CCW and caching

March 31, 2011

Im new to caching so im not sure if my o pion on the subject matters but think the idea of being armed comes with it certain responsibilities...Unless you have drawn your firearm and the assaulter is outside the 21 ft protacal of effectively using your weapon does it matter much? I carry fulfilling my obligation of having a ccw but in close, as many cachers might find themselves a LLO like pepper spray or the like might be a more effective option but again having options is what it is all about anyway. I dont care either way but i also see many that do have ccw's, have an air about them that can be disturbing. you are taught with any good training to defuse, retreat and do everything in your power to make yourself (for a lack of a better word) a sissy and get away, yet i have seen many who do carry almost flaunt the fact they have a CW and act braver or chest popped out that to me invites confrontation instead of negate it. CC is not IMO courage in a bottle but a fulfillment of the 2nd amendment. The states where it most might be warranted dont even allow CC anyway, like where i grew up Los Angeles, calif. so yes carry if you need that added state of mind but not if you go out wanting to be made to use it.....just my 2cents

I agree with most of what you said but the 21 foot rule has been debunked as myth. Anyway, if you have received proper firearms training you know not to "fight static". Dynamic movement off the "X"!

1.5k · March 31, 2011

I'd suggest you leave the moderating to the moderators.

Ironic.

But point taken. I did need to read it more carefully.

March 31, 2011

I'd suggest you leave the moderating to the moderators.

Ironic.

But point taken. I did need to read it more carefully.

There was probably a better way I could have said that, too.

Hopefully my point that it's nice to enjoy a friendly discussion (from many points of view) as seen in this thread came through, anyway.

Edited March 31, 2011 by mountainman38

March 31, 2011

A lot of my finds are coming home from work, and since I can't carry at work (or even have a gun in the car) I seldom carry while caching. I also have concerns when a cache takes me by a school, sometimes without knowing ahead of time. It seems unlikely that the issue would come up, but I would rather not explain to the officer that I didn't know I would be caching at a school when I left home.

When I do carry while caching it is so uncommon to have somebody watch me stumble around and look under logs that I have no worries about printing.

20.7k · March 31, 2011

A lot of my finds are coming home from work, and since I can't carry at work (or even have a gun in the car) I seldom carry while caching. I also have concerns when a cache takes me by a school, sometimes without knowing ahead of time. It seems unlikely that the issue would come up, but I would rather not explain to the officer that I didn't know I would be caching at a school when I left home.

When I do carry while caching it is so uncommon to have somebody watch me stumble around and look under logs that I have no worries about printing.

The way most of us handle this is if the arrow leads us to a location where we cannot have our weapon, we either save that cache for another day or secure our weapon in the vehicle, whichever is practical. I don't believe that anyone would advise to carry the weapon illegally simply because our GPSr's arrow directed us to that location.

20.7k · March 31, 2011

Im new to caching so im not sure if my o pion on the subject matters but think the idea of being armed comes with it certain responsibilities...Unless you have drawn your firearm and the assaulter is outside the 21 ft protacal of effectively using your weapon does it matter much? I carry fulfilling my obligation of having a ccw but in close, as many cachers might find themselves a LLO like pepper spray or the like might be a more effective option but again having options is what it is all about anyway. I dont care either way but i also see many that do have ccw's, have an air about them that can be disturbing. you are taught with any good training to defuse, retreat and do everything in your power to make yourself (for a lack of a better word) a sissy and get away, yet i have seen many who do carry almost flaunt the fact they have a CW and act braver or chest popped out that to me invites confrontation instead of negate it. CC is not IMO courage in a bottle but a fulfillment of the 2nd amendment. The states where it most might be warranted dont even allow CC anyway, like where i grew up Los Angeles, calif. so yes carry if you need that added state of mind but not if you go out wanting to be made to use it.....just my 2cents

I recommend that you read this and this. It covers just about all of your issues, starting with why the 21 foot rule, isn't and continuing on to why pepper spray or the like isn't the perfect solution.

Regarding your 'courage in a bottle' comment, that has not been my experience. I know absolutely no permit holders who bravely charge into dangerous situations for no other reason than because they are armed.

1.5k · March 31, 2011

Regarding your 'courage in a bottle' comment, that has not been my experience. I know absolutely no permit holders who bravely charge into dangerous situations for no other reason than because they are armed.

That is my experience as well, CCW holders are by nature cautious individuals.

3.1k · March 31, 2011

Regarding your 'courage in a bottle' comment, that has not been my experience. I know absolutely no permit holders who bravely charge into dangerous situations for no other reason than because they are armed.

That is my experience as well, CCW holders are by nature cautious individuals.

