

Death is not a good outcome, generally.

No one has any way of knowing what would have happened had she not had a firearm.

Most robbers take their loot and leave, after all.

This does not provide a basis for predicting what would happen in any particular situation, and anyone with a knife held at their throat by a stranger does indeed have a reasonable apprehension of serious bodily harm or death, and almost certainly has no reasonable alternative for averting that threat.

A good outcome would have been two living people rather than one living person and one dead person, even where the dead person instigated the violence. Always.

Where that outcome does not appear to the person in the situation, acting on reasonable belief, to be likely, then the outcome in this case is better than one in which the outcomes were reversed.

There is still absolutely no reason for a decent human being to call it a "good outcome".

[drpepper67]

30. Then we agree there are times when using deadly force is the better of two outcomes.

[drpepper67]

32. "Most robbers take their loot and leave, after all." But not always...

http://www.dnaindia.com/bangalore/report_home-alone-widow-raped-robbed-and-murdered-in-bangalore_1495943

Home alone widow raped, robbed and murdered in Bangalore

[iverglas]

34. Bangalore! my my

Do please note the care I took to say, repeatedly: robbery in COMMMERCIAL ESTABLISHMENT. In the USofA, of course.

Refuting apples with baskeballs. Doesn't work.

[drpepper67]

36. Here's another "basketball"...

http://www.wsbtv.com/news/25455026/detail.html

CUMMING, Ga. -- A Cumming man is on the loose after authorities said he raped, robbed and killed a woman, according to the Forsyth County Sheriff’s Office.

[iverglas]

53. jeezus gawd

And she was working in COMMERCIAL ESTABLISHMENT at the time of the event, was she?

Oops. NO.

Such a short trail of breadcrumbs, so few people able to follow it.

The opening post made a gratuitous reference to a woman not being raped. The incident in question involved a robbery in the commercial establishment where she was working. There was no suggestion whatsoever that she had been the victim of a sexual assault or would have been had she not killed the assailant.

The reference to rape was gratuitous, exploitive and unpleaseant. I questioned it for that reason.

I am not remotely interested in further tales of women who were sexually assaulted anywhere.

Unless someone can tell me how potential sexual assault victims having handguns on their persons would avert significant numbers of sexual assaults.

No one can, because it won't. But someone could at least try.

[shedevil69taz]

55. Here's one for you

http://baltimore.cbslocal.com/2011/03/14/hopkins-student-studying-for-mba-murdered-search-is-on-for-the-killer/

Right in a very high population area, right here in the US.

[drpepper67]

56. Oh look! An Apple....

[AzWorker]

64. Bushels of apples, but only crow to eat....

another anti-rights argument bites the dust.

[PavePusher]

62. If you continue to let Reality(tm) over-ride your belief in The Message(tm)....

you will not be one of the Civilized(tm) Enlightened(tm) Elite(tm) who know what is best for Others(tm).

[iverglas]

74. let me try again, perhaps you will understand it this time

The reference to rape was gratuitous, exploitive and unpleaseant. I questioned it for that reason.

I am not remotely interested in further tales of women who were sexually assaulted anywhere.

[Glassunion]

79. Take it up with the journalist..

"The reference to rape was gratuitous, exploitive and unpleaseant."

Read the article. The words "sexual assault" and "rape" appear no less than 3 times. The OP only mentioned it once.

[iverglas]

92. no, I won't, Mr Johnny Come Lately

You pay attention, and stop trying to pretend that the OP had knowledge of any of the allegations since made.

[Glassunion]

58. "tell me how potential sexual assault victims having handguns on their persons would avert

significant numbers of sexual assaults"

Actually, ANY form of self defense or protective measure has been shown to improve one's odds in a violent situation.

http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/index.cfm?ty=pbdetail&iid=2218
In the DOJ 2008 NCVS Report, 63.1%(128,520) of victims of sexual assault in particular used some form of protective measure when attacked.
Of those that used a protective measure...
53% say it helped the situation
9% say it hurt the situation
5% say it both helped and hurt the situation
17% say it did not help or hurt the situation
6% say the do not know
10% was not available

Of those 68,115 people who say it helped the situation...
33.7% or 22,954 people say they avoided injury or grater injury to answer your particular question

Now, out of the victims who used some form of self defense.
2.7% or 3,470 sexual assault victims attacked their offender with a weapon, of those who attack the offender with a weapon 1.8% or 63 victims of sexual assault suffered the violence being completed.
2.9% or 3,727 sexual assault victims attacked the offender without a weapon, of those who attack the offender without a weapon 9.5% or 354 victims of sexual assault suffered the violence being completed.
30.9% or 39,712 sexual assault victims resisted the attack, of those who resist 35% or 13,899 victims of sexual assault suffered the violence being completed.

