What Could Go Wrong?

A new law taking effect in Kentucky this week aims to reduce domestic violence by putting guns in the hands of even more people.

via Mother Jones

The new Kentucky law, which passed with overwhelming bipartisan support, doesn’t stop abusers from possessing a firearm. But it makes it easier for victims to carry a weapon. Under the law, anyone granted an emergency protective order or who obtains a domestic violence order can apply for a permit to carry a concealed weapon, temporarily waiving the requirement to complete firearms training. (The person still has to complete a background check.) This means a victim (or someone threatened with domestic violence) can obtain a concealed carry permit in as little as 24 hours.

So, you’re Kentucky. You have the unenviable problem of having the highest partner murder rate in the country. And your solution is to put guns in the hands of victims as quickly as possible — with no training requirement — while tempers could still be flaring.

I’m not saying victims shouldn’t be allowed to defend themselves, but wouldn’t it be more prudent to take guns out of the hands of abusers rather than hand out even more guns?

With no training requirements, will the number of accidental shootings increase? What if the gun owned by the victim is used by the abuser?

When you’ve been diagnosed with lung cancer, do you begin smoking twice as much to make it go away?

This entry was posted in Guns and tagged , , , . Bookmark the permalink.
  • trgahan

    This law is utterly tone deaf to the reality of domestic abuse (but then again, what “just add more GUNS!” solution isn’t entirely divorced from reality). The only thing this will add is an increase in the percentage of abused gun owners ending up killed by their own guns.

    BTW, I’d like to know what actual Kentucky Police Officers think of this (actual police, not right wing sheriffs yearning for the days when their job solely consisted of keeping THOSE people in their place), since responding to domestic disturbance is one of the most dangerous calls they get. Doubt a “add more guns!” solution is what they had in mind…

    I am sure the cops desire to protect themselves will require them to enter such calls more heavily armed…which the Right will just use to “prove” the further militarization of our police forces (against white people only, of course) and therefore the need for more GUNS!

    There is a comic book level of super villainy in the gun lobby/industry….

  • Ipecac

    AAAAUUUUUUUGGGGGGHHHHHH!!!!

  • fry1laurie

    Kentucky’s “Create an Orphan Act” of 2014.

  • KABoink_after_wingnut_hacker

    But of course we’ll need to arm all the children next. It’s the only way to be safe….idiots.

  • Christopher Foxx

    Because, of course, any time a victim fires at her abuser things work out perfectly for her.

    Oh, wait.

    • Lady Willpower

      It’s so much harder to make that work when it’s a woman of color. I wish I knew why…

  • muselet

    Damn, I’m glad I live in a relatively sane state.

    –alopecia

  • RamOrgan

    A well regulated Wife, being necessary to the security of a free Man , the right of the Man to keep and bear Arms, and use them on the Wife, shall not be infringed.

    In case it needs to be said … this is satire.

  • Emily333

    Remember that scene in The Matrix when Neo and friends are getting ready to go save Morpheus and Neo says “We’ll need guns.” And some guns appear. And then he says, “LOTS of guns” and hundreds of huge racks of guns appear all around him? Hey, it worked for them, right?