How many of you carry a gun as part of your cycling equipment?

[tonyzackery]

Originally Posted by BeginnerCycling .



Perhaps you should have let me reply before starting a (premature & unwarranted) victory dance . . . just sayin' /img/vbsmilies/smilies/smile.gif

Edit: By the way, I never understand the vitriol some people express toward law-abiding citizens that choose to exercise their 2nd Amendment rights? Does it threaten your illusion that the world is a place where nothing bad happens without reason? As I said before, I have yet to carry while cycling -- but I wouldn't hesitate to if I lived in an area or had circumstances (known dangerous enemies, etc.) that warranted a precaution. I would not begrudge other law-abiding citizens the right to make that judgment for their own safety either.

Strawman.
Do you think the polemics flow both ways? Just asking...

Your "reply" still fails to address the issue at hand: carrying a firearm while riding a bicycle.
All your stats prove is that there are still even more stats out there that will disprove yours...so now what?

Perhaps you can answer the question as to how a properly stored and concealed firearm is going to assist a cyclist when attacked by a criminal. And please don't tell me the cyclist rides without his/her hands on the bars.

 

[samspade73]

Originally Posted by BeginnerCycling .

There was a study by Dr. Gary Kleck (Professor in the School of Criminology and Criminal Justice at Florida State University) that estimated 2.5 million defensive uses per year (which is approximately once every 15 seconds). The Department of Justice also did a study, using a smaller statistical sample, that estimated 1.5 million defensive uses per year. (see http://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles/165476.pdf - especially chart on bottom of page 8). Even if you prefer the lower number, that's still more than 30 times the reported number of bicycle accidents.

[SIZE= medium]First off, thanks for sharing your sources. I always respect people more who are willing to their cite their sources.[/SIZE]

[SIZE= medium]The DOJ study you cited is a review article, which, in research terms reviews other people’s original research, summarizing and drawing their own critical conclusions. When you cited that the DOJ did a study that estimates 1.5 million, the DOJ really didn’t do that research, they were citing the low estimate of the Kleck article you cited. So, all your data you used to reach this assumption is based on one researcher. Just something to think about. The Kleck data was gathered by calling 5,000 homes and conducting a survey via telephone and multiplying the findings by our national population. I’m curious what method of sampling they used (random? Stratified? Cross sectional?) and were they “self-aware,” i.e. upfront about statistical bias (all studies have them). In the same DOJ article you cited, they raised the point that “it is of considerable interest and important to check the reasonableness of estimates before embracing them.” The Kleck estimate is on the extreme end of the spectrum (1.5 million) vs. National Crime Victimization Survey, which pulls on police records, court fillings, etc. and put the figure at 108,000 a year. The DOJ article does a really good job at looking at false positives (on page 10) and lists reasons why someone would give false responses to a DGU ( Defensive Gun Use) question: they want to impress the interviewer with their heroism, they may be confused due to substance abuse, mental illness, or simply less than accurate memories, they might have falsely reported using the gun in the past year, but really it occurred years earlier…one such phone study had a woman claim that she was involved in a lawful DGU 52 times in the previous year and she was not a member of law enforcement. Maybe she has bad luck? Maybe she has a cell phone with a US number, but lives in the worst slum in the world, or maybe she’s just plain crazy. Reread the review article and take a closer look at the studies that pulled on reports, not cold calling someone in the phone book. So, do I prefer to take Kleck's low estimate? No, I don't. I think it's subpar research done by someone with just enough knowledge of how to conduct a study to be dangerious. [/SIZE]

