Take enough facts, stack them just right, turn them this way or that, maybe trim the corners a bit, and before long you have a huge untruth.
The premise here is that when a woman is assaulted, it’s frequently by somebody she knows. Okay, I’m told that’s true. If she shoots that person in self-defense, the cops/prosecutors/etc will gaze upon her case with a jaundiced, predatory eye. Also possibly true. Therefore, guns are bad. Uh…huh? No, really. That’s the logic. Much better for a woman to just let herself be assaulted.
Here’s another one:
This is an “interview” article about a woman who wrote a book proving that – you guessed it – guns are bad. The author makes some facile observations about the medieval development of English common law which may or may not be true, notes with alarm that the rule of household self-defense applied to “specifically white, male, property-owning citizens,” and through a series of logical gyrations comes to the shocking, unexpected conclusion that guns are bad. Or at least self-defense with guns is bad. And American self-defense with guns is really bad.
I think there’s a kind of alchemy of different power structures that conspired to turn the United States into a place that celebrated a particular kind of heroic, white, frontier ruggedness, and capacity to spread from sea to shining sea through manifest destiny.
White people with guns! And so you see guns are bad.
Hey, I just read this shit so you won’t have to.