PDA

View Full Version : Guns On The Trail



Former Admin
09-03-2002, 20:20
Most of us know theres no need to carry a gun for safety on the trail, however newcomers to the trail might be interested in understanding this better.

Comments, concerns, issues, experiences, etc .........

SGT Rock
09-03-2002, 20:35
A gun is not needed on the AT at all!

I'm not a anti gun freak, in fact I'm an advocate of legal gun ownership. I own two pistols, two rifles, and one shotgun. I hunt (well I have, but not in a while), target shoot, and carry firearms as a part of my job. I've done that since I was ten, and have been actually working with weapons as a profession over 17 years. As an NCO in the Army in a direct ground combat specialty I understand very well the safety needs of a weapon, the responsibilities of carrying a loaded weapon, and what it really takes to have the correct mental attitude to use deadly force.

But I think that a lot of people that are potential gun carriers have not thought about, or realize the real consequences of carrying a gun.

First thing you should consider is the legality. Carrying a concealed weapon is almost universally illegal. You could carry a pistol in a holster on your hip, but no one will be interested in being close to you, and then the potential attacker also knows you are packing and can take steps to prevent you gun use. But carrying a gun is also illegal in many parks you must cross. AND, some states like NJ will take your gun and lock you up if you transport firearms through the state without the proper documents.

Next is the legality of shooting someone - it isn't. Sure you may claim self defense, but that means you must stop everything you are doing with your hike and your life to go through the process of police reports, investigation, possibly going to court for bail and time in jail while they sort it out, maybe a trial or at least grand jury (Weasel would know the ins and outs better). AND you may not have anyone to back up your story against the local boy. Also remember they guy in Louisiana about 10 or so years ago that shot the Japanese exchange student because he thought the guy was trying to break into his house, but the student just wanted to borrow a phone after his car broke down - my point is you may kill some innocent person thinking you are in danger when you really aren't. HOW COULD YOU LIVE WITH YOURSELF AFTER THAT!?! I will talk about this again.

How about the weight? Even a light gun with ammo weighs about a pound and that is useless weight. How about maintenance? Guns require cleaning and lubrication. Mud, sand, and water aren't good for them; guess what there is a lot of on the trail.

How about training? Most people can point and shoot, some can even shoot well at cans. But in a real gunfight even professionals have a hard time hitting anything. Remember that video of the two sheriffs having a gun fight about 5' from a couple of white separatists when they pulled them over? Over 30 shots fired at close range from professional police and NOT ONE SINGLE HIT! Can you look someone in the face and actually pull the trigger? What will you do after shooting them and the blood is everywhere and this human being is pleading for their life after you shot them? People don't always drop like in the movies, and it is a bloody mess. Will you let them die in front of you? If you will, you're sick. If you do the right thing, imagine how much of a problem and a responsibility it is to treat a gunshot person, especially when they are bleeding out and their backside looks like raw hamburger.

A responsible gun user must always carry their gun on them. To let it out of your possession means anyone else can get it. And for defense, it must always be ready, and always be very accessible. If you plan to put it inside your pack neither requirement is met, so there is no usefulness in the weapon. If you are always carrying it, then how? They do make holster/waist belts that look like a normal waist belt, but after carrying it 24/7 for a month will you feel safe or burdened? What will you do when showering in a hostel? Or swimming in a creek? People will catch on, then you may have problems.

I mention this before about shooting someone innocent accidentally, but I think I must cover this from experience. When you are in the defensive mode, every other person you meet, and I mean EVERY OTHER PERSON, must be considered a potential threat or otherwise you loose the defensive edge. Now imagine meeting 10-20 people a day on the trail. That is a lot of decision making about weather or not to pull pistols! Now multiply that by a 6 month hike - 1,800 to 3,600 possibilities of shooting an innocent person - and that is just on the trail! What I found was that everyone that was the lest bit suspicious caused me to go into the defensive mode and think about all the possibilities and options of a fight - not my hike. And in a three day period that was a lot of non-hike enjoyment time. I would see a guy in denim and sunglasses while I was carrying and see a potential hillside strangler, but without the gun he was a funny looking tourist. Either way I didn't need the gun, but with the gun I was focused on defending from a possible threat (which was false) while without the gun I shrugged it off and had fun.

SO consider the actual threat. In 74 years (I think that is right) of the trail, there have been less than 10 murders. Now think of the length of the AT, and some of the areas it passes through or near and their crime rates. Think of the number of people on the trail every year and imagine a city with that population. A city with the same size/population of the Appalachian Trail would most likely have a lot more than 10 murders in 74 years. So you have a safer time on the trail than you do in your own home town if you look at it that way.

Wildlife? Do you really think you can kill a bear with your snub nosed .38? And if you plan on doing that, well WHY?

So why carry a pistol? I figure it is an unnatural fear of what is in the woods, or an anachronistic thought process that thinks wilderness=danger and gun=safety. Well the formula that says that is a hundred years out of date. Small women hikers can go the entire length of the At without killing anyone, why can't big macho guys get by without one?

Wow, a longer rant than normall, and I don't think I hit all the aspects of why a gun isn't needed.

highway
09-05-2002, 16:48
The lopsided response elicited by this single topic is amazing in that it seems to bring out mostly the extremists on each side of the issue. I think that, other than those few extremists on the periphery, most hikers are ambivalent and care little what you bring. Personally, I really donít feel we should be so quick to judge just another piece of backpacking gear that some might choose to either bring or not, like hiking poles. I donít think either is really necessary in the wilderness. Guns are heavy to carry but I donít presume to have the right to tell you not to carry one. I am terribly offended, though, walking along a beautiful narrow trail, seeing millions of tiny little holes alongside my path planted by the hikers using hiking poles that have gone before me. I had much rather see just the trail, the trodden path without those distracting holes and I have often wondered about the ecological damage being done by them. But just because I am offended by those holes, (LNT?) and am concerned that they are enlarging the pathway, does not give me the right to insist that you not use them.

And I want. Now I wonder how many of those hikers with poles carried some firearm that I saw no evidence of? At least hiking poles in the hikerís hands have affected the AT much more than firearms in those hands have. How does that apt phrase go, ďhike your own hike but donít force others to hike yoursĒ? Anyway, more than half those killed on the AT were stabbed, not shot and the only murder I found that was committed by another hiker used a hatchet for the deed. Now I donít think any of us really need to bring a hatchet, do we?

Easyhiker
12-25-2002, 20:39
I might have started this thread, but there are exceptions to this.

For one if your threatened by someone of influence in a big city you might want to carry a gun on the trail because they'll find you and its their perfect oppurtunity while your hiking if they find you. This is where a glock pocket rocket comes in handy.

So if I your life is threatened off the trail (by a real threat) you might think about carrying a weapon on the trail. However if your just carrying it because your afraid of whats out there on the trail you won't need it.

Lone Wolf
12-25-2002, 21:04
I'll carry concealed. Better to be judged by twelve than carried by six.

Bandana Man
12-26-2002, 13:57
This is kind of changing the topic, but instead of carrying a gun, why not carry a cannister of bear spray? It's legal in all federal parks whereas guns are prohibited. Bear spray isn't lethal. And it works on bears as well as human predators. I carried a cannister in the Grand Tetons after being strongly advised by park rangers. Didn't need it -- didn't see one bear, dang it -- but IMO it's better to carry something that can save your life and not need it, than to need something that can save your life and not carry it. BTW, obviously I'm not really into this go-lite stuff!

SGT Rock
12-26-2002, 14:30
Actually I think in the convoluded leagal and moral system of our country you might get your ass sued off for using bear spray on a human.

Easyhiker
12-28-2002, 21:18
.

Waterbuffalo
01-09-2003, 16:07
Like Lone Wolf I also carry conceled in my daily life but not on the trail since there is no need. Something I do carry with me that is better than bear spray is a titanium ASP Baton which has a nice little caring case and fits on my hip belt. It is carried by law enforcement and is really nothing more than a retractable lightweight metal billy club. If you get one make sure you learn how to use it just like a gun only only do you good if you know how to use it. I haven't ever had to use it but if I had to take care of an angry Bear , Hog or pervert picking up hitchhikers I know I could use it.

You can get them at www.galls.com

Connie
06-27-2004, 18:22
I am not on the AT.

I think I will carry my Counter Assault bear spray, for a "bad bear". This brand bear spray is legal here and in Canada.

I "spritzed" the bear spray, as recommended on the label, to see how far it shoots out. Only a small "whiff" got on me. I was totally incapacitated 20 minutes !

The park officials recommend drop face down, covering your neck with your arms, and spray at the last moment.

But, out here in Montana, practically everyone that lives here carries a gun on the trail ..just not in the national park.

I purchased my 41 magnum "last resort" handgun after seeing a grizzley bear that was, actually magnificent, and absolutely huge, even for around here.

Happily, he was not interested in me. He stood downwind, in a creek, allowing me and the horses to pass. At the moment, we were closest, he said "WoooF".

But we have "bad bears" transported by the forest service and the park service to "deeper backcountry". I regard any bear interested in backpacker food, a "bad bear". Any grizzley as close as 30 yards, is real danger.

The bear experiences I have had, however, have been "good bear" experiences.

It is a huge fine, if you do shoot a bear, so the bear had better fall on you to prove it really was self defense.

smokymtnsteve
06-27-2004, 18:26
Actually I think in the convoluted legal and moral system of our country you might get your ass sued off for using bear spray on a human.


Isn't America great! :D

Surplusman
05-03-2009, 16:52
I have used firearms since I was a kid and I have had a lot of formal training. But carrying a roscoe on the AT? No...never.

warraghiyagey
05-03-2009, 16:56
A gun is not needed on the AT at all!



I have used firearms since I was a kid and I have had a lot of formal training. But carrying a roscoe on the AT? No...never.

Agreed. . . !!!!!

Engine
05-03-2009, 17:10
Just look at what has happened recently between Spike and the Mad Kiwis. What might have happened had that escalated with firearms involved? I am pro gun and own more than a few, but some places just don't call for it and I would like to think the AT is one of them. Innocent people could easily end up hurt or killed by thoughtless use of a firearm, even among trained individuals as Sgt Rock pointed out.

I responded to a call years ago when a local LEO was involved in a close range shooting with a distraught mental patient. The LEO emptied a 15 round clip of 9mm while taking fire from a bolt action .243 at maybe 15 feet. Maybe 20 shots fired in all and neither party hit, but lots of damage to storefronts in the parking lot. After seeing what happened I thought the safest place to stand would have been right between them. :-?

warraghiyagey
05-03-2009, 17:13
http://www.deonandan.com/uploaded_images/pew-pew-pew-small-778901.jpg

Engine
05-03-2009, 17:16
http://www.deonandan.com/uploaded_images/pew-pew-pew-small-778901.jpg

I can has cheeseburger?

warraghiyagey
05-03-2009, 17:43
I can has cheeseburger?
Yupperrdoodle!!

CowHead
05-03-2009, 18:40
i only carrie a knife and it's for spreading peanut butter

KMACK
05-03-2009, 18:51
As a LEO I have had a weapon on my side for the last 16+ years. Its a part of my life and I dont leave home w/out it. That said I have mixed emotions about this issue.

Phoenixdadeadhead
05-03-2009, 19:31
Connie you mentioned Montana, which is one of my favorite places I have lived so far, and you are right everyone there has a gun. It is so bad there, that I was at work and a coworker said "you can make an AR15 fully auto by filing down the fire pin", our supervisor heard the convo, and said "Nope, lemme show you", he proceded to take us out to his car opened the trunk, removed some parts from his AR15 and replaced them with others, and said "That's how you make an AR15 full auto". With gun nuts like that making up most of the population of Montana, many would think the crimes involving guns would be high, and you would be wrong.
There is something comfortable about everyone having a gun, and looking for a reason to use it.
On the trail though, it is pretty much illegal, and unneeded. I am not sure about cap and ball legallity since many of the laws pertaining to fire arms do not apply, but I have thought many times about carrying a navy colt on the trail, but then the powder, balls and grease, would get kinda heavy after a while.

Dr O
05-03-2009, 19:31
Just look at what has happened recently between Spike and the Mad Kiwis. What might have happened had that escalated with firearms involved?

Then again if everyone carried and everyone knew it, everyone would be hella polite. :D

Lone Wolf
05-03-2009, 19:45
hikers are easy prey. lotsa murders, rapes and assaults over the years. folks choose to be victims.

Phoenixdadeadhead
05-03-2009, 19:54
Then again if everyone carried and everyone knew it, everyone would be hella polite. :D
Exactly, most people don't want to find out who the fastest draw is lol. If we keep making laws against guns the only people with guns will be the people who don't mind breaking the law. Why does that sound like a really bad thing? I bet most people wouldn't expect a bleeding heart liberal hippie to feel this way huh lol.

Dr O
05-03-2009, 19:57
Exactly, most people don't want to find out who the fastest draw is lol. If we keep making laws against guns the only people with guns will be the people who don't mind breaking the law. Why does that sound like a really bad thing? I bet most people wouldn't expect a bleeding heart liberal hippie to feel this way huh lol.

Here in Kennesaw GA, law requires all heads of household maintain a firearm. Crime dropped 68% immediately after this law was enacted.

Polite town, even if it is an urban sprawling mess here.

take-a-knee
05-03-2009, 20:01
As a LEO I have had a weapon on my side for the last 16+ years. Its a part of my life and I dont leave home w/out it. That said I have mixed emotions about this issue.

Well, you ain't like most cops, 'cause most don't carry off-duty. The question is, when the excrement hits the rotating blade assembly, can you hit anything with it?

4Bears
05-03-2009, 20:06
IMHO Sgt. Rock is correct and he stated the point quite well. I too have been hunting and shooting since I was a young lad, too young by many modern standards but I see no reason for carrying guns on the AT. We should learn to listen to our bodies and when those hackles on the back of your neck raise up and start to tingle, excuse yourself and move on, there is an instinctual reason for this to occur. Should the person(s) decide to follow along then act appropriately to distance yourself from them.

Alaskanhkr23
05-03-2009, 20:09
Like I Said You Better Have A Bigger Gun Than Me-out On The Trail 460 Is What I Carry I Dont Need Dilerance Happening

Jester2000
05-03-2009, 20:14
Like I Said You Better Have A Bigger Gun Than Me-out On The Trail 460 Is What I Carry I Dont Need Dilerance Happening

I have a sneaking suspicion that "Dilerance," whatever that may be, is unlikely to happen regardless of whether you have a gun or not.

take-a-knee
05-03-2009, 21:50
Just look at what has happened recently between Spike and the Mad Kiwis. What might have happened had that escalated with firearms involved? I am pro gun and own more than a few, but some places just don't call for it and I would like to think the AT is one of them. Innocent people could easily end up hurt or killed by thoughtless use of a firearm, even among trained individuals as Sgt Rock pointed out.

I responded to a call years ago when a local LEO was involved in a close range shooting with a distraught mental patient. The LEO emptied a 15 round clip of 9mm while taking fire from a bolt action .243 at maybe 15 feet. Maybe 20 shots fired in all and neither party hit, but lots of damage to storefronts in the parking lot. After seeing what happened I thought the safest place to stand would have been right between them. :-?