I seriously doubt all CCW holders are "by nature cautious individuals." Although I'm sure many CCW holders are prudent, I'm also fairly sure some will be overconfident and act more bravely and/or more foolishly than they should. It's a potential tendency that CCW holders should be aware of.

Here's one study that addressed "the risk or protection that having a gun might create for a person at the time of a shooting." It estimated that a person with a gun, on average, was "4.5 times more likely to be shot in an assault than those not possessing a gun." Of course, there are multiple reasons why this might be the case, but I wouldn't rule out overconfidence as being one contributing factor. While the study wasn't perfect, it should give us something to think about.

March 31, 2011

Regarding your 'courage in a bottle' comment, that has not been my experience. I know absolutely no permit holders who bravely charge into dangerous situations for no other reason than because they are armed.

That is my experience as well, CCW holders are by nature cautious individuals.

I seriously doubt all CCW holders are "by nature cautious individuals." Although I'm sure many CCW holders are prudent, I'm also fairly sure some will be overconfident and act more bravely and/or more foolishly than they should. It's a potential tendency that CCW holders should be aware of.

Here's one study that addressed "the risk or protection that having a gun might create for a person at the time of a shooting." It estimated that a person with a gun, on average, was "4.5 times more likely to be shot in an assault than those not possessing a gun." Of course, there are multiple reasons why this might be the case, but I wouldn't rule out overconfidence as being one contributing factor. While the study wasn't perfect, it should give us something to think about.

I think that's a seriously flawed study. If you include every gang banger who carries a pistola stuck in the front of his trousers (hanging about knee level) in the group of those involved in shooting -- yeah, odds aren't so good.

If you look at those of us who carry responsibly, train, and think about where we put ourselves -- I don't agree with that whole idea.

Not being prepared is safer than being prepared?! Hmmm.... bad guys won't shoot me if I'm helpless... Yeah, that's going to work well.

20.7k · March 31, 2011

Regarding your 'courage in a bottle' comment, that has not been my experience. I know absolutely no permit holders who bravely charge into dangerous situations for no other reason than because they are armed.

That is my experience as well, CCW holders are by nature cautious individuals.

I seriously doubt all CCW holders are "by nature cautious individuals." Although I'm sure many CCW holders are prudent, I'm also fairly sure some will be overconfident and act more bravely and/or more foolishly than they should. It's a potential tendency that CCW holders should be aware of.

Here's one study that addressed "the risk or protection that having a gun might create for a person at the time of a shooting." It estimated that a person with a gun, on average, was "4.5 times more likely to be shot in an assault than those not possessing a gun." Of course, there are multiple reasons why this might be the case, but I wouldn't rule out overconfidence as being one contributing factor. While the study wasn't perfect, it should give us something to think about.

Not perfect? I would grade that study as hopelessly flawed.

20.7k · March 31, 2011

Regarding your 'courage in a bottle' comment, that has not been my experience. I know absolutely no permit holders who bravely charge into dangerous situations for no other reason than because they are armed.

That is my experience as well, CCW holders are by nature cautious individuals.

I seriously doubt all CCW holders are "by nature cautious individuals." Although I'm sure many CCW holders are prudent, I'm also fairly sure some will be overconfident and act more bravely and/or more foolishly than they should. It's a potential tendency that CCW holders should be aware of.

Here's one study that addressed "the risk or protection that having a gun might create for a person at the time of a shooting." It estimated that a person with a gun, on average, was "4.5 times more likely to be shot in an assault than those not possessing a gun." Of course, there are multiple reasons why this might be the case, but I wouldn't rule out overconfidence as being one contributing factor. While the study wasn't perfect, it should give us something to think about.

I think that's a seriously flawed study. If you include every gang banger who carries a pistola stuck in the front of his trousers (hanging about knee level) in the group of those involved in shooting -- yeah, odds aren't so good.

If you look at those of us who carry responsibly, train, and think about where we put ourselves -- I don't agree with that whole idea.

Not being prepared is safer than being prepared?! Hmmm.... bad guys won't shoot me if I'm helpless... Yeah, that's going to work well.

Also, the 'control' group was merely people who survived a shooting and self-reported as not being armed.

It also only considered those incidents where bullets were fired, rather than including any incidents where the presence of an armed individual kept the situation from escalating to that point.

As you stated, it also didn't limit the study to permit holders.

3.1k · March 31, 2011

Regarding your 'courage in a bottle' comment, that has not been my experience. I know absolutely no permit holders who bravely charge into dangerous situations for no other reason than because they are armed.

That is my experience as well, CCW holders are by nature cautious individuals.

