About five years ago I binge watched every episode of Grey’s Anatomy, and have kept up with the show ever since. They’ve gone down the political road before, like many “brave” TV shows, but last night Grey’s Anatomy went after women, and shamed those of us who enjoy an evening stroll without the paralyzing fear of those who will gladly take advantage of the weaker sex. I can smell their sanctimonious – “We’re going to get attacked, but we’re doing the right thing!” – mock worthy martyrdom from here.
Usually I take a good 48 hours to breathe before venting, but this subject is so simple and stupid-proof that, quite honestly, anyone with an IQ greater than that of a cantaloupe should be able to gather their thoughts rather quickly. And, well, I’m irritated and feel like writing.
The episode began with a dramatic crisis – per usual – and the team gathers in wait of the approaching ambulance. An eight year-old has been shot by his friend who got a hold of his mother’s gun, which they overemphasized was locked away. The doctors rushed the child to the operating room, and then began to have the following discussion:
Alex: So, his mom just had a gun laying around.
Owen: She said she had it locked up.
Amelia: The mom should be locked up.
Owen: Well, she might be. It could involuntary manslaughter if…
Alex: Don’t even say it. It’s not gonna happen.
Amelia: Do you own a gun?
Owen: No. No. No, I, uh, fix bullet holes. I don’t make them.
Jo: I just mean you’re in the Army. I imagine…
Owen: Well, you need one in the Army. You don’t need one here.
Amelia: Well, every day, someone’s kid is in an O.R. With a gunshot wound. Every single day.
Alex: When are people gonna learn? It just makes things worse.
Amelia: And people always say they need one for protection. They don’t.
Now, I had a slight glimmer of hope when Jo, one of the surgical residents, informed the group that she owned a gun for her own safety. I briefly thought to myself, “Hey! Maybe they’re going to at least give a proper two sided debate!” Of course the rest of the team began to “mansplain” about how she will more than likely have the gun used on her… because nothing says “empowerment” like being told by men that you should willingly be an easier target because the superior sex will probably wind up with the upper hand anyway. The funny part about this is that the characters immediately faded away, and all I pictured were a bunch of elitist actors and actresses with bodyguards telling women like myself that we’re irresponsible for protecting ourselves instead of hanging up the rapist “Welcome!” sign for the good of their ivory tower conscience.
Unfortunately, my glimmer of hope was destroyed. Near the end of the show, Jo gives a dramatic explanation about her childhood, and how she was homeless and living in her car when she purchased the weapon.
Jo: I lived in my car when I was 16 years old. Every night, trying to fall asleep, I would listen to the voices–people going by, people who had nothing going on, nothing going for them, nothing to lose, scared to death that they would break in and take my stuff, take me. This gun made me feel like I had something, something on them. But then, today, that little boy will never walk again.
Alex: Jo, he’s still alive.
Jo: Barely. You know, back then I, I didn’t value my life all that much, but it’s different now. I’ve outgrown this. I don’t need it anymore. I don’t want it.
Ahhhh, there’s the meat and potatoes, friends. If you are an independent woman who uses a weapon for self-protection, you don’t value your life all that much. If you shed said weapon from your life, you’ve “grown.”
Let’s take a moment and talk about real women who value their life.
Amanda Collins valued her life. Amanda Collins had a handgun that she was trained to use and, as a bonus, was a CCW license holder. Amanda Collins was a law abiding citizen, which included following her campus weapon laws. In 2007, Amanda Collins was raped at gun point between two vehicles in a parking garage on campus – in a gun free zone. This particular parking garage was chosen by a very careful Collins because she felt as though she would be safe. You see, this garage housed the campus police cruisers, and the campus police themselves were roughly 100 feet away from where the rape took place.
Forced to remain unarmed, Amanda Collins was brutally attacked at gun point in that parking garage, and her attacker would go on to make national news after he was found guilty of the highly publicized rape and murder of 19 year-old Brianna Denison, a beautiful young woman – who I’m assuming valued her life, as well – disappeared in January of 2008 and was found in a field, carelessly disposed of, in February.
Amanda Collins later testified in front of the Nevada Assembly:
Collins stated that she remains confident in the knowledge that at some point during her attack, she would have been able to use her weapon had it been on her person. Amanda Collins is a real person. Brianna Denison is a real person, and she’s buried in Mountain View Cemetery in Nevada. Jo Wilson is not a real person facing the dangers that everyday women in America face, she’s a character played by Camilla Luddington. Countless real women are raped daily in the United States, and we are – by far – the most targeted demographic for violent sexual crime.
