Hannah
Szabo
Professor
Eric Leake
Original
Article: http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2013/02/07/gayle-trotter-the-woman-who-called-gun-control-sexist.html
Freedom’s New
Hero: Gayle Trotter Speaks Out
A successful conservative woman who relates gun control to
sexism does not stand a chance of being taken seriously on the left-leaning
website The Daily Beast. Indeed,
author Caitlin Dickson negatively portrayed Gayle Trotter in her article “Gayle Trotter:
The Woman Who Called Gun Control Sexist,” which I recently found on The Daily Beast. This news and opinion site targets liberal-minded
readers with stories titled “Distrust of Fox News Hits New High,” “The Hagel
Witch-Hunt,” and “In Wichita, the Ground Zero of the Abortion War, a New Clinic
Rises.” I decided to rewrite Dickson’s article about Gayle Trotter as if the
article had appeared on The Foundry, a
conservative blog-child of the Heritage Foundation Research Institute. The Foundry takes an extremely pro-gun
stance and supports the National Riffle Association. I knew that rewriting the Daily Beast article for The Foundry would require me to change
the originally hostile language to heartening diction. I replaced some of the
comments Dickson included of Trotter’s critics with evidence from reliable
research and direct quotes given by Trotter herself. In doing so I created a
new article titled “Freedom’s New Hero: Gayle Trotter Speaks Out,” by the
esteemed blogger Hannah Szabo.
She does not call herself a
political activist, but Gayle Trotter sparked some excitement in the political
world at a Senate hearing on gun control last week. Trotter, a successful
mother of six and D.C. lawyer at a firm she built with her father, claimed guns
“are the great equalizer” for women. According to Trotter, a woman equipped
with a firearm has the ability to protect her children and the confidence to
defend her family against hardened criminals. She also said women are “especially
important potential beneficiaries of the Second Amendment.” Trotter
made these comments in an effort to sway the opinions of Senators seeking to tighten
background checks for current and potential gun owners. Immediately critics
went off to attack her. They called Trotter insane, untrustworthy, and
outrageous, but ignorantly overlooked the evidence she gave defending her
statement. In fact, the evidence supporting Trotter’s claim make her critics look
like the insane, untrustworthy, and outrageous ones.
Take, for
example, concealed carry laws. Research shows that states restricting women from carrying
concealed handguns have twenty-five percent more rapes than states with
nondiscretionary concealed handgun laws. Or consider the fact that between 2001
and 2010 only six to nine percent of violent victimizations were executed with
firearms. That means violent criminals rely more on their physical size and
strength than on guns to attack women. This puts woman at a disadvantage due to
the fact that men have genetically stronger bodies. The ability for women to
carry a firearm levels the playing field and switches the balance of power
before a violent conflict occurs.
Along with solid evidence and
logical claims, Trotter used a compelling story about Sarah McKinley to support
her pro-gun stance. McKinley had been alone at home with her baby when two
violent intruders broke down the front door to steal her deceased husband’s
medication. She frantically called 911, but it was too late; the intruders were
quickly approaching and ready to attack. McKinley, scared for her and her son’s
life, fired her gun at the callous criminals. She fatally wounded one intruder
and scared off the other. With the aid of a fire arm McKinley effectively
defended herself, her son, and her home. McKinley’s story does not stand alone.
Trotter offers twenty-one impressive accounts of women successfully using
firearms to protect themselves from violent men.
It is important to note that Trotter
gave her valid testimony to supporters of stricter background checks for gun
ownership; these are the same supporters who reference the invalid “forty
percent” statistic to make their argument. The hackneyed mantra that forty
percent of gun sales come from gun shows where criminal background checks are
waived fails to reflect reality. The Washington
Post revealed the forty percent statistic came from a telephone survey of
only two hundred and fifty people who bought firearms in 1993 and 1994. The
survey took place four years before the National Instant Criminal Background
Check System (NICS) went into effect. The NICS requires federal firearm dealers
to conduct background checks for all firearm sales, including sales from gun
shows. Basing an argument off of this survey is similar to relying on a
basketball for directions: it just does not make sense.
When critics
blast Trotter as a dangerous, gun-loving, extreme right-wing nut job, remember
the reliable facts, evidence, and affinity of case studies supporting gun
rights. Trotter’s testimony before the Senate should act as inspiration for all
Americans concerned with our diminishing freedom. We
need to defend freedom and not be ashamed to say, in the words of Trotter, “I am an
unapologetically liberty-loving, tyranny-hating, red-blooded, patriotic
American … who is proud to say that the Declaration of Independence, the
Constitution and the Bill of Rights are the founding charters of freedom and
that government of the people, for the people and by the people is here to
stay.”
Works Cited
Dickson,
Caitlin. “Gayle Trotter: The Woman Who Called Gun Control Sexist.” The Daily
Beast. 7 Feb. 2013. Web. 9 Feb. 2013.
Kessler,
Glenn. “The Stale Claim That 40 Percent of Gun Sales Lack Background Checks.” The
Washington Post - Blogs 25 Jan. 2013. Web. 14 Feb. 2013.
No comments:
Post a Comment