I seriously doubt all CCW holders are "by nature cautious individuals." Although I'm sure many CCW holders are prudent, I'm also fairly sure some will be overconfident and act more bravely and/or more foolishly than they should. It's a potential tendency that CCW holders should be aware of.

Here's one study that addressed "the risk or protection that having a gun might create for a person at the time of a shooting." It estimated that a person with a gun, on average, was "4.5 times more likely to be shot in an assault than those not possessing a gun." Of course, there are multiple reasons why this might be the case, but I wouldn't rule out overconfidence as being one contributing factor. While the study wasn't perfect, it should give us something to think about.

If you include every gang banger who carries a pistola stuck in the front of his trousers (hanging about knee level) in the group of those involved in shooting -- yeah, odds aren't so good.

Agreed. Which is why I wrote: "Of course, there are multiple reasons why this might be the case, but I wouldn't rule out overconfidence as being one contributing factor."

If you look at those of us who carry responsibly, train, and think about where we put ourselves -- I don't agree with that whole idea.

Again, agreed. But I think we both also would agree that not every CCW holder always acts responsibily, always is well trained, and always thinks about where they put themselves. Nor are all of them "by nature cautious individuals."

Edited March 31, 2011 by CanadianRockies

2.1k · March 31, 2011

Regarding your 'courage in a bottle' comment, that has not been my experience. I know absolutely no permit holders who bravely charge into dangerous situations for no other reason than because they are armed.

That is my experience as well, CCW holders are by nature cautious individuals.

I seriously doubt all CCW holders are "by nature cautious individuals." Although I'm sure many CCW holders are prudent, I'm also fairly sure some will be overconfident and act more bravely and/or more foolishly than they should. It's a potential tendency that CCW holders should be aware of.

Here's one study that addressed "the risk or protection that having a gun might create for a person at the time of a shooting." It estimated that a person with a gun, on average, was "4.5 times more likely to be shot in an assault than those not possessing a gun." Of course, there are multiple reasons why this might be the case, but I wouldn't rule out overconfidence as being one contributing factor. While the study wasn't perfect, it should give us something to think about.

If you include every gang banger who carries a pistola stuck in the front of his trousers (hanging about knee level) in the group of those involved in shooting -- yeah, odds aren't so good.

Agreed. Which is why I wrote: "Of course, there are multiple reasons why this might be the case, but I wouldn't rule out overconfidence as being one contributing factor."

If you look at those of us who carry responsibly, train, and think about where we put ourselves -- I don't agree with that whole idea.

Again, agreed. But I think we both also would agree that not every CCW holder always acts responsibily, always is well trained, and always thinks about where they put themselves. Nor are all of them "by nature cautious individuals."

I think all CCW holders do always act responsibly. I've never heard of one committing a crime, for example.

I don't know about where you live, but around here, they are always well trained. They have to be, in order to get the permit in the first place.

3.1k · March 31, 2011

I think all CCW holders do always act responsibly. I've never heard of one committing a crime, for example.

Because you have never heard of a CCW holder committing a crime, you conclude ALL CCW holder ALWAYS act responsibly. Are you serious?

1.5k · March 31, 2011

I seriously doubt all CCW holders are "by nature cautious individuals." Although I'm sure many CCW holders are prudent, I'm also fairly sure some will be overconfident and act more bravely and/or more foolishly than they should. It's a potential tendency that CCW holders should be aware of.

Here's one study that addressed "the risk or protection that having a gun might create for a person at the time of a shooting." It estimated that a person with a gun, on average, was "4.5 times more likely to be shot in an assault than those not possessing a gun." Of course, there are multiple reasons why this might be the case, but I wouldn't rule out overconfidence as being one contributing factor. While the study wasn't perfect, it should give us something to think about.

I didn't say "all CCW holders". There are few absolutes in this world.
You're comparing one subset of gun owners, CCW holders, with very different subset of gun owners, 41 who were shot in Philadelphia between 2003-2006 - none that are known to be CCW holders. (This was a bizarrely constructed study, but that is WAY off topic here.)
Depending on the state and who is doing the number crunching, CCW holders are 7 times less likely to commit a violent crime than the population as a whole. (I've seen stats ranging from 3-50 times less likely).

Yes, in my experience, CCW holders tend to be more cautious by nature. If you think about it, it makes sense. They are a preselected sample that chose to go through a (typically) complicated process of training, background checks, and paperwork to get their CCW. The violent crime rates for CCW holders are minuscule compared to the population as a whole. (As an example here are the numbers for Texas for 2007.)

Edited March 31, 2011 by Ecylram

3.1k · March 31, 2011

I don't know about where you live, but around here, they are always well trained. They have to be, in order to get the permit in the first place.

