Archive for March, 2006

A few music-related thoughts…

March 31, 2006

As Cactus Music & Video, Houston’s largest independent record shop, closes today, this runs in the Houston Chronicle:

Today’s closing of Cactus Music & Video on Shepherd has proved what we’ve all suspected: Independent music stores are dying. Fast.

The few independents left are neighborhood spots specializing in specific genres of music. Most are struggling because, although their niche customer base provides a steady clientele, they don’t get the volume needed to stay in the black.
“A few months ago we were thinking about closing,” said Clark Miles II, who runs Turntable II Records & Tapes on Fondren in far southwest Houston. “Man, it was ugly out here. It’s hard to stay in business if you’re a small shop.”
Hard because of the nature of the music business, Miles said. Major chains can secure enough inventory from record labels to allow for low pricing that undercuts the smaller record shops. Making matters worse, major chains also are given free copies in exchange for prominent display, which further increases profits.

And, of course, it squeezes out the good folks on the smaller labels, too, as the big-box stores by and large see fit only to stock music from the more popular artists out there, thus depriving the regional artists on those smaller labels the chance to have their music out there on the shelf for those of us lucky enough to hear it and would like to own it. The vicious cycle is turbocharged as terrestrial radio sees fit to ignore the regional artists on the smaller independent labels, save for a few hours on Saturday and Sunday nights here in Southeast Texas, for example. And this is driven by exactly the same thing that’s happened to the record industry — rampant corporatization (if that’s a word), that is, radio shifting from more regional companies to more nationwide, centralized companies that employ more of a one-size-fits-all approach. Just as the big-box stores (with few exceptions) see fit to stock only product from major artists, radio (with even fewer exceptions) sees fit to play only those major artists, which leaves a lot of good music falling through the cracks. I am as much of a capitalist as anyone, so I can’t fault the people in charge for actually wanting to make money, but I don’t understand, for example, why the folks who run country radio seem to think that the national audience for it would only like “country music” that comes from the Nashville-based labels. I know that’s what the consulting firms’ research says, but country radio’s declining ratings nationwide over the last few years, in tandem with country music’s decline in sales over roughly the same period, would seem to show that research is at least a little bit off the mark. I don’t see it changing any time soon, and that’s a real shame. I made a trip over to Cactus when I went to see George Strait at the rodeo, just to see what I could find, and I found about 40-plus copies (combined) of a few cds I’d gone looking for all over the Golden Triangle but had yet to find in Wal-Mart, FYE or Sam Goody. Before my plans to go to the rodeo, I’d considered making the trip just to buy those cds, but I am in a distinct minority as far as that goes, I am sure, with brick-and-mortar shops like Cactus being supplanted with direct Web marketing. That is a good thing for the artists on the small, independent labels like Houston-based D Records, but I don’t know whether satellite or Internet radio will be enough to make up for the exposure the independents don’t get on terrestrial radio. Only time will tell, but being a fan of the regional artists you can many times find only in the independent shops like Cactus or on the Web, I worry…

An excellent point, that will very likely go unaddressed

March 30, 2006

David Codrea, as is his wont, once again makes an excellent point in response to this:

“They were just kids,” Nicole laments in righteous indignation.

Two of them were. I have yet to hear those like Nicole asking what the hell grown men in their 20’s and 30’s were doing partying with 14 and 15-year-old girls instead of protecting them.

Why, Dave, it’s part of their CULTURE, don’t you know, you insensitive lout?
Seriously, though, I thought we once had a name for grown men in their 20s and 30s who partied with 15-year-old girls like this — pedophiles, or at least pedophiles in the making. And the fact that this sort of thing is not looked down on in the “rave culture” is, of course, another sign of its dysfunctionality. Of course, the multiculturalists among us will say, “don’t be so judgmental, you don’t know their mind-set, their customs are just as valid as ours,” though if you look at what the columnists are saying in the Seattle papers, it’s quite plain they’re passing judgment on all of us who think that mutant should be held responsible for his own actions and that the “rave culture” is what should be cast under the spotlight instead of some bullshit “culture of firepower.”

And, of course, David had the perfect reply to the idiot columnist who would claim to know what I as a gun owner would want or need:
“Hey Nicole: Molon Labe. What I told Sallie goes double for you.”