That should have been that cops' last patrol. To thank him for his service, he should have been offered a slot in the next fire academy class. I'll bet he's still packin' heat every day though.

Kanati
05-03-2009, 22:23
What's sad is that it has come to this. Personally, I think too many people worry way too much about being attacked. I know it happens but not very often. Stop worrying !!! You're at a lot greater risk crossing the street in most cities than hiking the AT. All this gun/attack talk creates paranoia in some peoples minds, especially females and most young folks. You're destroying the santicity of the trail. I think alot of people just like to brag about their pistols or want someone to think they are tough. For petes sake, go join a "Skined-Head" group or something. I hiked for 5 months alone on the AT last year and didn't see not one incident that raised suspicion. Everyone was friendly and polite or simply minded their own business.

So, if you're scared to hike without an arsenal, well, I hate to say it, but you need to stay home and lock yourself in the house. Anybody that scared has got no business with a pistol in the first place. They're apt to shoot someone accidently by firing the darn thing in the dark at noises.

Now, go hiking and have fun. :sun

take-a-knee
05-03-2009, 22:36
What's sad is that it has come to this. Personally, I think too many people worry way too much about being attacked. I know it happens but not very often. Stop worrying !!! You're at a lot greater risk crossing the street in most cities than hiking the AT. All this gun/attack talk creates paranoia in some peoples minds, especially females and most young folks. You're destroying the santicity of the trail. I think alot of people just like to brag about their pistols or want someone to think they are tough. For petes sake, go join a "Skined-Head" group or something. I hiked for 5 months alone on the AT last year and didn't see not one incident that raised suspicion. Everyone was friendly and polite or simply minded their own business.

So, if you're scared to hike without an arsenal, well, I hate to say it, but you need to stay home and lock yourself in the house. Anybody that scared has got no business with a pistol in the first place. They're apt to shoot someone accidently by firing the darn thing in the dark at noises.

Now, go hiking and have fun. :sun

Here's to you Kanati.....BAAAAA,BAAAAA,BAAAAAAAAAA!.

Yeah man, I'm scared of my own shadow. How many night freefalls have you made? Been in any combat zones?

Kanati
05-03-2009, 23:03
Here's to you Kanati.....BAAAAA,BAAAAA,BAAAAAAAAAA!.

Yeah man, I'm scared of my own shadow. How many night freefalls have you made? Been in any combat zones?

Don't get upset. I spent 2 years in the Army in 1966-1967. Drafted. Would never join anything that.......

Lived with pistols stuck to my gut. Fought many a defensive fight. Had too, was small and red headed. Sheriff Buford Pussers deputies almost killed me in his jail in January 1968 just to have fun. They also pulled half of my hair out, literally. Lots of other guys died in his jail. Mysteriously hanged themselves.

Two years ago, I was assaulted by a deranged, 6'-6'' 260 pound crazy man. I am 5'-10", 165 pounds. Had to fight my way out of it. I was 60 years old at the time. That's when I got a carry permit and keep a .357 Mag in my truck because with this person, who has attacked other people, believe it's not over till he says its over. I watch my backside every time I leave the house and try to stay out of his way because I do not want trouble. So I try to avoid it. If you go expecting it, you WILL find it.

But the point is this. I don't go around talking about it like it's something important, because it isn't, and I am not afraid of anything I enounter on the trail without a weapon. And no one else should be either. The trail is not that kind of place. Hiking it should be fun, not a place where you're expecting an assault at every shelter. It's really not like that. But all this crazy talk will scare a lot of people away. It breeds paranoia.

So stay cool and leave your heat at home.

Happy hiking. :sun

vamelungeon
05-03-2009, 23:11
I don't believe in the notion that anyone can spot a psychopath, that a dangerous person gives off some kind of vibe. A successful psychopath blends in, and a successful attack is one you don't expect. I am nearly always armed, discreetly, and don't plan on being anyone's victim. Being armed is a personal choice, and doesn't have anything to do with fear but rather my knowledge of people after having spent my adult life working in the criminal justice system.

People who don't expect to be robbed/raped/attacked make great victims. Declaring a place as a "gun free zone" sets up people as prey to human predators. I would rather keep the predators wondering.

take-a-knee
05-03-2009, 23:22
I don't believe in the notion that anyone can spot a psychopath, that a dangerous person gives off some kind of vibe. A successful psychopath blends in, and a successful attack is one you don't expect. I am nearly always armed, discreetly, and don't plan on being anyone's victim. Being armed is a personal choice, and doesn't have anything to do with fear but rather my knowledge of people after having spent my adult life working in the criminal justice system.

People who don't expect to be robbed/raped/attacked make great victims. Declaring a place as a "gun free zone" sets up people as prey to human predators. I would rather keep the predators wondering.

Excellent post! Well stated.

take-a-knee
05-03-2009, 23:33
Don't get upset. I spent 2 years in the Army in 1966-1967. Drafted. Would never join anything that.......

Lived with pistols stuck to my gut. Fought many a defensive fight. Had too, was small and red headed. Sheriff Buford Pussers deputies almost killed me in his jail in January 1968 just to have fun. They also pulled half of my hair out, literally. Lots of other guys died in his jail. Mysteriously hanged themselves.

Two years ago, I was assaulted by a deranged, 6'-6'' 260 pound crazy man. I am 5'-10", 165 pounds. Had to fight my way out of it. I was 60 years old at the time. That's when I got a carry permit and keep a .357 Mag in my truck because with this person, who has attacked other people, believe it's not over till he says its over. I watch my backside every time I leave the house and try to stay out of his way because I do not want trouble. So I try to avoid it. If you go expecting it, you WILL find it.

But the point is this. I don't go around talking about it like it's something important, because it isn't, and I am not afraid of anything I enounter on the trail without a weapon. And no one else should be either. The trail is not that kind of place. Hiking it should be fun, not a place where you're expecting an assault at every shelter. It's really not like that. But all this crazy talk will scare a lot of people away. It breeds paranoia.

So stay cool and leave your heat at home.

Happy hiking. :sun

Be sure and post a picture of your truck so all the local felons (who can't pass the background check to buy a gun) can steal your .357. A gun in a vehicle is damned near useless, it needs to be on your person. Do you drive to the trailhead? Do you leave a gun in a parked, unattended vehicle for days? At your age, if you haven't thought this through, you really need to refrain from giving personal security advice. I don't give out advice about computers, or rocket science, 'cause I don't know a damned thing about either one.

I will agree with you that the danger to a physcially fit, averaged sized male on the AT is miniscule. If and when I ever thru, I probably wouldn't carry a handgun. Right now though I'm a section hiker who sometimes hikes with his teenaged daughter, so when you see me on the trail, ask and I'll show you my nine, cause mine won't be left in my vehicle, I'll have it handy.

Lone Wolf
05-04-2009, 05:24
So, if you're scared to hike without an arsenal, well, I hate to say it, but you need to stay home and lock yourself in the house. Anybody that scared has got no business with a pistol in the first place. They're apt to shoot someone accidently by firing the darn thing in the dark at noises.

Now, go hiking and have fun. :sun

So, if you're scared to hike without staying in shelter, bearbagging your food and treating your water, you need to stay home and lock yourself in the house

CowHead
05-04-2009, 07:13
Personally if it wasn't so heavy I like to take my crossbow. Works will fishing and hunting but for now I just stick to my knife to spread peanut butter. I don't fear bears, water, or others on the trail, the only fear I have is my wife and not keeping her happy..As they say happy wife = happy life

Rockhound
05-04-2009, 07:25
Here in Kennesaw GA, law requires all heads of household maintain a firearm. Crime dropped 68% immediately after this law was enacted.

Polite town, even if it is an urban sprawling mess here.
that's a BS law and you know it. Show me some facts. What if the head of the household was a former felon? or a pacifist? Or blind? A law that requires people to carry? Can you say unconstitutional?

Rockhound
05-04-2009, 07:27
So, if you're scared to hike without staying in shelter, bearbagging your food and treating your water, you need to stay home and lock yourself in the house
You forgot hiking without poles LW

vamelungeon
05-04-2009, 07:39
that's a BS law and you know it. Show me some facts. What if the head of the household was a former felon? or a pacifist? Or blind? A law that requires people to carry? Can you say unconstitutional?
That is an actual ordinance in Kennesaw, GA.
Here's a google of "kennesaw GA gun"
http://www.google.com/search?q=Kennesaw%2C+GA+gun+&sourceid=navclient-ff&ie=UTF-8&rlz=1B3GGGL_enUS268US268

JAK
05-04-2009, 07:47
What about a pointed stick?

Rockhound
05-04-2009, 07:51
Just read it. It states conscientious objectors are exempt. So I guess the law is you must own a gun unless you don't want to. It also states they passed this law in response to another city's attempt to make it illegal to own a gun within its city limits. This also smacks of unconsitutionality. Once again the 5% of extremists on both ends of the spectrum providing fodder for the 90% in the middle.

JAK
05-04-2009, 07:58
In my town everyone must have at least one piece of passion fruit in their home at all times. It is in response to a nearby town which has outlawed all references to Monty Python.

Rockhound
05-04-2009, 09:01
In my town everyone must have at least one piece of passion fruit in their home at all times. It is in response to a nearby town which has outlawed all references to Monty Python.
Your father's a hamster and your mother smells of elderberries.

warraghiyagey
05-04-2009, 09:04
You musgt bring me one shrubbery.. . .

weary
05-04-2009, 09:33
A gun is not needed on the AT at all!

I'm not a anti gun freak, in fact I'm an advocate of legal gun ownership. I own two pistols, two rifles, and one shotgun. I hunt (well I have, but not in a while), target shoot, and carry firearms as a part of my job. I've done that since I was ten, and have been actually working with weapons as a profession over 17 years. As an NCO in the Army in a direct ground combat specialty I understand very well the safety needs of a weapon, the responsibilities of carrying a loaded weapon, and what it really takes to have the correct mental attitude to use deadly force.

But I think that a lot of people that are potential gun carriers have not thought about, or realize the real consequences of carrying a gun.

First thing you should consider is the legality. Carrying a concealed weapon is almost universally illegal. You could carry a pistol in a holster on your hip, but no one will be interested in being close to you, and then the potential attacker also knows you are packing and can take steps to prevent you gun use. But carrying a gun is also illegal in many parks you must cross. AND, some states like NJ will take your gun and lock you up if you transport firearms through the state without the proper documents.

Next is the legality of shooting someone - it isn't. Sure you may claim self defense, but that means you must stop everything you are doing with your hike and your life to go through the process of police reports, investigation, possibly going to court for bail and time in jail while they sort it out, maybe a trial or at least grand jury (Weasel would know the ins and outs better). AND you may not have anyone to back up your story against the local boy. Also remember they guy in Louisiana about 10 or so years ago that shot the Japanese exchange student because he thought the guy was trying to break into his house, but the student just wanted to borrow a phone after his car broke down - my point is you may kill some innocent person thinking you are in danger when you really aren't. HOW COULD YOU LIVE WITH YOURSELF AFTER THAT!?! I will talk about this again.

How about the weight? Even a light gun with ammo weighs about a pound and that is useless weight. How about maintenance? Guns require cleaning and lubrication. Mud, sand, and water aren't good for them; guess what there is a lot of on the trail.

How about training? Most people can point and shoot, some can even shoot well at cans. But in a real gunfight even professionals have a hard time hitting anything. Remember that video of the two sheriffs having a gun fight about 5' from a couple of white separatists when they pulled them over? Over 30 shots fired at close range from professional police and NOT ONE SINGLE HIT! Can you look someone in the face and actually pull the trigger? What will you do after shooting them and the blood is everywhere and this human being is pleading for their life after you shot them? People don't always drop like in the movies, and it is a bloody mess. Will you let them die in front of you? If you will, you're sick. If you do the right thing, imagine how much of a problem and a responsibility it is to treat a gunshot person, especially when they are bleeding out and their backside looks like raw hamburger.

A responsible gun user must always carry their gun on them. To let it out of your possession means anyone else can get it. And for defense, it must always be ready, and always be very accessible. If you plan to put it inside your pack neither requirement is met, so there is no usefulness in the weapon. If you are always carrying it, then how? They do make holster/waist belts that look like a normal waist belt, but after carrying it 24/7 for a month will you feel safe or burdened? What will you do when showering in a hostel? Or swimming in a creek? People will catch on, then you may have problems.

I mention this before about shooting someone innocent accidentally, but I think I must cover this from experience. When you are in the defensive mode, every other person you meet, and I mean EVERY OTHER PERSON, must be considered a potential threat or otherwise you loose the defensive edge. Now imagine meeting 10-20 people a day on the trail. That is a lot of decision making about weather or not to pull pistols! Now multiply that by a 6 month hike - 1,800 to 3,600 possibilities of shooting an innocent person - and that is just on the trail! What I found was that everyone that was the lest bit suspicious caused me to go into the defensive mode and think about all the possibilities and options of a fight - not my hike. And in a three day period that was a lot of non-hike enjoyment time. I would see a guy in denim and sunglasses while I was carrying and see a potential hillside strangler, but without the gun he was a funny looking tourist. Either way I didn't need the gun, but with the gun I was focused on defending from a possible threat (which was false) while without the gun I shrugged it off and had fun.

SO consider the actual threat. In 74 years (I think that is right) of the trail, there have been less than 10 murders. Now think of the length of the AT, and some of the areas it passes through or near and their crime rates. Think of the number of people on the trail every year and imagine a city with that population. A city with the same size/population of the Appalachian Trail would most likely have a lot more than 10 murders in 74 years. So you have a safer time on the trail than you do in your own home town if you look at it that way.

Wildlife? Do you really think you can kill a bear with your snub nosed .38? And if you plan on doing that, well WHY?

So why carry a pistol? I figure it is an unnatural fear of what is in the woods, or an anachronistic thought process that thinks wilderness=danger and gun=safety. Well the formula that says that is a hundred years out of date. Small women hikers can go the entire length of the At without killing anyone, why can't big macho guys get by without one?

Wow, a longer rant than normall, and I don't think I hit all the aspects of why a gun isn't needed.
This is a fabulous discourse on why guns are a silly and dangerous burden to carry on the AT. I hope everyone reads it and thinks about the Sarge's comments.

Homer&Marje
05-04-2009, 09:36
This is a fabulous discourse on why guns are a silly and dangerous burden to carry on the AT. I hope everyone reads it and thinks about the Sarge's comments.

