Comments on: Venus, get your gun.

Venus, get your gun.

tizzie — Fri, 20 Apr 2007 05:32:03 -0800

I support gun control, but for 82-year-old Miss America Venus Ramey, I make an exception. The first redhead and the only native Kentuckian ever to be Miss America, she's pretty fearsome with a snub-nosed .38.

By: DU

DU — Fri, 20 Apr 2007 05:40:05 -0800

She had to balance on her walking stick as she pulled out a snub-nosed .38-caliber handgun. At least she was using a safety.

By: psmealey

psmealey — Fri, 20 Apr 2007 05:42:04 -0800

Sounds like she had pretty good gun control to me.

By: srboisvert

srboisvert — Fri, 20 Apr 2007 05:49:01 -0800

Let me get this straight. She fired a gun not in self defense and this is being applauded. The guy's vehicle was right there with license plates on it and she would have been able to identify the thief. Tizzie not only do you not support gun control you don't even support responsible gun use.

By: Plinko

Plinko — Fri, 20 Apr 2007 05:52:21 -0800

One 82 y/o female with limited walking capacity versus three adult males? And you're scolding her for defending herself with a handgun? Right.

By: dabitch

dabitch — Fri, 20 Apr 2007 05:53:54 -0800

She shot his tire. I say she's a good, and wise, shot on top.

By: peeedro

peeedro — Fri, 20 Apr 2007 05:58:33 -0800

Where's the swimsuit photo?

By: mendel

mendel — Fri, 20 Apr 2007 06:04:28 -0800

Tizzie not only do you not support gun control Ok, I'll bite. How can you tell?

By: prostyle

prostyle — Fri, 20 Apr 2007 06:10:18 -0800

Penning a post with a laudatory leading quip mired in your personal contradictory opinion is certainly marvelous form. I'd expect you all would do well to remember this lesson when you're scrambling to flesh out the next news item from the Cincinatti Enquirer.

By: phooky

phooky — Fri, 20 Apr 2007 06:10:35 -0800

For every story about a tough, uppity old geezer defending their property from today's namby-pamby youth, there's a dozen about some old dude stabbing someone in the throat. I applaud this nice lady's spunk and verve and think that someone should take that gun away from her.

By: srboisvert

srboisvert — Fri, 20 Apr 2007 06:17:26 -0800

Ok, I'll bite. How can you tell? Because it is clear that tizzie doesn't. I support gun control, but is yet another of the "I support x, but not x" that is getting so common here. She had his car blocked in, there is no indication that there had been any threat of violence and having caught the thieves in the act she didn't even need to detain them since she could identify them. So an 82 year old with precarious balance fired a handgun one-handed at a car. There could have been people in the car, she could have missed and hit someone. How good is her eyesight? Remember this is all to protect some old junk in a barn not a life. If you support shooting a gun in this case there really can't be many scenarios you wouldn't support so why claim you support gun control?

By: pax digita

pax digita — Fri, 20 Apr 2007 06:18:10 -0800

Gun control? Good range safety and careful aim.

By: chuckdarwin

chuckdarwin — Fri, 20 Apr 2007 06:19:34 -0800

Cute story. I'm not sure we really want gun-toting octogenarians, though.

By: psmealey

psmealey — Fri, 20 Apr 2007 06:19:38 -0800

This is a farking great link though, it even employs proper use of the HERO(ine) tag.

By: CitrusFreak12

CitrusFreak12 — Fri, 20 Apr 2007 06:22:22 -0800

Yes, because you linked to an article about an old woman using a gun to aid in the capture of criminals who had been robbing her for quite some time, it is quite clear that you do not support gun control, so you should go ahead and stop lying to us. I'm from the internets, man, don't mess.

By: Balisong

Balisong — Fri, 20 Apr 2007 06:22:43 -0800

Guns don't shoot out tires, beauty queens with guns shoot out tires!

By: miss lynnster

miss lynnster — Fri, 20 Apr 2007 06:27:20 -0800

Well personally? I think she kicks ass. Period. The key point here is NOBODY GOT HURT. She blew out tires. She didn't aim for their kneecaps. She protected herself and caught them in the act to make life simple for the police. From personal experience I can tell you that if they'd driven away, even with a license plate they quite probably wouldn't have been caught. I caught three people stealing my dad's car red-handed once & even with all of the license information & description of the thieves they still never arrested anyone. PLUS, just the simple fact that I was an unarmed female who suddenly found herself alone with three male criminals put me in a Hell of a lot of potential danger. You never know what desperate people will do to stay out of jail. It's hard for most men to relate to just how vulnerable women feel to potential violence against us, but every woman knows exactly how that feels. We know we are physically weaker and we can't do anything about it. Most women wouldn't handle that situation with as much confident kickassitude at 22, let alone 82.

By: miss lynnster

miss lynnster — Fri, 20 Apr 2007 06:29:42 -0800

[Not a fan of guns. Just a fan of old women with balls who don't allow themselves to be easily victimized.]

By: DU

DU — Fri, 20 Apr 2007 06:30:48 -0800

...because you linked to an article... No, it's because an exception was made for a situation for which an exception should not be made. That said, I think the intro sentence was just a rhetorical device.

By: Plinko

Plinko — Fri, 20 Apr 2007 06:32:59 -0800

If she had damaged the tire in some other fashion, would you be equally incensed?

By: Kirth Gerson

Kirth Gerson — Fri, 20 Apr 2007 06:34:16 -0800

So probably only women should be allowed to have guns. Or only old women. Or only old beauty queens. Or something.

By: MrMustard

MrMustard — Fri, 20 Apr 2007 06:35:25 -0800

Erm, nothing in the article actually confirms they were stealing from her. So she's allowed to shoot at anyone she suspects is stealing from her? She sounds like a bit of a batty old woman to me. And, as a general rule, I'd prefer it if batty people didn't have guns. By the way, is this where we finally get to have the gun control debate?