If I lived in Alaska, Arizona, or Vermont, then I wouldn't even need a permit to carry. (Add Wyoming to that list as of July 1, 2011.)

According to Wikipedia, "Georgia, Pennsylvania, and Washington have no training/safety certification requirement whatsoever." The training requirements in some of the other states probably wouldn't rise to most people's definition of "well trained."

March 31, 2011

To further back up the point Ecylram made: when I was taking my handgun carry permit (HCP) class in TN, the latest available data for HCP holders involvement in reported shootings was available through 2007. At that time, over 200,000 people in TN had obtained HCPs: only 6 had been involved in a reported shooting, and all 6 had been adjudicated as justified. The percentage of people with revoked permits was on the order of 0.01%, with only a miniscule number of those revocations attributable to "brandishing" or other actions indicative of careless or reckless behavior. My own experience with contacts with other HCP holders who are carrying is that they are indeed quite cautious, and extraordinarily aware of safety and proper handling of their firearm. But, just as with practitioners of this game, your mileage may certainly vary...

March 31, 2011

I don't know about where you live, but around here, they are always well trained. They have to be, in order to get the permit in the first place.

If I lived in Alaska, Arizona, or Vermont, then I wouldn't even need a permit to carry. (Add Wyoming to that list as of July 1, 2011.)

According to Wikipedia, "Georgia, Pennsylvania, and Washington have no training/safety certification requirement whatsoever." The training requirements in some of the other states probably wouldn't rise to most people's definition of "well trained."

Here in Arizona, you can carry concealed or open carry without a permit, but you must be able to legally purchase a handgun. BTW, that's a recent change here. In order to get a CCW, you still have to go through training (with a few exceptions.)

1.5k · March 31, 2011

I don't know about where you live, but around here, they are always well trained. They have to be, in order to get the permit in the first place.

If I lived in Alaska, Arizona, or Vermont, then I wouldn't even need a permit to carry. (Add Wyoming to that list as of July 1, 2011.)

According to Wikipedia, "Georgia, Pennsylvania, and Washington have no training/safety certification requirement whatsoever." The training requirements in some of the other states probably wouldn't rise to most people's definition of "well trained."

I've lost track of the point you're trying to make.

3.1k · March 31, 2011

I don't know about where you live, but around here, they are always well trained. They have to be, in order to get the permit in the first place.

If I lived in Alaska, Arizona, or Vermont, then I wouldn't even need a permit to carry. (Add Wyoming to that list as of July 1, 2011.)

According to Wikipedia, "Georgia, Pennsylvania, and Washington have no training/safety certification requirement whatsoever." The training requirements in some of the other states probably wouldn't rise to most people's definition of "well trained."

Here in Arizona, you can carry concealed or open carry without a permit, but you must be able to legally purchase a handgun. BTW, that's a recent change here. In order to get a CCW, you still have to go through training (with a few exceptions.)

Excuse me, but I'm somewhat confused by your comments. If I understand your first sentence correctly, then you're saying that to legally carry a handgun in Arizona, you must be eligible to legally purchase a handgun. No surprise there.

I'm less sure what you mean by "in order to get a CCW." Are you saying that to carry a concealed weapon (without a permit), you still must go through training (usually)? Does Arizona require training before you can legally buy a weapon? That would surprise me. If not, though, then where does the training requirement enter the picture?

Edit: I think I've figured it out. If you want to get the optional CCW permit in Arizona (perhaps to carry your weapon in states with reciprocity agreements), then you would need to get training. If that's the case, then you still can carry a concealed weapon in Arizona without training.

Edited March 31, 2011 by CanadianRockies

March 31, 2011

I don't know about where you live, but around here, they are always well trained. They have to be, in order to get the permit in the first place.

If I lived in Alaska, Arizona, or Vermont, then I wouldn't even need a permit to carry. (Add Wyoming to that list as of July 1, 2011.)

According to Wikipedia, "Georgia, Pennsylvania, and Washington have no training/safety certification requirement whatsoever." The training requirements in some of the other states probably wouldn't rise to most people's definition of "well trained."

Here in Arizona, you can carry concealed or open carry without a permit, but you must be able to legally purchase a handgun. BTW, that's a recent change here. In order to get a CCW, you still have to go through training (with a few exceptions.)

Excuse me, but I'm somewhat confused by your comments. If I understand your first sentence correctly, then you're saying that to legally carry a handgun in Arizona, you must be eligible to legally purchase a handgun. No surprise there.

I'm less sure what you mean by "in order to get a CCW." Are you saying that to carry a concealed weapon (without a permit), you still must go through training (usually). Does Arizona require training before you can legally buy a weapon? That would surprise me. If not, though, then where does the training requirement enter the picture?