As I noted in a previous post, the arguments used by gun-control advocates are not only based in skewed stats and manipulated data, they’re demeaning and dehumanizing. They pretend as though women are items unworthy of the most sensible and effective means of protection available.
“Women should know the facts, we shouldn’t just smile and nod when someone puts a handy phone up on campus while they pretend like it’s going to do us any good, like women can just say, “Hold that thought, Jeffrey Dahmer, I need to go over there and use the phone that those swell administrators put up for moments like this.” Because we all know that those morally sound psychopaths normally give women a phone-a-friend before making them a statistic. We shouldn’t agree with a man that hands us a ballpoint pen to use as protection against an attacker, and we should ask if that man would give his own daughter a ballpoint pen as a means of protection. We as women should not sit idly by while bureaucrats legislate our safety and have the audacity to tell us to pee ourselves to deter potential rapists. And the women that push such degrading ideals onto other women should have to turn in their feminist card to be burned and buried, never to be resurrected.”
This is that part of the program where gun-control advocates tell me that America still has more rape and murder than other civilized societies, including the UK, which contradicts the idea that guns save women a lifetime of trauma, or a lifetime lost.
However, here’s the rub:
Women need to educate themselves and fully understand the incredibly important differences between the US and the UK definitions. Our criminal system encompasses a large variation of crimes under broad descriptions, we are unique in this way. Unfortunately, gun-control advocates have used this to their advantage. So, in the United States, let’s say you meet a drunk girl at the bar and take her home, if she doesn’t appreciate your savvy pick-up tactics during her inebriated state the next morning, it is defined as rape. If you are 18 and have consensual sex with a girl 1 year younger, and Daddy gets mad, it is rape and you spend your life on a sexual offender registry. Crime definitions per country are vastly different, and it is almost impossible to get an accurate comparison. By far, the United States has more blanketed definitions, which leads to our higher crime rate.
If you look under the UK legal definition, they are very strict on what they consider to be “rape,” yet the US – as mentioned above – has a much broader definition. I won’t go into incredibly graphic detail (I’m pretty sure you know how to use Google), but rape in the UK is defined by simply a forceful penetration of one person on another, the legal definition of rape in the US includes anyone who commits an unwanted sexual attack. This includes threats, coercion, picking up a drunk girl, sexual attack with an item, statutory, etc… If you tell a girl that you love her to coerce her into bed, you’ve committed rape in the United States, and if she reports it, it goes in the stats even if you don’t face conviction. Most countries have not evolved in this aspect. Not only is the definition for rape different, so is the definition for murder. Homicides in the UK are calculated differently. Since 1967, the UK calculations exclude any cases that do not result in conviction, as well as suicides and cases prosecuted under the grounds of self-defense. We do. If Chicago alone – where a vast number of homicides go unsolved – were not calculated, our numbers would take a dramatic nosedive.
Perspective: In 2012 we had 14,827 homicides, only 7,133 arrests were made for those homicides. The number of convictions are even less. SO, If we JUST went by that one change alone, our murder rate would easily be cut in half.
Additionally, female gun ownership has had a dramatic increase according to the most recent data. At the same time, rape has dramatically decreased. In 1992, 42.8 women out of 100,000 were raped, in 2014, that number was down to 26.4. The problem with the “you’re more likely to be murdered by a gun than saved by one” theories – like those perpetuated by Hollywood elitists – is that you can’t possibly measure one side of the argument.
Back in 1982 and 1983, the U.S. Department of Justice paid Professors James D. Wright and Peter Rossi of the Social and Demographic Research Institute at the University of Massachusetts to conduct a study on 1,874 imprisoned felons in 10 states. Wright and Rossi both had presuppositions in regards to gun-control, mainly that it deterred crime. However, by the end of the research, they came to the conclusion that just the knowledge of an armed populace deters crime.
Some of their findings:
- 81% of interviewees agreed that a “smart criminal” will try to determine if a potential victim is armed.
- 74% indicated that burglars avoided occupied dwellings, because of fear of being shot.
- 57% said that most criminals feared armed citizens more than the police.
- 40% of the felons said that they had been deterred from committing a particular crime, because they believed that the potential victim was armed.
Dr. Gary Kleck, an award winning criminologist, has also done various studies on the impact of guns in the United States. Kleck is a registered Democrat who, to the best of my knowledge, does not own guns, nor accept money from either side of the debate. He has testified before Congress and state legislatures in regards to gun-control, and his extensive library of research was cited in the Supreme Court case involving D.C.’s handgun ban.