Absolutely agree.

vamelungeon
05-04-2009, 09:43
Like religion, those on opposite sides of the question will never convince the other no matter how well stated the pros and cons. I've participated in way too many of these discussions to think otherwise. They usually end up with petty personal insults, name calling and references to phallic symbols.
If you choose to not be armed, more power to you, it's your decision. Don't worry yourself about what's in my pocket, though. As long as you aren't trying to do anything bad to me you'll never know about it anyway.

krozby
05-04-2009, 09:44
The lopsided response elicited by this single topic is amazing in that it seems to bring out mostly the extremists on each side of the issue. I think that, other than those few extremists on the periphery, most hikers are ambivalent and care little what you bring. Personally, I really donít feel we should be so quick to judge just another piece of backpacking gear that some might choose to either bring or not, like hiking poles. I donít think either is really necessary in the wilderness. Guns are heavy to carry but I donít presume to have the right to tell you not to carry one. I am terribly offended, though, walking along a beautiful narrow trail, seeing millions of tiny little holes alongside my path planted by the hikers using hiking poles that have gone before me. I had much rather see just the trail, the trodden path without those distracting holes and I have often wondered about the ecological damage being done by them. But just because I am offended by those holes, (LNT?) and am concerned that they are enlarging the pathway, does not give me the right to insist that you not use them.

And I want. Now I wonder how many of those hikers with poles carried some firearm that I saw no evidence of? At least hiking poles in the hikerís hands have affected the AT much more than firearms in those hands have. How does that apt phrase go, ďhike your own hike but donít force others to hike yoursĒ? Anyway, more than half those killed on the AT were stabbed, not shot and the only murder I found that was committed by another hiker used a hatchet for the deed. Now I donít think any of us really need to bring a hatchet, do we?
The entire population of Red China could hike the AT with nuclear powered jackhammering leki's and not do the damage of one steel shod horse.

Get real

Engine
05-04-2009, 09:48
...Don't worry yourself about what's in my pocket, though...

I was hoping it was a banana.

warraghiyagey
05-04-2009, 09:48
The entire population of Red China could hike the AT with nuclear powered jackhammering leki's and not do the damage of one steel shod horse.

Get real
Uhhhh . . . . . Red China? . . . . is this 2009 or did I miss a memo. . . . or maybe I'm too far removed from my deep woods, frontier upbringing. . .
:welcome Welcome Krozby. . . . I guess. . . .

weary
05-04-2009, 09:51
Excellent post! Well stated.
About, "I don't believe in the notion that anyone can spot a psychopath, that a dangerous person gives off some kind of vibe. A successful psychopath blends in, and a successful attack is one you don't expect. I am nearly always armed, discreetly, and don't plan on being anyone's victim. Being armed is a personal choice, and doesn't have anything to do with fear but rather my knowledge of people after having spent my adult life working in the criminal justice system."

People who don't expect to be robbed/raped/attacked make great victims. Declaring a place as a "gun free zone" sets up people as prey to human predators. I would rather keep the predators wondering."
Do you suppose that a wise psychopath, suspecting you may be armed, might just pick up a stick from the fire ring and whack you on the back of the head, and then walk away with your gun, leaving you to be eaten by the nearest hungry bear?"

warraghiyagey
05-04-2009, 09:55
Weary - keeping ****tardation in vogue since 1869. . . :)

Tin Man
05-04-2009, 09:58
Weary - keeping ****tardation in vogue since 1869. . . :)

i am just thankful that penguins aren't armed :)

Homer&Marje
05-04-2009, 10:12
i am just thankful that penguins aren't armed :)

I'm pretty sure the red squirrels are armed. Scare tons of people away with those:D

Kanati
05-04-2009, 10:54
Be sure and post a picture of your truck so all the local felons (who can't pass the background check to buy a gun) can steal your .357. A gun in a vehicle is damned near useless, it needs to be on your person. Do you drive to the trailhead? Do you leave a gun in a parked, unattended vehicle for days? At your age, if you haven't thought this through, you really need to refrain from giving personal security advice. I don't give out advice about computers, or rocket science, 'cause I don't know a damned thing about either one.

I will agree with you that the danger to a physcially fit, averaged sized male on the AT is miniscule. If and when I ever thru, I probably wouldn't carry a handgun. Right now though I'm a section hiker who sometimes hikes with his teenaged daughter, so when you see me on the trail, ask and I'll show you my nine, cause mine won't be left in my vehicle, I'll have it handy.


You make some good points. And I totally agree that many felons and nut cases can acquire a carry permit. We each have to make our decisions about our security or the security of those we care about. I think my primary point is that TOO much talk about weapons and carrying them on the trail sends the wrong message to the average person aspiring to hike our trails or spend time in the outdoors in our natural world. The trail is not a dangerous place. Carrying a concealed weapon is a personal choice, and if we do so in public, we need to be totally secretive about it, which includes discussions. My assessment of most of the hikers and others that I met along the A.T. between GA and ME last year is that they would not be comfortable in a discussion about firearms.

Every once in awhile a nut shows up on our sacred trails, but they are rare. Perhaps the best way to handle situations like this Spike thing, (if in fact he's guilty), is similar to what happened on this thread. When a suspicious person with a peculiar or aggressive manner/behavior is encountered the word should be spread immediately up and down the trail. Let the operators at the hostels, and authorities know asap. Talk to other hikers about it so that everyone is on the lookout and are aware that there is someone out there that my be a psyco. Do not wait until a physical altercation occurs as it may be too late. There's been a lot of good discussion about the present incident on this thread, but in my opinion and others, it's 3-4 weeks too late. It should have been done immediately with the first occurrence, just so everyone is alert and watching. There is strength in numbers and words.

My .357 Mag ? No one knows if I carry it or not, but anyone breaking into my truck won't find it.

warraghiyagey
05-04-2009, 11:03
Yo

My .357 Mag ? No one knows if I carry it or not, but anyone breaking into my truck won't find it.
Sounds like an invitation. . .

Slimer
05-04-2009, 11:05
an invitation to get your head blown off.

Kanati
05-04-2009, 11:44
an invitation to get your head blown off.

You hit the nail on the head. It's the "not knowing what's going to happen if you mess with someone" that keeps them at bay. That's the whole idea of concealment. I have some very close, mild mannered friends whom I "think" may carry a concealed weapon. I don't ever recall them mentioning it. These are really nice guys and girls.

Phoenixdadeadhead
05-04-2009, 11:50
i am just thankful that penguins aren't armed :)
Does this me you are a fellow futurama fan?

Tin Man
05-04-2009, 12:01
Does this me you are a fellow futurama fan?

nope, wrong penguin

Phoenixdadeadhead
05-04-2009, 12:02
LOL My Bad

Chaco Taco
05-04-2009, 12:21
but I have thought many times about carrying a navy colt on the trail, but then the powder, balls and grease, would get kinda heavy after a while.

Yea and i dont care who you are, if I see ya, Im callin the po-po.

warraghiyagey
05-04-2009, 12:28
http://www.alioth.net/flying/PVille99/SpudGunShakesEarth.jpg

JAK
05-04-2009, 13:45
I'm pretty sure the red squirrels are armed. Scare tons of people away with those:DUhhhh . . . . . Red Squirrels? . . . . is this 2009 or did I miss a memo. . . . or maybe I'm too far removed from my deep woods, frontier upbringing. . .

Chaco Taco
05-04-2009, 13:46
I hope that aint you Warr

2011_thruhiker
05-06-2009, 10:19
Why invite trouble? Guns have a real purpose in life-but when the purpose serves you to more likely get you in a lot more trouble (illegal to carry on most if not all federal land/parks-let's see, illegal possession of a fire arm, (if you have it in plain sight-that could be another charge of banishing an illegal firearm, (if you have concealed in your pack) than that is concealment of an illegal firearm, (if you discharge it regardless of why-just you having it opens you up to a ***** storm-) of discharging an illegal firearm-that is like what? four or five felonies right there???) than you bargained for than the likely hood it protecting you-IMO I think it is wiser to leave it at home because as long as you have it regardless how legal your ownership-on fed park land where it is illegal-you don't have a prayer in heaven to keep you from being whisked off to jail...........

No thanks-aint worth the trouble, I will leave my .9 at home.

vamelungeon
05-06-2009, 10:25
Wearing a firearm in plain sight is not brandishing, brandishing involves holding or pointing, not a gun in the holster. If you have a concealed weapon permit in Virginia you can carry concealed in a National Forest legally.

Jayboflavin04
05-06-2009, 10:59
I am gonna post this again. In no way, am I against ownership of fire arms. There is a very insightful 20/20 called "If I only had a Gun"...you can and should watch it for free on abc.com. Go to free episodes.

2011_thruhiker
05-06-2009, 11:05
OMG-I never said wearing a firearm in plain sight was branishing.

But what I said was "if you have it in plain sight-that could be another charge of banishing an illegal firearm" If you have it in plain sight could mean you are holding it at your side, pointed in front of you, cleaning the gun or having it holstered. I don't state where the gun is "other than in plain sight-which means "able to be viewed by others within the immediate area." And depending on what you were doing WITH the gun in plain sight depends on whether you could be charged with branishing.


Wearing a firearm in plain sight is not brandishing, brandishing involves holding or pointing, not a gun in the holster. If you have a concealed weapon permit in Virginia you can carry concealed in a National Forest legally.

take-a-knee
05-06-2009, 11:11
Why invite trouble? Guns have a real purpose in life-but when the purpose serves you to more likely get you in a lot more trouble (illegal to carry on most if not all federal land/parks-let's see, illegal possession of a fire arm, (if you have it in plain sight-that could be another charge of banishing an illegal firearm, (if you have concealed in your pack) than that is concealment of an illegal firearm, (if you discharge it regardless of why-just you having it opens you up to a ***** storm-) of discharging an illegal firearm-that is like what? four or five felonies right there???) than you bargained for than the likely hood it protecting you-IMO I think it is wiser to leave it at home because as long as you have it regardless how legal your ownership-on fed park land where it is illegal-you don't have a prayer in heaven to keep you from being whisked off to jail...........

No thanks-aint worth the trouble, I will leave my .9 at home.

Give advice about something that you have a clue about Dude:

1) Discharging a firearm without proven intent to harm another human is never a felony.

2) 40 states issue concealed carry permits, look into it before you post something stupid again.

3) No one here has advocated conceal carry in a National Park, though recently that has become legal to do so.

4) Discharging a firearm in defense of your own life IS likely to be a life-altering act. You find forfeiting your own preferable? Maybe the Ned Beatty thing appeals to you?

Fortunantly, we still live in a country that is peaceful enough to allow the sheeple among us to live unmolested, most of the time. I guess you feel lucky.

weary
05-06-2009, 11:54
Give advice about something that you have a clue about Dude:

1) Discharging a firearm without proven intent to harm another human is never a felony.

.
Not true. People occasionally are charged with manslaughter for accidently or carelessly shooting people.

Jayboflavin04
05-06-2009, 12:47
WATCH THE 20/20 EPISODE....I think that video fits in perfectly for this thread.

le loupe
05-06-2009, 13:12
WATCH THE 20/20 EPISODE....I think that video fits in perfectly for this thread.

the 20/20 show was a farce- read the article by John Lott (http://johnrlott.blogspot.com/), senior research scientist at the University of Maryland and the author of More Guns, Less Crime (http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0226493644/ref=nosim/?tag=johnrlotttrip-20) (University of Chicago Press, second edition, 2000) and The Bias Against Guns (http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0895261146/ref=nosim/?tag=johnrlotttrip-20) (Regnery, 2003).

http://foxforum.blogs.foxnews.com/2009/04/15/lott__gun_control_experiment_rigged/

take-a-knee
05-06-2009, 13:27
Not true. People occasionally are charged with manslaughter for accidently or carelessly shooting people.

In that instance I stand corrected, could also result in a criminal negligence charge if actual harm is caused.

randyg45
05-06-2009, 13:51
"When a suspicious person with a peculiar or aggressive manner/behavior is encountered the word should be spread immediately up and down the trail. Let the operators at the hostels, and authorities know asap."

Absolutely. Anytime one of us thinks someone is peculiar we should all, as one flock of perverse bullying sheep, make the guys life as miserable as possible. Far better than just quietly assuming responsibility for your own safety. Sure.

It's a dangerous world imo. My family and I go armed, and you don't have a clue.

Relevant story:http://http://www.wsbtv.com/news/19365762/detail.html (http://http//www.wsbtv.com/news/19365762/detail.html)

le loupe
05-06-2009, 13:56
link doesnt appear to work-

this is the transcript:

COLLEGE PARK, Ga. -- A group of college students said they are lucky to be alive and they’re thanking the quick-thinking of one of their own. Police said a fellow student shot and killed one of two masked me who burst into an apartment.

Channel 2 Action News reporter Tom Jones met with one of the students to talk about the incident.

“Apparently, his intent was to rape and murder us all,” said student Charles Bailey.


Bailey said he thought it was the end of his life and the lives of the 10 people inside his apartment for a birthday party after two masked men with guns burst in through a patio door.

“They just came in and separated the men from the women and said, ‘Give me your wallets and cell phones,’” said George Williams of the College Park Police Department.

Bailey said the gunmen started counting bullets. “The other guy asked how many (bullets) he had. He said he had enough,” said Bailey.

That’s when one student grabbed a gun out of a backpack and shot at the invader who was watching the men. The gunman ran out of the apartment.

The student then ran to the room where the second gunman, identified by police as 23-year-old Calvin Lavant, was holding the women.

“Apparently the guy was getting ready to rape his girlfriend. So he told the girls to get down and he started shooting. The guy jumped out of the window,” said Bailey.

A neighbor heard the shots and heard someone running nearby.

“And I heard someone say, ‘Someone help me. Call the police. Somebody call the police,’” said a neighbor.

The neighbor said she believes it was Lavant, who was found dead near his apartment, only one building away.

Bailey said he is just thankful one student risked his life to keep others alive.

“I think all of us are really cognizant of the fact that we could have all been killed,” said Bailey.

One female student was shot several times during the crossfire. She is expected to make a full recovery.

Police said they are close to making the arrest of the second suspect.

2011_thruhiker
05-06-2009, 15:02
Give advice about something that you have a clue about Dude:

1) Discharging a firearm without proven intent to harm another human is never a felony.

2) 40 states issue concealed carry permits, look into it before you post something stupid again.


4) Discharging a firearm in defense of your own life IS likely to be a life-altering act. You find forfeiting your own preferable? Maybe the Ned Beatty thing appeals to you?

Fortunantly, we still live in a country that is peaceful enough to allow the sheeple among us to live unmolested, most of the time. I guess you feel lucky.

1. I think another has addressed this fairly-no need to bring up what someone else has already wisely pointed out.

2. I'm confused-where was this ever brought up in my post? Perhaps you need to read carefully before you jump...

4. Sigh. Never said it "wasn't" a life altering act-as you put it....

Let me ask you this one thing: Have you ever really had anything really, really bad happen to you that you experianced that fear of immiment and immediate threat to your life?


The fact is: there is no guareentees that law enforcement/prosecuting attorney (state's attorney) would see it your way, but I guess you are counting on the fact that they would and agree also with you that you were justified in discharging your firearm in a public place...

And I guess just because **my** position and preference is to leave my gun at home while hiking because of all the "variables and assumptions" that must be in place to keep me from being charged with a felony because a high priced lawyer can't pick anything that I did apart and turn it around to haunt me and make ME look like the bad person no matter how "justified" I felt Iwas in pulling that trigger to preserve my life at that very moment, the *Ned Beatty* thing must appeal to me....darn, wow, and I *must be* a anti-gun supporter, and definately not card carrying NRA member who often frequents their indoor range at their headquaters in Fairfax, Virginia-who has a carry and concealed permit in Virginia and not an active right to the 2nd amendment supporter and there is no way I personnally own a berreta .9, glock .45 and a remington 12 gauge?

