Working as an Advocacy Project Peace Fellow with IANSA on the Disarming Domestic Violence campaign this summer has opened my eyes to the horrible realities of domestic violence. However, no matter how many months I spend researching the topic, I know I will never truly understand what it is like to be a victim, or survivor, of domestic abuse.
Understandably, it has been difficult for me to find abuse victims willing to share their stories; some are too ashamed while others do not want to relive the terrible memories they have worked so hard to forget.
One individual wanting to tell her story, though, is Donna Carrick. Donna posted a comment on one of my entries about her abusive father with the hopes that it would illustrate the increased fear and danger brought on by the presence of firearms.
I got in touch with Donna and asked if she would be willing to share more of her story with me. Kindly, in order to help promote awareness of this important issue, she agreed.
The following narrative was written by Donna. In her own words, she describes the abuse she witnessed and experienced firsthand as a child and into her first marriage.
My name is Donna Carrick. I’m forty-nine, married, and we have three children. Our home is peaceful. My husband and I are both writers with day-jobs. Most would describe me as out-going and confident.
On the subject of Domestic Violence, in particular with regards to how a violent situation can be made worse by the presence of firearms, I have first-hand knowledge. My father was a Military man. He was also a collector of hunting rifles and subscriber to many gun-related magazines. Canadian-born, he was an avid outdoorsman.
In later years we were able to honour him as a parent. He had many good qualities – loyalty, intelligence, and a sharp sense of humour. He was aware of his personal failings, which made him forgivable to his family.
However, when I was young he was abusive and violent. He often threatened to shoot my mother and even myself and my sisters. I don’t know how my ninety-five pound mother survived those years of physical abuse. My older sister did not survive – I lost her to suicide when she was only nineteen.
My father was physically, verbally, psychologically and sexually abusive to my mother, my older sister, and myself. My younger sister denies having experienced any abuse, but adds she has no memories prior to the age of twelve, which is hard for me to imagine. I have very distinct and sharp memories.
My father would strangle my mother. We girls would lie in our beds and hear her cries for help, too afraid to move. She was an unfailing wife and mother, didn’t drink, didn’t swear, and was raised to be a lady. He would beat her, would put inanimate objects inside her, would call her names, and worst of all, would threaten to take down one of his guns and kill us all. I consider it to be a “long-shot” we were not all shot.
IANSA
I have a sense of humour, enjoy my life, writing, family and my work and friends. All of that is forgotten, though, as I remember those years. I am again a child, afraid and frustrated, unable to take any action, dreaming only of escape.
No one can understand this despair unless they have lived through it. When I tell these stories, the reactions I encounter are 1 of 2 kinds:
1-How can you say these things about your family? (As if I am disloyal. But when my father was dying of cancer, it was I who visited him every day. I fed him, cleaned him, took him to his medical appointments, and never uttered an unkind or unloving word to him. “Keeping the silence” only perpetuates the abuse by enabling the abusers.)
2-Why didn’t your mother leave him? She left him when I was six, only to discover she had no family support. Her relatives felt she had “made her own bed”. My father’s employer, the Military, pressured her to return to him. She left him once again when I was fifteen, after being beaten so badly that several ribs were broken and her face was not recognisable. She was unable to get out of bed for three weeks. That time he actually did quit drinking and sought help for his problems. After three months we went back, and he never hit my mother again. Just when I was sure things were better, he was again sexually abusive. I left home shortly after that.
Guns were a terrifying presence in our house. We all understood we would most likely die by shooting. I’ve heard others say that this scenario is like “living in the eye of a hurricane”, in that you never know when the next bout of violence will erupt. On the contrary, we could usually predict the onset of violence. There would be a false bravado, a tone of camaraderie, a heightened sense of humour in my father’s speech that was certain to end badly.
During one of his moments of sobriety and remorse, my father allowed my mother to lock away vital parts of each firearm. I know little about hunting rifles, but I believe it was the “clips” that he removed. It was probably this insistence on my mother’s part that saved our lives.
When I finally escaped from my childhood I became another statistic. I married my first husband, a drug and alcohol abuser with an even worse temperament than my father had. During that brief marriage he strangled me twice, beat me several times, threatened and belittled me constantly, refused to work and demanded my pay checks, was constantly paranoid and jealous and accused me of having affairs.
One night, when we were entertaining people for dinner at our apartment, he took a large kitchen knife and threatened to kill one of our guests, then chased me down the street till I took refuge in a local restaurant. The owner found a blanket to wrap around me and called the police. I was seventeen at the time.
One day I went to put the clean towels away in the linen closet and found an illegal handgun hidden there. I knew it was time to get out. When I left, he would not let go. I lost several good jobs because of his stalking. He called incessantly and would show up. One of my bosses had to call security. It was the embarrassment that made me most depressed. On at least two occasions, he got on the bus I was on, and the bus driver had to force him off.
My oldest sister committed suicide when she was only nineteen. When you spend your childhood having your life threatened by a parent with a gun, you doubt your right to live. Her death was a defining moment for me.
Obviously there will always be men like my father who are violent, with or without access to firearms. However, when we take an already difficult domestic situation and add the element of firearms, the situation becomes worse. A bullet is more “certain to kill” than most other weapons.
