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



Duffer

New Member
Feb 10, 2007
20
0
0
63
For the benefit of us all, may I suggest employing something other than insults and personal attacks? It's the mark of poor argumentation and inadequate time to formulate a good response.

Many of the items are peppered with degrading comments regarding the lineage, heritage, sexual orientation, and ethnicity of the other participants. While Roberts Rules of Order may not appropriate, general standards of civility and personal conduct are worthwile and the mark of education. (I've yet to see anything written indicating inadequate education among any of the participants on either side of the equation).

Argumentation can be as intense as you crave, and it certainly is lively, isn't it?
 

CAMPYBOB

Well-Known Member
Sep 12, 2005
11,945
2,086
113
Our cycling club of about 300 total members has lost 4 members that died while cycling. The last, our club vice president, died as the result of a broken neck this past June after he overcooked a turn while descending and vaulted a guard rail into a ravine.

My rifle and pistol clubs, each of the two i belong to have over 1000 members, are composed of hunters, target shooters, self-defense shooters, etc. have suffered ZERO deaths due to participation in their chosen sport.

Perhaps it is time bicycles were banned.:D
 

Duffer

New Member
Feb 10, 2007
20
0
0
63
I'm reminded of a certain somebody, who was 13-years-old, who looked surprisingly like me. But it wasn't me. Really. He just looked me, only sillier. And bloodier. (Oh, alright, it was me! Just don't bug me about it, okay? Can't a man live down his mistakes???)

A more experienced peer had told me it was possible to fend off dogs by taking the frame mounted pump, and with a snap of the wrist, extending it like a trombone. I was on my brand-new Batavus, and cycling in the country at twilight. Just after passing a house, two doberman pincers took off after me. (You can see it coming, can't you?) Recalling the advice, I deftly took my pump, and with a brisk backward snap of the wrist, extended it into the rear wheel of my bike. It somehow went completely between the spokes. Sir Isaac Newton would have easily calculated my trajectory as the bike abruptly stopped, dead still, and I went somersaulting in an olympic pose called "the barbary tarantula". Skidding to a stop on the pavement under the shadow of a willow tree, the two dogs came sniffing up to me. I heard one dog say to the other, "Hey! We caught one! Now what do we do with it?"The other replied, "Well, I dunno. It doesn't smell very good". Just then, the lady of the house came out the door to see what had gotten the dogs barking. Laying on the road, in the twilight, under the shade of a willow tree, she didn't see me. The two dogs ran inside. She closed the door and turned out the light. And there lay I, sprawled upon the pavement, with a pump between my spokes, in the shape of the letter "V".

- FIN
 

cbjesseeNH

Member
Jun 10, 2005
424
6
0
stevebaby said:
USA murder rate is almost 3X that of Australia

USA murder rate with firearm is 8X that of Australia.
Wow! With an estimated 1 gun per 3 persons in the US, and some 1/2 to 2/3 of US homes having a gun on the premesis, you would think the differential would be much higher. Maybe some cultures handle their freedoms better than others...and give them up much less willingly.

Proportionally, it would seem that the shortage of handguns leads Australians to murder by other means. You find that in US states where guns are strictly regulated, the violent crime rate utilizing non-gun weapons is higher. But that doesn't make press, as Brady wasn't knifed - he was shot, so the anti movements don't push the media on non-gun incidents.

I guess compared to yet another sensless shooting, a stabbing makes more sense???
 

cbjesseeNH

Member
Jun 10, 2005
424
6
0
"The NRA has been using the figures about violent crime in Australia, fraudulently, for quite a while now. What they never show is the text accompanying the graph...which explains that the method of classifying 'violent crime' changed at roughly the same time."

Coincidentally, the same point is being raised in the UK right now, where, although the number of gun-crimes has increased, the "changes in the way data are gathered" arguement is used by the Home Office to discount the issue. One good way of never finding what you don't want to find is, apparently, to make sure you can't look for it.

When crime drops, one never hears any hedging about different methods of gathering or analyzing data ...

