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



Dan H

New Member
Sep 17, 2004
209
0
0
From the number of replies I gather this thread has been around a while.

I only read a few responses but it looks like most everything has been covered.
I started carrying in the early '90s but had a hard time figuring out how to carry on a bike. I didn't want to put it in a pack or off body in case I somehow became seperated from the bike. When I went to a gun store in full road gear to look for a holster, the owner patronized me saying that I would first need a carry permit. Duh! I ended up designing a holster specificly for cycling but turns out to work well for other situations as well. When my friends found out about it they wanted one too and soon after I put them into production and sold them through local retailers and the internet. I used to carry a Glock 23 (compact .40) because of it's resistance to sweat, rain, mud or whatever but it was a bit clunky and heavy to be comfortable for everyday carry. I like the idea of the little Kel-Tecs but the folks at the range tell me the rentals sometimes jam. I settled on a Scandium/titanium .38 with laser grips because of the aforementioned resistance to elements and the utter reliability of the time tested revolver design. It's not as light or flat as the .380 Kel-Tec but I traded that for more power and reliability.
To those of you who wonder why I think I need to carry, why do you think you don't? Reports of assault on cyclists by both 4 legged and two legged predators abound!
That's my 2 cents. Now I'll go read more of the replies.


Joe West said:
Just wondering how many of you carry a gun as part of your cycling equipment? Here in Arizona we can legally carry open and concealed (concealed with permit).

For long distance touring and bicycle camping... I think I'd feel safer carrying my .45 semi-auto pistol (concealed so it doesn't freak people out).

Anyone else carry while biking?

JW
 

OneRing

New Member
Sep 29, 2004
41
0
0
61
It seems this issue has become very centred on the USA. There are many countries where one's personal safety is regularly at risk & there is a high incidence of gun ownership.

I would exclude countries like Canada, Australia, etc as the vast majority of weapon are used for hunting, farming etc which is not really what we are talking about. The fact remain that these countries have a low incidence of gun crime.

I live in rural Ireland & I don't think there are any farmers about to take a pot shot at me. I'm more likely to have a problem with a horse (bicycles seem to give them the willies).

But if you think of the countries where you might consider carrying a gun around as you go about you daily business (and there are many) are confined to the third world. Except the USA. It's the height of irony that the USA as the richest country in the world has in this respect a quality of life similar to the poorest nations.

It really is a pitifull inditement of American society. I acually agree that the guns are a symptomn rather than the cause. And the cause is obviously some fundamental flaw in American society/culture.

I'm not trying to lay the blame at the feet of individuals I believe there are good & bad people everywhere & americans are no worst or better than anyone else but the fact remains that americans kill each other at a rate similar to the most lawless & disfunctional nations on earth.

It's an interesting question & really ALL americans need to take a critical look at themselves & ask themselves why. You may live in a part of the USA which is safe as safe can be but you are still part of American society & as such have a stake in the goood of society as a whole.

You can admit your country is not perfect & still be patriotic. I'm Australian & will happily tell you about Australia's flaws. But I still want them to beat the POMS in cricket.

My opinion is that the root of many problems are the foundations of the culture. For example Australia was initially settled by convicts & in the case of the Irish many political pruisioners. This legacy form the basis of much of australian culture (not all for the good).

America was on the other hand settled by what amounted to religious zealots. This is why america to this day is very morally conservative. Even american radicalism is reactionary in flavour. Look at the abortion issue in America. Capital punishment (eye for an eye). In God we trust, God bless America etc etc.

This has made you the ecomomic powerhouse that you are but it also means yoi are riduled with guily everytime you enjoy yourselves. Two weeks holiday a year? Anyone in Europe want a job with only two weeks holiday? Don't think so. I'd go around shooting people if that's all the holiday's I got.

A lot of europe, beer in McDonalds & the fabric of society is not unraveling.

Roman catholic europe *** rated TV on regular cable. No one bats an eyelid.

Did you know that sat least 10 times as many slaves went to Brazil as to the USA. They mostly inter bred so don't have the same black white issues you have.

