SF lady with Brit accent wants her guns

Status
Not open for further replies.
Joined
Dec 25, 2002
Messages
2,383
Location
Salem, Oregon
From the SF Chronicle http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2005/12/05/MNG30G33SM1.DTL

THE LINE OF FIRE
Some citizens fear for safety if courts uphold S.F.'s voter-approved ban on handguns
- Cecilia M. Vega, Chronicle Staff Writer
Monday, December 5, 2005

For a long time, Margaret Hurst lived in fear.

Gangs control turf just a few blocks from her Mission District apartment in San Francisco, and she's sure a neighbor across the street deals drugs. Her building was broken into four times in one year. She saw teenagers on her street display a gun. And while she was stopped at a red light one day, a man tried to punch in her car window in a case of road rage.

So she bought a handgun. Now Hurst is no longer scared.

"I'll tell you one thing. If I'm going down, I'm taking them with me," said 49-year-old Hurst, who is about as un-Charlton Heston as any woman with a British accent, braided bun and long flowing skirt could be.

After a heated campaign brought the national debate over gun control to San Francisco, the city's famously liberal voters passed a law last month banning the sale, manufacture and distribution of firearms and ammunition within city limits. The measure, which takes effect Jan. 1, also makes it illegal for residents to possess handguns.

And as that date approaches, handgun owners like Hurst are becoming increasingly fearful of the consequences.

"We're exactly the kind of people that should have weapons. We're vulnerable," Hurst said during a recent conversation in her cozy apartment, where she lives with her partner and their two cats. "The guns are not going away unless they absolutely have to."

When 58 percent of the city's voters approved the handgun ban, San Francisco joined only two other cities in the nation with similar laws, Chicago and Washington, D.C.

The day after the election, the National Rifle Association and other gun advocates filed a lawsuit challenging the ban, saying it oversteps local government authority and intrudes into an area regulated by the state. That battle continues in court.

Backers of the law known as Proposition H include San Francisco Supervisor Chris Daly, who placed the measure on the ballot with three other supervisors.

At a time when San Francisco is experiencing a wave of homicides, backers concede that the ban will not solve the problem of violence, but say the law will at least help curb violence.

"There are other ways that people can defend themselves in their homes," said Bill Barnes, a spokesman for the Prop. H campaign. "Let's say someone breaks into this woman's house and steals her gun and gets in a gunfight. The proliferation of handguns has made the city less safe."

In 1999, the last year for which data are available, 213 people in the city were victims of handgun incidents, according to a 2002 San Francisco Department of Public Health report. Of all firearms used to cause injury or death that year, 67 percent were handguns.

But it's about more than statistics to Hurst, who wanted to be identified by her maiden name rather than her last name, out of concern she might be singled out by criminals.

Growing up in a London suburb, she was never exposed to guns. In fact, she had never fired a gun in her life before the day six years ago when she borrowed a friend's rifle, took a trip to the shooting range and learned she's actually a great shot.

Not long after that, she and her partner, B.C., went to a gun show and spent $700 on matching 9mm handguns. Two years ago, B.C, who also did not want her last name used, bought Hurst a Winchester rifle as a Christmas gift.

Now the weapons are hidden in different rooms of their apartment after careful thought about the various scenarios in which the women may need to use them.

"I'm not going to start anything, but if somebody else starts something, I'm going to fight for my life," Hurst said. "And not only that, I'm going to try to do enough harm to my attacker that they're not going to go after somebody else who they think might be an easy target."

Both belong to the NRA, not because they agree with what they call the "right-wing lunatics" running the organization, but mostly because they like the mailers and Second Amendment literature the group offers.

They pride themselves on being responsible gun owners -- they take regular trips to the range to practice and always keep the bullets separate from the guns. It's just, they say, that they have too many friends who have been raped and abused to allow themselves to fall victim to anyone.

"Not only am I female, it is real obvious, unless you're blind, that I'm gay. I have been harassed more often than I care to think about," said B.C., a 43-year-old personal trainer who has won trophies in bodybuilding competitions. "If all of a sudden it becomes apparent that I'm not going to be able to have a gun at home and you decide to follow me all the way home, well, I'm not looking forward to that at all."

It is unknown exactly how many handguns exist in San Francisco, because the state does not require owners to have a license or permit for their handguns, and many weapons are bought and sold illegally.

From 2000 to 2004, there were 4,235 handguns sold legally in San Francisco County, according to the California attorney general's office.