By: lysdexic

lysdexic — Fri, 20 Apr 2007 06:36:26 -0800

*mounts hobby horse* She's by herself on a farm, not in a crowded urban environment. Now why she doesn't have a way to call 911, I don't know, but this would fall under "responsible gun use". *puts hobby horse away*

By: lysdexic

lysdexic — Fri, 20 Apr 2007 06:46:21 -0800

Shoulda previewed. Why not, MrMustard? Lets do. Gun control is about controllng access to dangerous weapons to be sure that the irresponsible don't get them, and doing our best as a society to see that everyone obtains a measure of self-control. She fired a warning shot. If they'd been armed, she could very likely have taken them out, since she already had beat them to the draw. Remember the old lady who took out three cops who'd burst into her home by mistake? Who had the self control there and who didn't?

By: Karmakaze

Karmakaze — Fri, 20 Apr 2007 06:46:42 -0800

Erm, nothing in the article actually confirms they were stealing from her.

She asked them what they were doing, and they told her they were there to haul away scrap metal from her property without her permission. That's what "scrapping" is. You don't think that qualified as confirmation of theft?

By: HuronBob

HuronBob — Fri, 20 Apr 2007 06:48:00 -0800

Wow, we didn't even hit the weekend before someone posted a link to a story to make us feel warm and fuzzy about handguns....... I feel much better about this week's events now.... Thanks

By: Kirth Gerson

Kirth Gerson — Fri, 20 Apr 2007 06:48:39 -0800

Mr. M, she shot at a tire, not at a person. The guys admitted to her they were taking her stuff. The three men were arrested, so at least the cops were convinced they were stealing. lysdexic , it sounds like the tools were stored in a remote outbuilding - she had to drive there. No phone in that building, and lots of old people don't have cell phones.

By: veronica sawyer

veronica sawyer — Fri, 20 Apr 2007 06:49:43 -0800

Erm, nothing in the article actually confirms they were stealing from her. So she's allowed to shoot at anyone she suspects is stealing from her? She shot out their tires--not at them. It wasn't some sort of Serpentine, Shelly, serpentine! scenario.

By: psmealey

psmealey — Fri, 20 Apr 2007 06:49:46 -0800

So she's allowed to shoot at anyone she suspects is stealing from her? The article is pretty vague, but the part that seems at least pretty clear is that she wasn't shooting at anyone. From the account, she drove down to the shop, and blocked the truck with her car, and then she shot the truck's tires out.

By: Aloysius Bear

Aloysius Bear — Fri, 20 Apr 2007 06:52:09 -0800

Remember the old lady who took out three cops who'd burst into her home by mistake? Who had the self control there and who didn't? Um, the old lady? I'm sure cops bursting into your house is a pretty unpleasant experience, but it hardly justifies shooting them!

By: IronLizard

IronLizard — Fri, 20 Apr 2007 06:55:16 -0800

Um, the old lady? I'm sure cops bursting into your house is a pretty unpleasant experience, but it hardly justifies shooting them! In areas where home invasion robberies are common, it's perfectly understandable.

By: lysdexic

lysdexic — Fri, 20 Apr 2007 06:55:18 -0800

Um, the old lady? I'm sure cops bursting into your house is a pretty unpleasant experience, but it hardly justifies shooting them! Cripse, now I have to find the link. It was a drug bust gone bad - they came in based on shitty information, breaking down the door, shouting and armed to the teeth. She pulled out her revolver and took three of them out before they gunned her down. 'cept my google-fu is gone, and I've got to go to a meeting. have fun y'all!

By: BeReasonable

BeReasonable — Fri, 20 Apr 2007 07:05:02 -0800

From the article, "For some time, thieves had been breaking into the building to steal the machines to sell for scrap. She hadn't been able to catch anyone in the act until last week." Obviously, innocent until proven guilty and etc., but here in Kentucky, getting a tire shot is a light penalty for stealing from a farmer. Also, I'm willing to wager an aged farmer isn't going to be walking around with a cell phone handy. I still think she's pretty cool. Although, I think Old Grandma Hardcore is cooler and these two live pretty close to each other. Maybe they could get together for tea and target practice.

By: HuronBob

HuronBob — Fri, 20 Apr 2007 07:06:39 -0800

"have fun y'all!" talking about unnecessary death is seldom fun...... What say we have a contest... I'll post a link to the story about the local kid here who was shot this week by his best friend when they found dad's loaded handgun and were playing with it.... one dead, one living with guilt the rest of his life, two families destroyed.. Then someone can post the fun link about the old lady that gunned down three cops .. Then we'll post another link about some child losing his or her life... oh, wait, don't forget to post something about VT.... And on and on and on... We'll see who runs out of links first and they will be the winner, and this whole fucking gun control debate will be settled right here on metafilter!

By: chuckdarwin

chuckdarwin — Fri, 20 Apr 2007 07:13:44 -0800

HuronBob - read this

By: IronLizard

IronLizard — Fri, 20 Apr 2007 07:17:24 -0800

talking about unnecessary death is seldom fun...... No one was talking about unnecessary death, or any death for that matter. Unless you're talking about the poor, deceased tire. I imagine the goodyear family isn't taking this as well as we are.

By: tizzie

tizzie — Fri, 20 Apr 2007 07:19:59 -0800

Once again, folks, you are overthinking a plate of beans. This is an 82 year old lady who lives alone on a farm, shooting out the tires of a bunch of thieves near her barn, out in the hills of Kentucky where there is no reliable cell phone service and no instant-response 911. Yes, I live in Kentucky, in an urban area, and I don't have a gun and I wish none of my neighbors did. But are Ms. Ramey's actions ok with me? Hell, yes.