Just for your info-it's not that I feel "lucky", it's I choose to be a survivior a long time ago at one point in my life and I choose to not be a vicitm which takes unbelievable courage, healing and strength. And because of that experiance it IS why I own my guns and NOT afraid to use them, hike freely without them because I believe the trail is safer than sleeping in my own bed (statitistics show this too), and have my carry and conceal permit so I can feel safe walking across Walmart's parking lot at night by myself and fight so hard to protect my right to that because it's my lifeline, it is my peace-so Sir with all due respect, I am not asking you to agree with me, but perhaps I might know a tiny bit of what I'm talking about because I "might have" lived it.

-Shaking her head in dismay and disbelief- :-?

snowhoe
05-06-2009, 15:17
Man, I am soooo glad this thread was brought up again!!!! It was getting kinda boring on WB. Now back to the action!!!

Homer&Marje
05-06-2009, 15:39
"When a suspicious person with a peculiar or aggressive manner/behavior is encountered the word should be spread immediately up and down the trail. Let the operators at the hostels, and authorities know asap."

Absolutely. Anytime one of us thinks someone is peculiar we should all, as one flock of perverse bullying sheep, make the guys life as miserable as possible. Far better than just quietly assuming responsibility for your own safety. Sure.

It's a dangerous world imo. My family and I go armed, and you don't have a clue.

Relevant story:http://http://www.wsbtv.com/news/19365762/detail.html (http://http//www.wsbtv.com/news/19365762/detail.html)

This is how I get the cops called while peacefully camping by myself on the outskirts of a local state forest.

Verbatim... "Theres a crazy homeless guy living in Foxboro State forest"

Coming from a group of mountain bikers that rode by and were visible for about 30 seconds to me. They didn't stop, bother to have a tiny bit of insight....no just paranoia.

If I reported every weird person I ever met on the trail the whole trip would be a list of people I thought were peculiar and need to call the cops on. For **** sake the hiking community is an odd group. Clearly expressed and demonstrated by most of us. I was camping by myself I was probably walking around singing a song to myself and they misinterpreted that as the rantings of a madman.

Me singing Journey aint the prettiest sound and sight combo though:D


PARANOID!

Homer&Marje
05-06-2009, 15:47
Ahhh!!! What the hell is that!!!! Call the COPS!!!! GET THE GUN!!!!!!!

mister krabs
05-06-2009, 16:07
This is how I get the cops called while peacefully camping by myself on the outskirts of a local state forest.

Verbatim... "Theres a crazy homeless guy living in Foxboro State forest"

Coming from a group of mountain bikers that rode by and were visible for about 30 seconds to me. They didn't stop, bother to have a tiny bit of insight....no just paranoia.

PARANOID!


Dude, that's just sensible, I'd have called the cops too if I saw this,
http://whiteblaze.net/forum/vbg/files/1/7/8/4/6/60210015.jpg

2011_thruhiker
05-06-2009, 16:18
Ahhh!!! What the hell is that!!!! Call the COPS!!!! GET THE GUN!!!!!!!

Homer, are you by any chance my ex-boyfriend????

:D

take-a-knee
05-06-2009, 16:29
1. I think another has addressed this fairly-no need to bring up what someone else has already wisely pointed out.

2. I'm confused-where was this ever brought up in my post? Perhaps you need to read carefully before you jump...

4. Sigh. Never said it "wasn't" a life altering act-as you put it....

Let me ask you this one thing: Have you ever really had anything really, really bad happen to you that you experianced that fear of immiment and immediate threat to your life?


The fact is: there is no guareentees that law enforcement/prosecuting attorney (state's attorney) would see it your way, but I guess you are counting on the fact that they would and agree also with you that you were justified in discharging your firearm in a public place...

And I guess just because **my** position and preference is to leave my gun at home while hiking because of all the "variables and assumptions" that must be in place to keep me from being charged with a felony because a high priced lawyer can't pick anything that I did apart and turn it around to haunt me and make ME look like the bad person no matter how "justified" I felt Iwas in pulling that trigger to preserve my life at that very moment, the *Ned Beatty* thing must appeal to me....darn, wow, and I *must be* a anti-gun supporter, and definately not card carrying NRA member who often frequents their indoor range at their headquaters in Fairfax, Virginia-who has a carry and concealed permit in Virginia and not an active right to the 2nd amendment supporter and there is no way I personnally own a berreta .9, glock .45 and a remington 12 gauge?

Just for your info-it's not that I feel "lucky", it's I choose to be a survivior a long time ago at one point in my life and I choose to not be a vicitm which takes unbelievable courage, healing and strength. And because of that experiance it IS why I own my guns and NOT afraid to use them, hike freely without them because I believe the trail is safer than sleeping in my own bed (statitistics show this too), and have my carry and conceal permit so I can feel safe walking across Walmart's parking lot at night by myself and fight so hard to protect my right to that because it's my lifeline, it is my peace-so Sir with all due respect, I am not asking you to agree with me, but perhaps I might know a tiny bit of what I'm talking about because I "might have" lived it.

-Shaking her head in dismay and disbelief- :-?

Pardon me ma'am, I was not aware of your gender. I would have replied that I've posted on several occasions that, if I ever thru'd, I wouldn't carry a gun. I don't have a vagina, and I'm not likely to recieve the "Beatty" treatment. It's a free country, for awhile anyway, but any female who hikes without being able to deal instantaneous death if need be, ain't too smart. I''m glad to hear you have a tactical mindset, don't leave it at home when you go to the trail. If you have a Glock, then get yourself a Khar PM9, they fit in ULA belt pockets, also the Granite Gear belt pockets. Also get a Desantis Nemesis pocket holster for it. You can carry the pistol in the thigh/cargo pocket(in the nemesis) or in the pack/belt pocket. Like you said, you've chosen not to be a victim.

Have I experienced an imminent threat to my life? Every morning of 05 when I rolled out of the FOB wherever I was in Iraq at the time.

Valentine
05-06-2009, 16:36
Too expensive and too heavy. I would rather carry other things that would let me hike farther away from crazy people. More water etc...

Homer&Marje
05-06-2009, 17:03
Dude, that's just sensible, I'd have called the cops too if I saw this,
http://whiteblaze.net/forum/vbg/files/1/7/8/4/6/60210015.jpg

I'm gonna get that blown up to wall size and put it in the living room:D Looks like the first UNA Bomber sketches...must be a crazy whoever that is

2011_thruhiker
05-06-2009, 17:34
It's a free country, for awhile anyway, but any female who hikes without being able to deal instantaneous death if need be, ain't too smart.

First, thank you for your sacrifices and service to our country.

The weight that gun would put on me would be better served by a bottle of water, an extra towel, extra pair of socks or another pound or two of food-you know-immediate threats that are looming in the darkness of the forest just beyond the A.T. following me down the trail spying on me in the dense shadows under the cover of the dark green leaves that are threatening to overcome me and kill me at any second of the day...

But sadly, we all gotta die sometime, but hey, not knocking you at all-I do understand PTSS is a hard thing to deal with but very treatable these days....

randyg45
05-06-2009, 19:12
WATCH THE 20/20 EPISODE....I think that video fits in perfectly for this thread.
I've watched enough 20/20 to know not to trust them.
That doubles down if the subject is related to guns.

randyg45
05-06-2009, 19:20
I''m glad to hear you have a tactical mindset, don't leave it at home when you go to the trail.

Almost all perceptions of safety are false. People get attacked and killed in their beds. People get attacked and killed in churches. People get attacked and killed on trails.

Pedaling Fool
05-06-2009, 19:22
It's not just 20/20 and not just the subject of guns. I don't trust anything I hear in the news without verifying it through multiple sources. I watched a special (can't remember if it was 20/20 or 60 minutes). They claimed that the military was creating fighters-for-god. They were saying that the military, especially the army, indoctrinates (brainwashes) us into becoming religious missionaries. They claimed that a service members career was in jeopardy if you did not tow the religious (Christian) line.

23 years in the Navy, I know nothing could be further from the truth. There is absolutely no coercion in the military to be a Christian.

Homer&Marje
05-06-2009, 19:55
Almost all perceptions of safety are false. People get attacked and killed in their beds. People get attacked and killed in churches. People get attacked and killed on trails.

Par.......ahhhhhhh.......NOID!!!!!

No kidding people get attacked in that many places? There's not some set rule where you have to attack someone? Coulda fooled me.

I walk forward everyday with my chin high and enjoy the view to my front left and right. Spend your whole day looking over your shoulder ya paranoid fool...and good luck with that. While your notifying the authorities that I just walked by you....I'll be baggin another peak.


HMHDI and remember....the only gun you should carry on the trail is a Browning .30 caliber mounted machine gun with 5000 rounds.

Anything else would be childs play. 75 extra pounds is nothing to being able to cut down 18 trees and not worry about whether you hit your supposed psycho.:D:D

2011_thruhiker
05-06-2009, 20:18
the only gun you should carry on the trail is a Browning .30 caliber mounted machine gun with 5000 rounds.

Anything else would be childs play. 75 extra pounds is nothing to being able to cut down 18 trees and not worry about whether you hit your supposed psycho.:D:D

Well, your pack weight just went through the roof! :banana
So, is it fair to say that those drag marks left on the trail behind you were really caused by dragging your 300 pound pack up the mountain and not a body?

Damn, talk about putting a new spin on the old fashion shoot out....But that's what a pyscho gets for messin with a AT hiker....:sun

Homer&Marje
05-06-2009, 20:56
I've never seen a sign limiting the use of elephants on the trail. I could mount an entire arsenal on top of it. Not to mention the amenities I could bring to my hike.

I'm thinking.... hibachi and a parasol for those sunny days:D

CowHead
05-07-2009, 06:48
Just remember folks guns don't killed people bullets do!

man2th
05-07-2009, 07:30
blaming guns for the crimes is like blaming your keyboard for misspelled words, get a clue people, enjoy YOUR hike.

Jester2000
05-07-2009, 18:29
I've never seen a sign limiting the use of elephants on the trail.

The AT is a footpath only. No elephants! (for a related thread, see "Turtle Riding on the AT?!?")

wrongway_08
05-07-2009, 20:36
Just remember folks guns don't killed people bullets do!


WRONG>>>>> WRONG>>>>>> WRONG!

Guns dont kill, bullets dont kill ...... my finger does the killing as I pull 5 pounds worth of pressure against the trigger...... :sun

wrongway_08
05-07-2009, 20:40
blaming guns for the crimes is like blaming your keyboard for misspelled words, get a clue people, enjoy YOUR hike.

Dam.... about time someone figured it out! WOW, took long enough.

Seems people forget this bit of common sense info.

Chaco Taco
05-07-2009, 23:16
Dam.... about time someone figured it out! WOW, took long enough.

Seems people forget this bit of common sense info.

Remember the big guy in Happy Gilmore that has the tshirt "Guns dont kill people, I do"?

waywardfool
05-07-2009, 23:51
Let me ask you this one thing: Have you ever really had anything really, really bad happen to you that you experianced that fear of immiment and immediate threat to your life?

In 2002, I had my drunk hispanic neighbor come over into my yard and start berating me for no reason when I arrived home one night. He was waving around a Llama .45 and verbally threatening me. I was legally (ccw) carrying my own .45, a S&W Model 457. He never saw it, I never drew it. I backed off and let the cops handle it.

To the dismay of the anti-gunners, blood didn't run in the streets, an innocent kid across the street didn't die, and I didn't shoot him just because I could legally do it. I was able to get cover, and call the cops. If he had pursued, or made my porch (wife in house), it would have been a different outcome.

Yes, I was under imminent and immediate threat to my life. But, I was able to retreat, but remain fully ready to defend myself and my family if he escalated the situation from that point.

Relating to the AT...if this had been along the trail, say a road crossing or shelter/camp with nearby road access, and I didn't have hard cover or a defensive position to retreat to (and wait how long for help to arrive, or for the person to loose interest or move on), I would have been left with few alternatives. Situations like that are why I am prepared. You can't pick them, they pick you.

If I call the cops at my house, it takes 5 to 10 minutes for the first unit to arrive. In a situation like that, one won't go in alone, he'll wait a block or two away until other cops get in the area (listen to a scanner sometime -- it'll open your eyes!). Just at my back fence is the city limits...in the county, the house behind me, it's over 40 minutes average response time. What is the response time to your average AT shelter, IF you could make an immediate cell phone call for help (say, for example, where the alleged incident with Spike occurred)....two hours? four?

Rifleman
05-08-2009, 00:33
Most of us know theres no need to carry a gun for safety on the trail, however newcomers to the trail might be interested in understanding this better.

Comments, concerns, issues, experiences, etc .........

You're absolutely right. No immature, irresponsible man or woman should be allowed anywhere near any kind of weapon.:eek:

Homer&Marje
05-08-2009, 05:38
In 2002, I had my drunk hispanic neighbor come over into my yard and start berating me for no reason when I arrived home one night.


Nice job calling the cops to handle the situation. Tell me....how does the race of your next door neighbor play into the story?

Lemni Skate
05-08-2009, 06:28
I'm a big 2nd Amendment guy. I don't think the government should be more armed than the populace. That being said, I don't own a gun (I don't hunt--have children who don't need to get hold of one), and have never even considered a gun on the AT. I feel much safer out there than in the "real" world. It would defeat my campaign to keep my pack as light as possible, also.

I look at it like a lot of stuff some people pack. Unnecessary. On 99.95% of thru-hikes you want need it so why carry it. Just like a snakebite kit.

I understand a few people might need it for peace of mind, but I'd rather save the weight.

Pedaling Fool
05-08-2009, 07:46
I was watching the news, many are pushing to control certain types of guns in an effort against the War on Drugs. I was thinking why don't they just make them illegal - period. And while they're at it, why don't they just make drugs illegal?

Can someone explain that, just pass a law and make it illegal and then no one will use drugs -- what am I missing?

Chaco Taco
05-08-2009, 08:25
Nice job calling the cops to handle the situation. Tell me....how does the race of your next door neighbor play into the story?
Its just one of the facts of his story, chill.:rolleyes:

Chaco Taco
05-08-2009, 08:27
I'm a big 2nd Amendment guy. I don't think the government should be more armed than the populace. That being said, I don't own a gun (I don't hunt--have children who don't need to get hold of one), and have never even considered a gun on the AT. I feel much safer out there than in the "real" world. It would defeat my campaign to keep my pack as light as possible, also.

I look at it like a lot of stuff some people pack. Unnecessary. On 99.95% of thru-hikes you want need it so why carry it. Just like a snakebite kit.

I understand a few people might need it for peace of mind, but I'd rather save the weight.

Guns have no place on the trail. The only people that should be carrying guns on any trail are LEO's.

zoidfu
05-08-2009, 08:39
In 2002, I had my drunk hispanic neighbor come over into my yard and start berating me for no reason when I arrived home one night. He was waving around a Llama .45 and verbally threatening me. I was legally (ccw) carrying my own .45, a S&W Model 457. He never saw it, I never drew it. I backed off and let the cops handle it.


