Does anybody else think the whole, "if only they had a gun" mindset is victim blaming?

Every time there is a shooting, conservatives and the NRA, say this rather than mourn the victims. I fail to see the logic in this other than using it blame the victims of gun violence. Someone explain this.


2|1
6|15

Most Helpful Guy

  • I agree with you.
    And besides that, it's also a stupid statement because having a gun doesn't necessarily mean you can defend yourself. I can think of tons of scenarios where a gun would be worth shit. Take the guy in Nice who drove a truck into a crowd of people. Now, how're you gonna stop that guy eh? Gun nuts would of course yell "I would shoot him right through the windshield!" Well, smartypants, that's actually what the police tried to do. If you look at photos of the truck, they shot the windshield about 8-9 times. Yet, the guy continued his killing spree as though nothing happened.
    Considering that on top of that, people were standing in a large crowd where you can't escape easily (which leads to mass panic) and you're probably more focused on jumping out the way or saving your girlfriend etc. when a big truck approaches you with 80 km/h, it's just silly to spew all that cowboy bullshit. Maaaaybeee if you are a trained police officer or soldier with years of experience, you might be able to react well in such a situation but EVEN THEN it's unlikely because reality always feels different from exercise. For example when you're a soldier and you go into battle, you know what awaits you. You know there's gonna be people shooting at you and you can prepare yourself physically, emotionally and mentally. When you're out on a romantic evening with your girlfriend/boyfriend or your kids to watch some fireworks, you don't expect a guy to run you over with a truck. 99% of those gun fanatics who boast about their balls of iron would shit their pants in such a situation just like anyone else would. Not because they're cowards but because it's the natural human reaction. There have been multiple public shootings in the US where some of the victims actually did carry guns (such as in the movie theater in Aurora) but did not use their gun to kill the crazy dude. And there's a reason for this. If you go to have a fun evening and watch a movie, you don't expect someone to suddenly open fire on you. And if you're lucky and you don't get shot in the head during the first 5 seconds, the only thing you're probably thinking is "what the fuck is happening? Is this some kind of joke? Where is this coming from?"
    Most of those NRA guys imagine themselves stand up in this extra cool terminator-style way, put on some sunglasses (while being shot at of course), dropping a cool line and then killing the crazy guy single-handedly. However, that's not how reality works.

    1|0
    3|3
    • You have a very cartoonlike view of things about which you know nothing.

    • Show All
    • @gotc147 I comprehend them still about a thousand times better than you do because contrary to you, I actually read up on stuff. You just feel all snobby and pretentious because you've got a gun at home, so you think you're entitled to call strangers uninformed. Well here's a memo: owning a table doesn't make you an expert on carpentry.

    • You clearly do not read up on stuff, at least not on this topic because if you did you'd see that the numbers you threw out don't stand up to much scrutiny.

      *I* did my homework on the issue, *I* am the informed one. You simply confirmed your bias, you didn't ask about external variables, you didn't ask why Chicago and Washington DC have such ridiculously high murder rates despite strict gun control, you didn't ask why rural areas where gun ownership is high have so much less crime than urban areas, where gun ownership is low, you didn't ask how often people successfully defend themselves with a gun, you didn't ask why every catagory of crime is at historic lows in the US despite the number of guns in civilians hands increasingly drastically, you didn't ask anything. You might have checked another website that parroted the same old tired half-truths you parrotted here, but you didn't actually challenge them.

      And that, is why you are wrong on the issue.

Most Helpful Girl

  • No, I don't agree that it's victim blaming and it's also not true that conservatives don't mourn the victims. It's possible to mourn the tragedy of the loss of life while also acknowledging that people have the right to defend themselves. That doesn't mean having a gun will 100% ensure nothing bad ever happens, but it's better than having nothing and being utterly defenseless against a criminal. If someone chooses to attack me, I'd rather not make it easy for them, I want to be able to defend myself.

    Wanting people to be able to protect themselves is not victim blaming... most conservatives and the NRA want people to NOT become victims. There's nothing at all wrong with promoting the concept of self-defense and it doesn't mean we aren't mourning the loss of life that occurred.

    2|2
    0|0
    • I am talking more about extreme examples. I once heard a reporter say that if the Stanford rape victim had a gun she could've prevented her rape. That pissed me off because she was unconscious. I also heard a guy rant about if someone at the Orlando night club had a gun, they could've prevented the Orlando shooting. That's an awful thing to say to the victims families. Nobody can have a gun on them 24/7. Especially because laws in Florida prevent someone from having a gun in a nightclub. Which nobody thinks to bring a gun to night club. I certainly wouldn't. Guns and alcohol don't mix.

    • Show All
    • @SvetlanaSavachenko That's true. Which is why so many conservatives are against gun-free zones in general. Most mass shootings happen where people *can't* defend themselves because legal firearms aren't allowed.

    • @xHoneyxBeex I'm against gun free zones too. That's where all the tragedies occur yet the liberals answer to the problem is take away the guns of the responsible citizens. I'm of the impression now the liberals are communists who are trying to take away the country from "We The People".

What Guys Said 14

  • It's not victim blaming. They think everyone should have the right and ability to defend themselves. There's a difference.

    I think nobody should have guns but then I'm not American so the culture I live in has a different attitude.

    6|1
    2|1
    • I am talking about extreme examples. I once heard a reporter say that if the Stanford rape victim had a gun she could've prevented her rape. That pissed me off because she was unconscious. I also heard a guy rant about if someone at the Orlando night club had a gun, they could've prevented the Orlando shooting. That's an awful thing to say. Because laws in Florida prevent someone from having a gun in a nightclub and nobody thinks to bring a gun to night club. I certainly wouldn't. Guns and alcohol don't mix.

