Women's Fear of Random Attacks

Off Topic
261

[quote]Cockney Blue wrote:

The example of the woman alone in the house, hearing a noise. Her best course of action is probably to leave the property by another exit and call the police, regardless of whether she has a gun or not. However because she has a gun, she feels safe and powerful and confronts the suspected intruder.

Now there are a number of things that can happen, she shoots the intruder and now has to live with the trauma of having killed someone. She panics, freezes up and gets raped and murdered. She acidentally kills the family pet.

[/quote]

I don’t understand what you’re trying to say here. You make it sound like her rape and murder is as much her fault as her killing someone else. Or else you are saying that she should risk being raped and murdered as an alternative to possibly killing her dog. Or, basically, that no one should arm themselves because they might possible do harm to someone else, regardless of the fact that someone might do harm to them.

I’m not the most perceptive person in the world, but this paragraph just doesn’t read right.

262

no cops no criminals

no weapons no wars

it’s law

law of attraction :)))))))))))))))

we are WE are the one to make the world change! :))))))))))))))))))))))))))

good thoughts

LOVE, LOVE , LOVE…THAT’S THE KEY

we have to understand, that we are all the same!! we are equal, there is no separation

no different countries, races, religions, etc

we are all the same! when we do understand this and we love our next as ourselves, the world will be amazing

you can try in your own self… start loving, start seeing the beauty the love, unconditionally everywhere… you will feel good response from your gut.

Our emotions never lie

and LOVING is the most natural of the things

263

[quote]sluicy wrote:
I don’t understand what you’re trying to say here. You make it sound like her rape and murder is as much her fault as her killing someone else. Or else you are saying that she should risk being raped and murdered as an alternative to possibly killing her dog. Or, basically, that no one should arm themselves because they might possible do harm to someone else, regardless of the fact that someone might do harm to them.

I’m not the most perceptive person in the world, but this paragraph just doesn’t read right. [/quote]

Of course it is not as much her fault, the blame totally lies with the attacker however her choice of reaction to the situation may minimise the chance of it happening or exacerbate the situation.

By getting away from the situation instead of confronting it she is minimising the risk (this is not always possible.)

For the record I am not totally against responsible gun ownership, I just see it as a last resort whereas it seems from the responses on here that a number of people see it as the first resort.

I’m sure my reactions are different to someone in the US due to the different situations in which we grew up. I grew up in a country where gun ownership is effectively banned therefore I would naturally look for a different solution to a problem.

In the US you grow up indoctrinated with your ‘Right to bear arms’ which is seen by many as a responsibility to bear arms. Many of my friends who hale from the US and then spend time living outside the US are amazed at how their country is percieve abroad and how their understanding of that perception changes when they are viewing things from a distance.

I have had this experience when I spend time back in Britain or meet other British people on my travels.

264

[quote]Cockney Blue wrote:
sluicy wrote:
I don’t understand what you’re trying to say here. You make it sound like her rape and murder is as much her fault as her killing someone else. Or else you are saying that she should risk being raped and murdered as an alternative to possibly killing her dog. Or, basically, that no one should arm themselves because they might possible do harm to someone else, regardless of the fact that someone might do harm to them.

I’m not the most perceptive person in the world, but this paragraph just doesn’t read right.

Of course it is not as much her fault, the blame totally lies with the attacker however her choice of reaction to the situation may minimise the chance of it happening or exacerbate the situation.

By getting away from the situation instead of confronting it she is minimising the risk (this is not always possible.)

For the record I am not totally against responsible gun ownership, I just see it as a last resort whereas it seems from the responses on here that a number of people see it as the first resort.

.[/quote]

I really don’t think anyone is saying that having a gun is their first resort. It looks to me that what you just stated is what the other people are agreeing with.

265

[quote]EmilyQ wrote:
As for the rest of you, I started this thread thinking “yeah, it’s crazy to be worried about being attacked when I’m out running.” For me, much better to be worried about a broken leg.

And now I’m whipped up into a complete frenzy of fear over people whose throats I’m supposed to punch and bored kids with hunting knives. …

…I’ll be hiding under my bed for the rest of the day if anyone needs me…

[/quote]

You too? I havn’t gotten out of my bed since I first clicked on this thread.

266

[quote]tom63 wrote:
dcamnc wrote:
A female Officer that I work with (I’m a cop) told me the other day that she was scared to walk to her car when getting off…I politely reminded her that she was a Police Officer, with a Glock 37, taser, oc spray, ASP baton, and a police radio, walking in a pretty safe area. What more does she need to feel safe? Good grief.

Then why is she even a police officer.
[/quote]

This is slightly off topic, but follows along the same lines. Also, I must state that I have nothing against female officers at all.

Being 100% honest. Most females officers make great leos. The ONLY problem I’ve ever seen with them, is that most of them “freeze up” when stuff goes south. They make very good detectives, admin., SRO’s and so on. I’m not so sure some of them should be on the street though. This may bring heat from some of the members on this site, but I’m just relaying what I’ve seen for myself. Of course men too freeze up. My Sgt. being one of them. But in general the females GTFO when stuff turns bad for some reason. Again, I have nothing but love for women.

