Caching with weapons

July 24, 2002

It seems to me that drawing a lethal weapon without being mentally prepared to kill (if necessary) is the worst position to be in. I wonder how many of the people who have been shot with their own guns froze at the critical moment when they could have defended themselves and were thus overpowered?

Seneca, is everyone who owns a weapon working with "mushified brain cells" in your book? Or is it only the people that actually plan on using them if the need arises? I'm also bothered by people who seem to spend their lives looking for a fight, for some excuse to unleash lethal force- but I don't see PREPARATION for a crisis and seeking and relishing a fight as the same thing at all. Some of the finest people I've met have been in the martial arts- they are very prepared for trouble but don't seek it. I've met a couple of wackos too who seemed to be looking for a reason to use their skills to break somebody's neck. Going out looking for trouble is foolish, but if trouble comes looking for you, you should at the very least be mentally prepared to do whatever it takes to defend you and yours.

Some people on this thread have mentioned brandishing a weapon as a threat. It seems to me that you shouldn't let your *** write checks your mouth can't cash. If you won't pull the trigger, don't draw the gun.

I don't own a gun. I don't particularly like guns, but philosophically I'm 100% behind our right to own them and use them responsibly.

July 24, 2002

alot of pretty words, but what do they really mean??

let us examine the basic workings of a gun, in VERY lamans terms. in a FUNCTIONING gun there are two elements, the gun itself, and the ammunition. (here is where i may have to qualify my previous statement that guns are designed to kill) the gun itself is simply a mechanism to activate or launch the ammunition. they can range from very complex to being a carved peice of wood with a rubber band and a nail. (very very dangerous but yes they do exist as homemade makeshift gun.) the ammunition is a small amount of incindiary powder locked into a casing benieth a metal/lead/sometimes rubber, "nugget" when set off, this sends the "nugget" flying out at, and in the case of non rubber (assuming that the target is not missed completely) into the target. this destroys any tissue that it goes through, (there are even mention in here of hollow tip bullets which do even more damage.) the purpose of this damage is not to "cause an attacker to flee" or to "injure" them, as i pointed out previously and you chose to ignore, there are other tools for that. the purpose for sending a high velocity object into a target is to nullify it. to "kill" it. the gunsmith does not go into his shop and

then you call me a liar... sir, i hope you can back this up. as i can back up calling you a liar.

you directly quoted what i said that guns are desined to kill, then proceded in your own translation of what i said to add the word humans. not what i said, not what i meant. i know of no guns company that bosts his guns to be the most intimidating in appearance or have the scariest sound, or nonlethal injuries. what is the measure of a gun?? two big ones are accuracy and stopping power. how well can it hit the target and how much damage can it do. i may not know alot of flowery words, or be the most eloquent guy around, but i do know common sense and common decency, by your posts, and the accusations they contain, it seems you lack both.

July 24, 2002

Humbly lying down my emotional rant. I could not hope to state my opinion nearly as succinctly as Len just did. Thank you my friend.

"it is hard for thee to kick against the pricks" Acts 26:14

July 24, 2002

Humbly lying down my emotional rant. I could not hope to state my opinion nearly as succinctly as Len just did. Thank you my friend.

"it is hard for thee to kick against the pricks" Acts 26:14

July 24, 2002

Vash, was part of your post missing? You lost me in the middle there.

Something to consider: guns ARE intentionally used non-lethally, hence the term "kill shot" as opposed to a shot intended to only impair. A cop who shoots a knife-wielding maniac in the head is in big trouble compared to one who aims and hits in the legs.

Secondly: Who called you a liar? I notice Len used the phrase "you're not being honest..." a few times- is that what you're referring to? This is a way of saying that you haven't genuinely thought something through or you are using purposefully fake or outlandish examples in an argument. I don't think any offense was intended and nobody here is questioning your integrity.

-Respectfully submitted

July 24, 2002

So you get the point, I hope. To say "guns are designed to kill," is (1) a lie, and (2) if it weren't a lie, it would still be intentionally misleading.

he who lies is a liar, and 2, is come on now, intentionally misleading is a lie, who is this guy, bill clinton??

"i did not have relations with that gun"

the point i made was not that guns can not be used nonlethaly, the point, was and still is that they are made/created/designed with lethal power specificly in mind. hence the nonlethal methods. stungun, tazer etc.. (a point which continues to be ignored) this whole thing is silly. why not just admit that guns are lethal weapons which they are, and as such, people who are not able to handle such a responsibility should not be armed with them, as people who can handle it should be. why all the PC garbage??? i am not currently a gun owner, though i hope to be in the future. and i say without apology, that i am (whether with a gun or any other thing including my hands) prepared to kill IF THE SITUATION WARRANTS IT.

as to the police example a police man that shoots someone in the head is in big trouble no matter what. i have several friends, police and military, and have taken many of the classes that are in the local police academy curriculum. and one thing that remains constant from instructors and friends alike, shoot for the primary mass (though i can not think of what the official term they use is at the moment) in other words, you are less likely going to hit an arm a leg or a head, so when you shoot, you shoot for the chest, the biggest and easiest target. every time a cop pulls the trigger there is paperwork and investigation (legalities) to be sure everything was legit. which means dont shoot unless its ABSOLUTELY necessary, and by that it usually means having used all other means of subduing. im reminded of one of those "real tv" shows i saw one time where a very similar situation was at hand. (the man had a katana, a samauri sword) swat team all over and everything. i'll give you a hint, they didnt shoot out his legs... actually they got the fire dept to hit him with the hose. now i know your all thinking so what. whats the point? the point is, they used another nonlethal means of incapasitation. why?? i'll let you chomp on that one. and thank you screamappillar for being one of the few (though i have seen some) respectful people in here..