Those who favor banning handguns in the city say that too many innocent people are shot in gun accidents and that handguns are often used in suicides.

They say criminals often get guns by robbing law-abiding gun owners.

Hurst denounces all those arguments, saying that there are simply too many guns out there to ban them all and that having a weapon levels the playing field against an attacker, who is likely to be armed.

"Assuming I'd be able to make a 911 call in the first place, you're looking at six or seven minutes realistically before police can get here," Hurst said. "You can get killed many times over in that length of time."

"Or raped and maimed and then killed," B.C. added.

If the lawsuit against the ban fails, handgun owners in the city may surrender their weapons to the police by April 1 without penalty; the law doesn't apply to rifles and shotguns.

The couple say they'll abide by the law and will ask a friend in another city to watch over their handguns.

"I will let go of my handgun," Hurst said, "and buy another rifle."

E-mail Cecilia M. Vega at [email protected].


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
©2005 San Francisco Chronicle
 
Both belong to the NRA, not because they agree with what they call the "right-wing lunatics" running the organization, but mostly because they like the mailers and Second Amendment literature the group offers.

Yeah if it wasn't for them you wouldn't even have a gun.

:rolleyes:

Just the mention of those Proposition H supporters and their ilk in this article make me nauseous. It's not suprising that these elitist neo-marxists would push for victim disarmament. The level with which they are willing to stoop has no bounds.
 
Gosh,

If one was criminally inclined, I think one could love living and working in S.F.... say sometime next year.

Of course, one would give up one's handgun(s) to the Police first :rolleyes:

Sounds like a potential target rich environment, neh?
 
Re: Huh, can't say I have ever heard anyone saying they like all the NRA's mailings before.

Even the "normal" SFers exhibit some sort of wierdness, I guess.
 
not because they agree with what they call the "right-wing lunatics" running the organization

I like how they casually dismiss a wide variety of people who served our country in the military, police or elected government as "right-wing lunatics." God forbid we actually take a close look at the people running the NRA and judge them on the merits of their actual views and accomplishments.

As if the flowers and socialism crowd ever won a war for this country or stopped a crime in progress.

If it wasnt for "right wing lunatics" that scuttled gun control on a national level, you wouldnt even be able to own that handgun of yours. Not all too long ago, the assault weapon weenies were anti-handgun weenies. These people dont consider self defense to be a legitimate use of a firearm and wouldnt hesitate to ban handguns if they could.

Silly lady.
 
I win at email. Sent.
I like how you casually dismiss the leadership and membership of the NRA. God forbid we actually take a close look at the people running the NRA and judge them on the merits of their views and accomplishments. You might actually be surprised by the caliber of person running the organisation.

In any case, the NRA answers to its members. You know, the 4-5 million people who send money in every year, vote and write our congresspeople. The NRA isnt powerful because it is on the right wing fringe, it is powerful because it represents the views of a large portion of the voting population. Has it every occurred to you that if you sit far enough to the left, the center becomes the "right fringe?"

If it wasnt for "right wing lunatics" that scuttled gun control on a national level, you wouldnt even be able to own that handgun of yours. Not all too long ago, the assault weapon banners were handgun banners. They only switched to military looking weapons because they werent able to demonize handguns effectively. These people dont consider self defense to be a legitimate use of a firearm and wouldnt hesitate to ban your handgun if they could.

-jim
 
Guy B. Meredith said:
From the SF Chronicle
Both belong to the NRA, not because they agree with what they call the "right-wing lunatics" running the organization, but mostly because they like the mailers and Second Amendment literature the group offers.

Lots of "liberal" gun owners seem to take pains to point out that they're not "right-wing gun nut whackos", and these ladies are no different in that respect.
Good for these two for opening their eyes to the reality of what they face, and taking steps to ensure their safety. I hope they succeed in their struggle, even if they call me mean names. :) If the good and embattled gun-owning citizens of San Francisco feel they need to call me a "gun nut", so be it. I've been called worse, usually by ex-girlfriends.
 
Guy B. Meredith said:
Backers of the law known as Proposition H include San Francisco Supervisor Chris Daly, who placed the measure on the ballot with three other supervisors.
Proposition H..??

PROPOSITION H....!?!?!?

HA! Sounds a lot like Preparation H.

And as far as I'd be concerned - the "supervisors" could do exactly the same thing with it.

