Called 911, but no one came in time

[tattedupboy]

Whoa, and would you say that if she had been a he? I think not. Properly trained, no one sets their gun down or drops it, male or female. Sorry, try again!

Would it have made you feel better if had had said "he," or been gender neutral? The fact is, the victim was a woman, and that's why he she "she.' I'm certain he didn't intend to be sexist.

[magicman007]

The police in Los Angeles pretty much agree that they cannot protect and serve as their motto suggests. It's up to us, folks, to protect and serve ourselves!

And this will only get worse. With the economy the way it is, governments are scaling back so they don't go bust too. That means less vehicle patrols, less OT for officers, less visibility, less perceived safety. And now they (Obama and friends) want to take way our personal protection too!?!?! WTF!?!?!?!?

[Boomboy007]

Considering that Wisconsin has made CC illegal, I wonder what the response time would have been for someone calling in to say that they might have seen some "joe blow" at McDonalds with a gun in his pocket. One of you guys (I forgot who) has as a sig line which is my new best argument when talking with my local gun snatching proponents: When seconds count, the police are only minutes away.

Now we know exactly how many minutes we are talking.

[gdcleanfun]

Okay, granted that maybe you didn't mean to be sexist. But, how many males would have set the gun down? I think, none. When I read your post it reminded me of the posts I've read that said that women would have the guns taken from their hands so they shouldn't have pistols for self-defense. I just think that with the proper training neither men nor women would have the firearms taken from them, and neither would set the gun down in the midst of self-defense. That is not the thing to do, that's obvious to me, and hopefully to you, and to all who want to be defensive.

[Glock Fan]

Okay, granted that maybe you didn't mean to be sexist. But, how many males would have set the gun down? I think, none. When I read your post it reminded me of the posts I've read that said that women would have the guns taken from their hands so they shouldn't have pistols for self-defense. I just think that with the proper training neither men nor women would have the firearms taken from them, and neither would set the gun down in the midst of self-defense. That is not the thing to do, that's obvious to me, and hopefully to you, and to all who want to be defensive.

I've seen many men and women put their firearms down in "defensive" sitations. I do a lot of firearms training with military, civilians, and law enforment. You would be amazed to hear what I've seen. Very disturbing in some situations. Gun grabs are always the scariest.

Don't get too hung up on what others say about women and guns. I took it as the article was written about a woman, hence the "she" reference. Rest assured that both men AND women do things that they shouldn't be doing in a "defensive" situation.



gf

[capo2186]

I feel terrible for this victim and her fiance. This is so tradgic! This is why people need to armed to defend themselfs.

[HK4U]

You hear sometimes of someone having their gun taken away and used on them. That tells me two things. First they let the perp get to close and second they were not mentally prepared to pull the trigger.

[KimberPB]

Okay, granted that maybe you didn't mean to be sexist. But, how many males would have set the gun down? I think, none. When I read your post it reminded me of the posts I've read that said that women would have the guns taken from their hands so they shouldn't have pistols for self-defense. I just think that with the proper training neither men nor women would have the firearms taken from them, and neither would set the gun down in the midst of self-defense. That is not the thing to do, that's obvious to me, and hopefully to you, and to all who want to be defensive.

gdcleanfun I don't think he meant it in any sexist way. I think he was just pointing out that just because you have a gun does not mean you have a free pass to survive an encounter like this, man or woman. This is one of the main reasons I carry an extra mag and sometime a bug. Not only do I have a few more rounds but if I have a malfunction the other mag will come in handy.

Example. In the past three year I've only had this happen to me once but he is what I think he was talking about. After a long day of work and running around afterwards I get home, take my holster off, set it on my cafe table, and to my surprise the mag had popped loose. I'm sure if I were to have drawn it the mag would have dropped out the mag well and if not after the first shot it would have. Luckily, I didn't need it that day and I did have an extra mag that would have cured the problem quickly. It doesn't matter if you’re male or female mechanical devices break and fail. I think that’s all he was getting at.

[FreedomsAdvocate]

gdcleanfun,

Not to beat this to death, and fully admitting that I could have been more specific in my examples of not having either the weapon or the will when it is needed, none of that goes to the point I was describing (poorly; from the responses it has received ) Every security situation is based on a layered defense. Partly to mitigate a lucky or well prepared threat, and partly to mitigate Murphy's law. To use a male example , take mine for home security:

Layer One: I live in a gated neighborhood; if the threat gets through the security for whatever reason,
Layer Two: My home is always locked and we have a peep hole; if they get through that for whatever reason,
Layer Three: I have two dogs that bark their fool heads off for all kinds of noises I can't even hear; if they get through that for whatever reason,
Layer Four: 911 is on speed dial and rarely is anyone home alone; if they get through that for whatever reason,
Layer Five: we have weapons strategically located around the house, and everyone in the family practices with them regularly and knows where they are.

Any one of these layers can fail, even several, but unless they all fail--for whatever reason or combination of reasons--we have the ability to defend ourselves and our property. As you increase the number of layers, the probability of the success for the BG goes down.

Having a weapon in her case--since the 911 layer failed for whatever reason--would have increased the probability of her survival.

My whole point: the more layers you have, the likelihood of a catastrophic failure is reduced.

The sex of the victim matters not at all.

[gpbarth]

My home security is equally as layered, and I would hope that long before I had to shoot someone, they would give up trying to get into my home. Truth be know, and I think most up here would agree wit hme, I really don't look forward to blowing someone away, but I also feel that if given a reason, I wouldn't hesitate to pull the trigger. I'd rather just not have anyone try to assault my home, period.