Bio
I blog at Somewhere Else to Go and The Woman Citizen, which started out as heavily military and defense policy oriented.  (They grew out of my first...
 
 
 
 

What’s Hot on BlogHer.com

Women and Guns

  • Share This Post
  • submit
  • 4
  • Sparkle (
    )
     

In a previous post, I mentioned that I voted for Obama, then went out and bought a handgun.  First handgun that is mine, not my husband’s.  Yesterday, I went shooting for the first time in approximately 12 years, and shot a handgun for the first time in at least 15.  Took me a while to go to the range, because when you buy a handgun, sooner or later you expect to have the serious intention of putting metal into a human body, and (along with sex) that’s as about as morally serious as you can get.

 

I’d spent some time dry firing, or what the Marine Corps calls snapping in.  This means that with an unloaded weapon, you get used to the sight picture (which I didn’t mess with, just put the front sight blade level in the rear sight aperture), trigger pull, how the weapon feels in your hand or hands, how far you want your arms extended, and so on and so forth.  I also spent some time just holding (i.e., not dry-firing) my pistol with a loaded magazine in it—safety on, no round chambered—so I had a sense of the weight.  This way, before I actually fired live ammunition, I had some sense of what that weapon would do and how it really felt in my hands.

 

The last time I fired a pistol (again, more than 15 years ago), I doubt I could have hit the broad side of the barn with it, unless perhaps I was in the barn.  When I bought this pistol, my riding partner asked me how my aim was, and I told her I believed I could throw it more accurately than I could shoot it.  In fact, I joked, it would make a handy club if I had to beat someone to death.   

 

Wrong.

 

I fired 4 magazines of 5 rounds each.  (Magazine holds more but I simply didn’t want to spend that much time fighting stiff magazine springs.)  I fired the first magazine of 5 just to get used to the recoil and the flash of the propellant.  Shot group wasn’t bad:  all my rounds were in the target itself.  I was not surprised to find the time I’d spent lifting weights paying off:  the pistol wasn’t heavy at all.  What did surprise me was that within the first few rounds, I felt my body trying to put me in a position that in the saddle is very strong and stable:  heels, hips, shoulders and ears aligned, sitting on my pockets with my pelvis tucked underneath me, legs long, body tall, shoulders back so my chest is open, even if I was holding my pistol in both hands, my elbows flexed and close to my chest.  In my case, I know my riding position is right when my shoulders and head feel a little behind the vertical, and I felt that way when I was shooting.

 

From that position, I fired the next three magazines.  I fired the second magazine of five rounds, slow, about (but no more than) 10 seconds between rounds.  At about 15-20 feet, I put the first four rounds into the center ring and one in the 9 ring.  I then fired the third and fourth magazines fairly fast, about 5 seconds between each shot, and put all but 3 rounds in the black.  Four of the rounds impacted so close together they form an arched tear.

 

And then I stopped because I believe you should always end on a positive note.

 

To say I liked shooting is an understatement.  I like shooting the way I like knitting, and for the same reason:  they both

  • 4
  • Sparkle (
    )
     

Comments

Post comment as twitter logo facebook logo
Sort: Newest | Oldest
Erin Solaro 5 pts

Kat:

I was astonished that anyone would say, much less attribute to a self-defense instructor, an unarmed combatant can beat an armed combatant at hand-to-hand range.  Yes, it can happen, a lot of other stuff not being equal.  But any self-defense instructor who says that such a thing is the norm ought to be sued into the afterlife-and I doubt any would.  (Incidentally, when I have seen this issue written about in other forums, some posters of both sexes have advocated arming and training Congolese women, but I would think that would be the absolutely universal first response, with literacy, job training, all the rest, coming a distant second.) 

This whole issue of women taking action, serious, purposeful, when need be violent action, to defend what is theirs, is a very interesting issue, because the issue is real freedom and real power in our world.

Cheers,

Erin

battledress 5 pts

"...ncluding one woman who said, any self-defense instructor will tell you
a handgun is no match for a well-trained unarmed assailant." 

I can't believe anyone would be naive enough to say that! The only time an unarmed assailant would be more devastatin than a woman with a gun is if they don't know how to use the gun (point and squeeze?)

I have a fear that part of this might be the acceptance of the role of women as martyrs - we will be raped and we shall be abused and be the victim only to be saved by the men with guns (police, the military/UN?). Though that's a frightening conclusion and I hope I'm wrong.

Kat of Tough Girl 101 ( http://toughgirl101.blogspot.com ) I am physically and mentally tough.

Erin Solaro 5 pts

Kat:

Thanks for the reply, and you’re definitely right that women don’t typically see weapons as tools.  In fact, sometimes, they don’t see tools as tools, although that has changed greatly.  But that’s different from detesting violent video games and movies, which some women (and men!) do because we see violence as a serious means to a very serious end.

Would you be willing to dig down and try to answer the deeper question?  Which is, why are women so hostile to the idea of other women owning (and using) weapons? 

A few months ago, I read an article on the use of rape (a polite and gentle euphemism, to be honest) in the war in Congo.  A number of male commentators wrote in with the obvious solution of arming the women.  (In fact, this is a situation that cries out for a quality military assistance and training mission far more than a UN Peacekeeping Force because there is no peace to keep, you’re not dealing with two sides that are trying to end a conflict and know they need a neutral third party to help them.)  None of the women commentators advocated that, and a number of them specifically decried it, including one woman who said, any self-defense instructor will tell you a handgun is no match for a well-trained unarmed assailant.  Which is pure BS.  And I thought, this is so odd.  I mean, I can certainly sympathize with being afraid to engage in combat—but not if it means that at worst, you will die quickly, with your clothes on, rather than slowly, naked. 

There is as far as I can tell no pressure by feminists to arm women in order to defend their lives, their families and their property, even when those women are in the most deadly peril.  We have Eve Ensler’s “Vagina Warriors,” but they are unarmed, a cruel, mocking delusion that as a feminist saddens me.

Why isn’t there? 

Cheers (or not, I suppose),

Erin Solaro

battledress 5 pts

Because most women are taught to be afraid of guns. Most women dont play violent video games. Most women see guns as something bad, as opposed to a part of a fun hobby or a kind of protection. I also have an extensive knife collection and people have asked me why I have them... the answer is "because I want them?" Some women collect shoes, and I ask "Why?" and their answer is "because I want them?" But shoes are more acceptable for women.

 Guns are still largely the territory of men, and they scare the hell out of a lot of women, even those who grew up around them.

 I love getting rounds down range. It's almost calming to me. 

Kat of Tough Girl 101 ( http://toughgirl101.blogspot.com ) I am physically and mentally tough.