267

[quote]imhungry wrote:
I really don’t think anyone is saying that having a gun is their first resort. It looks to me that what you just stated is what the other people are agreeing with.

[/quote]

OK, let’s look at some of the direct quotes from this thread

2

3

4

5

[quote]
I’ve told her many times if she is ever attacked to simply empty all five rounds in the upper torso of her attacker.

At 5’3", 110 lbs., this gives her a clearly superior position in a violent confrontation that she is clearly likely to lose otherwise, no matter how much MMA/physical defense experience she may have. [/quote]

So where could I possibly have got that idea?

268

[quote]Cockney Blue wrote:
imhungry wrote:
I really don’t think anyone is saying that having a gun is their first resort. It looks to me that what you just stated is what the other people are agreeing with.

OK, let’s look at some of the direct quotes from this thread

Common sense and a .357 will end most attacks but mostly it’s the .357.

2

Nothing and I mean nothing empowers a woman more than effective training and carry of a weapon. It equalizes everything or rather places her in a superior position.

3

My future wife and daughter are both going to be the proud recipients of a .38 snub nose with the hammer sawed off.

4

In all honesty your guy would probably prefer to escort you everywhere, but that just isn’t realistic.

Might as well get them a gun.

5

I’ve told her many times if she is ever attacked to simply empty all five rounds in the upper torso of her attacker.

At 5’3", 110 lbs., this gives her a clearly superior position in a violent confrontation that she is clearly likely to lose otherwise, no matter how much MMA/physical defense experience she may have.

So where could I possibly have got that idea?[/quote]

Did they ever say that it was their first defense over not putting themselves in a bad position, being aware of their surroundings, etc? No.

The gun was an addition, not the end all, be all.

269

[quote]stefanogym wrote:

We experience what we think, so being in you I would stop thinking to those kind of things because as you think them you are attracting them and I would not be surprised if you would experience something someday.
[/quote]

That sounds dangerously close to “she had it coming.”

Do you seriously believe that every woman who has ever been raped was raped because she made a victim out of herself.

I cannot speak from experience, but I believe that rape is often such a shock because a victim does not expect it.

270

[quote]ctschneider wrote:
stefanogym wrote:

We experience what we think, so being in you I would stop thinking to those kind of things because as you think them you are attracting them and I would not be surprised if you would experience something someday.

That sounds dangerously close to “she had it coming.”

Do you seriously believe that every woman who has ever been raped was raped because she made a victim out of herself.

I cannot speak from experience, but I believe that rape is often such a shock because a victim does not expect it.
[/quote]

I totally think she was having a vibration that was low enough to be compatible with such event.
There is no other possibility, things happens for attraction at this world, it is a law, the law of attraction.

So when we generate a frequency that is particularly low we attract things that we do not want, and they can be a rape, an injury, a death…a shot, an iccedent…whatever…

those things cannot happen to someone who really is connected with source energy, who really lives the life holding positive thoughts all of the time, it can 't be, it is law!

271

[quote]imhungry wrote:

Did they ever say that it was their first defense over not putting themselves in a bad position, being aware of their surroundings, etc? No.

The gun was an addition, not the end all, be all.[/quote]

Seriously, you can read:

Common sense and a .357 will end most attacks but mostly it’s the .357

and surmise that the person does not see the gun as the first option?

I’m sure that post was in part tongue in cheek however it doesn’t exactly stray far from most non US people’s sterotype of Gringo’s as John Wayne wannabes with an itchy trigger finger.

272

[quote]imhungry wrote:
Cockney Blue wrote:
imhungry wrote:
I really don’t think anyone is saying that having a gun is their first resort. It looks to me that what you just stated is what the other people are agreeing with.

OK, let’s look at some of the direct quotes from this thread

Common sense and a .357 will end most attacks but mostly it’s the .357.

2

Nothing and I mean nothing empowers a woman more than effective training and carry of a weapon. It equalizes everything or rather places her in a superior position.

3

My future wife and daughter are both going to be the proud recipients of a .38 snub nose with the hammer sawed off.

4

In all honesty your guy would probably prefer to escort you everywhere, but that just isn’t realistic.

Might as well get them a gun.

5

I’ve told her many times if she is ever attacked to simply empty all five rounds in the upper torso of her attacker.

At 5’3", 110 lbs., this gives her a clearly superior position in a violent confrontation that she is clearly likely to lose otherwise, no matter how much MMA/physical defense experience she may have.

So where could I possibly have got that idea?

Did they ever say that it was their first defense over not putting themselves in a bad position, being aware of their surroundings, etc? No.

The gun was an addition, not the end all, be all.[/quote]

Agreed he quoted me twice but failed to include the posts where I said that running is the first option and best option.

And the only reason to have a gun is to make it easier to run away from someone who is potentially faster.

[quote]Westclock wrote:
Cockney Blue wrote:

Serious question here because I have no idea, but how easy is it to find a decent course taught by a competent instructor?

Are most courses good or is it like Self Defence courses where most of the available ones would leave you worse off than not taking them?