You don't have to have a CCW to carry concealed in AZ anymore. That was a recent change. You may still get a CCW (which requires training with a few exceptions.) Alot of people here still get CCWs in order to carry concealed out of state in states we have recipricocity agreements.

3.1k · March 31, 2011

You don't have to have a CCW to carry concealed in AZ anymore. That was a recent change. You may still get a CCW (which requires training with a few exceptions.) Alot of people here still get CCWs in order to carry concealed out of state in states we have recipricocity agreements.

I figured this out just as you were posting your clarification (see my edit in my above post). If I had waited a minute longer, then I wouldn't have had to strain my brain.

My point remains, however. It is possible to carry a concealed weapon in Arizona (and several other states) without any training.

Edited March 31, 2011 by CanadianRockies

March 31, 2011

Thats handy!

3.1k · March 31, 2011

Thats handy!

Check the timestamp of my edit with the timestamp of Caped Crusader's post.

Edit: I supposed I could have gotten very lucky, checked this thread just as the Caped Crusader published his post, read it quickly, made my edit, and published it within the same minute 11 seconds.

Edited March 31, 2011 by CanadianRockies

March 31, 2011

You don't have to have a CCW to carry concealed in AZ anymore. That was a recent change. You may still get a CCW (which requires training with a few exceptions.) Alot of people here still get CCWs in order to carry concealed out of state in states we have recipricocity agreements.

I figured this out just as you were posting your clarification (see my edit in my above post). If I had waited a minute longer, then I wouldn't have had to strain my brain.

My point remains, however. It is possible to carry a concealed weapon in Arizona (and several other states) without any training.

I don't see how seven states qualify as several, when there are 50 (possibly very soon 51) states. But, yes, there are states that allow you to carry concealed without training, but as soon as someone does something stupid with their gun, their right to carry is revoked making it a felony for them to be in possession of any firearm.

1.5k · March 31, 2011

We're arguing over minutia at this point that isn't related to geocaching. Anybody have something to get us back on track?

3.1k · March 31, 2011

You don't have to have a CCW to carry concealed in AZ anymore. That was a recent change. You may still get a CCW (which requires training with a few exceptions.) Alot of people here still get CCWs in order to carry concealed out of state in states we have recipricocity agreements.

I figured this out just as you were posting your clarification (see my edit in my above post). If I had waited a minute longer, then I wouldn't have had to strain my brain.

My point remains, however. It is possible to carry a concealed weapon in Arizona (and several other states) without any training.

I don't see how seven states qualify as several...

Several: Being of a number more than two or three but not many.

March 31, 2011

I seriously doubt all CCW holders are "by nature cautious individuals." Although I'm sure many CCW holders are prudent, I'm also fairly sure some will be overconfident and act more bravely and/or more foolishly than they should. It's a potential tendency that CCW holders should be aware of.

I have read your posts so far and I have a serious question:

Other than the fact that in some states a person can get a CCW without training and a study that does not include CCW holders, are there any other reasons you believe CCW holders are not cautious in general?

I ask because of the hundred or so CCW holders I know (admittedly not at all a random sample) I can't think of a single one that I would consider reckless.

3.1k · March 31, 2011

We're arguing over minutia at this point that isn't related to geocaching. Anybody have something to get us back on track?

How's this. Geocachers who opt to carry concealed weapons still should act prudently and not be overconfident in dangerous situations.

1.5k · March 31, 2011

We're arguing over minutia at this point that isn't related to geocaching. Anybody have something to get us back on track?

How's this. Geocachers who opt to carry concealed weapons still should act prudently and not be overconfident in dangerous situations.

I think we can all agree with that one.

2.1k · March 31, 2011

We're arguing over minutia at this point that isn't related to geocaching. Anybody have something to get us back on track?

How's this. Geocachers who opt to carry concealed weapons still should act prudently and not be overconfident in dangerous situations.

I like it better with the unnecessary words edited out.

20.7k · March 31, 2011

We're arguing over minutia at this point that isn't related to geocaching. Anybody have something to get us back on track?

How's this. Geocachers who opt to carry concealed weapons still should act prudently and not be overconfident in dangerous situations.

I think we can all agree with that one.

I've been involved in several threads on this subject and I can't recall a single poster who argued against that point.

March 31, 2011

We're arguing over minutia at this point that isn't related to geocaching. Anybody have something to get us back on track?

How's this. Geocachers Everyone who opt to carry concealed weapons still should act prudently and not be overconfident in dangerous situations.

I like it better with the unnecessary words edited out.

