Also if the man is planning on hurting the woman, he is already breaking a law, so why would not having the carry law make it so he wouldn't use a gun? if both a small woman and a strong male offender have a gun, they are equally strong, unlike if the woman aren't allowed to carry, if the man has a gun or not, the man is still stronger. If both are just as strong, not only is it a deterrent to committing a violent crime, it is also harder for one to hurt the other and make it out unscathed.
since convicted violent domestic offenders already cannot own guns or use them, the carry law doesn't overrule those laws does it? Secondly, if anything victims of domestic violence should be able to protect themselves if their offender has a gun, which is why they should be able too.
a strong man vs a small woman, if neither is allowed to carry a gun, the man will most likely win.
Jackson Lee: "henious act"?
SeaWolfe59 1 week ago
Also if the man is planning on hurting the woman, he is already breaking a law, so why would not having the carry law make it so he wouldn't use a gun? if both a small woman and a strong male offender have a gun, they are equally strong, unlike if the woman aren't allowed to carry, if the man has a gun or not, the man is still stronger. If both are just as strong, not only is it a deterrent to committing a violent crime, it is also harder for one to hurt the other and make it out unscathed.
houndeye 2 months ago
since convicted violent domestic offenders already cannot own guns or use them, the carry law doesn't overrule those laws does it? Secondly, if anything victims of domestic violence should be able to protect themselves if their offender has a gun, which is why they should be able too.
a strong man vs a small woman, if neither is allowed to carry a gun, the man will most likely win.
houndeye 2 months ago