You see it's radical christianity. Lets face it we are all suffering from the results of radical religion these days. (You just about have to get naked to get on a plane now). I live quite close to Shannon airport & there's a poor old Guarda that has to stand freezing his bollocks of out in the middle of a field to guard the back gate from terrorists. I often stop for a chat when I ride that way (cycling reference). Oh & he doesn't have a gun. (Gun reference).
 

Dan H

New Member
Sep 17, 2004
209
0
0
What are you, French? I would expect that kind of reply from a lay down.
I wear a gun ESPECIALLY when I go out with my girl!
When you are assaulted you can be a victim or a survivor.

As for Columbine, if just one teacher had been armed, a whole lot of innocent lives might have been saved!

Routier said:
Are you sick? What attitude is that? You also wear a gun while going to the theatre with your girl?
Well I guess it's just typical american behaviour. I saw that movie once "Bowling for Columbine". You should watch that, it gives you a whole other look on the carrying of weapons.
Answer to you question: No I don't carry a weapon on training!
 

OneRing

New Member
Sep 29, 2004
41
0
0
61
OH & I still recon you'd be most likely to blow your balls off that anything else. Or spend the rest of your life with a gun shaped imprint on your ****.

That last post was way too serious. Better have some more performance deminishing drugs.
 

OneRing

New Member
Sep 29, 2004
41
0
0
61
Dan H said:
What are you, French? I would expect that kind of reply from a lay down.
I wear a gun ESPECIALLY when I go out with my girl!
When you are assaulted you can be a victim or a survivor.

As for Columbine, if just one teacher had been armed, a whole lot of innocent lives might have been saved!
Dan Mate do yourself a favour, dig up some Irish relatives, get your Irish nationality & come on over to Ireland & you'll never need that gun again. Relax mate, have a guiness, no gun toting gangs on the wild streets of Ennis, walk around with your girl in complete security. We'v e got a few crims in Dublin with guns but they only shoot each other. The weathers **** but apart from that it's just about paradise on earth.

Doesn't sound like much fun over there, sounds like you have to be Rambo just to walk down the shop for a packed of fags.

Ps I'm an immigrant here myself.
 

Dan H

New Member
Sep 17, 2004
209
0
0
Excuse me, I have to on a tri state killing spree....



OneRing said:
Dan Mate do yourself a favour, dig up some Irish relatives, get your Irish nationality & come on over to Ireland & you'll never need that gun again. Relax mate, have a guiness, no gun toting gangs on the wild streets of Ennis, walk around with your girl in complete security. We'v e got a few crims in Dublin with guns but they only shoot each other. The weathers **** but apart from that it's just about paradise on earth.

Doesn't sound like much fun over there, sounds like you have to be Rambo just to walk down the shop for a packed of fags.

Ps I'm an immigrant here myself.
 

wolfix

New Member
Mar 11, 2005
2,756
0
0
OneRing said:
I would exclude countries like Canada, Australia, etc as the vast majority of weapon are used for hunting, farming etc which is not really what we are talking about. The fact remain that these countries have a low incidence of gun crime.
Canada ....... There are many places in canada where gun violence is common...



But if you think of the countries where you might consider carrying a gun around as you go about you daily business (and there are many) are confined to the third world. Except the USA. It's the height of irony that the USA as the richest country in the world has in this respect a quality of life similar to the poorest nations.
That statement is totally false. Very few of the people in America carry a gun. It is rare to know someone who does.

It really is a pitifull inditement of American society. I acually agree that the guns are a symptomn rather than the cause. And the cause is obviously some fundamental flaw in American society/culture.
Look where the gun crime occurs on a daily basis...... That segment needs to determine why they feel guns solve their problems.

I'm not trying to lay the blame at the feet of individuals I believe there are good & bad people everywhere & americans are no worst or better than anyone else but the fact remains that americans kill each other at a rate similar to the most lawless & disfunctional nations on earth.
Not all parts of American society has problems with guns...

My opinion is that the root of many problems are the foundations of the culture. For example Australia was initially settled by convicts & in the case of the Irish many political pruisioners. This legacy form the basis of much of australian culture (not all for the good).