There, that's better! :grin:

March 31, 2011

I don't know about where you live, but around here, they are always well trained. They have to be, in order to get the permit in the first place.

If I lived in Alaska, Arizona, or Vermont, then I wouldn't even need a permit to carry. (Add Wyoming to that list as of July 1, 2011.)

According to Wikipedia, "Georgia, Pennsylvania, and Washington have no training/safety certification requirement whatsoever." The training requirements in some of the other states probably wouldn't rise to most people's definition of "well trained."

Why don't you give us the stats on the firearm violence done by a CCW holder?

3.1k · March 31, 2011

I seriously doubt all CCW holders are "by nature cautious individuals." Although I'm sure many CCW holders are prudent, I'm also fairly sure some will be overconfident and act more bravely and/or more foolishly than they should. It's a potential tendency that CCW holders should be aware of.

I have read your posts so far and I have a serious question:

Other than the fact that in some states a person can get a CCW without training and a study that does not include CCW holders, are there any other reasons you believe CCW holders are not cautious in general?

If you reread the quotation you cited, then you should discover that I'm not saying CCW holders are not cautious "in general."

3.1k · March 31, 2011

We're arguing over minutia at this point that isn't related to geocaching. Anybody have something to get us back on track?

How's this. Geocachers Everyone who opt to carry concealed weapons still should act prudently and not be overconfident in dangerous situations.

I like it better with the unnecessary words edited out.

There, that's better!

I certainly agree with the rewording. I was just trying to stay on topic, as Ecylram requested.

March 31, 2011

We're arguing over minutia at this point that isn't related to geocaching. Anybody have something to get us back on track?

How's this. Geocachers who opt to carry concealed weapons still should act prudently and not be overconfident in dangerous situations.

I like it better with the unnecessary words edited out.

Much better. Why should carry permit holders, who are statistically speaking more law abiding than the rest of the population, be singled out? If anything we should be advising non permit holding geocachers to be cautious. But I like it best with either bias edited out.

3.1k · March 31, 2011

We're arguing over minutia at this point that isn't related to geocaching. Anybody have something to get us back on track?

How's this. Geocachers who opt to carry concealed weapons still should act prudently and not be overconfident in dangerous situations.

I like it better with the unnecessary words edited out.

Much better. Why should carry permit holders, who are statistically speaking more law abiding than the rest of the population, be singled out? If anything we should be advising non permit holding geocachers to be cautious. But I like it best with either bias edited out.

Just in case you missed my response: "I certainly agree with the rewording. I was just trying to stay on topic, as Ecylram requested."

3.1k · March 31, 2011

We're arguing over minutia at this point that isn't related to geocaching. Anybody have something to get us back on track?

How's this. Geocachers who opt to carry concealed weapons still should act prudently and not be overconfident in dangerous situations.

I think we can all agree with that one.

I've been involved in several threads on this subject and I can't recall a single poster who argued against that point.

Never underestimate what forum participants are willing to argue against. :rolleyes:

1.5k · March 31, 2011

We're arguing over minutia at this point that isn't related to geocaching. Anybody have something to get us back on track?

How's this. Geocachers who opt to carry concealed weapons still should act prudently and not be overconfident in dangerous situations.

I like it better with the unnecessary words edited out.

Much better. Why should carry permit holders, who are statistically speaking more law abiding than the rest of the population, be singled out? If anything we should be advising non permit holding geocachers to be cautious. But I like it best with either bias edited out.

In all fairness, this IS a discussion on concealed carry so it's not surprising that someone wrote specifically about those who carry concealed. But I agree with the broader point, we should be careful as cachers - whether carrying or not.

April 1, 2011

I seriously doubt all CCW holders are "by nature cautious individuals." Although I'm sure many CCW holders are prudent, I'm also fairly sure some will be overconfident and act more bravely and/or more foolishly than they should. It's a potential tendency that CCW holders should be aware of.

I have read your posts so far and I have a serious question:

Other than the fact that in some states a person can get a CCW without training and a study that does not include CCW holders, are there any other reasons you believe CCW holders are not cautious in general?

If you reread the quotation you cited, then you should discover that I'm not saying CCW holders are not cautious "in general."

My impression was that you disagreed with the post you quoted ("That is my experience as well, CCW holders are by nature cautious individuals.") Sorry if I misunderstood, but actually i am glad to hear you agree with that.

3.1k · April 1, 2011

I seriously doubt all CCW holders are "by nature cautious individuals." Although I'm sure many CCW holders are prudent, I'm also fairly sure some will be overconfident and act more bravely and/or more foolishly than they should. It's a potential tendency that CCW holders should be aware of.