By: IronLizard

IronLizard — Fri, 20 Apr 2007 07:21:01 -0800

Oh, and my step-father had a snub nosed .38, I was lucky to hit a tree at ten feet with it. Somebody give that lady a nice .40 cal or magnum.

By: winks007

winks007 — Fri, 20 Apr 2007 07:22:37 -0800

Heros do heroic things regardless of the consequences. This woman has a right to protect herself and her property. She excercized her right. If you don't like it, don't go around trying to take advantage of little old ladies. I gotta admit, she's alot nicer than I would have been in the same situation. When guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns. I can buy 3 guns off the street way faster, cheaper than going by the book to purchase/register one from a licensed vendor. Gun control laws are only applicable to those who obey the laws. Way to go, granny!

By: HuronBob

HuronBob — Fri, 20 Apr 2007 07:24:05 -0800

IronLizard.. read that little link that chuckdarwin posted for us... you may not agree with the politics, but the statistics are pretty grim and probably beyond dispute.. and... Chuck...thanks

By: psmealey

psmealey — Fri, 20 Apr 2007 07:25:16 -0800

Cool... more bumper sticker slogans than you can shake a stick at.

By: miss lynnster

miss lynnster — Fri, 20 Apr 2007 07:30:30 -0800

In my mind, I'm picturing that she lives on a somewhat remote farm. Having lived in big cities, I've always been very very anti-gun. When I visited my brother on his farm in Michigan, I saw that he has quite a few guns around the property & I got upset about it. We got into a big discussion about it because he didn't see why I had such different feelings about them. While I still hate guns, my brother did help me to understand that his opinion on them was different due to his environment. In a big City, guns are mostly used by criminals or to commit violence against people for personal reasons so I personally believe they should only be carried by police. But in the country though, people feel that there are practical reasons for owning a gun since people need to protect themselves against animals. Also, since sometimes there are no police anywhere around for many many miles, people keep them for emergency safety. Gun owners in the country also seem to have had a lot more target practice and training on how to handle a gun responsibly than their counterparts in the City. YMMV, but that's been my observation. I'm assuming that Miss America probably doesn't own a cel phone. My mom is 80 and she doesn't want anything to do with one. I'm also assuming there possibly wasn't a phone line hooked up in the barn. Since people had been stealing from her for years and she had never caught them, it sounds like the barn is far removed from the main house so she has to drive a bit to get to it. It also sounds as though she lives alone and is just trying to do so in peace. Add all of that up & it would make sense that she owns a gun for safety, because from my experience many people living in her situation out on a farm DO. And if she's been on the farm that long, I'm also imagining that she probably has had experience with gun safety and doesn't just tote one around without knowing how to use it. It's just a very, very good thing that she has a good head on her shoulders and that a walker makes a good tripod for a gun. But then again, this is how I like to imagine her.

By: IronLizard

IronLizard — Fri, 20 Apr 2007 07:32:17 -0800

but the statistics are pretty grim and probably beyond dispute.. If metafilter has shown me anything it's that statistics are never beyond dispute. You don't find it the least bit funny that was posted by a guy with DARWIN tacked to his nickname? The problem isn't so much the guns, it's the parent's who don't have trigger locks/safes to keep curious little hands OFF of them. Just to be clear, I have three kids and don't have a single gun in the house. Why? 'Cause they're sneaky. (The author of that article obviously has no idea how powerful the apple lobby is here.)

By: winks007

winks007 — Fri, 20 Apr 2007 07:39:33 -0800

ironlizard, I grew up in a family of four and my dad (and his dad) always had guns around. We didn't play with them. You see, at an early age, our fathers and grandfathers showed us what they were, how to use them properly, and when to use it. I never played with my dad's guns, if I wanted to learn about a gun, all I had to do was ask. I am a parent and I have 2 children, 14 and 10. They are both very educated when it comes to firearms. I have some items locked up, but not all. My biggest fear is the kids who don't get to learn about guns from a responsible owner and instead find an old rusty .22 cal in the canal and go around showing it off. Those are the litle jerks that wind up hurting/kiling/maiming someone.

By: Pope Guilty

Pope Guilty — Fri, 20 Apr 2007 07:43:55 -0800

Those are the litle jerks that wind up hurting/kiling/maiming someone. Of course, they've had no training in gun safety and don't understand, don't have any real way to understand the danger they're in and the danger they're causing, but hey, let's insult them.

By: IronLizard

IronLizard — Fri, 20 Apr 2007 07:57:21 -0800

Well, I'll tell you winks007, living in an urban environment I've had few chances to show my son (10 yesterday) anything regarding real guns. He did, however get a sound thrashing and very long fatherly monologue the other day for shooting his little brother with one of those little plastic pellet guns. I worry now, because I remember my brother and I...... We were running around a 5 acre lot one day playing some variation of cowboys and indians with him carrying an old spring action BB pistol and me a simple bow. Things got a bit carried away and he ends up popping me right in the cheek with one of those little brass coated things andf even at the good distance we had between us, it stung like a m*therf*cker. So I let loose a field point arrow in his direction, without even stopping to think. Imagine my shock when it hit just above his knee and hung for a second before dropping to the ground. The rest of that day was a serious lesson in impulse control. (Luckily, he wasn't injured much at all.) I'd had much the same education you speak of. Even though we lived in the city, step dad was a hunter and often took me out with him. Went to the range with the local scout troop quite often, as well. At any rate, not all kids learn the lesson well enough or fast enough to prevent accidents. I find it best just to avoid the problem entirely. As for them finding an old weapon somewhere, what I'm teaching them will hopefully be enough, but you never know when childhood enthusiasm will get carried away.

