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

[AceBruceGary]

Originally Posted by BadWolf .

For what it's worth, my most common carry gun is usually either a S&W 340PD in 357 or a S&W 342Ti in 38. They're light and dependable. I haven't yet however carried while riding the bicycle.

The 340PD is way out of my price range for something I'd likely only use on rides. (I carry a G19 or G26 daily) I have always wanted one but could never bring myself to spending that kind of money.
I used to have a 442 but found that the cylinder itself was somewhat wide and it didn't work out so well in a pocket. I ended up selling it which I do regret.

I am looking for a reliable semi that is thin enough not to print and comfortable in a jersey pocket.
I think I'm leaning towards the Kel tec P3AT

 

[tonyzackery]

I feel safe and secure while riding with a cell phone, a spare tube, tire levers, multi-tool, identification, and a little cash.
If I'm going for 3+hrs, I'll bring along an energy bar. Very dependable for mitigating that late ride bonk. But it does "print" and is comfortable in the pocket.

 

[dhk2]

Originally Posted by tonyzackery .

I feel safe and secure while riding with a cell phone, a spare tube, tire levers, multi-tool, identification, and a little cash.
If I'm going for 3+hrs, I'll bring along an energy bar. Very dependable for mitigating that late ride bonk. But it does "print" and is comfortable in the pocket.

I carry all that, but for me to feel safe I also carry a DiNotte taillight and keep it on at all times. After several riders around here have been hit from behind and badly hurt or killed, I just don't feel safe without a flashing red light that can be seen from 1/4 mile or more behind in bright daylight. You might call me paranoid, but losing a close friend to a driver has changed me. As I've said before, criminally-negligent drivers are the real threat here, not armed attackers. Since "didn't see the cyclist" gets the driver off without even a ticket in this state (unless they are DUI), there is no need to assault us with a gun.

As far as an armed attacker, one encounter in decades of riding tells me that carrying a gun isn't going to help anyway. Back in the '70s, a passing car fired a shot at me at close range. All I remember was hearing the shot, then seeing an arm with a small dark revolver out the passenger side window. If I'd been armed at the time, it wouldn't have made any difference. Or worse, I might have drawn my weapon and fired at the car before even stopping to think.

 

[Not Sure]

[COLOR= #ff0000]This[/COLOR] is what I mean when I say you should be prepared for what may happen after the police arrive.

If this is how some act just for carrying, imagine what it will be like if shot have been fired.

Check out t[COLOR= #ff0000]his guy[/COLOR] for a possible instruction on how to surrender once the police arrive after shots have been fired.

best wishes

 

[Tedcase]

You people are insane.

 

[jhuskey]

Yes, but what is your point?

 

[Tedcase]

No point. I just want to express my opinion that people who carry hand guns around while cycling are insane.

It is my right.

I don't need to justify it. It is like asking why I feel the need to speak my opinion or believe in the religion that I do. Humoring the "why" gives legitimacy to the argument of "need".

 

[AceBruceGary]

He's not questioning your "right" to speak your mind (which you actually don't have on a private forum) but rather the purpose of your comment.



Quote: Originally Posted by Tedcase .

No point. I just want to express my opinion that people who carry hand guns around while cycling are insane.

It is my right.




I carry a gun on me almost 100% of the time I am awake. I don't care whether other people choose to or not.

For what it's worth:
I am in the executive branch of govt (enforcement), a state police firearms instructor as well as teach quite a few different NRA firearms safety courses.

I have never shot and killed someone though I have been the target of both attempted violent home invasions as well as home invasion with kidnapping due to my employment. (All situations ended up with suspects serving time)

I find it very amusing that some people out there feel that they can say "you don't need to carry" when they have no clue who I am nor what circumstances I am in. It's rather egocentric.

As I mentioned before they are free to think what they want so long as they don't impose their views on me.

And as this is a cycling forum I had hoped to gain some valid discussion regarding the topic of cycling with concealed firearms.

 

[samspade73]

Since we've established that there are a good number of people who feel the need to pack heat while cycling and what their weapon of choice is perhaps they will inform us what type of weapons they carry during races (cycling, running, triathlons).

Since the gun toters on here want to be prepared for all scenarios whether statistics support that or not I want to know what gun would they recommend for the swim portion in case of shark attack? What about another competitor who kicks you repeatedly during a rough start (this is assault after all)? If we're talking Ironman, a 2.4 mile swim is no joke.

