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

Discussion in 'Cycling Equipment' started by Joe West, Oct 2, 2004.

  1. cbjesseeNH

    cbjesseeNH New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2005
    Messages:
    424
    Likes Received:
    3
    Personal experience is all very interesting and makes for good conversation, but is hardly relevant. Look at any statistics published by a local, state or national authority on violent crime rates. Of the percentage of people ever a victim of violent crime, 100% in the other group can honestly say they have never been a victim of violent crime.That does little to prove to those who are victims that there is no risk to be deterred against. Some people wise-up and take positive steps to deter violent crime AFTER they experience it, or maybe they just cower in fear and hope they are not picked to be a victim again, or that "the authorities" are there to help BEFORE the next time. Others take a lesson from the statistics and take positive steps to avoid victimization BEFORE they are picked as targets. Some of those steps may incude owning and carrying a gun for self-defense.

    Are the odds of victimization while riding a bike lower than the overall rates of victimization? No stats exist, but probably. Are the odds zero? Check this and the other major guns thread on this forum for numerous examples posted from the news media documenting violent crimes against bike riders. The odds are not certainly zero.

    Do we chide others for wearing seatbelts or bike helmets while driving or biking, having carbon monoxide or smoke detectors at home, haiving locks on doors and windows, etc? No - but is that only because laws require some of these in some places, or is it because they are wise actions to proactively assure safety? Some who carry no flat kit ot wear no helmet while biking think others are fools for dragging the extra weight along, but most think these actions wise. Pretty much the same with guns.

    Concealled carry weapons permit holders have lower overall crime rates than the public at large, and of those CCW holders that commit crimes, most are non-firearms related.So those that legally carry guns, while cycling or otherwise, do not present a greater danger to the public by doing so.

     


  2. tonyzackery

    tonyzackery Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 23, 2006
    Messages:
    3,517
    Likes Received:
    46
    LOL! Personal experience irrelevant to how people act/react? A most ridiculous statement in the context of this thread...

    Would I chide a driver of a road-going vehicle equipped with a full roll bar, 8pt. racing harness, and wearing a full-face racing helmet? You bet I would! I'd call him a nut job. Would I chide a person for a having a smoke detector in every room of their home? You bet I would! I'd call them paranoid. Would I chide a person for having dead-bolt locks and iron bars on every opening of their dwelling? You bet I would. I'd call them a fanatic who's living in abject fear.

    A person's feelings of safety or paranoia move on a continuum. It's apparent where you and your opinions stand where carrying a gun and bicycle riding stand...

    I'd still like for you to address how, while riding a bicycle, a legally concealed gun will keep you from becoming a statistic if the perpetrator is intent on making you his/her victim...
     
  3. cbjesseeNH

    cbjesseeNH New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2005
    Messages:
    424
    Likes Received:
    3
    To add to the mix, you can look at the debate on DGUs at:

    http://www.guncite.com/gun_control_gcdguse.html

    http://www.sovereignty.org.uk/siteinfo/newsround/gunlie.html

    http://www.gunsandcrime.org/dgufreq.html

    - and at as many other sites as you can Google up.

    The point being, only the rabid anti-gun fanatics, and researchers funded by grants from anti-gun organizations accept the lowest DGU numbers ever proposed. The pro-gun people tend to accept the highest numbers. The true answer likely dwells in between, and is not insignificant.

    Most, if not all, scholarly medical journals accept anti-gun article and editorials but refuse to publish articles, editorials or letters from pro-gun researchers - many, such as Lott and Kopel, document their efforts that are ignored by medical journal and popular media editors. The bias against guns in the media was, in fact, the subject of a book by Lott. Ever wonder why the pro-gun stats are published in economics and crime/law journals and not medical journals? The medical journal editors reject them outright saying they are not about medicine, but somehow manage to publish the anti-gun articles.

    This bias in not limited to guns - research about my company's medical product, conducted by independent academic medical centers, is consistently returned for extensive revisions, over and over again, by reviewers and editors with financial conflicts with our main competitor - the 800lb gorilla in the industry sector. NIH grants submitted to study our product are rejected, abstracts to present at medical symposia are rejected. Insurance carriers reject claims for use of our product. Etc. We can't afford to fly docs for a weekend in Vegas, including a 2hr educational symposium featuring our product, but they can.

    Researchers funded by organizations with strong anti-gun agendas only need mention the source of funding - who knows the James Joyce Foundation, MacAurther Foundation, etc., specifically fund anti-gun research and who knows the NRA is pro-gun? Try and get an NRA-funded article or editorial published in the New England Journal of Medicine!