By: winks007

winks007 — Fri, 20 Apr 2007 08:05:39 -0800

Then maybe, just maybe we agree, it's not the guns that need control, it's the presons behind them. My son also has a spring loaded, REDRIDER and he isn't allowed to have it loaded, not alowed to carry it around. He doesnt even take it out of the closet, there is a time and a place for that. WE TAUGHT HIM THAT. Thet is the way it's suppoes to be. TEACH your kids. If you have all of your guns locked away, what about the diazapam/ alprazolam/hydrocodone in your medicine cabinet. I'm way more concerend in reagrds to someone giving my kid a pill than a handgun. My kids know what to do when the see someone they dont trust with showing off a gun, THEY LEAVE.

By: Blazecock Pileon

Blazecock Pileon — Fri, 20 Apr 2007 08:20:17 -0800

Gun control? Good range safety and careful aim. Were you there when Rush Limbaugh jumped out of his chair and started shaking like that spaz Michael J. Fox? That joke was hilarious, too.

By: IronLizard

IronLizard — Fri, 20 Apr 2007 08:21:56 -0800

Then maybe, just maybe we agree, it's not the guns that need control, it's the presons behind them. Why the maybe? I thought I said that earlier? Only problem is, it's even more difficult to control the people most likely to cause a problem than the gun trade. I think that's why so many places have gone the easy route (Japan, as a prime example). Anyway, haven't we talked about gun control enough for one month? Let's get back to grandma 'cappin a tire.

By: JeffL

JeffL — Fri, 20 Apr 2007 08:23:16 -0800

She's not the only Kentuckian to be named Miss America. Heather French Henry, who grew up a few miles from us, and who dated my brother years ago, won in 2000.

By: lilithim

lilithim — Fri, 20 Apr 2007 08:27:35 -0800

Great article. Makes a clear distinction that the incident was provoked by trespassing. Terrible post. I support x but not x makes for bad discussion. Poster might be in favor of the woman in question, but opens the door to discussion on the intent of the poster. I flag in protest of poor rhetoric. /grouchy.

By: bruce

bruce — Fri, 20 Apr 2007 08:28:23 -0800

"i support gun control, but for 82-year-old venus ramey, i make an exception..." who gives a flying fuck about your personal beliefs in this context? i support the second amendment. i live in rural oregon, and i own guns. so do most of my neighbors, and there's very little crime here, because the criminals know this and don't want to look down the barrel of my s&w. i love the way anti-gun posters distort the facts to support their position: heck, these guys weren't criminals stealing from an elderly woman, they were just...they were entrepreneurial salvage consultants! the only two conclusions that can be drawn, alternatively, 1) anti-gun people are way stupid, or 2) anti-gun people are pro-criminal. if you read this post and sympathized with the entrepreneurial salvage consultants instead of the old woman, you might be pro-criminal too.

By: winks007

winks007 — Fri, 20 Apr 2007 08:31:21 -0800

This thread needs more pro-gun, bumper sticker, style comments.

By: Greg Nog

Greg Nog — Fri, 20 Apr 2007 08:32:29 -0800

"I'm trying to live a quiet, peaceful life and stay out of trouble, and all it is, is one thing after another." Fantastic!

By: LordSludge

LordSludge — Fri, 20 Apr 2007 08:33:33 -0800

Thet is the way it's suppoes to be. TEACH your kids. Good thing kids never disobey their parents. Thet again, you're suppoesd to kill disobedient children anyhow, so I suppose unsecured firearms are Teh Lord's Way.

By: ewkpates

ewkpates — Fri, 20 Apr 2007 08:54:17 -0800

I'm for car control. Old people shouldn't be allowed to own cars. Guns they can have. Look at the numbers, people, look at the numbers. I also advocate pool control and also prescription drug control. Like guns, these are regulated but still kill. But, like, more people. Did any of those young hooligans take prescription drugs or have access to a swimming pool? These are the important questions...

By: kableh

kableh — Fri, 20 Apr 2007 09:12:47 -0800

Good thing kids never disobey their parents. I imagine a parent responsible to teach their kids firearm safety probably is responsible enough to have a trigger lock on any firearms, or have them in a safe, have ammo somewhere else, etc. I don't own a gun. I learned about them from an early age, though. My uncle took us to a gun safety course at the local range, we got to handle several, and learn safe handling of them in general. And when I was at a party and a drunk friend pulls his gun out of the closet to show it off, I knew enough to make it safe, check the chamber, then chastise him for being such a fucking idiot. If only as much lip service and education went into teaching people how to drive.

By: tkchrist

tkchrist — Fri, 20 Apr 2007 09:17:04 -0800

PLATE OF BEANS!!!!!!

By: srboisvert

srboisvert — Fri, 20 Apr 2007 09:19:25 -0800

i love the way anti-gun posters distort the facts to support their position: heck, these guys weren't criminals stealing from an elderly woman, they were just...they were entrepreneurial salvage consultants! the only two conclusions that can be drawn, alternatively, 1) anti-gun people are way stupid, or 2) anti-gun people are pro-criminal. if you read this post and sympathized with the entrepreneurial salvage consultants instead of the old woman, you might be pro-criminal too. I love the way some pro-gun people completely misrepresent many of the people who disagree with them. I can only conclude that there are far more gun cleaning accidents than reported and fewer frontal lobes than assumed.

By: psmealey

psmealey — Fri, 20 Apr 2007 09:26:43 -0800

By: substrate

substrate — Fri, 20 Apr 2007 09:26:50 -0800

I say let the octogenarians carry guns. They'll do less damage than letting them loose with a drivers license in a Farmer's Market.

By: miss lynnster

miss lynnster — Fri, 20 Apr 2007 09:29:02 -0800

Okay boys, break it up. *Fires gun into the air*

By: IronLizard

IronLizard — Fri, 20 Apr 2007 09:31:42 -0800

PLATE OF BEANS!!!!!! BUT THIS A SERIOUS PLATE OF BEANS!

