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

[stevebaby]

"better to die on your feet than to live on your knees."

A sentiment obviously not shared by General 'Dugout Doug' Douglas MacArthur, who when faced by the invading Japanese Army in the Philippines evidently decided that discretion was the better part of valour, and was rewarded with a Congressional Medal of Honour.

 

[stevebaby]

"Man! Am i glad i didn't resist those nazis!"



"It's much better to trust my masters...stevebaby said it's so!"

How many Jews survived the Ghetto Uprising? How effective were their pistols, rifles and petrol bombs at saving their lives?
The answers are...
1) None.
2) Not at all.

 

[stevebaby]

This is an interesting concept... and appears to be consistent with your other posts. If you are weak, recognize your weakness, throw yourself on the mercy of your attacker and (assuming your attacker allows you to live); resist as best you can in a passive sense.

I personally would prefer to be strong in the first place (carry a gun) and then when someone attacks, rather than depending on the mercy of my attacker, I'll fight back with everything I have.

Please... someone... anyone... explain to me how NOT having the option of using a weapon (a gun in this case) is a BETTER choice HAVING the option of using a weapon. If someone is attacking you or your family... wouldn't you always at least like to have the option of defending yourself with a gun or some other weapon?

Honestly... steve's post cuts right to the heart of the issue... weakness leads to surrender and your attackers are free to do whatever they want. Strength (which many people will recognize is reinforced by carrying a gun) leads to your ability to defend yourself with force and stop the attack.

I choose to give myself the option to use a gun... and I choose strength over weakness.

Others choose to not give themselves the option to use a gun and pick a slightly weaker position (or perhaps their governments choose not to give them the option to carry a gun so that they are forced into a weaker position).

Joe

Do you carry your own parachute when travelling by plane?
Or do you choose to be a victim if the plane goes down?
You're frightened of a lot of things that are very unlikely to happen.
You're a victim of fear, and the idea that carrying a gun makes you strong is a very telling one.
You're scared of 'bad guys', bogeymen, monsters under the bed and probably your own shadow.
How sad that must be.

 

[stevebaby]

Rebecca Peters, presently the Director of the International Action Network on Small Arms (IANSA) and formerly chair of the (Australian) National Coalition for Gun Control at the time of the Port Arthur Massacre in 1996, and who played a key role in the introduction of stricter gun control and gun confiscation, in Australia, has indeed argued that individuals have no inherent right to self-defense. Given that this 'lie-down-and-take-it' attitude has had a decade to mature, it's not surprising to see the position has flourished in isolated quarters of the world.

File this one under 'Chinese gun control...1.3 billion and rising.'
Alternately...file under 'Spurious quotations by nutjobs.'
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2002/03/27/MN11348.DTL
Merced massacre -- dad kills 4 kids, self / Ex-wife finds grisly scene on return from walk

 

[bigpedaler]

You still haven't answered the question.
Where are the billion people?

they've all been privately contacted, and are preparing conduct thier own critical mass ride...to your front door -- boo-yah!

 

[CAMPYBOB]

How many Jews survived the Ghetto Uprising? How effective were their pistols, rifles and petrol bombs at saving their lives?
The answers are...
1) None.
2) Not at all.

Once again, you are incorrect in your posting, stevebaby.

1. Over 100 Jews survived the second uprising in the Warsaw Ghetto...armed jews that fought their way out and gave time and diversion for others to escape thru the sewers. That is not an insignificant number considering how few weapons the Jews possessed, how little training they had as a fighting unit and how vastly outgunned they were.

100 Jews, give or take, isn't many compared to the numbers rounded up and killed, but I'll take my chances armed against any enemy everytime. Those that were unarmed had zero chance.

2. As far as being effective, armed partisans from the Jews, to Yugoslavia, to France...they assisted the cause in many ways.

Tell me, does this group of Jews look somehow 'ineffective' to you?

Do they look somehow 'less effective' to you than those that simply marched unarmed into the gas chambers?

How effective were they? If they only took out ONE thug...just one...before surrendering their lives in defense of themselves, their friends, their families and their homelands...then they were very effective indeed.

Please explain 'effective' in terms of simply surrendering to those who would do you harm as opposed to standing up on your hind legs like a man.

 

[reallyoldpunk]

When people finally resort to using Nazi Charactures and Nazi Death Camp victims on Fark, it means the thread is over. I would suggest the same ending here.

