Firearms while caching?

[+Knight2000]

can i just ask why you felt a need to tell people you wanted to carry at an event?

 

if you carry legally ALL THE TIME, there's really no reason for people to go all weird on you. it's like putting on shoes.

You are most certainly correct!

 

I was ticked that MWGB had rule for no firearms. I think most of these types of rules are made just because people think it makes sense. I inquired as to the rule. For instance if it was on private property then the MWGB would have nothing to say on the matter. If it was at a county fairgrounds and it was not permitted per the county than this would be illegal in the state. If you don't care to know why then care skip the next paragraph.

 

In Ohio this happens quite a bit. Different local communities decide that firearms should not be allowed in parks or public places so they make laws reflecting this. The catch is that in Ohio local laws cannot be more restrictive than the state laws rendering their laws illegal. A local group sued one of these communities and won. Since then once this issue is brought up with communities they have one of two choices. Remove restrictions/signs voluntarily or get sued, pay a lot of money and then take them down anyway.

 

I wanted to know how to approach the issue. I wanted to take my family. I asked and was told that the rule was made because they didn't want some crazy person coming in and making a fuss. I pointed out that the restriction wouldn't stop a person like that. I was told that it would be fine if I carried concealed. The problem is despite what was said, I didn't want to break the law. (Carrying in a no carry zone.) Plus I don't patronize places that are partial in that way.

 

I try to view everything in a logical manner. Therefore I kind of think most other people do also. The thread was discussing the MWGB and I stupidly said how I wasn't going because of their policy protecting criminals. (Criminals can carry, but I, a law abider, cannot? My logic.)

 

This seemed to enrage someone that said that firearms have no place at an event. I said I carry everywhere that I legally can because I feel it is my responsibility to protect my family and you never can predict when and where something will happen.

 

I might as well have been talking to a doorknob. Typical anti-gun comments that sound good on the surface but don't make any sense once dissected. This cacher got so mad they told me I am not welcome at their events if I have a firearm. They also contacted Geo-woodstock and groundpseak about it. Both said it is fine if legal but an organizer can request whatever they want.

 

There are other local cachers that carry that just keep it quiet. No one knows and all is fine.

 

Open mouth. Insert foot. I never expected any controversy from my statement. I only expected logical replies. (At least logical in my mind.) Live and learn, eh?

Edited August 15, 2009 by Knight2000

[+Arrow42]

Open mouth. Insert foot. I never expected any controversy from my statement. I only expected logical replies. (At least logical in my mind.) Live and learn, eh?

 

The diplomat in me would recommend respecting their wishes or not going. As a guest to an event you have an obligation to honor your host. (I know, no one cares about the rules of hospitality any more...) That said, I do find the rule just a little silly.

 

I could see it being reasonable if it was for insurance reasons.

[+sbell111]

Hmm...

 

A restaurant owner has the right to restrict people from bringing a handgun into his establishment. However, if I invite some friends to join me at a restaurant that allows concealed carry, I don't have the authority to tell my buds not to bring their handguns.

 

Similarly, the park where a geo-event is held has the authority to tell me to leave my weapon at home, but the organizer of the event has no such authority.

[+doingitoldschool]

No mattr where you are, if you carry a firearm while caching, be sure to wear one of these:

As for mountain lions and bears, you don't usually see them, and they're scared of you. The only encounter with dangerous wildlife I've had was with a huge rattler. Could've used a gun in that situation.

 

I have to politely disagree with you on the mountain lions; in our part of the world, they are getting more aggressive and starting to stalk and hunt people on the trails. Most bears still run, but we have had some very public encounters, with people who were not doing the usual stupid things like feeding them.

[+Kit Fox]

 

You love to show that picture whenever possible, don't you.. get your camera out and take a few more.

 

Another angle (revolver is next to my left hand)

 

 

 

That is a revolver isn't it? What caliber is that?

 

Ruger GP-100 .357 complete with lead free ammo to comply with California's "condor protection" law.

[AZcachemeister]

can i just ask why you felt a need to tell people you wanted to carry at an event?

 

if you carry legally ALL THE TIME, there's really no reason for people to go all weird on you. it's like putting on shoes.

You are most certainly correct!

 

I was ticked that MWGB had rule for no firearms. I think most of these types of rules are made just because people think it makes sense. I inquired as to the rule. For instance if it was on private property then the MWGB would have nothing to say on the matter. If it was at a county fairgrounds and it was not permitted per the county than this would be illegal in the state. If you don't care to know why then care skip the next paragraph.

 

In Ohio this happens quite a bit. Different local communities decide that firearms should not be allowed in parks or public places so they make laws reflecting this. The catch is that in Ohio local laws cannot be more restrictive than the state laws rendering their laws illegal. A local group sued one of these communities and won. Since then once this issue is brought up with communities they have one of two choices. Remove restrictions/signs voluntarily or get sued, pay a lot of money and then take them down anyway.

