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

[ax25nut]

daviddb wrote, in relevant part:
"Would a Taser stun gun discourage a bear?"

My reply:
Actually, I believe it would, and for the same reason it works on humans. The original 25,000 volt taser was tested, quite consistently, on a 400lb gorilla, and also on humans with pacemakers, and found to be effective, without unwanted side-effects. The original unit is now long-out-of-production, but the good news is that newer ones use air-discharge instead of firearm-type discharge, and come in much higher voltages. These things work on all but the most highly-trained individuals. Bear in mind, we're not talking about stun guns here, which must be held against your attackers body to be effective. As anyone should be aware, this is not a good idea with any human, bear or gorilla, as (a) it puts you in harms way, and (b) neither likes surprises for any reason, and they are, despite any training you might have, far faster than humans can react to. I've tried 25,000 and 40,000 volt stun guns before, and I think they would cause the most aggressive bear/jackass to run the other way, as soon as they can stop jerking and pissing themselves. Of course, you could just call the company that makes the air-taser and ask them. Did I mention that the taser is much quieter than any firearm, except those equipped with good-quality sound suppressors? Oh....also, nobody has to suffer life-threatening injury. Just a thought.

 

[bkwitche]

The number of people who '**** themselves' as a result of being tazed is minuscule.

 

[grandamn]

I'll let someone taze me if they buy my a Pinarello

 

[Jared Purdy]

Is this a serios question on a cycling forum? You do realize that Arizona is not the centre of the universe, and from a social, cultural and political standpoint, it might just be the lowest place in America to live. You think that the right to bear arms, while cycling, it, what, exactly? This is seriuously beyond the pale. You need to check yourself into a facility that offers professional psychiatric help as you are demonstrating socio-pathic tendencies with sucha ridiculous question. Contemplating some cycling-by-shooting? Get a grip.

 

[Jared Purdy]

Is this a serious question on a cycling forum? You do realize that Arizona is not the centre of the universe,right? And from a social, cultural and political standpoint, it might just be the lowest place in America to live. You had a fairly well known politician who was recently shot, in public, in broad day light, by another gun carry idiot. You think that the right to bear arms, while cycling, is, what, exactly? This is seriously beyond the pale. You need to check yourself into a facility that offers professional psychiatric help as you are demonstrating socio-pathic tendencies with such a ridiculous question. Contemplating some cycling-by-shooting? Get a grip. Hand guns should banned for public use..

 

[jpr95]

Originally Posted by Jared Purdy .

Is this a serious question on a cycling forum? You do realize that Arizona is not the centre of the universe,right? And from a social, cultural and political standpoint, it might just be the lowest place in America to live. You had a fairly well known politician who was recently shot, in public, in broad day light, by another gun carry idiot. You think that the right to bear arms, while cycling, is, what, exactly? This is seriously beyond the pale. You need to check yourself into a facility that offers professional psychiatric help as you are demonstrating socio-pathic tendencies with such a ridiculous question. Contemplating some cycling-by-shooting? Get a grip. Hand guns should banned for public use..

Read "More Guns, Less Crime" by John Lott, then get back to this thread when you have a statistical reality check. The safest areas in this country are the ones with the most people legally carrying firearms. You've watched too many spaghetti westerns--shootouts at high noon over poker disagreements just don't happen. Carjackings by armed thugs do--but not to well-armed citizens. If you're unarmed and unable to defend yourself against a criminal in public, that makes you prey. If you are armed and able, that keeps you at the top of the food chain where God put you, and makes you a defender of freedom.

I've always said that the biggest mistake the founding fathers of the U.S.A. made was to put the right to keep and bear arms second in the bill of rights. It's the right that enforces all others, so it should have been first.

Jason

 

[grandamn]

From a personal stand point. I live in one of the most liberal states in the country. I enjoy relying on myself though. I pay for all my own stuff, including food and healthcare. I protect myself with my shotgun. People need to stop being so dependent on the state and have to sacrifice in order to get ahead. With that said, who's going to taze me. I really want the pinarello fp2.