By themselves self defense courses serve only one real purpose.

To make the female more confident and practiced in what should come naturally.

Females are not as aggressive as males, and hence their immediate reaction is panic, fear, and generally fleeing. This is normal and very much the correct response if under attack by a male.

The classes teach you to run, to throw your purse, throw your keys, etc. And flee. It supposed to keep you calm so you make CORRECT decisions.

IF you cant get away immediately your supposed to go for soft spots, groin, eyes, neck, face.

Attacking these spots is intended to stun the attacker long enough to allow you to, again, run as fast as you can.

Its not so much “self defense” as a “how to punch a guy in the throat and run like hell”, class.

Which is the best decision.

The gun opens up a different option, instead of having to run from the guy and risk him catching you, or punch, kick, stab the guy in the eyes, when he tries to catch you…

You just open up on him with a .38 and then run like hell, if you hit him even once hes not going to be able to catch you.

And even if somehow you miss, hes not going to go after a chick who just shot at him, hes going to get out of there.

My future ladies are getting both a self defense course taught by my incredibly badass uncle who owns a martial arts studio.

But also the shaved .38’s from my grandfather.

[/quote]

273

[quote]stefanogym wrote:
I totally think she was having a vibration that was low enough to be compatible with such event.
There is no other possibility, things happens for attraction at this world, it is a law, the law of attraction.

So when we generate a frequency that is particularly low we attract things that we do not want, and they can be a rape, an injury, a death…a shot, an iccedent…whatever…

those things cannot happen to someone who really is connected with source energy, who really lives the life holding positive thoughts all of the time, it can 't be, it is law![/quote]

I don’t understand any of this.

274

[quote]pch2 wrote:
stefanogym wrote:
I totally think she was having a vibration that was low enough to be compatible with such event.
There is no other possibility, things happens for attraction at this world, it is a law, the law of attraction.

So when we generate a frequency that is particularly low we attract things that we do not want, and they can be a rape, an injury, a death…a shot, an iccedent…whatever…

those things cannot happen to someone who really is connected with source energy, who really lives the life holding positive thoughts all of the time, it can 't be, it is law!

I don’t understand any of this. [/quote]

I think acid would help.

275

westclock, I trawled back through this rather large thread for the quotes.

Sorry if I put something you said out of context by accidentally splitting it in half and not mentioning a later post.

But even you have to admit that your original post implied that if your man is not around to protect you, all you need is a gun.

276

[quote]stefanogym wrote:

those things cannot happen to someone who really is connected with source energy, who really lives the life holding positive thoughts all of the time, it can 't be, it is law![/quote]

So wait: if someone’s truly connected to an unidentified (or rather unidentifiable) “source energy,” then nothing bad happens to them. So how come no one has managed to circumvent the aging process? Did the 20 million Russians who died under Stalin just not have good enough vibes? How about the 6 million Jews who died in WWII? Or all the Chinese who starved to death during the great leap forward? And here, I thought that all those Native Americans died of smallpox because they weren’t resistant to it. It turns out that they hadn’t tapped into “source energy”… whatever that is.

277

[quote]pch2 wrote:
stefanogym wrote:
I totally think she was having a vibration that was low enough to be compatible with such event.
There is no other possibility, things happens for attraction at this world, it is a law, the law of attraction.

So when we generate a frequency that is particularly low we attract things that we do not want, and they can be a rape, an injury, a death…a shot, an iccedent…whatever…

those things cannot happen to someone who really is connected with source energy, who really lives the life holding positive thoughts all of the time, it can 't be, it is law!

I don’t understand any of this. [/quote]

Basically, it’s all your fault.

=/

278

[quote]ctschneider wrote:
stefanogym wrote:

those things cannot happen to someone who really is connected with source energy, who really lives the life holding positive thoughts all of the time, it can 't be, it is law!

So wait: if someone’s truly connected to an unidentified (or rather unidentifiable) “source energy,” then nothing bad happens to them. So how come no one has managed to circumvent the aging process? Did the 20 million Russians who died under Stalin just not have good enough vibes? How about the 6 million Jews who died in WWII? Or all the Chinese who starved to death during the great leap forward? And here, I thought that all those Native Americans died of smallpox because they weren’t resistant to it. It turns out that they hadn’t tapped into “source energy”… whatever that is.[/quote]

I think he explains all this stuff over in his physique thread.

279

[quote]Cockney Blue wrote:
imhungry wrote:

Did they ever say that it was their first defense over not putting themselves in a bad position, being aware of their surroundings, etc? No.

The gun was an addition, not the end all, be all.

Seriously, you can read:

Common sense and a .357 will end most attacks but mostly it’s the .357

and surmise that the person does not see the gun as the first option?

I’m sure that post was in part tongue in cheek however it doesn’t exactly stray far from most non US people’s sterotype of Gringo’s as John Wayne wannabes with an itchy trigger finger.[/quote]

Actually, I am partially retarded, but I can read pretty damn good.

Your perception and the reality are not the same. You do not live in the U.S, how can you make any kind of judgements on places that you’ve never lived?

280

How can you make any real judgement on places you have never lived outside?