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



lyotard

New Member
May 3, 2005
343
0
0
as is common, some would be said to maximize if not exagerate the facts while others would seek to minimize and categorize by relative moralism. both these stances fail in delivering any message conclusively as they are not impartial by any means.
this because of the passionate allegiance to one-sided mindset and the subjectivity this causes.
the accurate objective truth then, would lie somewhere in between.




cbjesseeNH said:
Sorry - you misread my meaning.

If you hear someone on TV say that X% of children either kill or are killed by guns, you picture innocent kids in gradeschool through highschool getting shot dead. The data as presented by Brady Campaigners has included 18-21yr old individuals as "children". Their data also include gang members killing other gang members in acts of gang retribution.

Had they attempted to elicit sympathy for their cause
 

teton explorer

New Member
Jul 25, 2005
40
0
0
Hypnospin said:
so we have a vote in favor of collateral damage from drive by shootings as being an acceptable by product of the perceived right to pack?
Wasn't Collateral Damage a Steven Segal or Bruce Willis movie? If so, I wouldn't vote in favor of it.
 

teton explorer

New Member
Jul 25, 2005
40
0
0
MountainPro said:
Bathtubs, planes and basball bats were not designed to fire a high velocity projectile designed to kill or seriously injure others. Guns are.

This is why banning guns needs to be done with common sense so that we wont get the 'cars kill people' argument.

When you have people comparing a gun with the likes of bathtubs etc. you know they arent thinking rationally. A golf tee can kill if you bang it hard enough into a persons temple....stupid eh...yes some people are that stupid?
According to the NGTA (National Golf Tee Association - a subsidiary of the NRA), golf tees don't kill people; people (banging them into another person's temple) do. In the immortal words of Charlton Heston, "if you outlaw golf tees, only outlaws will have golf tees," and "you'll get my golf tee from me when you pry it from my cold dead hands."
 

teton explorer

New Member
Jul 25, 2005
40
0
0
MountainPro said:
Bathtubs, planes and basball bats were not designed to fire a high velocity projectile designed to kill or seriously injure others. Guns are.

This is why banning guns needs to be done with common sense so that we wont get the 'cars kill people' argument.

When you have people comparing a gun with the likes of bathtubs etc. you know they arent thinking rationally. A golf tee can kill if you bang it hard enough into a persons temple....stupid eh...yes some people are that stupid?
Do any of you carry bathtubs or golf tees when you ride. I know that where I live you can carry a bathtub without a permit, but I"m not sure about golf tees.
 

MountainPro

New Member
Aug 11, 2004
3,071
2
38
Nein11 said:
Well, I BELIEVE that he was using "hollywood" as another weak attempt to discredit americans/american society.

I certainly do not deny that I am affected by the US media, however I have a degree in history and am certainly not limited to some stereotype about americans that only know what they see in a movie.
Nein, i am not trying to discredit anyone. I love America and American people, i only said what i said because it is what i have heard Americans say to me. When i have been there an dthey ask where my accent is from...they say, hey Braveheart right?, sorry all i know about scotland is what i have seen in Braveheart, Rob Roy etc...which is perfectly understandable if you have never sampled the culture in person.

All i knew about america was what i have seen in the movies until i visited. So the statement about Hollywood could also have been directed at myself a few years ago.

I dont know much about Hollywood productions but i have been to Hollywood...have you been to Hadrian's Wall?
 

MountainPro

New Member
Aug 11, 2004
3,071
2
38
teton explorer said:
According to the NGTA (National Golf Tee Association - a subsidiary of the NRA), golf tees don't kill people; people (banging them into another person's temple) do. In the immortal words of Charlton Heston, "if you outlaw golf tees, only outlaws will have golf tees," and "you'll get my golf tee from me when you pry it from my cold dead hands."
If it is in the NGTA handbook then we must respect that. I would be a dire world if only outlaws were allowed to have golf tees.

Golf would cease to exist....which might not be a bad thing actually.
 

gudel

New Member
Aug 12, 2005
8
0
0
does anyone know if there's an holster to be used in bikes? looking for one that would fit HK USP45 and Beretta 92FS.
 

artemidorus

New Member
Mar 10, 2004
2,307
0
36
MountainPro said:
Correct...it was to keep the Caledoni and other Pictish tribes from raiding the Roman controled part of what was to become England. This was one tribe of warriors that the Romans couldnt defeat in open battle and besides, Scotland didnt agree with the lifestyle of the Romans who preferred the warm Italian weather. The Welsh were in a diferent part of the country.
The "Welsh", per se, didn't exist at all at the time of the Romans; this name is an Old English (Anglo-Saxon) word meaning "foreigner" - what a joke, called foreigners in their own country!
What I meant, calling the Britanni the Welsh, was that the peoples of the island of Britain were the group of tribes that ultimately were pushed into modern Wales, and Cornwall, by the invading Teutonics, and the invading Scots in the North. The language orignially spoken in what is now modern Scotland was an archaic form of the language that is now called Welsh, and not Gaelic, which was imported from Ireland.
 