Tell you what - let's wait another 30-40 years to see how the long term statistics bear out in countries that have banned guns before we start in on the USA. Oh yeah...people claim that if gun bans elsewhere are not obviously succesful, it's because guns from the US are mucking up the program.

So although we seem to have data in the US that concealed carry decreases crime, we need to discard those data and believe that if we would only ban guns in the US, the statistics that are faltering in countries that have already banned guns would finally bear out the truth.

"Leap before you look" is not an adage - and for a good reason.
 

stevebaby

New Member
Jun 22, 2004
3,515
4
0
feetorfish said:
Stevebaby, thanks for the welcome to the board. I went on the equipment part of the forum for the first time, and this was the busiest section. I guess it does not belong here, more a political question. ... and it would be better if we just rode bikes and did not discuss these types of questions on boards like this. this.
My point exactly.
 

stevebaby

New Member
Jun 22, 2004
3,515
4
0
missing said:
Just so I'm clear, acording to our Aussie, Euro, and misguided American friends on this forum, in the U.S. if you carry a handgun your a paranoid nutso. If you ever had to try defend yourself with it you would be so full of fear or adrenaline that you wouldn't be able to use it. Even the police only have them for pipes and bottles and if it was an armed bad guy we have to call up a special unit. Only those trained to a razers edge could even begin to have the skills to handle an armed confrontation with a handgun.

Well what do you know an off duty police officer stops a shotgun wielding nutball, (thats right a shotgun, you know a "sporting arm") with a handgun (early reports say a Kimber 1911 in 45acp, Col. Cooper is smiling from heaven).

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/02/13/national/main2466711.shtml

Armed citizens in this country use firearms with great regularity to prevent crime, most of the time with out touching off a shot.

http://www.nraila.org/ArmedCitizen/Default.aspx

Undrestand this, our country is a counrty born of war, and firearms are a big part of our heritage, in fact such a big part it's in our constitution.

Recomended reading.

http://harris.dvc.org.uk/jeff/

http://www.johnlott.org/

stevebaby since you like to ask questions of others here, why did you quit being a LEO? Get caught on the take? Lose your nerve (this is my guess based on his post)?
Actually...the off-duty officer was unable to actually hit the gunman...he apparently fired his weapon 'as a distraction'!
John Lott (AKA 'Mary Rosh')...claimed to have conducted a survey which supported his hypothesis that guns prevent crime. When challenged on the data...he claimed to have lost the data in a hard drive crash!
He also used the name 'Mary Rosh' to promote his own book and lied about that too!
Not exactly a credible source.

I suggest you read Dave Grossman's book and expand your knowledge of what actually happens to human beings when under stress. Here's an interview with him.
file:///C:/WINDOWS/My%20Documents/s23921.htm
ABC Radio National - Background Briefing: 2 May 1999 - Killology

'Caught on the take','Lost your nerve'...C'mon...is that the best you can do? :D :D :D
 

stevebaby

New Member
Jun 22, 2004
3,515
4
0
Duffer said:
I am roadkill on the Information Superhighway - I tried to upload a jpg of Graham Chapman in a general's uniform with the logo, "Stop that! That's silly!". I don't seem to have the wherewithall of doing so on this website.

Now then, let's see. Australia has approximately 16.5 million people and the United States just cleared 300,000,000.
Australia's population is 20.4 million.
 

Tapeworm

New Member
Dec 1, 2006
130
0
0
stevebaby said:
Actually...the off-duty officer was unable to actually hit the gunman...he apparently fired his weapon 'as a distraction'!
John Lott (AKA 'Mary Rosh')...claimed to have conducted a survey which supported his hypothesis that guns prevent crime. When challenged on the data...he claimed to have lost the data in a hard drive crash!
He also used the name 'Mary Rosh' to promote his own book and lied about that too!
Not exactly a credible source.

I suggest you read Dave Grossman's book and expand your knowledge of what actually happens to human beings when under stress. Here's an interview with him.
file:///C:/WINDOWS/My%20Documents/s23921.htm
ABC Radio National - Background Briefing: 2 May 1999 - Killology

'Caught on the take','Lost your nerve'...C'mon...is that the best you can do? :D :D :D

+1 on Grossman's book, "On Killing". Makes for very interesting reading.