Maybe he was just really, really excited about his new gun and was trying to show it to you. You didn't understand spanish so you called the cops. Sounds like a terrible misunderstanding:D

vamelungeon
05-08-2009, 08:40
Guns have no place on the trail. The only people that should be carrying guns on any trail are LEO's.
Everyone who can legally possess a firearm should have the choice of carrying it.

Chaco Taco
05-08-2009, 08:40
Maybe he was just really, really excited about his new gun and was trying to show it to you. You couldn't understand spanish so you called the cops. Sounds like a terrible misunderstanding:D

Wow that was actually funny. Maybe you do have your moments:clap

Chaco Taco
05-08-2009, 08:41
Everyone who can legally possess a firearm should have the choice of carrying it.

That is true, but they have no place on the trail.

zoidfu
05-08-2009, 08:43
Guns have no place on the trail. The only people that should be carrying guns on any trail are LEO's. This is only an opinion.

*fixed........

vamelungeon
05-08-2009, 08:43
That is true, but they have no place on the trail.
Carrying it would mean carrying it everywhere, including trails. The choice to do so should be legal.

Dr O
05-08-2009, 08:45
Guns have no place on the trail. The only people that should be carrying guns on any trail are LEO's.

What reason would they need them?

Pedaling Fool
05-08-2009, 08:46
What reason would they need them?
Yeah, good point.

Chaco Taco
05-08-2009, 08:47
Carrying it would mean carrying it everywhere, including trails. The choice to do so should be legal.

But the debate is having them on the trail. Permit or not, legal or not there is no reason to carry a firearm on a hiking trail. What if, and this is a big what if a child is close to you in a shelter and your gun discharges and kills the boy. Im just sayin, it could have been avoided.

Chaco Taco
05-08-2009, 08:48
What reason would they need them?

Gary Hilton

zoidfu
05-08-2009, 08:50
You know what's coming, right?

Pedaling Fool
05-08-2009, 08:51
Gary Hilton
You're getting there, just missing a few pieces of the puzzle:sun

Chaco Taco
05-08-2009, 08:51
You know what's coming, right?

The padlock?

Chaco Taco
05-08-2009, 08:52
You're getting there, just missing a few pieces of the puzzle:sun

Fill in the pieces:-?:D

zoidfu
05-08-2009, 08:54
The padlock?

And it's gonna be in a sock and they're going to beat you with it. It's a losing battle:) Even harder to argue when we have a Constitutional Amendment backing it.

Pedaling Fool
05-08-2009, 08:54
Fill in the pieces:-?:D
No, it'll take away the satisfaction you feel when you complete the puzzle. I'll just watch now:)

Chaco Taco
05-08-2009, 08:56
A gun is not needed on the AT at all!

I'm not a anti gun freak, in fact I'm an advocate of legal gun ownership. I own two pistols, two rifles, and one shotgun. I hunt (well I have, but not in a while), target shoot, and carry firearms as a part of my job. I've done that since I was ten, and have been actually working with weapons as a profession over 17 years. As an NCO in the Army in a direct ground combat specialty I understand very well the safety needs of a weapon, the responsibilities of carrying a loaded weapon, and what it really takes to have the correct mental attitude to use deadly force.

But I think that a lot of people that are potential gun carriers have not thought about, or realize the real consequences of carrying a gun.

First thing you should consider is the legality. Carrying a concealed weapon is almost universally illegal. You could carry a pistol in a holster on your hip, but no one will be interested in being close to you, and then the potential attacker also knows you are packing and can take steps to prevent you gun use. But carrying a gun is also illegal in many parks you must cross. AND, some states like NJ will take your gun and lock you up if you transport firearms through the state without the proper documents.

Next is the legality of shooting someone - it isn't. Sure you may claim self defense, but that means you must stop everything you are doing with your hike and your life to go through the process of police reports, investigation, possibly going to court for bail and time in jail while they sort it out, maybe a trial or at least grand jury (Weasel would know the ins and outs better). AND you may not have anyone to back up your story against the local boy. Also remember they guy in Louisiana about 10 or so years ago that shot the Japanese exchange student because he thought the guy was trying to break into his house, but the student just wanted to borrow a phone after his car broke down - my point is you may kill some innocent person thinking you are in danger when you really aren't. HOW COULD YOU LIVE WITH YOURSELF AFTER THAT!?! I will talk about this again.

How about the weight? Even a light gun with ammo weighs about a pound and that is useless weight. How about maintenance? Guns require cleaning and lubrication. Mud, sand, and water aren't good for them; guess what there is a lot of on the trail.

How about training? Most people can point and shoot, some can even shoot well at cans. But in a real gunfight even professionals have a hard time hitting anything. Remember that video of the two sheriffs having a gun fight about 5' from a couple of white separatists when they pulled them over? Over 30 shots fired at close range from professional police and NOT ONE SINGLE HIT! Can you look someone in the face and actually pull the trigger? What will you do after shooting them and the blood is everywhere and this human being is pleading for their life after you shot them? People don't always drop like in the movies, and it is a bloody mess. Will you let them die in front of you? If you will, you're sick. If you do the right thing, imagine how much of a problem and a responsibility it is to treat a gunshot person, especially when they are bleeding out and their backside looks like raw hamburger.

A responsible gun user must always carry their gun on them. To let it out of your possession means anyone else can get it. And for defense, it must always be ready, and always be very accessible. If you plan to put it inside your pack neither requirement is met, so there is no usefulness in the weapon. If you are always carrying it, then how? They do make holster/waist belts that look like a normal waist belt, but after carrying it 24/7 for a month will you feel safe or burdened? What will you do when showering in a hostel? Or swimming in a creek? People will catch on, then you may have problems.

I mention this before about shooting someone innocent accidentally, but I think I must cover this from experience. When you are in the defensive mode, every other person you meet, and I mean EVERY OTHER PERSON, must be considered a potential threat or otherwise you loose the defensive edge. Now imagine meeting 10-20 people a day on the trail. That is a lot of decision making about weather or not to pull pistols! Now multiply that by a 6 month hike - 1,800 to 3,600 possibilities of shooting an innocent person - and that is just on the trail! What I found was that everyone that was the lest bit suspicious caused me to go into the defensive mode and think about all the possibilities and options of a fight - not my hike. And in a three day period that was a lot of non-hike enjoyment time. I would see a guy in denim and sunglasses while I was carrying and see a potential hillside strangler, but without the gun he was a funny looking tourist. Either way I didn't need the gun, but with the gun I was focused on defending from a possible threat (which was false) while without the gun I shrugged it off and had fun.

SO consider the actual threat. In 74 years (I think that is right) of the trail, there have been less than 10 murders. Now think of the length of the AT, and some of the areas it passes through or near and their crime rates. Think of the number of people on the trail every year and imagine a city with that population. A city with the same size/population of the Appalachian Trail would most likely have a lot more than 10 murders in 74 years. So you have a safer time on the trail than you do in your own home town if you look at it that way.

Wildlife? Do you really think you can kill a bear with your snub nosed .38? And if you plan on doing that, well WHY?

So why carry a pistol? I figure it is an unnatural fear of what is in the woods, or an anachronistic thought process that thinks wilderness=danger and gun=safety. Well the formula that says that is a hundred years out of date. Small women hikers can go the entire length of the At without killing anyone, why can't big macho guys get by without one?

Wow, a longer rant than normall, and I don't think I hit all the aspects of why a gun isn't needed.

I am reposting this because it is mostly the point I am making as to why guns have no place on the AT coming from a man that I respect very much.

Chaco Taco
05-08-2009, 08:59
And it's gonna be in a sock and they're going to beat you with it. It's a losing battle:) Even harder to argue when we have a Constitutional Amendment backing it.

I agree with you. Its a judgement call. But why bring a friggin gun on the trail? The chance of it hitting something in your pack and firing and hitting yourself or someone else is a risk that is so avoidable. I agree with you totally with the constitution. Do what you want, Im just sayin, if you have a gun, stay the hell away from me. :)

Dr O
05-08-2009, 09:01
Gary Hilton

Gary Hilton didn't attack a LEO.

Chaco Taco
05-08-2009, 09:52
Gary Hilton didn't attack a LEO.
I know that, but that is the reason why LEO's carry guns on the trail. Sometimes people running from the law seek refuge on the trail. For the most part, LEO's stay away from the trail unless there is trouble.

vamelungeon
05-08-2009, 10:41
But the debate is having them on the trail. Permit or not, legal or not there is no reason to carry a firearm on a hiking trail. What if, and this is a big what if a child is close to you in a shelter and your gun discharges and kills the boy. Im just sayin, it could have been avoided.

"your gun discharges.."

Why would it do that???? I have been around firearms my entire life, handled them daily as a police officer and am a licensed collector, and I've NEVER seen or heard of a guns just "discharging." If you have heard of a case where a gun spontaneously discharged, it needs to be documented.

The other reason it won't happen is I'm not staying in a nasty shelter, so it's a moot point.

le loupe
05-08-2009, 10:45
"your gun discharges.."

Why would it do that???? I have been around firearms my entire life, handled them daily as a police officer and am a licensed collector, and I've NEVER seen or heard of a guns just "discharging." If you have heard of a case where a gun spontaneously discharged, it needs to be documented.

The other reason it won't happen is I'm not staying in a nasty shelter, so it's a moot point.

I'm glad somebody addressed this- there isnt even much activity that could happen inside a pack that would discharge a weapon, as has been suggested. Besides, we all understand the accessibility issues of carrying in a pack and wouldnt do it.

Chaco Taco
05-08-2009, 11:17
"your gun discharges.."

Why would it do that???? I have been around firearms my entire life, handled them daily as a police officer and am a licensed collector, and I've NEVER seen or heard of a guns just "discharging." If you have heard of a case where a gun spontaneously discharged, it needs to be documented.

The other reason it won't happen is I'm not staying in a nasty shelter, so it's a moot point.

Why would you carry a firearm on the trail????

Chaco Taco
05-08-2009, 11:20
Why would you carry a firearm on the trail????

And I ask this in a totally respectful way. I understand the right to bear arms. Im am totally cool with the legality and respect your right to bear arms as a legal gun owner.:D But why would you want to carry a gun when you go hiking?

Rifleman
05-08-2009, 12:46
Why would you want to have (or need) First Amendment (or any of the other natural, unalienable freedoms) rights on the trail?:-?

Slimer
05-08-2009, 12:52
excellent post by Rifleman!

Homer&Marje
05-08-2009, 15:10
And I ask this in a totally respectful way. I understand the right to bear arms. Im am totally cool with the legality and respect your right to bear arms as a legal gun owner.:D But why would you want to carry a gun when you go hiking?

They will never understand our side of the argument. Right to bear arms and the correct places to bear arms are completely different topics.

No need for guns in the NPS unless you are legally hunting. Then I'm all for it....I got my blaze orange just don't shoot me when I'm wearing my frogg toggs and look more like a deer:D

jersey joe
05-08-2009, 15:11
Seems like the odds of needing a gun on the AT are so small that it wouldn't be worth it's weight. I was sitting here trying to think of a circumstance where I might want a gun with me. I guess I could imagine that if I had a kid that I was hiking with, I might want to carry a gun to protect the child if we were attacked?!?

Chaco Taco
05-08-2009, 15:53
attacked?!?

Attacked?? When would you ever be attacked on the trail that would warrant such an action as shooting someone??

Bad Co
05-08-2009, 17:01
Life is unpredictable

Dr O
05-08-2009, 17:21
I know that, but that is the reason why LEO's carry guns on the trail. Sometimes people running from the law seek refuge on the trail. For the most part, LEO's stay away from the trail unless there is trouble.

Those are both reasons for non-LEO's to carry guns. :)

1) that is the reason why LEO's carry guns on the trail. Sometimes people running from the law seek refuge on the trail.

2) For the most part, LEO's stay away from the trail

Dr O
05-08-2009, 17:25
Attacked?? When would you ever be attacked on the trail that would warrant such an action as shooting someone??

When the sight of a gun pulled in defense alone wouldn't stop them, which would be almost never.

weary
05-08-2009, 17:26
Seems like the odds of needing a gun on the AT are so small that it wouldn't be worth it's weight. I was sitting here trying to think of a circumstance where I might want a gun with me. I guess I could imagine that if I had a kid that I was hiking with, I might want to carry a gun to protect the child if we were attacked?!?
No child has ever been attacked on the trail.

leeki pole
05-08-2009, 17:36
Attacked?? When would you ever be attacked on the trail that would warrant such an action as shooting someone??
Not saying that I would carry, but if life and limb were in imminent danger by assault with intent to injure or kill, that warrants use of lethal force in my book. How that force is distributed would be the person who has been assaulted call, not some scumbag attacker. As has been posted before, better to be judged by 12 than carried by 6. Have a nice weekend.

Bad Co
05-08-2009, 17:41
Prey for the best, Prepare for the worst

leeki pole
05-08-2009, 17:42
No child has ever been attacked on the trail. You forgot Meredith, Weary. She could have been our child.

Bad Co
05-08-2009, 17:45
sorry put the original post in wrong

Rifleman
05-08-2009, 17:49
Attacked?? When would you ever be attacked on the trail that would warrant such an action as shooting someone??

"In the Gravest Extreme"

jersey joe
05-08-2009, 18:08
Attacked?? When would you ever be attacked on the trail that would warrant such an action as shooting someone??
I agree, the chances are remote, but if someone or some animal tried to attack my child, I could see how having a gun could make a difference. And likely not to shoot them but to deter them.

jersey joe
05-08-2009, 18:09
Also, wasn't a young boy attacked by a bear cub in the past few years?

Kanati
05-08-2009, 19:34
I know that, but that is the reason why LEO's carry guns on the trail. Sometimes people running from the law seek refuge on the trail. For the most part, LEO's stay away from the trail unless there is trouble.


I'm a LEO.

Chaco Taco
05-08-2009, 19:36
Wow some of you are really paranoid. I had my life threatened on the trail by another hiker and still would never think of carrying a gun. Also ran across a crazy hiker that obviously was off his meds and seemed very unstable. Ill run the risk of just getting my a** kicked rather than getting killed.

Chaco Taco
05-08-2009, 19:39
I'm a LEO.

And??????? I meant LEO's on duty. Most of the time , they dont really mess with the trail unless there is a reason.

Kanati
05-08-2009, 19:44
"your gun discharges.."

Why would it do that???? I have been around firearms my entire life, handled them daily as a police officer and am a licensed collector, and I've NEVER seen or heard of a guns just "discharging." If you have heard of a case where a gun spontaneously discharged, it needs to be documented.

The other reason it won't happen is I'm not staying in a nasty shelter, so it's a moot point.

Sorry to say this but you're mistaken. Guns that have a lot of wear discharge sometimes by themselves. Guns with broken/misssing parts sometimes discharge by themselves. I've witnesses both in over 50 years of hunting and gun handling. I have my wifes dads old 20 ga. double and the triggers are so worn, you can breathe on them and the gun will discharge.