I am not a victim of domestic abuse, but a Survivor. I understand this story could easily have ended quite differently for me.
I still experience the most horrible nightmares. My husband and children tease me about them – they don’t understand why I sometimes wake up screaming for help.
Tags: Disarming Domestic Violence Campaign, domestic violence, Donna Carrick, gun control, IANSA
A sad story to be sure, yet no one did die from the guns. So, what’s the point? And yet again, had she not returned the first time (No support is utter bunk – As I said, I personally witnessed one lady friend go thru leaving an abusive spouse – She was amazed at the support received) none of the resulting idiocy would have happened.
Although the story is tragic, it is not about a gun, or threats that a gun made. It just happens that instead of focusing on the real problem, the abusive, father, you are focusing on a gun, which played NO part in the above drama. Was any gun actually USED? No, it was just another instrument of psychological control. He could just as easily told them he was going to chop them up with a sword or stab them with a spear, and either alternative would have had the same effect.
The real question is if a gun wasn’t in the house would the outcome been any different? I sincerely doubt it.
Removing guns from all homes is just a panacea that will unjustly persecute tens of millions of innocent firearm owners and their family members, simply to justify your personal fears. All that effort in the hope of “saving” a dozen or so victims? If an abuser is willing to use a gun to harm a spouse, they are equally willing to use whatever else is at hand.
In the end, you spend huge amounts of time and effort policing millions of people who do not need “government supervision” and will NEVER be a problem, but in doing so, you still have done NOTHING to change the plight of the victims, except divert the very recourses they actually need.
Why not go after the abusers themselves?
Ah yes. Emotion.
The anti gun persons fall back position when their manipulation of statistics and “facts” fall apart.
First off, taking the “clip” away does nothing to stop a PERSON from operating a firearm. It can still function by manually inserting a round into the chamber. IF her father wanted to kill them with the firearm, taking away the “clip” would not haved stopped him.
Secondly, I have read the story. Obviously both her father and first husband were drunk, cowardly scumbags. The first husband clearly threatend her and others with a knife. The story makes mention she found an ILLEGAL handgun while putting towels away, which ultimately lead to her leaving him. The key word here Elizabeth is ILLEGAL. How would gun control or the handgun registry, which has been in existance since 1934 stopped what MIGHT have happened from happening. The answer of course is gun control and the registry would have done NOTHING.
Elizabeth
In several of your comments on previous blog entries you claim you have never said that you are in favour of total civilian disarming. However the IANSA logo with this story would suggest otherwise.
Soulchaser-Sometimes it’s okay to believe someone who doesn’t share the same opinion as you. Go ahead…believe me when I tell you I don’t care if you’re law-abiding and own a gun…c’mon, you can do it!
You know Elizabeth, given that you are the peace fellow for North America and an American, I really have to wonder why you chose to come to Canada to spew your garbage.
Maybe it’s because our “pro gun lobby” isn’t as powerful or organized as the NRA is down in the USA, and you figured you would be able to spread your lies, misinfomation and hatred for male firearms owners unchallenged.
Obviously you were wrong.
You are absolutely right. It is OK to believe someone who shares a different opinion . Now look in a mirror and tell YOURSELF that.
While I certainly do feel for Donna and her family I think it’s also important to note that policy shouldn’t be based on isolated examples.
Obviously her situation is tragic – more so as her sister felt she had to take her own life to end the abuse she was suffering.
Clearly her father should not only not have owned guns, he should have been in prison for repeated cases of physical and sexual assault.
Beyond that, it’s fairly safe to assume that had firearms not been present her father would have been equally abusive, although perhaps he would threaten to “beat” or “stab” instead of “shoot” everyone in the house.
Again, I can’t help but feel you’re overlooking the perpetrator and instead focussing on an object.
In the case of Donna’s first husband – who chose a knife – we can clearly see that an abuser will use whatever is accessible.
Both Donna’s first husband, in owning an illegal handgun, and Donna’s father, in having access to military firearms, had weapons accessible outside of the control of legislative firearms regimes.
I would like to know what legislative changes you would suggest that might disarm people like Donna’s father and first husband?
“One day I went to put the clean towels away in the linen closet and found an illegal handgun hidden there. I knew it was time to get out.”
ILLEGAL handgun.
So the tragic story of one victims life is justification to make me a criminal if my firearms licence expires one minute after midnight?
Again, your agenda is VERY clear, complete disarmament of all peoples.
SR has saved me the trouble of writing a lengthy response. I agree with him 100%.
I’ve had fully automatic rifles pointed at me, I’ve been threatened with a machete, and I’ve been threatened with fists. I can assure you that the fists and machete invoked exactly the same fear response in me as the rifles. In fact, knowing of the incredible atrocities that have been committed with a machete (far worse than any that have ever been committed with a gun), I think I was more afraid of the blade!
I’m not in any way trying to minimalize the terror that Ms Carrick felt or downplay the severity of her experiences. But it’s not the threat of being shot that’s so horrifying. It’s the threat of violence. Period. It makes no difference what form that threat takes or what tool is used to make it.
