Quote from: pandy on February 15, 2017, 09:43:11 AM
I kinda wish all of the U.S.ofA. was an open-carry country. I think that if we all just were ABLE to show phat pistols on our hips, there would be a lot less problems (yes, I realize that this is likely a bit controversial, especially in our peace-loving ally countries where even the cops don't carry - this is a marvel to me!). Plus....well... I just want to be ABLE to carry.

Surely carrying a weapon only works as a deterrent if the others aren't carrying too. If you're allowed to carry to a gun, does that mean it is legal for you to discharge in public as well? If it's not legal to fire your weapon in a public place then your gun becomes as much of a weapon as any of the other accessories your wearing?

In my more formative years going out to paint the town red was fairly literal, the night would almost always end in fisticuffs, once fought a dude who was wearing motorbike gloves with kevlar knuckles. Totally rung my bell! but other weaponisable accessories include your belt, wrap it around your hand like a brass knuckle or use it like a whip, your gloves make your punch so much nastier, a headbutt with a motorcycle helmet will cause some damage. I used to favour a stanley knife, I think you call them box cutters. Point is if you are carrying a weapon, legally or otherwise, you should be prepared to use to it.

When it comes to protecting your motorbike you've got to do what you've got to do. If you have to drop to your knees and please this clown, do it, if you need to shatter his knees with a crow bar...

I'm lucky, my neighbours don't complain but when I moved in I made a point of introducing myself to everyone maintain these relationships with things like Christmas cards and the odd gift. My neighbour took in my front tyre the other day so I bought them a pack of lager. Good luck in your quest for conflict resolution.

Chris

Quote from: the_63 on February 28, 2017, 04:23:50 AM
Surely carrying a weapon only works as a deterrent if the others aren't carrying too.

I think the idea is that if everyone is carrying, then people will be a little more hesitant to start conflict, since they can assume the other person has a gun as well. I don't necessarily agree that it's the right way of dealing with things, but everyone is entitled to their own opinion about stuff.

Quote
If you're allowed to carry to a gun, does that mean it is legal for you to discharge in public as well? If it's not legal to fire your weapon in a public place then your gun becomes as much of a weapon as any of the other accessories your wearing?

Being "allowed" to discharge a carried weapon depends on the circumstances. If your life is actively in danger, then yeah, sure, fire away. But shooting someone over anything less than a life and death situation is probably gonna land you in jail.

Quote
In my more formative years going out to paint the town red was fairly literal, the night would almost always end in fisticuffs, once fought a dude who was wearing motorbike gloves with kevlar knuckles. Totally rung my bell! but other weaponisable accessories include your belt, wrap it around your hand like a brass knuckle or use it like a whip, your gloves make your punch so much nastier, a headbutt with a motorcycle helmet will cause some damage. I used to favour a stanley knife, I think you call them box cutters. Point is if you are carrying a weapon, legally or otherwise, you should be prepared to use to it.

Thankfully, I haven't ever had to resort to a real weapon to end an altercation. I've always been able to either restrain the person (I wrestled for close to 10 years and did MMA for around 3) or avoid a fight entirely just by talking it out. My attitude is that unless you're fighting for sport (MMA, boxing, etc.) you should avoid a fight if you can, and end it as quickly as possible if you can't.

If you're ever really in a pinch, put your car key in your fist so the key sticks out between your fingers and punch the attacker in the neck repeatedly. Fight over.

Quote
When it comes to protecting your motorbike you've got to do what you've got to do. If you have to drop to your knees and please this clown, do it, if you need to shatter his knees with a crow bar...

Lol, I seriously doubt it will come to that.

Quote
I'm lucky, my neighbours don't complain but when I moved in I made a point of introducing myself to everyone maintain these relationships with things like Christmas cards and the odd gift. My neighbour took in my front tyre the other day so I bought them a pack of lager. Good luck in your quest for conflict resolution.

Like I said, I'll leave him a note if I put the bike there again. I'm not trying to start an argument with the guy, but I'm not gonna kiss his ass, either.

Quote from: the_63 on February 28, 2017, 04:23:50 AM

Quote from: pandy on February 15, 2017, 09:43:11 AM
I kinda wish all of the U.S.ofA. was an open-carry country. I think that if we all just were ABLE to show phat pistols on our hips, there would be a lot less problems (yes, I realize that this is likely a bit controversial, especially in our peace-loving ally countries where even the cops don't carry - this is a marvel to me!). Plus....well... I just want to be ABLE to carry.

Surely carrying a weapon only works as a deterrent if the others aren't carrying too. If you're allowed to carry to a gun, does that mean it is legal for you to discharge in public as well?

I might be one of the most informed and simultaneously most opinionated person on this forum when it comes to being pro-gun, so I would like to weight in here on a few things.

Open Carry vs Concealed Carry...  I don't like open carry.  Open carry does a few things right.  For one it is a big "don't mess with me" red flag to a lot of people.  It also is the quickest to employ into action.  And it allows you to carry something full-size.  As a motorcyclist, having to dig through a jacket and shirt or get into a pocket, especially with gloves on, you might as well not be carrying.  Adding to this, small compact pistols are nearly impossible to handle with an armored glove.  So when I ride and I'm fully geared up in my pants and heavy gloves, I will carry a full-size 9mm open on my hip.
But what open-carry does wrong is a bigger issue.  Like it or not, some people just aren't comfortable around firearms.  So separate from your demeanor the very presence of the firearm can make people nervous.  It also calls attention to you, and contrary to my first point for advantages it can make you a target.  Suspect goes in to rob a bank, sees a gun on my hip, no one else is apparently armed, guess who he is attacking first...  So I OC more out of necessity than want.

One interesting quote that tries to be pro carry is "An armed society is a polite society."  It's easy to pick apart.  The logic is "If a suspect knows that anyone may be potentially armed, he is less likely to commit a crime."  The detractors spin on it and say "If everyone is scared they will be shot by whoever else they will be as nice as they can be, so it's really 'A scared society is a polite society.'"  I lean more towards the first description, but add that all it really does is keep the honest honest, and give the criminals something to second guess.  I don't see any reason why little old Mrs. Hatty going to 7/11 to buy her scratch off should be mortally afraid of me pumping gas with my Ruger on my hip...

Contrary to what most people think, a bunch of armed citizens is not equal to the "Wild West".  I live in the literal cowboy country, here in AZ it's Constitutional Carry.  That means I don't even need a license to carry a firearm in public.  As long as I am not a convicted felon it is 100% legal for me to walk in downtown Tucson with a pistol on my hip, a Deringer in my pocket, or an AR15 on my back.
The whole "It's only a deterrent to others who aren't carrying;" no one is out here to start a gunfight.  This isn't the "Wild West," you don't settle fights at sunset outside the watering hole.  Most people who stick you up aren't out to get hurt, or even hurt you, really.  They just want something you have.


In most instances it is illegal to discharge a firearm within one mile of a residence or within the city limits.  That being said, the law is meant to keep people from plinking in their back yards.
Take this for example, there is dangerous wildlife out here and if you get attacked by a mountain lion within 1 mile of someone's ranch no court in the state would convict you for defending yourself.  Don't say it wont happen, I live 10-15 minutes from the base of a mountain and Coronado National Forest is on two sides of me, which has native Mountain Lions, Bobcats, and Black Bears, not to mention rattle-snakes that do enter the city limits.

But that is another huge talking point.  Many will say a firearm is a tool to defend life, home, and property.  I think property is a little bit of a grey area.
Someone kicks in my front door and they're getting about 5 ounces of buck shot in their chest, no second guess.  Only reason you are literally breaking down my door is to cause harm.
Someone opens fire on a shopping mall and I'm at ground zero I'm not going to be a static bystander.  I'm not out to be a hero, either, I'm not running TOWARDS the sounds of gunfire, but if I'm there I'm going to open fire.
Someone tries to pick a fight with me in an ally and pulls a knife on me, I pull a gun.
But if someone puts a gun in my face and demands I give them my wallet, they're getting my wallet, and I'm calling the police and cancelling those credit cards as soon as I can.  There's no way on earth I can draw and put rounds on a guy who had a pistol trained on me and live, I'd be dead before I cleared leather, unless they were bluffing and had a toy gun or it was unloaded or something.
But at any rate I'm cooperating.  Then once they're turned around and running, guess what?  If I shoot them in the back I get charged for murder...

A firearm is a specific tool for a specific job, and that is to combat lethal force.  It's not a show of force, it's not a boasting token, it's not "That guy looked shady and I pulled my gun to be safe," it's not "That Bobcat was in my way and I thought I would get attacked if I approached it."
It's one thing only.  "My life is in danger, and I feel if I don't kill I will be killed."

Quote from: Watcher on February 28, 2017, 12:08:34 PM
...
In most instances it is illegal to discharge a firearm within one mile of a residence or within the city limits.  That being said, the law is meant to keep people from plinking in their back yards.
Take this for example, there is dangerous wildlife out here and if you get attacked by a mountain lion within 1 mile of someone's ranch no court in the state would convict you for defending yourself.  Don't say it wont happen, I live 10-15 minutes from the base of a mountain and Coronado National Forest is on two sides of me, which has native Mountain Lions, Bobcats, and Black Bears, not to mention rattle-snakes that do enter the city limits.
...

I just want to say, I hike and fish in northern PA all the time, and have encountered all of these animals multiple times. A gun is not required for dealing with any of them. Bobcats are not going to attack you unless you are actively attempting to kill or trap it. You'd be lucky to even SEE one before it ran. Same with black bears. Unless you're between a mother and her cubs, just back away slowly. You'll be fine. As for rattlesnakes, there's no situation where shooting the snake is the right move. If it bit you before you saw it or heard it rattle (very, VERY unlikely), shooting it is not going to help you. You need to go to a hospital ASAP. Not to mention, you'd have to shoot the snake in the head to prevent it from trying to bite again, which is a ridiculously small target you need to hit AFTER being subject to an incredibly painful snakebite. Good luck landing that shot. If you hear a rattle or see a snake before it bites, just back off. Snakes don't want to bite anything they can't eat, its a waste of energy.

Mountain Lions are a different story. I have read stories of them stalking and attacking people, so being armed while in Lion territory seems like a smart move to me. No mountain lions in PA though, so I've never even seen a live one outside of a zoo.

Very well said, Watcher. Ohio isn't as gun friendly as Arizona, but I can also open carry without a permit. I choose not to, except when hunting, and as you have mentioned around here a couple of times, if I were to be carrying while riding (something I'll likely do more often as I begin to ride more often), I'd open carry due to necessity. Before I can do that, though, I'll need a nice OWB holster for my SR9.

Watcher, right on the money man!

FWIW TX doesn't have Constitutional carry, but we did recently pass both open carry (for CHL holders, which is kind of silly) and campus carry. I carry concealed every day all the time pretty much no exceptions except maybe when I'm on my mountain bike. I don't OC except for when it's absolutely the only option; for example I'll OC my CW9 when tramping around my parents' ranch land out in the way out country and probably to and from that place as well (in the car). I probably would OC in the car on a long trip within TX, and I don't mind OCing when pumping gas or stopping at a rest stop along the way. You know the midst of the King Ranch in South Texas can be pretty dodgy territory and rest stops in the middle of the night are particularly iffy. I prefer the deterrent and quick response. But life is better if nobody knows I'm carrying except me.

Now, I don't fully ascribe to your thoughts on protecting property but the law in TX is different; we are specifically protected when using deadly force to prevent property crime. I do think citizens using deadly force to defend against property crime, especially armed robbery as you suggest, is a huge deterrent against property crime. Austin PD has a terrible (nonexistent, likely) track record on prosecuting specific property crime. Basically if someone steals your car they don't even bother to look for it. Ditto that if your house is burglarized or someone rolls you for your laptop and cell phone. And let me tell you, I have a serious life problem if my car is stolen or someone takes my laptop. And like you, if someone breaks into my house it's going to end very badly with a few rounds of 000 buckshot and very loud 12-ga reports. I pray that will absolutely never happen, but nevertheless I won't be caught unprepared.

I once heard Jerry Seinfeld (an avid cyclist ...) say that you shouldn't do any activity which requires a helmet. Well, I kind of feel the same way about carrying a gun. I carry all the time. But I simply don't go to places or get into situations where I feel like I might *need* one. If anyone discovers I am carrying, it's because there's a life or death emergency in progress.

Quote from: qcbaker on February 28, 2017, 01:17:08 PM

Quote from: Watcher on February 28, 2017, 12:08:34 PM
...
Mountain Lions, Bobcats, and Black Bears, not to mention rattle-snakes that do enter the city limits.
...

A gun is not required for dealing with any of them. Bobcats are not going to attack you unless you are actively attempting to kill or trap it. You'd be lucky to even SEE one before it ran. Same with black bears. Unless you're between a mother and her cubs, just back away slowly. You'll be fine. As for rattlesnakes, there's no situation where shooting the snake is the right move. If it bit you before you saw it or heard it rattle (very, VERY unlikely), shooting it is not going to help you. You need to go to a hospital ASAP. Not to mention, you'd have to shoot the snake in the head to prevent it from trying to bite again, which is a ridiculously small target you need to hit AFTER being subject to an incredibly painful snakebite. Good luck landing that shot. If you hear a rattle or see a snake before it bites, just back off. Snakes don't want to bite anything they can't eat, its a waste of energy.

I won't say you NEED a gun vs bobcats, but as the saying goes "it's better to have and not need than to need and not have".  Yes, bobcat are fairly docile.  That being said, most attacks I hear of are on small children and pets, and people HAVE had bobcats try and take a dog on a leash.  My cousin a short distance away has frequent bobcat visits on his property that come in from the nearby wash.  Sometimes he'll go to let the puppers out and see one up on the stone fence.  He hasn't had a problem yet, but it is something to be cautious of.

Re: rattlesnakes, they are considered a pest out here in many instances, but the big thing nobody takes into consideration is that they are territorial.  In the wild you probably have one rattlesnake per 50 square meters, and they will defend their plot.  From other rattlesnakes, from other animals even.
The rattle is enough of a warning most times, and in the wild you would simply back away from a snake.  Bit, if and when a rattler decides that the backyard where the dog poops or the shady spot right under your car's driver's door is a prime location for them to make "home," they sit there and hold their ground.  You approach and it's not slither away into a hole, it's coil up, rattle, and prepare to strike.
The "right thing" to do is call the local fire department and they come with a 5 gallon bucket and some 4-foot long grabbers and take the snake away, but considering the territorial nature of the snakes and their fairly specific needs relocating them often does not result in the snake's survival.  What they actually do with the snakes when they're collected I'm not sure.  In lieu of that, a Bond Arms Deringer loaded with .410 shot gets the job done so your dog is safe in the back yard or you can actually enter your vehicle...

Quote from: mr72 on February 28, 2017, 03:08:34 PM
Now, I don't fully ascribe to your thoughts on protecting property but the law in TX is different; we are specifically protected when using deadly force to prevent property crime. I do think citizens using deadly force to defend against property crime, especially armed robbery as you suggest, is a huge deterrent against property crime.

My statement shouldn't be taken to mean I'd be outside my rights to shoot someone trying to steal my motorcycle, it's to mean I don't feel like property theft is justifiable homicide.  Even if I'm currently strapped, someone tossing a leg over and trying to ride my Buell off will be met with my knuckles before a hollowpoint.

Quote from: Watcher on February 28, 2017, 04:00:46 PM
My statement shouldn't be taken to mean I'd be outside my rights to shoot someone trying to steal my motorcycle, it's to mean I don't feel like property theft is justifiable homicide.  Even if I'm currently strapped, someone tossing a leg over and trying to ride my Buell off will be met with my knuckles before a hollowpoint.

I suppose I was talking specifically about what you said, an armed robber. Someone holding you up at gunpoint. That's an imminent threat to your life, and not only yours but the next victim, who may not be as compliant and might get shot. Since the APD won't stop these thugs it is up to the citizens. IMHO.

Now, if someone tries to ride off on my motorcycle they are probably going to be looking own the barrel of my 9mm and I will kindly invite them to leave it be, and be on their way. I don't plan to shoot someone over it but my bike is not insured and I don't intend to just watch someone ride off on it if I can stop it. However, the nice thing about having a cheap and busted motorcycle is nobody will likely want to steal it.

The thing is, in Texas, someone (in the daytime) trying to steal your motorcycle or any other property does not justify the use of deadly force. The threat of deadly force (that is, display a firearm, shout "stop or I'll shoot!" etc.) is considered "the use of force", so it is justified whenever the use of force is justified. And the use of force (not deadly force) is justified to prevent theft in the daytime. So-called "theft in the nighttime" justifies (legally) the use of "deadly force". In fact there was a case just as you describe, but at night, just down the road in Lago Vista here a couple of years ago. Someone attempted to steal some property in the nighttime, may have even been a motorcycle, and they were shot (and killed, IIRC) while fleeing with the property, made big news locally but there was no filing of charges against the victim (shooter).

This is all pretty technical and weird but it does make a big difference. If you (the "grand" you) intend to carry a firearm then it is incumbent to know the law regarding the use of deadly force because at the very least you will be prepared on what the legally-justified options are when you encounter a situation. Just like you said, it's not "the wild west" as many who live in gun-free areas would believe, mostly because those who legally carry firearms at least in Texas tend to be well educated on the use of deadly force and have thought through scenarios to know what their response will be ahead of time.

Maybe someday I'll start a thread that doesn't drift away from the original topic by page 2...

Quote from: qcbaker on March 01, 2017, 08:36:58 AM
Maybe someday I'll start a thread that doesn't drift away from the original topic by page 2...

HAHA!  This is Odds n Ends, right?

To bring it back on topic and tie in the recent discussion, I'll say this: I don't recommend shooting your neighbor over this.

Yes, definitely don't brandish a weapon at your neighbor while saying "Come at me, bro." 

I disagree 

Have you seen your neighbour since?

Chris

Quote from: Watcher on February 28, 2017, 04:00:46 PM
I won't say you NEED a gun vs bobcats, but as the saying goes "it's better to have and not need than to need and not have".  Yes, bobcat are fairly docile.  That being said, most attacks I hear of are on small children and pets, and people HAVE had bobcats try and take a dog on a leash.  My cousin a short distance away has frequent bobcat visits on his property that come in from the nearby wash.  Sometimes he'll go to let the puppers out and see one up on the stone fence.  He hasn't had a problem yet, but it is something to be cautious of.

I get what you mean. Still, I don't know that any of those things are enough for me to want to carry a gun "in case of bobcat attack." You're far more likely to be attacked by a stray dog than a bobcat, but you don't see anyone carrying guns around because of that.

Anyway, I've never heard of a bobcat trying to take a kid, but its within the realm of possibility I guess. Children are pretty noisy, generally, and bobcats tend to steer clear of anything making a bunch of noise. Plus, kids are normally close enough to adults that a bobcat wouldn't even think about it. So I don't think it's super likely that a bobcat would ever really identify a child as a potential meal. But if a little kid was being quiet and somehow got far enough away from a parent, doesn't seem too outlandish that the cat would stalk/attack a little kid.

Dogs are not unheard of as prey, but I'd say it's pretty unlikely too. Any bobcat I've ever seen bolts at the slightest indication that it's been discovered (or any loud noise in general, really), and dogs aren't exactly the most subtle of animals. If a dog barked in its general direction, it would be up a tree or something. They might go for a small dog if it were alone and they were able to sneak up on it, I guess, but how often is that the case? And attacking a leashed dog, right near a person? Basically unthinkable. Maybe AZ bobcats are braver than their PA wilderness cousins lol.

Generally speaking, big cats don't like to stalk/kill anything they think will put up a fight. They can't risk getting injured in the process of getting their food. Dogs have been known to put mountain lions up a tree, simply because the lion decided it wasn't worth the risk of injury even if they were to kill the dog. If mountain lions have second thoughts about attacking dogs, I seriously doubt a bobcat would try it unless it was either basically guaranteed a kill (small dog, no humans around, dog has not smelled/noticed the bobcat, etc.), or REALLY desperate.

Quote
Re: rattlesnakes, they are considered a pest out here in many instances, but the big thing nobody takes into consideration is that they are territorial.  In the wild you probably have one rattlesnake per 50 square meters, and they will defend their plot.  From other rattlesnakes, from other animals even.
The rattle is enough of a warning most times, and in the wild you would simply back away from a snake.  Bit, if and when a rattler decides that the backyard where the dog poops or the shady spot right under your car's driver's door is a prime location for them to make "home," they sit there and hold their ground.  You approach and it's not slither away into a hole, it's coil up, rattle, and prepare to strike.
The "right thing" to do is call the local fire department and they come with a 5 gallon bucket and some 4-foot long grabbers and take the snake away, but considering the territorial nature of the snakes and their fairly specific needs relocating them often does not result in the snake's survival.  What they actually do with the snakes when they're collected I'm not sure.  In lieu of that, a Bond Arms Deringer loaded with .410 shot gets the job done so your dog is safe in the back yard or you can actually enter your vehicle...

Yeah, I guess the territoriality of rattlers could be a problem if they decide your back yard is part of their property... Still, while shooting the snake does "solve the problem" so to speak, that wouldn't be what I would do. I'd rather just have the snake removed than kill it outright. Although, if it bit and killed a pet, maybe I'd feel differently.

Side note: My girlfriend's grandfather has participated in quite a few "snake hunt" contests in Northern PA over the years. He's caught and relocated probably hundreds of snakes (and various other animals, actually) in his lifetime... I'd probably just call him and have him help me remove it if I had a snake problem. He was apparently well-known in the hunting scene way back in the day. There were articles written in hunting mags about his trips and stuff. Cool dude, love talking fishing with him whenever I see him.

Quote from: mr72 on March 01, 2017, 08:43:14 AM
HAHA!  This is Odds n Ends, right?

To bring it back on topic and tie in the recent discussion, I'll say this: I don't recommend shooting your neighbor over this.

Quote from: Watcher on March 01, 2017, 08:57:49 AM
Yes, definitely don't brandish a weapon at your neighbor while saying "Come at me, bro." 

Yeah, I don't plan on making this disagreement physical at all lol. Was originally just wondering if it was really me who was being the jerk.

Quote from: the_63 on March 01, 2017, 09:05:51 AM
I disagree 

Have you seen your neighbour since?

Chris

I'm NOT gonna shoot him lol. And actually, no I haven't seen him since. He's an older guy (early 70's maybe?) and I think he might be sick. I've seen people in scrubs (home health nurses, I'm pretty sure) coming and going to and from his apartment bringing in groceries and stuff as long as I've lived here, so I don't know that he gets out much.

Quote from: qcbaker on March 01, 2017, 10:08:24 AM
Still, I don't know that any of those things are enough for me to want to carry a gun "in case of bobcat attack." You're far more likely to be attacked by a stray dog than a bobcat, but you don't see anyone carrying guns around because of that.

For those of us who choose to carry daily, like myself and probably Watcher, it's irrelevant why. "in case of a bobcat attack" is not why you carry. Or snakes or other wildlife. You carry in case you ever need it, and there is a wide range of reasons you might, enough to warrant the very minor inconvenience of carrying, much like wearing a seatbelt. Or a helmet on your motorcycle. When you need it, you absolutely need it and nothing else will get the job done. If you are evaluating situations and trying to account for the "need" to carry a gun, I'd say your mentality is not compatible with carrying in general.

Quote
Yeah, I guess the territoriality of rattlers could be a problem if they decide your back yard is part of their property... Still, while shooting the snake does "solve the problem" so to speak, that wouldn't be what I would do. I'd rather just have the snake removed than kill it outright. Although, if it bit and killed a pet, maybe I'd feel differently.

Growing up around snakes (and yes, I had many as pets as a kid), my rule of thumb in all cases is venomous snakes are killed when in a residential area and nonvenomous snakes are always left alone no matter what. I wouldn't even hesitate to kill a rattlesnake in a suburban park like where I go mountain biking, but those are not the most dangerous snakes. A copperhead is far more likely to bite without giving warning and a coral snake bite is much more likely to kill you or cause a serious injury.

Quote
Was originally just wondering if it was really me who was being the jerk.

Being totally honest, yeah. A little bit. IMHO.

Yeah, in the case of a bobcat an attack is a very unlikely situation, it was just a small example in a multitude.  Just trying to say dangerous creatures are out here and that could influence the decision to carry.

But it does seem AZ bobcats are bolder.  Especially the ones that can be seen in town, they're used to human presence and will stay put on a trail until you get within rock throwing distance before moving off, and noise alone doesn't seem to be that much of a deterrent.  They'll hop fences and take down small dogs, even while being barked at.
I'm sure my leash example is a one in a million chance, but I have heard of it happening.  An animal in an environment scarce for food and acclimated to human presence is capable of a lot of things you wouldn't expect.

Coronado National Forest resident bobcats are infinitely more skittish, you rarely see them.  But city bobcats?  Basically a whole other animal.



But as mr72 said the decision to carry isn't based on one factor alone.   

It's not at all like a spare tire; you don't walk around carrying a spare at all times, it remains in your vehicle because you 100% will not need it outside of driving.
That being said, many people do carry a firearm solely for wilderness, and will take something with when hiking, but they won't carry in town.  And that's their choice based on their perception of what defines a need.

But for me, as a daily routine, it's not about the mountain lion, or the robber I may or may not encounter, or the gunman at a movie theater.  It's somehow all of those at once, and yet none of those at all.
It's hard to explain.  At this point its more of a lifestyle than a decision...
The simplest explanation is that I understand that I live in a dangerous world, and while I can protect myself from the sun and the earth by wearing clothing, I can't do the same for someone or something that desires to do me harm.

Quote from: mr72 on March 01, 2017, 10:23:33 AM
For those of us who choose to carry daily, like myself and probably Watcher, it's irrelevant why. "in case of a bobcat attack" is not why you carry. Or snakes or other wildlife. You carry in case you ever need it, and there is a wide range of reasons you might, enough to warrant the very minor inconvenience of carrying, much like wearing a seatbelt. Or a helmet on your motorcycle. When you need it, you absolutely need it and nothing else will get the job done. If you are evaluating situations and trying to account for the "need" to carry a gun, I'd say your mentality is not compatible with carrying in general.

I wasn't trying to discourage you or Watcher from carrying, so sorry if it came off that way. You're right though, If I had a handgun, I probably wouldn't carry it around every day, concealed or otherwise. But, I have no real problems with carrying, in and of itself.

I actually don't currently own any guns, but in the future I'll probably end up with one or more. I like trap and target shooting a lot, and I've thought about going deer hunting at some point, so a rifle and a shotgun are in the "possible future purchase" category for me. Don't know if I want or need a handgun.
 

Quote
Growing up around snakes (and yes, I had many as pets as a kid), my rule of thumb in all cases is venomous snakes are killed when in a residential area and nonvenomous snakes are always left alone no matter what. I wouldn't even hesitate to kill a rattlesnake in a suburban park like where I go mountain biking, but those are not the most dangerous snakes. A copperhead is far more likely to bite without giving warning and a coral snake bite is much more likely to kill you or cause a serious injury.

I was mainly just talking about rattlers specifically. I'd probably still opt for relocation rather than killing, but yeah, copperheads and coral snakes are much more dangerous than rattlers for sure.

Quote
Being totally honest, yeah. A little bit. IMHO.

Eh, you're probably right. I'm not perfect.

Quote from: Watcher on March 01, 2017, 10:44:57 AM
Yeah, in the case of a bobcat an attack is a very unlikely situation, it was just a small example in a multitude.  Just trying to say dangerous creatures are out here and that could influence the decision to carry.

But it does seem AZ bobcats are bolder.  Especially the ones that can be seen in town, they're used to human presence and will stay put on a trail until you get within rock throwing distance before moving off, and noise alone doesn't seem to be that much of a deterrent.  They'll hop fences and take down small dogs, even while being barked at.
I'm sure my leash example is a one in a million chance, but I have heard of it happening.  An animal in an environment scarce for food and acclimated to human presence is capable of a lot of things you wouldn't expect.

Coronado National Forest resident bobcats are infinitely more skittish, you rarely see them.  But city bobcats?  Basically a whole other animal.

Same thing happens around here with coyotes. They're so used to people that they just kind of walk around in the suburbs cause a lot of problems with attacking pets and stuff. So, makes perfect sense to me that a different predator could do the same thing somewhere else. I just haven't heard of bobcats doing that (at least in PA lol).

Quote
But as mr72 said the decision to carry isn't based on one factor alone.  You don't walk around carrying a spare tire in case of a flat, it remains in your vehicle because you don't expect you'll need it outside of driving.
Relating to that many people do carry a firearm solely for wilderness, and will take a .44mag when hiking, but they won't carry in town.  And that's their choice based on their perception of what defines a need.

Yeah, that's more in line with the way I personally think about the situation. I carry the stuff I feel like its reasonable to assume I may need based on my current situation. Gun might be on the list if I'm hiking in mountain lion territory, but its not likely to be on the list if I'm just walking around town.

Quote
But for me, as a daily routine, it's not about the mountain lion, or the robber I may or may not encounter, or the gunman at a movie theater.  It's somehow all of those at once, and yet none of those at all.
It's hard to explain.  At this point its more of a lifestyle than a decision.
The simplest explanation is that I understand that I live in a dangerous world, and while I can protect myself from the sun and the earth by wearing clothing, I can't do the same for someone or something that desires to do me harm.

I get you. Like I said before, I wasn't trying to discourage you from carrying. Do you, mate.

I was just saying the likelihood of attacks from bobcats, bears, and rattlesnakes is a little low to warrant carrying a gun, IMO, if that were the main concern. I know animal attacks really aren't your biggest reason for carrying, but it felt like interesting conversation nonetheless lol.

Quote from: Watcher on March 01, 2017, 10:44:57 AM
The simplest explanation is that I understand that I live in a dangerous world, and while I can protect myself from the sun and the earth by wearing clothing, I can't do the same for someone or something that desires to do me harm.

For me it's a little bit more like why I carry, say, my health insurance card. I only really need it when I am going to the Dr. But I have at least once in my life found myself awakened from unconsciousness while in an ambulance. So there are certain emergencies that you can't foresee that might necessitate its use. Same for carrying a firearm. Any situation I can foresee needing a firearm for protection is just too dangerous a situation for me to get into, so I avoid those situations if at all possible. I carry a gun for all of the situations I can't foresee wherein I might need it. Unfortunately, you almost never know you need a gun until it's too late to get one, so if you don't carry all the time, you can't possibly be prepared in the unlikely incident where you absolutely need it.

Oh and speaking of urban wildlife, feral dogs are far more dangerous than the sum total of snakes, rabid bats, rare mountain lions, ticked off bobcats, etc. I've done a lot of mountain biking at night in urban and suburban wilderness spaces ("parks"...) and there are two main threats when you are out there: 1. is packs of feral or otherwise "wild" dogs, and 2. are people who are up to no good and are not fond of being surprised by a mountain biker when they think they are alone in the woods. But really people are far and away more dangerous than any wildlife.

I must say, I feel like this conversation is going unusually well. Normally opposing sides would be kicking off by now. Kudos to all

Chris

Quote from: mr72 on March 01, 2017, 11:45:10 AM

Quote from: Watcher on March 01, 2017, 10:44:57 AM
The simplest explanation is that I understand that I live in a dangerous world, and while I can protect myself from the sun and the earth by wearing clothing, I can't do the same for someone or something that desires to do me harm.

For me it's a little bit more like why I carry, say, my health insurance card. I only really need it when I am going to the Dr. But I have at least once in my life found myself awakened from unconsciousness while in an ambulance. So there are certain emergencies that you can't foresee that might necessitate its use. Same for carrying a firearm. Any situation I can foresee needing a firearm for protection is just too dangerous a situation for me to get into, so I avoid those situations if at all possible. I carry a gun for all of the situations I can't foresee wherein I might need it. Unfortunately, you almost never know you need a gun until it's too late to get one, so if you don't carry all the time, you can't possibly be prepared in the unlikely incident where you absolutely need it.

Yeah, I feel the same way, too.  "It's better to have and not need than need and not have."

Quote from: mr72 on March 01, 2017, 11:45:10 AM
...
Oh and speaking of urban wildlife, feral dogs are far more dangerous than the sum total of snakes, rabid bats, rare mountain lions, ticked off bobcats, etc. I've done a lot of mountain biking at night in urban and suburban wilderness spaces ("parks"...) and there are two main threats when you are out there: 1. is packs of feral or otherwise "wild" dogs, and 2. are people who are up to no good and are not fond of being surprised by a mountain biker when they think they are alone in the woods. But really people are far and away more dangerous than any wildlife.

True that. I've been chased around on dirt bike trails by dogs more than once. I don't want to call them feral, since I'm pretty sure they were owned by a guy who lives out in the woods up where I used to ride at, but they were mean regardless. One time, one of them bit one of the guys riding with us on the leg as we rode by. Luckily it wasn't serious and he was just able to twist the throttle and ride off, but if he had crashed or if they had pulled him off his bike it could've been much worse.

Haven't had any problems with people yet, but I've definitely run into people out in the woods.

Quote from: the_63 on March 01, 2017, 11:55:30 AM
I must say, I feel like this conversation is going unusually well. Normally opposing sides would be kicking off by now. Kudos to all

Chris

Oh right, we're all supposed to be at each other's throats by now... Uhhh...



Are we all fighting yet?