    • The examples you give are more of people being stupid then making real arguments. If you're unconscious then your ability to defend yourself is no more improved by having a weapon then without one. Saying "give them guns!" makes no sense at all.

      The one about the club is the same as the NRA said about teachers - armed people can kill an attacker and limit damage. Not the way I'd agree to deal with guns but it's not without merit.

      Since the Dunblane school massacre even hand guns are banned here. I wouldn't change that. I also don't think that's the answer for America. Way too many guns in your country. There needs to be a middle ground and work towards more limits.

  • It's not victim blaming. They just believe that everyone should have a right to defend themselves. It's different than blaming the victim for not having one.

    2|1
    1|0
  • I think there's a difference between "If they'd had a gun they might have survived, but they were prevented from carrying, which is a tragedy" like the NRA and such seem to say and "It's their own fault for not carrying a gun". Whether or not carrying a gun would have saved a victim's life none of us can really say but I think it's important to note the distinction between noticing something they COULD have done and declaring it something they SHOULD have done

    1|0
    0|0
  • No it's not.

    Does anybody else think the whole "preparing for worst case scenario = victim blaming" mindset is virtue signaling?

    1|0
    0|0
    • I get conservatives want to prepare for the worst situations but I still think saying, "if your husband/wife/son/daughter etc had a gun they wouldn't be dead." Is an awful thing to say.

    • yeah that is a dick thing to say for sure.

    • And don't think I am bashing guns. Just yesterday I shot an AR-14. It was fun until a guy, called the range nazi assumed I was going to kill everyone.

  • self defense has nothing to do with victim blaming.

    3|1
    1|0
  • I think it's a fucked up marketing campaign by the gun companies, and it's sad that so many people are falling for it.

    1|0
    0|0
  • 1. They should indeed mourn, it's a fucking death not an opportunity
    2. If nobody were concealing and carrying then these things wouldn't be fucking happening, NRA. You're protecting against yourselves.

    1|0
    1|0
    • 1. Democrats make no tike for mourning after such tragedies, they go to push their agenda right away.

      2. That is utter nonsense and completely made up.

    • Show All
    • Funny, I was thinking you finally started to understand the insanity of your position on the issue... Such a shame.

      Oh well, when you grow up maybe then you'll see.

    • @gotc147 Roight well agree to disagree, I'm off.

  • The better way to think is "if only guns were hard to get hold of and nobody had them this would be waaaaay less common". But y'know, Americans aren't known for their brains.

    2|0
    1|2
    • That mindset has proven to be incorrect many times.

    • Show All
    • @gotc147 Whatever you say pumpkin!

    • Show me the webpage, it's basic ethic.

  • It is not victim blaming, they are just stating that a civilian with a gun could stop the shooter faster than cops.

    2|0
    1|0
  • When the police respond to a shooting, they don't show up with nothing but water balloons and hope. They come armed because that's what an effective response looks like. That's what the "if they only had a gun" mindset means. You don't see it that way, but your interpretation, as explained in your question, is wrong.

    0|0
    2|0
    • I am talking about civilians not cops. Cops are trained how to respond, while civilians are not.

    • Show All
    • It's like saying a victim of heat exhaustion would be alive, if they had water with them.

    • of course it can't help in all situations.. but it gives you a better percentage of survival.

      nothing is a guarantee. you could die in 5 minutes and so could i.

  • it's pretty simple.. you either want to take control of your own life... or you're relying on others to do it for you.

    0|0
    0|0
  • its not blaming as much as it is a cry for more guns

    0|0
    0|0
  • I wouldn't say its victim blaming but I don't live in the US.

    0|0
    0|0
  • They were defenseless, so yeah, if they only had a gun then more of them would be alive. Absolutely! Just like having a defibrillator around when someone has a heart attack, the right tool at the right time will save lives.

    0|0
    0|0
    • I am pro gun and even if I had a gun, I would probably shit myself if a bad guy with a gun walked in.

    • But at least you would have a chance. As they say, training takes over, adrenalin helps, time slows down and you just seem to know what to do. Otherwise, you are in no worse shape anyway.

What Girls Said 5

  • No it's not victim blaming. It's blaming the state/county/city for not allowing the carrying of firearms by those with a permit to carry.

    1|1
    0|0
  • Why would you throw fire at a ball of fire to put out the fire? This is what I think of the mentallity that a gun would have helped someone in one of these cases.

    3|2
    1|2
    • Exactly. I am pro-gun but honestly even if I had a gun, and a bad guy with a gun walked in, I don't know how I would react. There are sick people out there and to them, that could be a game.

    • Show All
    • why are you still on the freezing up topic? i said.. after sufficient training you wouldn't freeze up...

      we're not talking about other people we're talking about you..

      are you telling me you'd still carry a gun knowing you'd freeze up when its' time to use it?

    • @orphan exactly I would probably still freeze. I don't know how I would react in a situation like this. If I had a gun with me at least I have a chance. I know we are not talking about other people. That's why I said, "I".

      again is it my fault if I freeze up not the gun mans?

  • ... I have yet to see any conservatives say "if only they had a gun". And I know quite a few conservatives, myself included...

    1|0
    0|0
    • Thats weird. I know a lot of conservatives who believe this. Then again I live in a very conservative county. Or they say a variation of this.

    • Show All
    • It certainly gives conservatives a bad name. I am pro gun and I think saying, "if you're son/daughter/wife/husband etc had a gun on them, they wouldn't be a victim" is an awful thing to say.

  • Yep. They can't possible expect everyone to have a gun on them at all times. This isn't a zombie apocalypse but that would be the NRA's wet dream.

    1|0
    1|1
  • It is definitely victim blaming

    1|0
    3|2
Loading...