Posted on 10/27/2002 10:33:10 AM PST by vannrox
A Deadly MythWomen, Handguns, and Self-DefenseIntroduction In the late 1980s, the gun industry began targeting women to counter slumping handgun sales among its primary market of white males. The false message delivered by gunmakers was clear: the greatest threat posed to a woman was an attack by a stranger and, the best form of protection a woman could rely upon was a handgun.1 Much to the disappointment and consternation of the gun industry, these efforts for the most part have failed. A 1995 study by the National Opinion Research Center (NORC) conducted by Tom Smith and Robert J. Smith found that handgun ownership among women was, and remains, uncommon. This study found any fluctuations in the percentage of women who owned handguns to be statistically insignificant (see Chart One below).2 The 1996 study Guns in America found that only 6.6 percent of adult American women owned a handgunless than one out of every 10 women. But of these women, nearly 85 percent owned their handguns for self-defensea figure that offers gunmakers continual hope in their marketing endeavors.3 Yet how often are handguns actually used by women to kill in self-defense? The answer, as revealed by unpublished Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) data, is hardly ever. Women were murdered with handguns more than 1,200 times in 1998 alone. As these numbers reveal, handguns don't offer protection for women, but instead guarantee peril.4 For all of the promises made on behalf of the self-defense handgun, using a handgun to kill in self-defense is a rare event.5 Looking at both men and women, over the past 20 years, on average only two percent of the homicides committed with handguns in the United States were deemed justifiable or self-defense homicides by civilians.6 To put it in perspective, more people are struck by lightning each year than use handguns to kill in self-defense.7 This study presents data from the FBI and consists of three different analyses concerning women, handguns, and self-defense. It compares incidents of:
Despite the promises of gun-industry advertising, a woman is far more likely to be the victim of a handgun homicide than to use a handgun in a justifiable homicide. In 1998, handguns were used to murder 1,209 women.8 That same year, 12 women used handguns to kill in self-defense. When a woman did use a handgun to kill in self-defense, it was usually against someone she knew, not against a stranger. Of the 12 handgun self-defense killings by women reported to the FBI in 1998, eight involved attackers known to the woman, while only four involved strangers. All the attackers that the women justifiably killed were males, as were an overwhelming number of offenders in female handgun homicides. For the majority of both justifiable and criminal homicides, both the shooter and the victim were of the same race. [See Table One]
Black - 67%
Other - 0%
Black - 58%
Other - 0% |
White - 55%
Black - 42%
Other - 3% |
White - 53%
Black - 45%
Other - 1% |
|||||||||||||||||||
Gender | . | Male - 100%
Female - 0% |
. | Male - 96%
Female - 4% |
|||||||||||||||||
Percent of incidents that were intra-racial10 | 75% | 92% |
In 1998, for every time a woman used a handgun to kill an intimate acquaintance in self-defense, 83 woman were murdered by an intimate acquaintance with a handgun.
It is often intimate acquaintances and family members who endanger a woman's life.11 Yet women who own a handgun for self-defense usually do so to protect themselves from strangers. Many women who use handguns to kill in self-defense use the weapon against someone they know, or someone with whom they have, or have had, a romantic relationship.
Recognizing that most people are killed by someone they know, it is not surprising that the majority of justifiable homicides involve victims and attackers known to each other. Of the 12 justifiable homicides by women using a handgun that were reported to the FBI in 1998, eight involved an attacker known to the woman. Of these eight offenders, six were intimate acquaintances (three boyfriends, three husbands), one was a friend, and one was an acquaintance.