 

I wanted to know how to approach the issue. I wanted to take my family. I asked and was told that the rule was made because they didn't want some crazy person coming in and making a fuss. I pointed out that the restriction wouldn't stop a person like that. I was told that it would be fine if I carried concealed. The problem is despite what was said, I didn't want to break the law. (Carrying in a no carry zone.) Plus I don't patronize places that are partial in that way.

 

I try to view everything in a logical manner. Therefore I kind of think most other people do also. The thread was discussing the MWGB and I stupidly said how I wasn't going because of their policy protecting criminals. (Criminals can carry, but I, a law abider, cannot? My logic.)

 

This seemed to enrage someone that said that firearms have no place at an event. I said I carry everywhere that I legally can because I feel it is my responsibility to protect my family and you never can predict when and where something will happen.

 

I might as well have been talking to a doorknob. Typical anti-gun comments that sound good on the surface but don't make any sense once dissected. This cacher got so mad they told me I am not welcome at their events if I have a firearm. They also contacted Geo-woodstock and groundpseak about it. Both said it is fine if legal but an organizer can request whatever they want.

 

There are other local cachers that carry that just keep it quiet. No one knows and all is fine.

 

Open mouth. Insert foot. I never expected any controversy from my statement. I only expected logical replies. (At least logical in my mind.) Live and learn, eh?

 

Emotion almost always trumps logic.

The only reason to carry firearms is if you intend to shoot someone, right?

[+bittsen]

Emotion almost always trumps logic.

The only reason to carry firearms is if you intend to shoot someone, right?

Right, and those that "must" carry a gun to feel "safe" are just "afraid" and not simply "prepared" as they will claim.

 

I would love to see the stats on how many people's lives were saved because they had a gun on them (removing the part where they would have been fine if they didn't have a gun)

 

I'm sure the logic is the same as the seat belt arguments.

[+Steve&GeoCarolyn]

There are meaner 4-legged critters than alligators?

Most of the gators I encounter are 6' long or less. Not a true threat to an adult human.

There have been rare instances where a larger alligator has dined on a person, but for the most part, they will avoid you.

The obvious exceptions are mating season and when Momma is sitting on a nest.

So long as you pay attention to your surroundings, and keep a mental note on the calendar, you'll be fine.

 

Thank you for your reply. I find this a great relief since I long to see the swamps along the bayou and the Everglades. I have been told that they are even more beautiful than the swamps here, which are already breathtaking. However, the thought of alligators has been a bit of a concern. I shall study up before planning a trip there so that I know to avoid mating and reproductive season and plan to enjoy the swamps.

 

BTW, I read your snake story to my beloved and he sends his thanks to you for getting the python home to his owner. (He is sympathetic to homeless snakes and worries that they will be killed by the authorities whenever they hit the news in such a spectacular fashion.)

 

And now I will stop hijacking the gun thread with all this critter talk.

 

Carolyn

[+Arrow42]

Emotion almost always trumps logic.

The only reason to carry firearms is if you intend to shoot someone, right?

 

The implied threat of force that an openly carried firearm represents provides a measure of safety all by it's self.

 

I would love to see the stats on how many people's lives were saved because they had a gun on them (removing the part where they would have been fine if they didn't have a gun)

 

I'm sure the logic is the same as the seat belt arguments.

 

I think that would be difficult to quantify. How do you account for all the times a mugger decided to wait for someone else because they caught the sight of your gun? Or all of the unreported cases where the gun owner simply displayed the gun and was able to end the attack before anyone got hurt. Or, how many times has an wounded animal decided flight over fight due to the extra confidence in your stance? (Maybe I'm stretching a tad for that one... )

[Clan Riffster]

I would love to see the stats on how many people's lives were saved because they had a gun on them

Back before firearms became such a Rosie O'Donnell issue <logic, exit stage Left> FDLE claimed the numbers were 5000/1. For every person victimized by a firearm, 5000 were protected from harm. I knew from my law enforcement background that the numbers would argue in favor of legal carry, but 5000/1? I asked for a reference source, and they never did provide me with one. Since Hollyweird and their flock of barking moonbats has entered our nation's legislative process, that statistic has disappeared from their media. Go figure... As Arrow pointed out, how could you conceivably keep an accurate count of something like that?

[+Knight2000]

I could see it being reasonable if it was for insurance reasons.

That will not be in an insurance policy in my state.

 

Similarly, the park where a geo-event is held has the authority to tell me to leave my weapon at home, but the organizer of the event has no such authority.

I agree, but tell that to the doorknob, not me!

Edited August 16, 2009 by Knight2000

[+sbell111]

I could see it being reasonable if it was for insurance reasons.

That will not be in an insurance policy in my state.

 

Similarly, the park where a geo-event is held has the authority to tell me to leave my weapon at home, but the organizer of the event has no such authority.

I agree, but tell that to the doorknob, not me!

I guess that my point is that it makes no difference whether the individual makes the demand, if they don't have the authority to do so. I will freely ignore their inappropriate demand and do as I wish.