:mad:
 
Well I will say one thing, I bet that lady is going to take a closer look at her self-proclaimed party affiliation. Once she digs through the lies I bet she switches sides or goes independent.
 
Possibly she is talking about the likes of Ted Nugent when she speaks of the right wing nut jobs

the city's famously liberal voters passed a law last month banning the sale, manufacture and distribution of firearms and ammunition within city limits.
This is the part I find interesting.
If we lived in a democracy this would be the last word.
The mob has ruled that there would be no more guns that should settle the argument.

I hope the NRA suit results in a repeal of the law
More to help put an end to the misinformed idea that America is a democracy than anything else
 
I think she means "Right wing politicallly", not "right wing they hate all gun control". Heck, I'm a political liberal, but I'm also very pro-gun.

Also, look closer at the thread. She mentions "partner" and "her partner, B.C.". She's lesbian.
 
Sometimes I hate THR.

Hey guys ~

Did no one notice that this was a sympathetic article about handgun owners in, of all things, the San Francisco Chronicle!?

Or that the author went out of her way to portray those gun owners as being "just like us!!" -- like all the other ordinary people in San Francisco's very liberal climate?

No, no, of course not.

All THR members ever notice is stupid, nitpicky, completely unimportant stuff. Go ahead and write to the paper bitching the reporter out and nitpicking about this positive article about self-defense in a major, big city paper.

Yeah, THAT will do our cause some good.

:banghead: :barf: :fire:

pax

And he goes through life, his mouth open, and his mind closed. -- Oscar Wilde
 
"There are other ways that people can defend themselves in their homes," said Bill Barnes, a spokesman for the Prop. H campaign. "Let's say someone breaks into this woman's house and steals her gun and gets in a gunfight. The proliferation of handguns has made the city less safe."
Um, what?
 
I think this has been suggested before, but how 'bout we do some tests? Take two people. Put them at opposite ends of a normal-sized hallway, bedroom, or just random room in a house (one in an entranceway, like a door or a window, the other somewhere "safe" in the room, like toward one of the corners.

You give the entranceway person nothing, and you give the other person a gas-operated airsoft gun, everyone gets normal safety equipment. Run 100 tests with various starting parameters (location of "bad guy", location of "good guy", state of preparedness of the firearm), and see how many times the "bad guy" is able to take the gun away from the "good guy" without getting shot one or more times. In the ensuing struggle (the participants are intended to wrestle for the gun), see how many more times the "bad guy" gets shot versus how many times the "good guy" gets shot.

Do so with various kinds of people of various levels of training, then factor in the fact that many criminals will be scared off by the mere presence of a firearm, and see how that ridiculous assertion holds up to some somewhat-scientific testing.

~GnSx
Note: the assertion in question is that a woman with a gun will always be overpowered by an attacker and have her gun used against her.
 
Is there a Pink Pistols in SF? Wonder why no one heard from them on this issue.

Or maybe they did. I figured a long time ago SF should just declare it's secession from the Union, and take the I-5 corridor with it :evil:
 
Steamship Trooper said:
Is there a Pink Pistols in SF? Wonder why no one heard from them on this issue.

Or maybe they did. I figured a long time ago SF should just declare it's secession from the Union, and take the I-5 corridor with it :evil:

According to what I've heard, they were one of the most vocal opposition groups.
 
+1 Pax

Totally agree with you! I like that they didn't portray a white male, mullet wearing NASCAR pickup driving, deer hunting, catfishing, redneck in the article. It shows that all walks of life believe in RTKABA.

Charby
 
beerslurpy said:
I like how they casually dismiss a wide variety of people who served our country in the military, police or elected government as "right-wing lunatics."

I can understand this impression.

I joined an NRA-ILA news feed about a year ago, and a large majority of the stuff that comes through it is right-wing biased garbage with little or no relation to RKBA.

Still, it is odd to hear someone one might assume to be a proponent of tolerance dismissing an entire segment like that.

charby said:
+1 Pax
I like that they didn't portray a white male, mullet wearing NASCAR pickup driving, deer hunting, catfishing, redneck in the article.

Well, the lady in the article indicates that she might very possibly have a mullet:D

Oh, and +1 to pax as well.
 
charby

Totally agree with you! I like that they didn't portray a white male, mullet wearing NASCAR pickup driving, deer hunting, catfishing, redneck in the article. It shows that all walks of life believe in RTKABA.

Charby

I moved from san fran sicko in june and I can tell you that even the mullet heads support gun control.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top