In trying to connect the first post in this thread to a nut jobs last post, I have to ask...are you suggesting I carry an armed Jew in my jersey pocket for personal protection?

Yep,that sounds ludicrous, definitely, thread over.

Godwin!

 

[stevebaby]

How many Jews survived the Ghetto Uprising? How effective were their pistols, rifles and petrol bombs at saving their lives?
The answers are...
1) None.
2) Not at all.

Once again, you are incorrect in your posting, stevebaby.

1. Over 100 Jews survived the second uprising in the Warsaw Ghetto...armed jews that fought their way out and gave time and diversion for others to escape thru the sewers. That is not an insignificant number considering how few weapons the Jews possessed, how little training they had as a fighting unit and how vastly outgunned they were.

100 Jews, give or take, isn't many compared to the numbers rounded up and killed, but I'll take my chances armed against any enemy everytime. Those that were unarmed had zero chance.

7 000 died at the hands of the Nazis during the uprising and 50 000 were killed in reprisal, to save 100?
It was a futile gesture.

 

[stevebaby]

When people finally resort to using Nazi Charactures and Nazi Death Camp victims on Fark, it means the thread is over. I would suggest the same ending here.

In trying to connect the first post in this thread to a nut jobs last post, I have to ask...are you suggesting I carry an armed Jew in my jersey pocket for personal protection?

Yep,that sounds ludicrous, definitely, thread over.

Godwin's Law applies yet again.

It might be better to tow a missile launcher behind our bikes...never know when a 'BAD GUY' might crash a plane on you.

 

[bigpedaler]

it mildly amuses me -- and disappoints me also -- that a simple question "how many of you carry a gun as part of your cycling equipment?" could result in such vitriol, and end up being a platform for the old argument about gun rights. there are a couple simple realities we have to deal with.

1.) different countries do things different ways, for different reasons. none are absolutely correct.

2.) in THIS country (USA), the right to keep and bear arms is guaranteed in the Constitution, and can only be lost by felony conviction, mental incapacity, or the back-door efforts of special interests. i personally do not carry/own anymore, as i don't trust myself not to want to use it if run off the road by a road-raging driver. i also believe that there needs to be some serious education in this country about the responsibilities that go hand-in-hand with our rights -- not just as they pertain to guns, either.

3.)no one has to agree with everyone else, or even anyone else -- that doesn't mean the other person is an idiot, nut-job, or anything else. you're free to believe your point of view is educated and intelligent, and thus the only right way to think. you are not free to denigrate anyone else for he same belief in a different philosophy.
so, forget about who's right about the efficacy of firearms possession, and simply answer the forking question -- is it part of your gear? those who say "yes" are free to contiue to carry; those who say "no" are free not to. to all the rest of this, GET OVER IT!

 

[CAMPYBOB]

It was a futile gesture.

Please tell that to those that survived.

 

[stevebaby]

It was a futile gesture.

Please tell that to those that survived.

I'm sure that the burden of guilt that the survivors must have borne would have convinced them of the futility of it.
What the Ghetto uprising has to do with carrying a weapon while cycling quite escapes me.
Care to explain it?

 

[CAMPYBOB]

I'm sure that the burden of guilt that the survivors must have borne would have convinced them of the futility of it.
What the Ghetto uprising has to do with carrying a weapon while cycling quite escapes me.
Care to explain it?

Guilt?

Yitzhak Zuckerman was an armed survivor of the Warsaw Ghetto.

"Zuckerman also joined Mordechai Anielewicz, the leader of the Warsaw Ghetto Uprising in April 1943 and the Polish uprising in August 1944. Zuckerman survived the war and in 1947 emigrated to Israel where he established the Ghetto Fighters' Kibbutz and the Ghetto Fighters' Museum."

He sure doesn't sound guilt-ridden to me. Does he sound guilt ridden to you? He went to Israel and helped others never to forget the danger of being unarmed.

Sure, stevebaby, I'll be glad to enlighten you what the uprising has to do with being armed while cycling.

It's just two simple words that apply to life on the street in peace time or in time of war.

Self defense.

We may not face a 'rational' stormtrooper, but there are irrational crackheads that kill for much less than what they could pawn a bicycle for, irate motorists that chase down and beat cyclists, muggers, thieves and rapists.