From this, I would say to resist. Better yet to attack the attacker. Better than that, attack the attacker with a weapon.

[spin]

45. How about this story? ...

Man accused of raping, robbing store clerk in Escondido pleads not guilty
Posted: May 20, 2011 7:55 PM EDT Updated: May 20, 2011 7:56 PM EDT

VISTA (CNS) - An 18-year-old man accused of robbing and raping a store clerk at her North County workplace and stealing her sport utility vehicle pleaded not guilty Friday to eight charges, including kidnapping for purposes of a sexual assault.

Hugo Elmer Garcia, who is in custody in lieu of $2 million bail, faces 69 years to life if convicted, said Deputy District Attorney Jodi Breton.

Garcia allegedly was casing a convenience store in the 1600 block of East Valley Parkway in Escondido shortly before 5 p.m. Wednesday, then confronted the victim inside the store at gunpoint, the prosecutor said.

After robbing the victim, the defendant ordered her into a back room, where he tied up her hands and feet and sexually assaulted her, Breton said. He then allegedly stole the victim's a white-and-tan 2000 Ford Expedition and fled.
http://www.cbs8.com/story/14688511/man-accused-of-raping-robbing-store-clerk-in-escondido-pleads-not-guilty

or this one:

Man in prison for abduction and rape of Viola store clerk now faces bank robbery charge
Posted on Thu, May. 26, 2011

WICHITA - A 42-year-old man already in prison for kidnapping and raping a convenience store clerk in Viola has been indicted for bank robbery, authorities said Wednesday.

Robert D. Abner is charged with robbing the Garden Plain State Bank in downtown Garden Plain on June 27, 2008. If convicted of the bank robbery charge, Abner faces a maximum penalty of 25 years in federal prison and a fine of up to $250,000.

The robbery occurred shortly after Abner released the Viola convenience store clerk he abducted on June 23. He held the clerk captive for about four days in his north Wichita rental home before dropping her off at her family's minister's home.

Read more: http://www.kansas.com/2011/05/26/1865549/man-in-prison-for-rape-kidnapping.html#ixzz1T95mUkXP

another:

Trial set for May for man accused of kidnapping Kwik Shop clerk
by Trish Mehaffey :: UPDATED: 24 February 2011 | 7:01 pm

CEDAR RAPIDS – The first-degree kidnapping trial of Keith Elson Jr., accused of kidnapping and raping a Kwik Shop clerk in May, was reset Thursday to May 9 in Linn County District Court.

Elson, 54, of Cedar Rapids, is accused of kidnapping Amanda Daniel, 19, at knife point from the Kwik Shop, 1001 First Ave. SW, May 17. Daniel told police Elson also raped her during the incident.
http://thegazette.com/2011/02/24/trial-set-for-may-for-man-accused-of-kidnapping-kwik-shop-clerk/

and yet another:

Jurors convict suspect in drugstore rape
May 27, 2011

A Fort Wayne man was convicted in the New Year’s Day rape of a 19-year-old store clerk.

It took a jury a little more than two hours Thursday night to find Robert P. Kemp Jr. guilty on each count of rape and criminal deviate conduct in the sex assault of a cashier inside the women’s bathroom at Walgreens at Lincoln Way East and Ironwood Drive Jan. 1.
http://articles.wsbt.com/2011-05-27/jurors-convict_29588887

[Glassunion]

47. Or..

About 8:20 a.m. Sunday, a woman was opening the door to a business on Freedom Boulevard when a man approached her from behind and held a knife to her, Watsonville police said.

The suspect forced the woman inside the business, where she was tied up, blindfolded and sexually assaulted, police said.