One of the 10 rules for gun safety taught in the TN hunter safety courses which all persons born after 1964, ( I may be wrong about this date), before they can purchase a TN hunting license reads:

Gun safety (definition): A mechanical device the sometimes fails.

IN OTHER WORDS, NEVER, NEVER, NEVER, NEVER, TRUST A GUN SAFETY !!!!! A lot of people have been accidently killed by doing just that.

Kanati
05-08-2009, 19:52
And??????? I meant LEO's on duty. Most of the time , they dont really mess with the trail unless there is a reason.

Is LEO in your context an acronym? Meaning?

Desert Reprobate
05-08-2009, 20:01
This thread is Deja Vu all over again. Some are going to carry because they always carry. I usually carry off duty but as Sgt Rock has suggested in the past, I weighed my handgun and compared it to the amount of water or food I could carry in it's stead. The only reason I have ever carried is to protect others. I try to keep aware of what and who are around me and don't often get into a situation where a gun would make a difference. New hikers need to be aware that a gun is not needed on the trail. It is a large responsibility when you carry one and you have enough to worry about just getting to the other end of the trail.
I had a thought about an experienced hiker, carrying a handgun, waking up when the Rangers start their practicing. He shoots back and the next thing you know the shelter disappears in a loud blast.

Kanati
05-08-2009, 20:08
Not saying that I would carry, but if life and limb were in imminent danger by assault with intent to injure or kill, that warrants use of lethal force in my book. How that force is distributed would be the person who has been assaulted call, not some scumbag attacker. As has been posted before, better to be judged by 12 than carried by 6. Have a nice weekend.

You are absolutely correct. I AGREE TOTALLY. Where it becomes a problem is when our judicial system enters the equation. Here in TN, self defense is declared when the courts decide if your life was in imminent danger. And justice does not always prevail. Smart lawyers do!!!

I'm still with you, if I think my life or someone whose is with me, their life is in danger and I have the ability to prevent it, I will do so and let the courts decide. Amen

vamelungeon
05-08-2009, 20:29
Sorry to say this but you're mistaken. Guns that have a lot of wear discharge sometimes by themselves. Guns with broken/misssing parts sometimes discharge by themselves. I've witnesses both in over 50 years of hunting and gun handling. I have my wifes dads old 20 ga. double and the triggers are so worn, you can breathe on them and the gun will discharge.

One of the 10 rules for gun safety taught in the TN hunter safety courses which all persons born after 1964, ( I may be wrong about this date), before they can purchase a TN hunting license reads:

Gun safety (definition): A mechanical device the sometimes fails.

IN OTHER WORDS, NEVER, NEVER, NEVER, NEVER, TRUST A GUN SAFETY !!!!! A lot of people have been accidently killed by doing just that.
Sorry, but you're mistaken. A gun may have worn parts that will allow it to unintentionally fire WHEN HANDLED OR MOVED but no firearm EVER discharged without some external force applied to it. To do so would defy the laws of physics. A firearm, no matter how far out of spec, will not discharge on it's own. A gun lying on a table won't self-fire, there must some force applied.
I never mentioned safeties and don't need a basic firearms safety course.

Bad Co
05-08-2009, 20:56
I wish Eve hadn't eaten the apple,
I wish Cain hadn't killed Able,
I wish mankind could live peacefully with one another,
I wish I never have to defend my live or a live of a loved one
wish in one hand and xxxxxxx in the other and see which fills faster
For anyone to tell someone else that nothing is going to happen just seems wierd to me are they quoting statistics,do they have a crystal ball or is it hope and denial .
Life is unpredictable we all live and die by the decisions we make.

waywardfool
05-08-2009, 21:30
[quote=Homer&Marje;834506Tell me....how does the race of your next door neighbor play into the story?[/quote]

To differentiate between him and my drunk black neighbor. And my drunk white neighbor. I live in a nice neighborhood.

TJ aka Teej
05-08-2009, 21:40
If you suffer from fear that is so debilitating you need to carry a gun while hiking perhaps you should stay at home where it's 'safe'.

Chaco Taco
05-08-2009, 21:55
Is LEO in your context an acronym? Meaning?
Law
Enforcement
Officer

Chaco Taco
05-08-2009, 21:59
I'm a LEO.

If you needed an explanation of what o meant by LEO then why did you say you are an LEO? Just curious.

Chaco Taco
05-08-2009, 21:59
If you suffer from fear that is so debilitating you need to carry a gun while hiking perhaps you should stay at home where it's 'safe'.

Couldnt have said it better.

Lone Wolf
05-08-2009, 22:16
If you suffer from fear that is so debilitating you need to carry a gun while hiking perhaps you should stay at home where it's 'safe'.
same could be said for carrying water filters and bear spray. you're more likely to get killed by a human on the trail than a bear

OutdoorsMan
05-08-2009, 22:48
If you needed an explanation of what o meant by LEO then why did you say you are an LEO? Just curious.
Maybe he thought you meant his astrological sign?

Bad Co
05-08-2009, 22:58
If your referring to my post where in it could you read I am in favor of carrying
I only stated my wishes and facts
If one can jump to conclusions like that
I'm glad they don't carry
If you were not referring to my post I am sorry
I have been on the sidelines for many years now and just trying to get the mindset of the culture.
The world has changed greatly since my last backpacking trip
what I have read is there are many encounters and to be mindful of your sourrondings even read a post of how to answer questions if you feel uneasy
at the same time I'm reading there is nothing to worry about
Oh I 'll be out there not to concern yourself though
Priest's don't carry firearms the boss doesn't allow it

take-a-knee
05-09-2009, 00:01
If you suffer from fear that is so debilitating you need to carry a gun while hiking perhaps you should stay at home where it's 'safe'.

Apparently you've lived most of your life where it is very "safe". Made safe by gun toters I might add. You probably thing they are are pansies, or morons, or both, kinda like Kerry's comment, "Study hard or you'll get stuck in Iraq".

Jayboflavin04
05-09-2009, 00:21
same could be said for carrying water filters and bear spray. you're more likely to get killed by a human on the trail than a bear

Not bickering with ya LW....but I would take it a step farther and say! You are more likely to be killed in a vehicle on the way to the trailhead, than be killed by either a human or bear.

KMACK
05-09-2009, 01:08
I'm an LEO. I'm neither scared or paranoid yet I carry on the trail, when I go shopping, when I take my kids to school etc. My gun is safely concealed and I can get to it in seconds. My gun will not go off unless the trigger is firmly pulled.

By the way, how many reports of firearm use/missuse have been documented on the AT??

Dr O
05-09-2009, 02:05
If you suffer from fear that is so debilitating you need to carry a gun while hiking perhaps you should stay at home where it's 'safe'.

People protect their homes with guns too. :)

Homer&Marje
05-09-2009, 08:27
Sorry, but you're mistaken. A gun may have worn parts that will allow it to unintentionally fire WHEN HANDLED OR MOVED but no firearm EVER discharged without some external force applied to it. To do so would defy the laws of physics. A firearm, no matter how far out of spec, will not discharge on it's own. A gun lying on a table won't self-fire, there must some force applied.
I never mentioned safeties and don't need a basic firearms safety course.


Laws of physics also say that a force applied to your body, like bouncing, shaking or jarring from the physical activity of hiking up and down mountains...will be transferred and released through anything also attached to your body i.e. your backpack, hiking stick, or possibly gun holster on your body.

If you jar your body jumping off a small rock or something silly the pressure is distributed and released through your body and pack. Things in your pack shift during hours of hiking...not saying it will happen often. Saying it could happen. Make sure if you put it in your pack where it will be mostly useless anyway that you face it towards yourself...not back towards me:D

Chaco Taco
05-09-2009, 08:30
I'm an LEO. I'm neither scared or paranoid yet I carry on the trail, when I go shopping, when I take my kids to school etc. My gun is safely concealed and I can get to it in seconds. My gun will not go off unless the trigger is firmly pulled.

By the way, how many reports of firearm use/missuse have been documented on the AT??

Yea but dont most LEO's carry when off duty. You are a trained pro. I dont really have a problem with LEO's carrying on the trail, even though i think it is not necessary. Military either. Its the idiots carrying firearms I have a problem with. People that do it just so they can say, "yea Im strapped" Its stupid. The point Im making and the for the purpose of the thread, leave you gun at home, they have no point on the trail. That is my opinion and I am entitled to it.

Reports of firearm missuse are uncommon on the AT because people rarely carry firearms on the AT.

Chaco Taco
05-09-2009, 08:32
Laws of physics also say that a force applied to your body, like bouncing, shaking or jarring from the physical activity of hiking up and down mountains...will be transferred and released through anything also attached to your body i.e. your backpack, hiking stick, or possibly gun holster on your body.

If you jar your body jumping off a small rock or something silly the pressure is distributed and released through your body and pack. Things in your pack shift during hours of hiking...not saying it will happen often. Saying it could happen. Make sure if you put it in your pack where it will be mostly useless anyway that you face it towards yourself...not back towards me:D

Yea and people say "well it just doesnt happen that often if ever." Well one thing is for sure I sure as s**t dont want to be around when it does. So if you are packing a piece, stay the h*** away from me and my fiancee.

Pedaling Fool
05-09-2009, 08:39
Yea and people say "well it just doesnt happen that often if ever." Well one thing is for sure I sure as s**t dont want to be around when it does. So if you are packing a piece, stay the h*** away from me and my fiancee.
I hear ya, I don't want to be around when a super-volcano goes off, doesn't happen often, but when it does life sucks.

Homer&Marje
05-09-2009, 09:08
I hear ya, I don't want to be around when a super-volcano goes off, doesn't happen often, but when it does life sucks.

Exaggerating gets us nowhere. A super volcano goes off what every 500 million years? Let's say it's 100 million years.

Gun powder was invented in the year 850 AD and let's say the first useful gun was invented 1000 years ago.

How many super volcanos have gone off? How many guns have discharged accidentally. I'll stand on a super volcano any day as long as no one has a gun on the trail any where near me:D

Chaco Taco
05-09-2009, 09:10
Exaggerating gets us nowhere. A super volcano goes off what every 500 million years? Let's say it's 100 million years.

Gun powder was invented in the year 850 AD and let's say the first useful gun was invented 1000 years ago.

How many super volcanos have gone off? How many guns have discharged accidentally. I'll stand on a super volcano any day as long as no one has a gun on the trail any where near me:D

It was probably a methaphor

Homer&Marje
05-09-2009, 09:12
We need to turn this web site into a friggin conference call so that we can get our intended directions of sarcasm out in the open:rolleyes::D:eek::-?:):sun:mad::confused::p

I don't know which one to use.

Pedaling Fool
05-09-2009, 10:00
Exaggerating gets us nowhere. A super volcano goes off what every 500 million years? Let's say it's 100 million years.

Gun powder was invented in the year 850 AD and let's say the first useful gun was invented 1000 years ago.

How many super volcanos have gone off? How many guns have discharged accidentally. I'll stand on a super volcano any day as long as no one has a gun on the trail any where near me:D
No exaggeration, not making a connection. This subject is a dead horse, there's no more that could be said to further the discussion.

BTW, the Yellowstone SV averages an eruption every 600,000 years (give-or-take), the last eruption was ~640,000 years ago.

Hooch
05-09-2009, 10:21
http://i.pbase.com/o6/05/29105/1/71376235.BISOnVbQ.beatdeadhorse.gif

Hooch
05-09-2009, 10:21
http://i.pbase.com/o6/05/29105/1/71376235.BISOnVbQ.beatdeadhorse.gif

HikerRanky
05-09-2009, 11:49
http://i.pbase.com/o6/05/29105/1/71376235.BISOnVbQ.beatdeadhorse.gif

Very nice.....

le loupe
05-09-2009, 12:47
Yea but dont most LEO's carry when off duty. You are a trained pro. I dont really have a problem with LEO's carrying on the trail, even though i think it is not necessary. Military either. Its the idiots carrying firearms I have a problem with. People that do it just so they can say, "yea Im strapped" Its stupid. The point Im making and the for the purpose of the thread, leave you gun at home, they have no point on the trail. That is my opinion and I am entitled to it.

Reports of firearm missuse are uncommon on the AT because people rarely carry firearms on the AT.

Let's not over-emphasize the idea of "trained pro".

As has been stated before by many- LEO use their guns very rarely on an annual basis. They have to re-qualify as to the use of there weapon. For some these are the only rounds they fire for the year.

A citizen enthusiast on the other hand may fire thousands of rounds a year. Along with the incumbent maintenance and care they may be more proficient with there firearm than any LEO.

An LEO could have a little more experience in threat recognition, etc., but those in favor of CC are not trying to advance the idea the idea that this is why they carry. They want to carry for self-defense purposes, which anyone can identify.

Bad Co
05-09-2009, 14:18
Well said le loupe

Chaco Taco
05-09-2009, 18:47
Well I agree after reading what you said Le Loupe. You made a very valid point. I respect that, but I am still sticking by my point that guns have no place on the trail.

Lone Wolf
05-09-2009, 21:28
but I am still sticking by my point that guns have no place on the trail.

says you. just your opinion

Hooch
05-09-2009, 21:30
.......guns have no place on the trail.Sure they do. In my right hipbelt pocket. :D

Skidsteer
05-09-2009, 21:37
By the way, how many reports of firearm use/missuse have been documented on the AT??

Exactly.


Reports of firearm missuse are uncommon on the AT because people rarely carry firearms on the AT.

How could you possibly know how many people are carrying firearms on the trail?

Chaco Taco
05-09-2009, 21:39
says you. just your opinion

Yep that is my opinion and that is what this seems to be, an expression of opinions.:D

Chaco Taco
05-09-2009, 21:41
Exactly.



How could you possibly know how many people are carrying firearms on the trail?

I dont. My bad. After I typed that I thought about it a little more and I dont know. Guess I was just jaded and thought that no one really carried any firearms.
Guess that I am the one that is wrong

le loupe
05-09-2009, 22:20
Yep that is my opinion and that is what this seems to be, an expression of opinions.:D

Nothing wrong with opinions. You can have yours. I'd like to think there is "place on the trail" for both.

I think you'll find that every gun owner/carrier is respectful of any persons right to not own/carry. No one wants to force anyone who doesnt want to, to carry a gun.

The reverse is much less true. Those opposed to ownership/carry want to have rules in place so that no one can own/carry. They want to force their way of thinking on the other group.

Of course this will seem perjorative but perhaps rules like that makes them feel safer. In the end which group has more fear?

Bad Co
05-09-2009, 22:24
Best way of putting it I have ever heard

Chaco Taco
05-09-2009, 23:06
Nothing wrong with opinions. You can have yours. I'd like to think there is "place on the trail" for both.

I think you'll find that every gun owner/carrier is respectful of any persons right to not own/carry. No one wants to force anyone who doesnt want to, to carry a gun.

The reverse is much less true. Those opposed to ownership/carry want to have rules in place so that no one can own/carry. They want to force their way of thinking on the other group.

Of course this will seem perjorative but perhaps rules like that makes them feel safer. In the end which group has more fear?

I really enjoyed reading this. :D

Tinker
05-09-2009, 23:18
Nothing wrong with opinions. You can have yours. I'd like to think there is "place on the trail" for both.