 

[cankiwi6]

Jared.. read the whole thread from day one and I think you might figure it out.

 

[ax25nut]

bkwitche wrote:
"The number of people who '**** themselves' as a result of being tazed is minuscule."

My reply:
You are, of course, correct. I'm only making a point here....an amusing one, perhaps, but just a point, nonetheless.


On the other hand, Jared Purdy wrote, in part:
"....you are demonstrating socio-pathic tendencies...."

My reply:
You are ignorant of any relevant facts, Jared, and you watch entirely too much liberal-biased and/or Hollywood-based **** on TV. The problem with liberal bias like yours, as I see it, is based on the principle that "We don't see the world as it is. We see it as WE are." This is the reason children make such good prey for predators-children can't believe anyone would mean harm to others, because they (the children) don't, unless taught to. It is also the most glaring reason I know for a heavily-armed and ever-ready population of adults. After all, how many times have you ever been attacked when an obviously-armed police officer was with you? All the folks I know of that have been attacked in recent history were attacked when law enforcement wasn't around, hence the obvious need for armed citizens.

Also, statistics show that, historically, shooting accuracy is many times better with armed civilians that have a personal interest in their safety than with law enforcement personnel, who's number one priority is going home to THEIR families each night. This principle is best spoken by a wise man who said: "The hireling careth not for the flock, because he is a hireling".

Finally, I believe folks like Jared are entitled to their own opinions, while the rest of us are entitled to ignore them. Nobody has a right to be heard in this country--only to speak. Everyone else will always have the right to ignore them. The evil results when someone tries to force their own ways or opinons on others, which nobody has any right to do. You don't want a gun? Don't get one. Afraid a gun will turn you into a sociopath? You know yourself better than I do. I've had one all my life, and never had any inclination to use it on anyone, unless terminally provoked, which has happened on several occasions, but no shots were fired. It seems that the attacker's "evil temporary insanity" was instantly cured by the site of that gaping muzzle pointed at them.

Your mileage may vary.

 

[ProdigalCyclist]

Ok... so this is my first post. But this topic hit a nerve, and I had to put in my two cents. Gotta love the fact that it's a somewhat politically charged thread so it looks like I'll be making enemies right out of the gate.

But to the ones that overreacted to this thread and the question it posed and got their libtarded panties all up in a wad... saying there is absolutely no reason to carry a firearm while riding... How bout you read some of these:
Two legged animal attacks
http://commuteorlando.com/wordpress/2011/03/05/boy-cyclist-attacked-by-man-and-daughter-in-pickup-truck-in-dekalb/
http://www.toledoonthemove.com/news/news_story.aspx?id=323365
http://www.stuff.co.nz/the-press/news/3272878/Dyers-Pass-cyclist-attacked
http://www.katu.com/news/9373291.html
http://bike-pgh.org/bbpress/topic/cyclist-attacked-on-east-liberty-blvd-memorial-day-weekend
http://nwahomepage.com/fulltext-news?nxd_id=220246
http://www.reporternewspapers.net/2010/07/15/cyclist-attacked-angry-motorist/
http://backalleybikes.wordpress.com/2011/03/22/cyclist-attacked-in-chapel-hill/
http://tribes.tribe.net/376ab122-6dde-4cfe-bfba-4216a0ad4ef6/thread/64a5aecb-6ece-4d22-95dc-a7010815ca83
http://www.crime-information.com/64

And some 4 legged animal attacks
http://www.crime-information.com/64
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/01/09/national/main592433.shtml
http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/story?id=128077&page=1

These results were from a quick search on Google under "Cyclist Attacked" The question from the begining of this thread was basically "do you carry a firearm while riding?" The question was never Do you go around brandishing a weapon while riding your bike through the worst neighborhood you can find? If someone feels safer CARRYING (not brandishing) some sort of protection (up to and including a gun) that is there business and they should be welcomed to do so.... Or do I need to remind you that OFTEN times when riding, a rider is alone and a LONG way from civilization and it's a sad fact that there are a whole lot of bad people in this world that have no problem attacking someone if for no other reason than the fun of it.

I'm just now getting back in to Cycling after a long "offseason" but back in the day, I happened upon a whole lot of crazy stuff on the bike. Including drug deals, domestic disputes, I was verbally assulted by drivers many times, and was even hit in the shoulder by the passenger of a moving car... and in fact I even happened upon a Murder / Suicide that occured less than a half an hour before I rode up on the scene (In Del Puerto Canyon outside Patterson CA) And all that was over 15 years ago, who knows what I'm going to find now days.

Look.... not everyone likes guns. I get that. But just because one person doesn't like guns doesn't mean that anyone who does is some sort of anarchist, or whack job.



If you get a chance, follow the story of one cyclist getting back on the bike after a 15+ year offseason. http://theprodigalcyclistca.blogspot.com/

 

[ProdigalCyclist]

I also thought this might be interesting, as of the time I'm posting this 737 people have "liked" this page.

http://www.facebook.com/pages/Ur-not-Lance-Armstrong-stop-biking-on-the-road/275921794926

There are plenty of people who have no problem what so ever causing trouble for a Cyclist, in fact just last month a Cyclist was beaten severly in Redwood City CA by three teenagers. His nose and wrist was broken among various other injuries.

 

[tonyzackery]

Originally Posted by ProdigalCyclist .

Ok... so this is my first post. But this topic hit a nerve, and I had to put in my two cents. Gotta love the fact that it's a somewhat politically charged thread so it looks like I'll be making enemies right out of the gate.

But to the ones that overreacted to this thread and the question it posed and got their libtarded panties all up in a wad... saying there is absolutely no reason to carry a firearm while riding... How bout you read some of these:
Two legged animal attacks
http://commuteorlando.com/wordpress/2011/03/05/boy-cyclist-attacked-by-man-and-daughter-in-pickup-truck-in-dekalb/
http://www.toledoonthemove.com/news/news_story.aspx?id=323365
http://www.stuff.co.nz/the-press/news/3272878/Dyers-Pass-cyclist-attacked
http://www.katu.com/news/9373291.html
http://bike-pgh.org/bbpress/topic/cyclist-attacked-on-east-liberty-blvd-memorial-day-weekend
http://nwahomepage.com/fulltext-news?nxd_id=220246
http://www.reporternewspapers.net/2010/07/15/cyclist-attacked-angry-motorist/
http://backalleybikes.wordpress.com/2011/03/22/cyclist-attacked-in-chapel-hill/
http://tribes.tribe.net/376ab122-6dde-4cfe-bfba-4216a0ad4ef6/thread/64a5aecb-6ece-4d22-95dc-a7010815ca83
http://www.crime-information.com/64

And some 4 legged animal attacks
http://www.crime-information.com/64
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/01/09/national/main592433.shtml
http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/story?id=128077&page=1

These results were from a quick search on Google under "Cyclist Attacked" The question from the begining of this thread was basically "do you carry a firearm while riding?" The question was never Do you go around brandishing a weapon while riding your bike through the worst neighborhood you can find? If someone feels safer CARRYING (not brandishing) some sort of protection (up to and including a gun) that is there business and they should be welcomed to do so.... Or do I need to remind you that OFTEN times when riding, a rider is alone and a LONG way from civilization and it's a sad fact that there are a whole lot of bad people in this world that have no problem attacking someone if for no other reason than the fun of it.

I'm just now getting back in to Cycling after a long "offseason" but back in the day, I happened upon a whole lot of crazy stuff on the bike. Including drug deals, domestic disputes, I was verbally assulted by drivers many times, and was even hit in the shoulder by the passenger of a moving car... and in fact I even happened upon a Murder / Suicide that occured less than a half an hour before I rode up on the scene (In Del Puerto Canyon outside Patterson CA) And all that was over 15 years ago, who knows what I'm going to find now days.

Look.... not everyone likes guns. I get that. But just because one person doesn't like guns doesn't mean that anyone who does is some sort of anarchist, or whack job.



If you get a chance, follow the story of one cyclist getting back on the bike after a 15+ year offseason. http://theprodigalcyclistca.blogspot.com/

Hmmm, appears we got the kettle calling the frying pan black. LOL! Sounds like someone's got their anti-libtard (not going to venture as to their political affliation - may be a neo-nazi for all I know) panties all wadded up to me - to the point that they felt compelled to post, for the very FIRST time, to this particular thread.

A bunch of cherry-picked articles creating a bogey-man. Appears to be typical Republican (and further right) propaganda to scare the masses, a la the "Chicken Little" syndrome. Please help me out by relating to me which of those case(s) would possession of a firearm have precluded any of those unfortunate attacks? Oh, that's right, it's always beneficial to have that gun after the attack so if you're still alive you can pop a cap or two in the perps rear-end to get your revenge. That'll show 'em who's boss...LOL!

Too many other strawman arguments and hyperbole-ish embellishment in one post to count...regardless, thanks for sharing your opinion and you're entitled to maintain it just as those others who hold a dissimilar viewpoint..."libtarded" - LOL! good one - never heard it before...and no - I wouldn't consider you an enemy...and if you value your sanity (assuming you started this journey with your sanity intact), you probably shouldn't take the discussion within internet forums too seriously...

Have a peaceful day and "Welcome" to the forums.../img/vbsmilies/smilies/wink.gif

 

[ProdigalCyclist]

Originally Posted by tonyzackery .




Hmmm, appears we got the kettle calling the frying pan black. LOL! Sounds like someone's got their anti-libtard (not going to venture as to their political affliation - may be a neo-nazi for all I know) panties all wadded up to me - to the point that they felt compelled to post, for the very FIRST time, to this particular thread.

A bunch of cherry-picked articles creating a bogey-man. Appears to be typical Republican (and further right) propaganda to scare the masses, a la the "Chicken Little" syndrome. Please help me out by relating to me which of those case(s) would possession of a firearm have precluded any of those unfortunate attacks? Oh, that's right, it's always beneficial to have that gun after the attack so if you're still alive you can pop a cap or two in the perps rear-end to get your revenge. That'll show 'em who's boss...LOL!

Too many other strawman arguments and hyperbole-ish embellishment in one post to count...regardless, thanks for sharing your opinion and you're entitled to maintain it just as those others who hold a dissimilar viewpoint..."libtarded" - LOL! good one - never heard it before...and no - I wouldn't consider you an enemy...and if you value your sanity (assuming you started this journey with your sanity intact), you probably shouldn't take the discussion within internet forums too seriously...

Have a peaceful day and "Welcome" to the forums.../img/vbsmilies/smilies/wink.gif

"Cherry picking" Is that what you're going to call it? I did a search of "Cyclist Attacked" and all those links were in the first 5 pages of the results. The only "Cherry Picking" I did was not link to multiple articles of the same attack, and I kept the links to stories with in the US. But of course you need to call it "Cherry Picking" because for your arguement to work mine has to be marginalized.

My problem here is not with the people who don't carry a gun... I personally don't and never did. And my problem is also not with the people who don't like guns all together. My problem is with the ones who think because they don't like guns, that no one should have them. That's the problem with libtards... (notice I specified libtards).... they think that everything they don't like (or agree with) should be banned everyone should accept everything they do like (or agree with) without hesitation.

And sorry to rain on your parade but the ASSumtion that I'm a Republican is false... Just because I use the word libtarded doesn't mean I'm anti-liberal or anti-democrat. Just like you can have a fat person and a morbidly obese person.... you can also have a liberal person and a libtarded person. But it's pretty funny that you automitcally made the jump that I was possibly a neo-nazi? Exactly how would you make that jump from what I posted above? That's just a (typical) and stupid response to someone who doesn't share the same beliefs.

And BTW... I'm not taking anything too seriously. Just offering an opinion that you obviously don't share.

