arma virumque cano (et alia)
So if women are 8x more likely to be killed with a gun in the home, and the general population is 2.3x more likely, how come most of the people killed are men? Hmmmm...
"Given that women are more likely to be killed by a spouse or lover if there is a firearm in the house." In the danger assessment from the study you cited, there are fifteen questions. One of them ask about the presence of a gun, the other fourteen are focused on the behavior of the partner. What do you think is more of a concern and has a greater effect on the results? The presence of a firearm? Or the behaviors of the potential assailant?
Let's pretend for a moment that all of these numbers are true. Eight times more likely than what?The number of people murdered in 2012 was about 15,000. Of that total of victims, 78% were male. So that means there were 3,300 female victims of homicide. Now there are some 157,000,000 women in this country. This means that a woman's chance of being mudered is one fifth of one percent in a given year. Even if the "eight times" figure is correct, which I doubt, we're talking about such small percentages that any variation will look huge.A better approach here would be for women to be aware of the nature of their domestic partners.
First of all, your number of women includes female babies and children. That's typically dishonest of you. Secondly, turning the deaths of real human people into a tiny fraction in order to say it's all ok, another typical trick of yours, is despicable.
What's your point about "female babies and children"? No, the numbers are subdivided according to those groups, and that shows that it's even less likely for an adult woman to be killed. But what these numbers do show is that the risks, while not insignificant, are small.
A great Valentine's day present. A woman should get a gun and know how to use it. If given a gun, should the receiver of the gift have to go through a background check?