More Left-Coast Anti-Gun Lunacy…

March 28, 2006

from Robert Jamieson of the Seattle Post-Intelligencer

Don’t blame the rave scene for the Seattle’s worst mass murder in more than two decades.

Blame the guns — and a culture that celebrates firepower.

That’s right, ladies and gentlemen, this man is saying that you should blame the inanimate objects for the bad things committed with them, not the warped culture of what has come to be known as the rave, a wild party in which wild lighting and techno dance music are fused with all sorts of illegal drug use — LSD, Ecstasy, GHB (also known as “the date-rape drug”), cocaine, and methamphetamines. I suppose we shouldn’t expect much better, but still, it’s quite maddening. Culture that celebrates firepower? What kind of blue-state horseshit IS that? If there’s any culture that “celebrates firepower,” it would much more likely be whatever you’d call the culture that drug-addled, brain-fried ex-ravers belong to. I would look at a raver much more suspiciously than I would any member of the NRA or any other pro-gun organization or person, because the without exception, every gun enthusiast I have ever come across has the utmost respect for human life and the power of a firearm and would never use it on anyone unless their lives or well-being were being threatened. How dare these elitist ivory-tower jackasses implicitly point the finger at those of us who own guns and view gun ownership as a sacred, inalienable right and say it’s OUR fault that bad people do bad things with guns.

The uncomfortable truth is, the right to bear arms has become a right for lunatics to get tools of lethal efficiency and shoot up people.

No, Mr. Jamieson, the right to bear arms doesn’t include any kind of “right” to go shooting at people who don’t threaten you. So let’s just go ahead and burn that straw man right here and now. And the NRA and every other organization that you so unfairly paint with your broad brush would tell you as much. The uncomfortable truth is that we as a society are now paying the price for the wrongheaded policies of the would-be gun-grabbers driving home the message whenever they can that children must be kept away from guns at all costs. It’s been said before, but it surely deserves to be said again — there are many lessons, valuable lessons, to be taught with the bearing of arms, and the sanctity of life is one of them, as it’s hard not to respect that when you have something in your hands that enables you to so easily extinguish it. God only knows what prompted this mutant to do what he did, but maybe, just maybe, if when he was little, his dad or another trusted figure in his life had taken him out in the backyard to shoot tin cans off the fencepost with a .22, and gone from there, maybe he wouldn’t have gotten so far off the path that he’d so easily pick up a gun and shoot at his fellow man. There’s a hell of a lot to blame to go around here, no doubt…but a “culture of firepower” is a scapegoat, a figment of the paranoia-gripped gun-fearing wuss’s imagination.

The Capitol Hill slayings present an opportunity for people to talk about how our nation is overrun with guns, including high-caliber assault rifles and semiautomatics.

No. The Capitol Hill slayings present an opportunity for us to talk about the fact that we as a society have gotten far, far off the beaten path trod by our forefathers. There is much I could say, but Darrell Scott, the father of Rachel Joy Scott, one of the 19 students murdered at Columbine High School, said it so much better than I ever could

“In the days that followed the Columbine tragedy, I was amazed at how quickly fingers began to be pointed at groups such as the NRA. I am not a member of the NRA. I am not a hunter. I do not even own a gun. I am not here to represent or defend the NRA – because I don’t believe that they are responsible for my daughter’s death. Therefore I do not believe that they need to be defended. If I believed they had anything to do with Rachel’s murder I would be their strongest opponent.

“I am here today to declare that Columbine was not just a tragedy-it was a spiritual event that should be forcing us to look at where the real blame lies! Much of the blame lies here in this room. Much of the blame lies behind the pointing fingers of the accusers themselves. “I wrote a poem just four nights ago that expresses my feelings best. This was written way before I knew I would be speaking here today:

Your laws ignore our deepest needs, Your words are empty air. You’ve stripped away our heritage, You’ve outlawed simple prayer. Now gunshots fill our classrooms, And precious children die. You seek for answers everywhere, And ask the question “Why?” You regulate restrictive laws, Through legislative creed. And yet you fail to understand, That God is what we need!
“Men and women are three-part beings. We all consist of body, soul, and spirit. When we refuse to acknowledge a third part of our make-up, we create a void that allows evil, prejudice, and hatred to rush in and reek havoc. Spiritual presences were present within our educational systems for most of our nation’s history. Many of our major colleges began as theological seminaries. This is a historical fact. What has happened to us as a nation? We have refused to honor God, and in so doing, we open the doors to hatred and violence. And when something as terrible as Columbine’s tragedy occurs – politicians immediately look for a scapegoat such as the NRA. They immediately seek to pass more restrictive laws that contribute to erode away our personal and private liberties. We do not need more restrictive laws. “Eric and Dylan would not have been stopped by metal detectors. No amount of gun laws can stop someone who spends months planning this type of massacre. The real villain lies within our own hearts. Political posturing and restrictive legislation are not the answers. The young people of our nation hold the key. There is a spiritual awakening taking place that will not be squelched! We do not need more religion. We do not need more gaudy television evangelists spewing out verbal religious garbage. We do not need more million dollar church buildings built while people with basic needs are being ignored. We do need a change of heart and a humble acknowledgment that this nation was founded on the principle of simple trust in God!

Amen, Mr. Scott. Amen.

Leave me and my fellow gun owners and our culture alone, Mr. Jamieson. It’s your right to mouth off in your newspaper about things you haven’t a clue about, but as you have such a large audience, it would behoove you to learn more about that culture. What is it? It’s Kim du Toit’s “culture of liberty and self-reliance.” (thank you, Kevin Baker.) It’s a culture that, contrary to your paranoid delusions, bears and nurtures a deep respect for life, both ours and our fellow man’s — which is why many of us pack that 12-gauge with the pistol-grip in the closet in case some mutant, who would so cavalierly extinguish human life, comes calling at 2 in the morning. It’s a culture of which I am proud and deeply honored to be a part of. I hate that you don’t understand it. I do so wish you would make a better effort at it. Both you and your readers would be much better off.

Morgan Spurlock Can Go To Hell

March 28, 2006

I always did think filmmaker Morgan Spurlock had at least a couple of screws loose, but I never knew he was such a Super Size Asshole.

The filmmaker who ate nothing but McDonald’s meals for a month for his Oscar-nominated film “Super Size Me” gave a profanity-laced, politically incorrect speech at a suburban Philadelphia high school, but not everyone was lovin’ it.

Speaking at Hatboro-Horsham High School’s first-ever health fair, Morgan Spurlock joked about the intelligence of McDonald’s employees, about “retarded kids in the back wearing helmets” and teachers smoking pot in the balcony.

Judas Priest. It just doesn’t get much more despicable than that. I guess it’s easy to look down on other people when you make truckloads of money, but to make fun of some of the most vulnerable people in society is just beyond the pale. You know what would be great? If people who pulled crap like that actually had to walk in those kids shoes, for an indeterminate amount of time,fully cognizant of the fact that they had once been, for lack of a better term, just like everyone else. Let them see what it’s like to be stared at, pointed at, made fun of. Retarded. What a load. I bet most of those kids that jackass referred to as “retarded” would know, without some idiot filmmaker telling them, that eating fast food all the time is bad for you.
Do I take that sort of thing personally? Damn skippy I do…because but for the grace of God, it could have been me. I don’t know the stories of those kids at the school at which Spurlock appeared, but I’d almost be willing to bet that one of or two have a full-blown case of what I have — cerebral palsy. The doctors took care of business in time for me to to come out of it not too bad off, but I was left walking with a limp and having limited use of my right hand…and that’s the extent of it. I still lead a full, normal life…go to the beach and get drunk, ride on an inner tube behind a boat, I am a decent shot with a pistol from 15 yards…I am indeed quite blessed. Most people with what I have can’t take care of themselves, much less be independent and lead a normal life. And they, and every other person who was born with some sort of mental or physical defect, deserve better than to be made fun of by some asshole who, but for the grace of God, could have been walking in their shoes.

Hey Kimber, We Like Your Guns in the Lone Star State, Too…

March 27, 2006

From the Orange County Shooters Assn. (h/t Alphecca):

NY has some of the most repressive gun laws of any state including an Assault Weapons Ban and registration of all handguns but that is not good enough for anti-gun Sheldon Silver, and anti-gun rights groups. Several bills, some written by gun haters from Washington D. C. and California, have passed the NY Assembly that would have a severe impact on gun owners and close all gun stores in NY.
One bill requires all gun stores to close if they do not have a million dollar insurance policy that does not exist and will never be offered by insurance companies. Another bill requires that guns have a 10 lb trigger pull but the worse bill is the new “Assault Weapons Ban” that would require registration of many common rifles and shotguns and end the sale of new firearms that fit this very broad definition and totally ban many competition handguns.
…We don’t know how much this new long gun registration scheme will cost but NY City first registered all long guns for a small fee of $25 then started raising fees so it now cost $140 for a 3-year license and after several years, certain long guns, even if they were registered, were banned. NY City Handgun licenses cost $344 every three years and are not valid in the rest of NY State.