America was on the other hand settled by what amounted to religious zealots. This is why america to this day is very morally conservative. Even american radicalism is reactionary in flavour. Look at the abortion issue in America. Capital punishment (eye for an eye). In God we trust, God bless America etc etc.
It is not in the neighborhood of the religious zeolots where gun crime is out of control..... it is the neighborhoods of the descendents of slaves where the large percentage of gun crime occurs.
 

stevebaby

New Member
Jun 22, 2004
3,515
4
0
6fhscjess said:
Once again Steve Baby goes off on to nuclear weapons instead of dealing with the topic of firearms. You are incapable of logic because you blame inanimate objects instead of the people that commit the crimes. Also people have to drop and/or detonate the bombs so without people to do this the bombs do nothing.

Nuclear weapons are truly weapons of mass destruction. They kill indiscrimanetly. Guns to kill effectively have to be aimed that is why when you look at wars the amount of people wounded far exceeds the amount of people killed. Out of war every so often a stray bullet will kill an innocent person but there are many other things that also cost innocent lives but you don't hear of the anti-gunners trying to do anything about them.There are many more instances where having a gun has saved innocent lives but you choose to ignore this.
The huge majority of gun owners do not go around killing people but you and people like you want to blame all gun owners for a very small minority of people that do. Also for your information criminals are not gun owners they are almost always people in possesion of stolen property which is stolen from not only gun owners but the police and military or they violate the laws and make their own.
It has been said all so called illegal guns start out legally well all babies are born innocent but not all stay that way but unlike guns which are an inanimate object and have no ability to choose their path in life the babies do as they grow up.

Iran and North Korea will have nuclear weapons whether we want them to or not that is why we have nuclear weapons to make sure they think twice before using them and that is why innocent people need to be armed if they choose so they can keep things in balance. Whenever there is an imbalance of power those with that power tend to abuse it.

Stop blaming guns and gun owners and place the blame where it belongs on the people that choose to commit criminal acts of which there are literally thousands of laws or more against commiting these acts.The reality is people intent on commiting a criminal act will not be detered because you say they can't do that.

Many more innocent lives are saved than are lost by gun ownership.
The estimates range from approximately 1.5 to 2.5 million defensive gun uses and the huge majority of those do not even reguire a shot to be fired because the large majority of criminals will decide it is in their best interest to leave rather than get shot.

Violent crimes such as rape, assault and murder are consistently higher where gun control is highest and lowest where gun control is non-existant or is low. Studies even from groups that are not pro-gun have shown this to be true but the anti-gun crowd chooses to ignore this fact. I went over this information in a prior post which I believe was back somewhere in the pages 60 to 70 or 70 to 80.

Steve baby did that licensed gun dealer knowingly sell these guns to criminals? Were the people that purchased these firearms legally allowed to purchase them and then the purchasers turned around and sold or gave them to criminals or the guns were stolen from these purchasers and the anti's blame the gun shop instead of the criminals that stole them or conducted straw purchases? This is a favorite tactic and use of deceipt that anti-gunners tend to use. The dealer actually sells the firearms legitamately but than whenever a gun is used in a crime they blame the dealer that sold it instead of blaming the criminals that stole it or that commited a crime by lying on the form in order to purchase the firearms. Also what was the time frame on these guns? Were all of them sold at once which I doubt or was this over a year or more?

The truth is that what happens with a gun can be good or bad depending on who's hand it is in and as I said in my prior post prohibition has never worked and has even increased crime. Criminals will always find a way to get what they want to take what we have. If they choose to use violence against me or my loved ones I want the best means possible to stop them.

You can choose to be an easy victim or not. I choose not to.
Also I'm sure people think I carry when I ride. I don't. I live in an area where I don't feel the need to and I don't want to carry any extra weight. Of course if I lived in the city where crime is much higher I would be more likely to carry but then most cities don't allow that because they have much tighter gun control and yet they also have much higher rates of violent crime and don't give me they get the guns from more lenient states because even if that is true than crime should be as high or higher in those lenient states and it is not. Hey wait a minute using the anti's logic we should ban cities because they have the highest crime rates.
So there should be no restrictions on WMDs?
Anyone can have them...to defend themselves?

