Forum Index » GEAR » Solo Wilderness Security


Display Avatars Sort By:
Rodney OndaRock
(RodneyOndaRock) - F

Locale: Southern California
Solo Wilderness Security on 08/29/2011 01:39:12 MDT Print View

Since there's been a few news reports around the world of wild animals killing experienced hikers on foot, attacking tent sleepers in Norway, as well as accidentally discovering an illegal marijuana farm in national forests, that are guarded by armed bears with machine guns...

Curious, how many of you "have a friend" who is packing? and with BPL in mind, what type of security products would your friend recommend...

My friend is thinking of possibly something in the high caliber with stopping power, that can endure dirty conditions, with night sights, low probability of jam and malfunction, low accuracy is OK since it will be used for close distance (this is not for hunting) and of course LIGHTWEIGHT.

For the sake of this topic:
1) let's ackowledge that we are all aware that weapons are not allowed in most wilderness areas
2) let's skip the debate on the legality of carrying.
3) let's exclude the recently popular machete option.
4) let's agree to move pro/con gun control debates to another thread in chaf.

Edited by RodneyOndaRock on 08/29/2011 01:57:35 MDT.

Craig W.
(xnomanx) - F - M
Re: Solo Wilderness Security on 08/29/2011 02:09:14 MDT Print View

My friend says skip the gun and spend $40 on some bear spray if your friend is that worried.

-cheaper
-simpler
-no permits
-less training
-less aiming
-less liability
-less chance of a nasty legal tangle if your friend actually used it on something
-probably far more effective against a bear
-no potentially fatal accidents
-in the 1/1000000000000000 chance your friend has an encounter he/she'd probably be more inclined to actually use it without panicking

And if your friend is accosted, kidnapped, attacked, or robbed by machine-gun-wielding pot growers your friend is F-ed regardless of what he/she's carrying.

My friend says your friend should relax.

Besides, my friend has always wondered...Say your friend is armed with a big gun. At what point do they open fire on the bear? 20 feet? 10 feet? 5 feet? 2 feet? When it's on you? Warning shots? It'd be pretty crappy to shoot up a bear over a mock-charge.

Paul Hatfield
(clear_blue_skies) - F
Re: Solo Wilderness Security on 08/29/2011 05:19:50 MDT Print View

> 1) let's ackowledge that we are all aware that weapons are not allowed in most wilderness areas

Not sure where you got that idea, but it's incorrect. The correct answer is that it depends on federal laws, state laws, and county ordinances in the area where you will be traveling.

> 2) let's skip the debate on the legality of carrying.

Not sure what that means. It is legal to carry in many National Forests, etc., but you need to check the laws in the area.
If you are implying that someone might disregard the applicable laws, I really suggest that person researches what penalties there could be.

> and of course LIGHTWEIGHT.

Define lightweight in ounces or grams.

From the second poster:

> And if your friend is accosted, kidnapped, attacked, or robbed by machine-gun-wielding pot growers your friend is
> F-ed regardless of what he/she's carrying.

Why? That doesn't make sense.

HK Newman
(hknewman) - MLife

Locale: Western US
Re: Solo Wilderness Security on 08/29/2011 05:20:44 MDT Print View

Curious, how many of you "have a friend" who is packing

Found out that an environmentalist/left-wing acquaintance of mine carried a handgun when backpacking, so you never know. Probably since he was well-known in this area and his advocacy in expanding wilderness areas, he was likely worried that a lynch mob of ranchers would recognize his truck. Despite lots of weight-lifting, he started having joint issues and wasn't able to carry even an ultralight load a couple years after retiring at 60.

Edited by hknewman on 08/29/2011 09:07:28 MDT.

tommy d
(vinovampire) - F
Re: Solo Wilderness Security on 08/29/2011 05:30:11 MDT Print View

I'll echo Craig's suggestion to carry chemical spray.

Also, I'll add that when a person does decide to carry a gun they should have (a) an understanding of the laws and regulations, (b) a good lawyer, and (c) "less-lethal" options (chemical spray), and retention support options (knife).

Finally, there are several things about your post that lead my to believe that you don't have much experience with firearms. If you decide to start carrying a gun, the type of gun will most likely be less important than the level of training and amount of practice you achieve. Most likely, by the time you have the level of experience you need, you won't need or want to ask anybody for suggestions.

Lowell Mills
(FarmHand357) - F
Re: Solo Wilderness Security on 08/29/2011 05:45:26 MDT Print View

You would probably want a revolver over a semiauto pistol. Greater reliability, simplicity, no magazines, etc.

Perhaps a Smith & Wesson 342PD. From a recent review: "...the lightest of the Centennial series, weighing a feathery 10.8 ounces. Smith & Wesson has pioneered the use of titanium alloys in its revolvers, resulting in weapons that are much easier to carry concealed, without sacrificing strength. Titanium, when compared to steel, is lighter, tougher, and absolutely rust-proof. The 342PD is over four ounces lighter than the aluminum-frame/steel cylinder 442, and three-quarters of a pound lighter than the stainless steel model 640. In a pocket gun, every ounce counts, and the 342PD is the lightest concealed-hammer .38 Special revolver you can buy. Only the S&W 337PD exposed-hammer Chief’s Special is lighter, by one-tenth of an ounce."

Plus pepper spray and a knife...

Stephen M
(stephenm) - MLife

Locale: The Great Lakes Bay Region
Solo Wilderness Security on 08/29/2011 05:51:36 MDT Print View

I am moving to the US shortly from Europe and this is the one item that really scares the crap out of me whether its in a City or in the middle of a forest.

Tom Lyons
(towaly) - F

Locale: Smoky Mtns.
Solo Wilderness Security on 08/29/2011 07:52:12 MDT Print View

In my particular area, bear hunting(black bear) is very common. For a handgun, I think any caliber in the 40-45 area is fine. People use 357 Magnum, but that might be a little light for the job if the bear is large or closing in on a charge. Also, the same caliber selections are fine for personal defense against human assailants too.
The most commonly used guns are .30-30 Winchester lever-action rifle, or .44 Magnum revolver, both of which are big(especially the rifle) and heavy.
Polymer-framed semi-auto pistols like a Glock in .40, 10mm, or .45 would do just as well, are very reliable, have alot of rounds in the magazine, and are lighter than steel-framed pistols. Glock is known for reliability(no-jam), and known for light weight, and they make some very compact and light models for carrying easily.


Chances are that you won't ever need any of that stuff, but you never know.

If guns are too scary, I can tell you that bears don't like dogs(medium-large), and neither do criminals, so a dog will typically help keep both problems away. Hunters here use packs of dogs for bear hunting, and the bears always run from the dogs until they are treed, or the dogs catch them(which doesn't come out well for the dogs usually). However, some other hikers don't like you to have a dog with you either, and you might catch some flak from them for bringing a dog.

Basically, do what you think you have to do. There is almost always somebody who is going to have some kind of opposition to almost anything you do.

Jeff LaVista
(LaVista) - F
packing on 08/29/2011 08:12:53 MDT Print View

I'm very pro "self defence" and I own a few defensive firearms for home protection and maintain proficient use in them. You could say I am a gun-guy.

The first step is making the promise to yourself to never willingly become a victim, self defense is a mixture of mostly mental preparedness, maintaining situational awareness of what us occurring around you, a little bit of dark intentions for any thing or person that means you harm, and lastly having a weapon or means to project physical force upon those who would harm you.

Now all that sounds pretty gung-ho, but avoidance and de-escalation is the name of the game. Hikers tell you about the tweakers at a shelter, bypass them and stealth camp elsewhere. Rangers posted signs at the trailed about problem bears? Hit another weekend loop somewhere else. Hike up onto a grow op/meth lab? Beat feet outta there!

Onto hardware: what you carry is a function of threat assessment vs your visible profile vs weight. Not enough weapon and your unable to project stopping force, too much and you risk scaring passers-by, maybe getting the police called on you. Likewise too much and youre weighed down.

If profile and weight weren't factors, we would all stroll out into bear country with RPG's or belt fed lmg's. But they are.

If you're worried about bears only, bear spray is the most survivable option. Alaskan police have done studies. Handguns (including magnum revolvers) offer negligible protection, large caliber rifles and 12 gauges give you about a coin tosses chance of survival, bear spray is like 90%+ survival rates in attacks.

If you're worried about people, a big gun can be a deterrence, or it can be an object to steal from your dead corpse, and this is why profile is equally important as stopping power. A full power modern handgun like a glock in 9mm, .40 or .45 is enough gun for a person or black bear, and can be carried in accessible fashion without drawing too much attention. You can also get some bird shot cartridges that will open up survival hunting options.

Whatever you carry, practice is everything. You must be able to rapidly deploy the weapon and engage the threat, or you may as well leave it at home.

For my needs I chose concealable pepper spray. Will put a person in the dirt, and I can flee the scene without informing any police, or leaving a body count (maintaining low profile), legal in more areas then the firearm, and easy to dispose of if you're in an area with questionable legality. Buy more online if you need it, get it shipped right to you at a supply point.

Good police grade pepper sprays will have a more potent mixture then bear spray formulas, so it will perform double duty. I'll return later with some links to suggested products.

Aaron Benson
(AaronMB) - F

Locale: Central Valley California
Re: Solo Wilderness Security on 08/29/2011 08:26:51 MDT Print View

I'll second all of Craig and Tommy's comments above.

Regarding "where" - there's a big difference between National Forest and National Park. If you're genuinely concerned about the Pot Growers, call your local NP/NF agency and ask them if it's relatively safe to hike near ______. I've heard of instances where hikers were actually cautioned against going into certain areas "before law enforcement can sweep that area."

One big thing to keep in mind is Tommy's suggestion about training. The finest bear gun or man stopper isn't worth a hoot if you can't shoot straight. Practice, practice, practice - to the point, as suggested, that when you're capable and ready (whatever that really means), this won't be a question. I grew up shooting responsibly and still shoot often; thousands and thousands of rounds have gone through my hands, through various calibers big and small; I own firearms, including something appropriate for what you're investigating. BUT, despite any concerns I've had about bears or bad guys, I have yet to pack a piece on the trail. I'll take Bear Spray, first, then when I can put a good lawyer on retainer, I'l consider the Glock. With that, though, I can't say I've never seriously thought about it a few times while packing gear. Each time, though, I've come to "how am I going to carry this thing?" It's certainly light enough, but it won't carry comfortably on my hip or back and it's worthless if it's carried in the backpack.

Half of my trail time is spent in areas where I'll see at least a handful of people everyday; if I were going out to more remote locations more often--spending more time in the National Forest--I might reconsider and figure out a comfortable light weight method of carry that won't interfere with a pack.

Edited by AaronMB on 08/29/2011 08:34:04 MDT.

scri bbles
(scribbles) - F

Locale: Atlanta, GA
Re: Solo Wilderness Security on 08/29/2011 08:34:25 MDT Print View

Glock for the city. Bearspray for the wilderness. It's very simple (to me).

Joe Clement
(skinewmexico) - MLife

Locale: Southwest
Solo Wilderness Security on 08/29/2011 08:41:35 MDT Print View

+1000 on the bear spray. Maybe if you're in parts of Alaska, and then it's a very specialized piece of hardware. But it's easiest, lightest, and safest to just carry spray; and that's coming from a guy with 2 safes who plays a lot of gun games.

Edited by skinewmexico on 08/29/2011 08:42:23 MDT.

Matthew Zion
(mzion) - F

Locale: Boulder, CO
Re: on 08/29/2011 08:46:10 MDT Print View

Sig Sauer in the city. Heavy steal frame for smooth repeating fire and no safety.

But in the backcountry I really go without 'protection.' Scariest thing I've ever encountered in the woods was having to cross a busy highway. 99% of the people you will see are going to be like minded and friendly and most of the large mammals will simply run away.

Jeff LaVista
(LaVista) - F
bear spray vs mace on 08/29/2011 08:49:40 MDT Print View

For the people suggesting bear spray, realize that while a bear is much bigger, they have more sensitive noses and spray that will cause a bear to make a 180, might not be as effective against an angry person. Since our noses are so comparatively dull, the formula for.human pepper sprays is a more severe mixture

Bear spray is meant to be a screening device, creating a hanging cloud of deterrent between you and the bear. human sprays are meant to be aimed and is a more persistent, concentrated agent.