The man then took the woman's keys, fled in her Lexus SUV and left her bound and blindfolded in the business, police said. A description of the suspect and the car were given to police in Santa Cruz and Monterey counties. A Watsonville police officer spotted Maynor walking out of a liquor store on the 600 block of East Lake Avenue, police said.

http://www.mercurynews.com/breaking-news/ci_18418809

or...

According to court records, 28-year-old Noah Hopkins, of the 3900 block of Vest Avenue, has been charged with one count each of forcible rape and armed robbery. He is currently in the middle of a 10-year sentence on unrelated convictions.

Police say Hopkins walked into the BP gas station at 1104 Hampton Avenue on Aug. 11, 2007, demanded money and brandished what appeared to be a stun gun. A female clerk gave him $500, then he forced her into a bathroom in the store, where he proceeded to rape her.

http://www.stltoday.com/news/local/crime-and-courts/article_7feb1434-af33-11e0-bc4a-001a4bcf6878.html#ixzz1T99zugXM

Never happens. Nope.

[drpepper67]

57. Opps, more apples...

[iverglas]

70. interesting

And they're both still alive.

I'd provide you with a few thousand tales of the women and girls who were sexually assaulted in the last few weeks ... mostly by parents, other relations, co-workers, present or former partners ... but their stories don't make the news.

And the likes of the gun dungeon denizens don't actually give a shit about them, so I'd be wasting my time anyhow.

[Glassunion]

78. Yes they are both still alive. But no less raped because of that fact.

You were asking for specific examples. If I may quote you: "note the care I took to say, repeatedly: robbery in COMMMERCIAL ESTABLISHMENT." and to go further up-thread, "Oh, did you have any facts to support your implied assertion that such things happen -- to any extent that might make them a reasonable expectation?" That is all I was responding to. Your direct request. Don't sugar-coat it by stating that they are alive. You asked for specific examples and you were given specific examples.

The OP mentioned "Rape", "Robbery" and "Murder". I would state that they are all not beyond probability. The thing is that we do not know what all of the bad guy's intentions were. However, I do believe, from reading the article that the attacker's intent was to rape her.

If you read the article, you will note, in the first sentence, that the attacker was indeed trying to sexually assault her. "A man is dead after the motel clerk he tried to sexually assault and rob early Monday morning fought back and killed him, deputies said."

Another quote from you up-thread: "The woman was in a situation that threatened her personal security and appears to have acted reasonably to avert the threat. Somehow, I suspect that her fear for her life, and not her fear of sexual assault, was uppermost in her mind. (Of course, we have no way of knowing whether her life was in jeopardy; a lot of armed robbers do just rob and leave, y'know.)"
and
"Exactly where did "raped" come into this?"
and
"Just a little more exploitation of women in the cause of an agenda that is overwhelmingly contrary to their interests. Ta."

I believe that she was indeed in fear of a sexual assault and fear for her life. If you read the article you also see mentioned: "Richland County Sheriff Leon Lott said Carson's intent was not only to rob the motel, but also to rape the clerk. "There's no doubt that was his intent," said Lott. "Not only was he going to rob her, but he was going to sexually assault her. Now what was he going to do after that assault was over with, we don't know."

Another quote from up-thread: "Had she been a male victim, no one would have embarked on fantasies about sexual assault."

You do realize that 19% of rape victims aged 12 and over are males? The majority of which are raped by strangers. And again, I'm not sure where you are getting the idea that this is a fantasy. I may suggest you read the article.

Another quote from up-thread: "Carrying a firearm is not a defensive measure because the person toting the damned thing around IS NOT DEFENDING THEMSELF AGAINST ANYTHING, for crissakes."

So, what exactly happened here in this case? Was this woman, who was carrying a gun, not defending herself with a gun that she was carrying?

You are mistaken that the likes of the gun dungeon don't actually give a shit about victims of rape. We have mothers, wives, sisters and friends as well as you do. Yes, it is a shame that these stories do not receive their time in the light that they should as it may open more eyes and hearts to the problem.

But, at the end of the day, my suggestion to you is to simply read the article.

[iverglas]

90. a cloo for yoo

http://www.midlandsconnect.com/news/story.aspx?id=644050

That's one of the original reports, in which no mention is made of any intended sexual assault.

So take your "read this" crap and tell it to somebody else.