July 25, 2002

quote:
the purpose of this damage is not to "cause an attacker to flee" or to "injure" them, as i pointed out previously and you chose to ignore, there are other tools for that. the purpose for sending a high velocity object into a target is to nullify it. to "kill" it.

True when hunting game. Not true when firing on an attacker. When the attacker stops his/her threat the shooting stops weather by turning around and running away, or by keeling over.

2.6k · July 25, 2002

quote:
Originally posted by vash the stampede:
as to the police example a police man that shoots someone in the head is in big trouble no matter what. i have several friends, police and military, and have taken many of the classes that are in the local police academy curriculum. and one thing that remains constant from instructors and friends alike, shoot for the primary mass (though i can not think of what the official term they use is at the moment) ..

My Dept. trains two shots Center Mass followed by two shoots to the head.

There is no general policys or proceedures throughout the country.

Every municipality, county and state is diferent.

I think that's two cents.

Preperation, the first law to survival.

July 25, 2002

thank you leatherman, thats the term . and like i said, it's all i have been told, even by your dept. standards center mass is first. which is the point, and i notice you didnt mention any apendages... (arms legs, not to kill)

July 25, 2002

quote:
Originally posted by MACpa:
A question for our friends in England: Is it true that If someone breaks into your home you are not permited to confront them and are expected to leave your own home

No its not true. That would be ridiculous.

However, there was a case relatively recently where somebody was put on trial and imprisoned for killing a burglar in his home by shooting him in the back. I think this was considered murder as the victim was running away at the time.

(Edited: Woops - just realised the question had already been answered pages back in this discussion. Ignore this!)

-----------------

el10t

mobilis in mobili

[This message was edited by el10t on July 25, 2002 at 03:07 AM.]

July 25, 2002

Wow! Believe it or not I read this whole thread! What was the original question? Oh yea, now I remember.

You're right, Solohiker. Carrying a weapon does seem problematic while hiking/geocaching. There are not many convenient ways to carry a gun with a backpack on and still have it accessible. Most holsters will compromise your comfort or interfere with your backpack in some way. You could put it in your pack but then it becomes impossible to retrieve in an emergency. An ankle holster might be doable but it's slow and awkward. You could just shove it under your hipbelt but invariably you'll forget it's there and it will drop to the ground when you remove your pack in the trailhead parking lot. How embarrassing! So what is the solution for the gun-toting geocacher? Do as I do and carry it in your hand. Preferably pointed straight ahead and canted sideways in the popular and effective "gangsta" style. This way your gun will be ready all the time and you won't have to worry about "getting the drop" on the bad guys. This carry method has never failed me and although I have never had to shoot a bad guy with my gun it did come in handy once when I encountered an unusually hard to open ammo-box.

"There's no need to be afraid of strange noises in the night. Anything that intends you harm will stalk you silently."

July 25, 2002

GPS is a weapon! used by the Department Of Defense to kill hundreds of people at a time.(the logic here is a firearm is only used to aim and fire a projectile. GPS is used to aim and detonate bombs)

I have seen loaded firearms sit on shelfs for months at a time and not one of them jumped up and tried to kill someone

Illegal posession of a firearm should carry a twenty year minimum sentence regardless of the age of the criminal

A person using the threat of death while commiting a crime should recieve the same threat in his sentecing. Age does not matter (Yes the 12 year old that robs a convience store with a weapon should recieve the death penalty)

Lets have new laws that deter criminal activity not take freedom away from honest law abiding citizens

32 states have provisions for citizens to carry firearms. If you were a career criminal where would you do buisness.

July 25, 2002

MACpa,

GPS is not a wepon! You and everybodey in here is dum to cary wepons whil chilrden are arond! I think maney of you is ignorent and clueless. What kind of peoples are you? most of you are very bad an evel people to say you wold kil baers!

boblog3

July 25, 2002

quote:
Originally posted by vash the stampede:

quote:
From Len:
So you get the point, I hope. To say "guns are designed to kill," is (1) a lie, and (2) if it weren't a lie, it would still be intentionally misleading.

he who lies is a liar, and 2, is come on now, intentionally misleading is a lie, who is this guy, bill clinton??

A man who repeats a lie may be a liar, but he may also simply be fooled by somebody else's lie. Since you're hardly the first person to repeat the false statement that "guns are designed to kill", it seems to me that you probably fall into the latter category.

But if you think carefully, you will find that the statement is false--or, to the extent it is true, meaningless. To get yourself rolling, consider two questions:

(1) Is it true that the only (or even primary) use of a gun user is to *kill* people? In 98% of defensive gun uses not one shot is fired, so I'd say the answer is clearly enough "No."

(2) Is it true that the only (or even primary) use of a gun is to *murder* people? Obviously not. People do not build guns hoping that they will be used in the commission of a murder.

quote:
...why not just admit that guns are lethal weapons...

Of course they are. Lethal means "capable of inflicting death". It does not mean "solely or primarily intended for the use of inflicting death." You are taking the fact that guns can be used to kill, and trying to conclude that gun owners are some sort of homicidal maniacs.

quote:
...and as such, people who are not able to handle such a responsibility should not be armed...

Of course they shouldn't. But it sounds like you're changing the subject: when did somebody suggest that the insane or the mentally incompetent should be armed? I never noticed anyone saying that.

quote:
i am (whether with a gun or any other thing including my hands) prepared to kill IF THE SITUATION WARRANTS IT.

Then you support the gun owners, since they feel the same way.

--Len.

July 25, 2002

Doh! Marge won't let me have a gun! She is afraid I might do something stupid! Sheesh, yeah right Marge! Homer Simpson doing something stupid! Duh...

"Oh, look at the Homer, he's shooting the car!"

"Look at the Homer, he shot himself in the face!"

"Look at the Homer, he's bleeding to daeth..."

Doh!!

HomerSimpsonOKC (Doh!)

