How many want to see an end to gun and cycling threads?

[Peter@vecchios]

Geeez, it's not like anybody's mind is going to be changed with arguments on a cycling forum. Let's stick to bicycles, shall we?

sign me 'tired of gun threads'.

[frenchyge]

I'd say the same about doping discussions, personally, but as long as the stuff that I do want to talk about isn't being dragged off topic then I don't mind people talking about other stuff without me.

[alienator]

Originally Posted by Peter@vecchios

Geeez, it's not like anybody's mind is going to be changed with arguments on a cycling forum. Let's stick to bicycles, shall we?

sign me 'tired of gun threads'.

I'll second that.

[Dr_hush1417]

Originally Posted by frenchyge

I'd say the same about doping discussions, personally, but as long as the stuff that I do want to talk about isn't being dragged off topic then I don't mind people talking about other stuff without me.

I'm with you, doesn't bother me unless there were multiple threads for it... pushing others off. Though I can see how it's a bit senseless.

[Bob Ross]

Personally I'd like to see a "Clif Notes" summary. There's no way in hell I'm going to start reading a thread that's already 20-some-odd pages deep, but I'm still somewhat curious about why it's such a hot topic

Note: I understand why once the topic gets started there are so many diehard supporters of both sides of the coin; what I don't understand is why the concept even gets started in the first place. "Bicycles + Guns" makes about as much sense to me as "Astroglide + Cactus", or "Harpsichord + Wildebeest". It's a non-sequitor.

[alienator]

Originally Posted by Bob Ross

...what I don't understand is why the concept even gets started in the first place. "Bicycles + Guns" makes about as much sense to me as "Astroglide + Cactus", or "Harpsichord + Wildebeest". It's a non-sequitor.

You'd have to ask the OP that question. Personally, I think the intent was just to stir the kettle.
The OP has almost no posts outside of that topic. I think that speaks for itself.

[64Paramount]

It doesn't interest me, so I don't read it.

[Peter@vecchios]

Originally Posted by 64Paramount

It doesn't interest me, so I don't read it.

I don't either but it won't DIE. It's always at the top of the list of threads cuz somebody HAS to put their 2 cents in.

Let it die I say. It has no answer. In the USN, we called it WHOGAS.....

[cyberlegend1994]

Originally Posted by Peter@vecchios

...sign me 'tired of gun threads'.

Originally Posted by alienator

I'll second that.

I'll third that...

[tonyzackery]

Hmmmm...my initial response to reading this thread title is that it should have been placed in the biyatching section, aka 'Your Bloody Soapbox'.

Acknowledging that I'm a co-offender here, the owner of site should be able to understand that the two major 'gun and cycling' threads have garnered over 285k views/hits...lots of traffic, aka people interested in the dialogue...

Nevertheless, I agree totally that the discussion should remain on the topic of carrying a gun as part of a person's cycling equipment. The 2nd Amendment stuff could be more effectively argued elsewhere on the web...

[jhuskey]

I am in the opinion that closing a particular thread will not change the general climate. Emotions can run high in some debates and are always present and ready to be revealed. As long as the debate remains civil and non-offensive I personally see no big deal in them, regardless of the subject. It is not a complicated thing to ignore what you don't wish to read
Of course I guess it is like the proverbial train wreck at times, painfull to look at but hard to look away.

[frenchyge]

Originally Posted by jhuskey

I am in the opinion that closing a particular thread will not change the general climate. Emotions can run high in some debates and are always present and ready to be revealed.

Right. That is why I support having dedicated playpens for certain topics in order to keep them from spilling over into every other discussion.... makes them easier for people to ignore if they aren't interested.

Admittedly, including guns under Cycling Equipment is a far stretch. Probably better suited for the Bike Cafe, and I would certainly support any effort to get them moved further away from the pure cycling discussions rather than closing them altogether.

[64Paramount]

Originally Posted by tonyzackery

Hmmmm...my initial response to reading this thread title is that it should have been placed in the biyatching section, aka 'Your Bloody Soapbox'.

That sounds like a good idea to me.

That will get it out of the Cycling Equipment forum, but still allow the folks that want to continue beating the dead horse a place to do so.

[Tackdriver56]

Originally Posted by frenchyge

Right. That is why I support having dedicated playpens for certain topics in order to keep them from spilling over into every other discussion.... makes them easier for people to ignore if they aren't interested.

Admittedly, including guns under Cycling Equipment is a far stretch. Probably better suited for the Bike Cafe, and I would certainly support any effort to get them moved further away from the pure cycling discussions rather than closing them altogether.

Since it's legal with a permit, where I live, to carry a gun for self protection, and since riding my bike is the ONLY time I seem to get assaulted, the two ARE linked.

A gun is a tool. Choosing the right tool, and the right way to carry it, is an absolutely appropriate discussion for Cycling Equipment.

When I was still trying to figure out a safe and effective way to carry while cycling, I had a hard time finding useful advice. It would be nice to have an easy-to-find, concise page, or sticky article, on this *equipment* topic.

It only gets political when someone inappropriately questions the legality, or the sanity of the cyclist who chooses to exercise a constitutional right. Or tries to shut down or hide a thread that I find useful (infringing Free Speech).

[jhuskey]

Since this is an international site constitutional rights vary and I must point out that freedom of speech rights do not hold true on a private forum such as this one.
Not trying to start a debate just stating facts.