 

[tonyzackery]

Originally Posted by ProdigalCyclist .





"Cherry picking" Is that what you're going to call it? I did a search of "Cyclist Attacked" and all those links were in the first 5 pages of the results. The only "Cherry Picking" I did was not link to multiple articles of the same attack, and I kept the links to stories with in the US. But of course you need to call it "Cherry Picking" because for your arguement to work mine has to be marginalized.

My problem here is not with the people who don't carry a gun... I personally don't and never did. And my problem is also not with the people who don't like guns all together. My problem is with the ones who think because they don't like guns, that no one should have them. That's the problem with libtards... (notice I specified libtards).... they think that everything they don't like (or agree with) should be banned everyone should accept everything they do like (or agree with) without hesitation.

And sorry to rain on your parade but the ASSumtion that I'm a Republican is false... Just because I use the word libtarded doesn't mean I'm anti-liberal or anti-democrat. Just like you can have a fat person and a morbidly obese person.... you can also have a liberal person and a libtarded person. But it's pretty funny that you automitcally made the jump that I was possibly a neo-nazi? Exactly how would you make that jump from what I posted above? That's just a (typical) and stupid response to someone who doesn't share the same beliefs.

And BTW... I'm not taking anything too seriously. Just offering an opinion that you obviously don't share.

yep, someone's panties are definitely in a twist...

Anyway, thanks for sharing your opinion devoid of assumptions - you're a model of anti-hypocrisy...

 

[ProdigalCyclist]

Of course you think I'm being a hypocrite... because it's obvious that anyone that doesn't share your opinion on guns is a

Republican
Hypocrite
Neo Nazi


Now.... who is it that's making the ASSumtions?

 

[tonyzackery]

Give it a rest already, pal - it's getting stale.

A quick Google of 'strawman argument' will probably allow you to utilize improved form in the future. Consider this an attempt to help you out.

Lastly, I'm most interested in your response to the question I posed in my initial reply to your ranting. To reiterate, I'm wondering in which one of those hand-picked cases would possession of a firearm have precluded the unfortunate attack?

 

[MortimerP]

I don't carry as part of cycling gear, i carry as part of my everyday gear.

 

[jlficken]

I finally got to hold a PM9 the other day and while small it did feel much more controllable than my LCP did. I am still contemplating it or a S&W 340 M&P. I wish someone had a PM9 locally I could try

 

[Triptaker]

I am not a card carrying member of the NRA or anything but one tiime on the Pinellas trail I had a flat in a bad neighborhood. A Kid approached me with his hands in the front of his jeans (not sure if he had a weapon or what). I picked up my rim and attempted to look as menacing as 220 lps could appear and the kid gave me a head nod and went on his way. If I had a gun chances are I would have pulled it when he started walking toward me and then he probably would have pulled his and one of us probably would have gotten shot. Although I would rather it have been him than me....shooting a 15 year old "yuff" is probably gonna be what most would consider a bad day. Instead I just fixed my tire and got the !@# out of there. I used to hunt....now I just shop at publix. ymmv

 

[ax25nut]

tonyzachery wrote, in part:
"To reiterate, I'm wondering in which one of those hand-picked cases would possession of a firearm have precluded the unfortunate attack?"


My reply:

Actually, tony, I can't think of ANY circumstances in which merely carrying a gun, or any other weapon for that matter, would "preclude" any attack.

A gun is carried not to prevent such occurances, but rather to be used to allow the carrier to walk away from such occurances with as little damage to oneself as possible. Preferably none. And while I prefer not to be involved in such events, sometimes you don't have any choice in the matter. Predators never ask your permission to prey on you. They are not interested in your opinion any more than they are interested in your rights. At such times it is your right to choose whether to use such instruments on another or not. It will never be anyone else's choice....not even our obsessively-interfering government has the right to make such choices for you. Therefore, you should know your capabilities and your limits, and choose wisely. I've noticed that it is as difficult to UN-shoot someone as it is to recover from the predations of the immoral.