[+Arrow42]

I guess that my point is that it makes no difference whether the individual makes the demand, if they don't have the authority to do so. I will freely ignore their inappropriate demand and do as I wish.

 

So, your just going to ignore the request of the host? If it was my event I and I found out I would ask you to not attend any more of my events.

[+Kit Fox]

I would love to see the stats on how many people's lives were saved because they had a gun on them

Back before firearms became such a Rosie O'Donnell issue <logic, exit stage Left> FDLE claimed the numbers were 5000/1. For every person victimized by a firearm, 5000 were protected from harm. I knew from my law enforcement background that the numbers would argue in favor of legal carry, but 5000/1? I asked for a reference source, and they never did provide me with one. Since Hollyweird and their flock of barking moonbats has entered our nation's legislative process, that statistic has disappeared from their media. Go figure... As Arrow pointed out, how could you conceivably keep an accurate count of something like that?

 

A. Guns save more lives than they take; prevent more injuries than they inflict

 

* Guns used 2.5 million times a year in self-defense. Law-abiding citizens use guns to defend themselves against criminals as many as 2.5 million times every year -- or about 6,850 times a day.1 This means that each year, firearms are used more than 80 times more often to protect the lives of honest citizens than to take lives.2

 

* Of the 2.5 million times citizens use their guns to defend themselves every year, the overwhelming majority merely brandish their gun or fire a warning shot to scare off their attackers. Less than 8% of the time, a citizen will kill or wound his/her attacker.3

 

* As many as 200,000 women use a gun every year to defend themselves against sexual abuse.4

 

* Even anti-gun Clinton researchers concede that guns are used 1.5 million times annually for self-defense. According to the Clinton Justice Department, there are as many as 1.5 million cases of self-defense every year. The National Institute of Justice published this figure in 1997 as part of "Guns in America" -- a study which was authored by noted anti-gun criminologists Philip Cook and Jens Ludwig.5

 

* Armed citizens kill more crooks than do the police. Citizens shoot and kill at least twice as many criminals as police do every year (1,527 to 606).6 And readers of Newsweek learned that "only 2 percent of civilian shootings involved an innocent person mistakenly identified as a criminal. The 'error rate' for the police, however, was 11 percent, more than five times as high."7

 

* Handguns are the weapon of choice for self-defense. Citizens use handguns to protect themselves over 1.9 million times a year.8 Many of these self-defense handguns could be labeled as "Saturday Night Specials."

 

B. Concealed carry laws help reduce crime

 

* Nationwide: one-half million self-defense uses. Every year, as many as one-half million citizens defend themselves with a firearm away from home.9

 

* Concealed carry laws are dropping crime rates across the country. A comprehensive national study determined in 1996 that violent crime fell after states made it legal to carry concealed firearms. The results of the study showed:

 

* States which passed concealed carry laws reduced their murder rate by 8.5%, rapes by 5%, aggravated assaults by 7% and robbery by 3%;10 and

 

* If those states not having concealed carry laws had adopted such laws in 1992, then approximately 1,570 murders, 4,177 rapes, 60,000 aggravated assaults and over 11,000 robberies would have been avoided yearly.11

 

* Vermont: one of the safest five states in the country. In Vermont, citizens can carry a firearm without getting permission... without paying a fee... or without going through any kind of government-imposed waiting period. And yet for ten years in a row, Vermont has remained one of the top-five, safest states in the union -- having three times received the "Safest State Award."12

 

* Florida: concealed carry helps slash the murder rates in the state. In the fifteen years following the passage of Florida's concealed carry law in 1987, over 800,000 permits to carry firearms were issued to people in the state.13 FBI reports show that the homicide rate in Florida, which in 1987 was much higher than the national average, fell 52% during that 15-year period -- thus putting the Florida rate below the national average. 14

 

* Do firearms carry laws result in chaos? No. Consider the case of Florida. A citizen in the Sunshine State is far more likely to be attacked by an alligator than to be assaulted by a concealed carry holder.

 

1. During the first fifteen years that the Florida law was in effect, alligator attacks outpaced the number of crimes committed by carry holders by a 229 to 155 margin.

 

2. And even the 155 "crimes" committed by concealed carry permit holders are somewhat misleading as most of these infractions resulted from Floridians who accidentally carried their firearms into restricted areas, such as an airport.15

 

C. Criminals avoid armed citizens

 

* Kennesaw, GA. In 1982, this suburb of Atlanta passed a law requiring heads of households to keep at least one firearm in the house. The residential burglary rate subsequently dropped 89% in Kennesaw, compared to the modest 10.4% drop in Georgia as a whole.16

 

* Ten years later (1991), the residential burglary rate in Kennesaw was still 72% lower than it had been in 1981, before the law was passed.17

 

* Nationwide. Statistical comparisons with other countries show that burglars in the United States are far less apt to enter an occupied home than their foreign counterparts who live in countries where fewer civilians own firearms. Consider the following rates showing how often a homeowner is present when a burglar strikes:

 

* Homeowner occupancy rate in the gun control countries of Great Britain, Canada and Netherlands: 45% (average of the three countries); and,

 

* Homeowner occupancy rate in the United States: 12.7%.18

 

Rapes averted when women carry or use firearms for protection

 

* Orlando, FL. In 1966-67, the media highly publicized a safety course which taught Orlando women how to use guns. The result: Orlando's rape rate dropped 88% in 1967, whereas the rape rate remained constant in the rest of Florida and the nation.19

 

* Nationwide. In 1979, the Carter Justice Department found that of more than 32,000 attempted rapes, 32% were actually committed. But when a woman was armed with a gun or knife, only 3% of the attempted rapes were actually successful.20

 

Justice Department study:

 

* 3/5 of felons polled agreed that "a criminal is not going to mess around with a victim he knows is armed with a gun."21

 

* 74% of felons polled agreed that "one reason burglars avoid houses when people are at home is that they fear being shot during the crime."22

 

* 57% of felons polled agreed that "criminals are more worried about meeting an armed victim than they are about running into the police."23

 

1 Gary Kleck and Marc Gertz, "Armed Resistance to Crime: The Prevalence and Nature of Self-Defense With a Gun," 86 The Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, Northwestern University School of Law, 1 (Fall 1995):164.

Dr. Kleck is a professor in the school of criminology and criminal justice at Florida State University in Tallahassee. He has researched extensively and published several essays on the gun control issue. His book, Point Blank: Guns and Violence in America, has become a widely cited source in the gun control debate. In fact, this book earned Dr. Kleck the prestigious American Society of Criminology Michael J. Hindelang award for 1993. This award is given for the book published in the past two to three years that makes the most outstanding contribution to criminology.

Even those who don't like the conclusions Dr. Kleck reaches, cannot argue with his impeccable research and methodology. In "A Tribute to a View I Have Opposed," Marvin E. Wolfgang writes that, "What troubles me is the article by Gary Kleck and Marc Gertz. The reason I am troubled is that they have provided an almost clear-cut case of methodologically sound research in support of something I have theoretically opposed for years, namely, the use of a gun in defense against a criminal perpetrator.... I have to admit my admiration for the care and caution expressed in this article and this research. Can it be true that about two million instances occur each year in which a gun was used as a defensive measure against crime? It is hard to believe. Yet, it is hard to challenge the data collected. We do not have contrary evidence." Wolfgang, "A Tribute to a View I Have Opposed," The Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, at 188.

Wolfgang says there is no "contrary evidence." Indeed, there are more than a dozen national polls -- one of which was conducted by The Los Angeles Times -- that have found figures comparable to the Kleck-Gertz study. Even the Clinton Justice Department (through the National Institute of Justice) found there were as many as 1.5 million defensive users of firearms every year. See National Institute of Justice, "Guns in America: National Survey on Private Ownership and Use of Firearms," Research in Brief (May 1997).

As for Dr. Kleck, readers of his materials may be interested to know that he is a member of the ACLU, Amnesty International USA, and Common Cause. He is not and has never been a member of or contributor to any advocacy group on either side of the gun control debate.

2 According to the National Safety Council, the total number of gun deaths (by accidents, suicides and homicides) account for less than 30,000 deaths per year. See Injury Facts, published yearly by the National Safety Council, Itasca, Illinois.

3Kleck and Gertz, "Armed Resistance to Crime," at 173, 185.

4Kleck and Gertz, "Armed Resistance to Crime," at 185.

5 Philip J. Cook and Jens Ludwig, "Guns in America: National Survey on Private Ownership and Use of Firearms," NIJ Research in Brief (May 1997); available at http://www.ncjrs.org/txtfiles/165476.txt on the internet. The finding of 1.5 million yearly self-defense cases did not sit well with the anti-gun bias of the study's authors, who attempted to explain why there could not possibly be one and a half million cases of self-defense every year. Nevertheless, the 1.5 million figure is consistent with a mountain of independent surveys showing similar figures. The sponsors of these studies -- nearly a dozen -- are quite varied, and include anti-gun organizations, news media organizations, governments and commercial polling firms. See also Kleck and Gertz, supra note 1, pp. 182-183.

6Kleck, Point Blank: Guns and Violence in America, (1991):111-116, 148.

7George F. Will, "Are We 'a Nation of Cowards'?," Newsweek (15 November 1993):93.

8Id. at 164, 185.

9Dr. Gary Kleck, interview with J. Neil Schulman, "Q and A: Guns, crime and self-defense," The Orange County Register (19 September 1993). In the interview with Schulman, Dr. Kleck reports on findings from a national survey which he and Dr. Marc Gertz conducted in Spring, 1993 -- a survey which findings were reported in Kleck and Gertz, "Armed Resistance to Crime." br>10 One of the authors of the University of Chicago study reported on the study's findings in John R. Lott, Jr., "More Guns, Less Violent Crime," The Wall Street Journal (28 August 1996). See also John R. Lott, Jr. and David B. Mustard, "Crime, Deterrence, and Right-to-Carry Concealed Handguns," University of Chicago (15 August 1996); and Lott, More Guns, Less Crime (1998, 2000).

