Sarah Palin may be the most famous hockey mom with a gun, but the debate about mothers who pack lunches, diapers, kids and heat was hot well before Palin became a household name.
Back in June, the website BabyCenter -- usually devoted to the gentler arts of motherhood -- posed this question: Do you think every mother should own a gun?
"I carry a Keltec 380 (small pistol) on my hip everyday," responded a mother of two toddlers. "I feel comfortable knowing that I will be able to defend my kids and I if we are in a life-threatening situation."
Another mother -- eight months pregnant and with a young child -- declared that "our gun is the only way I could defend myself and my children should someone intend to do us harm."
And there was this disclosure from a police officer mom: "I keep a loaded 9mm in my Coach diaper bag."
Suddenly, it seemed, mothers with guns were everywhere -- including movie star moms. Mother of six Angelina Jolie was quoted in British newspapers as saying she keeps a gun at home for security, and that "if anybody comes into my home and tries to hurt my kids, I've no problem shooting them."
The point-blank debate about point-blank defense continued on the ResponsibilityProject.com. "The mother who keeps her gun in her diaper bag should be locked up," one reader insisted. "That's just plain irresponsible. A holster keeps your firearm at the ready, but more or less secure."
But a holster -- when worn by a mother with a loaded gun -- also makes the national news, as happened last month in Lebanon, Pennsylvania when soccer mom Meleanie Hain showed up at her 5-year-old daughter's game with her loaded Glock pistol strapped to her hip. Parents upset at the site of the gun complained to the soccer coach, who asked Ms. Hain to move to the other side of the field, away from the 4 and 5-year-olds.
The day after the incident, the director of the soccer program -- a former judge -- notified Ms. Hain that she would be banned from attending her daughter's soccer games if she continued to do so with a loaded gun. "A responsible adult would realize that such behavior has no place at a soccer game," the director wrote.
A few days later, the sheriff revoked Ms. Hain's concealed weapons permit, based on a law that denies permits to any "individual whose character and reputation is such that the individual would be likely to act in a dangerous manner to public safety."
Moms with Glocks might not rock in Lebanon, Pennsylvania, but they do protest. "I'm just a soccer mom who has always openly carried [a gun], and I've never had a problem before," said Ms. Hain. "I don't understand why this is happening to me."
Ms. Hain hired a lawyer, who pointed out that it's perfectly legal to openly carry a firearm everywhere in Pennsylvania except for Philadelphia, and that the sheriff is "basically punishing her for doing something she is permitted by law to do." Ironically, the revocation of Ms. Hain's permit to conceal now forces her to wear her gun -- which she carries for "personal safety"-- out in the open.
"Meleanie Hain is welcome to attend any of my kids' sports or social functions while openly carrying her weapon," wrote one supporter in a letter to the newspaper editor, stating that if a "maniac" attacked, "legally armed citizens are the next line of defense." But another letter writer took offense, stating "Hain says she carries her gun because her husband is a probation officer...My husband works with meat all day; should he carry a meat cleaver?"
The entire episode prompted the local newspaper to quip, "What's the difference between a pit bull and a soccer mom? In the case of Meleanie Hain, it's a loaded sidearm."
As the debate about mothers with guns continues, one woman who took part in the discussion on the ResponsibilityProject.com zeroed in with a query of her own: "Would this question even be asked if it were a father and not a mother carrying the firearm?"
#1. Carry a gun with safety switch and have the safety on. There are many police officers and citizens who are alive today after a criminal took their gun because the perp did not know how to turn the safety off. With proper training and practice, a safety can be de-activated during the draw without any loss of time or accuracy. The M1911 is probably best suited for this.
#2 Carry a concealed backup gun. This ensures that even if someone manages to steal your primary weapon, you still have the ability to defend yourself against it. Kel-Tec P32 and Ruger LCP are excellent for this role.
Famed police officer/firearms instructor Massad Ayoob also recommends these precautions:
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m3197/is_9_49/ai_n6212426?tag=content;col1
LOL ...
I grew up around guns, BlackJac & I agree with you ... I've seen guns misused by my own family members (my adopted brother was convicted of attempted armed robbery) as well as others. Too many of the gunrights advocates cite lesser numbers of gun-violence fatalities; but often forget to weigh in the reality that lives are saved nowadays, due in part to medical advances & emergency procedures (that would have been another death-statistic otherwise).
Generally, I read too many romanticized views about firearms from gun-fanatic types, which tend to merely talk about the merits of possessing & using such weapons ... and not the dangers involved.
For work, I also carry a machete shovels. In my pocket I have a small pocketknife, keys, pens, and a pistol. Usually have fishing rods too. No flat tire yet, but I am PREPARED. Use my pocketknife often. Never had to use the pisol, but I am PREPARED.
I don't think, as (un) conventional wisdom seems to say -- that Democrats want to take away guns, or that Democrats don't own guns. That is absurd. I am a Democrat and I own several. Read through the comments, a lot of Dems here own them. Unless you do something stupid with them, they won't be taken away.
I would agree with this, except to say that a gun can also be holster on your person instead of locked up. Carrying a gun concealed in holster makes it readily accessable when needed and keeps it away from unauthorized users. With the proper retention holster, a gun can also be secured when openly carried.
The cliche bumper sticker is still the living truth--if guns are banned, only criminals will own guns.
If they are not banned, the possibility of a trained, armed individual as an adversary is quite sufficient to deter non-drugged criminals from victimizing anyone suspected as capable of self-defense.
My mom owned a gun, and kept it away from us until we were grown, as any sensible mother would.
My dad bought me my first gun, when I was of legal age. The militia in my family's home county has a woman chaplain and a large female membership. Nutcases? I doubt it--many are descended from volunteers who fought the British at King's Mountain. Many have grown children serving in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Women need guns, votes, and more and better women candidates than Palin.
That is prudence.
American people tend to have a simplistic view of life and create artificial categories that bear no connection to reality.
Yes, it would. Perhaps people shouldn't be taking babies into areas they feel are so unsafe that they need to carry a gun to protect themselves.
Banning something is always the way to go.
LIke banning books or censoring speech. Abstinence only sex education, and a while we are at it - lets ban recreational drug use(alcohol and cigarettes don't count).
Hey I don't own gun but I understand especially how a woman would like "carry" given their natural concerns regarding their personal safety. Training is of course the key.
Now if we could just ban stupidity...bad idea nobody would run for office.
Luckily my rights trump your emotionalism. Also. i'd LOVE to see your statistics to substantiate your unfounded claim that "[guns] cause more harm than good." You'll lose that one every time.
http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2008/10/todays-polls-1023-mccain-on-life.html
Looking at GUN VIOLENCE is only looking at a portion of the true problem. Controlling overall violence sould be our goal, one we cannot attain by regulating implements.
a) there would be MORE backlash were it a man, I believe, since it would create more anxiety about inappropriate gun use since men are historically more aggressive, or at least perceived as such. However, for this same reason, a woman with a gun, especially a mother, would draw more attention.
b) also, refer to the following quote from this article:
" A few days later, the sheriff revoked Ms. Hain's concealed weapons permit, based on a law that denies permits to any "individual whose character and reputation is such that the individual would be likely to act in a dangerous manner to public safety." "
The bad reputation she gained was a result of her carrying her weapon to the soccer game. She had received the permit in the first place, so the permit itself was the reason for her bad reputation. She acted in a "dangerous manner" by carrying a gun, so by this ruling anyone who carried a gun would be a danger to public safety and therefore no one should carry guns at all. (just to clarify -- that's the rationale I'm extrapolating from this quote, not my own belief).