Emily Maluski is dead wrong in her letter on May 5, Truth is better rape defense than guns
which criticized Ashley Herzog's May 3 column, Women can ensure own safety with guns.
A woman's right to carry a gun is another means of protection. The use of guns and other types of rape prevention are not mutually exclusive issues. Although it is unlikely women will be attacked while walking alone, it does happen, and women need to take measures against this.
Two major points mentioned in Maluski's letter seem to stem from ignorance. First of all, if Maluski is implying that a properly trained woman cannot successfully defend herself with a firearm, perhaps she is the one who needs to do a little research. With sufficient practice a woman can fend off the biggest of attackers with her gun, and many have done so.
Second, Maluski's statement about the legal consequences of shooting an attacker is just plain idiocy. Let me get this straight: she is implying that it would be better to risk rape and possibly death than to get arrested? That makes no sense whatsoever. Even if for some reason the victim is seen as the one at fault, who among you would rather die or be brutally assaulted than to face a trial? The saying, Better to be judged by 12 than carried by 6 comes to mind.
Finally, I totally agree with the ideas advocated by Take Back the Night. I see no incompatibly between these issues and women's use of firearms for self-defense. Perhaps Maluski is uncomfortable with guns, but she should at least acknowledge they have their usefulness.' Andrew Wargo is a senior civil engineering major.
17
Archives
Letter to the Editor