All I know is that I am very, very happy with the fact that I live in a country where the merest possibility of the slightest thought of strapping on a gun when I go riding doesn't even begin to enter my mind.

"Where is the nearest coffee shop??" is what I am concerned with!

We can argue this topic ad nauseum however it won't change the fundamentals of our environment or mindset.

My 2 cent, I am very comfortable living in an environment where I do not feel the slightest need to go around carrying a firearm just in case and that the chances of being shot by one are remote. More likely to get killed in a car crash than shot.

Though I do have a question for those who do carry a gun while riding... do you bother with the latest carbon frames and wheels when you are carrying and extra .5 kgs or more? All that extra weight up hills.... ugh!
 

missing

New Member
Aug 24, 2006
26
0
0
stevebaby said:
Actually...the off-duty officer was unable to actually hit the gunman...he apparently fired his weapon 'as a distraction'!
The kill shot has not been identified yet, even if he did not hit him he stoped him long enough for backup to arrive and end the situation. Something he would not have been able to do if he was unarmed. No matter what he saved lives.
 

missing

New Member
Aug 24, 2006
26
0
0
stevebaby said:
John Lott (AKA 'Mary Rosh')...claimed to have conducted a survey which supported his hypothesis that guns prevent crime. When challenged on the data...he claimed to have lost the data in a hard drive crash!
He also used the name 'Mary Rosh' to promote his own book and lied about that too!
Not exactly a credible source.
Since he holds a unpopular position within certain circles, he is attacked without merit.
 

missing

New Member
Aug 24, 2006
26
0
0
stevebaby said:
I suggest you read Dave Grossman's book and expand your knowledge of what actually happens to human beings when under stress. Here's an interview with him.
file:///C:/WINDOWS/My%20Documents/s23921.htm
ABC Radio National - Background Briefing: 2 May 1999 - Killology
I'm fully aware of what happens to the human body under stress, been there done that.
 

stevebaby

New Member
Jun 22, 2004
3,515
4
0
missing said:
Since he holds a unpopular position within certain circles, he is attacked without merit.
He publicly admitted using the false name to praise and promote his own book, falsely claimed to be one of his own students and has said publicly that he can't produce the data on which his hypothesis was constructed.
Making a public accusation of corruption with no evidence...you're a security guard, right?
You sure aren't any sort of professional law enforcement officer. :D :D
 

missing

New Member
Aug 24, 2006
26
0
0
stevebaby said:
He publicly admitted using the false name to praise and promote his own book, falsely claimed to be one of his own students and has said publicly that he can't produce the data on which his hypothesis was constructed.
Making a public accusation of corruption with no evidence...you're a security guard, right?
You sure aren't any sort of professional law enforcement officer. :D :D
Do have proof?

Been a State Trooper for the past 17 years, you quit being a LEO after 4 years, kinda makes a person go ....hmmmm.
 

missing

New Member
Aug 24, 2006
26
0
0
You still wont answer the question, so I guess you are a coward. Did a bad guy scare you, make you wet your pants?
 