Elizabeth,
That story sounds very coached if not exaggerated.
How did she know the handgun was illegal? How did she know her husband didn’t go through all the requirements to buy it?
Oh, I “found an illegal handgun” isn’t proof it is illegal. It may well have been, but how would she KNOW?
reply to Soulchaser, who says: “Obviously both her father and first husband were drunk, cowardly scumbags.”
I don’t make these judgments. My emotions are genuine although I’ve learned to keep them in check, and to refrain from name-calling. There are many causes of domestic abuse, most dating back to the abuser’s own childhood. My feelings for these important people in my life have long ago been reconciled.
On the other hand, in reading some of the comments posted on this site, it does seem that emotions do run high. Advocates of “right to bear arms” should try to reign in their emotions — the thought of ranting people carrying guns is frightening to most people in society.
It appears that “emotion” is ok when making a case for “right to own”, but not when speaking out against guns in the home.
One can only speak the truth as one understands it, and let others understand their own truths.
An ex spouse of 15 1/2 years attacked me with a pair of barber scissors, a hatchet three times, and sewing scissors. I was never hit until the last time when the scissors drew blood in the palm of my left hand.
I left with my eight year old son. In court I was granted joint guardianship and joint custody (Which I asked the BC Supreme Court Judge to rule in the best interest of my son).
Spousal abuse? You bet. I left because I was in grave danger, I could literally smell death coming.
Soulchaser and Kent (and other posters taking the same stance):
It took me a long time to decide whether I should allow comments on this post. I’ve had it ready for over a week. I can only imagine the number of harassing emails and comments I would receive accusing me of censorship had I decided not to accept comments, though, so I did.
However, I need to make one thing clear, and this should be taken into consideration by anyone else who decides to comment on this entry: you have absolutely no right to belittle an individual brave enough to share her story. Donna’s abuse is not her fault, although it’s obvious you are trying to make it seem that way. Trying to disguise your disrespect with words like ‘tragic’ and ‘sad’ do not fool me, will not fool Donna, and only work to illustrate your lack of understanding of, and compassion for, victims and survivors of domestic violence.
Trying to discredit experts is one thing, but trying to discredit and accuse coaching of someone who had courage enough to tell her story is utterly unfair. Just for once, have some compassion.
Marcel, You do realize that it would have furthered my argument for the Firearms Act more if the gun were not illegal, right? Really, it’s not necessary to argue with EVERYTHING I say. In making a guess, I would say you’ve tried to submit at least twenty or so comments in the last day alone. Somtimes you should pick your battles, and make sure your argument is valid, before trying to ‘stomp all over me’ as you gunnutz like to say.
Hi Elizabeth,
First of all, I would like to say that I feel really sorry for Donna, her mom and her sister due to all of the abuse that they have endured at the hands of her father and husband. Those men were clearly very disturbed and abusive individuals and they give males a bad reputation.
But what I fail to see is how their abuse has any connection to the men owning firearms. I think you and I would both agree that abused women need better support networks and resources to seek for help. Will banning guns save battered women? I doubt it.
Why didn’t Donna’s mother go to the police and file charges against her father? Why didn’t Donna go to the police when her husband chased her down the street with a large kitchen knife? He should have been charged with attempted murder.
Guns are nearly irrelevant in this story. No one was threatened with a gun and no one was even shot.
Reply to Marcel B — My story is my story. Never coached, with no agenda hidden or otherwise. My opinions are my own, not borrowed from anyone.
I make it a practice not to presume to judge the stories that other people present. We all have our own truths.
As to how I knew the handgun was illegal, I was there and knew the person. You were not and you did not. As one other reader pointed out, the fact that it was an illegal weapon does not support the gun control case. Nevertheless, it is the truth, and I won’t bend the truth for anyone.
Marcel, on behalf of abuse survivors everywhere, I must apologise if our stories don’t seem real to you. I don’t want to be sarcastic here — I realise that to many people these stories seem unreal. That’s too bad I guess. We have to tell the stories anyway. I don’t know what method of telling would make it more real to you, but I have to be true to myself, not to your perception.
Elizabeth
Kindly point out where in my posts on this blog entry I “belittled” the victim in this story.
You linked the need for gun control to help to stop these situations from continuing. My post was directly related to this lady’s finding her husbands ILLEGAL handgun, and the fact taking firearms away from legal owners, and the firearms registry did not and would not have done anything to protect this, or any other victim of domestic violence.
However my second comment questioning why you chose to focus on Canada even though you are American is still awaiting a response.
I think your work on domestic violence is commendable and I thank you but I have a couple questions. Why the focus on guns? they do not now or never have played a large role in the domestic violence issue in canada. Its not the weapon of choice and its used in less than 1/3 of domestic violence murders so why the fuss over something so far down the list? what was it again…….something like the sixth on the list of risk factors? what are you wasting your time on something that is already over controlled in this country?
“However, I need to make one thing clear, and this should be taken into consideration by anyone else who decides to comment on this entry: you have absolutely no right to belittle an individual brave enough to share her story. Donna’s abuse is not her fault, although it’s obvious you are trying to make it seem that way. Trying to disguise your disrespect with words like ‘tragic’ and ’sad’ do not fool me, will not fool Donna, and only work to illustrate your lack of understanding of, and compassion for, victims and survivors of domestic violence.”