July 25, 2002

As I recall, Krusty the Klown gives three legitimate uses for guns:

1)Protecting yourself and your family

2)Killing dangerous or delicious animals

3)Keeping the King of England out of your face

July 25, 2002

quote:
Originally posted by Team Screamapillar:
As I recall, Krusty the Klown gives three legitimate uses for guns:

1)Protecting yourself and your family

2)Killing dangerous or delicious animals

3)Keeping the King of England out of your face

Yeah, I told Marge that exact thing, "OK, Marge. You win, I won't buy the bazooka, BUT, when the King of England with his fancy pants on comes bursting through our front door and gets right in your face, you'll wish we had a bazooka then!"

And, oh, those delicious tasty, animalls! Uuhhhhhhh... (drool)

Bart thought we could scare away burgulars with it too!

HomerSimpsonOKC (Doh!)

July 25, 2002

quote:
Originally posted by vash the stampede:

now a note to george leroy tirebiter,

"i think its time you should leave, i'll call you a taxi. if you dont want to leave in a taxi you can leave in a huff and if thats too soon you can leave in a minute and a huff"

given your avatar and name that should make a little sense to you, in fact it makes such little sense your probably the only one that will get it.

Close, and I do get it!

The Album cover is from "Firesign Theater", not "Marx Brothers" (although I am an afficionado of both!)

--Mark Brothers--

I married your mother because I wanted children... Imagine my disappointment when YOU arrived!

Gamerson, take a letter. To my lawyers, Honerable Charles H. Hungadunga. In care of Hungadunga, Hungadunga, Hungadunga, and McCormick. Gentlemen, question-mark.

Do you want that "question-mark" in the letter?

No, put that in the envelope...

--FST--

I think we're all bozos on this bus! How can you be in two places at once when you're really nowhere at all?

Don't forget to pump your shoes!

Hemlock Stones, Pordgy, Mudhead and Poor Little Bozo

George Leroy Tirebiter (Movie star)

More Sugar!!

July 25, 2002

Man,

This thread weaves back and forth across those double yellow lines like this train was being driven by a crazy, cattle-prodded, toothless, helper monkey! I still can't make it funny, and this might be off-topic, so I ain't comin' in here!

--majicman

(NEVER get "off-topic." These threads are ALL far too serious for that!)

July 25, 2002

How about this: If you want to carry, do it. Just get the proper training and licensure first. If you don't want to carry, don't. It's nice that we at least have the option. I think this is in the spirit of the original posting.

OK, I didn't want to, but I have to get in on the controversy. Why is it that gun owners are often perceived by non-gun owners as being paranoid goof balls? I've never understood this one.

Do you also view people who exercise their other rights as goofy morons? Boy, people who vote are real loosers, right???

Some people see the glass as half empty, some see it as half full. I see a glass that's twice as big as it needs to be.

July 25, 2002

quote:
Originally posted by Titanium:
Do you also view people who exercise their other rights as goofy morons? Boy, people who vote are real loosers, right???

Boy, we are really getting into some logical arguments here

Exercising rights is a completely neutral concept to me. A person generally has the right to act like a "goofy moron" and when they exercise that right, I view them as being a "goofy moron". When a person exercises their right to be a positive, constructive force in the community I compliment and applaud them for it.

You may not agree with what I say, but I will defend, to your death, my right to say it!(it's a Joke, OK!)

July 25, 2002

I saw the topic and was all excited to post that I carry an 8 foot bullwhip while caching, just as a noisemaker to scare animals off really(I make 'em from Roo leather I import from Australia). Until I read the first 3 pages of the thread that is, and got bored with the big gun talk this turned into.

British travel book definition of a Canadian. "Looks like an American - Free Health care - no gun"

We hardly have any citizens toting guns here and I like it that way. Who knows, if I lived in the USA I might change my mind and start packin' too.

Cheers!

July 25, 2002

quote:
Originally posted by Duke_:
Pepper spray? A knife? Trekking poles? Good grief! Are you goint out prepared to kill or what? I mean seriously, do you really need those tools to defend yourselves? Good grief, if I happen to stumble out on the trail in front of you, are you going to spray that pepper spray in my eyes? are you going to stick me with that knife? are you going to stab me with that trekking pole? Good grief man, what are you, paranoid or something? Why must you insist on carrying those offensive weapons out into our peaceful wilderness?

"it is hard for thee to kick against the pricks" Acts 26:14

Well, reading over what the rest of the conversations have been about, I'm going to assume you were joking around when you wrote this. The pepper spray is our main defense and no, I wouldn't spray it in your eyes if you stumbled on the trial, I'd probably see if you were alright and if you needed any assistance. The knife is brought along in case of emergency. Mainly to cut things if needed (no, not people) and if you do happen to be stuck in the woods, it's a dadgum good thing to have on you. In the case that a dog/cougar/crazy beaver or something actually bites onto one of us, yes, the knife would probably be used to get it off. The trekking poles are just used for trekking. I said you COULD beat something with it if you had no other choice, but it's not like I run after deers with my poles and beat them down (unfortunately, I can imagine some people actually doing that).

Anyways, so does an air horn work as good to scare the animals away as one of those bear bangers? It seems as if it would, maybe we'll just pick one of those up.

I am the Rabbit King, I can do anything

July 25, 2002

I would like to post an addendum to my earlier posting.

If you are a paranoid goof ball, please stay away from firearms. Especially when geocaching.

"Some people see the glass as half empty, some see it as half full. I see a glass that's twice as big as it needs to be."

July 25, 2002

What is this all about.

Geocaching with guns? Are we hunting here or geocaching? Give me a break people. You only carry the guns with you because you are interested in them and you FEEL like carrying them. Its definitely a hobby. Similar to cell phones. The majority of the population doesn't actually NEED to have one. Most of them just think its COOL to have one and use one in public. I own guns, and have been around them all of my life and I know for a fact when I have one with me or near me it makes me feel more in control. Why take this ability to kill with you geocaching??? Bring a stun gun or something if you really need protection. Or if you need to feel COOL then just bring a cellphone. What all this really comes down to is:

People carrying guns simply = more people carrying guns. I personally don't trust anyone with a gun.