By: IronLizard

IronLizard — Fri, 20 Apr 2007 09:32:29 -0800

Now, miss lynnster, do you have any idea where that heavy little ball of lead is going to land?

By: miss lynnster

miss lynnster — Fri, 20 Apr 2007 09:49:35 -0800

OWWW! MY EYYYEEEEEEE!!!!!!!!!!!!! Dammit. Why didn't I use my walker to steady that shot?

By: winks007

winks007 — Fri, 20 Apr 2007 09:50:25 -0800

ironlizard, according to Mythbusters, the falling bullet doesnt quite reach terminal velocity. I would not be the one so "cocksure" to stand under to see if they were right.

By: miss lynnster

miss lynnster — Fri, 20 Apr 2007 09:51:13 -0800

Yeah okay IronLizard... I'll see your plate of beans. And raise you a tub.

By: deanc

deanc — Fri, 20 Apr 2007 09:54:51 -0800

ironlizard, according to Mythbusters, the falling bullet doesnt quite reach terminal velocity Actually, the bullet does reach "terminal velocity"-- the velocity at which air resistance equals the accelerating force of gravity. It's just that the terminal velocity (supposedly) is not high enough to be fatal.

By: Stunt

Stunt — Fri, 20 Apr 2007 09:57:27 -0800

This is a fucking trainwreck so far. I've seen well thought out, respectful, intelligent discourse on hot topics here before and this is not even remotely it. Can people knock off the bullshit and have a grown up conversation here? Oh wait, the article is a minor blurb that doesn't really warrant too much serious discussion so it naturally evolves into a gun control debate? Sigh. We just did this. In fact, the metatalk thread for the discussion is still open; there's not need to have yet another shouting matching on control. We all seem to disagree and are incredibly rude, I get it. No need to keep driving that home.

By: winks007

winks007 — Fri, 20 Apr 2007 09:57:44 -0800

deanc, thanks for the correction.

By: Aloysius Bear

Aloysius Bear — Fri, 20 Apr 2007 10:05:04 -0800

It's just that the terminal velocity (supposedly) is not high enough to be fatal. In other words, the terminal velocity isn't a terminal velocity.

By: LordSludge

LordSludge — Fri, 20 Apr 2007 10:13:51 -0800

kableh: I imagine a parent responsible to teach their kids firearm safety probably is responsible enough to have a trigger lock on any firearms, or have them in a safe, have ammo somewhere else, etc. Nope, cuz that renders the firearm useless for defense in teh Jet Li fantasy home invasion scenario -- you know, where the bad guyz are rushin' in with shotguns and AKs, and you have to grab teh glock as you dive for cover behind teh bedstand... Every thing goes slo-motion as you BLAM! BLAM!! perfect head shots on teh invadorz in mid-air... You're the big hero, and the wife calls over her twin sister for an awesome, if incestuous, three-way. Roll credits. Now how am I gonna do all that if I got a damn trigger-lock on the gun and the ammo's in the other room?? (Why do you hate gun owners?) Much ~~easier~~ better to dispense with the ~~precautions~~ restrictions and just tell my kids not to mess with firearms without my permission. I mean, I'm a freekin hero -- why would my kids ever disobey me?? And that, in a nutshell, is my problem with the "I have a firearm for home defense" concept. If you secure the gun, it's useless for home defense. If you don't secure the gun, it's more dangerous to your family than not having one.

By: IronLizard

IronLizard — Fri, 20 Apr 2007 10:24:00 -0800

If you don't secure the gun, it's more dangerous to your family than not having one. Well of course. But only if you have children.

By: CitrusFreak12

CitrusFreak12 — Fri, 20 Apr 2007 10:31:24 -0800

I'm with Stunt on this one, more or less.

By: quin

quin — Fri, 20 Apr 2007 10:35:05 -0800

I find myself not wanting to get drawn into a gun control thread, but a line from chuckdarwin's link bugged me: Screw your "constitutional right" to have an apple, there is something called the "greater good" I hate, hate, hate this kind of reasoning. This is exactly the kind of logic that has allowed things like the War on Drugs, the restrictions of habeas corpus, illegal imprisonment of non-combatants, extraordinary rendition, and the implementation of free speech zones' to occur. It's bullshit, it's just steps away from asking "Won't someone please think of the children?" Stop talking about Greater Good when trying to push your agenda, because Greater Good can also be used to validate things like eugenics and ethnic cleansing.

By: Snyder

Snyder — Fri, 20 Apr 2007 10:37:03 -0800

That's a fabulous strawman, LordSludge. But I'm sure it makes sense in your reality.

By: Snyder

Snyder — Fri, 20 Apr 2007 10:38:02 -0800

It's bullshit, it's just steps away from asking "Won't someone please think of the children?" I think it's a few steps beyond that, actually, but otherwise agree with your argument.

By: LordSludge

LordSludge — Fri, 20 Apr 2007 10:40:17 -0800

Well of course. "Of course" to you and me, but to a lot (most?) guys (see above posts), they're thinkin ~~three-way~~ "hero". But only if you have children. Certainly, the risk goes down if you don't have kids. (But again, read some of the preceding posts.. amazing!) There's still a significant risk of an adult losing self-control, getting drunk, losing one's temper, having one's ego challenged, accidental discharge while cleaning the weapon, mistakenly shooting a loved one that snuck in without turning the lights on, etc, etc... Guns make it really, really easy to kill someone, which is of course the whole point -- but they can kill even if you don't intend to.

By: LordSludge

LordSludge — Fri, 20 Apr 2007 10:45:09 -0800

Snyder: That's a fabulous strawman, LordSludge. But I'm sure it makes sense in your reality. So you're a Joe American. You keep a gun for home-defense, but you keep it trigger-locked and the bullets in another location to keep it safe from the kids. How long would it take you to get it ready for "action", should the need arise? One, maybe two minutes? Hmmm, methinks you have not thought this clever plan through...