Had she been a male victim, no one would have embarked on fantasies about sexual assault.
You do realize that 19% of rape victims aged 12 and over are males? The majority of which are raped by strangers. And again, I'm not sure where you are getting the idea that this is a fantasy. I may suggest you read the article.

What the fuck does how many rape victims are male have to do with anything I said? Quite apart from the fact that your figure is nonsense. By the way, men are not raped. Rape is an act of sexual violence committed against a woman, and an instrument used by men throughout time and space to control, intimidate, terrorize and subjugate women. It has nothing at all to do with sexual assaults committed against men.


And again, I'm not sure where you are getting the idea that this is a fantasy.

I do know where you got the idea that I said any such thing was a fantasy. Not from anywhere labelled "the truth", that's for sure.


So, what exactly happened here in this case? Was this woman, who was carrying a gun, not defending herself with a gun that she was carrying?

It becomes painful having to explain things so slowly and in words of so few syllables that they will be understood around here.

A person carrying a firearm is not DEFENDING THEMSELF against anything.

A person who uses a firearm may be defending themself against something.

How bleeding obvious is that, now?


You are mistaken that the likes of the gun dungeon don't actually give a shit about victims of rape.

No I'm not.

They may all care oh so deeply about their wives, daughters, etc. They're theirs, after all.

There it stops. The proof is in the pudding, friend.

[Glassunion]

100. And a few clues for you...

"That's one of the original reports, in which no mention is made of any intended sexual assault.
So take your "read this" crap and tell it to somebody else."

Clue#1. The report you linked was not the link in the OP. I only read the link in the OP, where the sexual assault was mentioned no less than 3 times. So sue me for not reading an article that was not linked in the OP or anywhere else in this topic that we are all discussing.

"What the fuck does how many rape victims are male have to do with anything I said?"

Clue #2. If you look here:http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=118&topic_id=440356&mesg_id=440487 You said, and I quote "Had she been a male victim, no one would have embarked on fantasies about sexual assault.". It has everything to do with what you said, because YOU SAID IT.

"Quite apart from the fact that your figure is nonsense."

Clue#3. My figure is not nonsense. According to the US Bureau of Justice statistics, 19% of rape victims aged 12 and over in the United State are males. http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/index.cfm?ty=tp&tid=92#

"By the way, men are not raped. Rape is an act of sexual violence committed against a woman, and an instrument used by men throughout time and space to control, intimidate, terrorize and subjugate women. It has nothing at all to do with sexual assaults committed against men."

Clue#4. Definition of Rape from the same Bureau - Forced sexual intercourse including both psychological coercion as well as physical force. Forced sexual intercourse means vaginal, anal or oral penetration by the offender(s). This category also includes incidents where the penetration is from a foreign object such as a bottle. Includes attempted rapes, male as well as female victims and both heterosexual and homosexual rape. Attempted rape includes verbal threats of rape. Sugar-coat it anyway you want, or try to redefine it, but rape is rape regardless of the sex of the victim.

"I do know where you got the idea that I said any such thing was a fantasy. Not from anywhere labelled "the truth", that's for sure."

Clue #5. I got it from here: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=118x440356#440487 where you said: "no one would have embarked on fantasies about sexual assault".

"It becomes painful having to explain things so slowly and in words of so few syllables that they will be understood around here."
"A person carrying a firearm is not DEFENDING THEMSELF against anything."
"A person who uses a firearm may be defending themself against something."
"How bleeding obvious is that, now?"

Clue#6. "A person carrying a firearm is not DEFENDING THEMSELF against anything." you did not initially say that. Originally you stated here: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=118x440356#440760 "Carrying a firearm is not a defensive measure because the person toting the damned thing around IS NOT DEFENDING THEMSELF AGAINST ANYTHING, for crissakes." In this context a "defensive measure" would be the steps an individual would take in order to protect themselves at some point in the future. The act of carrying a firearm is indeed a defensive measure against an unforeseeable future event. You correct however that an individual is not actively defending themselves against anything while carrying it, however they carry it as a tool to defend themselves should the need arise. Your two statements contradict each other. If you had initially stated that, it would have been bleeding obvious as you put it.