Being afraid and being prepared are two different things. You carry a patch kit or spare tire not out of fear, but in order to be prepared for the odds of getting a flat. Those that carry a firearm are prepared for the odds of meeting a criminal.

 

[matagi]

[Sure, stevebaby, I'll be glad to enlighten you what the uprising has to do with being armed while cycling.

It's just two simple words that apply to life on the street in peace time or in time of war.

Self defense.

We may not face a 'rational' stormtrooper, but there are irrational crackheads that kill for much less than what they could pawn a bicycle for, irate motorists that chase down and beat cyclists, muggers, thieves and rapists.

Being afraid and being prepared are two different things. You carry a patch kit or spare tire not out of fear, but in order to be prepared for the odds of getting a flat. Those that carry a firearm are prepared for the odds of meeting a criminal.

I asked this before and didn't get an answer .... What is the real risk of meeting a criminal intent on doing you harm while you are out riding your bike compared to the perceived risk? If the real risk is actually quite small then the "being prepared" argument begins to look a little weak and one would be forgiven for thinking that fear and paranoia are playing a larger role in the decision than is perhaps acknowledged. A frightened person with a gun is a dangerous combination because very few of us are capable of acting rationally when gripped by fear.

It's obvious that there is a fundamental difference in philosophy and culture here .... most of us from Australia wouldn't dream of carrying a gun while riding even if the law permitted us to do so because we cannot see the need (ok, I'll admit, I have derived the odd fleeting moment of pleasure at the thought of blowing away some braindead SUV driver if only I had a gun in my saddlebag) whereas it seems a number of posters from the US wouldn't leave home without their gun.

I hope the posters from the US realise that the rest of us are getting a very poor picture of life in the US if it is a place where the average citizen feels they must be armed in order to ensure their safety whilst carrying out the ordinary business of day to day life.

 

[reallyoldpunk]

whereas it seems a number of posters from the US wouldn't leave home without their gun.

It's only the Nut Jobs that are so emasculated that they need compenasation for their small...er...calibers, that they feel the need for firearms. It's sad that the rest of the world judges the USA due to a few Nut Jobs actions/beliefs/insecurities. Anyone that feels the need to take a gun out on a bike ride should stay in the safety of their basement and just use a trainer. Until I joined this forum, I could have never believed that carrying a gun on a bike ride would even be considered an "option".

I view SUV/4 wheel drive pickups as a larger threat than "gun toting criminals".

 

[cbjesseeNH]

I asked this before and didn't get an answer .... What is the real risk of meeting a criminal intent on doing you harm while you are out riding your bike compared to the perceived risk? If the real risk is actually quite small then the "being prepared" argument begins to look a little weak and one would be forgiven for thinking that fear and paranoia are playing a larger role in the decision than is perhaps acknowledged.

I don't think anyone has contested SB's use of published data to highlight the difference in murder rates between the US and AUS. While I argue that 3x is a small difference, given the vast number of guns available in the US compared to AUS, I don't argue with the numbers (with the exception that ~10% are reclassified as self-defense - reference previously posted).

So which is it? There is either no real risk in the US or the US is a dangerous place? You can't argue it both ways.

Some people look at the stats and consider the risks low, as they figure - what are the odds of ME being a victim? Other consider the risks and figure - it ain't gonna be ME that's the victim. Who gets to pick who the potential vicitims are? Not the potential vicitims - the 'bad guys'.

Does one pick Tuesdays not to carry a firearm, as that's the day 'bad guys' take off work? The day one doesn't feel like carry a firearms is not the day that the odds of needing it are lower. One is fairly sure one will never 'need' to use ones firearm - but when you do, you need it right away. Not tomorrow.

I wouldn't object if there were a way to make firearms illegal for use by criminals, and if we could have a buy-back or something to rid the criminal community of firearms. When it was pretty clear that all the criminals had turned in thier firearms, just MAYBE there would be more sentiment to support reducing firearms held by honest folks - but probably not enough to win a vote. Of course, the lesson we learn from countires that severely restrict firearms for individual self-defense, is that firearms remain in the criminal population. Maybe they pay more for them - but getting the cash doesn't seem to be their problem.