By: HuronBob

HuronBob — Fri, 20 Apr 2007 10:48:30 -0800

OK, MetaFilter... put the thread on the floor and slowly back away! /there, that takes care of it!

By: winks007

winks007 — Fri, 20 Apr 2007 10:55:08 -0800

Not all of mine are locked up. What do you anti-gun people do for self defense? A baseball bat? The bad guys have you outgunned. I predict that some of you anti-gun folks are pro-running. I'm anti-run, pro-gun and damn proud. With that stance, I guess you could say I'm "anti-bat?" Thats probably gonna lead to more shit but, what the hell, it's Friday.

By: IronLizard

IronLizard — Fri, 20 Apr 2007 11:01:26 -0800

I do have a nice bat and a breaker bar in strategic locations since a gun would be a very bad idea. Kids are dangerous. My four year old once hit his brother with the bat once. It's a good idea to wait behind a corner with one of these if you hear someone in your home. They have less chance to react that way. Be careful you don't bludgeon your mother in law on accident...

By: IronLizard

IronLizard — Fri, 20 Apr 2007 11:04:14 -0800

Also: there is no dearth of potentially dangerous objects in the home. In the wrong hands, even my sawzall is fucking deadly. It's all about proper precautions.

By: winks007

winks007 — Fri, 20 Apr 2007 11:07:17 -0800

Metafilter: It's all about proper precautions.

By: srboisvert

srboisvert — Fri, 20 Apr 2007 11:31:30 -0800

I predict that some of you anti-gun folks are pro-running. I'm anti-run, pro-gun and damn proud. I have a lord of the rings replica sword and some twenty sided dice that the intruders will trip on if I roll 16 or higher so I think I can equal your preemptive pride and raise you some charisma.

By: JanetLand

JanetLand — Fri, 20 Apr 2007 11:39:44 -0800

Well, I'm glad this didn't turn into a thread about how beauty pageants exploit women.

By: IronLizard

IronLizard — Fri, 20 Apr 2007 11:42:52 -0800

I pity the fool who tries to exploit Ms. Kentucky there.

By: LordSludge

LordSludge — Fri, 20 Apr 2007 11:43:32 -0800

winks007: Not all of mine are locked up. What do you anti-gun people do for self defense? A baseball bat? The bad guys have you outgunned. I predict that some of you anti-gun folks are pro-running. I'm anti-run, pro-gun and damn proud. So you're aware that you endanger your kids for the sake of your own pride. ::shakes head:: Oh, shit, are you that Harley Guy??? I thought I recognized the cognitive dissonance..!

By: teece

teece — Fri, 20 Apr 2007 11:43:51 -0800

You know what really bugs me? In black and white photographs/movies, redheads don't exist. In the picture provide, she's only a redhead because folks who saw her in real life told me so. And some dolts actually think black and white is more objective... .

By: lysdexic

lysdexic — Fri, 20 Apr 2007 11:52:17 -0800

Lordy. miss lynster, do you still have ammo? and bruce, srboisvert? STFU. I'm not anti-gun, I'm pro-knife. teece: LMAO! Quick, someone find the Calvin cartoon!

By: daq

daq — Fri, 20 Apr 2007 12:25:04 -0800

Stop, or my formerly hot beauty queen grandmom will shoot!

By: humblepigeon

humblepigeon — Fri, 20 Apr 2007 12:25:07 -0800

This woman is the epitome of an American. 1) She achieved greatness from a humble beginning. 2) She's physically handsome (or was). 3) She's armed.

By: aiq

aiq — Fri, 20 Apr 2007 12:38:47 -0800

I am a lefty who argues for owning guns. Why? >the right wing is heavily armed >the cops and military are heavily armed >criminals are heavily armed >the veneer of civilization is paper thin...LA, Katrina, 9/11 >the gun laws are not observed by criminals >mofos will kill you for your pocket change I heard an anti-gun advocate on the radio say Americans are afraid of each other...looking around I see plenty of reason to be. In addition, NO one is going to hurt me or mine. Sounds harsh? Too bad. If the Reagan to Dubya era isn't enough to freak you out, read a couple of Pat Robertson's books or listen to Brother John Hagee on TV. That crew has some nutty ideas about how the US should be governed (by the Old Testament) not to mention their views on science. Me, I'm not willing to go back to the Middle Ages. And hey, how about that new Supreme Court we have? Are we doing enough to fight poverty and desperation? Not at all...but in the meantime I do intend to survive. These reasons are enough for me, but if one makes the decision to own a firearm...learn to use it, store it in such a way that a child cannot gain access, children in the residence need to become savvy, and protect against theft. Guns aren't referred to as deadly force for nothing.

By: deanc

deanc — Fri, 20 Apr 2007 12:57:25 -0800

Given that "gun control" normally means, "background check and safety class required, no criminal record or endagering mental health issues, irresponsibility results in losing your permit," I don't see how supporting this woman's actions is inconsistent with being an advocate of "gun control." For those bragging about how you own guns and don't keep them locked up, what you're doing is just like putting a sign outside your door that says "steal my gun!"

By: lysdexic

lysdexic — Fri, 20 Apr 2007 13:12:37 -0800

hmmm. This puts a whole new spin on "join me in a cup of tea"? I was a passenger in a car full of high school chums when the driver was talking about her weekend clubbing and someone asked her why she didn't feel afraid. She reached over, popped open the glove compartment, and pulled out her gun. No lock, no safety ((like I could tell) right in my fucking face. I have considered taking a class and getting a concealed carry license, but not a gun. Mostly I want to know what I'm doing when I might be around one.

By: srboisvert

srboisvert — Fri, 20 Apr 2007 13:53:59 -0800

and bruce, srboisvert? STFU. You posted a comment in meta where you single handedly resolved the gun control debate while I was on holiday in Paris! I missed it. No more vacations for me. Thanks for the vital pointer lysdexic. I almost faved it before I realized you used the letter F to represent the F word. Twice.

By: winks007

winks007 — Fri, 20 Apr 2007 13:58:24 -0800

LordSludge, It's not a Harley - it's a Honda you DICK! My kids are in more danger on the fucking schoolbus than in my home. It's not pride. It's home protection. What a dipshit. I knew you would bite, that's why I amped it up a bit after I saw your username. Once again, Lordsludge is going to tell everyone how wrong they are. Apparently thats "his thing." You are the reason I hope I never "grow-up." We must be your ONLY friends? Cranky old fuck!

By: teece

teece — Fri, 20 Apr 2007 14:01:28 -0800

That's pretty well stated, deanc. I'm a lefty, and I support "gun control." I also have a father who owns guns, I've thought about buying them, and this is not inconsistent. I really don't want guns banned, nor do I want to demonize semi-automatic weapons or assault weapons or gun owners, nor do I want to blame murders on guns. First: it's the right to keep and bear arms that is protected. A nuke is an "arm." No one argues that we should be able to buy a nuke at Wal*Mart. Hardly anyone argues that we should all be able to buy fully loaded Apache gun-ships, even. Or anti-tank weapons or 120MM howitzers. So, I think it's important to remember right from the start that "arms control" is supported by darn near 100% of Americans, even most members of the NRA. Disagreeing over where to draw the line does not mean someone hates the 2nd Amendment, as is often argued by the NRA. They want the line in a different place: they don't want the line eliminated, which would be required for their holier-than-thou attitude to make sense. Having limits about what guns are acceptable for personal ownership is OK, and such a belief in limits is not necessary antithetical to the US Constitution. Regulating the sale and ownership of guns is a 100% no brainer: it MUST be done. Now, eliminating or severely restricting gun ownership? Not worthwhile, even if it might cut down on homicide numbers (stress on the might. It might not at all: I think it really depends on factors internal to the society. That is, homicide is not caused by guns, so eliminating them does precious little to address the root causes of homicide, and is thus of limited utility in cutting down on homicides. It's an impediment only. And that's assuming you can make guns darn near impossible to obtain). The NRA is run by a bunch of dopes, but they are completely correct when they say that guns don't kill people, people do. American society is to blame for gun deaths, not guns. We need to address those issues, not go for the knee-jerk band aid of banning guns. "Those issues" are fundamentally difficult to address. But it's also true that NRA-talking-point robots that tell us how concealed-carry and 100% gun ownership would make us safer are full of shit, too. Again, people kill people, not guns. A need to arm everybody is a sign that your society is very, very sick. If you are seriously thinking that will fix anything, I think you misunderstand the problem. If we all need a gun to stay safe, we're fucked. The reality is that, once in a very rare while, a gun might be very usefully to you. The probability of needing a gun to save your life is extremely low in America. Weapons for all would thus not help at all. That would only be a viable solution for cutting violence if you needed a gun to save your life on a rather regular basis. That's not the case for American citizens, no matter what the paranoid, fear-laden American good ol' boy might imagine. So the urge to ban guns is wrong, as is the urge to arm everyone. "Gun control" is very much right, and supported by pretty much everyone, if you talk honestly about what gun control actually means.

By: winks007

winks007 — Fri, 20 Apr 2007 14:04:02 -0800

DeanC, I think they're referring to "trigger" locks. Try getting on of those trigger locks off at 2:00 AM when the dog is going apeshit and your night watchman (motion detected light) in the back yard comes on. You're not gonna get the drop on the bad guy with that trigger lock, at those hours, after being jolted out of bed. I can't seem to figure out how my rights can be so wrong to so many people. And this lordsludge guy, anyone want to be HIS neighbor? I'd imagine that would be the equivalent to moving in next to Judge Judy. Pfffttttt.

By: Iron Rat

Iron Rat — Fri, 20 Apr 2007 14:06:31 -0800

So much arguing, I thought guns and property defense by the elderly against the lousy scrappers that want to melt down her antique lathes is the sort of thing we all could agree on.

By: LordSludge

LordSludge — Fri, 20 Apr 2007 14:21:51 -0800

LordSludge, It's not a Harley - it's a Honda you DICK! I'm so, so sorry. (WTF?) It's not pride. It's home protection. What a dipshit. Again, very sorry.. I thought you wrote this: I'm anti-run, pro-gun and damn proud. Nevermind. Let's just stop. I gotta go. I really don't want to do you again. I knew you would bite, that's why I amped it up a bit after I saw your username. Once again, Lordsludge is going to tell everyone how wrong they are. Apparently thats "his thing." You are the reason I hope I never "grow-up We must be your ONLY friends? Cranky old fuck! Yeah, you sound like a real sweetheart yourself, there, buddy. And I'll say that folks with anger management issues (seems to be common in middle-aged men for some reason) probably shouldn't have guns. Maybe your online personna doesn't accurately reflect you in real life, at least I hope not. Look, I gotta run and meet my un-friends, but maybe somebody will keep you company here. (Funny thing is I'm not even anti-gun, per se. I own one myself. I'm just anti- stupid, self-contradictory arguments. "Some people" flip out when you point that out.)

By: lysdexic

lysdexic — Fri, 20 Apr 2007 14:25:55 -0800

srboisvert, I do what I can. And if I ffoul up my spelling, well, check the naem.

By: psmealey

psmealey — Fri, 20 Apr 2007 14:32:25 -0800

Wow... this wended ell. I wonder if tizzie had not mentioned gun control, the conversation would have taken quite this tack.