I think you'll find that every gun owner/carrier is respectful of any persons right to not own/carry. No one wants to force anyone who doesnt want to, to carry a gun.

The reverse is much less true. Those opposed to ownership/carry want to have rules in place so that no one can own/carry. They want to force their way of thinking on the other group.

Of course this will seem perjorative but perhaps rules like that makes them feel safer. In the end which group has more fear?

"Many" or "Most" or even "Some" would be fitting to use in reference to the groups above. I have no desire to carry, nor I have any desire to prevent responsible people from carrying. It's foolish for anyone to think that rules actually make safer. After all, in the words of some, "Rules were meant to be broken". When guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns. Of course, determining one's ability to responsibly carry does not mean that the individual will remain responsible or stable even. To some gun regulation means restriction. The two words are not interchangeable.
Lastly, I don't think it's remotely possible to arm those who wish to remain unarmed. It may take place in the military, but that's another story.

take-a-knee
05-09-2009, 23:40
I really enjoyed reading this. :D

Yeah, you enjoyed it so much you were unable to offer a counterpoint, which is a nice way of saying you realized you were FOS.

Chaco Taco
05-09-2009, 23:42
Yeah, you enjoyed it so much you were unable to offer a counterpoint, which is a nice way of saying you realized you were FOS.
Wow that was wrong jerk

Chaco Taco
05-09-2009, 23:47
Yeah, you enjoyed it so much you were unable to offer a counterpoint, which is a nice way of saying you realized you were FOS.

What it is, me trying to respect others opinions instead of being an a**hole like you obviously have no problem being! Take a knee and kiss my a**

Homer&Marje
05-10-2009, 00:36
I didn't start this pissing contest. I just want to make that perfectly clear so it does not end up being my fault:D

Opinions are like ass holes folks. We all have em, they all stink.

Chaco Taco
05-10-2009, 00:42
But when someone is trying to have a rational conversation and listen to both sides objectively, and a jerk decides to come in and tell someone they are FOS is uncalled for.

Bronk
05-10-2009, 05:43
There is absolutely no coercion in the military to be a Christian.


For 8 weeks of basic training in the Army I was told if I didn't go to church I would have to scrape the grass out of the cracks in the sidewalk with a screwdriver. I scraped grass.

One Sunday the drills decided they needed a break from us and we needed a break from them, so they put us on a bus to a nearby town and left us in the care of a church for the whole day. It was a nice break, and they put on a great home cooked dinner for us, but the fact remains that as a private I was ordered onto the bus and forced to sit through a church service...I wasn't given a choice.

Everywhere else I went in the military I experienced no religious coercion, but I wouldn't go as far as to make a blanket statement that there is "absolutely no coercion." I'm sure there are plenty of officers and NCOs that use their position to coerce their subordinates to participate in christian activities, whether blatantly or subtlely. I remember a news article about an atheist soldier who was told he wouldn't be promoted because it was his commander's belief that being a christian was required in order to show leadership to those under his command.

But to stay on topic, I believe it is a moral right to be able to defend yourself, and have no problem with anyone who wants to carry a gun any time or any place. But as others have said, I wouldn't carry one on a thruhike of the AT because of the weight, accessibility issues, maintenance issues, potential legal issues, and the fact that I just generally don't think its necessary.

There was only one occasion when I really wished I was packing and that was my own dumb fault for camping directly next to a road...some kids came by in a pickup truck late at night and were throwing beer bottles at my tent trying to get me to "come out and join the party." Just as I was about to come out of the tent with knife in hand they got bored and pulled away.

Lesson learned: when you are on the trail you are generally with other hikers...most of them are alright, and very few are dangerous...its just too much effort for someone to walk that far to try and kill you. When you cross roads/towns, its just like anywhere else.

Pedaling Fool
05-10-2009, 08:16
For 8 weeks of basic training in the Army I was told if I didn't go to church I would have to scrape the grass out of the cracks in the sidewalk with a screwdriver. I scraped grass.

One Sunday the drills decided they needed a break from us and we needed a break from them, so they put us on a bus to a nearby town and left us in the care of a church for the whole day. It was a nice break, and they put on a great home cooked dinner for us, but the fact remains that as a private I was ordered onto the bus and forced to sit through a church service...I wasn't given a choice.

Everywhere else I went in the military I experienced no religious coercion, but I wouldn't go as far as to make a blanket statement that there is "absolutely no coercion." I'm sure there are plenty of officers and NCOs that use their position to coerce their subordinates to participate in christian activities, whether blatantly or subtlely. I remember a news article about an atheist soldier who was told he wouldn't be promoted because it was his commander's belief that being a christian was required in order to show leadership to those under his command...
I donít doubt it has happened, and in isolated incidents still happens, but Iíve never seen it. When I said, "There is absolutely no coercion in the military to be a Christian". I was speaking of the military as a whole, but like I said, Iím sure there are isolated cases.

Homer&Marje
05-10-2009, 09:23
But to stay on topic, I believe it is a moral right to be able to defend yourself, and have no problem with anyone who wants to carry a gun any time or any place.

There was only one occasion when I really wished I was packing and that was my own dumb fault for camping directly next to a road...some kids came by in a pickup truck late at night and were throwing beer bottles at my tent trying to get me to "come out and join the party." Just as I was about to come out of the tent with knife in hand they got bored and pulled away.


The first part of your on topic statement is ridiculously irresponsibly written. There are at least a million reasons why millions of people should never own, see, or have a gun in there possession.

Secondly, what would you have done to a bunch of punk kids in a pickup truck with a gun that you could not have accomplished with a knife or bare handed? You that scared of kids?

le loupe
05-10-2009, 12:29
[quote=Homer&Marje;835564]The first part of your on topic statement is ridiculously irresponsibly written. There are at least a million reasons why millions of people should never own, see, or have a gun in there possession.
quote]

Morally irresponsible to defend oneself? Regardless of whether it is with you hands, a knife or a gun, there is no immorality is that position.

Further no responsible gun owner advocate unfettered access to guns. It makes sense to keep guns from violent offenders and the mentally unstable.

Until you fall into one of those categories there are 2.5 million annual reasons why responsible, law abiding people should have access to guns. Every day, 550 rapes, 1,100 murders, and 5,200 other violent crimes per day are prevented just by showing a handgun. In less than 0.9% of the time is the gun ever actually ever fired

Homer&Marje
05-10-2009, 12:47
[quote=Homer&Marje;835564]The first part of your on topic statement is ridiculously irresponsibly written. There are at least a million reasons why millions of people should never own, see, or have a gun in there possession.
quote]

Morally irresponsible to defend oneself? Regardless of whether it is with you hands, a knife or a gun, there is no immorality is that position.

Further no responsible gun owner advocate unfettered access to guns. It makes sense to keep guns from violent offenders and the mentally unstable.

Until you fall into one of those categories there are 2.5 million annual reasons why responsible, law abiding people should have access to guns. Every day, 550 rapes, 1,100 murders, and 5,200 other violent crimes per day are prevented just by showing a handgun. In less than 0.9% of the time is the gun ever actually ever fired

And those statistics are valid how? How many of those same crimes could be prevented with simple self defense tactics and running away?

What I said was that saying that "I believe it is a moral right to be able to defend yourself, and have no problem with anyone who wants to carry a gun any time or any place." is a farce reality from what should be.

take-a-knee
05-10-2009, 12:48
The first part of your on topic statement is ridiculously irresponsibly written. There are at least a million reasons why millions of people should never own, see, or have a gun in there possession.

Secondly, what would you have done to a bunch of punk kids in a pickup truck with a gun that you could not have accomplished with a knife or bare handed? You that scared of kids?

Alternate reality/Marxichusetts huh? I'll bet you work for the government.

Homer&Marje
05-10-2009, 12:50
Alternate reality/Marxichusetts huh? I'll bet you work for the government.

Far far from it. Marxist? No. Realist. Yes. As for my reality. It's my choice.

le loupe
05-10-2009, 15:03
[quote=le loupe;835660]

And those statistics are valid how?

That is a statistic provided by the National Crime Victimization Survey, 2000, Bureau of Justice Statistics, BATF estimates on handgun supply.

I didn't just pull them out of the sand.

le loupe
05-10-2009, 15:13
[quote=le loupe;835660]

How many of those same crimes could be prevented with simple self defense tactics and running away?

I don't understand why that matters- especially given the effectiveness and relative safety in which guns are used this way.

Try this one on-


About 11% of police shootings kill an innocent person - about 2% of shootings by citizens kill an innocent person. The odds of a defensive gun user killing an innocent person are less than 1 in 26,000. (according to
Cramer C and Kopel D. "Shall Issue": The New Wave of Concealed Handgun Permit Laws. Golden CO: Independence Institute Issue Paper. October 17, 1994.


You and I have gone round this topic on other threads, but I don't think I've ever heard you say why you feel the way you do about guns.

Homer&Marje
05-10-2009, 17:41
[quote=Homer&Marje;835671]

I don't understand why that matters- especially given the effectiveness and relative safety in which guns are used this way.

Try this one on-


About 11% of police shootings kill an innocent person - about 2% of shootings by citizens kill an innocent person. The odds of a defensive gun user killing an innocent person are less than 1 in 26,000. (according to
Cramer C and Kopel D. "Shall Issue": The New Wave of Concealed Handgun Permit Laws. Golden CO: Independence Institute Issue Paper. October 17, 1994.


You and I have gone round this topic on other threads, but I don't think I've ever heard you say why you feel the way you do about guns.

Innocence is decided by the courts and isn't always what happened. One child dies every other day due to a misfired gun kept in the home. That statistic is a fact. But I'm sure your side of the argument won't agree that it's valid.

It's like banging your head against a wall with these type of arguments. End up with a headache and you got no where.

Alaskanhkr23
05-10-2009, 17:46
i think if u have a small caliber handgun,and its concealed safely,and you know how to use it properly,you have the right to have it, whats the problem ,just dnt be shooting it for no reason or pulling it out over a verbal argument

man2th
05-10-2009, 17:48
funny, in my 15 yrs as a paramedic the ONLY > 18 y/o shootings i have been around have been gang related and suicides.....NOT these " accidents" you speak of. when you want facts, talk to the people that are actually witness the events.

Homer&Marje
05-10-2009, 17:48
[quote=Homer&Marje;835564]The first part of your on topic statement is ridiculously irresponsibly written. There are at least a million reasons why millions of people should never own, see, or have a gun in there possession.
quote]

Morally irresponsible to defend oneself? Regardless of whether it is with you hands, a knife or a gun, there is no immorality is that position.

Further no responsible gun owner advocate unfettered access to guns. It makes sense to keep guns from violent offenders and the mentally unstable.

Until you fall into one of those categories there are 2.5 million annual reasons why responsible, law abiding people should have access to guns. Every day, 550 rapes, 1,100 murders, and 5,200 other violent crimes per day are prevented just by showing a handgun. In less than 0.9% of the time is the gun ever actually ever fired


[quote=Homer&Marje;835671]

I don't understand why that matters- especially given the effectiveness and relative safety in which guns are used this way.

Try this one on-


About 11% of police shootings kill an innocent person - about 2% of shootings by citizens kill an innocent person. The odds of a defensive gun user killing an innocent person are less than 1 in 26,000. (according to
Cramer C and Kopel D. "Shall Issue": The New Wave of Concealed Handgun Permit Laws. Golden CO: Independence Institute Issue Paper. October 17, 1994.


You and I have gone round this topic on other threads, but I don't think I've ever heard you say why you feel the way you do about guns.

So by these statistics...if I've done my math right. Which I won't guarantee but please check it.

2.5 million crimes in which a hand gun could prevent the situation.
Divided by the 1% of the time in which a gun is fired = 25,000 times a gun was fired in crime prevention (by citizens, by your count)
Divided by the 2% of shootings by a citizen that kill an innocent person is 500 innocent people shot each year due to citizen crime prevention.
25,000, the amount of times the gun was fired...divided by 500 innocent lives leads us to a 1 in 52 chance of being an innocent person shot in which a gun was involved by a citizen in crime prevention.

Alaskanhkr23
05-10-2009, 17:54
gang shooting only happen most of the time in gang area's go to alaska where shootings happen all the time,Ct has shootings alot also in inner city dwellings,you could fall and the pin can go off and shoot ur own foot ,i mean there's no telling what can happen with guns, i own, a S&W 460,1942 Lee enfield,a 30-06,and a twelve gauge,i've had a miss fire in both 30-06 and lee enfield and not due to cleaning problems just happens sometimes

Alaskanhkr23
05-10-2009, 17:56
thats my point or opinion this conversation can turn ugly at any point and im sure it has,and i wont be a part of it

le loupe
05-10-2009, 18:03
[quote=le loupe;835747]

Innocence is decided by the courts and isn't always what happened. One child dies every other day due to a misfired gun kept in the home. That statistic is a fact. But I'm sure your side of the argument won't agree that it's valid.

It's like banging your head against a wall with these type of arguments. End up with a headache and you got no where.

I'm not arguing.

I agree with your statistic and its always a terrible thing when a child's (or any innocent's) life is cut short.

But put it in perspective-

13 teenagers die everyday behind the wheel of there own auto
4 children die everyday as a result of abuse or neglect
13 women or children die everyday at the hand of a convicted felon in the supposed supervision of a government program

2% of all unintentional death in children are the result of guns according to the Natl Safety Council and the Centers for Disease Control.

Contrast 190 accidental child deaths with 1100 prevented murders and 550 rapes. Remove the emotion of it being a child and a life is a life, child or adult.

le loupe
05-10-2009, 18:09
[quote=le loupe;835660]

[quote=le loupe;835747]

So by these statistics...if I've done my math right. Which I won't guarantee but please check it.

2.5 million crimes in which a hand gun could prevent the situation.
Divided by the 1% of the time in which a gun is fired = 25,000 times a gun was fired in crime prevention (by citizens, by your count)
Divided by the 2% of shootings by a citizen that kill an innocent person is 500 innocent people shot each year due to citizen crime prevention.
25,000, the amount of times the gun was fired...divided by 500 innocent lives leads us to a 1 in 52 chance of being an innocent person shot in which a gun was involved by a citizen in crime prevention.

Leave the math and studies to others.

just because a gun in fired doesnt mean a person is killed. the study only found that in cases where a person was killed, 2% of the time that person was innocent.

the statistic said 1:26000 is the chance of an innocent person being killed.


Firearm misuse causes only a small number of accidental deaths in the U.S. Forexample, compared to accidental death from firearms, you are:

ē Twice as likely to suffocate on a swallowed object
ē Seven times more likely to be poisoned
ē 10 times more likely to die falling
ē And 31 times more likely to die in an automobile accident

KMACK
05-10-2009, 18:15
All these stats are great but they dont reflect on the original question. If there are no stats for guns/shooting on the AT then that answers it for me. NO guns are not needed on the AT........but if one is a law abiding/safe/legally licensed gun owner that wants to carry then go for it.

