Dr. Harveen Kaur Sidhu, who lives in an affluent neighborhood in the city of Chandigarh in Punjab, is one such lady gun owner.
“I don’t have faith in the police to protect me,” she told The Guardian last spring.
are so many attacks on women these days. It’s everybody’s right to
defend themselves. I think all women who are vulnerable should be
Typically, about one-fifth of all gun applicants
are women, the Times of India reported – but since the Dec. 16
gang-rape, that proportion has spiked to more than one-third.
We're called, among other things, misogynists for not following the PC line; but it's the other people who don't want women to have the best means of self-defense possible.
Now read this:
The National Crime Records Bureau of India recorded 5,575 gun-related
homicides in 2010 -- of this figure, an extraordinary 89 percent (4,988)
were by illegal or unlicensed weapons. In contrast, the United States,
which has one-fourth of India’s population, recorded 12,664 murders in
2011, of which 8,583 were caused by guns.
Do you see what I see? For India they note ONLY the number of homicides committed with firearms, for the US they use the TOTAL number of murders, then the number involving firearms; agenda, much? Now, this page at Wiki, the total homicide number in India for 'the most recent year' was 40,752+.
Isn't that '+' interesting?
The National Association for Gun Rights India claims, however, that
the authorities put up obstacles to women acquiring firearms. For one
thing, most gun permit applications are rejected by police, usually
citing a lack of proven threats and grave danger to the applicant.
are issued more gun licenses than women in Delhi even if the latter
have genuine reasons to apply for them,” a member of the association
told Indian media.
“The fact that even parents are ready to hand
over weapons to their daughters shows they are living in fear. There is a
20 percent increase in self-defense courses across the city.”
Difference from the gun bigots here? It wouldn't be women being screwed over, it would be EVERYONE except the wealthy and connected being disarmed(yeah, I'm talking to you, Schumer. And you, Feinstein).
The ultimate reason for our 2nd Amendment is, as the judge said, a doomday provision; which doesn't change that self-defense is one of, maybe the, most basic right. And a bunch of people would love to take it away from us.