11Lott and Mustard, "Crime, Deterrence, and Right-to-Carry Concealed Handguns."

12Kathleen O'Leary Morgan, Scott Morgan and Neal Quitno, "Rankings of States in Most Dangerous/Safest State Awards 1994 to 2003," Morgan Quitno Press (2004) at http://www.statestats.com/dang9403.htm. Morgan Quitno Press is an independent private research and publishing company which was founded in 1989. The company specializes in reference books and monthly reports that compare states and cities in several different subject areas. In the first 10 years in which they published their Safest State Award, Vermont has consistently remained one of the top five safest states.

13Memo by Jim Smith, Secretary of State, Florida Department of State, Division of Licensing, Concealed Weapons/Firearms License Statistical Report (October 1, 2002).

14Florida's murder rate was 11.4 per 100,000 in 1987, but only 5.5 in 2002. Compare Federal Bureau of Investigation, "Crime in the United States," Uniform Crime Reports, (1988): 7, 53; and FBI, (2003):19, 79.

15 John R. Lott, Jr., "Right to carry would disprove horror stories," Kansas City Star, (July 12, 2003).

16Gary Kleck, "Crime Control Through the Private Use of Armed Force," Social Problems 35 (February 1988):15.

17Compare Kleck, "Crime Control," at 15, and Chief Dwaine L. Wilson, City of Kennesaw Police Department, "Month to Month Statistics: 1991." (Residential burglary rates from 1981-1991 are based on statistics for the months of March - October.)

18Kleck, Point Blank, at 140.

19Kleck, "Crime Control," at 13.

20U.S. Department of Justice, Law Enforcement Assistance Administration, Rape Victimization in 26 American Cities (1979), p. 31.

21U.S., Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice, "The Armed Criminal in America: A Survey of Incarcerated Felons," Research Report (July 1985): 27.

22Id.

23Id.

[+Kit Fox]

 

Emotion almost always trumps logic.

The only reason to carry firearms is if you intend to shoot someone, right?

 

That is a Straw Man Argument. I personally carry a firearm when I hike in remote areas of Angeles National Forest for many reasons. None are for premeditated murder. "ANF" as well many other forest / parks within California have been taken over by Mexican Drug Cartels who use the forest to grow illegal Marijuana Crops. Armed encounters with "crop guards" are on the rise. This issue is discussed quite frequently in Mule Deer hunting forums (which i'm a participant) because the pot growers frequent the same remote, water rich areas as do the deer. I happen to enjoy remote areas due to their solitude, the great caches, and the lack of people / grafiiti.

 

Other things that I want to avoid while hiking are Black Bears an Mountain Lions. Aggressive Mountain lion and Bear Encounters with humans is on the rise. Mtn Lions possessPasteurella multocidain their mouths. The last thing I want is to be bitten by one. While hiking in remote areas, I make lots of noise, carry bear spray, and a knife. If I am confronted, I plan to use my bear spray before I use my revolver.

Edited August 16, 2009 by Kit Fox

[+Arrow42]

A. Guns save more lives than they take; prevent more injuries than they inflict

(snip...)

 

Thanks Kit. Excellent data you have there.

Edited August 16, 2009 by Arrow42

[+sbell111]

I guess that my point is that it makes no difference whether the individual makes the demand, if they don't have the authority to do so. I will freely ignore their inappropriate demand and do as I wish.

 

So, your just going to ignore the request of the host? If it was my event I and I found out I would ask you to not attend any more of my events.

You're really not going to like this response.

 

You don't have the authority to forbid a cacher from coming to your event. Events listed on GC.com are open to all geocachers.

 

Sorry to have to break this news.

[+Curioddity]

It is your prerogative to be a victim anytime.

Please .... >waves hand dismissively<

 

I used to be an avid pistol shooter. Some might even suggest "rabid" would be a better word. At the height of my involvement I had several sponsors and was regular competitor in The Masters and The Steel Challenge. I still maintain an ARA, SCSA, and ISPC membership and I still have quite a collection of M1911-based pistols in .38 Super, 10mm, .40, and .45, but I haven't been an active shooter for several years.

 

I also used to feel compelled to carry, but that compulsion also left me years ago. In retrospect, I can recall a lot more situations where I was glad I was carrying when I was carrying than situations where I wished I was carrying when I wasn't. The only practical conclusion I can come to is I was deliberately putting myself into those "glad" situations because I was carrying.

 

I still go where and do what I want to. The only thing that has possibly changed is what I want to do and where I want to do it now. In the simplest of terms, I no longer have a desire to do something or be somewhere that I'd feel more comfortable if I had a gun. Common sense is my weapon of choice now, and it's serving me at least as well as a gun ever did.

 

Pedro Pistoles

[ParamedicBK]

3. Even when I carry my firearm, it is NEVER concealed. I keep it holstered on my belt in full view of everyone. In the great state of Texas, you don't need a concealed weapons permit to carry if your weapon isn't concealed.

 

TGC

 

Is this a recent change? This site seems to indicate otherwise. A Google search brings up several groups lobbying for open carry, but nothing indicating Texas is open carry without a permit.

I just took CCL course and they said Texas is not a open carry state. Sounds like bad info...

[ParamedicBK]

I guess that my point is that it makes no difference whether the individual makes the demand, if they don't have the authority to do so. I will freely ignore their inappropriate demand and do as I wish.

 

So, your just going to ignore the request of the host? If it was my event I and I found out I would ask you to not attend any more of my events.

When it comes to protecting my self and my family I will protect them, if that means not going to that event then so be it but if the host asked you not to wear your seatbelt when driving to the event would you? If they ask you to do something unsafe would you do it just because they asked?

[ParamedicBK]

It is your prerogative to be a victim anytime.

 

I was carrying than situations where I wished I was carrying when I wasn't. The only practical conclusion I can come to is I was deliberately putting myself into those "glad" situations because I was carrying.

 

Sounds like you made the right decision not to carry anymore, it makes it hard on the rest of us when people go looking for trouble just because they have a gun.

[+jtbrady01]

Emotion almost always trumps logic.

The only reason to carry firearms is if you intend to shoot someone, right?

Right, and those that "must" carry a gun to feel "safe" are just "afraid" and not simply "prepared" as they will claim.

 

I would love to see the stats on how many people's lives were saved because they had a gun on them (removing the part where they would have been fine if they didn't have a gun)

 

I'm sure the logic is the same as the seat belt arguments.

 

Interesting take on things. I've been carrying for quite some time now. In fact I have carried and used while I was in the Army. Now, back to Geocaching. Have I had the need to unholster my pistol? Not yet. However, as someone who tries to stay in shape I have unholstered it twice in the past 5 years. Both times have been in what some would call a decent neighborhood while I was out walking. Why? First I was walking my dog and another much larger dog came charging. I attempted to shout and distract the dog but, it did not stop the charge. As soon as it saw the pistol it stop and turned around. Obviously it had been shot at before. Second, I was walking again with some kids and some guy had another dog on one of those retractable leashes. The dog was terrorizing the kids (only a couple feet away) and after asking the guy to restrain the dog he continued to laugh. I had 3 kids crying and a dog snapping and barking. Only after pointing the pistol at the dog and saying last chance did the guy restrain the dog. The police later did issue him a citation.

 

A firearm can be use to shoot someone but, also can be used to diffuse a situation. Did I want to shoot a dog in front of 3 kids? Not really. However, each person has to take responsibility of their own actions. If this confrontation could happen in a neighborhood who's to say it can't happen somewhere else? Phones work great. But, the police can't arrive instantaneous. Your choice

[+Curioddity]

In retrospect, I can recall a lot more situations where I was glad I was carrying when I was carrying than situations where I wished I was carrying when I wasn't. The only practical conclusion I can come to is I was deliberately putting myself into those "glad" situations because I was carrying.

The more I read this, the more it looks incorrect to me. How it should read is:

In retrospect, I can recall a lot more situations where I was glad I was carrying when I was carrying than situations where I wished I was carrying when I wasn't. The only practical conclusion I can come to is I was allowing myself to get into those "glad" situations because I was carrying.

 

The difference is I never have been someone who went looking for trouble, but there was a time when I didn't always avoid it when it would have been easy to do so.

 

'Nuff!

 

Pete

[+Curioddity]

Ive always been of the opinion that someone that means to do you harm is prepared to do so and you are not at an advantage to have a firearm on you. Good luck to you if you pull it on someone prepared to use theirs.

Heh ... Statistically, armed civilians face a much greater chance of being shot than unarmed civilians.

 

Pete

[+bittsen]

Ive always been of the opinion that someone that means to do you harm is prepared to do so and you are not at an advantage to have a firearm on you. Good luck to you if you pull it on someone prepared to use theirs.

Heh ... Statistically, armed civilians face a much greater chance of being shot than unarmed civilians.

 

Pete

 

Yup. A lesson I learned when I was much younger was "if you carry a weapon, you have a greater chance of a weapon being used on you"

 

It's a valuable lesson that the NRA nutjobs would never want you to know.

[+Criminal]

Ive always been of the opinion that someone that means to do you harm is prepared to do so and you are not at an advantage to have a firearm on you. Good luck to you if you pull it on someone prepared to use theirs.

Heh ... Statistically, armed civilians face a much greater chance of being shot than unarmed civilians.

 

Pete

Statistically, men who dislike firearms are more likely to stand in front of a mirror admiring themselves in panties and a bra.

 

See how easy that is?

[+Curioddity]

I personally carry a firearm when I hike in remote areas of Angeles National Forest for many reasons. None are for premeditated murder. "ANF" as well many other forest / parks within California have been taken over by Mexican Drug Cartels who use the forest to grow illegal Marijuana Crops. Armed encounters with "crop guards" are on the rise.

I'm not a "crop guard" and never have been. But I tried to think like one after reading what you wrote, and this is what I came up with:

 

If I was a "crop guard" and I saw a hiker wandering around in the area, I'd probably take a "wait and see" attitude and hope that confrontation wouldn't be necessary. But if the hiker was wearing paramilitary gear (like you seem to favor) and was wearing a pistol, they'd never know what hit 'em or why.

 

And if I was the hiker and I managed to spot the illegal farm before the "crop guard" confronted me, I'd be extracting myself from the area as quickly and as quietly as I could and it wouldn't much matter how well I was armed.

 

Pete

[+Curioddity]

Ive always been of the opinion that someone that means to do you harm is prepared to do so and you are not at an advantage to have a firearm on you. Good luck to you if you pull it on someone prepared to use theirs.

Heh ... Statistically, armed civilians face a much greater chance of being shot than unarmed civilians.

 

Pete

Statistically, men who dislike firearms are more likely to stand in front of a mirror admiring themselves in panties and a bra.

 

See how easy that is?

If you somehow determined that I dislike firearms, then you got it very wrong. I've simply been trying to illustrate how utterly ridiculous most of the arguments in favor of carrying them are.

 

That was easy too.

 

rePete (who's had enough of this topic)

[Motorcycle_Mama]

As enlightening as this whole discussion is, everyone needs to be sure they are staying on topic which is "Firearms while caching".

 

Discussion of side issues should be carried on in the Off-Topic Forum.

 

Thanks.

[Clan Riffster]

Thanx Kit! I knew the numbers would be strongly in favor of folks being safer while carrying (even while caching) but I couldn't trust FDLEs original data.

[+Kit Fox]

I personally carry a firearm when I hike in remote areas of Angeles National Forest for many reasons. None are for premeditated murder. "ANF" as well many other forest / parks within California have been taken over by Mexican Drug Cartels who use the forest to grow illegal Marijuana Crops. Armed encounters with "crop guards" are on the rise.

I'm not a "crop guard" and never have been. But I tried to think like one after reading what you wrote, and this is what I came up with:

 

If I was a "crop guard" and I saw a hiker wandering around in the area, I'd probably take a "wait and see" attitude and hope that confrontation wouldn't be necessary. But if the hiker was wearing paramilitary gear (like you seem to favor) and was wearing a pistol, they'd never know what hit 'em or why.

 

And if I was the hiker and I managed to spot the illegal farm before the "crop guard" confronted me, I'd be extracting myself from the area as quickly and as quietly as I could and it wouldn't much matter how well I was armed.

Pete

 

Here is a geocache I won't bother finding because I suspect it is near an illegal Marijuana crop.

Roger's Camp

 

But the apparent presence of a part-time resident dissuaded me.

 

I'd love to hear what you found. I found some water bags & some brand new gardening tools. Maybe the Boy Scouts store stuff up here for trail maintenance. Yeah that's it: Boy Scouts.

 

Be careful with this one. Go in pairs.

 

Yes I was armed when I was in that area of that geocache, but I chose to stop at The Pianobox Prospect and not to look for danger or a shootout.

Edited August 16, 2009 by Kit Fox

[+Knight2000]

Yup. A lesson I learned when I was much younger was "if you carry a weapon, you have a greater chance of a weapon being used on you"

 

It's a valuable lesson that the NRA nutjobs would never want you to know.

Lets throw around the stereotypes now.

 

Your comment us bunk. Is there a risk? Sure. But police officers have the same risk. Maybe if officers stopped carrying then they would have a less likely chance to have the weapon used on them. Not just anyone can carry a weapon. You need to have good training and you need to constantly continue that training.

 

I have carried for about 15 months. My wife for 12. I have never cleared leather. I have been a bit spooked caching and felt glad that I had it. My wife has never cleared leather either. Many times though she has been relieved that she has had it though. She does not like carrying at all.

 

She was on a break at school vacuuming her car. Two men were eying her making her feel very uncomfortable and vulnerable. They walked into a gas station and then came out and started walking toward her. While they were inside she unlocked her glove box and put on her gun. She is tiny so it is hard to conceal with jeans and a shirt. When they came out she said they still were eying her and they were coming straight at her. Then they saw her weapon. She said they abruptly stopped and went the other way.

 

Would something have happened? Probably not. Could something have happened if she hadn't done that? Certainly. I'd rather her not take that chance though. (This was in rural country. Not some urban areas that some folks think this stuff only happens in.)

 

Curioddity: I have NEVER cached in an area I would have otherwise been nervous to without a gun. I have never went somewhere or took chances because I had a gun. That is just stupid. Using a gun is the last resort! The first line of defense is BE SMART. Do not put yourself in these situations.

 

Don't use your unwise decisions to assume that others do the same as you did.

 

One of our local parks systems hosted a caching event on how to identify what items are used to make meth as this is often done in secluded areas that cachers might be in. I'd rather have a way to protect my family if we stumble upon some paranoid people making this stuff. It happens.

[AZcachemeister]

Just to clarify, I was playing Devils Advocate in that last post.

I fully support individuals with proper training and permits to carry firearms.

Hell, I live in Arizona where you don't need a permit for (exposed, obvious, un-concealed) firearms.

[+xshooter]

 

The only reason to carry firearms is if you intend to shoot someone, right?

 

NO!!!!!!! I absolutely do not want to shoot someone. However, if I'm ever in a situation where somebody is going to kill me or my wife then I will do everything in my power, including shooting them, to prevent them from achieving their goal.

[+texasgrillchef]

I keep saying and thinking... when ever someone opposes having a gun, or carrying a gun.

 

1. OUTLAWS... (Criminals) don't give a rats a** about any laws or rules. They will carry a gun weather or not you like it and weather or not their is a law against it. If they want to shoot you, they will, & only another gun will stop them.

 

2. When guns are outlawed... only outlaws will have guns.

 

My point being is that the people who are actually LAW ABIDING CITIZENS (BTW watch the movie with that name coming soon, I saw the sneak preview very good!) aren't the ones you need to worry about carying guns. They won't shoot you unless you give them good legal reasons to do so. It's the ones who are criminals, the so called bad guys that will carry a gun with intentions of no good that you have to worry about. Those guys don't care about gun laws and no gun law or rules, or regulations is going to STOP them from having a gun. EVER.

 

As long as guns exist outlaws will have guns. Even if they have to make them themselvs. Bombs are illegal and don't normally exist. Yet they do... cause as we all know we can make one. Timothy McVei did! So having bombs "Banned" didn't save the lives of the 169 who lost their life in Oklahoma City.

 

TGC

[+cachesuchen]

I think this would be a good point to lock this one down. It seems everyone has drawn their lines in the sand. I can't see too much more being contributed to this. I didn't want to incite a huge debate, I just wanted to see what others think about.

 

Thanks for all the statistics. You guys definitely know how to support your argument with facts.

Edited August 18, 2009 by cachesuchen

[knowschad]

Geeze... a 2nd ammendment thread, a swastika thread... what's next... a pro-choice vs. right-to-life thread? My neighbor's cat, btw, is pro-choice, despite her many litters that have ended up near the humane society now outdoor geocache that no longer contains dog biscuits.

[+OldLog]

I usually leave my Glock19 in the car.

[+Knight2000]

I usually leave my Glock19 in the car.

[knowschad]

I usually leave my Glock19 in the car.

 

Dude!! Have you got any idea how many people have been killed in car accidents? Please ride a bike, for Pete's sake!!

[+debtodd007]

I hunt deer with a handgun.

 

I've seen mountain lions on the trail, and even had one follow me for a couple miles one time when I was fishing. Scary

 

I've seen bears out on the trail.

 

I've run into rattlesnakes more than once.

 

I don't carry a handgun when caching or hiking unless its hunting season.

 

I do carry pepper spray (bear repelling strength) and walking stick.

 

The pepper spray design for bears will work fine on mountain lion if needed, and will nearly blind a human.

 

Actually, I've been more fearful of some urban caches in metropolitan areas than I've been out in the woods. I usually have my kids with me, and often family friends. Personally I just don't see the need to carry anthing more than pepper spray when out in the woods in Montana.

[+Steve&GeoCarolyn]

Geeze... a 2nd ammendment thread, a swastika thread... what's next... a pro-choice vs. right-to-life thread? My neighbor's cat, btw, is pro-choice, despite her many litters that have ended up near the humane society now outdoor geocache that no longer contains dog biscuits.

 

As long as no one starts a debate on Macs vs. PCs, I think we'll be all right.

 

Carolyn

[+bittsen]

Thanks for all the statistics. You guys definitely know how to support your argument with facts.

 

I think you should have corrected this to say "You guys definately know how to support your argument with a lot of text"

 

Whether or not it's "factual" is highly debatable.

[aniyn]

Geeze... a 2nd ammendment thread, a swastika thread... what's next... a pro-choice vs. right-to-life thread? My neighbor's cat, btw, is pro-choice, despite her many litters that have ended up near the humane society now outdoor geocache that no longer contains dog biscuits.

 

You're not the only one who's noticed this - getting a bit heated in here isn't it?

[Motorcycle_Mama]

I think this would be a good point to lock this one down. It seems everyone has drawn their lines in the sand. I can't see too much more being contributed to this. I didn't want to incite a huge debate, I just wanted to see what others think about.

 

Thanks for all the statistics. You guys definitely know how to support your argument with facts.

 

Closed per the OP's second request.