    All to say, don't think the peer-reviewed medical literature is an honest representation of what's true. It's not the NRA's flunkies against honest academic researchers. When you believe the ends justify the means, and can find like-minded journalists, editors, reviewers, panels of experts, etc, you can make truth invisible, or at least muddled and confusing.


     
  4. cbjesseeNH

    cbjesseeNH New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2005
    Messages:
    424
    Likes Received:
    3
    I always thought tonyzackery was SteveBaby on his meds, with the therapy only partially effective at best. Sorry, a rare cheap-shot.. /img/vbsmilies/smilies/biggrin.gif

    Maybe carrying a 12G Rem 870P shotgun in a back-sheath and a FN Five-seveN 5.72 in a thigh-rig would be overkill equal to the examples you note before, but how is carrying a 380g KelTec P3AT 38acp (130mm x 89mm x 20mm) in a jersey pocket excessive?

    One of my reports at work moved to a section of So Boston and walks or ride her bike through a nasty section to get to work, and always calls a friend while walking so, as she says, the friend can call 911 if she is attacked. Is she paranoid? Is her self-defense plan effective?

    I could give you hyotheticals about how I might use a gun in self-defense while riding, and you could then counter how it wouldn't work if, blah, blah, blah... People always seem justified to say it makes no sense to keep a gun for self-defense, such as - what if someone broke into your home while you were out, without leaving any signs, hid under your bed silently, and crept out silently while you slept to slit your throat - and then smugly considered that proof.

    People are assaulted while biking. People do successfully use guns for self-defense. Do you suggest that one can't use a gun for self-defense while riding a bike? Under what other situations do you doubt the utility of a gun for self-defense? (Please, not the old "stay on-thread diatribe - this thread will not be locked by the moderator despite numerous pleas...)

     
  5. tonyzackery

    tonyzackery Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 23, 2006
    Messages:
    3,517
    Likes Received:
    46
    With no cogent response, resort to name-calling. Sad, but I didn't really expect anything more...carry on...
     
    samspade73 likes this.
  6. SummerZest

    SummerZest New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2011
    Messages:
    10
    Likes Received:
    2
    hahahhahaaa! brilliant!
     
  7. samspade73

    samspade73 New Member

    Joined:
    May 25, 2011
    Messages:
    40
    Likes Received:
    2
    cbjesseeNH:

    1) Your South Boston example is an extreme scenario because it is one of the highest crime areas in the country (also, she's not carrying a gun, she's using her head in a simular way as defensive drivers or backpackers do). The person who responded here that lives in Alaska and rides a mountain bike on isolated paths and sees Moose and Bear semi-regularly makes a reasonable case for carrying a firearm. Should we all pay attention to the Alaska cyclist's scenario and start carrying bear bells and firearms to protect ourselves on rides from wild animals regardless of where we live? I've yet to see a bear or moose in Portland.

    2) Many of the studies you cited have already been discussed in this thread. I suggest you read back and actually read the full studies. The first and third sources you cite are BOTH relying on 100% data from the Kleck study. You can post 800 links but if they're pulling on the same single study, you're only using one source. The weakness of the Kleck study have already been discussed earlier in this thread as well.

    3) Your second source "Media Bias Against Guns" by John Lott states that there are 1.5-3.4 million incidents of defense using guns. He doesn't cite his source, but this is the same figure quoted over and over again which is pulled from only 3 studies (two of which call people at their home and ask them if they have used their legally owned firearm that they have a license to carry in deterring crime in the past year). An example of how flawed this study is occurred when one woman answered between 50-60 times that year and other studies have shown that some respondents were lying to prove a point or appear macho, or they were mistaken if it had happened this year or several years ago, or their definition of a legal use of a handgun differed from the law (when asked for further details they defined a fender bender where the person was driving poorly as a reason to pull their weapon). The third study that Lott uses is....drum roll.....the Kleck study yet again. The Lott article is arguing about media bias in reporting crime and he cherry picks events covered in media looking at how the media coverage varies and what they chose to omit. Again, look back at the studies I cited that pulled on emergency room stats/police reports/verifiable stats. Even if you triple this number to account for people who choose not to report using their gun to protect themselves, it's not even in the ballpark of the 1.5 million.