"No I'm not.
They may all care oh so deeply about their wives, daughters, etc. They're theirs, after all.
There it stops. The proof is in the pudding, friend."

Clue#7. You have no proof, nor pudding friend. You cannot speak for anyone here but yourself on how any single one of us feel about the topic. But do yourself a favor and before you speak, think about who may be listening. 1 in 6 women and 1 in 10 men have been a victim of sexual assault. What are the odds that some of us here may know, are acquainted with, are brothers of, are sisters of, are parents of or are husbands or wives of a victim. Yet you claim that all of us have no feelings on the subject, that it stops at our door and we care nothing about what happens outside of our homes. This is a bullshit comment and unless you can magically prove how it stops at our doorstep.

[iverglas]

103. give it another try

timestamp on the OP:

Mon Jul-25-11 09:58 AM

timestamp on the version of the story you are reading, at the link in the OP:

Story posted 2011.07.26 at 08:01 AM EDT


The OP linked to a story written a day in the future, did it?


Clue#4. Definition of Rape from the same Bureau

Ask me how big a fig I don't give.

Revisionism is not my concern.


What the fuck does how many rape victims are male have to do with anything I said?
Clue #2. If you look here:http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph... You said, and I quote "Had she been a male victim, no one would have embarked on fantasies about sexual assault.". It has everything to do with what you said, because YOU SAID IT.

Yes -- what I SAID was: "Had she been a male victim, no one would have embarked on fantasies about sexual assault."

So tell me again: what does how many victims of "rape" are male have to do with anything?

If so many victims of "rape" are male, then surely every time a male person is a victim of a potentially fatal robbery and survives, all of the gun dungeon would be breathing an audible collective sigh of relief that he wasn't "raped".

RIGHT?

And yet ... oh gosh ... IT NEVER HAPPENS.

Thoughts of men being raped just aren't quite as exciting for the average dungeon denizen, I can only guess.


Clue#6. "A person carrying a firearm is not DEFENDING THEMSELF against anything." you did not initially say that. Originally you stated here: (link) "Carrying a firearm is not a defensive measure because the person toting the damned thing around IS NOT DEFENDING THEMSELF AGAINST ANYTHING, for crissakes."

Good god. You keep quoting me saying things that prove I said exactly what I said and not what you have pretended I said. Have you considered quitting while you are ... well, at least before you get any further behind??


In this context a "defensive measure" would be the steps an individual would take in order to protect themselves at some point in the future.

NO. In ANY context, a "defensive measure" is something someone does TO DEFEND THEMSELF. Lordy lordy lordy.


You cannot speak for anyone here but yourself on how any single one of us feel about the topic.

I speak from a decade of evidence, pal.


But do yourself a favor and before you speak, think about who may be listening. 1 in 6 women and 1 in 10 men have been a victim of sexual assault. What are the odds that some of us here may know, are acquainted with, are brothers of, are sisters of, are parents of or are husbands or wives of a victim.

Christ almighty, how about you consider taking your own advice?

[Glassunion]

108. Another try.

1. You have my apologies. As you can see from my posting times I did not start replying to the article's contents until after it was updated as I had not read it up until that point. I was unaware that the article had changed its contents and do regret my comments to you in regards to the contents of the article.

2. You initially brought up the subject if the roles were reversed and the victim a male, than no one would have mentioned the topic of rape. To that I was simply bringing into the light the issue of male victims of "sexual assault". You brought up males, and I simply provided numbers to add to your comment.

3. The term "Defensive Measure" is a military term. It is defined by a military taking a form of action or placing resources in order to protect against enemies. For example: If the Army places a line of tanks on their eastern flank in case they are attacked from the east, they are taking a defensive measure. They have placed resources at their disposal should they need them. In the context of the individual, this can easily be correlated to carrying a firearm. The individual has placed a resource(the gun) at their disposal should they need it.

4. Since you have a decade of experience and know exactly how all of us here feel. Please do enlighten me as to how I personally feel about sexual assault and how it stops at my door.

[iverglas]

109. better yet

Please do enlighten me as to how I personally feel about sexual assault and how it stops at my door.

How about you tell me about the time you spend doing something, anything, that might actually be effective to reduce the incidence of violence against women?

Promoting an agenda associated with guns doesn't count.