TRUST ME I KNOW WHAT THE HELL I'M TALKING ABOUT

July 25, 2002

Further to that!

I would place a healthy bet that the majority of people who actually carry a gun with them on a hike or geocache are very inexperienced when it comes to firearms. In fact that handgun is likely the only gun you own and is relatively new to you. Maybe you've only shot is once or twice. Scary really.

A true marksman/hunter wouldn't carry a gun and surely wouldn't admit it for geocaching.

TRUST ME I KNOW WHAT THE HELL I'M TALKING ABOUT

July 25, 2002

But look at the Avatar.. I'v got a little experience with firearms, and a whole lot of time dedicated to training with rifle, pistol and shotgun. I shoot guns competitivly as my other hobbie. Trust me. You want me there if the SHTF.

Tango Down!!!

July 25, 2002

I have a 50 cal Desert Eagle. I carry it for the extra work out.

"My gps say's it RIGHT HERE".

http://www.geogadgets.com

July 25, 2002

I got 7 handguns and 12 longarms,I love my Glock,but the sweetest handgun I own is a S&W 25-5 .45 L.C.,but I hike on alot of N.P.S. land and I'am not sure if it's legal,I know you can't discharge A weapon on N.P.S. land.I don't carry when I hike,but man their has been times I would have love to capped a diamondback or an old copperhead.But one thing is for sure I don't want Geocaching to pick up a bad rap by connecting the two.We all know what jerkwads the media is when they can get a story on people that carry.Just my 2 cent. Oh crap I just realized I'am post# 223 no one will ever read this.

July 25, 2002

I just finished reading this entire thread. Took me about an hour and a half.

I would like to respond as rationally as I can. I will not use any statistics and will not assert any superiority in our laws over those of other countries nor will I project any inferiority the other direction. I will also try to keep this on topic related to what has been said here and in relating to hiking and geocaching.

First though I would like to say that I find it a little offensive that there is an attitude that all gun owners are somehow irresponsible and paranoid. Also that children + Guns = Accidents and Death. First relating to people carrying guns as being inherently dangerous and such a threat, if that were the case than why do we have armed police officers. If having a gun on you makes you a frightened paranoid shell of a person than why aren't more cops shooting at their shadows. The reason is maturity and training. Just because a private citizen has chosen to arm himself does not mean that he/she hasn't engaged in that same training and possessing of similar professionalism and maturity. As for children it is not strictly an age thing and not a certainty. In many cases upbringing, training and GUIDANCE AND RESPONSIBILITY BY PARENTS makes a big difference. I am not advocating putting guns in the hands of children but the difference between some 13 or 14 yr old suburban or city kid who finds a gun hidden behind a garage in his neighborhood and has never been introduced to the seriousness of a gun may react differently than the child half his age that has lived on a farm or in a rural wilderness kind of area where guns are an important part of life. Personally I started shooting guns when I was 13 when I attended a military academy. I had friends who were dear hunting when they were 7 or 8. The training I received included a strict emphasis on the seriousness of what a gun can do and included rules about handling, pointing and storage. Always hold your rifle UP AND DOWN RANGE. I also took training in TX when attending college that included the full range of instruction of how to handle a firearm safely. Texas Safe Hunter Program and was offered through ROTC. In both cases, asside from learning how to hold and shoot a rifle for competition and hunting there was a lot of emphasis on safe handling. Some of this might sound rediculous but you would be surprised how many people do not have the common sense to realize this. Always treat a firarm as if it was loaded. Never aim at something you do not intend to shoot. Never store a loaded gun. Do not grab a firearm by the barrel. There were others but I don't want to belabor this part If you are interested check the NRA or other DNR and Hunter Safety sites. In fact with all the heat that the NRA takes for unsafe handling of guns in this country, it is the NRA that sponsors, totally or in part, most of the Safety and Training programs in this country. The point is that yes, there are irresponsible people out there but I would venture to guess that most gun owners do have such training and knowlege, maturity and common sense to act safely and responsible with their guns. Maybe an answer to the percieved problems is to require every gun buyer to show that they are so trained and experienced. You could learn everything you need to know in one afternoon. To lump everyone under a label of "Let me know when you are around because I don't want to get shot" is an unfair assumption and highly offensive. Some might say that a person with that attitude is Paranoid.

I will add that now I live in an urban area where I may have no need to own a gun. I do not and actually never have felt the need for one. I live in an area where when I call the police they will be there in 5 minutes or less. It was not long ago though when I lived in an area in Wisconsin where a single county deputy might have an area of about 40 miles by 40 miles to patrol. If you had some need for assistance it could take half an hour for him to get to you. If I lived in an environment like that I might have a different opinion of my need to have some protection. For that matters I would definately have a first aid kit and maybe even a defibrilator just in case (j/k) Point is though that even emergency medical help can take a long time to arrive. Also, just because there are a lot of cops and people around does not mean you are safe. I point out an incident in Chicago where a woman with a restraining order against her ex called police when he was trying to break in. 911 dispatched officers that took a long time to arrive, might have been 45min but I can't remember. Anyways, by the time they did arrive, well the ending was tragic. I do not say she should have been armed. That could have even put her in more harms way if she was not prepared or trained to use the gun to defend her. Also could be that she may have had children in and out of the house which could be a problem. Anyways, it should be everyones choice and dependant on if they are legally able to have a gun.

