It’s an oft-used cliche that anti-gun-rights people are fixated on the relative size of men’s…ahem, packages1. This is usually phrased in a way similar to “Gun owners have small penises, and thus own firearms to compensate for this shortcoming2.”
However, an online comment on a recent article in the local rag proposed an interesting approach to self-defense:
I don’t need to carry a gun everywhere I go. All the real men in my family have a real penis.
My reading of this comment is that, due to its magnitude, the commenter would be able to fend off a criminal attacker with his3 penis. I admit this is a rather novel idea, and one I haven’t considered before. This might be plausible, as several gunbloggers (including myself and Robb) are known for not liking pants. Intriguing. I would consider experimenting with such a tactic, but I’m a bit deterred by potential public indecency charges that such…uh…”open carry” might lead to. I think that it might be wiser to keep the junk and the gun concealed (or perhaps the gun carried openly, based on the situation and the weather).
On a more serious note, unless one is attacked while naked by an extremely self-conscious criminal, it’s unlikely that the size of one’s wibbly bits will have any bearing whatsoever on the outcome of a violent confrontation. It’s probably far better to rely on training and weapons designed for the purpose. To quote Breda, “Carry your gun – it’s a lighter burden than regret.”
- I still have yet to understand why this is the case, as essentially all of the gun owners I know personally, both male and female, seem to have satisfactory sex lives with no complaints about penis size. How did this cliche come about? [↩]
- Pun very much intended. [↩]
- Based on the posted name, the commenter is male. [↩]