Perhaps as the word of this odious bill gets out, Kimber (and any other NY-based gunmaker) will follow the lead of the Illinois gun manufacturers and threaten to pull up stakes and leave the Empire State if this bill passes. I don’t know if any other manufacturers are based there, so the economic impact of their departure might not be enough to make them sit up and take notice. We’ll see as the time goes on. I know that if it were my company, I would be doing my level best to get the hell out of there, though I know that’s not always a viable option and would not hold it against any gun manufacturer who decided to stay where they were. But, once again, if anyone in Yonkers is listening, Texas is a great place…heh.

Yet another reason gunnies need to be on guard at all times…

March 27, 2006

Yet another example from the Houston Chronicle, though, in fairness, they were merely reporting on someone else’s bat-guano interp. of the 2A…

Leave the interpretation to the pundits.

That was the motto of Cathy Travis, the longtime spokeswoman for Rep. Solomon Ortiz, D-Corpus Christi, while writing her first book, Constitution Translated for Kids.

She said some people who have seen the book dislike her handling of the Second Amendment — “A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.”
The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that the original intent of militia just means the National Guard, she wrote.
The guys on the left want to know why I didn’t make it clear that only the National Guard can have guns,” she said. “The guys on the right are unhappy with me including the phrase about the militia. In politics, when both sides are unhappy, you’ve hit it straight down the middle.”

mmmk, boys and girls, it’s off to the races, yet again…
I’d say she has the leftists more or less pegged. It’s leftists and Democrats (Gun Control Act of 1968, anyone?) who have been agitating for more “gun control”, well, in at least in the years since the thugs at HCI and all the other gun prohibitionist organizations, and their ideological soulmates, started rearing their ugly heads on Capitol Hill and statehouses across the fruited plain.
As for “the guys on the right (being) unhappy…with (her) including the phrase about the militia,” well, she has it partly right. It’s not so much the inclusion of the phrase as it is an incomplete explanation of it. Had Travis been more complete, she would have included the fact that the National Guard was established some 150 years AFTER the Second Amendment was ratified, thus throwing into question the wisdom of the Supremes’ rulings on original intent. She would also have informed her reader that, according to the United States Code, the “militia” is defined as all able-bodied males ages 17 and older — NOT the National Guard. And then, of course, there’s the fact that the rights enumerated in the other nine amendments in the Bill of Rights have all been taken to be individual — not collective — rights. It would seem that the Second Amendment is seen as the lone exception. I know well what Warren Burger has said about the 2A, the treasonous sack of guano, but it is the interpretation of the Second Amendment as a collective right that is the biggest — and arguably the most dangerous — fraud ever perpetrated on the American people. And for Ms. Travis to sit there and pat herself on the back, saying she has it split right down the middle, seems to me to be just so much shameless self-aggrandizement. Such should be expected from those cretins on Capitol Hill, but still, it’s maddening just the same. Misinformation to the left of us, deception to the right, here we are, stuck in the middle, and it’s a hell of a place to be, and not in a good way…

Control of Language = Control of Debate; or, Handgun or Defensive Sidearm?

March 25, 2006

Not many who come to my humble corner of the blogosphere know this — in fact, I don’t know if any do — but in addition to being a gun owner and enthusiast, I am a writer as well. As such, I am keenly aware that much of what argument consists of is the way certain things are referred to, what they’re called; for example, as I’ve said before, there are those who would say my little Ruger 9mm semi-auto pistol is an assault weapon because of its 15-round magazine and the fact that I can reel off shots with it pretty rapidly because of its relatively low recoil. And, of course, we all know what kinds of images the term “assault weapon” conjures up. In other words, you can basically control the debate by controlling what language is used, that is, what terms are used in the debate. I was thinking about this today, as I was at work, making money for my next gun. 😉 I saw this little tidbit on one of my daily reads the other day, from


Dihydrogen monoxide is colorless, odorless, tasteless, and kills uncounted thousands of people every year. Most of these deaths are caused by accidental inhalation of DHMO, but the dangers of dihydrogen monoxide do not end there. Prolonged exposure to its solid form causes severe tissue damage. Symptoms of DHMO ingestion can include excessive sweating and urination, and possibly a bloated feeling, nausea, vomiting and body electrolyte imbalance. For those who have become dependent, DHMO withdrawal means certain death.