Anyways relating to arming yourself for caching. In my area I have little to fear. About the worst I might encounter is an angry beaver or more realisticly a Coyote. I understand that Coyote are very shy and would probably not bother you. You may not even know they are around. However, remember that when you are poking around under logs, in small caves or other dug out features you never know when you might intrude upon a den or bedding site. An angry mother Coyote defending her pups or a White Tail Doe or Buck with young or a mate around could be a dangerous propositon. I do not believe carrying a gun in an urban forest presereve or a city park is wise. Personally I don't think I could shoot an animal anyways. Unless, hopefully, my life was in imenent danger. As much as I wouldn't have minded going along, I never did take to the Deer Hunting rituals in Wisconsin. I had several friends who had invited me along for weekends. On the other hand, if I was wandering the wilderness in Florida where I might encounter a panther, a bear, a boar, a gator or other angry animal who's terratory I have invaded or who's young I might be threatening and that animal was in an aggressive and highly defensive posture I might want to be prepared to defend my life. I just don't see any of this as a likelyhood in my current surrounds.

Reading these posts I think that I might consider a knife and some pepper spray. The knife could be useful for other needs like digging or cutting wood etc. In this area there is a limit on the size of a knife. 6" I believe. If I get attacked by an angry raccoon or oppossum or Coyote I am sure I could scare it off with a stick, bat, pepper spray or some other non leathal force. Also the knowlege to back off and not approach is usually most sufficient. Most animals are, as I said, being defensive. They are trying to scare you off. Back away and you might usually be fine. The retractable batton sounds good too but I believe they may actually be illegal in my area. I have a strong belief that most cachers are probably similar in feeling. That is they probably will not be armed with a gun. They may be prepared for the angry raccoon or stray or wild dog.

July 25, 2002

quote:
Originally posted by wmas1960:
I would like to respond as rationally as I can.

Sounds pretty rational to me. Well said. I do not disagree with most of what you have said.

You may not agree with what I say, but I will defend, to your death, my right to say it!(it's a Joke, OK!)

July 25, 2002

I thought I had read all of this but now I find that I only read one page of these posts. Looks like I have about 4 more hours of reading to do.

Anyways, in my last post I mentioned some differences between different locales that one might be caching. For instance, in the Forest Preserves around me where The biggest animal is a White Tail and maybe the scariest a lone Coyote. Those might be able to be fought off with some simple understanding of the animals defense mechanisms and some pepper spray or foam, a bat or a stick or maybe a knife. However, to reiterate, if you are in an area where you could be the victim of a charging bear or a panther or other more aggressive or powerfull critter like an allegator, or other swift or stealthy animal you may want somehting more substantial to defend yourself with. You might even want a shotgun. Incidentally somebody mentioned caching with an assault rifle. That is rediculous and was never even mentioned. It shows the irrational arguements and rebuttals that some can have. Every serious post I read were talking about small hand guns. Far different than an AK-47 or an AR-15

You may be correct in general that a gun is not one of the first things you would put in your pack. In many situations it might not be needed at all. However it all depends on where you are caching. Not all caches are along bicycle trails or on picturesque sailing lakes in Wisconsin or Wooded areas around Chicago. There are some that have been put in some pretty rough and challenging areas. You could look at it though as, special equipment or skills, like a cache that might require climbing ropes and gear or a conoe ... Some caches might be in areas where a person may want to have a firearm with them.

quote:
Originally posted by vash the stampede:
i like guns, in fact i really really like them, i just dont thing a gun should be on the list of things you get specificaly for geocaching, which is what this thread is about. how many times must i say it, if you are hunting or in bear and beast country guns are a great idea. but other than that there are better weapons if you need one for GEOCACHING. defending your home, use a gun, taking a stroll through gangland at midnight, you'd be crazy not to have one, walking on a hiking/biking trail in a public park in the middle of the day, you could be asking for trouble. again, those people who are responsible about it are fine, but those who are spooked by people being there at the same time shouldnt be carrying ANYTHING dangerous. just read those forums. i am progun, i would like to have a few of myself, cant afford them though and when i referred to them as toys, i meant it. they should be something we can enjoy safely not something we have to clutch on to to keep from wetting our pants of fear every moment of the day

July 25, 2002

I thought I had read all of this but now I find that I only read one page of these posts. Looks like I have about 4 more hours of reading to do.

Anyways, in my last post I mentioned some differences between different locales that one might be caching. For instance, in the Forest Preserves around me where The biggest animal is a White Tail and maybe the scariest a lone Coyote. Those might be able to be fought off with some simple understanding of the animals defense mechanisms and some pepper spray or foam, a bat or a stick or maybe a knife. However, to reiterate, if you are in an area where you could be the victim of a charging bear or a panther or other more aggressive or powerfull critter like an allegator, or other swift or stealthy animal you may want somehting more substantial to defend yourself with. You might even want a shotgun. Incidentally somebody mentioned caching with an assault rifle. That is rediculous and was never even mentioned. It shows the irrational arguements and rebuttals that some can have. Every serious post I read were talking about small hand guns. Far different than an AK-47 or an AR-15

You may be correct in general that a gun is not one of the first things you would put in your pack. In many situations it might not be needed at all. However it all depends on where you are caching. Not all caches are along bicycle trails or on picturesque sailing lakes in Wisconsin or Wooded areas around Chicago. There are some that have been put in some pretty rough and challenging areas. You could look at it though as, special equipment or skills, like a cache that might require climbing ropes and gear or a conoe ... Some caches might be in areas where a person may want to have a firearm with them.

quote:
Originally posted by vash the stampede:
i like guns, in fact i really really like them, i just dont thing a gun should be on the list of things you get specificaly for geocaching, which is what this thread is about. how many times must i say it, if you are hunting or in bear and beast country guns are a great idea. but other than that there are better weapons if you need one for GEOCACHING. defending your home, use a gun, taking a stroll through gangland at midnight, you'd be crazy not to have one, walking on a hiking/biking trail in a public park in the middle of the day, you could be asking for trouble. again, those people who are responsible about it are fine, but those who are spooked by people being there at the same time shouldnt be carrying ANYTHING dangerous. just read those forums. i am progun, i would like to have a few of myself, cant afford them though and when i referred to them as toys, i meant it. they should be something we can enjoy safely not something we have to clutch on to to keep from wetting our pants of fear every moment of the day

July 25, 2002

I like your fake pistol comment. It brings to mind something said by some cop friends of mine. Some years ago there was a debate in town about banning handguns. After a high profile school shooting in a nearby town. Anyways, my friends said that a hand gun was not your best defense if you hear an intruder in the house. One guy said to have a shotgun. Put a spent shell in the barrel and stand over your front stairs. Rack that thing and let the shell bounce of the floor. Most intruders will be gone in a flash.