I’m sorry Elizabeth but I have to take exception with your comment quoted above as it seems to be, in part, directed at me.
Donna’s past abuse is tragic. Obviously it’s not her fault. And it’s a failing on society’s part that there were not better programs in place for her mother to be able to escape her abusive spouse.
Donna also illustrates the circle of abuse that children who grow up in abusive homes often fall into.
I don’t believe I’ve said anything disrespectful, and I find it offensive that you lump all “gun owners” as being so.
There is nothing disrespectful with disagreeing with someone’s conclusions. Whether they’re yours or Donna’s. Stifling debate with claims of “insensitivity” hardly seems productive.
I think Donna’s case isn’t an example of why we need more “gun control”, I think Donna’s case is, instead, a clear illustration of why we need more spending on programs to help women that are victims of domestic violence.
In Donna’s case her mother tried to leave – only to find she had no familial support, and no where else to turn.
I suggest that Donna’s sister might still be alive, and both her and her mother would have suffered much less abuse, if there was somewhere for them to go.
I find myself sounding like a broken record. Why is it that you choose to ignore the perpetrator and instead focus on an object used in 0.1% of cases?
to Donna Carrick
I am trully sorry for the expirence that you your mom and your late sister had to suffer that the hands of you father. He was a discrace to men and the military.
I do understand a little of what you went threw my dad use to beat me till I was strong enought to fight back.
to elizabeth
From what ive read of other readers posts NO ONE is belittleing Ms.Carricks expriences it terrible horiffic that anyone could act like that, but the problume is once again the indidual that has used the tools avalable to cause harm and not the tool alone.
To disarm lawabiding citizans is crazy you are opening them to people that dont care about laws, or other people and will aquire illigal firearms JUST TO DO HARM to LAWABIDING citizans.
If you trully want to help abuse in the house hold instead of posting on a website about the atrocity of gun owners, how about u try and help those that are in this situation to get out. donate some money to local abuse centers write to the local reprsentive to get more funding for said centers. there is ALOT you can do that would be more benifical then trying to twist a tragic even such as Ms.Carrick’s into your propaganda against gun’s and there legal owners.
Thank you, Ms. Mandelman for letting me tell this story, and also thanks to eveyone who read it, regardless of their beliefs.
I don’t feel particularly brave for telling it. In fact, originally I did not intend to read or reply to any comments, because I try to avoid conflict, having experienced enough of it already.
Then I realised that since it was time to tell this story, I would also have to be prepared to stand by it. That means asserting to readers that it is true.
I would also like to take this opportunity to remind everyone that all stories have many sides. It is very easy to label my father a coward, but like many servicement in this country, he served us bravely for 27 years. He was not a typical bully in that he was not a coward, and would be serving this country still if he could. He had many faults, and he would be the first to say so. Cowardice was not among them.
As for anyone who called my mother “stupid”, I can’t reply to that. Anyone who has lived through this kind of trauma knows too well the mixture of fear, love and depression that goes into every daily decision. Some are able to break away. Others are not. My mother was a fine lady, and anyone who knew her would tell you that. She was not stupid, and not a coward. She was a rock.
There are so many shades of grey between the “black” and “white” in this world. I try to take what was good from both of my parents — kindness and fairness from my mother, intelligence and a sense of humour from my father. I try my very best not to judge. I don’t always succeed. But I am always honest.
Elizabeth, everyone here has compassion for Donna Carrick. It is you who are using her tragedy to forward your agenda which has absolutely nothing to do with her experiences whatsoever. You are trying to invoke an emotional appeal that is not even supported by her own interview, to demonioze an inanimate object in lieu of personal responsibility and accountability, namely her father and husband. And you would like to make sure that all others pay the price guilty or not.
For once, you should have some compassion and understanding. Shame on you.
And thank you for censoring my comments that refute your position. So much for no censorship. And I’m still waiting for answers to my questions that are at the heart of your entire crusade.
Dave, As Cindy Cowan, Executive Director of the Interim Place, told me in an interview a couple of weeks ago, you can’t erase the years of oppression and cultural norms that exist, allowing things like this to happen. Providing more money to social services is something that would provide more beds for battered women to sleep in, yes, but it wouldn’t work to fix the problem. As Cindy Cowan stated, it would only ‘bandage up a few more women’. Because one cannot erase the past, it’s necessary to look to different policy measures that will help to lessen the damage that history has done.
And, I mean no disrespect (you obviously meant none to me in your comment), but if you read Donna’s story and are unable to gauge the relavancy of guns, there is something very wrong with that. Donna’s father had a gun in the home, and used it to threaten and subjugate her mother. It also worked to instill fear into Donna and her sisters.
Soulchaser,
A. Accusing me of appealing to emotion. (At least now I know, though, that you have feelings)
B. Calling her first husband and her father scumbags.
C. Pointing out that removing clips from guns don’t do anything. What’s the point, Soulchaser? Are you trying to tell her thta her fears were unfounded? I can’t think of another message you would have been trying to get across.
A+B+C=Belittlement
Elizabeth,
You’re doing a great job on your blog. Just keep fighting the fight and don’t let naysayers put a doubt in your mind that what you are doing is noble and just. I struggle with this issue as well.
I wanted to thank Donna for her bravery. It is not easy for someone to discuss these issues and she is a powerful person for doing so.
In my personal opinion, guns are not only a method to an end but a tool of psychological empowerment, especially in domestic violence. A gun has more sway than a knife. The only way to protect against a gun is with another gun and it is much easier to defend yourself against a knife attack.
I am for the complete disarmament of small arms in both Canada and the United States. Correct me if I’m wrong, but much of the illegal arms that enter the black market are robbed from legal shops.
It is not worth your time to respond to all of the posts, but this blog is a great medium for dialogue on the subject. Keep up the good work!
-Farzin
Rafael, That comment was not directed towards you. You may not agree with me (or even Donna’s opinions in this case), but as of yet you’ve been quite nice and respectful, honoring the fact that everyone is entitled to their opinion. I just think that it’s important to remember in this situation that we’re talking about a real person here. I think Donna’s story will help illustrate, among other things, the psychological consequences of abuse, and the fact that firearms do cause greater fear. No, it was never used, but that does not mean it did not cause severe fear and intimidation. I think that Donna is very brave in telling her story, and I also think that the reason more victims/survivors do not tell their stories is because they get reactions like she’s received to this entry. Because I’ve falsely been accused of censorship, I wanted to make clear what sort of comments I find inappropriate in respect to this entry.
I did not coach Donna to tell me anything (as someone else has suggested). Donna came across my blog, entered a comment, and I asked her to expand. I did not tell Donna she should pretend her father owning a gun made her more frightened. I did not edit Donna’s story. I asked her to write what she felt comfortable talking about, and that’s exactly what she did. Criticizing me is one thing, but I will not stand for others criticising someone brave enough to share her story, in order to shed some light on a very serious issue.
Elizabeth, I see that guns were present in that home. So were Donna’s fathers hands to strangle he mother. Both were tools. The man using the tools is the problem. Your misdirection of blame or resources compounds the problem, it does not help it. Double shame on you.
My assessment of the relevance of guns in that home is 100% correct, I doubt anyone posting here or any reasonable person will dispute that. What is wrong here is your use of this as an excuse to disarm decent, law-abidng folks under thin veil of spousal safety. Not only do you disrespect a large portion of the Canadian population, but your use of the tragedies of others to push your agenda disrespects them. Everyone has tragedies in their lives, none are to be discounted. None are more special than anyone elses.
Equality for all, or equality for none.
I believe in personal responsibility for ones actions. I hate the word accident because of its overuse in our society and often used incorrectly.
A tragic story and I really do feel for the victims. Again the focus is on object not the abuser and not the cycle of violence. Guns are simply inanimate objects and as long as people focus on the objects of abusers the root of the problem cannot and will not be addressed. And vital funds will be diverted and wasted.
From a were early age I looked forward to Sundays. My mom tells me my brother and I started shooting at 5. In the winter Sundays was hockey game day and in the summer it was range time with my mom, dad and brother. My parents where awesome we did not have much money, but my brother and I never wanted for anything. Some of my earliest memories of my parents are at the range.
My mom knows that I am a firearms owner and I have been for a very long time. My Mom is also a firearms owner and still goes to the range even thought my dad has since passed. She keeps reminding me that it will soon be time to teach my children as my father taught me. So that our family traditions can be passed down and kept alive.
My daughters have never been to the range both are still too young. My oldest is getting very close though where she can learn firearms safety. She is very curious and I will soon have to sit down with her and go over ACT’s and PROVE. For her next birthday I have even picked out a nice .22 bolt action rifle and her range trips will start. Nothing in my safe will be a mystery to her and under supervision after her birthday she will be allowed to handle anything in the safe. And like me when she turns 18 and has her licenses she will be given the combination. Just like my dad did for me given she is a trustworthy person.
My wife has an interest in firearms, but has yet to ever fire one. She is fully licensed and has gone to the range and watched me shoot. She is fully capable to PROVE a firearm safe and has many times. I have left the offer open over the years and she will try when she is ready, but that is her choice and I respect that.
I mentioned my dad had passed but here is his story of how the government failed him. He was scheduled for a MRI the closest date was 9 months the day before his appointment he got a call that he had been bumped and got a new date 3 months after that as he was not a high priority/risk. My dad was diagnosed with cancer. The kicker is early diagnoses of this type of cancer would have been very treatable and he would have had a high chance of full recovery. The year he waited for a simple MRI could have very well killed him. Every dollar that goes into the registry is money sucked away from real issues with tangible results. The reality is simple every dollar spent on health care has a direct tangible correlation to lives saved.
Thanks,
Paul
Elizabeth,
While it may be true firearms are a contributing factor to the fear felt by victims of domestic violence it’s hardly logical to conclude that removing firearms is the solution. Firearms are used in a miniscule fraction of situations.
Donna’s experience is clearly genuine, and it’s foolish to question its authenticity, but – as I said before – we can’t base policy on the exceptions. And based on Statistics Canada’s report it is the exception.
Frankly, I also disagree with your suggestion that more money to social services for more beds is nothing more than a “bandaid”.
I think the women who could take advantage of those extra spaces would certainly welcome the chance to leave their abusive relationships.
If there’s something we should learn from Donna’s story it’s that we need to make it easier for victims to get help.
Sorry for the hijack Elizabeth, but I just couldn’t let those points pass unaddressed.
-Farzin-
In regards to your comment “The only way to protect against a gun is with another gun and it is much easier to defend yourself against a knife attack.”
With a statement like that, I’d wager you’ve never taken any self-defense classes. People regularly walk away from gunfights completely uninjured. People NEVER walk away from a knife fight unharmed. This webpage summarizes it quite well, if you’re interested in learning more. The group is called Arming Women Against Rape and Endangerment (AWARE) http://www.aware.org/arttruelaw/knifeattack.shtml
And about this one “but much of the illegal arms that enter the black market are robbed from legal shops” While the statement is vague, the fact that you said “arms” leads me to believe you’re talking about the international trafficking of weapons on the black market. The leading suppliers of these weapons are the governments of USA, UK, France, China and Russia. For example, when the United States leaves a war zone, they typically leave their weapons behind – it’s cheaper to buy new guns than to ship them home. If you were referring to the domestic black market, the issue is far more complicated than I can cover in this comment.
If you’re going to continue to be an advocate for something like total small arms disarmament, which will have an immediate and direct impact on the lives of well over 100 million people in the US and Canada, please take the time to fully educate yourself on the issue first.
I have a question for Donna. Please give this some thought and post your honest response. Donna, let’s imagine that your father and ex-husband did not own any firearms legally or illegally. Would you have felt any safer in your home, knowing that if they really wanted to kill you, they could have used something else like a kitchen knife of their fists? Or would it really have made no difference if guns were in home or not? It just seems to me that guns are being made out to be the ‘bad-guy’ when it’s really your father and ex-husband who are to blame for the abuse that you suffered.
Without guns in the home, he would have still abused (probably would have said stab instead of shoot), without him in the home the guns are harmless. People are the problem, not guns.
Elizabeth
In this story, Donna mentions an abusive ex-husband who had a worse temperment than her father.
Yet, on her personal blog at http://blogdc.donnacarrick.com when talking about her history with domestic violence she only mentions her father. In fact, in an earlier blog posting where she is discussing gun control she posted the following:
“I am not anti-American. My ex-husband, a gentle man, was born in Louisiana. Despite his non-violent nature he believed, as do many Americans, that an armed population is a free population, and that only by remaining armed can a population expect to remain free.”
Why no mention of the abusive ex husband on her personal blog? It may lead a sceptical person to ask if she used some of her writing skills to create one for your blog.
Matt, If you had read the narrative with open eyes rather then skepticism from the start, you wouldn’t be making such an offensive accusation. Perhaps it has something to do with the fact that he stalked her for years, and she’s had to make sure he’s unable to find her, whether that’s in person or on the web. Or maybe it’s because talking about the abuse of her father was difficult enough for Donna. Whatever the reason, you have no right.
Elizabeth, Matt has every right to question, just like you have every right to post up a story. This a tennet of free and open dialogue.
I’m not sure if you are aware of this, but the Canadian culture and American culture are quite different. Yes, sure, we speak the same language, have the same TV shows, but little else is similar. I’m curious how a story based on the 1960′s and 1970′s in he U.S., with their societal values, relates at all to the Canada of today?
Now, if Donna’s story is 100% true, that is fine. If it is not, and is a product of some elements of truth with fiction sprinkled in, that is fine. If you are presenting the latter as truth, then that is abhorant and you should be ashamed of yourself.
I’m still waiting for you to provide those stats on threats.
Actually Elizabeth, Matt DOES have the right to question the facts of Ms. Carricks story. We have freedom of speech in Canada, just like you do in your native USA. And as you have pointed out in an earlier entry here, everyone is entitled to their own opinion.
You didn’t answer the question.
On her blog, her ex-husband is described as gentle and non-violent.
On your blog, he is described as a drug and alcohol abuser, more violent than her father.
So by your assertion, it was too difficult to talk about on her blog about 10 days ago, but not too difficult to talk about her ex-husband on your blog in an attempt to bolster your opinions.
Elizabeth:
From Ms. Carrick’s blog:
“In my humble opinion, an advanced and civilised society has no place for guns, other than in the military and for use by our police. Obviously there will always be men like my father who are violent, with or without access to firearms. However, studies show that heightened control and registration of guns coincides directly with a reduction in the number of deaths related to domestic violence. I am for anything that keeps women and children MORE SAFE, so they can finally grow past their fear to live happy and productive lives.”
You presented Ms. Carrick as someone who simply wanted to tell her story about her experiances being the victim of domestic abuse. But from the above passage, she clearly has the very same anti firearms agenda that you do: taking firearms away from everyone but the police and military. She even hits all the same talking points people like you and Wendy Cukier hit: The “studies” that show gun control and the regstering of firearms reduces domestic violence (even though she clearly states her father would have been just as abusive with or without firearms), it’s worth it if it save one life, ect.
I think we can both agree that Ms. Carricks story is one that should be told. Just tell the truth. She is not only a victim who wanted to tell her story as you portrayed her, she is also a supporter of a complete ban of civilian firearms ownership.
I await your response that claims, yet again, I am belittleing Ms. Carrick.
Elizabeth,
I hate to go off topic with this response and I understand if you do not post it, but I fell I must respond to Farzin and Donna.
Farzin,
I was born a free and I will die a freeman. I will never give up my liberty or freedom for the sake of security.
I believe in freedom and choice above all else. Honest law abiding citizens should not be controlled or told what to do by the state. I don’t have to like, understand or even embrace another persons lifestyle or religion, but I have to embrace there rights to not be interfered with because to me there are no degrees of freedom. You are either free or you are not.
I am glad to see that you would take my freedom, liberty and property rights away from me. And make sure a significant portion of my countries and families history and heritage cannot continue. Yet you work in Iran looking to bring freedom and choice which you would take away from me in a heartbeat how very ironic don’t you think.
“In my personal opinion, guns are not only a method to an end but a tool of psychological empowerment”
Interesting in my house growing up almost all the fresh meat we ate in the spring, fall and summer came via a gun or bow. I must note that we did not hunt for sport we hunted for survival. My family was not a farming family but our farmer neighbors always gave permission for us to hunt there lands and never complained when we helped them with pest control.
“Correct me if I’m wrong, but much of the illegal arms that enter the black market are robbed from legal shops.”
Your statement is very vague and also very incorrect. I have always believed that before one cannot have an educated opinion about a topic one should at least research and understand the topic.
Donna,
I have no doubts about your story being true or not. This type of story is all too common especially given the time when it happened in my opinion, but that does not change my views on the topic. I blame people not objects and as long as the focus is on objects valuable resources will be diverted away from the root problem and mechanisms that really do help.
I don’t blame alcohol for drunk drivers. Just like I do not blame firearms for what a human does with one.
I will not insult you or your family as it serves no good purpose. I sincerely hope that you have broken the cycle of violence and that you have all the support you need. I wish you the best on wherever your journeys may take you.
Thanks,
Paul
Ms. Mandelman,
I too have the same question as Matt referring to the narrative.
And we have the right to question the information you are feeding us, just as you have the right to dispute our position. You see, it is not because we are not fellows associated with IANSA or working on our Masters that we are idiots.
Please, give us some credit for independent thought once in a while.
Inconsistencies get our attention. We’re actually pretty good at finding them. And right now, I am finding myself wondering about that particular discrepancy between Mrs. Carrick’s blog and your own.
Ms. Mandelman, so far you have done very little to make yourself very credible, at least with us. You have refused to meet with members of the firearms community yet you meet with members of the gun control lobby. You censor a number of comments. You misquote stats and do not put them in context. You do not answer points and questions raised in comments.
Also, you would think that someone with an abusive ex-husband who stalked her for years (of which we know of on YOUR blog instead of in Mrs. Carrick’s) would be smart enough NOT to put her name to a blog. In the military, we call this operational security, or OPSEC.
And good OPSEC is to NOT advertise yourself in any way. Blogs, Facebook, MySpace, etc, are just ways to create an electronic footprint that can easily be tracked. With a minimum of ingenuity, anyone can easily track someone else down once they find such a footprint.
Someone who has run from an abusive ex-husband would probably know better than have that story anywhere, and tied to her name in an environment that yields itself so well to information gathering as the internet.
As such, with the combination of factors I have here listed, I am let to wonder as to the validity of the claims regarding Mrs. Carrick’s first husband.
But then again, you and I, we see things very differently. You will probably state I have no right to question your or Mrs. Carrick. You will probably call me blind and close-minded for not seeing things your way, or that I see things only the way I want them to be seen.
However, Ms Mandelman, you are in no position to chastise anyone about selective understanding of information either.
As usual, in case you do not see it fit to post this comment, it will be sent to multiple recipients in order to ensure as much light as possible can be shed on this issue.
Really Elizabeth, ENOUGH with your theatrics and “outrage.”
So you think my “accusation” is offensive? First off, it was not an “accusation” but a question about a rather glaring discrepancy between the two versions of the same story.
What I find offensive is that you, as an American, think you have the right to come to my country and tell me or anyone else what we do or do not have the right to comment on.
Now to your point about Ms. Carrick still being scared about being stalked either in person or on the web, by her abusive ex-husband. I’m afraid you’ll have to come up with a better reason than that to explain away the glaring discrepancy. Because if that was indeed the reason,the question then becomes WHY ON EARTH WOULD SHE:
a) Open her own personal blog on the internet using her real name;
b) Use that blog to tell everyone about herself;
c) Post pictures of herself, her husband and children on that blog;
d) Let everyone know not only what city she lives in, but also the area where she has a rural residence;
e) Come to your blog and post details about what this person who stalked her did to her.
These really don’t sound like the actions of someone who is afraid of an abusive ex-husband/stalker finding her.
Karen, The ex-husband she describes as gentle and non-violent is her second. Her first husband, whom she was involved with at the age of seventeen (as described in her ‘questionable’ story), was abusive. Donna included the fact that she had been married two times prior to her current marriage, but it’s the one sentence I deleted, as I can only imagine what the pro-gun community would say to her about that. After seeing people on gunnutz talk about the recent shooting in Pittsburgh and say “I wonder what some woman did to him to make him shoot a bunch,” I was weary of the reaction she’d get. The pro gun community is one of the most paranoid bunch of people I’ve ever encountered in my life, and obviously the reason you find it necessary to bring guns to places like the grocery store or restaurants.
Brad, I think you and the pro gun community are the ones that should be ashamed of yourselves. You egg eachother on by suggesting that others besides yourselves actually think accusing someone of making up a tragic story is reasonable and appropriate. It’s actually helping my cause by illustrating just how paranoid the lot of you are. Spending my summer harrassed by the pro gun community has already changed my opinion that most adovcacy groups are rational and polite, but these comments have flat out made me sad for you and inability to accept anything but your opinions.
Matt, Refer to the comment I left in response to Karen’s comment. And yes, Matt, your accusation is offensive, not to mention another unfortunate and unfair attempt to discredit a credible person.
P. Dusablon-Let’s set the record straight. The pro gun community is the one who has been claiming this whole summer that I’m an idiot, not the other way around. If I need to point readers to CanadianGunNutz.com, I will. In addition, I have already made clear on multiple occassions that I have spoken with members of the pro gun community, respectful ones, unlike yourself. Constantly making a claim that’s blatantly false is going to get you nowhere, just like claiming that the registry cost two-billion dollars has gotten you nowhere; again, they’re both blatantly false, and people know you’re lying. You do have no right to question Donna’s story, but then again, like I’ve said to other people, it just helps my cause by illustrating your paranoia and lack of respect and compassion.
Soulchaser, You apparently think that you’ve solved some great mystery by stating that Donna is for gun control. Obviously she is, otherwise she wouldn’t have commented on my blog in the first place. She wanted to tell her story to share with others the increased fear and danger induced by firearms, which again, clearly was not a secret. I already explained to you why calling Donna’s family members scumbags, etc, acts to belittle her. You clearly don’t want to take the time to understand why your words are offensive, so I’ll save my breath.
Hi Elizabeth. You refer to the pro-gun community as a bunch of paranoid people, but I think that we are being prepared (not paranoid). Do you remember the Luby’s shooting in Texas in 1991? Susan Gratia Hupp could have stopped the maniac, but she wasn’t allowed to carry her gun with her under Texas law. She watched her mother and father (along with many others) get killed by the gunman, and couldn’t do anything about it. I think you should do a blog about her. There is nothing wrong about being prepared. Violent situations do happen.
Who are these gun rights people you claim to have met with??? Why not put an interview with them in your blog in the interest of “fairness”??
Hold on a second Elizabeth
You consider asking a question about apparent discrepancies between to postings of the same story an “unfair attempt to discredit a creditable person?”
I call it an attempt to seek clarification. I call it an attempt to seek the truth.
Am I to assume that you always accept what is put in front of you without question?. Unfortunately for you, I and many others here have not lost the ability to think for ourselves.
Elizabeth:
From the beginning, all you had to say is Donna Carrick is a survivor of domestic abuse AND a supporter of civilian disarmament. It’s called the truth. But you chose not to. You chose to present the story as coming from a random person who just wanted to share her story. And you know what, that’s fine. Just be prepared to asnwer questions as to why you omit details.
You said: “You apparently think that you’ve solved some great mystery by stating that Donna is for gun control. Obviously she is, otherwise she wouldn’t have commented on my blog in the first place.”
I thought you said she came to your blog to share her story about being a victim of domestic abuse, not support your agenda for total civilian disarmament?
You seem to become very angry when anyone asks a legitimate question. You should really see someone about that. I don’t think you would pass the screening process for a firearms licence in Canada with a temper like that.
And, again with the belittlement accusation. I can’t help but notice you failed to put up my post defending myself against you A+B+C diatibe. Obviously I must have done a pretty good job of proving you wrong.
And again for the record, I didn’t call her “family members” scumbags. I called Ms. Carricks ABUSERS scumbags. One of whom happened to be her father.
As always, peace and love to you.
Soulchaser, If you can’t put two and two together, than that’s an issue you’ll have to work out yourself. Donna commented on my blog, obviously knowing what I’m here working on. Then she wrote her story, and I posted it. If that didn’t make it clear to you that she’s in favor of gun control, well then…
Everyone is entitled to there opinion, and to open and respectful debate. That is not what has happened here. That is not what the pro gun community chooses to engage in. Trying to “stomp all over” those who disagree with and wear them down emotionally by calling names and attacking personal characteristics is not intellectual. “Stomp all over” are the words of gunnnutz.com, not my own. Try as you may to make someone backdown just for having an opinion. It obviously doesn’t work, as Wendy Cukier has been an advocate of gun control for many years, and you haven’t been able to “stomp” her out yet, have you?
Donna’s family members were her abusers and thus, you’re calling her family members scumbags. I chose not to post your last comment to save you some embarrassment. I kind of wish I hadn’t.