She lives in Washington, so I'd take "reasonable precautions" with a threat like that, but not go overboard. You can get a concealed pistol license on a shall-issue basis in WA (I have one, it took about an hour), pick up a gen3 glock 19 and holster, take a couple Massad Ayoob LFI classes, get an unlisted phone number and an alarm system for your house, register some stuff to a PO box vs. a home address, and that's pretty much enough for any non-specific non-state threat. And even that is probably overkill.
back
2 comments
Obtaining, training with, and carrying a firearm are not "reasonable precautions" for a lot of people.
I absolutely agree, for the average citizen of a first world nation who isn't at any particular special risk. However, when you face a credible death threat for your (principled, honorable) actions, you have the choice of backing down, running, or standing your ground. If you're going to stand your ground, it is prudent to be armed.
During the Civil Rights movement in the south, Rabbi William B. Silverman stood up for the rights of blacks. Some racists threatened him and his children. Instead of backing down or running away, he got a .38spl revolver (and became a deputy sheriff), and drove his kids to school every day vs. having them ride the bus; no one touched him.
From a practical perspective, is it a bigger sacrifice to change your name, give up your job, and go into hiding, or to spend a few thousand dollars becoming credibly able to defend yourself with a firearm?
Sorry, I didn't write very clearly in my post. What I meant to imply (and did poorly) is that many people, no matter what, would not be comfortable with the notion of picking up a gun in the name of self defense.
You sound like you would, I know I would, but there holds a large body of people for whom that is just not an option they would pursue. Those with a doctrine of non-violence, turning the other cheek, etc., are the people I have in mind.
Definitely, those people exist. I would not advise those people to pick fights with terrorists.
I think those are more reasonable precautions than changing your name and going into hiding.
However, owning and carrying a firearm is a great defence against muggers and burglars, but a lousy defence against assassins. The thing about gunfights is that the guy who shoots first has a huge advantage.
Generally the kind of people who act on fatwahs to kill people like that are not super ninja assassin masters, but actually fairly incompetent. Being alert (which is one of the main things taught in self defense classes) would be a huge advantage, but in a place like the home, being armed would improve one's chances substantially.
You don't have to be a super ninja assassin master, you just have to be hidden. Even walking behind the target is good enough, especially if you're happy not to escape.
John Hinckley Jr was neither particularly competent nor particularly sane, but he managed to shoot Ronald Reagan and not get shot himself despite the fact that Reagan was surrounded by quite a few armed guards at the time. And there was another president who got shot by some random bozo in a good hiding place, whom I shall refuse to mention because this is the internet and you just know it would immediately summon a horde who want to discuss their conspiracy theories.
Basically, if I had people actively trying to assassinate me, the simple act of carrying a gun would probably only increase my confidence by a few percent.
So an offended Muslim could also get a "gen 3 glock 19 and holster" too. Why does that make you feel safer?
Offended but law-abiding armed Muslims are fine. (and I think some of the EDMD cartoons were offensive, and if I were a Muslim, more of them would be offensive to me).
Non-law-abiding potential-assassins aren't going to have difficulty becoming non-law-abiding armed potential-assassins. Armed but historically fairly incompetent assassin vs. somewhat trained, alert, armed target has a lot better odds for her than vs. an unaware target. She would get more value out of training than the weapon itself, in that it would allow her to spot threats, but there are definitely situations where then being armed would be the best response to a threat (particularly in the hope).