Dihydrogen monoxide:

  • is also known as hydroxl acid, and is the major component of acid rain.
  • contributes to the “greenhouse effect.”
  • may cause severe burns.
  • contributes to the erosion of our natural landscape.
  • accelerates corrosion and rusting of many metals.
  • may cause electrical failures and decreased effectiveness of automobile brakes.
  • has been found in excised tumors of terminal cancer patients.

Contamination is reaching epidemic proportions!

Quantities of dihydrogen monoxide have been found in almost every stream, lake, and reservoir in America today. But the pollution is global, and the contaminant has even been found in Antarctic ice. DHMO has caused millions of dollars of property damage in the midwest, and recently California.

Despite the danger, dihydrogen monoxide is often used:

  • as an industrial solvent and coolant.
  • in nuclear power plants.
  • in the production of styrofoam.
  • as a fire retardant.
  • in many forms of cruel animal research.
  • in the distribution of pesticides. Even after washing, produce remains contaminated by this chemical.
  • as an additive in certain “junk-foods” and other food products.

Companies dump waste DHMO into rivers and the ocean, and nothing can be done to stop them because this practice is still legal. The impact on wildlife is extreme, and we cannot afford to ignore it any longer!

The American government has refused to ban the production, distribution, or use of this damaging chemical due to its “importance to the economic health of this nation.” In fact, the navy and other military organizations are conducting experiments with DHMO, and designing multi-billion dollar devices to control and utilize it during warfare situations. Hundreds of military research facilities receive tons of it through a highly sophisticated underground distribution network. Many store large quantities for later use.

In 1997, Nathan Zohner, a 14-year-old student at Eagle Rock Junior High School in Idaho Falls, based his science fair project on a report similar to the one reproduced above. Zohner’s project, titled “How Gullible Are We?”, involved presenting this report about “the dangers of dihyrogen monoxide” to fifty ninth-grade students and asking them what (if anything) should be done about the chemical. Forty-three students favored banning it, six were undecided, and only one correctly recognized that ‘dihydrogen monoxide’ is actually H2O — plain old water.

It’s all in the language, you see. And while this may be an extreme example of language manipulation — a reductio ad absurdum, if you will — its lesson still stands: you can get the people to go along with just about any idea if you use the right language.
Which brings me to the issue of firearms, once again. We all know well the tripe peddled by HCI, the Violence Policy Center, etc., about how, “guns ‘r bad, m’kay?” And, of course, they’re always talking about those eeevil “handguns” (ooooh, a gun that’ll fit in your HAND!) and how they’re good for nothing but death and destruction. Well, we know which way the cost-benefit analysis goes vis-a-vis crimes committed with handguns vs. good things being done with handguns; that is, the benefits of civilian handgun ownership far, FAR outweigh the costs. So, taking into consideration the good things that happen because of civilian handgun ownership (i.e., the approximately 2.5 million-3 million defensive gun uses per year), in place of the term handgun, let us instead plug in the term defensive sidearm. To wit:

Every Defensive Sidearm Is Aimed At You: The Case for Banning Defensive Sidearms — book by Josh Sugarmann, VPC executive director — one of VPC’s myriad hysteria sites

“I hate defensive sidearms. Defensive sidearms are used to shoot people and as long as they are around, people will shoot each other.” — Daniel Craig, the new James Bond

“If we allow (law-abiding) citizens to carry defensive sidearms in public, blood will flow in the streets.” — NOT an actual quote, but it sums up perfectly the gun prohibitionists’ position on any type of concealed carry

And there are a thousand more examples where those come from; the ones above put in rather stark display the utter lunacy of the gun prohibition movement. But here’s one more, just for good measure:

“It is said that a total ban on defensive sidearms, including .22s, would take away innocent pleasure from thousands of people…Is that more or less pleasure than watching your child grow up?” — Sean Connery, in an ad on the BBC, after the Dunblane massacre

Would that the disarmament lobby in Britain had been so up-front. Had Connery actually used that term, it might have been more clear to the British that what they were giving up was a hell of a lot more than just “innocent pleasure.”