I have read your posts so far and I have a serious question:

Other than the fact that in some states a person can get a CCW without training and a study that does not include CCW holders, are there any other reasons you believe CCW holders are not cautious in general?

If you reread the quotation you cited, then you should discover that I'm not saying CCW holders are not cautious "in general."

My impression was that you disagreed with the post you quoted ("That is my experience as well, CCW holders are by nature cautious individuals.") Sorry if I misunderstood, but actually i am glad to hear you agree with that.

Oh, well. I tried.

April 7, 2011

Before this thread degenerates...

For those who carry while caching, what method of carry do you use to keep your weapon secure and not 'print'? As cachers we're reaching, bending over and even crawling under things. It's somewhat easier to conceal in the colder climes during winter, but summer is fast approaching.

What works for you?

What works will depend on the person, the weather, and the area...

There are some states (and far more local areas) that are more or less hostile to people going armed even when it is perfectly legal. A few states issue concealed carry permits but ban open carry. In such states, especially if the local attitude is hostile, you may problems with "printing" being a serious issue. Even in states were open carry is legal, occasionally local cops will hassle people who they notice carrying. In a few areas you might even be charged with "brandishing a weapon" if a concealed firearm becomes visible. It is important to know both the laws and the local attitudes wherever you carry.

I am fortunate to be in an area where open carry is legal and mostly accepted (at least outside our large metro area). In this area I can carry concealed without being overly concerned about printing or accidental flashing.

One thing I have found is that your overall appearance is important whenever carrying either openly or concealed. If I wear dress slacks and a dress shirt (the same clothes I wear to the office), I can stop in the local Wendy's carrying a full size or compact automatic in a strong-side belt holster and no one will notice that I don't have a badge clipped to my belt like the other people dressed like me do. I can put on a jacket or windbreaker over that same outfit and carry concealed without being concerned about printing. If you look respectable you are much less likely to draw any unwanted attention. At the same time, you need to show good sense. When I am carrying as described I don't go into the bank or other places where people are especially sensitive about guns.

When you need to carry really concealed, you are generally limited to a smaller gun and/or heavier clothing -- or off-body carry, such as a backpack or "fanny pack". A hiker carrying some sort of bag doesn't draw much attention most places where hiking is a common activity.

Your clothes and equipment all need to fit your surroundings and your activity. Most of us would dress differently for urban or rural geocaching, you need to take those conditions into consideration when planning to carry a legal weapon.

Keep in mind that your concealed carry permit may have limitations that block carry in many locations where caches might be placed. As of February 22, 2010, a new federal law allows people who can legally possess firearms under applicable federal, state, and local laws, to legally possess firearms in most National Parks, but many states ban firearms in state parks.

One more consideration with carrying firearms while geocaching is that even with a concealed carry permit, you may run into problems with state hunting laws. Many states have hunting laws or regulations that limit the kind or caliber of firearms that can be used while hunting - such laws are not generally meant to apply to carrying for personal defense, but most of those laws were written to assume that if a person is in an area where hunting occurs and carrying a firarm then they must be hunting with that gun. For example, if you are carrying a pistol in the woods during "bow season" you may have a problem with the local game warden - especially if he has some other reason to want to hassle you.

May 1, 2011

I always carry when caching. Most of the time it's my Ruger LCP in a pocket holster.

May 2, 2011

I've been known to own a weapon or 30 but if I did carry, I'd not share the info with everyone else. Kinda' defeats the purpose, no?

Heck, now I know who to mug if the chance ever presented itself (JOKE). Thanks for sharing your info.

You have a right to do as you want. Just scares me some of the people that do carry. Some people who have a ccw should of never been allowed to have one. I believe all police should carry and people who have a chance of encountering a dangerous animal and that's about it. Now that I've identified who here carries, I'll know who to avoid when me and my kids are out in the wildreness. Can ya'll post the links to the rest of the threads that have debated this subject? Tanks...er....thanks. :rolleyes:

20.7k · May 2, 2011

I've been known to own a weapon or 30 but if I did carry, I'd not share the info with everyone else. Kinda' defeats the purpose, no?

Heck, now I know who to mug if the chance ever presented itself (JOKE). Thanks for sharing your info.

You have a right to do as you want. Just scares me some of the people that do carry. Some people who have a ccw should of never been allowed to have one. I believe all police should carry and people who have a chance of encountering a dangerous animal and that's about it. Now that I've identified who here carries, I'll know who to avoid when me and my kids are out in the wildreness. Can ya'll post the links to the rest of the threads that have debated this subject? Tanks...er....thanks.

A forum search will turn up those other threads. Reading this one or those will explain why some of the assumptions that you made in your post are incorrect.