Can you recommend a good handgun to deter people from drafting off of you during the bike portion yet one that wouldn't hold you back during a final race kick to the finish on the run?

Last but not least.....How much ammo should I carry if I'm in a race with a lot of competitors? Perhaps one or two mags wouldn't be enough if the peloton decided to attack.....what I mean is what if they attacked me while attacking? Remember when Mark Renshaw headbutted a competitor during the Tour de France? Contador threw a few punches at a rabid fan who was threatening this year. Have you seen how crazed those cycling fans get on the climbs?

Also food for thought: what if criminals start reading this thread, know that some cyclists pack heat and they're prepared for this? We might want to start a new thread for what type of flak or bullet proof vest we wear when riding....

To the gentleman who works for the federal gov't and has been the target of kidnapping attempts I can respect that that is your reality and something you must face everyday as do other high profile individuals or those who are at greater risk based on what they do for a living or status (if you're worth 500 million dollars, installing a safe room might not be a bad idea, if you're worth $100, maybe hold off on taking out the second mortgage), but how many others on here can honestly say that scenario applies to them as well?

 

[AceBruceGary]

1. It's personal choice to carry. Whether or not someone wants to carry at a race is really their choice to weigh regardless of how ridiculous it may seem to you.
2. I don't believe anyone on here who actually does carry a gun has even come close to suggesting the use of their firearm in an inappropriate manner. Those strange sarcastic comments you and others made seem only to come from those who don't carry a gun. I highly doubt I will use my gun to stave off drafters, shoot people while on the move or try and threaten cars that seem to get in the way. You have a computer right? Does that mean you'll be exchanging kiddy ****? That's pretty much as offensive, dumb and as relevant as the comments you are making.
3. Criminals prepare for armed civilians? Is this relevant? If I choose not to carry a gun does that mean that criminals won't prepare anymore? If I carry guns they'll prepare even more? I take it you don't work with criminals for a living. In case you don't, let me give you a hint: Criminals prepare. Most victims don't.
4. I am not "high profile" and I am not a millionaire nor have I suggested that I was. I know plenty of people who used to say "I don't have a need to own a gun"...but this is what I deal with on a daily basis and I don't expect others who may work in an office or out in the corporate world or have yet to be a victim of a serious crime to hold the same perspective. As I said before, people are free to believe what they want. Just don't tell me what I should do.

Originally Posted by samspade73 .

Since we've established that there are a good number of people who feel the need to pack heat while cycling and what their weapon of choice is perhaps they will inform us what type of weapons they carry during races (cycling, running, triathlons).

Since the gun toters on here want to be prepared for all scenarios whether statistics support that or not I want to know what gun would they recommend for the swim portion in case of shark attack? What about another competitor who kicks you repeatedly during a rough start (this is assault after all)? If we're talking Ironman, a 2.4 mile swim is no joke.

Can you recommend a good handgun to deter people from drafting off of you during the bike portion yet one that wouldn't hold you back during a final race kick to the finish on the run?

Last but not least.....How much ammo should I carry if I'm in a race with a lot of competitors? Perhaps one or two mags wouldn't be enough if the peloton decided to attack.....what I mean is what if they attacked me while attacking? Remember when Mark Renshaw headbutted a competitor during the Tour de France? Contador threw a few punches at a rabid fan who was threatening this year. Have you seen how crazed those cycling fans get on the climbs?

Also food for thought: what if criminals start reading this thread, know that some cyclists pack heat and they're prepared for this? We might want to start a new thread for what type of flak or bullet proof vest we wear when riding....

To the gentleman who works for the federal gov't and has been the target of kidnapping attempts I can respect that that is your reality and something you must face everyday as do other high profile individuals or those who are at greater risk based on what they do for a living or status (if you're worth 500 million dollars, installing a safe room might not be a bad idea, if you're worth $100, maybe hold off on taking out the second mortgage), but how many others on here can honestly say that scenario applies to them as well?