If you want dual protection carry a potent human oriented formula that will also be sufficient to keep the bears away.

Stephen Barber
(grampa) - MLife

Locale: SoCal
Acme Security on 08/29/2011 09:02:42 MDT Print View

I just carry a light weight plastic "This Property Protected by Acme Security" sign and post it outside my tarp. That keeps all the bears and bad guys away! ;)

Fred Thorp
(BFThorp) - F
Security on 08/29/2011 09:29:05 MDT Print View

"My friend is thinking of possibly something in the high caliber with stopping power, that can endure dirty conditions, with night sights, low probability of jam and malfunction, low accuracy is OK since it will be used for close distance (this is not for hunting) and of course LIGHTWEIGHT."

I will not comment on bears, but for the two legged threats: When I don't know much about the shooter, I generally recommend a Glock-19. Easy to shoot, durable, reliable, available parts, and cost of practice ammo. Airweight revolvers, I'd skip. Laws, you need to know. Understand, stopping power of most self defense handgun calibers pretty much sucks.

"low accuracy is OK" ... Discounting the need for accuracy worries me.

Edited by BFThorp on 08/29/2011 09:52:56 MDT.

Terry Trimble
(socal-nomad) - F

Locale: North San Diego county
Solo Wilderness Security on 08/29/2011 10:20:37 MDT Print View

I was backpacking to the summit of Mt San Jacinto out of Idylwild on the deer springs trail. I ran in to drugged out guy who was coming down the trail he asked me where I was going I lied to him. But then I looked down on the switch backs he turned around was following me up so I hiked really fast and ditched him and instead of camping at the designated area. I spent the night off trail 2 miles past over looking the trail in secluded area.

Bears and pot growers avoidance is the best weapon and speed and evasion techniques, good physical shape to get out of the situation as quickly as possible is your best weapon . Self defense how to disarm and take a man out quickly so you can get out of there is a last resort.

Good old fashion art of talking and bargaining your way out of a situation is also good with marijuana growers they don't need dead bodies planted all over the place. Just say you stumbled upon the area by accident and you could care less about what their doing and will not report them because what they are doing is a great service to the medical marijuana user and their saints for what their doing. Keep your word to them when you get out of there.
Most rational people will listen and let you go. Irrational people will have already have disarmed you and killed you with your gun or their guns.
Terry

HK Newman
(hknewman) - MLife

Locale: Western US
Re: Solo Wilderness Security on 08/29/2011 10:38:34 MDT Print View

Solo Wilderness Security Posted 08/29/2011 05:51:36 MDT by Stephen Mullen (stephenm)
I am moving to the US shortly from Europe and this is the one item that really scares the crap out of me whether its in a City or in the middle of a forest.


Would not worry about it too much except around trailheads with easy vehicle access (i.e. close to a good road). I often solo and have my gear ready to go after turning off the car. Solo I definitely carry bear spray (for starters) that will knock a grizzly off a kill, plus anything else with a nose.

Jeff LaVista ... bear spray vs mace on 08/29/2011 08:49:40 MDT
....For the people suggesting bear spray, realize that while a bear is much bigger, they have more sensitive noses and spray that will cause a bear to make a 180, might not be as effective against an angry person. Since our noses are so comparatively dull, the formula for.human pepper sprays is a more severe mixture


There were some well publicized "tests" about a decade ago, where some law enforcement officers sprayed bear spray on a volunteer or 2 to see if the top brand(s) would work on humans (think it was written up in Backpacker magazine as a blurb also). They found it worked "surprisingly" well - also keep it secure in your vehicle, as apparently some crashes occurred after accidental discharge inside an auto.

ADD: that's bears and humans, not sure if there's been any tests or incidents with other animals - not even sure it would be legal to conduct such testing anyways.

Edited by hknewman on 08/29/2011 10:54:45 MDT.

Richard Cullip
(RichardCullip) - M

Locale: San Diego County
My Friend is not packing while hiking on 08/29/2011 10:50:25 MDT Print View

My friend, who hikes around the Southern Sierra mostly in the Golden Trout Wilderness, doesn't feel the need to carry any protection from large animals of either the two-footed or four-footed variety.

The only black bear he's ever encountered while on the trail was more scared of him than he was of the bear. That bear swapped ends very quickly and scampered off up the hill away from the trail.

As for the two-footed variety, he just assumes that he couldn't carry enough fire power to make a difference if he ever needed to get into a fire-fight with druggies who have set up their grow operations in the National Forest. So far this approach has worked for him since the late 60's and he sees no need to change his "No Packing" approach while out enjoying the wilderness.

Ben Crocker
(alexdrewreed) - M

Locale: Kentucky
Friends on 08/29/2011 11:02:20 MDT Print View

Richard and I must have the same friend.
And I'm with Terry. I think my wits are likely to be much more valuable than a firearm in dealing with other people.

folec r
(folecr) - M
friends on 08/29/2011 11:25:17 MDT Print View

I just bring my gun nut friends along.

Fred Thorp
(BFThorp) - F
Rational? on 08/29/2011 11:49:51 MDT Print View

...“Irrational people will have already have disarmed you and killed you with your gun or their guns.”

…”he just assumes that he couldn't carry enough fire power to make a difference if he ever needed to get into a fire-fight with druggies who have set up their grow operations in the National Forest.”

I don’t agree with these assumptions, but everyone has to make their own decisions, informed or not.

Samuel C. Farrington
(scfhome) - M

Locale: Chocorua NH, USA
"Solo Wilderness Security" on 08/29/2011 12:16:10 MDT Print View

Rod,
All the bears I know prefer an HK or MP machine pistol, so that's what you will be up against; and unlike what you see on TV, a rifle or handgun will be useless in the face of such overwhelming firepower superiority.

When you have acquired your shooter, please let us know, so we can rat you out.

Thanx.

Mike M
(mtwarden) - MLife

Locale: Montana
firearms on 08/29/2011 12:56:07 MDT Print View

when I'm working I carry my firearm into the backcountry, when I'm recreating I leave it at home

if I'm in grizzly country I carry bear spray, regardless if I have my firearm or not- it's going to be more effective for a charging grizzly

have there been times I wished I had my sidearm, a few- but so few that I plan on continuing to leave it at home on non-work trips

for those wondering on the pepper spray, the bear spray is very (very) effective against any two legged species- OC spray is measured in Scoville units (measures heat) and bear spray is typically stronger than LE OC spray- also a much larger quantity :)

my advice to your "friend" is forget about the sidearm for the backcountry, the city....... that's another matter altogether

Ultra Magnus
(Ultra_Magnus) - F
wind on 08/29/2011 13:35:26 MDT Print View

What about bear and pepper sprays in the wind? Where I live, there are very few bears, but lots of tweakers and dirt people (desert variant of hill billy), and here in the desert the wind blows (both figuratively and literally). It's always blowing... So, what do you do if your assailant is coming at you from down wind?

Also with regards to practice- I was reading a similar discussion in another forum where someone made a pretty good point, I thought. While most gun nuts are pretty well practiced with the operation with their firearms, how much practice does that average outdoors-man have with a bear spray canister? I mean, I dunno how much one costs, but for $20 I can rip out quite a few rounds at the shooting range with my handgun. How much practice does it take to be proficient with a bear canister? With practice drawing a firearm becomes a reflex.

Now, out of all the time I spend in the desert I've never carried anything more than my 4" tactical folder (but I always carry that with me anyway). I've never been assaulted but have run past some shady looking people out in the desert of a few occasions.

BM

Rodney OndaRock
(RodneyOndaRock) - F

Locale: Southern California
Further clarification on 08/29/2011 14:20:54 MDT Print View

1) Thank you everyone for taking the time to provide feedback.
2) A hot topic draws many diverse points of view.
3) My friend's concern scenario is such: sleeping in a solo tent, stealth camp in the national forest, visibility is limited to a tent shadow at best. A bear, mountain lion or human attacks you while in the tiny tent.

That was the reasoning for "low accuracy is OK" because the situation might be shooting at the sudden tent intruder biting the camper's foot. distance range 5 ft ?

The other issue is with a shorter barrel, generally it's less weight, but at the trade off accuracy.

If a bear invades your tent and bites your foot, pepper spray will blind you just as much in a tight tent space.

As for the 2 legged attackers, a pepper spray can is not taken seriously as a deterrent, since some of those guys use it as a dinner condiment. Also, a can runs out of spray pressure in 30-45 secs, where as the stopping power is limited by your refill inventory.

The "packing" gear feedback I gathered from the posts:
Smith & Wesson 342PD, titanium
S&W 337PD
any caliber in the 40-45 area is fine
.44 Magnum revolver
Glock in .40, 10mm, or .45
glock in 9mm, .40 or .45 is enough gun
Glock-19

Generally impractical to carry while moving on the trail during the day, those encounters can be mitigated in a variety of ways. So during the trail walk, the toys would be in bag. It's the night/sleep when a person is most vulnerable.

I was surprised that the Glock was of interest for the outdoors, no one mentioned stun or taser guns. They prob would not be effective on fat and furry predators, 2 or 4 legged.

All laws, risks and liability considered, I was curious what BPL people were packing, with UL weight consideration vs effectiveness.

Thanks everyone for the feedback.

Fred Thorp
(BFThorp) - F
Carrying? Why not. on 08/29/2011 14:34:55 MDT Print View

"Generally impractical to carry while moving on the trail during the day"

Not at all. Concealed and quickly accessible is easily done.

Ultra Magnus
(Ultra_Magnus) - F
Re: Carrying? Why not. on 08/29/2011 15:03:06 MDT Print View

"Not at all. Concealed and quickly accessible is easily done."

Yeah, I was wondering about that one. It seems that that hip-belt would be in the way of most ccw holsters. At least most that I've seen... But, it did get me thinking, a cool ccw hip-belt pocket holster might be a possibility.

BM

HK Newman
(hknewman) - MLife

Locale: Western US
Re: wind on 08/29/2011 15:15:30 MDT Print View

What about bear and pepper sprays in the wind? .Black bears (specifically) I have run into have been pretty silent in the forest, and have usually crossed my path from thick brush with barely a sound (most just flee with a flash of bear booty).

If an altercation with a bear were to happen, it'd likely be hand-to-hand (or hand-to-paw) where wind would be negligible given how quick, yet stealthy bears can be.

I fire off some bear spray every so often in a strong breeze/wind. It is highly pressurized. While firing bear spray into a strong wind can be problematic, it does pretty good in a crosswind. With a canister, one really does not need much (if any) practice as the spray comes out as a pretty deng big cone (different experience IMO, firing than a handgun, which I practiced with for my previous job at taxpayer expense -ranges, close quarters, switching from carbine to pistol, etc...).

Edited by hknewman on 08/29/2011 16:12:34 MDT.

David Adair
(DavidAdair) - M

Locale: West Dakota
Re: Lawn Chair Pack'n for Solo Wilderness Security on 08/29/2011 19:02:59 MDT Print View

Is it too late to get in my less than two cents?

I don't carry a defensive firearm any longer on any back-country trips as I have found them to be heavy, awkward and generally of no use. On a hip belt they largely serve to pull my pants down and get in the way of my pack belt. Instead I have taken to packing an old aluminum lawn chair with green straps. It is every bit as heavy and awkward but with greater utility after I hump the thing up a mountain.

Let me explain:

In case of a grizzly encounter on the trail one can wave the lawn chair overhead while making huffing noises and clacking one's own jaws. The bear will either:
1) Think you are a thirteen foot bear and leave you alone or:
2) have a concern about ingesting second hand LSD and leave you alone.

At bedtime one hangs the chair from an overhead branch to swing in the wind. Any bear encountering such a thing will:
1) Be creeped out by the odd thing swinging in the wind and leave you alone or:
2) Recognize it as a lawn chair on a string and leave you alone with the same concern for the possibility of ingesting second hand LSD.