Of course there was a debate over whether to have the next shell be a dud or real. I might prefer real. Just in case the intruder has some friends that are cops. Incidentally, does anybody know if they make shotgunshells filled with Habenero pepper powder. If you want Non-Lethal you could fire that at an intruder...

quote:
Originally posted by cwsprenkle:
I almost always carry a handgun while geocaching, hiking, walking about town, or on a trip to the mall. The handgun is usually carried in a fanny pack/holster combo. Looks just like an ordinary fanny pack. What makes people think they will only need a gun in specific areas? Crime happens everywhere. Do I see a bogeyman behind every tree? No, I've been licensed and carrying since 1971 and not once have I felt threatened enough to draw my weapon. But....it could happen tomorrow. Someday you may be glad that there was a law abiding, gun carrying citizen around to aid you, your family, or a friend. To those who advocate a fake pistol - that's called suicide.

July 25, 2002

I like your fake pistol comment. It brings to mind something said by some cop friends of mine. Some years ago there was a debate in town about banning handguns. After a high profile school shooting in a nearby town. Anyways, my friends said that a hand gun was not your best defense if you hear an intruder in the house. One guy said to have a shotgun. Put a spent shell in the barrel and stand over your front stairs. Rack that thing and let the shell bounce of the floor. Most intruders will be gone in a flash.

Of course there was a debate over whether to have the next shell be a dud or real. I might prefer real. Just in case the intruder has some friends that are cops. Incidentally, does anybody know if they make shotgunshells filled with Habenero pepper powder. If you want Non-Lethal you could fire that at an intruder...

quote:
Originally posted by cwsprenkle:
I almost always carry a handgun while geocaching, hiking, walking about town, or on a trip to the mall. The handgun is usually carried in a fanny pack/holster combo. Looks just like an ordinary fanny pack. What makes people think they will only need a gun in specific areas? Crime happens everywhere. Do I see a bogeyman behind every tree? No, I've been licensed and carrying since 1971 and not once have I felt threatened enough to draw my weapon. But....it could happen tomorrow. Someday you may be glad that there was a law abiding, gun carrying citizen around to aid you, your family, or a friend. To those who advocate a fake pistol - that's called suicide.

July 26, 2002

quote:
For me however, the issue here is whether or not when I prepare to go Geocaching do I _want_ to be prepared to kill someone? The answer is no. Contemplating killing someone, in advance, is not something I would find at all right or pleasurable, and it is certainly not something I want to go through life doing, in particular when I am participating in a recreational activity such as Geocaching._

I think this may be a source for a lot of the conflict on this issue and the gun issue in general. You seem to assume that everyone who is carrying a firearm on them has contemplated killing someone or thought, as they were putting the gun in their bag, I might kill someone today.

I think any reasonable person, while they might, and better, recognize that could happen, is actually thinking I might need this to DEFEND MYSELF. The thought of killing someone is not on their mind. Self Preservation might be. Some here have even stated that they carry, not because they really intend to use it against a person but, to defend from an animal. For some it is a defence against nature.

Incidentally I would point out, and I will admit I don't have the experience to actually know, It might not be a good choice to shoot a 32 or 9mm or something at a Grisley or other bear. Unless you are real lucky or a good shot you might not find it all that effective. That is what I have heard though.

Of course, one of the first things I was taught when I had a .22 put in my hands in military school was that even something as small as the .22 long ammunition can be DEADLY. In fact, somebody mentioned pellet guns earlier. While usually not, they, and bbs, can be fatal as well. You Never, Ever, treat any gun other than a potentially leatal weapon. Even if you are out shooting at a piece of paper. However, that does not mean that every person who picks up a gun has that objective in mind.

July 26, 2002

Bear Banger - English Sausage made of bear meat that had previously been sprayed with pepper spray than beaten to death by a GeoCacher with a baseball bat.

quote:
Originally posted by White Rabbit:
Don't mind my stupidity, but what exactly are bear bangers? I can pretty much tell that they make a loud noise that'll usually scare a bear, but all I can picture is a Geocacher running around crashing two frying pans together. Whatever they are, they do sound like a good thing to carry around.

http://www.iinet.net.au/~rabbit/rabpics/buneatg.gif _I am the Rabbit King, I can do anything_

July 26, 2002

You appearently miss a couple of things. The knife and the trekking poles serve multiple purposes. Assiting with climbing and walking and taking stress off of knees and othe joints and the knife can also be used to cut some wood or fillet a fish or for digging... The only item in the trio that is truely a weapon is the pepper spray, unless you intend to spray your fish first before eating it. Also these items were not necessarilly mentioned AS weapons. I believe they were mentioned by people who fealt that should the need for a defensive weapon arise these items could be sufficient in most circumstances instead of having to carry a gun.

At least that is how I interperated their mention.

quote:
Originally posted by Duke_:

quote:
Originally posted by White Rabbit:
On long hikes and long Geocaches, we'll take High Power Pepper Spray, our knife, and our trekking poles.