Homer&Marje
05-10-2009, 18:18
[quote=Homer&Marje;835818][quote=le loupe;835660]



Leave the math and studies to others.

just because a gun in fired doesnt mean a person is killed. the study only found that in cases where a person was killed, 2% of the time that person was innocent.

the statistic said 1:26000 is the chance of an innocent person being killed.


Firearm misuse causes only a small number of accidental deaths in the U.S. Forexample, compared to accidental death from firearms, you are:

ē Twice as likely to suffocate on a swallowed object
ē Seven times more likely to be poisoned
ē 10 times more likely to die falling
ē And 31 times more likely to die in an automobile accident


Was your numbers I used to do the math. You didn't prove me wrong in any sense. if 1 in 26000 is the chance of an innocent person being killed then 1 in 52 is the chance an innocent person has when that situation comes up.

I used your numbers. Please..... add it up differently for me because those numbers scare me more than anything on the trail.

Alaskanhkr23
05-10-2009, 18:20
thats what i said Kmack,seriously the only reason for a gun is safety righ? from what i've read is that the AT is one of the safest places in the US.yeah some assualts and murders have happened but not many.The only reason i would bring a gun on a trail is if its in grizzly country

man2th
05-10-2009, 18:58
hey alaskanhkr23, not sure about that model,(the 460) but modern s&w"as do most hand guns have a firing pin block safety that is engaged untill the hammer is completely back,,,in single or double action mode, to prevent drop discharges

le loupe
05-10-2009, 19:06
[quote=le loupe;835831][quote=Homer&Marje;835818]

Was your numbers I used to do the math. You didn't prove me wrong in any sense. if 1 in 26000 is the chance of an innocent person being killed then 1 in 52 is the chance an innocent person has when that situation comes up.

I used your numbers. Please..... add it up differently for me because those numbers scare me more than anything on the trail.

Your version of the stats breaks down when you assume that every time a weapon is fired a "shooting" is the result. The statistics don't speak to how many people are shot in the course of deterring violent crime. You can be sure its much lower than 2.5 mill x 1%. BTW 1:52 is still more or less 2%- you didnt give me anything new regardless of your advanced math.

As I stated previously- there is room on the trail for both view points. Go back to post #187

KMACK
05-10-2009, 19:10
man2th, I believe you are correct. Also most modern semi auto have internal firing pin disconnecters that only re-engage as the trigger is being pulled...ie they will NOT go off from bouncing around in a pack.

Homer&Marje
05-10-2009, 19:34
[quote=Homer&Marje;835838][quote=le loupe;835831]

Your version of the stats breaks down when you assume that every time a weapon is fired a "shooting" is the result. The statistics don't speak to how many people are shot in the course of deterring violent crime. You can be sure its much lower than 2.5 mill x 1%. BTW 1:52 is still more or less 2%- you didnt give me anything new regardless of your advanced math.

As I stated previously- there is room on the trail for both view points. Go back to post #187


Damn new math. Listening to a Cosby stand up skit or sumtin?:D

No **** it's nothing new. The argument is a two sided and for the most part pig headed view of a problem that probably won't be fixed anytime soon. Healthcare anyone? Oh wait. This is WB.

Skidsteer
05-10-2009, 19:44
[quote=le loupe;835865][quote=Homer&Marje;835838]


Damn new math. Listening to a Cosby stand up skit or sumtin?:D

No **** it's nothing new. The argument is a two sided and for the most part pig headed view of a problem that probably won't be fixed anytime soon. Healthcare anyone? Oh wait. This is WB.

It doesn't need fixed.

Folks aren't getting shot on the trail by people licensed to carry firearms.

You may not like that but tough. Mind your own damn business.

Homer&Marje
05-10-2009, 19:55
It doesn't need fixed.

Folks aren't getting shot on the trail by people licensed to carry firearms.

You may not like that but tough. Mind your own damn business.

Ok......minding

briarpatch
05-10-2009, 21:24
Way Back on Page 4 or 5,
. . . . .
3) No one here has advocated conceal carry in a National Park, though recently that has become legal to do so. . . . .



Its illegal again for now. A judge said that the park service didn't do a complete enviromental impact study on the rules change and held up implementation. The ruling is currently on appeal.

Details here:

http://www.nraila.org/legislation/read.aspx?id=4634

Bronk
05-11-2009, 02:11
The first part of your on topic statement is ridiculously irresponsibly written. There are at least a million reasons why millions of people should never own, see, or have a gun in there possession.

Secondly, what would you have done to a bunch of punk kids in a pickup truck with a gun that you could not have accomplished with a knife or bare handed? You that scared of kids?


I stand by my statement. It is a moral right to be able to defend yourself, and this right exists for every person at any time and anywhere.

Some people probably shouldn't have guns for a variety of reasons...but who gets to pick and choose? At any rate, anybody who does something stupid with a gun won't last very long.

On the second part, you're right...not much you can accomplish with a gun that you can't do with a knife or your hands...it just happens a lot faster and makes people think twice.

And for the record, I didn't get out of the tent until after they had gone, at which time I packed up and moved down the trail...I didn't know how many of them there were, how big they were, or what if any weapons they may have had. I only considered leaving the tent when the beer bottles started flying one after the other...if I had had to get out of the tent, I would have rather had a gun than a knife.

Homer&Marje
05-11-2009, 06:20
I stand by my statement. It is a moral right to be able to defend yourself, and this right exists for every person at any time and anywhere.


Your absolutely correct. Everyone has the moral right to be able to defend themselves from harm.

That does not mean everyone has the right to defend themselves with a gun. That is why we have the second amendment and many accompanying laws that clearly express that. That's why we have the Brady Bill and other preventative measures for non licensed and illegal carrying of a firearm.

If Charles Whitman had survived would you give him a gun today? Anyone who doesn't know who that is....Google it.

Which is illegal to do the entire length of the AT. Stated again.

Bronk
05-12-2009, 03:52
What part of "shall not be infringed" is so hard for people to understand? Look up those four words and see if you can figure out what they mean.

It stands to reason that if one has the moral right to self defense, which you have conceded, then they have the right to do so on an equal footing with the person attacking them, otherwise it is no right to self defense at all. Given that criminals will carry guns whether it is legal or not, I suggest for your consideration that any law restricting the rights to arm yourself with a gun are immoral and incompatible with the natural rights we all possess. It is these natural rights that were the basis for the founding of this country. Its too bad this isn't taught in public schools anymore.

I say again, anybody who does something stupid with a gun won't last very long.

Bronk
05-12-2009, 03:56
Oh, and if Charles Whitman had survived to stand trial, he would likely have already been executed for his crimes. In Texas the death penalty means what it says.

TJ aka Teej
05-12-2009, 06:01
What part of "shall not be infringed" is so hard for people to understand?

What part of "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State," is so hard for people to quote?

My guns are for shooting a few geese, some skeet, and many tin cans. I don't fear the scary scary deep dark woods, so I don't hike with them. Your mileage may vary.

Homer&Marje
05-12-2009, 06:06
What part of "shall not be infringed" is so hard for people to understand? Look up those four words and see if you can figure out what they mean.

It stands to reason that if one has the moral right to self defense, which you have conceded, then they have the right to do so on an equal footing with the person attacking them, otherwise it is no right to self defense at all. Given that criminals will carry guns whether it is legal or not, I suggest for your consideration that any law restricting the rights to arm yourself with a gun are immoral and incompatible with the natural rights we all possess. It is these natural rights that were the basis for the founding of this country. Its too bad this isn't taught in public schools anymore.

I say again, anybody who does something stupid with a gun won't last very long.

They taught it in my school. But what they ALSO taught was the fact that it is hard for us to interpret what our forefathers wrote down as guidelines to follow over 200 years ago.

You have the natural right to defend yourself. If your at your house, in your home state, have a ccw permit then you have the right to defend yourself with a concealed weapon. I don't know the validity of this statement but I'd be willing to guestimate that most assaults and violent attacks in the US don't involve a gun on the part of the attacker. You are most likely on equal grounds already besides the element of surprise and fore knowledge.

This thread is about guns on the trail. IF....IF the law that Bush instilled before he left office to allow the carry and concealment in the NPS is not overturned by the current administration then you are even allowed to carry your gun on the trails in your local state.

It is ILLEGAL to carry a gun the entire length of the AT and it is even difficult to go between one state and the other...LEGALLY.

So therefore by your quote anyone who is carrying a gun the entire length of the AT or even a large section for that matter is a criminal and should be legally persecuted to the fullest extent.

zoidfu
05-12-2009, 06:08
What part of "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State," is so hard for people to quote?

My guns are for shooting a few geese, some skeet, and many tin cans. I don't fear the scary scary deep dark woods, so I don't hike with them. Your mileage may vary.

Yet you're afraid of law abiding individuals! How droll!

Lone Wolf
05-12-2009, 06:10
So therefore by your quote anyone who is carrying a gun the entire length of the AT or even a large section for that matter is a criminal and should be legally persecuted to the fullest extent.

obviously you know nothing about gun laws and persecution :rolleyes: (or spelling)

Homer&Marje
05-12-2009, 06:32
obviously you know nothing about gun laws and persecution :rolleyes: (or spelling)

I'll persecute them. The law can Prosecute them:D And I know enough about guns to realize we don't need them for protection from a bunch of grumpy old men on the AT

Troll much:rolleyes:

Homer&Marje
05-12-2009, 06:35
Ben Franklin: "Do you think this line about everyone have the right to bear arms should be worded differently?"

Thomas Jefferson: "No, how could that be misconstrued. Everyone has the right to own a pair of Bear Arms. It's in plain English":D:D

Bronk
05-12-2009, 06:40
What part of "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State," is so hard for people to quote?

My guns are for shooting a few geese, some skeet, and many tin cans. I don't fear the scary scary deep dark woods, so I don't hike with them. Your mileage may vary.


The founders understood the word "regulate" to mean "to make equal," which is in keeping with what I said about being able to defend yourself with the same means as your attacker. They understood the word "militia" to mean all able bodied men. So the part you quote means that the security of a free state depends upon all able bodied men having the equal right to keep and bear arms.

And as I said earlier, I personally don't think carrying on the trail is necessary.

Lone Wolf
05-12-2009, 06:41
I'll persecute them. The law can Prosecute them:D And I know enough about guns to realize we don't need them for protection from a bunch of grumpy old men on the AT

Troll much:rolleyes:

you don't hike on the AT much

Homer&Marje
05-12-2009, 06:49
you don't hike on the AT much

Obviously not as much as someone that lives right next to it. You see I'm at least 2 hours from the AT. But what I've found LW that there is plenty of OTHER trails in between me and the AT. I've hiked a lot of miles...and proud to say most of them....arent on the AT.

Homer&Marje
05-12-2009, 06:52
The founders understood the word "regulate" to mean "to make equal," which is in keeping with what I said about being able to defend yourself with the same means as your attacker. They understood the word "militia" to mean all able bodied men. So the part you quote means that the security of a free state depends upon all able bodied men having the equal right to keep and bear arms.

And as I said earlier, I personally don't think carrying on the trail is necessary.

Classic gun advocate taking words and switching them to completely different words for their own side view of the argument.

The reason we need all able bodied men to bear arms and form a militia is because we were in a country with no established military force, organization or presence. Therefore we needed all able bodied men to bear their own arms in case that we were attacked from outside forces.

I think our military has enough big guns to protect us now.

Bronk
05-12-2009, 07:03
Classic gun advocate taking words and switching them to completely different words for their own side view of the argument.

The reason we need all able bodied men to bear arms and form a militia is because we were in a country with no established military force, organization or presence. Therefore we needed all able bodied men to bear their own arms in case that we were attacked from outside forces.

I think our military has enough big guns to protect us now.


Actually, that's part of the problem...people re-interpreting and changing the original meaning of words in the constitution...I was just trying to explain to you the meaning and intention the founders had when they wrote that. This is why I try to focus on natural rights, which is what the constitution is based upon.

The constitution also said we shouldn't have a standing army, but I digress...

Bronk
05-12-2009, 07:08
And while defense of the country is one of the reasons for 2nd amendment rights, another reason is that the colonists had just finished a revolutionary war to break away from a tyrannical government, and they wanted their posterity to have the arms to do the same.

Homer&Marje
05-12-2009, 07:10
Actually, that's part of the problem...people re-interpreting and changing the original meaning of words in the constitution...I was just trying to explain to you the meaning and intention the founders had when they wrote that. This is why I try to focus on natural rights, which is what the constitution is based upon.

The constitution also said we shouldn't have a standing army, but I digress...

Well then now we have to argue if a gun is really a Natural form of defense. People and animals have defended themselves successfully for hundreds of thousands of years with only 1000 of those involving guns. You have the natural right to defend yourself with equal or greater force than your attacker. That doesn't mean you need a gun to do that. 300 lbs of pressure of which a 100 lb woman can deliver by dropping to 1 knee and punching will break a human pelvic bone if anyone wants a good technique.

Notably if your attacker who could have a ccw permit and is traveling through your local NPS is armed...you should disarm them before attempting that one:D

Pedaling Fool
05-12-2009, 07:14
You outlaw drugs and you get a drug war, you outlaw alcohol and you create a mafia, yet people think if we outlaw guns criminals will be unarmed:rolleyes:

take-a-knee
05-12-2009, 07:18
Classic gun advocate taking words and switching them to completely different words for their own side view of the argument.

The reason we need all able bodied men to bear arms and form a militia is because we were in a country with no established military force, organization or presence. Therefore we needed all able bodied men to bear their own arms in case that we were attacked from outside forces.

I think our military has enough big guns to protect us now.

You are completely FOS Homer. The Founders said exactly what they meant in the Federalist Papers and in their voluminous correspondence with one another. The idea that the US Constitution should "evolve" is straight out of Marx and Lenin's little bag of tricks.

Homer&Marje
05-12-2009, 07:19
You outlaw drugs and you get a drug war, you outlaw alcohol and you create a mafia, yet people think if we outlaw guns criminals will be unarmed:rolleyes:


I never said criminals wouldn't be armed. It would just make more people that are armed...criminals.

Get it. No good solution folks we ALL know that. The tree huggers hate the loggers, the no gunners hate the gun owners, the PETA folks hate fur and love red paint, whales blah blah blah blah AHHHHRRHRGGHGHG!

Say it with me now


:datz:datz:datz:datz:datz:datz:datz:datz:datz:datz

Homer&Marje
05-12-2009, 07:21
You are completely FOS Homer. The Founders said exactly what they meant in the Federalist Papers and in their voluminous correspondence with one another. The idea that the US Constitution should "evolve" is straight out of Marx and Lenin's little bag of tricks.

So now I'm a communist? Your a little paranoid man. I'm just a guy from Mass with an opinion. Stinks just like yours. At least I can concede that theres two sides to the argument.

Pedaling Fool
05-12-2009, 07:30
I never said criminals wouldn't be armed. It would just make more people that are armed...criminals...

:datz:datz:datz:datz:datz:datz:datz:datz:datz:datz
You are saying to dearm the lawful gun owners. You're opinion really does stink.

HikerRanky
05-12-2009, 07:38
Since this thread has digressed from it's original subject of guns on the trail into politics and such, this thread is hereby closed.