Make no mistake, domestic abuse of any kind is horrible. As bad as the hitting can be, the verbal and psychological abuse can be just as bad. I’ve seen it with my own two eyes.
For the anti-gunners, though, they use domestic abuse as grounds to infringe on our rights as citizens. They note how horrible a situation it is, but then pretend that if guns aren’t in the mix, all will be well. Like suddenly, everything will suddenly get better.
Maybe I’m being a little unfair to them. Perhaps they get that there will still be abuse but simply think, mistakenly, that if a gun isn’t around, the victim can leave; that husbands won’t kill their wives without a gun.
Well, a case in Florida proves that even if guns are present, a husband is fully capable of taking his wife’s life without one.
Police in Florida said that despite a gun being recovered at the scene, a man allegedly killed his wife with a sword.
According to the City of Homestead police, Mark William Thibault, 53, confessed to killing 56-year-old Rachel Thibault on Tuesday.
Police said that a handgun was recovered shortly after a relative reported that Mark Thibault had confessed in a phone call to killing Rachel Thibault, Local10.com reported.
The fight reportedly started as an argument before turning physical. Thibault is alleged to have slammed his wife’s head against the bathtub before stabbing her.
He’s been charged with second-degree murder with a deadly weapon.
There are a few key points we need to remember here. First and foremost is that while a gun was present in the household, that’s not the weapon Thibault used. Instead, for some weird reason, he used a sword.
Don’t get me wrong, swords are deadly, especially if you know how to use one. I study 15th Century Italian longsword for fun, so I’m fully aware of them. (And yes, I’m kind of curious as to what kind of sword he used, but not enough to actually try to find out.)
Yet the narrative is that if guns aren’t in the household, things like this won’t happen. Well, they do.
See, the problem with that narrative is that it ignores a few facts, starting with basic biology. Men are, on average, bigger and stronger than women. As such, a violent man doesn’t actually need a weapon to murder a woman. He can also use any manner of household implement he desires. Had it not been a sword, it could just as easily been a knife.
Hell, I call our meat tenderizer a “war hammer” because it kind of looks like a weapon and it amuses me. Do you mean to tell me that a violent man can’t kill his wife with one of those?
Yes, they sometimes use firearms. No one is happy about that.
But treating every law-abiding man as if he’s a domestic abuser in the making, pushing for laws that allow him to be disarmed for no reason, is not how you fix that problem. After all, would we be better off if those women were killed with swords instead?