Pepper spray? A knife? Trekking poles? Good grief! Are you goint out prepared to kill or what? I mean seriously, do you really need those tools to defend yourselves? Good grief, if I happen to stumble out on the trail in front of you, are you going to spray that pepper spray in my eyes? are you going to stick me with that knife? are you going to stab me with that trekking pole? Good grief man, what are you, paranoid or something? Why must you insist on carrying those offensive weapons out into our peaceful wilderness?

"it is hard for thee to kick against the pricks" Acts 26:14

July 26, 2002

If you read all the posts wmas, you will realize that my statements about the pepper spray, knife, and trekking poles were stated with heavy sarcasm to poke fun at some of the rediculous statements from the anti gun folks. I was using absurdity to point out the absurd.

People carrying those mentioned items are going out prepared.

People who carry a sidearm are going out prepared.

But some folks in here believe that going out prepared with a sidearm somehow makes you a paranoid threat to the civilized world. And that is nonsense.

"it is hard for thee to kick against the pricks" Acts 26:14

July 26, 2002

quote:
Originally posted by GlfWrVt:
But look at the Avatar.. I'v got a little experience with firearms, and a whole lot of time dedicated to training with rifle, pistol and shotgun. I shoot guns competitivly as my other hobbie. Trust me. You want me there if the SHTF.

Tango Down!!!

Sorry brother, but when the SH.. HITS THE FAN I don't want some auto technician for the US military taking care of buisiness!!! Everyone learns how to shoot a gun in Basic Military Training!!!!

TRUST ME I KNOW WHAT THE HELL I'M TALKING ABOUT

July 26, 2002

Well,

I hate to give up one of my crowns, but I have to pass the verbosity headpiece to WMAS.

P.S. I like verbosity! If you don't say what you mean (which takes some words) then you'll never mean what you say!

--majicman

BigSig rules to live by:

1.) Don't take life too seriously, you'll never get out of it alive!

2.) There is NO... Rule #2.

3.) NEVER get "off-topic." These threads are ALL far too serious for that!

July 26, 2002

quote:
I think this may be a source for a lot of the conflict on this issue and the gun issue in general. You seem to assume that everyone who is carrying a firearm on them has contemplated killing someone...I think any reasonable person...is actually thinking I might need this to DEFEND MYSELF...

Right. In fact, most people probably isn't even thinking that, usually. At some point in the past a person decides to carry a weapon to defend himself. Having made that decision, he probably doesn't revisit that issue: he simply thinks, "Gotta put on my pants...then the shoes...belt...watch...gun...okay; we're good to go."

quote:
Some here have even stated that they carry, not because they really intend to use it against a person but, to defend from an animal.

I've considered that. Until a few years ago I lived in upstate New York, where packs of coyotes still roam at night. I've been out at dusk, a mile into the woods, with an ATV that won't start, and heard coyotes start to howl...and wished I was packing.

quote:
...somebody mentioned pellet guns earlier. While usually not, they, and bbs, can be fatal as well. You Never, Ever, treat any gun other than a potentially leatal weapon.

Agreed! For safety, you should treat the gun like a loaded, lethal weapon. But if you're choosing a gun for defensive use, don't choose a pellet gun. Actually using it defensively requires incredible skill plus a lot of luck, since a hit will only anger your attacker unless it penetrates the brain. (Pros don't rely on head shots--they CERTAINLY don't plan on hitting their opponent in the eye-socket.)

In fact I think your caution above should be repeated clearly and often. I've seen anti-gun people handling a firearm, and it's a wonder they don't kill somebody. I think *antis* should send their kids to a gun safety course, because you never know when it will save somebody's life.

(I think that's a life principle. I'll send my boy to a high-speed, low-friction driving course because it could save his life--even though I'll ground him for a year if I ever catch him driving fast on ice.)

--Len.

July 26, 2002

Len, not making much sense to me.

quote:
I've considered that. Until a few years ago I lived in upstate New York, where packs of coyotes still roam at night. I've been out at dusk, a mile into the woods, with an ATV that won't start, and heard coyotes start to howl...and wished I was packing.

Because you hear Cayotes howling you wish you had a gun??? Being an outdoorsman and all don't you know that Cayotes will not harm let alone come near humans?????? Because you hear noises at night does now merrit carrying a firearm. Its situations like this that scare me. If you heard me walking through the bush at night near you would you pull out your firearm????? Bad things can happen from this point on, including accidents.

TRUST ME I KNOW WHAT THE HELL I'M TALKING ABOUT

July 26, 2002

quote:
Originally posted by Rockdoctors:
Len, not making much sense to me...Because you hear Cayotes howling you wish you had a gun??? Being an outdoorsman and all don't you know that Cayotes will not harm let alone come near humans??????

That's generally true--but far from guaranteed. They hunt in packs looking for defenseless animals, but have been known to attack almost anything--including humans. They have attacked and even killed children.

Waving my arms and shouting would probably suffice to scare them off, since they look for easy prey. But I'd really rather not rely on that as my sole means of defense.

quote:
Its situations like this that scare me.

Eh? You're scared I might wantonly shoot a coyote?

quote:
If you heard me walking through the bush at night near you would you pull out your firearm?????

Dunno: do you usually walk though the bush at night without a flashlight, howling like a pack of coyotes?

Anyway, your hysteria is unmerited. I don't carry a sidearm at all--and when armed with a shotgun or bow, I check my targets thoroughly. I've passed up gorgeous deer because I was verifying the shooting lane too long.

I was even startled and terrified, half-asleep in the wee hours, by what I thought at first was a bear--and though I drew my bow I held my fire to verify the target. (It was an enormous dog, I think a Rottweiler, as I realized when I spotted his pal--a spaniel--trailing along behind.)

Fact is, I'm more afraid of the antis acting irrationally than the armed people. I recently read an amusing article: an anti-gun protester was arguing with a counter-demonstrator, and attacked and severely pummelled his antagonist. The police broke them up, and the victim of the assault said, "Officer, I wish to inform you that I am carrying a licensed firearm." The "peace-loving" protester was guilty of assault and battery. His victim endured a vicious beating, even though he was armed with a deadly weapon the whole time.