6fhscjess

Member
Aug 7, 2003
180
18
18
stevebaby said:
If laws are ineffective at preventing crime...why have any laws at all? Legalize drunk-driving, abolish age restrictions on alcohol purchase,legalize drugs etc. Ludicrous.
The crime rate in Montreal escalated rapidly within an hour of the Montreal police going on strike in 1969. Police enforce laws...just as they do here against illegal guns.
Re 'Gun Facts 4.1'. This, as it pertains to Australia, is simply a collection of lies. Handguns have always been rare in Australian history and it has for 80+ years been extremely difficult to have one legally. Ownership of a handgun for personal protection was even more difficult. The only non-security officer I've ever heard of having a pistol permit for self-defence was a jeweller who frequently (so he claimed) carried large quantities of jewellery. His permit was revoked after his girlfriend tried to shoot him with it after a drunken domestic dispute. She missed him from a range of around 5 -10m. Most of the guns in Australia were not banned...they were restricted according to need. I would have no trouble buying one legally if I could demonstrate a need and complied with the law.
Anyone claiming to use a gun to kill in self-defence would most likely face a manslaughter charge, like the female security guard who was recently bashed quite savagely in the commission of a robbery. After she had been bashed she drew her pistol and killed the robber who was attemptig to flee. She was eventually acquitted,on the grounds of diminished responsibility...not self-defence. Her lawyers never pleaded self-defence since it would have resulted in a murder conviction and it was clearly impossible to plead self-defence when the robber was fleeing the scene and was shot from behind.
The crime statistics quoted in 'Gun Facts 4.1' bear no relation to the figures from the Australian Bureau of Statistics, whose Director, as I previously stated, has publicly refuted many times the misuse of raw figures and deliberate lies disseminated in the infomercial aired by the NRA and shown here on a few current affairs shows which also debunked the lies of the NRA, who obviously never guessed that it would receive an airing here.
The actual figures show a fall in homicide,violent crimes and sexual assault and the previous rise was due to a change in classification,with such offences as 'Resist Police' and domestic violence being re-classified and a standardized method of collecting data across 9 police forces.
Read the actual figures for yourself...instead of the utter ******** being spread by the NRA.
http://www.aic.gov.au/publications/facts/2005/01_recordedCrime.html
Recorded crime (in: Australian crime : facts and figures 2005) [Publication]

I already answered your question about why we have laws. Money for the criminal justice system and they are used for sentencing.
The fact that crime went up when the police went on strike proves that the laws were no deterrent to crime because the laws were still on the books and the criminals ignored them. What does act as a deterrent are the police if they are present or in the area but criminals tend to avoid where the police are because they don't want to get caught. As I said before with all the laws there already are if laws stopped crime there would be none.
What is a criminal? Someone who does not obey the law.

Gun Facts does not use statistics from the NRA they use many sources.
The liers are the anti-gun groups that use people aged up to 24 when they talk about children killed per day by firearms. They also don't seperate how many were killed in commision of crimes etc. On the page for Australian statistics that I was looking at it did not say anything about the amount of handguns in Australia so I don't know why your mentioning that.

Also not sure of spelling but Bessilles and Kellerman wrote anti-gun studies that were debunked and Bessilles who had won an award for his had to forefit the award.

As I have shown in my prior posts even non pro gun studies such as those done by the Clinton administration could show no evidence that gun control reduced crime.

As I've said before crime goes up and down but how does it compare since gun control was enacted?

How many people were massacred before Port Author and if they were shootings was the only person with a gun the shooter meaning no one else could defend themselves?
People tend to do one of 3 things when attacked. They either run if they can, hide or fight back. When you don't have an equal means of fighting back the odds of your survival are much less.

Here is a link for you http://newsbusters.org/node/9140 on the US.

Some mass murders in the US for you no gun involved:
9/11 over 3000 murdered Planes crashed into WTC.
1995 Timothy McVeigh 168 murdered-chemical explosion
Andrew Kehoe Bath 1927 dynamite bomb at school murdered 45 people including himself and injured an additional 58.

In Japan 2001 Mamoru Takuma stabbed eight children to death and seriously wounded 13 other children and 2 teachers.
There are many murders committed througout the world that don't involve guns.

Some of these definitely could have been reduced in severity or prevented if some of the victims had been armed.

Gun control proponents included Stalin, Hitler, Pol Pot etc.
I choose not to be in their camp.
 

alienator

Well-Known Member
Jun 10, 2004
12,596
310
0
missing said:
You still wont answer the question, so I guess you are a coward. Did a bad guy scare you, make you wet your pants?

Talk about cowards.....here you are talking like a rough and tumble stud boy. Talk is cheap Frances, and there are more than enough cops that are shivering cowards at their core. Careful how you pigeonhole people, because it can just as easily be done to you.

You sound like an embarassment to the shield you wear.
 

Similar threads