When there is a deadly encounter between a woman and her intimate acquaintance, and a handgun is involved, the most common scenario involves a woman being shot and killed by her intimate acquaintance. Of the 872 women murdered with a handgun whose relationship could be determined, 57 percent (497 of 872) were intimate acquaintances of the offender.12 Of these, more than half (260 of 497) were wives of the offenders. [See Table Two]
TABLE TWO Women who killed an intimate acquaintance with a handgun in self-defense Women murdered by an intimate acquaintance with a handgun
Number of People
6
497
Relationships
3 were Girlfriends
3 were Wives
260 were Wives |
180 were Girlfriends
31 were Common-Law Wives
26 were Ex-Wives
In 1998, for every time a woman used a handgun to kill a stranger in self-defense, 302 woman were murdered with a handgun.
Women who purchase handguns for self-protection are most likely planning to protect themselves and their families from strangers. Yet, women rarely use handguns to kill strangers in self-defense. In fact, compared to the frequency with which a woman uses a handgun to kill a stranger, the number of times that a handgun is used to murder a woman is staggering.
Table Three lists, by state, the number of women who used a handgun to kill a stranger or an intimate acquaintance in self-defense, as well as the number of women murdered with a handgun in 1998. Of the 47 states that submitted data to the FBI that year, only eight reported any justifiable homicides by women involving a handgun: California, Colorado, Georgia, Michigan, North Carolina, Oklahoma, Tennessee, and Texas. Of these, only California, Georgia, and North Carolina reported women who justifiably killed a stranger in self-defense, while California, Colorado, Oklahoma, Tennessee, and Texas reported women who justifiably killed an intimate acquaintance in self-defense.
Table Three
State
Number of Women Who Used a Handgun
Number of Women Murdered with a Handgun
to Kill a Stranger in Self-Defense
to Kill an Intimate Acquaintance in Self-Defense
to Kill a Friend or Acquaintance in Self-Defense
Alabama
0
0
0
37
Alaska
0
0
0
4
Arizona
0
0
0
42
Arkansas
0
0
0
20
California
2
1
0
178
Colorado
0
1
0
21
Connecticut
0
0
0
10
Delaware
0
0
0
2
Florida13
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Georgia
1
0
0
46
Hawaii
0
0
0
1
Idaho
0
0
0
5
Illinois
0
0
0
49
Indiana
0
0
0
51
Iowa
0
0
0
8
Kansas
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Kentucky
0
0
0
8
Louisiana
0
0
0
48
Maine
0
0
0
5
Maryland
0
0
0
28
Massachusetts
0
0
0
3
Michigan
0
0
1
41
Minnesota
0
0
0
6
Mississippi
0
0
0
15
Missouri
0
0
0
28
Montana
0
0
0
2
Nebraska
0
0
0
2
Nevada
0
0
0
16
New Hampshire
0
0
0
1
New Jersey
0
0
0
18
New Mexico
0
0
0
3
New York
0
0
0
45
North Carolina
1
0
0
59
North Dakota
0
0
0
0
Ohio
0
0
0
35
Oklahoma
0
1
0
20
Oregon
0
0
0
17
Pennsylvania
0
0
0
53
Rhode Island
0
0
0
0
South Carolina
0
0
0
39
South Dakota
0
0
0
1
Tennessee
0
2
0
34
Texas
0
1
1
124
Utah
0
0
0
8
Vermont
0
0
0
1
Virginia
0
0
0
34
Washington
0
0
0
27
West Virginia
0
0
0
9
Wisconsin
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Wyoming
0
0
0
5
Total
4
6
2
1,209
Table Four offers a more detailed analysis of the 1998 incidents involving women who used a handgun to kill a stranger in self-defense versus female handgun homicides. The female victims murdered with a handgun, as well as women who killed a stranger in self-defense, tended to be disproportionately black. According to the U.S. Census Bureau, in 1998 12.1 percent of the U.S. population was black.14 However, 42 percent of women murdered with a handgun and 75 percent of women who killed a stranger in self-defense with a handgun were black. Additionally, all the intruders that the women justifiably killed and an overwhelming number of the offenders in female handgun homicides were male. Finally, for both criminal and justifiable homicides, the majority of victims and offenders were of the same race.