 

[FlatTired]

First off, it's not a need, IT'S A RIGHT!
The need comes second.
I live in a small city, about 20 miles south of one of the highest crime rate areas in the nation. DETROIT! And I CARRY.
However, there are no geograhical limitations to crime. Criminals pick the easiest target they can find, wherever they find one.
I used to hike the Appalachian Trail through VA, MD and PA ,solo, and my bucket list goal was to hike the entire length.
Young gangs in some of the cities near the trail figured out hikers carry a lot of expensive gear and MONEY! They don't say please, and they won't hesitae to harm you, if you are unarmed and alone.
My former neighbor rides from SE Michigan to Nothern California every summer on a bike. Last year he was finally able to afford a semi high end touring bike, a vast improvement over his previous bikes. While traversing Utah, a van roared to a stop in front of him 3 guys got out, shoved him off his bike, threw the bike in the van, took his wallet and left him stranded. And he is is not a small man.
When he was able to get back, he asked me what would he need to do to get a concealed carry license. and what kind of pistol he should carry so he would never be a victim again.
I hope you will never be a victim, but as long as there are sheeple there will be.

 

[AceBruceGary]

Originally Posted by FlatTired .

First off, it's not a need, IT'S A RIGHT!

Really that's all that needs to be said...and why I often don't humor people asking me "why?"
For some reason people question it yet they don't question their right to free speech or religion. I'm not sure they understand or are just all sheep.
And for some reason they forget (or never learned) that the 2nd Amendment is embedded into the creation and existence of America.

Sheep

 

[tonyzackery]

Again, I ask the rhetorical question: "Which came first, the chicken, or the egg?"

For the "right" to have been enacted, do you 2nd Amendment folks first think there was a "need" amongst the people to keep and bear arms??? Y'all got it bassackwards, among other things, but that's nothing new.

Scared or prepared? I choose the former.

 

[cbjesseeNH]

A right, but not one granted by the government. A right retained by the people and enumerated in the US Constitution. Government is sworn to uphold and protect this and other rights, but does not grant rights. The US Constitution merely acknowledges the rights of man as natural laws, as did the 1689 English Bill of Rights recognize "the true, ancient and indubitable rights and liberties of the people."

But I tarry too long on this forum - my job is finished here, Tonto. At least for now. I'll be back again (and again, an again) when the next major supreme court decision broadens gun rights or yet another state is added to the shall-issue list.

Y'all can keep at it until then.

 

[samspade73]

I've never said that you didn't have the right to carry a gun. I've even argued on here that a rider who spends a good bit of time in isolated Alaska made a good case and someone who rides in a very high crime area (not imagined high crime). I also think having a gun in the home isn't a bad idea, assuming the gun owner stores it properly (we've had two police officers in the Portland area this year leave their guns out and their children shot and killed themselves), know how to use it properly and have good judgment. Earlier in this post I cited and linked to solid studies about guns used to avert crime, people seem to prefer a story they heard or an article they dug up on the Internet over a solid peer reviewed study (this explains why Fox News has more power to influence than a professional body of economists or physicians or scientists with solid research and debates). Offering anecdotal or qualitative information is worth listening to sure, but I wouldn't form my reality based on this. Would you want someone in health care to not look at the broader picture but merely say (must be this rare disease someone told me about in a meeting lets send 'em to surgery).

I work in a hospital and at least three or four times a month a male in his 50s-70s comes in with a household item stuck in his ass (light bulbs and flashlights are the most common item but recently its been toothbrushes). Should I assume that this is typical behavior for males ages 50-70s and assume that someday, when left alone, I'll also want to put household items in my ass simply because this is the professional reality I deal with everyday? Or should I look at statistics, studies, pull on my education and experience and put it in proper context? Yes, what you do for a living shapes your reality, absolutely, but I don't carry medical tools to remove items from asses when I fly on a plane or go to the theater because I believe it's only a matter of time before I'm asked to do so in mid-flight. I could choose to do so and it would be my right, but would it be justified? Probably not.

Did anyone on here suggest using their firearm in an inappropriate way on the message board? Nope. Do I see evidence of that on a weekly basis first hand? Yep. (self inflicted gunshot wound to the hand in Wallmart parking lot....self inflicted gunshot wound trying to shoot a "rabid cat"....and those are just this week...the week before was a gunshot wound that resulted from an argument over a neighbor letting his lawn clipping blow into the neighbors yard).

Originally Posted by AceBruceGary .