By: MrMustard

MrMustard — Fri, 20 Apr 2007 15:52:55 -0800

Hmm, I wonder if someone hadn't posted a blatantly pro-gun article within days of the worst gun related tragedy in the States, it might have lead to anyone having a reasonable discussion about gun control. Perhaps not, eh? Frankly, I don't think this site is capable of having a sensible discussion on this topic. Which is very sad.

By: miss lynnster

miss lynnster — Fri, 20 Apr 2007 16:01:24 -0800

Sorry, still think she kicks ass. Old lady with cojones (previously very hot young lady) not allowing herself to be easily victimized + nobody getting hurt other than a tire or two + admitted thieves being caught & going directly to jail without passing go = feel good story. Period.

By: oncogenesis

oncogenesis — Fri, 20 Apr 2007 16:14:19 -0800

Kang: AbortionsGuns for all.
        [crowd boos]
      Very well, no abortionsguns for anyone.
        [crowd boos]
      Hmm... Abortionsguns for some, miniature American flags for
           others.
        [crowd cheers and waves miniature flags]

Thanks, Metafilter, for reminding me to clean my shotgun this weekend.

By: MrMustard

MrMustard — Fri, 20 Apr 2007 16:14:52 -0800

And legally purchased guns + seriously deranged student + 32 innocent people = well, at least some batty old cow is allowed to shoot up someones tire. That makes everything OK.

By: lysdexic

lysdexic — Fri, 20 Apr 2007 16:33:27 -0800

batty. old. cow. You got one out of three right. Please quote the article for the parts where she's "batty" and a "cow".

By: MrMustard

MrMustard — Fri, 20 Apr 2007 16:49:25 -0800

Batty? Every quote from her in this section screams 'batty' to me. "He was probably wetting his pants," Ramey said Thursday from her home in Waynesburg, about 140 miles south of Cincinnati. Ramey was on her Lincoln County farm last week - "Friday the 13th, apropos date, isn't it?" she noted Thursday - feeding a horse when she saw her dog run to a nearby building where she stores old steel-shaping machines, lathes and other equipment. "This stuff is over 100 years old," she said. For some time, thieves had been breaking into the building to steal the machines to sell for scrap. She hadn't been able to catch anyone in the act until last week. She drove over to the building and blocked the truck sitting there. When she asked a man what he was doing, he replied "scrapping," and said he would leave. "I said, 'Oh, no you won't,' and I shot their tires so they couldn't leave," Ramey said. She had to balance on her walking stick as she pulled out a snub-nosed .38-caliber handgun. "I didn't even think twice. I just went and did it. If they'd even dared come close to me, they'd be 6 feet under by now." Ramey then tried to flag down people driving by. When one stopped, she asked them to call 911. Eventually, three people were arrested - one at the scene and two others walking on a nearby road. "They've been stealing from me for years. Those good-for-nothing slobs," she said. Cow? Well I'm sorry, but I think someone who's willing to fire a gun over a bit of scrap metal probably deserves that epithet.

By: Snyder

Snyder — Fri, 20 Apr 2007 17:03:35 -0800

Preventing your stuff from being stolen, and catching the people who did it? Yeah, totally batty. No sane person wants that. And your right. Everyone who thinks that this story was a good thing obviously feels that the V. Tech shootings were A-OK.

By: lysdexic

lysdexic — Fri, 20 Apr 2007 17:07:31 -0800

Every quote from her in this section screams 'batty' to me. Guess we'll have to agree to disagree. To me she sounds like someone who's used to being self-sufficient, and who knows what she's doing with a dangerous firearm, and who can use it responsibly. Cow? Well I'm sorry, but I think someone who's willing to fire a gun over a bit of scrap metal probably deserves that epithet. It was scrap to the would-be thieves, not to her. Whether we think it's worth it is arguable. If she hadn't had her gun, maybe she would have gone to the main house and called the sherrif.

By: Aloysius Bear

Aloysius Bear — Fri, 20 Apr 2007 17:42:51 -0800

It was scrap to the would-be thieves, not to her. Whether we think it's worth it is arguable. Whatever kind of scrap it was, I'm pretty sure it isn't worth a man's life. ("I didn't even think twice ... If they'd even dared come close to me, they'd be 6 feet under by now.")

By: MrMustard

MrMustard — Fri, 20 Apr 2007 17:53:17 -0800

Everyone who thinks that this story was a good thing obviously feels that the V. Tech shootings were A-OK. That's not at all what I said. Although everyone who thinks this story is a good thing obviously feels that this "good thing" is worth the risk of 32 people being killed every now and again.

By: spikeleemajortomdickandharryconnickjrmints

spikeleemajortomdickandharryconnickjrmints — Fri, 20 Apr 2007 18:50:54 -0800

When guns are beauty queened, only beauty queens will have guns.

By: IronLizard

IronLizard — Fri, 20 Apr 2007 19:28:11 -0800

Whatever kind of scrap it was, I'm pretty sure it isn't worth a man's life. Well, it obviously didn't cost a man his life, now did it? ("I didn't even think twice ... If they'd even dared come close to me, they'd be 6 feet under by now.") Protecting herself from attack, wouldn't be worth the assailants life? Your assertion makes no sense whatsoever. How does saying she would protect herself from assault equal shooting someone over the goods? What the fuck are you smoking?

By: miss lynnster

miss lynnster — Sat, 21 Apr 2007 00:09:36 -0800

MrMustard? With all due respect, you're kind of assy & you like to put words into people's mouths that they aren't saying.

By: the other side

the other side — Sat, 21 Apr 2007 17:48:08 -0800

So she's allowed to shoot at anyone she suspects is stealing from her? That's an odd question. She's not allowed to shoot at someone who's not stealing from her (even though they were in this case) anymore than I'm allowed to walk up to some random person and punch them in the face.