You are the one that misses the point. The Smith & Wesson pistol is not a "device that is one of the leading causes of death in women." Rather, it is a weapon used to defend women hundreds of times daily.
As a police officer, I see the reality of death daily. I don't just sit back and talk about it, or read about it, or even -gasp- blog about it. Firearms are used to defend people FAR more than they are used illegally.
Stop repeating what you have been told, but do not know.
The point is, the product the company manufactures is not responsible for a single death (man or women) in this or any other country. The person responsible for the deaths when a firearm is used as a tool is the person pulling the trigger. This is the same as choosing to smoke. The person responsible for the repercussions of smoking is the person who, knowing the possible consequences, lights up. Smith and Wesson is a great company that makes a great product, that is used for good every day. Many women (and men) have used their products to fend off attackers, and to preserve their life and the lives of their loved ones. Many law enforcement officers use their products to preserve the peace and protect the good people of this country. It is strange, you only see the product being used to hurt women, but where are your percentages describing the number of women who are going out and purchasing (and using when necessary) their product to defend their right to life and liberty? I say, by giving women the ability (with proper training) to defend themselves from any attacker, and to choose not to be a victim, the products Smith and Wesson provides actually empowers women. I (might) feel bad for anybody who decides to accost Julie in a dark ally (or anywhere else). I commend S&W and Julie for donating their hard earned money to a cause as worthy as the fight against breast cancer. So should you.
You blame an inanimate object on the criminal acts of a tiny minority of the population and assume that the company that manufactures the object that you so despise is trying to "cloak" the complicity that you assign them.
Missing from your evaluation of the relative value of guns is any consideration for how many women's lives are SAVED each year by having a gun available and knowing how to use it...like, say, this one:
" A Mobile, Alabama woman fatally shot a violent ex-boyfriend who broke in to her home, hid in her bedroom closet, and attacked her when she returned home."
You are allowing your own bigotry and irrational fear of an inanimate object interfere with the ability of a lawful, robust industry to help with a cause that you yourself support.
Sounds to me like you are placing your own personal feelings over the lives of the breast cancer sufferers that the money raised by the firearms industry might help.
Comparing guns to cigarettes? So guns are bad then right? That means no police officer, law abiding citizen, competitor in shooting sports, sportsman or hunter, should be allowed to have them? No company that makes them should be able to market them? Is that because anyone that has a firearm or works for a gun company is evil? Unfortunately you have missed the point and are simply anti-gun.
Oh? What's that "tiny" percentage? You don't seem to want to fairly report how much the company has donated, supported events that raise awareness, etc. You seem ready to put other statistics that support your personal political views under the guise of non-partisan fairness. Now that's hogwash.
Anne,
You are the one that misses the point. The Smith & Wesson pistol is not a "device that is one of the leading causes of death in women." Rather, it is a weapon used to defend women hundreds of times daily.
As a police officer, I see the reality of death daily. I don't just sit back and talk about it, or read about it, or even -gasp- blog about it. Firearms are used to defend people FAR more than they are used illegally.
Stop repeating what you have been told, but do not know.
Richard
This article blames inanimate objects (guns) for the deaths of women instead of the people who use those objects.
It's sad when finding a cure for cancer is less important than someone's anti-gun agenda.
The point is, the product the company manufactures is not responsible for a single death (man or women) in this or any other country. The person responsible for the deaths when a firearm is used as a tool is the person pulling the trigger. This is the same as choosing to smoke. The person responsible for the repercussions of smoking is the person who, knowing the possible consequences, lights up. Smith and Wesson is a great company that makes a great product, that is used for good every day. Many women (and men) have used their products to fend off attackers, and to preserve their life and the lives of their loved ones. Many law enforcement officers use their products to preserve the peace and protect the good people of this country. It is strange, you only see the product being used to hurt women, but where are your percentages describing the number of women who are going out and purchasing (and using when necessary) their product to defend their right to life and liberty? I say, by giving women the ability (with proper training) to defend themselves from any attacker, and to choose not to be a victim, the products Smith and Wesson provides actually empowers women. I (might) feel bad for anybody who decides to accost Julie in a dark ally (or anywhere else). I commend S&W and Julie for donating their hard earned money to a cause as worthy as the fight against breast cancer. So should you.
You blame an inanimate object on the criminal acts of a tiny minority of the population and assume that the company that manufactures the object that you so despise is trying to "cloak" the complicity that you assign them.
Missing from your evaluation of the relative value of guns is any consideration for how many women's lives are SAVED each year by having a gun available and knowing how to use it...like, say, this one:
" A Mobile, Alabama woman fatally shot a violent ex-boyfriend who broke in to her home, hid in her bedroom closet, and attacked her when she returned home."
You are allowing your own bigotry and irrational fear of an inanimate object interfere with the ability of a lawful, robust industry to help with a cause that you yourself support.
Sounds to me like you are placing your own personal feelings over the lives of the breast cancer sufferers that the money raised by the firearms industry might help.
Comparing guns to cigarettes? So guns are bad then right? That means no police officer, law abiding citizen, competitor in shooting sports, sportsman or hunter, should be allowed to have them? No company that makes them should be able to market them? Is that because anyone that has a firearm or works for a gun company is evil? Unfortunately you have missed the point and are simply anti-gun.
Oh? What's that "tiny" percentage? You don't seem to want to fairly report how much the company has donated, supported events that raise awareness, etc. You seem ready to put other statistics that support your personal political views under the guise of non-partisan fairness. Now that's hogwash.
Pages