But the only way anyone has thought of reducing firearms in the criminal population is to take them away from the honest folks and hope it trickles down to fewer firearms in the criminal population. Americans just aren't big on knowing their generation, their childrens' generation and their grandchildrens' generation (maybe 80years plus?) must endure being defenseless while the criminal population slowly depeletes their firearms pool. That level of tolerance seems limited to tiny islands - especially tiny islands with high population densities that create special social pressures.

That's not the USA.

So why insist Americans endure what others on tiny islands endure to reach an end that is very unsure?

 

[matagi]

I'm insisting on nothing.

As far as I'm concerned the planet is doomed, we are all facing extinction in a few generations' time and those with guns will be able to survive and suffer a little longer than those without. (I hope they all remember to keep a bullet in reserve)

 

[cbjesseeNH]

I'm insisting on nothing.

As far as I'm concerned the planet is doomed, we are all facing extinction in a few generations' time and those with guns will be able to survive and suffer a little longer than those without. (I hope they all remember to keep a bullet in reserve)

Buck up, lad. I'm counting on you for some reasoned discourse on this topic. If a Democrat is elected next President of the US, many are predicting a turn-around.

Some other folks on this thread seem to have some rare form of Tourette Syndrome (Coprolalia) wherein they may mentally form a response to a point but end up barking invectives instead. Us Americans being socially advanced, at least on the matter of recognizing such traits as ilnesses rather than character deficits, I've chosen not to reply in kind. It makes for a broken stream of discussion, but it's the socially responsible thing to do.

 

[stevebaby]

Buck up, lad. I'm counting on you for some reasoned discourse on this topic. If a Democrat is elected next President of the US, many are predicting a turn-around.

Some other folks on this thread seem to have some rare form of Tourette Syndrome (Coprolalia) wherein they may mentally form a response to a point but end up barking invectives instead. Us Americans being socially advanced, at least on the matter of recognizing such traits as ilnesses rather than character deficits, I've chosen not to reply in kind. It makes for a broken stream of discussion, but it's the socially responsible thing to do.

Is it 'socially responsible' to post an incomplete quote in a vain attempt to back up another spurious claim of yours...that more than 'a billion people can carry concealed weapons'?
That isn't social responsibility. That's called 'DISHONESTY'.
And what is it that 'bad guys' are guilty of?
DISHONESTY.

So what does that make you?

Sorry...no gun for you. You're dishonest and you shoot yourself in the foot. You're socially irresponsible.

http://www.gunowners.org/opagn0301.htm
Op-Ed: Anti-Gun Nut of the Month Mar 2001
That's the link which you posted in support of your claim that '...1.3 billion and rising' Chinese were able to carry concealed weapons.
That isn't true...is it?
What's really really funny is that not only did that link not support your dishonest claim...it directly contradicted it!
I don't need to find links in support of the regulation of lethal weapons. You're doing it for me.
Please continue.

 

[Joe West]

Here is your answer:

Let's say (and I'm making this number up) that the real risk is 1:10,000

Now... let's say that you or your family happens to be the 1 out of 10,000 individuals who is unlucky enough to encounter a criminal bent on doing you or your family harm.

Tell me... what number would cause YOU to carry a gun to protect yourself or your family? 1:1? 1:20?

You see my point? My point is... when it comes to protection, it really doesn't matter what the number is. If you simply refuse to be a victim no matter what the probability of an encounter is... then numbers don't mean anything.

Now... answer my question. What probability would it take for YOU to take up arms for defense? Give me a number.

Joe

I asked this before and didn't get an answer .... What is the real risk of meeting a criminal intent on doing you harm while you are out riding your bike compared to the perceived risk? If the real risk is actually quite small then the "being prepared" argument begins to look a little weak and one would be forgiven for thinking that fear and paranoia are playing a larger role in the decision than is perhaps acknowledged. A frightened person with a gun is a dangerous combination because very few of us are capable of acting rationally when gripped by fear.

It's obvious that there is a fundamental difference in philosophy and culture here .... most of us from Australia wouldn't dream of carrying a gun while riding even if the law permitted us to do so because we cannot see the need (ok, I'll admit, I have derived the odd fleeting moment of pleasure at the thought of blowing away some braindead SUV driver if only I had a gun in my saddlebag) whereas it seems a number of posters from the US wouldn't leave home without their gun.

I hope the posters from the US realise that the rest of us are getting a very poor picture of life in the US if it is a place where the average citizen feels they must be armed in order to ensure their safety whilst carrying out the ordinary business of day to day life.