It works for two legged pests as well. Now suppose you should come upon a group of drunken lowlifes. With that old lawn chair on your back they will surely recognize you as one of their own. Anybody with something of value surely wouldn't be schlepping an old lawn chair around. Home free! (this works better if you trade the Patagucci R1 for an old army shirt btw)

So there you have it - wilderness security at its best!

PS Don't worry, folks on the trial will still notice you are pack'n and suspect you might be a little crazy- just a nice sort of crazy instead of a dangerous sort of crazy.

Justin Baker
(justin_baker) - F

Locale: west coast best coast
Solo Wilderness Security on 08/29/2011 19:40:01 MDT Print View

If you end up bumping into a pot field, I think the likely scenario is you would end up quickly drawing and shooting an armed growing before he can draw on you on the outskirts of an operation and then run your butt off. Either way, not a good situation if you are going to be chased.
Learn the signs, stay away from small streams on the side of well wooded mountains that lead into bigger creeks or rivers. Pot farmers need a water source and they would rather set up on some steep hill than right next to a river where people might be fishing or floating down. If you see any tools, buckets, piping, strange soil modification or digging, turn right around.

Has anybody here had luck with a chest mounted rig?

J Boro
(JBend) - F

Locale: PNW
Re: Re: wind on 08/29/2011 20:43:49 MDT Print View

Lots of really good points here.

If your concern is unwanted midnight visitors, then there are a few simple things you can do and should do before you arm yourself to the teeth. First, in potentially shady areas you may want to stealth camp which can eliminate problems with people and bears. I sometimes camp along the edge of brush or downed trees. This gives me a feeling of some protection on a few sides and I at least know that nothing big is going to come sneaking up from that side. It also gives you some camo so that you are not visible from the trail. If you head uphill you'll also deter the lazy from stumbling onto your camp.

If you are part of the incredibly small unlucky minority that encounters a problem bear or person then you have to weight the benefits and drawbacks to guns vs. bear spray. In open terrain, where you may get a few seconds to respond, both guns and bear spray would be effective against people and bears. Spray allows more room for error and is generally more accessible than a gun. Also, with people, it is likely that you will be blindsided so unless your gun is in your hand it will probably be useless. In a tent however, it's likely that you'll blind yourself as well as the bear whereas a gun is quite effective.

For me, then answer to this conundrum is usually a knife mounted in a deployable position camouflaged on my pack (fallkniven f1 or Esee Izula). If I sense a potential problem, then I'll undo the snap and it is ready to deploy. It's fast enough to surprise a human attacker (quite deadly as well) and while it won't lop a bears head off, it's better than your bare hands if you are in a tent. It's also socially acceptable on the trail.

Lastly, you may want to take into account who else is out on the trail. If it's an area that is accessible to a lot of people then you probably don't have people exercising food discipline and are more likely to have an animal encounter in addition to problem people. For those reason, I'd be more likely to carry a knife and a firearm on quick overnighters or weekend trips than I would far into the backcountry.

Bob Bankhead
(wandering_bob) - MLife

Locale: Oregon, USA
Re: Solo Wilderness Security on 08/29/2011 20:46:15 MDT Print View

Get one of the smaller fanny packs, and wear it with the pouch to the front, over your pack's hip belt buckle. Place your firearm in the fanny pack, out of sight but readily accessible. Keep wearing the fanny pack whenever you take off your pack.

CAVEAT: be sure you either (1) have a current Concealed Carry Permit issued by the state in which you are doing this, or (2) that said state will honor the CCW you do have if it was issued by a different state. Twenty-five states will issue CC permits to non-residents, but don't just assume reciprocity exists.

See http://www.handgunlaw.us.com for the latest information. According to them;

The District of Columbia does not issue CC permits nor will they honor ANY permits from ANY state.

Illinois (IL) and Wisconsin (WI) are "Non CCW issue states".

Colorado (CO), Michigan (MI), South Carolina (SC), New Hampshire (NH),
Florida (FL), and Maine (ME) only honor permits from residents of the issuing states. (Interesting as all of them except MI issue non-resident permits themselves.)

Vermont, Alaska & Arizona: Anyone who can legally own a firearm can carry it concealed. No Permit/License is required.)



OPEN CARRY without a permit is legal in most states, but it is your responsibility to KNOW before you try it. If you're worried about other people, open carry (where the bad guys can see it) is a far better deterrent than concealed carry and you don't have the hassles associated with permits.

Alaska is a totally different animal but here in "the lower 48", I've never seen the chippies and marmots numerous or bad enough to warrant packing a gun on the trail. Mosquitoes, yes, but I can't carry enough ammo to even put a dent in their numbers.

Edited by wandering_bob on 08/29/2011 22:30:55 MDT.

Eric Blumensaadt
(Danepacker) - MLife

Locale: Mojave Desert
Best choice - IMO on 08/29/2011 22:12:51 MDT Print View

The Tarus 444 Titanium in .44 magnum at 28 oz is the lightest gun that will "Do the job." if you do yours and get a decent head shot on a brown bear.

I own guns but have no revolver yet. When I DO get one next June it will be this model for protection from brown bears. A .44 magnum is the MINIMUM cartridge one should consider for stopping dangerous North American game.

BTW, I read "scribbles" comment, "Glock for the city. Bear spray for the wilderness." So far that's exactly what I've been doing - and the biggest bear spray canister.
But for brown bear country the Tarus 444 Titanium is the lightest gun in .44 magnum you can find anywhere. Great design and excellent quality.

Edited by Danepacker on 08/29/2011 22:20:34 MDT.

joseph peterson
(sparky) - F

Locale: Southern California
Solo Wilderness Security on 08/29/2011 22:17:19 MDT Print View

The need to carry in the city or the wilderness just reaks of fear. I realize others see it different, but I see it as a sign of fear.

And yes I live in a rough area of a rough town, and hike in bear and mountain lion country.

Eric Blumensaadt
(Danepacker) - MLife

Locale: Mojave Desert
Fear, etc. on 08/29/2011 22:52:10 MDT Print View

Joseph, there's fear and there's prudence. The two are not the same.

If you feel you're more macho than me for not carrying in "Indian Territory" and in wilderness areas with dangerous game then fine. For me it's not fear but prudence, kinda like "accident insurance".

Remember, "When seconds count the police are only minutes away."

If you're ever UNarmed and at the wrong end of a gun in a potentially deadly situation you'll know fear and only fear.

If you're ever armed in the same situation you'll know both fear and hope of survival.

When an FBI agent friend and a Henderson police friend both tell me to carry in Las Vegas metro area I feel they are advising me out of an abundance of prudence. So I carry, mostly at night. Plus I have the feeling that my home is secure when these firearms - properly stored - are in the house. As former armed security I have been trained by private companies on the use of deadly force with several types of weapons so I know the ways and times to deploy them and when NOT to.

In a wildnerness situation I may carry only bear spray where there are black bears and will ALWAYS carry at least a .44 magnum where there are brown bears (griz).

As for you, God bless you with continued good luck.

** ADDENDUM: I stand corrected, the Smith & Wesson "pd" series of titanium revolvers in .44 magnum is 3 oz. lighter than the Tarus 444 Ultralite titanium in the same caliber, albiet more 'spensive than the Tarus. Either are excellent choices.

Edited by Danepacker on 08/30/2011 11:49:45 MDT.

Stephen M
(stephenm) - MLife

Locale: The Great Lakes Bay Region
Pack a couple of Claymores on 08/30/2011 03:14:10 MDT Print View

All Jokes aside, I do find this conversation a bit crazy.

I never hike in the forests in the UK or Ireland as the Treeline ends at about 300m and Met Labs and Pot growing operations are normally in Cities :-)

I| do have cousin in LA who was shot along time ago.

Edited by stephenm on 08/30/2011 03:38:13 MDT.

Ben Crocker
(alexdrewreed) - M

Locale: Kentucky
Luck on 08/30/2011 06:17:04 MDT Print View

I have ha the same luck as Joseph. Amazing its happened to both of us.

Edited by alexdrewreed on 08/30/2011 07:21:42 MDT.

Ken Thompson
(kthompson) - MLife

Locale: Behind the Redwood Curtain
Re: Solo Wilderness Security on 08/30/2011 06:31:18 MDT Print View

nm

Edited by kthompson on 08/31/2011 06:32:31 MDT.

Ben Crocker
(alexdrewreed) - M

Locale: Kentucky
Fear and danger on 08/30/2011 06:40:34 MDT Print View

By far the most dangerous thing we do is drive to the trailhead.

a b
(Ice-axe)
Armed fires on 08/30/2011 07:37:54 MDT Print View

My buddy Sage and i ran into a Cowgirl in Montana. She was rounding up her cattle from horseback with one broken arm in a sling because :"There ain't nobody else to do it."
We noticed she had both bear load pepper spray AND a pistol on her hip.
When asked about it she replied: "The Bear spray is in case my horse and I get charged by a grizzly. The pistol is for my horse if i have to put it down and myself if i get injured to bad to make it."
She was totally serious.
That was the exact opposite attitude Sage and i expected to find from a rough, trail hardened Cowgirl outside of East Glacier Montana.
Personally I would carry a gun.. except that bullets are made out of lead Ya know.. Lead is heavy.
Instead i carry a toothbrush with a full length handle.
Never underestimate the power of a FULL size toothbrush!
.Grizzly bear defense system

Edited by Ice-axe on 08/30/2011 07:39:24 MDT.

Don Morris
(hikermor) - F
Solo Widerness security on 08/30/2011 07:41:33 MDT Print View

This is the most rational thread I have seen on this subject. A lot of people really get carried away when hashing this out. My friends usually cite studies that show that bear spray is actually more effective and safer than firearms, which do add to the weight. They also avoid irrigated wilderness gardens.

I am a longtime firearms user and backpacker. I have never felt the need to carry when in the woods. On the one time when I did confront weapon (a 45 auto pointed at my COM) carrying would not have done me any good, and might have gotten me killed. I had to talk my way out of the situation.

Fred Thorp
(BFThorp) - F
Fear... on 08/30/2011 08:09:44 MDT Print View

"The need to carry in the city or the wilderness just reaks of fear. I realize others see it different, but I see it as a sign of fear."

I have a spare tire and a rain coat in my vehicle. I'm not “afraid” of flats or rain. I’m around people that carry or are within arms reach of a firearm, 24/7. It’s not a fearful crowd. We don’t usually get to choose when bad things happen. Everyone has to make their own decisions, hopefully informed.

Larry De La Briandais
(Hitech) - F

Locale: SF Bay Area
Re: Fear, etc. on 08/30/2011 08:10:49 MDT Print View

Remember, a gun is MUCH less effective at keeping you safe against a brown bear than bear spray is...

adam spates
(adamspates) - F

Locale: southeast
hmmmm on 08/30/2011 08:19:42 MDT Print View

I wonder if the guys who recently got attacked in Yellowstone and Colorado while asleep in their tents wish they would have had a gun?

I'm not going to tell you wether or not you should carry in the wilderness. That's one of the great things about America....you have the choice(for the most part anyways).

But for your original posted question......

I would check ou the Ruger LCR. They just added .357mag to the line up this year. It is a very light double action only hammerless revolver. No hammers protruding to snag on the draw. No slide to deal with. Unlike semi autos you will not have a jam to clear and if there is a dead round just pull the trigger and it will move to the next round unlike Glocks and other semi autos where you have to operate the slide. The weight on the trigger is your safety. So it is a gun that is easy to draw and easy to shoot(just point and pull the trigger). It is extremy durable and lightweight for the type gun it is.

As for me....I have guns and love guns. But I neither carry a gun or bear spray in bear country or anytime on the trail. Will there be a day that I wish I had one or the other? A good Possibility. But I've lived a good life.

Mark Primack
(Bufa) - MLife

Locale: Cape Cod and Northern Newfoundland
Unnecessary on 08/30/2011 10:52:28 MDT Print View

I've been a senior manager of public and private land for most of the last thirty years and a ranger before that. I used to be active in national associations of land managers and rangers. I used to pay attention to the Crime in Parks reports and statistics. In all those years I cannot recall one report or a single incident where someone saved themselves from either a bear or human attack by carrying a hand gun. Not one.

