On May 13, 1996, an article entitled "Why Feminists Should be Trigger Happy" appeared in The Wall Street Journal. The article was written by an attorney in Washington, D.C., Laura Ingraham. Her theme was that feminists ought to be applauding the new wave of women who were buying guns, many for self defense. Instead, she says, this apparent empowerment of females has been ignored, even disdained, by feminist leaders. Of course, as Rush Limbaugh so rightly points out, the feminist leadership in no way today represents the views of most women.
Well, Ms. Ingraham's article apparently elicited a large response from the readership of The Wall Street Journal - if the number of letters printed is any clue. One letter from Lori A. Tirbaso, of Chagrin Falls, Ohio, seemed to me to be the stereotypical letter we see so often from the anti-gun lobby. It was replete with misstatements of fact, reliance on discredited research, and some very naive talk about how women should just walk away from domestic violence.
So, taking to my keyboard, I dashed off a letter to The Wall Street Journal. I also included several pages of documentation about the discredited study on guns which appeared in "The New England Journal of Medicine" and some facts to buttress most of the statements in my letter. On June 26, 1996, my letter appeared in The Wall Street Journal.
As a former Federal agent who enforced the gun laws and who has studied gun crime for 35 years, I find particularly distressing the June 4 Letter to the Editor from Lori A. Tirbaso in response to Laura Ingraham's May 13 editorial page essay "Why Feminists Should be Trigger Happy."She says two-thirds of attacks on women are by someone known to them and suggests leaving the hostile environment. In the meantime, I wish to posit a new rule which I will call "The 230/230 rule." It is: "A 230 grain .45 caliber hollowpoint bullet fired by a 110 pound woman will neutralize the attack of a 230 pound man." Even after some women finally do leave abusive relationships, they are often stalked - and beaten or killed. Again 230/230.
Ms. Tirbaso seems to suggest that the high incidence of assaults against black, Hispanic, and low income/educational levels is somehow irrelevant. How's that? Is it okay to beat, rape, and murder them with impunity? She talks about the study in the New England Journal of Medicine regarding guns. That study, and others of its ilk, have been soundly discredited.
She speaks about the increased chances of a gun being used against the one who carries it. Not really. Less than 1% of armed citizens are disarmed by criminal assailants. And, U.S. Department of Justice statistics show (1993 stats) that of those who resisted a violent criminal assault, 67.2 percent helped their situation, while only 8.4 percent hurt the situation. Dr. Gary Kleck of Florida State University has estimated (bases on sound research) that handguns are used each year 1.9 million times for protective purposes.
If all the Lori's of this country would sit down for an hour with my friend Dr. Suzy Gratia, whose parents were shot in the Luby's Cafeteria massacre, they might change their view. If they would read Paxton Quigley's book, "Armed and Female," they might see the light. Paxton was a militant anti-gun activist. She helped John Glenn found the National Committee for Handgun Control. After years of seeing the failure of gun control, she did a dramatic 180-degree turn. In her book, she tells the story of a woman who was abducted and thrown into the trunk of a car. During the ride, the man kept yelling to her the things he was going to do to her. He stopped and opened the trunk. The lady victim emptied her handgun, aiming at the abductor's chest. End of story.
Richard C. Rhodes
Honey Grove, Texas
One paragraph in my letter was not included in the published version, probably due to space limitations. It was:
Texas finally got the message and passed a concealed-carry law. Now, Dr. Suzy Gratia can legally carry her revolver. Little solace that is to her when she visits the graves of her parents.
Only because I know Suzy quite well did I feel comfortable in saying the above. For those who may not remember the story, Suzy was having lunch with her parents in Luby's in Killeen, Texas. A madman crashed his pickup truck through a side window and began shooting people. Suzy saw her parents killed in front of here and herself escaped through a window when someone crashed the glass with a chair. Her revolver was in the car, because she did not want to jeopardize her Chiropractic license by carrying a concealed weapon.
After the essay ran in the WSJ and the responses were printed, Mike Royko, a syndicated columnist, whose home newspaper is the Chicago Tribune, wrote a strong column in favor of women carrying guns. He quoted from the original WSJ essay and from the letters in response to the essay. Now, he has my letter in response to one of the letters of response. I doubt that mine will be the last word. My only hope is that those who jump in will bring with them some facts and not rely on the worn-out platitudes and misinformation that has been spewed by Sarah Brady and other anti-gun activists for many years. It all sounds so convincing - until you hold the candle of truth behind it. Then, you can see the candle burning brightly behind the transparent arguments and the bogus studies and statistics.
A national TV program recently ran a segment about stalking. They indicated that there were about 200,000 cases of stalking a year, with hundreds ending in violence or death. The case of Kathleen Baty was highlighted. Kathleen has been stalked for a long time. Her husband is Greg Baty, a tight end with the Miami Dolphins. Even he is unable to fully protect her. He cannot be there all the time, especially with the road games the team plays.
Back to the list of Topics in this Section
Richard C. Rhodes June 27, 1996