Guns do not have to be aimed to kill. The number of soldiers wounded by firearms compared to the number of soldiers killed by them proves that. In any case ...in a war the intention is not to kill. Wounded enemies require care and attention and tie up valuable military resources. Wars are won by logistics.
Comparing babies to firearms? How oddly you think.

The licenced gun dealer referred to in an earlier post acquired all the weapons legally and falsely claimed that they had been made inoperable or destroyed. Many of the semi-automatic weapons (including pistols) were converted to full automatic. he sold them knowingly and deliberately to criminals who were prepared to pay higher prices than would have been possible legally (and without the paperwork). The weapons were sold over a period of a couple of years and several of the weapons were used in murders.

If prohibition/regulation has no effect on behaviour then why have laws to regulate any aspect of human behaviour?

If you think you can use a firearm to defend yourself then you have seriously deluded yourself. If someone wants to shoot you they aren't going to give you the opportunity to draw a gun. They will simply shoot you without warning...more likely when they think you have a gun.

Citizens of the US are 16 times more likely to be murdered with a gun than Australians. Britain's strong gun regulation makes them twice as safe as Australians. Why?
You already a victim....of the aggressive and deceitful marketing of firearms manufacturers who, since the American Civil War, deliberately aimed their marketing at the gullible and fearful in order to maintain the high profits of the wartime years.
 

artemidorus

New Member
Mar 10, 2004
2,307
0
36
POGATA said:
We in Europe hunt too, in fact some of us have even more handguns(see table underneath) than you folks in the USA.

?


Pogata, this is from your own source:

One study which examined the link between gun ownership rates and firearm deaths within Canadian provinces, the United States, England/Wales and Australia concluded that 92% of the variance in death rates was explained by access to firearms in those areas.
 

missing

New Member
Aug 24, 2006
26
0
0
I've read this thread with some intrest it would seem there are a fair amount of folks here who suffer from what the late great Col. Cooper caled Hoplophobia. There really is no use in arguing with folks like this since logic and reason are not part of their makeup.

For those of you who have misquoted our second amendent,

"A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed."

Why do the gun haters feel that evrywhere else in the constitution "the people" means just that the people, except in the second amendent?

As to the anti American feelings here, I guess when your the big boy on the block it's to be expected, just ask Lance.

As to carrying while cycling, I've found a Sahara Strider (chest holster) from Blackhawk works great. Holds my CZ 75 just fine.
 

missing

New Member
Aug 24, 2006
26
0
0
wolfix said:
If handguns were banned, violent crime with a gun would decrease dramatically. I know it is true some crimes can be committed with sportsman type firearms, but I doubt it would be an issue.
I'm not sure where you get your info but unless you have a source you can refer to I call BS.

Just for your info when I've seen an awful lot of "sporting arms" chopped and blocked by criminals. I've also seen an awful lot of them unaltered used by criminals.
 

Tim Lamkin

New Member
Oct 17, 2005
646
0
0
POGATA said:
Why should I have to flee from my home? :confused:

There`s a fine line between being stupid and being brave!
Not on this site :cool:


Originally Posted by wolfix ...If handguns were banned, violent crime with a gun would decrease dramatically. I know it is true some crimes can be committed with sportsman type firearms, but I doubt it would be an issue.
You have got to be kidding me
 

DV1976

New Member
Sep 29, 2004
419
0
0
I am just wondering how many of U that claim U carry guns for protection have ever been shot at? Cos all of U seem to think that U would have the time, the clarity of mind and the nerve of a contract killer to draw your gun and retalliate... Bollocks I say... An ex soldier maybe. And that takes years of specific training. But most of U would just be lucky if U remembered that U had a gun... U have been watching too many movies folks... Reality isn't like that... U'd like it to be though...
There was an old Guiness add that claimed:"80% of statistics are made on the spot"... This is definitely true for that topic...
 

6fhscjess

Member
Aug 7, 2003
180
18
18
stevebaby said:
So there should be no restrictions on WMDs?
Anyone can have them...to defend themselves?