[SIZE= medium]The DOJ article does cite some interesting statistics though that answer the question you’re puzzled about regarding “the vitriol some people express toward law-abiding citizens that choose to exercise their 2nd amendment rights.” In my first posting I said I don’t have a problem exercising their 2nd amendment rights, I do however; question the judgment of some of these individuals (i.e. their gun carrying and ussuage practices…for example, carrying a gun while cycling, ahem). The DOJ articles states “some correlates of gun carrying are worth noting. Males who carried guns in 1994 were about 2 ½ times as likely to have been arrested for a non-traffic offense as other men (15 percent versus 6) and disproportionate share of gun carriers resided in the South.” So was is it about someone who feels the need to carry a gun that makes them 2.5 times more likely to be arrested for a non-traffic violations? At the core, I think they are more fearful people (there’s a cyclist on this message board who wants to carry a handgun while riding because “I’ve seen some suspicious people while out riding at night.” I wish he would describe how suspicious people look who make him want to carry his gun so I can NOT look like this.) My point is, in carrying guns, being on edge, viewing the world as more dangerous than it is, are they are part of the solution (carrying guns as deterrent, feeling safer?) or are they part of the problem? (Disproportionate fear, paranoid, assuming everyone at the bus stop would rob me if given a chance, etc). Do I think the world we live in is devoid of threats? No, absolutely not. Do I think everyday I go to work might be the last one because I’ll be a victim of violent crime? No, although it’s possible. People win the lottery everyday and someone, somewhere in America, at some point was probably robbed at gun point while geared up in spandex, a sweet $5,000 road bike. I know if I watched the local news everyday I would totally believe that on any given run or ride there was a good chance I would be abducted, raped and cannibalized (and this is in the suburbs no less! Image what would happen in the hood!). [/SIZE]

[SIZE= medium]I work in a hospital and several times a week we have people, not involved in law enforcement, get caught carrying handguns to their appointments, to visit a friend, even to delivery a baby. It falls out of their purse, they take it off and hang it on the coat rack during an exam, or they just waltz right in with it on their hip. Sometimes they have a permit and sometimes they don’t, but when you explain, politely, to them that we have a no-weapons policy even if you do have a permit, they ask “what if I’m attacked? Who will defend me?” In the two cases where women were delivering babies they asked what if someone tried to steal their babies. We have a lot of security and at least one police officer in the hospital at all times, not to mention, a LOT of locked doors, barriers, cameras, etc. but this generally doesn’t persuade them. They argue, like you do beginner cyclist, “that anything is possible,” and true, anything can happen, but in reality how likely is it? [/SIZE]

[SIZE= medium]You mentioned you worked in law enforcement, so perhaps your experience has shaped your view of the world? I work in healthcare where people (99% of the time men in their 40s through 60s) come in on a fairly regular basis with objects stuck in their rectums (light bulbs, pliers, tooth brush cases, flash lights,) but I don’t assume that all males in their 40s-60s are doing this on a regular basis. At least I hope not. [/SIZE]

 

[KD5NRH]

Originally Posted by samspade73 .
Also side note: I work in a hospital and we have a weapon free policy unless you're law enforcement and on an almost daily basis someone brings a gun in for their appointment, surgery or even to deliver a baby. When we politely tell them we can secure it in our safe or they can lock it in their trunk they say the same thing "what if...." well, we have armed security for those "what ifs..." but they still want to bring in the guns.

Compare the requirements for armed security to those for concealed carry. Short version; send Barney back to Mayberry and let the people who actually have a stake in their own safety carry.

 

[tonyzackery]

Originally Posted by KD5NRH .




Compare the requirements for armed security to those for concealed carry. Short version; send Barney back to Mayberry and let the people who actually have a stake in their own safety carry.

paranoia will destroya...

 

[FamousTans]

I do...always have. My husband has since he was a marine.

spray tan fort worth and dallas

 

[jpr95]

Originally Posted by tonyzackery .




paranoia will destroya...

Just because someone is carrying does NOT mean they are paranoid (even while they're cycling)...

Jason

 

[jpr95]

There wasn't a strong push among states to allow concealed carry until after 1990--it was very difficult to get a carry permit in most states before then, so your statistics are old and irrelevant. I guarantee that those (otherwise law-abiding citizens) who were carrying illegally weren't reporting defensive use of a firearm that didn't result in a shooting or injury!

Jason

Originally Posted by samspade73 .



Where are you getting your statistics from that "Once every 15 seconds an American lawfully uses a firearm in self defense..."?

According to the peer reviewed American Journal of Public Health the "Between 1987 and 1990 there were an estimated 258,460 incidents of firearm defense, an annual mean of 64,615." ...

 

[tonyzackery]

Originally Posted by jpr95 .



Just because someone is carrying does NOT mean they are paranoid (even while they're cycling)...

Jason

You're opinion - you're entitled...

People that are so afraid of the boogeyman apparition beyond their front door; insecurity, bordering on paranoia, that even during an activity as enjoyable as cycling that one feels the need to be prepared for impending doom...sad. But hey, 'it is what it is'...

 

[samspade73]

Originally Posted by KD5NRH .




Compare the requirements for armed security to those for concealed carry. Short version; send Barney back to Mayberry and let the people who actually have a stake in their own safety carry.

1) If you don't feel safe in a hospital full of people, with cameras everywhere (and many hidden), several security guards, both in uniform and in street clothes, and at least one on duty, in uniform cop on the property at any given moment, would you feel safe carrying a handgun with a mere two clips? What a major fire fight broke with a dozen terrorists in the maternity wing? What if the zombie plague happened? Seriously, you really think there's a reasonable chance you'll be robbed and attacked in a hospital? wow....

Also, I'm not talking about mall rental cops. I can't speak for all hospitals but our security are very professional and well trained (they spend several weeks a year doing maintenance training and continuing education and they defuse situations on a regular basis using the best practices first). Also, all but one were ex active duty military. Now, what type of regular training do most people who carry concealed weapons generally have in dealing with people who are mentally ill, extremely agitated and hostile?

2) Someone has yet to respond to the question of what realistic scenario is someone going to use a concealed handgun while riding? This isn't a request for all the amateur screen writers out there who watch a lot of CSI to throw out a wild scenario.

 

[bikonator]

I agree. I get upset when people call me paranoid. I just don't want to go down like a helpless bunny. The gun may not save me, but at least I will put up fight. I am glad that an ex-cop agrees.

 

[dhk2]

The question I have is why would anyone who feels they need to carry a weapon for protection ever ride a bike on public roads? Trusting drivers to see us and pass us safety is a much greater "leap of faith" than trusting them not to assault us with a weapon.

I know cyclists who've been hit, disabled and killed by vehicles, but none who've ever been confronted with a firearm. And this is in a gun-loving state. The fact is that anyone who wants to do us harm has only to hit us with their vehicle. If they do that in this part of the US, there is a very good chance they won't even get a ticket. Whether the homicide was "accidental" or intentional, just saying "didn't see the cyclist" entitles the driver to walk away. No need to risk the use of a firearm when it's so easy just to run us down.

 

[tonyzackery]

Originally Posted by dhk2 .

The question I have is why would anyone who feels they need to carry a weapon for protection ever ride a bike on public roads? Trusting drivers to see us and pass us safety is a much greater "leap of faith" than trusting them not to assault us with a weapon.

I know cyclists who've been hit, disabled and killed by vehicles, but none who've ever been confronted with a firearm. And this is in a gun-loving state. The fact is that anyone who wants to do us harm has only to hit us with their vehicle. If they do that in this part of the US, there is a very good chance they won't even get a ticket. Whether the homicide was "accidental" or intentional, just saying "didn't see the cyclist" entitles the driver to walk away. No need to risk the use of a firearm when it's so easy just to run us down.

Nice post.

 

[Reid2]

I will not carry a gun ever again. There are too many times I might have used it, to tragic effect.

As it is, no-one is dead by my hand. I would like to keep my record.

 

[Not Sure]

3 of my 5 personalities carry a gun while riding.

Guess, who I am, nOw.

 

[bikonator]

I knew I cyclist who got killed with a firearm, for no reason. Only because the driver got frustrated for heaving to slow down. You go figure.
Had he had a gun hanging of the back of his saddle (well displayed), no one would even think about using his.

 

[Reid2]

Originally Posted by bikonator .

I knew I cyclist who got killed with a firearm, for no reason. Only because the driver got frustrated for heaving to slow down. You go figure.
Had he had a gun hanging of the back of his saddle (well displayed), no one would even think about using his.

Good point, I guess. Now, understand: I was trained in firearm use as a five year old.

I ride my bike, without fear, unarmed, through the local Black neighborhood, all its streets.

No-one ever robs or beats or shoots at me. If I had a gun, I could not ride those streets; I'd be killed for sure.

See why? As it is, I am not a threat, and am just "Robert", harmless eccentric.

Likewise, motorists seem to avoid hitting me. I wear no helmet, on purpose. I wear a stupid-loud lime-yellow safety shirt
(The Home Depot sells them, for instance).

The cars swing 'way wide to give me plenty of berth as they pass me on the road.

I have never been bumped, nor shot-at. But only yelled at, maybe twice or three times, in over fifty years.

I won't carry a gun because, if that were known, I'd become a target for resentful drivers.

You can always knock a man down from behind, unawares, if you drive a car. No gun would help him then.

 

[steve]

Originally Posted by Not Sure .


3 of my 5 personalities carry a gun while riding.

Guess, who I am, nOw.

Ha this is a great reason to avoid conflict on the road. /img/vbsmilies/smilies/duck.gif

 

[tonyzackery]

Originally Posted by Reid2 .





Good point, I guess. Now, understand: I was trained in firearm use as a five year old.

I ride my bike, without fear, unarmed, through the local Black neighborhood, all its streets.

No-one ever robs or beats or shoots at me. If I had a gun, I could not ride those streets; I'd be killed for sure.

See why? As it is, I am not a threat, and am just "Robert", harmless eccentric.

Likewise, motorists seem to avoid hitting me. I wear no helmet, on purpose. I wear a stupid-loud lime-yellow safety shirt
(The Home Depot sells them, for instance).

I understand the point you're making, so I won't take offense./img/vbsmilies/smilies/wink.gif
Understand too the fact that a$$holes come in all shapes, sizes, and colors.

Try being one of a handful of black guys regularly riding a bike in and around the Pac. NW (British Columbia and Washington state). Let's just say that "Black neighborhoods" are very few and very far between. If I was an emotional individual with a gun(/img/vbsmilies/smilies/eek.gif), there'd be scores of dead white motorists after they'd thrown their coins (yes, metal coins), hot coffee (several occasions), actually bumped me at a stoplight, hurled slurs my way, and given me the one finger salute - with and without my white riding partners. Thankfully for myself and them, my first reaction to a threatening situation is not one based on emotion.

I've never been robbed or accosted in any way by an individual on foot, however. It always seems to be those in vehicles that have the most courage.

Regarding riding without the helmet - I wish you luck. It'll only take one accident for you to quickly change your mind. Hopefully, the lesson learned will not be fatal...

 

[samspade73]

Originally Posted by bikonator .

I knew I cyclist who got killed with a firearm, for no reason. Only because the driver got frustrated for heaving to slow down. You go figure.
Had he had a gun hanging of the back of his saddle (well displayed), no one would even think about using his.

You personally knew a cyclist who was riding his or her bike and he was gunned down for no reason? Um....I'm going to call BS on that one until you provide a link to a newspaper article. Anything is possible, so it might be 100% true, but I'm always a bit wary of "I once knew someone who...." stories. I'm just sayin'.....someone in the history of the world has probably been riding a unicycle and robbed by someone, also on a unicycle, but.....

@Reid The "black neighborhood" comment is weird. Crime is higher in areas with low socio-economic status (high unemployment, under performing economy, low education, lack of services, etc.) regardless of race. I live in Portland, OR but work at a hospital in a rough mill town about an hour away that is 95% white (other 5% Asian and Hispanic) and has crime stats above the national average in every category (boom or bust, non-diverse economy, low education level, drug and alcohol problems, higher than average child and spouse abuse rates, which just keep screwing up the next generation of kids. This cycle has been unbroken for over 100 years and shows no signs of improving because the economy and culture here are unchanged and people here are slow to think outside the box....)

I think sports and athletics have always been a powerful way people from other cultures, countries, races, generations, realize we all have more in common than we realize.

Pro cyclist Rahsaan Bahati does a lot of amazing work to give low income kids all around the country (white, black, brown, doesn't matter) who might otherwise go down a different path, a positive outlet I think we can all agree is a good one: cycling. If you're not familiar with his story or charity, check it out. It's obvious this guy wants to be part of a solution.

http://www.bahatifoundation.org/index2.htm

http://www.bikeworldnews.com/2010/05/12/pro-cyclist-rahsaan-bahati-inspires-school-kids-glencoe-chicago/

 

[mattsonabike]

I thought about carrying mine. I live in south Anchorage Alaska and the other day I got ran up by a moose with calfs pulling into my drive way. Its legal to carry concealed or open without a license up here as long as you are 21 with no convictions. And most of our paths are in the woods, which doesnt mean too much when we have moose and bear get into parking garages of our local malls...