Nein11

New Member
Jun 19, 2005
36
0
0
mountain pro,

my bad then for jumping to conclusions.

i have not had the pleasure of visiting scotland yet.

while i am by no means a world traveler, i have been to quite a few european and eastern european countries. i love to learn about and experience other peoples culture and history.

i also love american culture and (short) history. hence the kneejerk reaction to some peoples blanket statements about the US. i believe that just because i dont agree with some of the decisions that my government makes, i dont have to become an apologist. i believe that the less government the better and the more rights that are preserved the better off we are.
 

Nein11

New Member
Jun 19, 2005
36
0
0
Arathald said:
Well, he is Scottish, so I think maybe he knows just a little about Scotland.
And it is true that the vast majority of Americans learn most of what they know through the media, so, as a whole, we Americans deserve a bit less credit than we give ourselves. Don't get me wrong, I'm by no means a self-hating American, I'm just a realist.

And even a degree in history doesn't equate to real life experience in another country. And even that experience is no assurance of protection from the media. I spent my early childhood in Chile, and even now, a good part of what I know comes from the media. If someone from Chile told me that a view I held about that country was wrong, I would accept their correction, because I'm sure they would know a heck of a lot more than I do about Chile.

You're making a little progress, but I'm still not nearly convinced that you're not susceptible to the "Hollywood Effect."

apparently being in the top 1% doesn't make you any more able to read. i already said that i don't deny being affected by the media.

due to your condecending attitude i dont believe i am capable of, nor am i interested in, "convincing" you of anything.
 

MountainPro

New Member
Aug 11, 2004
3,071
2
38
artemidorus said:
The "Welsh", per se, didn't exist at all at the time of the Romans; this name is an Old English (Anglo-Saxon) word meaning "foreigner" - what a joke, called foreigners in their own country!
What I meant, calling the Britanni the Welsh, was that the peoples of the island of Britain were the group of tribes that ultimately were pushed into modern Wales, and Cornwall, by the invading Teutonics, and the invading Scots in the North. The language orignially spoken in what is now modern Scotland was an archaic form of the language that is now called Welsh, and not Gaelic, which was imported from Ireland.
well researched, I learned something today...:D
 

bloke911

New Member
Aug 14, 2005
5
0
0
I would NEVER :eek: Shoot a gun when I'm riding!!!!!! Are you guys crazy?:( It is absolutely impossible to shoot with any accuracy when you ride.
What a dumb question! Where do you come up with this stuff?:confused:
 

MountainPro

New Member
Aug 11, 2004
3,071
2
38
no problems buddy,

sorry for the misunderstanding..

i do not judge you by the actions of your government...


Nein11 said:
mountain pro,

my bad then for jumping to conclusions.

i have not had the pleasure of visiting scotland yet.

while i am by no means a world traveler, i have been to quite a few european and eastern european countries. i love to learn about and experience other peoples culture and history.

i also love american culture and (short) history. hence the kneejerk reaction to some peoples blanket statements about the US. i believe that just because i dont agree with some of the decisions that my government makes, i dont have to become an apologist. i believe that the less government the better and the more rights that are preserved the better off we are.
 

pgfiveoh

New Member
Apr 21, 2005
1
0
0
akamrkent said:
I'm a police officer in Los Angeles County and when I first started riding recreationally (5 years ago) I used to carry my back-up duty weapon (Ti S&W 5-shot revolver). When I became more familiar with my routes and became more competative, I stopped carrying a weapon. It seemed stupid to me to spend 6K on a sub 16lbs bike, only to weigh it down with a weapon (even a hyperlight). I do enjoy weapons. I have 3 handguns and 3 rifles and shoot competitively, but, at the end of the day, I feel that I am fit and aware of my surroundings enough that I can get away from most knuckleheads with my bike. If they can run fast enough to catch me, or if they surprize me, then I deserve to get mugged. It's just motivation to train harder and a reminder not to get complacent.
As a police officer in the DC area, I started out riding with my Sig P239 (compact 9mm). As I progressed as a cyclist, my thinking changed too. I stopped carrying. I just remain aware of my surroundings. It sure is more convenient to not carry!
 