Kleck’s 1994 research concluded that in 1993, there were roughly 2.5 million incidents of defensive gun use, compared to roughly 0.5 million gun related crimes. The study found that roughly 46% of the defenders were females, and less than 25% of the total cases presented involved the defender firing their weapon. The majority of the time, merely the knowledge of a gun’s existence was enough to stop the crime. The estimations were drawn from the National Crime Victimization Survey.
In 1995, Marvin E. Wolfgang, known as ″the most influential criminologist in the English-speaking world,″ had this to say concerning Kleck’s research:
“I am as strong a gun-control advocate as can be found among the criminologists in this country. If I were Mustapha Mond of Brave New World, I would eliminate all guns from the civilian population and maybe even from the police. I hate guns-ugly, nasty instruments designed to kill people. […] What troubles me is the article by Gary Kleck and Marc Gertz. The reason I am troubled is that they have provided an almost clearcut case of methodologically sound research in support of something I have theoretically opposed for years, namely, the use of a gun in defense against a criminal perpetrator. Maybe Franklin Zimring and Philip Cook can help me find fault with the Kleck and Gertz research, but for now, I have to admit my admiration for the care and caution expressed in this article and this research. […] The Kleck and Gertz study impresses me for the caution the authors exercise and the elaborate nuances they examine methodologically. I do not like their conclusions that having a gun can be useful, but I cannot fault their methodology. They have tried earnestly to meet all objections in advance and have done exceedingly well.”
Of course various critics have come out of the woodwork, mainly because the data is difficult to measure. We don’t have rape kits, body bags, or toe tags to count. We have survivors who may not even be aware that they’re survivors. It is impossible to count the crimes that would have been, or to inventory the empty graves. Those who perpetuate the idea that women who own guns are more likely to die from them than be saved are committing the informal fallacy of argumentum ad ignorantiam; they are assuming their point is true because it is impossible to be proven as false.
We do however have two pertinent facts: We currently have more guns than ever before, and our crime rate – as a whole – hasn’t been this low (per capita) since 1967.
United States Population and Rate of Crime per 100,000 People
This particular Grey’s Anatomy episode also made sure the mother insisted that her gun was locked up, and that the kids picked the lock. Of course there are bad gun owners out there, just like there are bad drivers, and bad parents in general. However, the vast number of gun owners are responsible. My nephews live in a house with a handgun safe that requires an adult sized hand for the code, and when tampered with sets off an alarm. My own weapons have a locked safe, and my guns get dismantled and cable locked inside of said safe when my nephews are visiting. We also teach them gun safety and a healthy level of fear; my 9 year-old nephew would be the first to yell at you – and walk out of the room – if he saw you mishandling a weapon.
We are never going to rid the world of stupid parents. Tragedies occur because of irresponsible parenting, not because of inanimate objects. The parents who leave a gun in a shoe box are right up there with parents who throw their two year-old in a vehicle without a car seat, or give their 16 month-old toddler whole grapes and uncut hot dogs. Additionally, the “epidemic” gun-control advocates try to convince you of is really not an epidemic at all. Educated gun owners have worked tirelessly to secure their weapons and teach gun safety to their kids, more so now than they ever have. Gun manufacturers have developed fingerprint safes, gun locks, and programs that teach kids a healthy level of fear and respect for firearms – and it’s working.
According to the statistics, when you remove intentional homicide and suicide, the number of unintentional firearm fatalities has dropped by 58% since 1991. Falling behind accidents involving a motor vehicle, poisoning, falls, suffocation, drowning, fires, environmental, other forms of transportation, and struck by/against object. Children under 14 are much more likely to drown, choke, be accidentally poisoned, etc., than they are to die of accidental gun fire. Since 1990, unintentional firearm related fatalities with children 14 and under have dropped by 74 percent, despite the fact that guns now outnumber people in the United States, and manufacturing has more than doubled.
Just to give you a snapshot of how much the gun industry has grown, in 1990 the United States manufactured 3,959,968 guns and in 2013, despite the war on guns the left has waged, we manufactured 10,844,792 guns. Meanwhile, exports have remained fairly steady at 361,625 and 393,121, respectively. We have more guns, more concealed carry permit holders, and lower crime rates.
Of course, Grey’s Anatomy won’t tell you such facts. Instead they’ll vilify women who refuse to live their lives in fear. The alleged “war on women” is not found in ridiculously false pay inequality rhetoric, in a lack of free contraceptives, or in the random catcall. No, the war on women is found in the fight to manipulate women into being easier targets.
I haven’t outgrown my guns, Grey’s Anatomy, I’ve outgrown the way you vilify women who refuse to be victims.