--Len.

July 26, 2002

quote:
Originally posted by Budney:
(Coyotes) hunt in packs looking for defenseless animals, but have been known to attack almost anything--including humans.

In upstate New York we also have coy-dogs--the result of a coyote breeding with a domestic dog. They lack the coyote's fear of humans. And rabies is sufficiently common in that area that rabid coyotes or coy-dogs are a very real concern.

--Len.

July 26, 2002

Ya we have a similar problem except they aren't breeding with the dogs. They are breeding with humans. We call them Coy - hums or Werewolves. Very visious.

You make many assumptions. Apparently I am an "Anti" or a "Protestor". I'd like to point out although I already have in the above posts that I do own firearms. You also assume that I don't know what a Coyote is, but as a matter of fact I also (not only you and Upstate New York) live around Coyotes and they are heard and seen CONSTANTLY. Every evening. There has never been an attack or encounter. Also if there is interbreeding with other dogs why do you assume this breeds aggression? WHO IS BEING HYSTERICAL HERE?

TRUST ME I KNOW WHAT THE HELL I'M TALKING ABOUT

July 26, 2002

quote:
Originally posted by Rockdoctors:
You make many assumptions.

No I don't.

quote:
Apparently I am an "Anti" or a "Protestor".

Are you? Okay, if you say so. I certainly never called you anything, let alone "anti" or "protestor".

quote:
I...around Coyotes and they are heard and seen CONSTANTLY. Every evening. There has never been an attack or encounter.

You mean "I have never heard of", not "there has never been". Coyotes have in fact attacked and killed children, though you are correct that attacks on humans are rare.

quote:
Also if there is interbreeding with other dogs why do you assume this breeds aggression?

Why do you assume I'm "assuming" anything? Go learn about coy-dogs; it's simply a fact that they are more aggressive than Coyotes. They are wild animals who are less fearful of humans than coyotes are.

quote:
WHO IS BEING HYSTERICAL HERE?

Gee, I dunno; who's doing all the shouting?

--Len.

July 26, 2002

quote:
1) Is it true that the only (or even primary) use of a gun user is to *kill* people? In 98% of defensive gun uses not one shot is fired, so I'd say the answer is clearly enough "No."

a factoid, looks like a fact, smells like a fact, aint a fact... "three out of five doctors say smoking crack is good for you" .... depends on which five doctors you ask....and this also depends on alot of things.

thats cute but misleading.. for us to use this to say that guns are not designed to kill we would have to say that a1 98 percent of guns used in defence did not have firing pins, they were there only for looks, (since they, according to you served the purpose they were designed for without being fired) and that 100% of gun use is defensive. the fact is, that you are not taking into account military or police use of guns, or attackers. now lets hypothetically match up attackers with defenders, (this assumes that the same amount of people attack unarmed people with guns as people with guns defend themselves from attackers that are using some other weapon) already defensive gun use is only 50% of gun use, add police use, that shrinks ( i do not even pretend to know how much, in fact i would like to know where you get your numbers) ad military use it shrinks again, add hunters (no one said we are talking about killing people, or the moral value of the killing at hand only that they are designed to kill) the number drops again, now instead of focusing on america lets go worldwide, in those countries that allow for defensive guns the ratio is still hypotheticly 50/50 so that doesnt change things, but some countries ban guns so in those countries the criminals do drop the % of guns used for defence, then police use world wide and military use world wide drops it even more. all in all and this is just a number i am throwing out there, i would say maybe 10% of gun use is defensive. again i have not asked every gun user so i wouldnt know that conclusively but i think maybe i will look into it.

July 26, 2002

I will admit that your point did dawn on me after I sent that post. Especially when your next post seemed to be opposite to the post which I replied to . After reading 5 pages of these and spending almost 4 hours reading them it started to just be words. The identities of the writers seemed to fade and context with previous and following posts started to get foggy. Sorry if I took you too seriously. I probably got a little too goofy with all that politics and opinion.

quote:
Originally posted by Duke_:
If you read all the posts wmas, you will realize that my statements about the pepper spray, knife, and trekking poles were stated with heavy sarcasm to poke fun at some of the rediculous statements from the anti gun folks. I was using absurdity to point out the absurd.

People carrying those mentioned items are going out prepared.

People who carry a sidearm are going out prepared.

But some folks in here believe that going out prepared with a sidearm somehow makes you a paranoid threat to the civilized world. And that is nonsense.

"it is hard for thee to kick against the pricks" Acts 26:14

July 26, 2002

and i have clarified a MILLION times when i say kill i am not referring to only people, that is your word dont try to put it in my mouth. man machine or beast, it makes no difference. i find it very disturbing that you are either

a1:so immoral, for lack of a better word, to keep trying to make it as though i said something i didnt long after i clarified it,

or

b2 so stupid not to have been able to understand by now. in either case you are one of the people i would not trust with a gun. why? because whether immoral or stupid.... i wouldnt trust someone with either of those qualities to handle one. anyway, this is my final post on the matter of you, it taxes me, and insults my intellegence... go and peddle you nonsensicle numbers elswhere (oooh, this is the first time i have told someone off in here) if someone wants a gun for sport, defense or whatever reason, get it, but be sure you admit to what it is, and what it is for, and use it responsibly, that is all. i would gladly own several guns knowing they were designed to kill. i can enjoy them at the range, in the woods hunting. and though i would never wish to take a human life i could use it for defense. (now thats an entirely different debate which i wont get into, "when does defence justify killing a person") and the reason i am no longer going to debate w/ this guy is that he seems to want to make them one and the same. and it begs one last question, if the purpose is not to kill why does everyone think a nonlethal replica is such a bad idea??

Caching with weapons

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