BikingRyan

New Member
Aug 15, 2005
6
0
0
I have done a lot of backpacking and some of the people that you run into in these remote places lead me to believe that 'protection' is a must - I am sure long distance biking is no different.

People do wacked out **** when in the 'wilderness' - and mace/pepper spray may not stop thier aggressions, nor would I want them to get close enough to me to use a knife. If you are properly trained to use an appropriate fire arm, I see no reason not to carry.
 

Nishiki09

New Member
Aug 5, 2005
16
0
0
In florida i think the rule is that if u want to carry a gun in public at all u have to have a permit and it has to be concealed.
 

McSpin

New Member
Mar 17, 2005
34
0
0
I read a couple pages of this thread and then realized I didn't have the month it would take to read it all.... so I may be repeating someone else.

A pistol can be a very useful item and I have a permit to carry one. I've never felt the need for one when I ride, but that's just because I don't feel threatened where I ride. However, I fully support the right for anyone to carry one while riding, who feels they need the protection. There is no law that says they have to use it or even present it, no matter the situation. It's a judgement that they have the right to make depending on the situation.

I would like to clear up some things that I read here. First, no one I know is carrying with the intention of shooting anyone. Their first line of defense is to simply scare away someone who is threatening them physically. 99% of the time an antagonist will simply leave when presented with the option of approaching someone with a gun. Nobody who is sane, is going to pull a gun and just blow someone away. It's main purpose is to let the attacker know that the odds may not be on their side, and that backing off is the prudent thing to do.

Of course, everyone who has a gun should be trained and educated thoroughly on it's use. Sure, they can be dangerous and accidents can happen, but this is true of many things. Far more children die in swimming pools than get killed by a gun. I don't see any groups out to ban swimming pools. The same analogy can be made with many other dangerous activities that we commonly engage in every day. Of course, the press sensationalizes every shooting and all but ignores the everyday drowning. It's not small wonder that some have such a negative opinion of guns.

Having the freedom to protect ourselves (or not if we choose) is one of the many great things about this country. Freedom and liberty come only with a price. Most who live here would say the price is worth it. Those who don't, are free to move.
 

mitosis

New Member
Jun 21, 2004
1,539
0
0
McSpin said:
I read a couple pages of this thread and then realized I didn't have the month it would take to read it all.... so I may be repeating someone else.

A pistol can be a very useful item and I have a permit to carry one. I've never felt the need for one when I ride, but that's just because I don't feel threatened where I ride. However, I fully support the right for anyone to carry one while riding, who feels they need the protection. There is no law that says they have to use it or even present it, no matter the situation. It's a judgement that they have the right to make depending on the situation.

I would like to clear up some things that I read here. First, no one I know is carrying with the intention of shooting anyone. Their first line of defense is to simply scare away someone who is threatening them physically. 99% of the time an antagonist will simply leave when presented with the option of approaching someone with a gun. Nobody who is sane, is going to pull a gun and just blow someone away. It's main purpose is to let the attacker know that the odds may not be on their side, and that backing off is the prudent thing to do.

Of course, everyone who has a gun should be trained and educated thoroughly on it's use. Sure, they can be dangerous and accidents can happen, but this is true of many things. Far more children die in swimming pools than get killed by a gun. I don't see any groups out to ban swimming pools. The same analogy can be made with many other dangerous activities that we commonly engage in every day. Of course, the press sensationalizes every shooting and all but ignores the everyday drowning. It's not small wonder that some have such a negative opinion of guns.

Having the freedom to protect ourselves (or not if we choose) is one of the many great things about this country. Freedom and liberty come only with a price. Most who live here would say the price is worth it. Those who don't, are free to move.
... and if the attacker has a gun?
 

bloke911

New Member
Aug 14, 2005
5
0
0
McSpin said:
Of course, everyone who has a gun should be trained and educated thoroughly on it's use. Sure, they can be dangerous and accidents can happen, but this is true of many things. Far more children die in swimming pools than get killed by a gun. I don't see any groups out to ban swimming pools. The same analogy can be made with many other dangerous activities that we commonly engage in every day. Of course, the press sensationalizes every shooting and all but ignores the everyday drowning..

Ok New thread.


How many people carry there pool with them when they ride? Pools are more dangerous then guns so... attackers should be more afraid of pools and any one who carries a pool should be safer. As long As he or she is properly trained in the use of pools.


Thankyou:D:D:D:D

BUSH in 2008
 

Similar threads