    4) CBJesse, you wrote "Personal experience is all very interesting and makes for good conversation, but is hardly relevant." Should we discredit the rider from Alaska's experience or the woman from South Boston (both extreme settings for cyclists)? Should I discredit the fact I have been run over several times, received concussions, stitches, loss of property that totals around $4,000-$5,000? I took your advise and prepared by wearing a helmet, carry ID and who to contact in case of an accident, etc.

    5) Why can't you get a pro-NRA article published in the New England Journal of Medicine? Because it's what is called a peer reviewed journal and has a high standard for studies they publish. If the NRA wrote an article and only relied on the Kleck study and two or three others that are very weak in their information gathering techniques they would not get published regardless of topic. Any college freshman student can tell you if you turn in a paper using one source you're going to get an F. If anyone in the NRA organization conducted solid, ethical research that was of publishable quality and presented it to NEJM or any other peer reviewed journal they would stand a chance of getting published.
     
  8. samspade73

    samspade73 New Member

    Joined:
    May 25, 2011
    Messages:
    40
    Likes Received:
    2
    Also, I'm going to swim laps at the YMCA pool now. Do you advise I invest in a waterproof gun and holster? Perhaps swim with a knife between my teeth maybe? What type of ammo can you recommend in case I need to return fire while underwater. I just want to be prepared. Thanks.
     
  9. Daniel Lomartra

    Daniel Lomartra New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2011
    Messages:
    15
    Likes Received:
    0
    Typical American behavior? This is a world wide forum bubby full of many views and backgrounds, show some respect. Also, "Bowling for Columbine" is a radically liberal movie and shows the most extreme examples of stupidity this country has to offer; NOT A GENERAL AMERICAN. Millions carry every day without issue, and some of those millions have saved lives.
     
  10. BadWolf

    BadWolf New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2011
    Messages:
    43
    Likes Received:
    4
    I'm a woman, I ride bicycles, motorcycles and I also count firearms as one of my favorite hobbies and I have had a carry permit for many years. I don't carry on my bicycle (at least not yet) but I often do when out and about on the motorcycle or when in the car or when walking about town. If you live where it's a legal option and you are properly trained then it's your choice to carry or not carry.
    I have no concerns with those that carry legally, my concerns are with those that operate outside the law which of course might be why they are considered outlaws. They don't operate within the boundaries of our society and no amount of laws will change that.
     
    jpr95 likes this.
  11. samspade73

    samspade73 New Member

    Joined:
    May 25, 2011
    Messages:
    40
    Likes Received:
    2
    1) I agree that people carry handguns illegally (and who are up to no good) is reason to be concerned, hence feeling the need to carry a gun. This is like the snake chasing its own tale. "32% of felons had stolen their recently acquired handgun from legal gun owners" ( https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles/165476.pdf ) and 211,000 handguns and 382,000 long rifles/shotguns were stolen in 1994 alone (I'm assuming if you'll steal a gun, you're not a decent person). Same study says 22% of other felons acquired their guns from gun shows and from private owners who failed to do background checks. That study was from the national institute of justice. The same study shows that the overwhelming % of gun owners in this country are white, middle aged, college educated people who live in rural or sub-urban settings with very low crime rates. In other words, the perceived threat isn't equal to the actual threat. I am saying there's no/zero threat? No. I drive to work over four bridges, twice a day to get to work, there might come a day where my car winds up in the river, but, should I wear a life vest during my commute simply because cars do go off roads and land in bodies of water?

    2) Just food for thought: "people seek the protection of a gun because they may be disproportionately likely to lead risky lives or associate with violent people. Those who had been arrested for non-traffic offenses were more likely to own firearms (37% compared to 25%)...." also the study says that during phone interviews conducted by Kluck (the only study that the pro-carry crowd on here like to cite) they only asked people if when they used their handgun was it a legal use. They never asked a series of questions to determine if this was true and in other studies that did this, they found that 68% of "legal" gun uses for protection were not legal (ie, an argument in a bar led to pulling the weapon, a traffic accident, domestic argument) A custodian at the hospital I work at has a permit to carry legally and carries everywhere but at work (because we won't let him) and he's told me twice and I've overheard him telling several other people he carries it to deter gay men from hitting on him. If you say this guy, rust me, no man, woman, or beast would be interested in this guy.
     
  12. Not Sure

    Not Sure New Member

    Joined:
    May 25, 2010
    Messages:
    92
    Likes Received:
    2
  13. Not Sure

    Not Sure New Member

    Joined:
    May 25, 2010
    Messages:
    92
    Likes Received:
    2
    One thing to remember is that a permit to carry (concealed) is just that; carry concealed.

    As soon as you pull it out, you're brandishing/ flourishing (Brandishng is a felony gun crime).

    If the police show up (not the self-styled NRA police, the real ones), and you are holding a gun,
    you may get plugged.

    If you pull it out, then lay it down or drop it when the cops get to the scene, and it goes off;
    you probably wil get plugged.

    If you drop it or lay it down and the "real" criminal grabs it. Then what?
    YOU are responsible for what happens as the result of your having provided that gun.
    YOU are an accessory.

    I know gun people think they are helping but really they are just making it more difficult for the real police to do their jobs.

    You really have no idea how much crazier and more willing to use a gun the average career-criminal is, until after you've been one.
     
  14. PalmettoRider

    PalmettoRider New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2011
    Messages:
    14
    Likes Received:
    1
    No, I choose not to carry a gun when I ride. I own guns, but with kids in the house, they're securely locked away. If I either ride or live in an area where I believe I need to have a gun out, I'll live or ride elsewhere. Skynyrd said it best; " hand guns are made for killin', they ain't no good for nuthin' else".
     
  15. jpr95

    jpr95 Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 11, 2010
    Messages:
    870
    Likes Received:
    30
    Well, Not Sure, for one, many states issue a "carry permit'--it does NOT have to be concealed. I can carry openly in Indiana if I so choose due to having a carry permit, it does not specify that the firearm must remain out of sight.

    Second, if law-abiding citizens were not allowed to carry firearms, yes, the police would have an easier job--because they would simply be picking up more dead bodies. The stats don't lie on this one. Since the late '80s to early '90s when carry permits were once again acknowledged as Constitutional, violent crime rates have taken a nosedive.

    When seconds count, the police are only minutes away. They can serve, but they cannot protect. If you believe otherwise, you are setting yourself up for some very GRAVE disappointment some day.
     
  16. tonyzackery

    tonyzackery Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 23, 2006
    Messages:
    3,517
    Likes Received:
    46
    Bringing you US 2nd Amendment folks back on point - this thread is about carrying a gun while out cycling.

    Someone please tell me, while riding your bike, how you're going to use said weapon (be it open or concealed) if a perp is intent on making you a victim.
     
  17. CAMPYBOB

    CAMPYBOB Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 12, 2005
    Messages:
    11,945
    Likes Received:
    1,038
    Someone please tell me, while riding your bike, how you're going to use said weapon (be it open or concealed) if a perp is intent on making you a victim.

    It's become obvious that you are a troll or a moron. I'm going with the latter. You've asked this same question multiple times in this thread and it has been repeatedly answered.

    Of course, with your lack of intellect and having zero common sense, I am not surprised by your continued ignorance.

    Once again, for those with ability to read and reason:

    http://www.learnaboutguns.com/2009/05/10/armed-bicycle-rider-defends-self-against-multiple-attackers/

    "As reported, a Racine, WI man was riding his bicycle when four teenage attackers knocked him to the ground. The man grabbed his openly carried pistol from his holster, pointed it at the sky, and yelled “gun!” The attackers then fled, leaving the man with only minor injuries from being knocked off his bike." ""


    I would be happy to watch security cam footage of you, laying on your back like a beached turtle, getting your teeth kicked in by four thugs because you're too freaking stupid to figure out how to use a tool that could save your life. On or off a bicycle.

    I managed to use a cell phone at 25 MPH in a paceline last Sunday though. Probably yet another skill you need someone on the intarwebz to explain how it's done.

    Walking and chewing gum...how is it done? Now comes the un-clever comeback about three thug snipers and a bike thief ramming you with an armored tank from a dark side alley.
     
  18. tonyzackery

    tonyzackery Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 23, 2006
    Messages:
    3,517
    Likes Received:
    46
    The above poster and his/her mentality is good example for why gun control is necessary. Quite suprised he/she is posting again - must've gotten a day pass from the asylum. LOL!

    Anyway, first off - identify yourself, internet tough-guy. What's your name and where do you live? You have my information, I have nothing to fear - not even from your kind. I'm interested to know how brave you are without a gun under your armpit? Are you brave enough to stand behind your tough words posted in a cycling forum? Are you brave enough to take responsibility for your asinine comments? Brave enough to pull the sheet off your head? Only time will tell...But rest assured, I won't be replying to your drivel if it's apparent you're afraid to be accountable for your keystrokes.

    Regarding your posted article, I'm not buying it. I say the story is a fabrication for a stumblebum incident. The individual crashed on his bike and filed a false police report regarding the incident with the intent of claiming Clint Eastwood status. There's absolutely no way of proving the veracity, or lack thereof. 4 teenagers knocked him off his bike? LOL! Riding around at night with his holstered gun? Story has waaay too many holes in it, but you gun-types I'm sure have latched onto it as it makes for a good bedtime story. You got any more of these stories to relate? Speaks volumes that you could only post a single account, truthfulness notwithstanding...

    The request remains:
    Someone please tell me, while riding your bike, how you're going to use said weapon (be it open or concealed) if a perp is intent on making you a victim.

    The above non compos mentis individual failed to address how you're going USE said weapon (be it open or concealed) if a perp(s) is intent on making you a victim. Hoping you're able to function after being knocked to the ground (for argument sake, I'll take the above report as being truthful) doesn't really cut the mustard. If the 4 teenagers wanted to rob this fellow, they definitely still could have, and taken his gun and used it on him in the process. Furthermore, anyone can yell out "Gun!", whether they actually have one or not if they feel that is an adequate deterrent to an assault.

    Ergo, someone tell me how you're going to USE said gun while riding a bike???

    To the above anonomous individual - enjoy playing with yourself and I look forward to perusing your posted cherry-picked articles promoting firearm possession - not...
     
  19. samspade73

    samspade73 New Member

    Joined:
    May 25, 2011
    Messages:
    40
    Likes Received:
    2
    First of all Campybob, you've got some serious pent up anger going on, especially for someone you've never met. This is probably where the statistic came from where men who carry guns (legally) are also more likely to be arrested. You can disagree completely and still be respectful.

    Secondly, yep, you found an article where a gun was used to protect a cyclist. I also found an article of interest:

    "A loaded handgun fell from the pocket of a kindergarten student in Houston in April, firing a single bullet that slightly wounded two classmates and the "shooter." [Houston Chronicle, 4-19-2011]

    Does this mean that it's common for a kindergarten student to take a gun to class simply because I found one occurrence of it? I wouldn't draw any conclusions from this unless I saw some well conducted studies. In Portland, this weekend, we did, however have two serious incidents of cars hitting cyclists (one was an 18 year old kid with a bright future who was killed) and the other was Ex-Oregon Duck and NFL QB Joey Harrington, who was put in the ICU. Didn't hear of any uses of a weapon to protect a cyclist though.

    So again. Is it possible four teens could tackle me on my bike: yes, anything is possible. Is it even remotely as likely as being mowed over by a car? Not even close.
     
  20. cbjesseeNH

    cbjesseeNH New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2005
    Messages:
    424
    Likes Received:
    3
    I'll quote myself from above.

    "I could give you hyotheticals about how I might use a gun in self-defense while riding, and you could then counter how it wouldn't work if, blah, blah, blah... People always seem justified to say it makes no sense to keep a gun for self-defense, such as - what if someone broke into your home while you were out, without leaving any signs, hid under your bed silently, and crept out silently while you slept to slit your throat - and then smugly considered that proof.

    People are assaulted while biking. People do successfully use guns for self-defense. Do you suggest that one can't use a gun for self-defense while riding a bike? Under what other situations do you doubt the utility of a gun for self-defense? (Please, not the old "stay on-thread diatribe - this thread will not be locked by the moderator despite numerous pleas...)"

    You took mock offense to my slighting you (slightly) in 3466 and then chose to ignore my response thereafter, saying "With no cogent response, resort to name-calling. Sad, but I didn't really expect anything more...carry on..."

    Yet I note that you happily insult others, for example, saying in 3479 "The above poster and his/her mentality is good example for why gun control is necessary. Quite surprised he/she is posting again - must've gotten a day pass from the asylum. LOL!", but seem to be unable to withstand any heckling yourself. I'd call that a character flaw, but I know you would take offense and again ignore any response to claim it's not cogent. So I won't.

    With Wisconsin now a CCW state, that brings the total to 3 Unrestricted, 38 Shall-Issue, 8 May-Issue and 1 No-Issue. I'd say the anti-gun lot is continuing to lose big-time, wouldn't you? Knowing the strength of the anti-gun stance, evidence and argumentation is well reflected in this thread, I'm expecting those numbers to drift towards 50 Shall-Issue in the next several years...
     
Loading...
Loading...