[Glassunion]

110. So what you are saying is that you don't know anything about me. Yet you claim you do.

Come on, you can't pull on your 10 years of experience? You said it yourself, the proof is in the pudding.

I'll tell you what. I'll give you a clue. I have been known to play the part of tin man.

[TPaine7]

115. Why would the "Goddess of Truth and Beauty" ask a mortal for evidence

pertaining to his guilt or innocence after condemning him?

Isn't the investigation supposed to precede the verdict?!! I thought that was the case even in places like Canada and Europe.

Isn't "verdict before evidence gathering" the domain of regressive, barbaric regimes, more the territory of... say, the Goddess of Lies and Bullshit?

[Glassunion]

118. Well... In all fairness my clue was not so much supernatural, but it was super hero-ish

I am assuming that most nerds who enjoyed a good comic book growing up could piece together my clue.

[TPaine7]

119. Oh that has nothing to do with your clue; iverglas styles herself the Goddess of Truth and Beauty.

Isn't modesty wonderful? Sanity too!

The "beautiful truth" is that it wouldn't matter if you ran a women's shelter and had risked your life on multiple occasions to help women escape abusers.

I might as well tell you now if you don't already know it: you hate black people and you're very right wing in your views. You're also a sedentary, not very bright, middle-aged white man.

Why should you receive several shocks in a row? I figure it's best to get it over with in one devastating revelation.

[Glassunion]

127. Well shit. I guess I have to rethink this whole being black thing.

It served me well at times and at others not so well.

But now that I'm a middle aged white guy do I get to reap the benefits of being white? You know country club membership, not getting pulled over as much, higher paying job that I'm not qualified for and the like. I do already have the car and home in the proper neighborhood so at least I won't have to relocate.

I can report back to the other side to let them know what it is really like. I'll be incognegro.

[Euromutt]

122. Speaking of men being raped

There was a rather chilling piece about precisely that in last week's Observer: http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2011/jul/17/the-rape-of-men

The piece makes reference to incidents the occurred during the Bosnian war of 1992-1995, and while I'm not familiar with those specific incidents, I can state from my time analyzing witness statements at UN ICTY that male-on-male sexual violence was a far from uncommon occurrence, particularly in detention facilities of various kinds. We distinguished three categories: sexual assault (e.g. guard forces prisoner to suck him off), forced sex between persons (e.g. guard forces one prisoner to bugger another; making sons bugger their own fathers was a popular one), and rape (guard buggers prisoner).

[TPaine7]

116. How can you possibly know about thousands of criminal events that didn't make the news? n/t

[Blown330]

35. I don't call it a good outcome...

...I call it an outstanding outcome. Then again, I'm not delusional when it comes to the mindset of criminals nor I live in the fantasy world where I think it's ok to be a victim.

[iverglas]

93. really?

Then again, I'm not delusional when it comes to the mindset of criminals nor I live in the fantasy world where I think it's ok to be a victim.

Odd, since it seems to me that only a delusional person would allege that someone else believes that "it's ok to be a victim".

I can think of several other adjectives to describe a person who would say such things, several starting with "d". I'm sure you won't have any trouble thinking what at least one of them is.

[Blown330]

121. Poor child.

Nothing left but insults? How very small minded of you. Obviously you take exception to the criminal being killed at the expense of a hotel clerk choosing not to be a victim.

[SteveM]

44. "...her action appears to have been reasonable." I agree with you. nt

[TPaine7]

60. No. Not always.

Consider the BTK killer or another serial killer.

Better by far that his first intended victim kill him in a justified defensive struggle than that they both survive and he go on to torture and kill many victims and devastate many families and friends.

A good outcome would have been two living people rather than one living person and one dead person, even where the dead person instigated the violence. Always.

Not so.

[TPaine7]

46. In the real world...

23. in your world

an armed robber in a commercial establishment commonly takes time out from making a getaway with the loot to sexually assault a victim.

In the real world, the stated purpose of a guy with a weapon to your throat is neither limiting or definitive.

I'm glad I don't live there.

Me too, if you mean the US. You're welcome to join us if you mean reality outside the Field.

Not because I prefer such things not to happen, but because I dread to think what other weird shit must go on there.

This must be pertinent in some other conversation, I'm sure.

Oh, did you have any facts to support your implied assertion that such things happen -- to any extent that might make them a reasonable expectation?

There are no implied assertions in my post, only real assertions. (At least there aren't in the real world.) I said precisely what I intended to, with no insinuations or implied points whatsoever.

The woman was in a situation that threatened her personal security and appears to have acted reasonably to avert the threat. Somehow, I suspect that her fear for her life, and not her fear of sexual assault, was uppermost in her mind. (Of course, we have no way of knowing whether her life was in jeopardy; a lot of armed robbers do just rob and leave, y'know.)

Sometimes I feel bad for you, in spite of myself. The Field has shown you no mercy.

The woman was in a situation that threatened her personal security... (Of course, we have no way of knowing whether her life was in jeopardy; a lot of armed robbers do just rob and leave, y'know.)

Think about that, iverglas! Are you too far gone to see the tension?

We have no way of knowing whether she would have been killed or injured. The fact that a robber threatened her life tells us that her life was threatened--in jeopardy.

[PavePusher]

63. "I said precisely what I intended to, with no insinuations or implied points whatsoever."

That's how you confuse her. She doesn't understand anyone who says exactly what they mean.

[DWC]

133. "fantasies about sexual assault"

From the OP

"Richland County Sheriff Leon Lott said Carson's intent was not only to rob the motel, but also to rape the clerk. "There's no doubt that was his intent," said Lott. "Not only was he going to rob her, but he was going to sexually assault her. Now what was he going to do after that assault was over with, we don't know."

You know more than the sheriff - uh huh.

One thing great about America. In most places, if a Bad Guy creates a life threatening situation; more and more it is becoming his life at risk.

Semper Fi,

[iverglas]

134. are you ... er .. visually impaired?

There is post after post after post in this thread saying that what you quote

Richland County Sheriff Leon Lott said Carson's intent was not only to rob the motel, but also to rape the clerk. "There's no doubt that was his intent," said Lott. "Not only was he going to rob her, but he was going to sexually assault her. Now what was he going to do after that assault was over with, we don't know."

WAS NOT IN THE OP and WAS NOT IN THE ARTICLE THE OP LINKED TO.

The article you are reading is a version written A FULL DAY AFTER this thread was started, and the content of the article is COMPLETELY DIFFERENT from what it was when the OP was written.

The reference in the OP to rape was GRATUITOUS and EXPLOITIVE because it had NO CONNECTION with any KNOWN FACTS.

Had the event the OP was about involved a male victim, the author WOULD NOT have made any reference to rape.

Women are victims of violent crimes that have no connection with any sexual offence. The fact that someone posting a story about an attempted ROBBERY in a commercial establishment, which WAS what the event was described as at the time of posting, would inject sexual violence against women into the post is just ... yech, just ugly and doesn't bear much thinking about.


You know more than the sheriff - uh huh.

I know no more than you would if you had read the fucking thread ... and of course I have no evidence that you didn't do that.


One thing great about America. In most places, if a Bad Guy creates a life threatening situation; more and more it is becoming his life at risk.

In every country on earth, throughout human history, a reasonable apprehension of a threat to one's life or limb has provided and does provide a legitimate excuse for using force to defend against serious injury or death.

What's your point?

[DWC]

136. I can read just fine - you ought to try it

Scroll straight up to the OP. Click on the link. 6th or 7th paragraph from the top states

"Richland County Sheriff Leon Lott said Carson's intent was not only to rob the motel, but also to rape the clerk. "There's no doubt that was his intent," said Lott. "Not only was he going to rob her, but he was going to sexually assault her. Now what was he going to do after that assault was over with, we don't know."

If you find me to be wrong I will apologize.

Semper Fi,

[iverglas]

137. are you saying I'm lying

or are you really just unable to comprehend this simple concept?

The link in the OP goes to an article timestamped THE DAY AFTER THE OP WAS WRITTEN.

Are you following so far?

The article that was at that link at the time the OP was written WAS DIFFERENT.

Still with me?

The article that was at the link at the time the OP was written CONTAINED NO ALLEGATIONS ABOUT ANY INTENDED SEXUAL ASSAULT.

Have I lost you? Do you want me to try to explain that some other way? Can you tell me what bit you aren't grasping?

From my post 106, written 24 hours ago, one of several, by others besides me, pointing this out:

timestamp on the OP:
Mon Jul-25-11 09:58 AM
timestamp on the version of the story you are reading, at the link in the OP:
Story posted 2011.07.26 at 08:01 AM EDT

Unless you think the author of the OP was time travelling, or mindreading, or had access to inside information, he DID NOT KNOW of any allegation of any intended or attempted sexual assault.

THIS -- an article dated July 25, not July 26, is what was originally at the link in the OP:

http://www.midlandsconnect.com/news/story.aspx?id=644050

COLUMBIA (WACH) -- Richland County deputies say a suspected robber is dead after a robbery attempt at a Columbia-area hotel.

Investigators say it happened early Monday morning at the Days Inn on Plumbers Road near North Main Street and I-20. A hotel employee tells deputies that early Monday morning 43-year-old Vincent Carson of Orangeburg put a knife to her throat and instructed her that a robbery was underway.

Richland County deputies say Carson tried to tie the female hotel employee up, but she was able to grab her gun and shoot him in the chest. Carson was unresponsive when deputies arrived; a knife by his side.

Sheriff Leon Lott added that this was an unfortunate situation in which the victim feared for her life and defended herself.

The victim was taken to the hospital with non-life threatening injuries.

SUM TOTAL.

No reference to any intended or attempted sexual assault. We have no idea why Sheriff Lott did not mention that on July 25 and then mentioned it sometime after the original media reports appeared.


I found you to be wrong as soon as I saw your post. I told you exactly why you were wrong.

I don't give a flying fuck whether you apologize.

[DWC]

141. Close enough. n/t

[PavePusher]

42. And we should take "The assailant"'s word that it is all he intends?

Why would you trust someone with a weapon at your throat?

[iverglas]

135. what's your point?

It seems to be a very dull one.

If someone had a weapon at my throat, my concern would be for MY LIFE, as I have clearly said I suspect this victim's was.

It certainly was my concern when it happened to me.

I did not say that I believed he intended to rob her and not kill her. No one will ever know that. I said she appeared to have acted reasonably in the circumstances by using force to defend herself against what she very reasonably perceived as a threat to her life.

So why did anyone need to drag sexual assault into it at all?

What -- is rape a fate worse than death?

So take your nasty demagoguery:

And we should take "The assailant"'s word that it is all he intends?

in which you pretend that I said that you should take the assailant's word that robbery was all he intended, when I did not SAY OR IMPLY OR THINK any such fucking thing, and find something entertaining if uncomfortable to do with it.


html fixed

[Tejas]

67. Since you're in Canada, [phone] is long distance but...

if you call that number you'll reach Sgt Eleanor Savage. She takes complaints concerning employees of the Richland County Sheriff's Department. I'm sure she'll listen to whatever is on your mind concerning the actions of Sheriff Leon Lott:

Carson's intent was not only to rob the motel, but also to rape the clerk. "There's no doubt that was his intent," said Lott. "Not only was he going to rob her, but he was going to sexually assault her. Now what was he going to do after that assault was over with, we don't know."




Please post back here with your results.

[drpepper67]

68. That's a much more detailed report from when this was first posted this morning.

All I can say is wow.

I'm glad she's ok.

[Name removed]

80. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[iverglas]

94. My results?

My results are that you are yet another demagogue pretending to believe that the OP had knowledge of the allegations that have now been made.

I do find it interesting that those allegations were published only the next day, of course.

[Tejas]

104. You're right, it's unpossible the perp would've raped that woman.

Never happens, not in the US and SURELY not in Canada. North American women will now sleep easier knowing that no harm will ever befall them, just let the nice man tie you up. As always, thank you for your in-depth analysis.

[iverglas]

107. it's like whacking moles around here

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=118&topic_id=440356&mesg_id=441021

[Name removed]

112. Deleted message

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[The Green Manalishi]

54. Happy ending. Good thug=dead thug

[Glassunion]

81. How tacky and uncivilized of her to carry a gun outside of her home.

[oneshooter]

96. Hoyt will be ashamed of her. n/t

[ileus]

128. female cowboy gunner toaters are being unfair to rapist...

[friendly_iconoclast]

140. Just think of the moral harm she has caused!