Black - 75%
Other - 0%
TABLE FOUR
Women who used a handgun to kill a stranger in self-defense
Strangers killed by a woman with a handgun in self-defense
Women murdered with a handgun
Offenders who murdered a woman with a handgun
Number of people
4
4
1,209
at least 1,11015
Average age
32.0
24.0
34.5
36.2
Race (where known)
White - 25%
White - 25%
Black - 75%
Other - 0%
White - 55% |
Black - 42%
Other - 3%
White - 53% |
Black - 45%
Other - 1%
Gender | . | Male - 100% |
Female - 0%
. |
Male - 96% |
Female - 4%
Percent of incidents that were intra-racial16 | 50% | 92% |
Conclusion
Currently, only a small minority of adult American women own a handgun. Before a woman purchases a handgun for protection, she must pause to consider whether the grave riskin 1998, a woman was 101 times more likely to be murdered with a handgun than to use a handgun to justifiably kill an attackeris one she is willing to accept.
All contents © 2001 Violence Policy Center
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Agree with you about guns, disagree about car alarams. The latter are totally useless. In all the places I've lived, no one pays any attention to car alarms. All they do is create noise and annoy people trying sleep/work/relax/talk etc. They ought to be banned.
Also as Dr Glick proved in his research, guns are effective in stopping crimes just by being displayed. More victims repel criminals by displaying a gun than ever have to shoot.
For a full, detailed, serious study of the subject get "More Guns Less Crime" by Dr. Gary Klick it puts this BS to rest and shows it for the distortion it is.
But that's okay...if they want my guns, they're perfectly welcome to come try to take 'em.
Scouts Out! Cavalry Ho!
Why not? The American press completely ignores this factor too.The foiling of a criminal plot is good news. But
No news is good news, because good news "isn't news"
What's the solution?
Putting Occam's Razor to work. Occam's Razor is a theory wherein the simplest explanation has the highest probability of being the correct explanation. One example is the question: How can women better protect themselves from being rapped? Now, to put that question in context so that a person unfamiliar with firearms can grasp the answer via Occam's Razor:
Simple question for women (Or asked of a man in regards to his wife or daughter's safety.): If your were confronted by a criminal wanting to rape you which would you prefer?
1) A cell phone to dial 911. (Keep in mind that you'd have no defense to stop the rapist from ripping the cell phone out of your hand before you can dial 911.)
2) A hand gun that you were trained on to use in self-defense.
It should be obvious to the reader that honest, full-context statistics can answer the question. But we're dealing with irrationality, dishonesty and false-context/partial-context. Thus the reason for applying Occam's Razor as though both sides had equal weight. This has the added benefit of demonstrating how the side that is being deceptive uses statistics in attempt to defy common-sense logic.
Here's another example of Occam's Razor to work. This example regards the "war on drugs". The question needing an explanation is: Why has the war on drugs by all accounts failed to be won? Answer: That DEA has no motivation to reduce any drug problem. For, it has no desire to reduce its jobs or power.
Further edification:
If a person thinks they've harmed by a person's drug possession they can take the defendant to court and do their best to prove to an impartial jury that they/plaintiff had been hammed by that. The plaintiff would be lucky to convince a third of the jurors that they had been harmed by the defendant -- let alone convince all twelve jurors, which the plaintiff needs to obtain a guilty verdict.
Proof is simple and best expressed by a defendant's lawyer speaking to an impartial jury:
"Clearly the plaintiff and his lawyer have failed by all accounts to show any evidence -- failed to show even one single piece of evidence -- to support his claim that he has been harmed by my client's drug possession. The plaintiff's claim is wholly unsupported.
"Since supporters of the war on drugs have nothing but wholly unsupported claims they chose to harm people that possess drugs by enlisting government agents to initiate force on their behalf. That is, they are truly guilty of that which they falsely accuse others of -- initiating harm against a person that's minding his or her own business."
Then my daughter and I will be part of those 12 women. We're keeping our weapons!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.