1. It's personal choice to carry. Whether or not someone wants to carry at a race is really their choice to weigh regardless of how ridiculous it may seem to you.
2. I don't believe anyone on here who actually does carry a gun has even come close to suggesting the use of their firearm in an inappropriate manner. Those strange sarcastic comments you and others made seem only to come from those who don't carry a gun. I highly doubt I will use my gun to stave off drafters, shoot people while on the move or try and threaten cars that seem to get in the way. You have a computer right? Does that mean you'll be exchanging kiddy ****? That's pretty much as offensive, dumb and as relevant as the comments you are making.
3. Criminals prepare for armed civilians? Is this relevant? If I choose not to carry a gun does that mean that criminals won't prepare anymore? If I carry guns they'll prepare even more? I take it you don't work with criminals for a living. In case you don't, let me give you a hint: Criminals prepare. Most victims don't.
4. I am not "high profile" and I am not a millionaire nor have I suggested that I was. I know plenty of people who used to say "I don't have a need to own a gun"...but this is what I deal with on a daily basis and I don't expect others who may work in an office or out in the corporate world or have yet to be a victim of a serious crime to hold the same perspective. As I said before, people are free to believe what they want. Just don't tell me what I should do.

 

[tonyzackery]

Originally Posted by cbjesseeNH .

A right, but not one granted by the government. A right retained by the people and enumerated in the US Constitution. Government is sworn to uphold and protect this and other rights, but does not grant rights. The US Constitution merely acknowledges the rights of man as natural laws, as did the 1689 English Bill of Rights recognize "the true, ancient and indubitable rights and liberties of the people."

But I tarry too long on this forum - my job is finished here, Tonto. At least for now. I'll be back again (and again, an again) when the next major supreme court decision broadens gun rights or yet another state is added to the shall-issue list.

Y'all can keep at it until then.

Look forward to the tangential trolling. The thread pertains to carrying a firearm while riding a bicycle, by the way.

Rights not granted by the government??? Been livin' in the western world too long. You go tell that to someone livin' under Communism or strict Islamic rule. Think they know about "free" speech?

 

[AceBruceGary]

Originally Posted by tonyzackery .

Again, I ask the rhetorical question: "Which came first, the chicken, or the egg?"

For the "right" to have been enacted, do you 2nd Amendment folks first think there was a "need" amongst the people to keep and bear arms??? Y'all got it bassackwards, among other things, but that's nothing new.

Scared or prepared? I choose the former.

Rights are not enacted. Rights are affirmed by our Constitution and protected by our govt. I see in your signature that you may be in Canada so you might not be aware of how our Constitutional Republic is defined.

I'm not sure why you keep thinking about "scared or prepared". I'm not sure why it matters. Do you wear a seatbelt because you are scared or prepared. Why do you care?d

Originally Posted by samspade73 .

I work in a hospital and at least three or four times a month a male in his 50s-70s comes in with a household item stuck in his ass (light bulbs and flashlights are the most common item but recently its been toothbrushes). Should I assume that this is typical behavior for males ages 50-70s and assume that someday, when left alone, I'll also want to put household items in my ass simply because this is the professional reality I deal with everyday? Or should I look at statistics, studies, pull on my education and experience and put it in proper context? Yes, what you do for a living shapes your reality, absolutely, but I don't carry medical tools to remove items from asses when I fly on a plane or go to the theater because I believe it's only a matter of time before I'm asked to do so in mid-flight. I could choose to do so and it would be my right, but would it be justified? Probably not.

Did anyone on here suggest using their firearm in an inappropriate way on the message board? Nope. Do I see evidence of that on a weekly basis first hand? Yep. (self inflicted gunshot wound to the hand in Wallmart parking lot....self inflicted gunshot wound trying to shoot a "rabid cat"....and those are just this week...the week before was a gunshot wound that resulted from an argument over a neighbor letting his lawn clipping blow into the neighbors yard).

Before going into law enforcement I worked as an EMT for quite some time and I did see a few cases of the "stuck up the butt". Once was a vibrator which was stuck in the on position but seemed to make a turn in the lower intestine. No one is asking you to carry tools to remove objects from people's butts. Perhaps if you were inserting them in your own butt you might take some precautions and carry those tools around. Your analogy really doesn't make any sense at all.

I don't carry a gun so I can go around "helping" people. I carry a gun for myself.

Plenty of people here have suggested ridiculous situations that they seem to think may happen including yourself.
Shark attack..bike race competitors etc.

Plenty of douchebags carry pocket knives but it doesn't mean that they will stab the next person who steals their parking space. Plenty of people have weapons ready at hand (flashlight, pocketknife, keys, mace) and they don't spontaneously erupt into violence because of them.

Yes you have seen gun accidents. So have I. I have also seen stabbings, vehicular homicide, people being killed by rocks, kids drowned in pools. I'm not sure what your point is.
Is an accidental shooting any worse than a purposeful stabbing? Is a purposeful shooting any different than an accidental vehicular homicide?

A firearm is a tool. It doesn't make me a violent person nor any more prone to crazy actions. No more so than having a 6 pack of beer in your trunk will make you more likely to drive under the influence.

Originally Posted by samspade73 .

I want to know what gun would they recommend for the swim portion in case of shark attack?
What about another competitor who kicks you repeatedly during a rough start (this is assault after all)?

Can you recommend a good handgun to deter people from drafting off of you during the bike portion

Originally Posted by tonyzackery .

Rights not granted by the government??? Been livin' in the western world too long. You go tell that to someone livin' under Communism or strict Islamic rule. Think they know about "free" speech?

I don't want to be offensive but I think you have missed something in school (or maybe you didn't go to a US school).
Our founding fathers created the Constitution to protect our rights, not give us them. They believed our rights were inherent, not granted to us by any sort of power.
It is a major distinction and what sets us apart from other forms of govt.

 

[tonyzackery]

Bassackwards. Period.
Where the heck did this "right" originate?
When you came out of the womb - were you armed? Did you have reason to need to be armed? Explain to me what's "inherent" in possessing a gun?
Because it's "inherent" in the US means it should be inherent universally? How unsurprisingly arrogant the thought.
So what you've bought the Kool Aid about being armed being a "right". Your "founding fathers" saw the "need" to keep and bear arms in the context of the time in which they lived.
Makes considerable sense to you Charles Bronson types.

 

[AceBruceGary]

Hopefully the day will never come when someone tells you that freedom of speech was only applicable in the time in which it was created.

The "inherent" nature of these rights is protected by the Constitution of the US. I believe those inherent rights apply everywhere however they are not protected by governments everywhere.
It is what differentiates us as Americans. Those rights are what enabled us to gain our independence, and also what allowed us to catalyze our progress to industrial revolution. We have accomplished more in our infancy as a nation that others than have existed for thousands of years.

As shown in this thread, not everyone (American or not) agrees. That's ok. The revolutionary war was only fought by a small percentage of the population while the rest reaped the benefits. So long as there are people like me, and others who are willing to serve and protect, and uphold the Constitution regardless of whether many sheep in the populace ignorantly think it no longer applies, than we are still a great and capable nation. I will always fight for my rights as well as yours even if you don't agree.

It really is ok if you don't understand. I'm not trying to belittle you. With all due respect I just think you don't have a clue what you're talking about. You are free not to carry a gun (if you are in Canada I am not sure if you are legally allowed to anyway). That is up to you.

I don't think anyone here has made themselves out to be a "Charles Bronson" type...I think the very opposite is true: that many others here have made themselves out to be very assumptive and irrational sheeple.

Originally Posted by tonyzackery .

Bassackwards. Period.
Where the heck did this "right" originate?
When you came out of the womb - were you armed? Did you have reason to need to be armed? Explain to me what's "inherent" in possessing a gun?
Because it's "inherent" in the US means it should be inherent universally? How unsurprisingly arrogant the thought.
So what you've bought the Kool Aid about being armed being a "right". Your "founding fathers" saw the "need" to keep and bear arms in the context of the time in which they lived.
Makes considerable sense to you Charles Bronson types.

 

[tonyzackery]

Appreciate the weak history lesson. Quite clear the word "context" doesn't have much meaning for you. Nevertheless...

You have still failed in your attempt to expound on the true nature of the word "inherent" and its viability to the argument for gun possession - while riding a bike mind you. Because someone told you of the alleged inherency of the right to keep and bear arms, that still fails to make it so - unless I too can tell you that you have the right to run around stark naked, which makes it a right - because hey, you were at least born naked, not armed. It's obvious you agree with the opinion that the content of the 2nd Amendment is "inherent" - I disagree. You choose to stand on historical irrelevance as the foundational basis for your belief - good for you, I guess. I'll choose common sense any day and every day. And contrary to your apparent understanding, my opinion is just as valid as yours.

You are right about one thing: I don't understand why some (the great majority) individuals feel the need to be armed while riding a bicycle. I further fail to understand how that stored away firearm will preclude an attack by a perp inclined to do so, or in any way assist in stopping said attack.

Lastly, you're entitled to your opinions. Nonetheless, this is a cycling site. Do you have anything to offer to the cycling world, or was your sole purpose in joining to proffer your cause?