May 2, 2011

I've been known to own a weapon or 30 but if I did carry, I'd not share the info with everyone else. Kinda' defeats the purpose, no?

Heck, now I know who to mug if the chance ever presented itself (JOKE). Thanks for sharing your info.

You have a right to do as you want. Just scares me some of the people that do carry. Some people who have a ccw should of never been allowed to have one. I believe all police should carry and people who have a chance of encountering a dangerous animal and that's about it. Now that I've identified who here carries, I'll know who to avoid when me and my kids are out in the wildreness. Can ya'll post the links to the rest of the threads that have debated this subject? Tanks...er....thanks.

So you'd select a target for violence, based on the knowledge that they carry a deadly weapon? There's a wee bit of a flaw in that logic...

You've most likely encountered a lot of people who were carrying when you were out in the wilderness, and naturally were never aware of it. Carrying a gun in no way means someone needs to brandish it or show it off, or start firing blindly on the spur of the moment. Thinking that those of us who carry would act in such a way points up a lot of unattractive bias on your part.

May 2, 2011

I've been known to own a weapon or 30 but if I did carry, I'd not share the info with everyone else. Kinda' defeats the purpose, no?

Heck, now I know who to mug if the chance ever presented itself (JOKE). Thanks for sharing your info.

You have a right to do as you want. Just scares me some of the people that do carry. Some people who have a ccw should of never been allowed to have one. I believe all police should carry and people who have a chance of encountering a dangerous animal and that's about it. Now that I've identified who here carries, I'll know who to avoid when me and my kids are out in the wildreness. Can ya'll post the links to the rest of the threads that have debated this subject? Tanks...er....thanks.

So you'd select a target for violence, based on the knowledge that they carry a deadly weapon? There's a wee bit of a flaw in that logic...

You've most likely encountered a lot of people who were carrying when you were out in the wilderness, and naturally were never aware of it. Carrying a gun in no way means someone needs to brandish it or show it off, or start firing blindly on the spur of the moment. Thinking that those of us who carry would act in such a way points up a lot of unattractive bias on your part.

Where'd you get that idea? Other people on the thread stated they didn't carry. I was showing how foolish the thread was.

As for talking about you all, I've had people threaten me over a parking spot with flashing their weapon at me. Over a friggin' parking spot at a grocery store. I've also had a woman yank one out of her handbag just because I got within 15 feet of her walking through a parking lot. I guess since I live in a high crime area (Flint, Michigan), I can see why they might be paranoid plus, I'm a big person and might intimidate a smaller person but their actions leave a lot to be desired. So, my bias so far has fact to back it up.

I wish more of you CCW'ers would show common sense. As is, I see no use of it in GC'ing, unless you're in an area with animals that might be a danger to you.

Oh, I do own quite a few weapons but don't feel the need to carry as I'm not terrified of my own shadow. Carry on, Gentlemen.

20.7k · May 2, 2011

Again, if you would read the thread prior to spouting off, you'd be better off for it.

1.5k · May 2, 2011

I've had people threaten me over a parking spot with flashing their weapon at me. Over a friggin' parking spot at a grocery store. I've also had a woman yank one out of her handbag just because I got within 15 feet of her walking through a parking lot.

What makes you think they have CCW permits? All kinds of dangerous people carry guns without permits. CCW carriers tend to be very law abiding individuals (I base that on crime statistic analysis thats been done in many states), but you provide examples of individuals who are committing crimes by "brandishing" their weapons.

I wish more of you CCW'ers would show common sense. As is, I see no use of it in GC'ing, unless you're in an area with animals that might be a danger to you.

You've provided two examples of the human animal demonstrating a willingness to do you harm. Yet, you feel it's only ok to protect oneself against animals, but not humans? Statistically, you are more likely to be killed by a human than an animal.

Oh, I do own quite a few weapons but don't feel the need to carry as I'm not terrified of my own shadow. Carry on, Gentlemen.

You are perfectly within your right to choose to not defend yourself. I support your decision. However, have you considered that the people you've labeled as "terrified of [their] own shadow" might not be "terrified" but just cautious by nature? If I purchase fire insurance against my home, am I "terrified" of a fire? Or, if I have car insurance I'm "terrified" of other cars?

It seems you are concerned about a subclass of the population (CCW holders) that are several time LESS likely to commit a crime than the population as a whole and that doesn't quit make sense to me. That's why I wouldn't be concerned if I found that someone in my caching group WAS legally carrying.

On the other hand, if I knew someone I was caching with was carrying illegally I'd be very concerned and I would probably not cache with them again.

CCW and caching

Recommended Posts

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment