Seems most of us have learned the futility of arguing which is the the right religion -- we just need to take the next step to refrain from pontificating about which is the right approach re. guns. There is no single objective right approach, now, is there? No need to answer.

Can't we just learn to determine the right approach for ourselves -- and cultivate just a little respect for others to refrain from telling them their ways are wrong and ours is right? Take your gun with you, by all means, or not.

Edited by ben2world on 07/15/2011 15:52:43 MDT.

I liked the incident that happened many years ago in Yosemite. An armed ranger was several miles out on a trail when he received fire from some unknown sniper, and he was hit, then returned fire. The sniper escaped and the ranger was able to limp back to the road with a gunshot wound in the leg. The National Park Service mobilized dozens of armed rangers to search the area. After days, they came up empty.

Later on, the deeper truth of the incident was revealed. There was no sniper. The ranger's sidearm had discharged in the holster. He was so embarrassed that he cooked up the whole story of the sniper.

Needless to say, he doesn't work for NPS anymore.

--B.G.--

I read somewhere that if you bring a pistol into bear country take a .22 instead and shoot yourself. LOL. The pistol is very little match for a bear, and will only upset the bear more. What I read.

Someone way wiser than me said -

"Don't pack your fears."

Works for me.

Oh gosh Ben, the OP deserves no shame at all. None. He asked a valid question on a backpacking site. He's only guilty of not searching the site very well first, but there's a lot of folks guilty of that.

It's not his fault we can't act like adults and discuss such topics without sliding into silliness.

Ever met the type of person that shows up to the family BBQ and starts railing against the horrors of the meat industry while everyone is eating?

Or the type of dude that walks into the vegetarian health food store, chest puffed out with his favorite "I fear no deer" buck hunting shirt on?

Or the random guy sitting at your table at the corporate luncheon that immediately tries to steer the conversation into a political diatribe?

Yeah. It's not cool to be that dude.

Where I come from talking about killing people or the training necessary to kill people in a group of strangers is a little distasteful too.

Oh yes, Douglas, OP is clearly at fault. He didn't just ask about carrying guns, he asked for consensus!

Edited by ben2world on 07/15/2011 16:53:50 MDT.

"Where I come from talking about killing people or the training necessary to kill people in a group of strangers is a little distasteful too."

+1 Especially when it's so casually done.

For anyone keeping score, BTW, The 1st Amendment is clearly in the lead at this point.

"Where I come from talking about killing people or the training necessary to kill people in a group of strangers is a little distasteful too."

Don't know if I was the one that started the theme. But if I did, the next part was... often it is better and safer to talk your way out of a potentially volatile situation. Presenting a firearm when confronting someone you feel is a threat to you can be a point of no return. Thinking you will remain somewhat composed may not happen. Things can turn out much different than you projected in your mind. These are some of the factors one should review before deciding whether or not you want to carry a weapon. I don't carry one, don't encourage anyone to, but recognize the right others have to do so as long as they are within the law. As was mentioned, attitude and aptitude are two different things.

Lets face it, for all intents and purposes larger caliber handguns are designed to do one thing; kill. We can skirt that fact and be polite, but it does not change the fact. And some people cannot pull the trigger... that in a sense is a good thing -- deep down they value other lives; but presenting a weapon and freezing may put you in a much more serious situation than not. People who ask me about firearms when hiking always mention to protect yourself against others, which leads to many questions I think should be thought out carefully by those who are contemplating a weapon. If someone here asks the question about weapons and backpacking, it is a legitimate question. And to me, asking the question means they may not have considered all the points I just made. My intention is to layout the ingredients that should be considered before making a final decision. It is not my place to tell others how they should live their lives. Unfortunately, I have seen the view from both ends of a barrel. Neither is pretty, and neither is easy.

As I said earlier, do what you think is best for you.

What's the most ultralight gun model? What about a wrist-rocket with some rocks? Would that work pretty well for most things and still be lightweight?

Piper,

Wrist rockets and illegal in some states.

IMO as a former law enforcement officer, unless you are hiking where Grizzly or Polar Bears range, I submit that if you think you really need a firearm to protect yourself from anything or anyone, you are probably hiking in the wrong area. Go somewhere else; leave the stress, the extra weight, and the potential legal liabilities behind.


Incidentally, just displaying a firearm in a manner that can imply a threat to use it, even if you don't draw it, can constitute "brandishing" (or another legal equivalent)in many states.

Drawing and/or pointing a firearm at someone or in their general direction can constitute felony assault (of various types) in many states.

Pulling the trigger opens a whole new can of legal worms, even if you think you're justified in doing so.

Bottom line, be careful; you may have to convince a jury that given the circumstances as you saw them, each one of them would have done exactly what you did. That can be a hard sell, as they are not under the same mental stress that you were.


Best course of action.....try to walk or run away from trouble if you can.

Edited by wandering_bob on 07/15/2011 20:03:33 MDT.

Lol. I just went hiking with a buddy about a month ago into an area where there had been some reports of aggressive bear activity. (Mostly just stealing improperly hung food bags) He asked if I was bringing a gun, and I told him I was. (He's a liberal and doesn't own any guns, but he wanted to make sure I had mine!) He asked which gun I brought, and I told him my little .22 pistol. He looked a little concerned and said "A 22 won't stop a bear!" I laughed and told him it wasn't for the bear, it was for him. I was gonna shoot him in the leg and run.

He didn't think it was funny at first, but laughed later. :)

Az

"He's a liberal and doesn't own any guns"

I'm a liberal and I own side arms, shotguns and rifles. And I know ultra-right conservatives who don't own any type of firearm. Maybe it really isn't a political statement.

Edited by Umnak on 07/15/2011 23:44:41 MDT.

Sorry, didn't mean it that way, it was meant as a joke. I actually despise labels and have been known to vote both ways based on ideas and integrity rather than party affiliation. And clearly it's not too terribly important if I was willing to spend a week in the backcountry with a stinky liberal! ;)

At least he wasn't a Frenchman!

Az

I told you this was going to be fun.

I think this might be the best one yet! I can't remember that we've had religion and the army in here before. I want to see if we can get private vehicles versus public transport in as well, but I'm not sure if there's a way to bring it up without making it seem like I'm orchestrating something. Any one care to help out?

I've never felt I needed a weapon in the woods while backpacking, but I most always feel like I need one when using the metro in the DC area. Those public-transport-using people scare the bejeezus out of me. It's why I use drive in my own car, by myself, most often. I feel much safer in my own car than in any public transport vehicle.

(That wasn't so hard, now was it.....)

Allright! Now THIS is more like what I was expecting!

(Now do you understand, Tim?)

Where *I* come from discussing ways to kill people is simple professionalism, whereas making condescendingly smarmy straw-man attacks is considered distasteful. Not pointing fingers- just sayin'. :)

But I don't think that Tim was being That Guy. That would imply that BPL is a nest of groupthinking gun-banning hoplophobes, which it obviously is NOT since we do argue about this subject periodically. Some people just like to believe that all Right Thinking People agree with them. Or at least that they should. That is, after all, the very definition of "right thinking", isn't it?

Edited by acrosome on 07/16/2011 09:00:32 MDT.

A lowly deer can run 75 yds after having its lungs and heart shot out with a high powered rifle, spraying blood the whole way, and drop dead at the end with its body basically drained of blood.

Wild animals are capable of withstanding bodily damage that you and I really cannot comprehend, and still keep functioning for some time. If you shoot a bear, you better kill him and not just make him angry.

Now I understand now why there were groans all around when I started this. I wish I hadn't. I apologize for not properly searching. If I had, I would never had started this. I guess I assumed that everyone that read this would be an adult and would be able to discuss or offer an opinion in an adult manner. I see I was wrong.

FYI, I just got back from an overnight and I did not take a firearm with me. It had nothing to do with the discussion here, it all boiled down to weight. I didn't want to add the extra weight.

For those of you that answered my initial question, thank you for taking the time to respond. For those of you that completely turned this around, thank you for opening my eyes. I will remember what I have learned the next time I ask a question.