Additionally, away from trailheads and big campgrounds there is an infintesimal prospect of danger. The number of violent crimes reported from the backcountry by all federal and state agencies in any year amounts to less than a handful of incidents out of millions of visitors. What violent crime does occur in state and national parks--again, mostly in big public campgrounds--occur between people who either know each other--typically drunken friends--or are family members.

The fact is that you are in far far more danger driving down the street to pick up a quart of milk than you are from an assault in the backcountry. Then again, facts have never gotten in the way of either paranoia or machismo--that's the nature of the male psyche.

PS:I've been handling guns and occasionally hunting since I was eight or nine years old, and spent much of my professional career working with armed enforcement officers, so I have no problem with guns per se. In the backcountry, they are just a weight and psychological burden. Better to carry a lawn chair!

Rodney OndaRock
(RodneyOndaRock) - F

Locale: Southern California
Times are changing on 08/30/2011 11:19:14 MDT Print View

http://www.pe.com/localnews/inland/stories/PE_News_Local_N_pot19.4912612.html

With budget cuts, the rangers are understaffed to monitor the pot farms in the national forest.

With the border inspections getting slightly more restrictive on drug smugglers, the pot farmers moved inside the border.

In the San Jacinto mountains NF, every year they are doing an aerial inspection and bust. but only enough budget for 1 raid per year at the end of the growing season.

Times are changing rapidly . For the past two decades, never had any problems, just the occasional off-leash out of control dog, broken beer bottles or teenage graffiti.

Smooth talking your way "Cheech and Chong style" with drug mafia is pointless. It's not personal, it's business. With a $35 Million operation, there are machine guns and shallow graves to keep YOU quiet.

As stated earlier, it's not fear, it's insurance and protection. I'm not seeking trouble, but I either give up stealth camping in the bush or I increase my protection insurance.

My main concern is when tent sleeping - most vulnerable to wild animals and humans attackers outside the tent. Bear spray is ineffective in this situation, because the person holding the spray can is inside the tent. If you are having difficulty understanding my point, pretend the solo UL tent is an elevator cab, and pretend the pepper spray is a very potent fart. People (and bears) outside the elevator are not affected by this skunk defense.

Chance favors the prepared mind.

Edited by RodneyOndaRock on 08/30/2011 11:31:00 MDT.

Fred Thorp
(BFThorp) - F
Legal carry.. on 08/30/2011 11:27:32 MDT Print View

"I used to pay attention to the Crime in Parks reports and statistics. In all those years I cannot recall one report or a single incident where someone saved themselves from either a bear or human attack by carrying a hand gun. Not one."

Given that the law only recently changed to allow carry in parks, and still only in some states, I wouldn't expect much different.

"Additionally, away from trailheads and big campgrounds there is an infintesimal prospect of danger."

Come down to the border and bring your lawn chair.

Sumi Wada
(DetroitTigerFan) - F

Locale: Ann Arbor
Re: Times are changing on 08/30/2011 11:52:26 MDT Print View

I always find it a little amusing that so many people assume they're going to turn into Steven Seagal in a threatening situation. I, for one, KNOW that I'm no Laura Croft. In the middle of the night when I'm half asleep, I can easily be stumped by my tent zipper, so deploying a weapon with any efficiency (or effectively) is really unlikely.

So, for me, my dog is a much more dependable weapon. He's a passive deterrent, has better hearing, bigger teeth and is a lot more coordinated in the middle of the night.

Edited by DetroitTigerFan on 08/30/2011 11:53:40 MDT.

Rick Dreher
(halfturbo) - MLife

Locale: Northernish California
Re: Armed fires on 08/30/2011 11:56:06 MDT Print View

Matt, you are a man to be reckoned with. You are hereby awarded this thread and the Internets for one day.

Cheers,

Rick

Rog Tallbloke
(tallbloke) - F

Locale: DON'T LOOK DOWN!!
Re: Times are changing on 08/30/2011 12:02:05 MDT Print View

With a $35 Million operation, there are machine guns and shallow graves to keep YOU quiet.

Confronted by someone with a machine gun, the *last* thing I'd do is start waving a handgun around. I doubt the pot farmers inside the border machine gun people into shallow graves too often anyway. It's bad for business.

Dave T
(DaveT) - F
don't let the facts scare you. on 08/30/2011 13:07:56 MDT Print View

"The fact is that you are in far far more danger driving down the street to pick up a quart of milk than you are from an assault in the backcountry. Then again, facts have never gotten in the way of either paranoia or machismo--that's the nature of the male psyche."


+1

Mark Hudson
(vesteroid) - MLife

Locale: Eastern Sierras
thoughts on 08/30/2011 13:42:14 MDT Print View

I was watching the original karate kid with my son the other week. Mr Miagi said the best way to block a punch was to not be there when it landed.

I think if you or your friend are this concerned about their personal safety, perhaps you should just stay home.

I have to agree carrying a weapon is fear related, not prudence. You can always justify things by saying what if this happened, then I would be protected, but in reality that rarely happens, and even in the cases it does, the user is rarely able to protect themselves.

Police statistics point this out over and over again. Even with their level of training, they often fail in the line of fire. How many shows have you seen where trained experienced officers are unable to either get to their weapon, or miss their target.

I have seen reports where over 30 rounds were fired by police at a single target, and they all missed.

Fear, panic, and the rush of emotion that surely comes in that situation can not be trained for effectively by the average home user.

I really am not directing this at anyone, and in no way really fault anyone for their beliefs as I hope I am not faulted by mine, but I do sincerely believe most people simply take comfort in the fact they have a weapon, and the reality of it is, in a life threatening situation, more often than not they fail to defend themselves well.

Juston Taul
(Junction)

Locale: Atlanta, GA
Lambs on 08/30/2011 13:42:25 MDT Print View

Carrying = I'm afraid?

What a joke. I choose not to be a victim. I've carried daily for over 10 years and have never needed to use it. However, if I need it, I have it. I'm not afraid at all. Personally I blame crime on people who don't carry. "An armed society is polite society."

I don't always carry when I'm hiking, but when weight isn't an issue, I have it.

Anyone who relies on the police for protection and not themselves, are pretty ignorant in my opinion.

Justin Baker
(justin_baker) - F

Locale: west coast best coast
Re: Times are changing on 08/30/2011 13:45:10 MDT Print View

@Rodney
That's why I really don't like tent camping anymore, even if someone else carries it in. Many years ago when I was just a young kid, camping out on some back road of Mendo NF, someone drove up and starting walking around our camp with out announcing who he was. I almost pointed a shotgun barrel right at his face, which would not have been good... (he was LEO) I noticed his truck before I saw him luckily. That has kind of scared me off from tent camping.

Ben Crocker
(alexdrewreed) - M

Locale: Kentucky
UL guns on 08/30/2011 13:51:06 MDT Print View

That would have scare me away from carrying a gun. Statistically, you are more likely to kill yourself, a family member or friend that you are to kill a foe.

Frank Steele
(knarfster) - F

Locale: Arizona
Either you are a good shot or you are not. on 08/30/2011 13:51:41 MDT Print View

@ Mark "I have seen reports where over 30 rounds were fired by police at a single target, and they all missed."

I have shot at the range with several LEO who missed their targets when there was no stress.

You are either a good shot or you are not. if you are not then practice, if you are still a lousy shot then sucks to be you.

Rodney OndaRock
(RodneyOndaRock) - F

Locale: Southern California
Re: don't let the facts scare you. on 08/30/2011 13:55:57 MDT Print View

These are misleading comparisons about the danger of one option being greater of another.

That is only relevant if I was trying to decide to live the forest instead of live in the city. Discussing City security is irrelevant here. I still live in the city, and the occasional wilderness weekend outing.

it's like trying to compare which is worse for you, bacon cholesterol versus cigarettes. Irrelevant category comparison.

The main discussion of this thread is specifically asking those who:
1) are concerned about the wilderness security factors, and
2) are packing in the wilderness,
3) what is their BPL security gear of choice, close range almost point blank for bear, mountain lion, & drug mafia when stealth camping in the bush, and sleeping in a solo UL tent with limited visibility.

Some people:
a) don't carry any protection, but have a nice toothbrush.
b) carry only pepper spray only.
c) carry pepper spray and are packing.
d) carry a modified knife
e) carry a CCW
f) bring a dog for early warning.
g) all of the above.

Juston Taul
(Junction)

Locale: Atlanta, GA
Statistically on 08/30/2011 13:59:29 MDT Print View

If you guys are going to post things as FACTS then back it up. This thread is getting overran by people with diarrhea of the mouth.

Rodney OndaRock
(RodneyOndaRock) - F

Locale: Southern California
Re: Re: Times are changing on 08/30/2011 14:03:33 MDT Print View

@Rog Tallbloke (tallbloke)

"I doubt the pot farmers inside the border machine gun people into shallow graves too often anyway. It's bad for business."


You may be right about the machine guns. They * do * have them, according to the police after the raids, they always find them in camp, although the south of the border drug mafia prefers to use quiet machetes to dispose of their unexpected witnesses.

They regularly have severed heads on the side of the road in the Arizona Texas border area. You are right, those were not cut with bullets.

Larry De La Briandais
(Hitech) - F

Locale: SF Bay Area
Stress Shooting on 08/30/2011 14:08:34 MDT Print View

If you are going to carry for protection you should understand what stress shooting is and train for it. Without that training most could not hit a person sized target at ten feet. I have a friend that had a company that provided stress training services for the police. He said the difference was amazing. When he put trained police in a stressful situation against non-stressed opponents the police ALWAYS lost. And they were trained.

Know what will happen to you when attempting to shoot under stress. Otherwise you will make things worse for yourself.

BTW, I very strongly believe that we ALL have the inalienable right to protect ourselves (and loved ones) without relying on anyone else, should we choose to do so. And we have the right to "keep and bear arms" as a tool to be used for that protection.

Edited by Hitech on 08/30/2011 14:10:05 MDT.

Rodney OndaRock
(RodneyOndaRock) - F

Locale: Southern California
Re: Either you are a good shot or you are not. on 08/30/2011 14:13:53 MDT Print View

@ Frank Steele (knarfster)
"You are either a good shot or you are not."


The scenario discussed here is not shooting at a gun range or police hunting a fugitive that is evading bullets with the advice of Mr Myagi or doing the Neo Matrix move.

The attacker is close range. almost point blank. and the attacker is not running away. In the Norway situation as well as the NOLS attacks, the hungry bear was in the process of consuming the limb of the camper in the tent. Bear spray not a functional option, in a closed tent space. The Norway case, the rifle malfunctioned the first few rounds.

Edited by RodneyOndaRock on 08/30/2011 14:44:07 MDT.

Fred Thorp
(BFThorp) - F
Police training? on 08/30/2011 14:23:45 MDT Print View

"Police statistics point this out over and over again. Even with their level of training, they often fail in the line of fire. How many shows have you seen where trained experienced officers are unable to either get to their weapon, or miss their target."

"Even with their level of training" ??? Seriously? Most departments qualify for liability purposes. It couldn't be considered training. Statements like this really put my credibility meter in the red.

spelt !
(spelt) - F

Locale: SW/C PA
statistical perspective on 08/30/2011 14:25:45 MDT Print View

>> The fact is that you are in far far more danger driving down the street to pick up a quart of milk than you are from an assault in the backcountry.

Thanks for pointing this out. Driving is far more dangerous than a LOT of other things we worry about. It's a useful thing to remember if you're a nervous person. Sometimes I get anxious about flying...all I have to do is remember I was more at risk driving to the airport than I am on the plane. Problem solved.

Guns in the backcountry is an interesting theoretical discussion, but going by the numbers (as we like to do here) on both risk and weight, there's not enough justification for packing while 'packing.

Stephen M
(stephenm) - MLife

Locale: The Great Lakes Bay Region
Driving on 08/30/2011 14:53:37 MDT Print View

I moved from Ireland to Belgian 3 years ago and utterly shocked as to how the locals drive.

I have driven in the US 3 or 4 times (including a 1000 mile road trip) and find it a cakewalk compared to Belgium :-)

David Olsen
(oware)

Locale: Steptoe Butte
Re: Solo Wilderness Security on 08/30/2011 15:37:02 MDT Print View

I have always wanted to see a paper and spreadsheet of various options for bear protection.

brainstorming here-

All inclusive ie. bear canisters and hangs, electric fences, firearms and spray.

Weights, cost, lifespan.

Footnotes on effectiveness, proper use, carry, laws, and gear recommendations for
hiking areas.


---

Just did a family backpack into Grizzly and Wolf country and also where a 5 year old
was snatched by a cougar last year. Found scat in the trail with wolf toe nails in it
(saved it and had it ID'ed by the USFS biologist). Something is eating wolves!

Being as this place is just a 2 day walk for a Griz from my house has got me to thinking.

Don't want to end up like this guy--

http://www.spokesman.com/blogs/outdoors/2011/aug/26/prosecutor-releases-details-north-idaho-grizzly-killing-case/

spelt !
(spelt) - F

Locale: SW/C PA
mountain lions on 08/30/2011 15:41:51 MDT Print View

I've often wondered why I've never seen them mentioned. Are they that much more reclusive than bears that an encounter is that much more rare?

Brian UL
(MAYNARD76)

Locale: New England
statistical perspective on 08/30/2011 15:44:33 MDT Print View

Lets just be real,
You are bound to get feminist barbs and macho "I don't need a gun" posturing when this subject comes up.
Its a fact of life that no matter how clever you are or how careful, what weapon you carry or how well trained you are, a determined person can victimize you.
The police carry because its effective for self defense, but they also play a confidence game knowing that the uniform signifys that there's s an army and a whole system to back them up.
I am all for responsible law abiding citizen carrying - its not my business. I just don't think its always the best strategy.
No matter what you do nothing is guaranteed. I would suggest:

- being prudent and avoiding suspicious people and situations
- study a martial art since its more likely you will be in a physical altercation than a gun battle and be willing to use violence without hesitation to make a quick escape.
- practice running or sprinting so you get away when you are out gunned.
- carry pepper spray for range and something like a retractable baton for close quarters. Remember to go for the eyes if a bear gets a hold of you.
You can tell Im bored when I respond to a gun thread.

Mark Hudson
(vesteroid) - MLife

Locale: Eastern Sierras
Re: Police training? on 08/30/2011 16:02:57 MDT Print View

@ fred

so fred, we are to believe that all the ccw persons in the us have equal or more training than the police?

You in my opinion prove my point, you say our police who have more training than the average ccw permitted person are not adept, then where does that leave the average ccw person.

You may be gods gift to shooting but to believe that any other are is what puts my credibility meter in the red.

Someone also posted they have carried for 10 years and not needed it, but were happy they had it just in case. I am 46 havent needed one in 46 years, and I suspect that the person who posted actually is older than 10 so in reality they havent needed it in 31 years or more (21 to buy a gun and 10 years of experience).

I personally believe this topic has no place on bpl.

how many triple crowners have carried weapons, or even bear spray. These guys and girls have spent more time hiking than most of us could even imagine, and I doubt very seriously any of them carried weapons on their triple crown hikes.

David Olsen
(oware)

Locale: Steptoe Butte
triple crown hazards on 08/30/2011 17:19:28 MDT Print View

Having not hiked a triple crown, are those trails known for pot grows, meth labs or
grizzly bears?

Terry Trimble
(socal-nomad) - F

Locale: North San Diego county
Pure fear driven by Television,movies and 24 hour news on 08/30/2011 18:33:02 MDT Print View

I have been around guns since I was very small boy my father use to hunt and shoot skeet in club contest. My first daisy buffalo bill BB gun at 7 years old to learn how to shoot. Learned how to shoot real gun a 22 rifle and 12 gauge shot gun at age 9 years old in company of my father. Hunted a lot in Deluz area of far north San Diego county my 22. caliber pellet gun.
Use to have BB gun wars with friends when we were bored by the san luis rey river with simple rules no face shots. My friend cheated they wore heavy jackets. So I would tear off sneak around rocks like a sniper shooting their unprotected hands to win.
I was a Untied States Air Force Munition Maintenance specialist , My jobs consisted of bombs ,missiles, ammunition for planes, human carried guns,Stored and deliver supplies to EOD.
I missed my marksman ship ribbon by one shot because they gave me M-16 with crooked barrel that I asked to be exchanged and the instructor said deal with it. I had to adjust the sight and still aim 6 inches over to get a bull eyes. That my gun experience
So I am no stranger to firearms.

Rodney On da hill is right Riverside county has 14.4 percent unemployment rate so people are seeking other ways to make money.Marijuana growers in rural north san diego county and south riverside county have been around since the early 70's. Meth labs have been around also in the rural areas and urban neighbor hoods. A gang shot up the police headquarters and set police cars on fire in Hemet,Ca. like something out of the movies and it is one of the gate way towns to Mt.San Jacinto wilderness areas.

.
News Media, television shows ,film: has polluted are society with so much crime and fear that everybody thinks their time is up crime is banging at their door to kill them. Some human minds can take only so much and become paranoid and go in to full bore survivalist mode stock pileing guns, ammunition,food, living in the back country and swearing to shoot any city folks{Zombies} that invade during a natural disaster. Read some of the survivalist boards if you want a really good laugh. I am surprised we have not reverted back to a bomb shelter in every yard mode yet of the 50's and 60's during the cold war era that are government and media scared us in to.

Now here my take why I don't carry a Gun in to urban or wilderness areas I have been in a lot of bad urban gang area street skateboarding and working. I came to conclusion in my life I don't need guns in my life period. If I can't talk or evade my way out of something my time is up.

I also feel if you do carry gun in to wilderness area stumble on to meth labs ,marijuana growers they will think you are threat and stealing their crop or law enforcement and they will shoot ask question later.IMHO
Terry

Edited by socal-nomad on 08/30/2011 18:39:21 MDT.

Ken Helwig
(kennyhel77) - MLife

Locale: Scotts Valley CA via San Jose, CA
Re: Pure fear driven by Television,movies and 24 hour news on 08/30/2011 20:06:30 MDT Print View

God, not this gun thing again.................

I'm with Terry just above me on this one

a b
(Ice-axe)
Re: triple crown hazards on 08/30/2011 20:18:09 MDT Print View

I just finished my version of the Triple Crown on the Summer solstice this year.
By Far the single biggest threat/fear I had was Lightning. There is no escaping it sometimes. Places on the divide were exposed and the only option to get away would have meant climbing down a rocky cliff. I came to terms with that fear and only hunkered down on my sleeping pad when the lightning bolts came simultenously with with the clap of thunder.
There is no more visceral fear (for me at least) than being "hunted" across a moonscape of boulders by a massive thunderstorm the way only Montana makes them.
My second biggest fear was Hail (they make golf ball sized hail out on the divide) then ticks and mosquitos.
Bears do not even make my list.
From my experience of hiking from Mexico to Canada twice and from Georgia to Maine the wild life has no interest in a stinky thru hiker stealth camped away from water, CG's, roads, and towns.
The most unpredictable animal in the woods continues to be man.
You want an example: Five dirtbikers wearing pistols racing up the CDT behind you. Or automatic fire heard in the dead of night on the PCT in Washington state. Or beer bottles being flung from the window of moving cars along the road on the A.T.
Fortunately you wont see many of them anywhere off-trail, away from water, or out of town either.
I slept with my food, while stealth camped, through bear country on all three trails and been harassed by nothing more than a single packrat. And rat stole a sock and a chunk of my shoulder strap leaving my food entirely alone.
Go ahead and carry a bazooka if thats what you want to do.
You have that right.
Though you will be the only one.
Not a single long distance hiker I met on any trail was visibly armed with anything more than pepper spray or a tiny pocket knife.
The only difficulty you might have is mailing that gun home (and you will) or crossing an international border when the time comes.

Ben Crocker
(alexdrewreed) - M

Locale: Kentucky
Triple Crown on 08/30/2011 20:34:30 MDT Print View

Gratz on your route. Also good to hear the report of a pretty peaceful trail.

Eric Neumann
(eaneumann) - F

Locale: Vail Valley Colorado
Personal preference! on 08/30/2011 21:09:52 MDT Print View

It's all about what's comfortable. I personally carry bear spray as my first defense. But, I always have my Glock 23 and a fixed blade knife. In grizzly country I would want something bigger, but for where I'm at, it's the perfect size, weight, and durability. My 23 is my backpacking gun, not my daily carry.

For grizzly's, I would want a .44 mag or bigger. But I wouldn't carry anything that would interfere with me enjoying my time in the wilderness. I don't think the chances of something happening are very likely, but I wouldn't want to be that guy dead with a gun sitting at home.

Carrying a gun is all about personal preference. He asked for gun suggestions, not reason why he shouldn't carry : )

Dave T
(DaveT) - F
tonz o' gunz on 08/30/2011 21:55:48 MDT Print View

YAGT (yet another gun thread).

I guess part of the pushback on the gun thing is that this is not Everything And The Kitchen Sink Camperforum or Bang Goes The Gun Weekly, but Backpackinglight.

If you wanted to carry a 9 pound mountaineering tent to your weekend hike in Tennessee "just in case" you would probably get lots of discussion about why your risk assessment is completely wack. If you want to carry an ice axe to a desert mountain "in case of avalanche" people are gonna say that's nutty. If you carry a chainsaw as an "emergency fire making tool" you might get clowned.

Thus, when you carry a "heavy" firearm into the woods to be "prepared" for the statistically tiniest of circumstances, it seems silly to discuss on a Light/Ultralight Backpacking forum. It strikes me as odd when folks that strive hard to intelligently pare their packs down to face reasonable circumstances in the woods can't see the folly of needing a firearm to defend against a pack of rabid mountain lions chewing their leg through a tent or to engage in a running firefight against Mexican nationals with automatic weapons. On a different forum (e.g. about guns) it seems totally appropriate. On here, not at all.

Also, of course it's your right to carry it (when legally done so). The Constitution also says you can carry a 4 pound first aid kit, emergency flares, a ham radio, 20'x20' canvas tarp, 14 pound sledge, etc. just in case. I just started a thread over at Kitchensinkcamperforum if you want to discuss my 122 pound baseweight over there.

Anyway, proceed. (Gotta love the weekly gun thread.)

Mark Ries
(mtmnmark) - M

Locale: IOWAHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!
Help me with this one on 08/30/2011 22:13:30 MDT Print View

You are in a tent, its night a bear attacks, you have a gun, its dark, you cant see sh#t you just do what ? start shooting where you think the bear is? If its got your leg you could try shooting that direction. I hope to God you are solo. After getting sniffed at through a tent at lake elizebeth in glacier I came up with this idea. I keep my bear spray and my knife ready and where i know exactly where they are, like you do your gun. If a bear does attack I slice out of my beloved lightheart solo and spray out of the tent. If you have ever sprayed bear spray In a windless, light winded area or up wind you learn how nasty that stuff is to come in contact with, you gasp for air ,you can not breathe, you can not see well if at all. If you were unloading a canister of that outside the tent the bear would most likely get a good wiff and since it is not a situation where its protecting a cub it would likely drop you and leave. You are going to suffer some from your own spray but that would be my preference over likely at best wounding a bear and he can still breathe and see and is really pizzed off. There is a great arguement here for a tarp and quilt over a tent and sleeping bag but in my mind no arguement for a gun over spray.

Edited by mtmnmark on 08/30/2011 22:18:43 MDT.

Brian UL
(MAYNARD76)

Locale: New England
knowlege over gear on 08/30/2011 22:21:25 MDT Print View

I think the gun debate can be summed up with the idea that gear is no substitute for knowledge and experience.
While unfortunately violence can happen to anyone at anytime all you can do is be as street wise as you can and cross your fingers. No amount of firepower can make up for bad decisions and bad luck.
Im sure there are a few places where it may be prudent to carry but if you are in one of those places you probably will have knowledgeable and experienced rangers and law enforcement that can guide your decision making in the rare event that its needed.

Steven Paris
(saparisor) - M

Locale: Pacific Northwest
Solo Wilderness Security on 08/30/2011 22:29:21 MDT Print View

"While unfortunately violence can happen to anyone at anytime all you can do is be as street wise as you can and cross your fingers. No amount of firepower can make up for bad decisions and bad luck."

Well said.

Randy Nelson
(rlnunix) - F - M

Locale: Rockies
Statistics on 08/30/2011 23:44:52 MDT Print View

Since this is BPL and we try to carry only things we will use, except for a first aid kit, what is the likely hood of using the tool in question? How many backpackers have been killed by wildlife, pot growers, or two legged predators while they are doing the "occasional wilderness weekend outing"? in SoCal or wherever it is you go? The question I always ask in this case is: Do you wear a helmet or any extra protection when driving your car? I'm just guessing but you're probably 1,000 times more likely to die in a car accident than on the trail from a predator of any kind. So why would you take extra precaution for the unlikely one but eschew the extra protection when it might actually save your life? 2715 people died in car accidents in California in 2010. How many died in the back country by predators of any kind in the same time period? 1? 2? 3?

In Colorado, where I live, there have been only a handful of people killed by bears or mountain lions in the 100+ years of recorded history. 474 died in car accidents last year. Worried about your safety, wear a helmet when driving.

I don't really care if people carry or not as long as they do it safely. A friend of mine was exploring some rock formations in a wilderness area about 4 years ago. When he came around one of them he found a guy pointing a hand gun at him. The guy said "Sorry, I thought you were a mountain lion." I don't think that guy was carrying safely.

Dean F.
(acrosome) - MLife

Locale: Back in the Front Range
Begin Rant on 08/31/2011 00:45:35 MDT Print View

Wow, this was actually kind of civil for a few pages. Starting to heat up just slightly, now.

I gotta put this out here- I am exactly the guy that the American public should WANT wandering quietly among them with a concealed handgun. I grew up in a gun family so I'm certainly not a hoplophobe. I am well trained on handling and firing a handgun. I can certainly hit what I shoot at, even in the stress-fire scenarios I've done. Needless to say, I have never failed to qualify "expert" on the joke of a test the U.S. Army uses. I have a CCW for the state of Colorado, and I understand gun law. I have proven good judgement. I fret about what it means to actually have to use a handgun for its intended purpose, and especially about where a bullet might go after passing through it's target. I would rather die myself than harm an innocent bystander. I obsess about my family's safety with guns in the house. So, frankly, you all should feel SAFER knowing that I might be standing next to you in the mini-mart the day a crew of tweakers open up. If nothing else I will draw their fire away from YOU.

And that's kinda funny. A lot of people on this thread have mentioned how useless a gun is if you aren't intensely trained, and how poorly people shoot in stressful situations, etc. (I, too, have chuckled at any number of police officers who I have seen shooting VERY poorly on ranges I have visited. Most of them would rather have a nice pen than a nice gun, y'know? They use it much more.) Well, I am the guy who is well trained, and I will certainly do a better job than the tweaker...

But I almost never carry a gun. Ever. City or wilderness. I simply don't need it. The biggest reason I even own a handgun is in case some ba$tard breaks into my house and threatens my family, which is probably the only thing that would push me to egregious violence. Though I am a rational man with a great respect for human life, I'm certainly no pacifist.

Mind you, I find most of the arguments against carrying a gun on this thread to be spurious:

"You're carrying a gun 'cause you're SCARED!" What? I'm not scared at all. I'm evaluating risk. A gun is kind of like parachute- you'll probably never need it, but if you do you'll need it VERY BADLY. That's why it is obvious to me that a lot of people here don't understand risk. Risk is NOT equivalent to likelihood. Risk is likelihood x severity. If the likelihood is low but the impact is catastrophic, well, that's a significant risk. Certainly likelihood can be so low as to effectively nullify the risk, but I don't think it is a given that this is one of those cases. It is arguable.

"Someone else will kill you before you can use it!" Again- what?!? I'll take 2 to 1 odds against a tweaker any day. And I'm certainly not going looking for a fight. Those who look for fights find them. I'm talking my way out if I can.

"If the pot growers have guns they'll still kill you!" Wow. That's far from a true statement. And even if one makes that general assumption- are you claiming that you shouldn't even TRY to defend yourself?!? That's kind of nihilistic, isn't it?

"The drive to the trail-head is more dangerous!" Granted. So you drive carefully and buckle up, don't you? You have evaluated risk and taken measures, which is all that the people who are asking about carrying a gun are doing, too.

Nonetheless, despite my thoughts on all of that, I rarely carry a gun- because when I evaluate the risk I find it to be so very low. Bear spray IS probably more effective for bears, unless you carry a high-powered rifle or shotgun slugs or something, and those are simply too heavy. (I did carry a .45-70 on my Alaska trip a while ago- because all of the locals warned me that I should. And I didn't see a single grizzly.) No HANDGUN is going to be remotely reliable in stopping a charging grizzly- I don't care what magnum round you're considering- because shot placement is just too difficult. Even PEOPLE who are shot almost never drop dead immediately, contrary to Hollywood. Frankly, if you MUST use a handgun against a bear a high-capacity automatic might be better than the magnum- that's what the rangers often end up using on the bears when they must put one down and a rifle isn't available. More shots = better chance of hitting something vital. I've seen footage of a grizzly being shot behind the shoulder TWICE by a .300 Weatherby Magnum and still fighting, so do you really think your .44 magnum is going to stop one? For that matter, we don't have grizzlies in Colorado. We also don't have the pot-grower problems in Colorado that you all have in California, nor do we have the coyote and Mexican mafia problems of the border states, all of which I think is just a tad overblown, anyway.

So, when I EVALUATE THE RISK it seems to come down on the side of not carrying a gun. Not worth the weight. But do your own assessment. If I do carry one I keep it light, carry it in a SafePacker, and it isn't for bear protection. Most of the human threats you might encounter are not courageou, and will back down when it becomes obvious that you might kill them back. On the very rare occasion that I carry a gun it is because I'm worried about aggressive rednecks or ranchers with delusions about property rights or rural mafiosi or perhaps the occasional tweaker trying to steal stuff in crowded areas, and then I carry a Ruger LCR because it's light. In general, I am willing to take much greater risks with my own life, but when my wife and/or daughter are with me I'm more likely to carry the LCR. The argument that this makes me a greater threat to my family than anyone else is spurious- I OBSESS about gun safety. If it ever gets back from the gunsmith I'll probably change to my S&W Model 19 because I'm having a MagnaTrigger installed for safety reasons, and then the LCR will only get used for those extremely occasions when I want to carry it while solo hiking.

Frankly I'll agree that armed untrained people are more of a threat to themselves and their friends than to anyone else, and most people who walk around armed are macho frightening people. Hey, I'm a "gun guy"- I know these people, and they are macho and frightening.

If you EXPECT to get in a fight, heck, carry a rifle. If you don't expect to get in a fight but want to be prepared, carry a handgun. For people who are extremely unlikely to get into a fight (which is nearly all of us, including me) and who aren't "gun people" I like to recommend small double-action revolvers. And if you aren't "gun people" don't shoot at any range longer than across a desk. They will fire every time you pull the trigger- for all practical purposes they do not jam, no matter how poorly treated. You can leave them loaded in your nightstand for YEARS and they will function when you pull the trigger- which is not something an automatic you can be relied upon to do. There is no safety to fumble under stress. You can just jam them into your target and pull the trigger if you must- many automatics will go out of battery if you do this. Small ones like J-frame S&Ws or the LCR are very light. Five (lead) rounds really isn't that heavy.

But, wow, it is an extremely odd circumstance in which I even consider taking a gun.

Edited by acrosome on 08/31/2011 01:00:49 MDT.

Rog Tallbloke
(tallbloke) - F

Locale: DON'T LOOK DOWN!!
Re: Begin Rant on 08/31/2011 01:21:28 MDT Print View

Hi Dean,
Good comment. Here's the bit I'm interested in:

"Someone else will kill you before you can use it!" Again- what?!? I'll take 2 to 1 odds against a tweaker any day. And I'm certainly not going looking for a fight.

The most likely scenario is someone with bad intent is going to approach you all friendly, then pull the gun with their finger already on the trigger, and demand your cash.

You can't outdraw that, unless you are going to ready your own concealed gun as the person approaches. Now, 99 times out of 100, the person approaching really is a friendly local or fellow hiker, and the only reason he is putting his hand into his pocket as he approaches, is to pull out the map he's going to ask you for help reading or his cigarrettes to ask for a light. At this point, you draw and he sh*ts himself, and you have to lend him your spare boxers.

How many times do you do that before you come to the conclusion you'd rather give the 1 in a 100 tweaker your $50 than pay for replacement boxers for 99 traumatised hikers?

My own strategy is to carry the $50 in my shirt pocket to give away to the needy, and stash the rest of my holiday cash and credit card in the well concealed pocket down the inside leg of my pants. 2 to 1 odds isn't good when you multiply it by the severity of fumbling the draw. Better to be $50 lighter in this world than $50 richer in the next.

Edited by tallbloke on 08/31/2011 01:35:18 MDT.

Rodney OndaRock
(RodneyOndaRock) - F

Locale: Southern California
Re: Statistics on 08/31/2011 01:33:37 MDT Print View

@ Randy Nelson, (rlnunix)

In a car, I wear a seat belt, and the car has air bags. I have never needed either to save my life, but I still use the seat belt.

Surprisingly, I have not had a need to use my trail first aid kit in over 20 years, but if I get injured, I carry a kit to mitigate the risk of further serious injury.

When stealth camping with a buddy, I leave the hardware at home, but there is increased risk when solo and far away from the busy trail crowds.

Someone mentioned mastering martial arts as an alternative. I have no interest in tango dancing with Grizzly Mike Tyson. For about 1 lb of hardware, its piece of mind that I hope never to have to use in that rare awful scenario.

The pot-farm invasion of the national forests in So Cal is on-going, so in past years it used to be a hippie's well hidden crop, now it's turf warfare.

I like my mountains, I like to bush camp, I like to avoid busy trails, I like to go solo, I like solitude - unfortunately, so do the undesirable crowds, and the hungry predatory wildlife. In OC, the coyotes used to be a cute sighting, but their population exploded, now they are snatching leashed dogs while their owners are walking them in the morning. Coyotes are forming highly skilled packs and taking down single small, medium to large dog breeds. Also, mountain lions are on the move again because the past forest fires forced them to come out of hiding and seek out food in "people" areas.

but most of this stuff happens after 10PM and before 6AM.

Edited by RodneyOndaRock on 08/31/2011 01:35:02 MDT.

Dean F.
(acrosome) - MLife

Locale: Back in the Front Range
Re: Re: Begin Rant on 08/31/2011 02:12:12 MDT Print View

That's how how many muggings happen, but I'm not sure I'd say it is the "most likely" scenario. At least not in MY region. I'd say that the most likely scenario for me is a couple of shady-looking guys glancing around while they approach me across a parking lot, in which case, yes, I'd ask them what they want in a loud voice with my hand on my gun if I had it. Not drawn, but my hand would be on it. Don't underestimate one's ability to spot shady characters. Most (not all) criminals here aren't as well dressed as they are in Europe, and they tend to approach you in obviously suspicious and aggressive ways.

But Rog, I've already said that I'm not looking for a fight, and certainly not "outdrawing" anyone. Do you watch a lot of Westerns? I shudder to contemplate what you think of us Yanks -if some guy has the drop on me and asks for my wallet, well, he gets my wallet. If he doesn't have the drop on me I'm going to RUN if I can. But unfortunately in many jurisdictions here in the US we have something called a "three strikes law". If you are convicted of your third violent crime, you go away for life. This motivates criminals with two strikes to leave no witnesses, because they have nothing to lose. A two-strike mugger might START the mugging by killing his victim.

Certainly, if I'm in a minimart when some two-striker starts executing people I am going to fight.

I also habitually keep my cash separate from the rest of my wallet. I guess great minds think alike.

Heck, sorry Rog, I have a casualty coming in or I'd edit this into a more rational form...

Edited by acrosome on 08/31/2011 02:14:55 MDT.

Dirk Rabdau
(dirk9827) - F

Locale: Pacific Northwest
Re: Solo Wilderness Security on 08/31/2011 02:44:27 MDT Print View

I commend people for keeping this thread civil.

Here are a couple of studies that address injuries and fatalities in the outdoors. Neither study is all-encompassing, but basically backs up what I've read elsewhere:

That the main causes of death in the outdoors are (in no particular order):

1) Falls
2) Drownings
3) Cardiac events

Morbidity and mortality in the wilderness


Outdoor education fatalities in Australia 1960-2002. Part 1: Summary Of incidents and introduction to fatality analysis



Outdoor education fatalities in Australia 1960-2002. Part 2. Contributing circumstances: Supervision, first Aid, and rescue

On an aside, as someone who can't even operate the #*$&^@& zipper on his sleeping bag after waking up in the middle of the night to go pee, the chance of me brandishing a firearm effectively seems rather fanciful!

Edited by dirk9827 on 08/31/2011 02:47:47 MDT.

Rog Tallbloke
(tallbloke) - F

Locale: DON'T LOOK DOWN!!
Re: Re: Re: Begin Rant on 08/31/2011 02:51:50 MDT Print View

Dean, sounds like you're busy, and my prayers are with your client that your expert and full attention gives them the best possible outcome, so here's my reply for when you are off shift.

But unfortunately in many jurisdictions here in the US we have something called a "three strikes law". If you are convicted of your third violent crime, you go away for life. This motivates criminals with two strikes to leave no witnesses, because they have nothing to lose. A two-strike mugger might START the mugging by killing his victim.

In which case the mugger will come from behind all sneaky. The person with the prior intent has the advantage, which is why the *availability* of firearms is such a problematic issue in the states, regardless of the legality or rights issues around ownership and carrying away from home.

Mountain lions and coyotes are pretty sneaky too. And fast. Bears are just tough. A nice bright fire and some pepper spray would be my approach. And a handy stout billy stick. I'd have a better chance of whacking a lion or bear in the eyes with those than a handgun, even though I'm a good shot.

Not too sure I'd hike solo in grizzly country though, so if a handgun gives peace of mind to those who do, good luck to them.

Arapiles .
(Arapiles) - M

Locale: Melbourne
Re: Re: Pure fear driven by Television,movies and 24 hour news on 08/31/2011 04:21:00 MDT Print View

"God, not this gun thing again.................
I'm with Terry just above me on this one"

+1

Given that guns have been threaded time and time again, why not just search for the old threads and have a read of them?

Is anything new likely to be said?

Edited by Arapiles on 08/31/2011 04:25:08 MDT.

Katharina ....
(Kat_P) - MLife

Locale: Pacific Coast
Gun debate on 08/31/2011 06:13:49 MDT Print View

I'll preface that I don't like guns, that the thought of people backpacking with them disturbs me and that I believe that more violence is generated by the 4th amendment , by far, than is prevented. It is a difficult issue for me because I believe in personal rights, but I am disturbed by this one. I can't decide, I guess.
The reason I am posting here, though, is because I disagree with those that want the debate out of here, or that people just read old threads. Most issues have been discussed here and keep coming back, sometimes with new insights, sometimes not. I also dread this particular discussion, mainly because it always comes back around to one's manlihood or lack of it and other personal attacks. Yet it has it has it's place, because some members want to talk about it .It keeps coming up and then runs it's course and other than taking up room in the recent posts, which is not understandably not liked by those that just want to read about backpacking, it should be treated as any other marginally related issue.
Just my 2cents.

Cesar Valdez
(PrimeZombie) - F

Locale: Scandinavia
Location FTW on 08/31/2011 06:55:56 MDT Print View

Wow, this thread is yet another reason I am glad that I live in Sweden. If you statistic lovers think the odds are low of getting killed by a drug dealer or a bear in the US are low, they are even lower in Sweden. Much lower, especially for murder.

When I did live in the US, I never carried a gun or bear spray, just a knife (both urban and in the woods). Here in Sweden I only carry a knife into the woods, and sometimes an ax, but these are tools and not really for self defense. When I am hiking deeper in the woods (which is often) I will clap my hands and/or sing and/or holler every few minutes so that all the animals know where I am and clear out. I have yet to see a bear or wolf in the 5 years I have lived here, but I have seen plenty of moose, which are kinda dangers I guess. The rare few times a moose postured like it was going to charge, one time I just backed off (mother and her calf), and the other time I yelled and threw rocks (aggressive male) and it ran away.

If I ever ran into anyone that had a gun, I have at least a +10 on my diplomacy check, not including my charisma modifier which is above average, so I feel confident I could talk my way out of it.

If someone without a gun attacks me, urban or in the woods, I think that 3 years wrestling, 1.5 years boxing, and 2.5 years of Brazilian Ju-Jitsu training should suffice.


If I lived in the US I would only carry bear spray if I were going to be in grizzly bear areas. Black bears on the other hand (from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Black_Bear):

"Unlike grizzly bears, which became a subject of fearsome legend among the European settlers of North America, black bears were rarely considered overly dangerous, even though they lived in areas where the pioneers had settled. Black bears rarely attack when confronted by humans, and usually limit themselves to making mock charges, emitting blowing noises and swatting the ground with their forepaws. However, according to Stephen Herrero in his Bear Attacks: Their Causes and Avoidance, 23 people were killed by black bears from 1900 to 1980. The number of black bear attacks on humans is higher than those of the brown bear, though this is largely because the black species outnumbers the brown rather than them being more aggressive.

Compared to brown bear attacks, violent encounters with black bears rarely lead to serious injury. However, the majority of black bear attacks tend to be motivated by hunger rather than territoriality, and thus victims have a higher probability of surviving by fighting back rather than submitting. Unlike grizzlies, female black bears do not display the same level of protectiveness to their cubs, and seldom attack humans in their vicinity.[43] The worst recorded fatality incident occurred in May 1978, in which a black bear killed three teenagers who were fishing in Algonquin Park in Canada.[74] The majority of attacks happened in national parks, usually near campgrounds, where the bears had become habituated to human contact and food.[43] 1,028 incidences of black bears acting aggressively toward people, 107 of which resulted in injury, were recorded from 1964 to 1976 in the Great Smoky Mountains National Park, and occurred mainly in tourist hotspots where people regularly fed the bears handouts."

Fred Thorp
(BFThorp) - F
misdirected stats... on 08/31/2011 08:11:18 MDT Print View

@ Mark

"so fred, we are to believe that all the ccw persons in the us have equal or more training than the police?"

Not at all... but to apply police shooting statistics to responsible CCWs is misleading. Not all situations or people fit under the fat part of the bell curve. I thought a niche community like this would be more averse to averaging and broad generalizations. I was mistaken.

Richard Fischel
(RICKO) - F
Re: Begin Rant on 08/31/2011 08:44:28 MDT Print View

Dean - I really enjoyed what you wrote - pretty much middle of the road; therefore, folks on either extreme could have problems with it. I might not make the same choices you would make, but I would hopefully employ the same logic. i am currently not a gun owner, don't plan on being one any time soon, but fully understand that there are times and places that they are applicable.

Can i post it elsewhere? If yes, would you like attribution?

Funny story - I did a short stint in Alaska doing survey work as a fill-in for the regular guy. There was a rifle with every team, but as part of your personal kit you could requisition a large caliber revolver. You were told to file the front site off the gun so that when the bear shoved it up you a#$ it didn't hurt so much.

Edited by RICKO on 08/31/2011 08:49:34 MDT.

Michael Crosby
(djjmikie) - MLife

Locale: Ky
Rant on 08/31/2011 08:48:55 MDT Print View

@ Richard,
"...part of your personal kit you could requisition a large caliber revolver. You were told to file the front site off the gun so that when the bear shoved it up you a#$ it didn't hurt so much."

When I was invited by a friend to go hunting in Alaska, I was told the same thing.

"Violence is the last refuge of the incompetent." was Isaac Asimov's proposal, on which H. Beam Piper commented: "Only the incompetent wait until the last extremity to use force, and by then, it is usually too late to use anything, even prayer."
(another source gives it to Larry Niven)

No, violence is not that tidy so that it's always wrong, nor always tool of first choice.
Often violence breeds violence.
Heinlein suggested that "an armed society is a polite society" (SF is great for speculative debate)
But it means a lot of bloody weeding out of the idiots who can't be polite, having to be polite to rude bullies who happen to be good with a gun, and accepting a good number of casualties amongst innocent bystanders. Hmm.

On the whole, I'd prefer a duel of wits...
But sometimes a violent option is required.

(As a loner, should I be locked up immediately, or just forced to have friends?)

Edited by djjmikie on 08/31/2011 10:38:59 MDT.

Ben Crocker
(alexdrewreed) - M

Locale: Kentucky
I am great handling a gun on 08/31/2011 08:58:18 MDT Print View

Every gun owner I know thinks they are very skilled and safe with a gun, unlike those other idiots.

Dale Wambaugh
(dwambaugh) - MLife

Locale: Pacific Northwest
Re: Solo Wilderness Security on 08/31/2011 10:56:29 MDT Print View

All the the options are too heavy for the utility provided, just like a super thick sleeping pad, a chair, big double-walled tent, big cameras, etc--- all of which would actually get used every time. A satellite phone or an emergency beacon would provide far more security for the weight than a firearm would.

I grew up with firearms and gun control in my family means hitting the intended target. BUT, asking about carrying heavy metal objects on a forum where people debate carrying a Swiss Army Knife vs a single edge razor blade is kinda asking for it.

The fear thing is really interesting. Saying that you carry, but not because you are afraid, is an amazing twist of logic. If I am going to go to the expense, weight and liability of carrying deadly force, I would need to have a BIG fear to justify it. Even having one in the house is a balance of being afraid that someone will break in vs the fear of a family member being harmed with it.

I live in a big city and I don't carry and don't feel the need, in other words, I don't have sufficient fear of the consequences. 99% of the crime is in the populated areas, where I spend 99% of my time and if I don't have enough fear to justify carrying deadly force then, why in the world would I want to haul an extra couple pounds plus up and down the mountainside?

In the last 20 years, three people have been killed within a mile of my home-- all by law enforcement personnel in the commission of crimes. In the same time, I can recall one person being killed on the trail by a kid who thought she was a bear, and two women were murdered on a local trail. 19 people were murdered in my city (Seattle) last year (the lowest since 1954) and nearly all were killed by an acquaintance. 448 people were killed in traffic accidents. Indeed, I am in far more danger on the way to the trailhead than walking city streets, or walking any trail. Only one fatal bear attack has been recorded in Washington state. There are three non-fatal attacks on record.

And you can be certain that I wear a seat belt because I am afraid of the consequences of not using one.

I carry a first aid kit because I have sufficient fear of injury to justify the weight; likewise a whistle, redundant fire starting gear and an emergency bivy. I have used the first aid kit several times, but I've never been in a situation where deadly force was even remotely required.

I would go for a big ol' can of bear spray, which is cheaper, lighter, less liability, a better chance of hitting something and actually useful against a bear, where most handguns aren't.

But to answer your question, the ultralight hiking equivalent of a handgun would be an aluminum derringer at 7.5oz and is about as miserable a firearm as a single-edge razor blade is for a knife. It does fit all your criteria less the night sights, which I don't get as you want close range and aren't concerned with accuracy.

Bobby Pack
(Piddler) - MLife

Locale: West Virginia
M&P 360 .357 Magnum on 08/31/2011 12:25:35 MDT Print View

A voice in my head says to stay out of this thread but...

M&P 360

This Smith And Wesson revolver is about 13 ounces unloaded and about 17.5 ounces when loaded. Easy to shoot, easy to carry and it doesn't rust. You can practice with lower powered 38 special shells and carry it with your choice from a wide variety of nasty 357 loads.