Perhaps if we could get the terms of the debate changed — at least that particular term — we could turn the focus of the debate from the guns to the people doing bad things with them. We do not have an epidemic of handgun violence in this country. We have an epidemic of bad people using defensive sidearms for things they were not intended to be used for. And maybe if we could get the focus on the bad people who commit the crimes, and get the public to wake up to the benefits of defensive sidearm ownership, we might just be able to make some positive steps toward cutting down on violence perpetrated with guns. Thoughts from readers?

Carnival of Cordite No. 52

March 25, 2006

…is up at Gully’s place, parts 1 and 2, double the goodness in honor of the carnival’s 1-year anniversary! Much gunnie goodness contained therein, check it out!

Equal Treatment for All…Even Retired Cops

March 25, 2006
From today’s San Diego Star-Tribune:
The 2006 San Diego County Fair opens June 10, and still unresolved is whether off-duty law enforcement officers can carry their weapons inside the fairgrounds.

Off-duty law-enforcement officers routinely carry their weapons and are expected to respond to a disturbance or other situation. Fairgrounds officials are concerned that an off-duty officer responding to an incident in civilian dress could pose a threat to other officers and to the public’s safety.

The Deputy Sheriff’s Association of San Diego County and the San Diego Police Officers Association, along with the police officers associations in Escondido and Oceanside, disagree.

“An off-duty officer should be able to carry weapons anywhere,” said James Duffy, president of the deputies’ association. “We’re an asset to public safety.”

Jeff at Alphecca makes this comment:

These anti-gun types actually consider off-duty cops to be a threat to public safety! Folks, if I was one of those cops, I’d be posted day and night outside the fair, and the organizer’s homes just waiting for some traffic violation.

I’d also be so insulted that I’d make sure that if a call or alarm went out from either, I’d first stop at the nearest Krispy Cream to fortify myself before answering the call.

While I have a hard time arguing with that, I also have a hard time justifying letting retired law-enforcement officers carry but not California concealed-carry permit holders, even if federal law says to let retired peace officers carry. The deputies may well be an “asset to public safety,” but so, too are the people who go through the arduous process to get their license to carry — and that’s been shown to be the case in pretty much every state that has gone to shall-issue, in the form of lower rates of certain violent crimes after the respective states passed their concealed-carry laws. It would be wise to let the retired peace officers carry, I think — but it would be wrong not to let concealed-permit holders do the same. I know, I know…they have special training civilians don’t, they have more experience with their firearms, andonandonandon (and actually, that last thing isn’t always the case)…but it reeks of favoritism, and elitism too. Such isn’t exactly rare in California when it comes to how civilian gun owners are regarded vs. the good folks behind the badges, but still, it’s wrong, and Californians should not stand for it…but, of course, they probably will…

Hammer, Meet Head Of Nail

March 22, 2006
Clicking through old posts over at SayUncle a moment ago, I ran across this quote:

…telling someone else they’d be better off going to a shelter, or buying a can of mace, or one of those dandy little whistles – that is a nearly criminal lie. Preventing, or helping to prevent a woman from acquiring the knowledge, licence, and tool she needs for effective self defence – well, as far as I am concerned that is “accessory before the fact.

Yes, yes, yes! Shout it from the rooftops, run ads saying this in every medium, put it on billboards from Long Island to Long Beach! It just can’t be said any better than that, although I am tempted to go a little further and say that anyone who discourages a woman from getting the aforementioned knowledge, license and tools for effective self-defense would be a borderline accessory before the fact. Someone once told me that they’d rather their daughter be raped and deal with the aftermath than give her a gun (or even suggest the option, let alone encourage it) and risk an attacker taking it from her and using it on her. And that is something I just cannot fathom, even from a gun-fearing wuss. I guess this is a little personal for me, as my life and the life of someone I once knew would be completely different now, if she had taken the lethal-force route on her sadistic ex-boyfriend. Still, however, I believe with every fiber of who I am that 230 grains of prevention (administered at 850 feet per second) beats 230 tons of cure (administered any way), every time. I once saw a figure from a study that said a woman uses a gun to stop a rapist on average about 416 times a day, or an estimated 152,000 times a year. How many more could be prevented if every woman armed herself?
Once again…there is no such thing as an armed victim.