With all this talk about muting or not muting, I want to share a process I went through on hubski recently. I posted a short story three weeks ago called "Guns Don't Kill People". It was about the experience a friend of mine had when she asked the police to come to her house and remove some guns.

Three days ago, someone added this comment:

Why didn't you just get a gun to defend yourself? Even if he can't get his gun, he can get a gun from somewhere. That way, you would have had some way of defending yourself. Wouldn't you rather be empowered than a victim?

My emotional reaction to this commenter was very negative. I considered muting him. (Might be a her, but I'll go with him for pronoun simplicity.) I'm trying to get rid of guns and this dufus wants me to get a gun. The narrator had been threatened, but there was no immediate threat. What story was he even reading?

The reply bothered me though, so I eventually replied. There were so many differences in our world views and the ways we approached problems. I hinted at the cultural differences as one reason for not sharing his viewpoint. I then looked for something in his comment that I could agree with -- and I found it.

Even in Canada, guns are the most common weapon used for "female spousal homicide" -- I could agree with that. Women are victims of domestic gun violence. Perhaps the commenter just wanted me to be safe.

My own gun, though, would not make me feel safe, and I told him that. If I were threatened by a bullethead spouse, I'd sure as hell get out of the situation -- not get myself a gun. But I could see how some people might want to get a gun. I've known people who lived in terror of ex-spouses.

My response was more an exercise for me than anything else. The commenter probably wasn't expecting a serious response and just wanted to make his pro-gun point. Initially, I felt victimized by the comment, but after responding seriously to his points, I felt empowered.