Guns do not have to be aimed to kill. The number of soldiers wounded by firearms compared to the number of soldiers killed by them proves that. In any case ...in a war the intention is not to kill. Wounded enemies require care and attention and tie up valuable military resources. Wars are won by logistics.
Comparing babies to firearms? How oddly you think.

The licenced gun dealer referred to in an earlier post acquired all the weapons legally and falsely claimed that they had been made inoperable or destroyed. Many of the semi-automatic weapons (including pistols) were converted to full automatic. he sold them knowingly and deliberately to criminals who were prepared to pay higher prices than would have been possible legally (and without the paperwork). The weapons were sold over a period of a couple of years and several of the weapons were used in murders.

If prohibition/regulation has no effect on behaviour then why have laws to regulate any aspect of human behaviour?

If you think you can use a firearm to defend yourself then you have seriously deluded yourself. If someone wants to shoot you they aren't going to give you the opportunity to draw a gun. They will simply shoot you without warning...more likely when they think you have a gun.

Citizens of the US are 16 times more likely to be murdered with a gun than Australians. Britain's strong gun regulation makes them twice as safe as Australians. Why?
You already a victim....of the aggressive and deceitful marketing of firearms manufacturers who, since the American Civil War, deliberately aimed their marketing at the gullible and fearful in order to maintain the high profits of the wartime years.

You obviously cant put 2+2 together. you mentioned that guns that start out legally end up as illegal guns and so I said babies all start out innocent too but they don't always stay that way. As far as guns it depends who's hands they are in. Go back and read the whole sentence.
As far as nuclear weapons go I wish they did not exist but unlike you I am not under the delusion that all things will be sweet and everyone will play nice if they did not exist. Killing has been part of the human race since the beginning of time the only difference with firearms are that women, the small in stature the elderly can stop a larger more powerful aggressor. I also am intelligent enough to realize that whether the US or any other countries tell Iran, Korea etc. that they can't have nuclear weapons that if they want them they will get them anyway. I did not say guns have to be aimed to kill. I said to be effective for killing they need to be aimed if you just spray & pray you may or may not hit your victim. To listen to the anti-gunners you would think every time a shot is fired someone is wounded or killed this is not the case.

So the gun dealer was motivated by money to commit criminal acts. Well than using your type of logic we should ban money thereby removing his reason for commiting the crime. As they say the love of money is the root of all evil.

Well tell me how the laws stopped that gun dealer from commiting the crimes he did? Laws are totally ineffective against people that have chosen to commit a crime but they do serve to make people in the criminal justice system lots of money and they are used in sentencing.

I am not deluded into thinking I can use firearms in self defence because up to 2.5 million have.
Since Australia's gun control and the UK's gun control violent crime has gone up not down but you and people like you think thats okay as long as guns are not involved. You go right ahead and choose to be a victim.

You are brainwashed Steve baby by the Anti-gun groups. I have been around firearms all my life and they are not the problem people with criminal intent are.

For those interested in debunking all of the Anti-gunners claims you can put Gun facts 4.1 in your search engine and you will get all or most of the myths the anti-gunners spew and the research that show how much they lie, change statistics like including from 18-24 year olds as children to get their numbers.
 

lumpy

New Member
Oct 22, 2003
513
2
0
POGATA said:
I`ve been shot at with an air rifle from a passing car(other cyclists in the city I live, have been shot at from houses along the roads). Car drivers and truckers deliberately pass only inches away. I`ve been passed by car drivers who when in front of me deliberately hit the brakes so I crash into their cars.

So when a kid shoots a BB gun at you, you'll shoot back?
you'll get into a firefight with people in a house?
A car or truck who you've decided has passed too closely will get shot at?
And someone who slams on their brakes in front of you ............ you'll shoot them?

You live in a dangerous neighborhood. Dangerous because you're so ready to pull a trigger. You should be sure to let everyone know where you live how ready you are to shoot to protect yourself. Maybe a letter to the editor of your local paper?
I'm sure everyone will all back off and give you plenty of space once they know.

Of course you're not a law breaker so you certainly have a concealed weapon permit right?
 

Similar threads