We don't have brown bear around here to worry about and the black ones have never threatened me in any way. I do worry about aggressive dogs; I've been bit several times. I worry about rabid skunks and raccoons; we have a lot of those. I've even been stalked by a growling coyote. With the pot farmers in the woods, raging drivers on the road and drunken rednecks at the trail head I often find it worth the weight. I don't always carry it but I often do and it has been worth it.

A. B.
(tomswifty)
Fear on 08/31/2011 12:42:29 MDT Print View

I guess you can make anything fear-based if you want to Dale. I suppose I eat because I am fearful of starving?

The police must be afraid because they carry guns? Or maybe they understand it is the right tool for the job.

I'm sorry, but there is no requirement for fear to own/carry a gun. Maybe for you Dale.

Michael Crosby
(djjmikie) - MLife

Locale: Ky
voice in my head on 08/31/2011 12:44:31 MDT Print View

"A voice in my head says to stay out of this thread but..."


Isn't nice to always have company?

David Olsen
(oware)

Locale: Steptoe Butte
wrong on 08/31/2011 13:19:21 MDT Print View

Oh no, someone is wrong on the internet. No time to work, I must correct them now.

Bob Bankhead
(wandering_bob) - MLife

Locale: Oregon, USA
Solo Wilderness Security on 08/31/2011 13:54:14 MDT Print View

Pistols are like tents; you use different ones for different conditions. This can get expensive and fill nup a closet quickly.

Fortunately, Desert Eagle has solved that dilemma.

http://www.magnumresearch.com/Expand.asp?ProductCode=DEXIX6


You get THREE interchangeable barrels:

.50 AE

.44 Magnum

.357 Magnum


Pick your threat level; choose your barrel.

Edited by wandering_bob on 08/31/2011 14:34:46 MDT.

Rog Tallbloke
(tallbloke) - F

Locale: DON'T LOOK DOWN!!
Re: Solo Wilderness Security on 08/31/2011 14:21:28 MDT Print View

http://www.magnumresearch.com/Expand.asp?ProductCode=DEXIX6

Holy cr*p! 3 grand for a popgun.

I can fill myself out with nice nosh and do several months backpacking for that.

Joseph Reeves
(Umnak)

Locale: Southeast Alaska
carrying on 08/31/2011 14:24:24 MDT Print View

I think I've said this in the past, and hope it makes the point again.

Bear spray for backpacking and her for kayaking around Admiralty Island, which has the largest concentration of Brown Bears in the world.

Eve(erator)

I had a carry permit when I lived in New York, don't need one in Alaska because we can carry without a permit.

Edited by Umnak on 08/31/2011 14:25:05 MDT.

Fred Thorp
(BFThorp) - F
Desert Eagle... on 08/31/2011 14:29:07 MDT Print View

Finally, a good light weight response. :0

David Olsen
(oware)

Locale: Steptoe Butte
Re: Begin Rant on 08/31/2011 14:42:13 MDT Print View

"Nonetheless, despite my thoughts on all of that, I rarely carry a gun- because when I evaluate the risk I find it to be so very low. Bear spray IS probably more effective for bears, unless you carry a high-powered rifle or shotgun slugs or something, and those are simply too heavy. (I did carry a .45-70 on my Alaska trip a while ago- because all of the locals warned me that I should. And I didn't see a single grizzly.) No HANDGUN is going to be remotely reliable in stopping a charging grizzly- I don't care what magnum round you're considering- because shot placement is just too difficult. Even PEOPLE who are shot almost never drop dead immediately, contrary to Hollywood. Frankly, if you MUST use a handgun against a bear a high-capacity automatic might be better than the magnum- that's what the rangers often end up using on the bears when they must put one down and a rifle isn't available. More shots = better chance of hitting something vital. I've seen footage of a grizzly being shot behind the shoulder TWICE by a .300 Weatherby Magnum and still fighting, so do you really think your .44 magnum is going to stop one? For that matter, we don't have grizzlies in Colorado. We also don't have the pot-grower problems in Colorado that you all have in California, nor do we have the coyote and Mexican mafia problems of the border states, all of which I think is just a tad overblown, anyway."

Dean-

For arguments sake-

Here is an old paper by USFS on firearms (more correctly cartridges, as the results
were more a factor of bullet construction and loading than caliber).

www.fs.fed.us/pnw/pubs/gtr152

Note how one of the 44 mag revolver loads has similar penetration to your
mentioned .300 Weatherby rifle and even better than your 45/70 and one of the 375 H&H rifle loads?

Even an old 45 colt six shooter beats 'em.

In brown bear attacks I have read about where handguns were used to stop the attacks,
the person was already in the bear's grasp. A rifle may not have been able to be
brought to "bear". Seems a one handed option (spray?) would be preferred.

Randy Nelson
(rlnunix) - F - M

Locale: Rockies
Solo on 08/31/2011 15:14:13 MDT Print View

"@ Randy Nelson, (rlnunix)

In a car, I wear a seat belt, and the car has air bags. I have never needed either to save my life, but I still use the seat belt.

Surprisingly, I have not had a need to use my trail first aid kit in over 20 years, but if I get injured, I carry a kit to mitigate the risk of further serious injury.

When stealth camping with a buddy, I leave the hardware at home, but there is increased risk when solo and far away from the busy trail crowds."

@RodneyOndaRock

The point I was making about the helmet was that it was extra protection. People still get killed from head injuries in car wrecks even with seat belts and air bags. If you're trying to minimize your odds of being killed, a helmet in a car is a better bet than a gun in the backcountry.

That is surprising about the first aid kit. I used mine on Saturday for myself (got pretty scraped up) and on Sunday for somebody else.

Most of my trips are solo. I don't change anything either way. And I don't feel any more vulnerable than going with others. (Actually, I don't feel vulnerable at all.) I still bring my normal kit when going with others and I don't add a gun when going alone. I just don't see the need here in Colorado. But I didn't when I lived in SoCal either. I do see people with bear spray and bear bells occasionally here. When I ask where they're from, they're never from Colorado. They're on vacation and they've heard where there are bears you need that stuff. But you don't here.

The scariest animal I've encountered recently was a squirrel in Zion last weekend. We were on a paved trail after coming out of the Narrows and he was running along with a lollipop in his mouth. Still in the wrapper. It took 2 of us to take it away from him using walking sticks. He was p!ssed! Kept looking over my shoulder to make sure the little bugger didn't run up behind me and bite me in the ankle. Give me Bubonic Plague or something.

Now if somebody comes up with some portable, lightweight, lightning protection, THAT I'll carry!

Bottom line for me is: Whatever works for you. It's your kit.

Edited by rlnunix on 08/31/2011 15:15:58 MDT.

Ernie Fuentes
(askernie) - F
I am a GUN LOVER and... on 08/31/2011 15:22:21 MDT Print View

I am also a Scout Master. I am not an experienced Hiker like many of you here. BUT I have met experienced Scoutmasters/hikers that go where there are Black, Brown and even Grizzleys.

It has been told to me various times that the weapon of choice is not a handgun but a 12 gauge Stainless Mossberg Cruiser with a pistol grip or folding stock.

It seems the person who posted their girlfriend or wife with the same weapon in a previous post has the same opinion.

As most gun lovers will tell you " Its better to have a gun and not need it, then to need a gun and not have it"

If I was going into Bear territory...I would STRONGLY consider it.

ernie the eyeball

Dale Wambaugh
(dwambaugh) - MLife

Locale: Pacific Northwest
Re: Re: Solo Wilderness Security on 08/31/2011 15:49:32 MDT Print View

Rog wrote, "....Holy cr*p! 3 grand for a popgun.

I can fill myself out with nice nosh and do several months backpacking for that."

Or hire a bodyguard-- one that is a little slower so the bear can catch up to him first :)

D O
(catskilled) - F

Locale: LI, NY
Guns Guns Guns on 08/31/2011 16:32:12 MDT Print View

The first time I ever spent the night outdoors in the wilderness (not at a campground)I was afraid of bears and so brought a 12ga shotgun (Catskills, NY, mild concentration of black bears). The next morning I realized it was unnecessary and way too heavy to carry regularly. So, I no longer carry any gun while backpacking. Unless, of course, it's hunting season in which case I'll either bring the .22 or the shotgun for small game. I deal with the extra weight because during hunting season I want to go hunting as well as backpack. I often get dirty looks from yuppy types on the trail, but they can suck it.

Point is, at least around here, a gun for bear defense is not necessary, because bears are pretty rare and will stay away, but on almost all NY state land it is legal to carry a long gun (rifle or shotgun) at any time without any kind of special permission, and of course a pistol with the proper licenses, and so, if you want to carry, carry. Forget other, freedom hating, people's desire to stop you from doing something and do what you want. Just be aware of the laws for your own sake, cause the world's biggest gang comes down hard on firearms scofflaws.

Plus my dog always carries a .45 when we backpack so the whole thing is irrelevant.

Edited by catskilled on 08/31/2011 16:35:03 MDT.

Dave T
(DaveT) - F
yawn. on 08/31/2011 16:48:38 MDT Print View

"Forget other, freedom hating, people's desire to stop you from doing something and do what you want."


Yawn.

You are on a light/ultralight backpacking forum, though maybe you didn't know that since yer new here.

David Olsen
(oware)

Locale: Steptoe Butte
Re: Solo Wilderness Security on 08/31/2011 16:50:59 MDT Print View

There's bears and then there's BEARS.

This little pup chased a fat Tahoe black bear out of the yard. She weighed all of 29 lbs.
The bear looked to weigh as much as a smart car.

lady.jpg

Edited by oware on 09/01/2011 12:15:07 MDT.

Terry Trimble
(socal-nomad) - F

Locale: North San Diego county
the best story ever on 08/31/2011 16:58:33 MDT Print View

Randy wrote:
"The scariest animal I've encountered recently was a squirrel in Zion last weekend. We were on a paved trail after coming out of the Narrows and he was running along with a lollipop in his mouth. Still in the wrapper. It took 2 of us to take it away from him using walking sticks. He was p!ssed! Kept looking over my shoulder to make sure the little bugger didn't run up behind me and bite me in the ankle. Give me Bubonic Plague or something. "

ROFLOL! That's the best animal story ever Randy I love it.

This subject is a no win subject so it should end here everybody carry around holly hand grenades to take on all comers and use coconut shells clapping together to sound like horses. Watch out for killer white rabbits .
ALBATROSS,


Terry

D O
(catskilled) - F

Locale: LI, NY
Re: yawn. on 08/31/2011 17:01:55 MDT Print View

That's not relevant. People aren't just saying don't carry cause it's too heavy. They have a plethora of reasons, and some of them are related to simply not liking guns.

Dave T
(DaveT) - F
yawn no. 2 on 08/31/2011 17:24:40 MDT Print View

I admit I haven't read all of this (most recent) gun thread, but I doubt there's a whole lot of "i hate your gun-toting freedom!" talk in anyone's posts above.

so it get's a big fat YAWN from me.

(excuse me while i pack my freedom satchel with freedom food and freedom water and my freedom shelter and go freedom walking.)

HK Newman
(hknewman) - MLife

Locale: Western US
Shotgun? on 08/31/2011 17:34:05 MDT Print View

@Ernie - Shotgun? Might as well be really prepared then. Bring a pistol too for close-in work, cleaning kits for both, and wear your body armor/helmet constantly (as it simply won't do if the bad guys get the first shot and take you out). Night vision goggles as not to shoot a skunk at night next to your tent instead of a killer bear. Regular goggles for snowstorms and sandstorms, too. "Cool guy" glasses with different interchangeble lenses for changing light conditions. Also pack a GPS unit plus a PLB, satellite phone, some police tape (once the bad guys are taken out - hopefully- the crime scene must be secure), strobe markers for marking locations at night - makes the law enforcers/rescue team's job easier to find you at night, a couple smoke grenades for marking during the day, some maritime flares, leather gloves, climber's harness (in case you need a helicopter extraction is needed but there's no landing pad), crampons, snowshoes (could snow), full climbing rack, 200' of rope, some SAM splints, a double wall tent, synthetic sleeping bag, full-length Downmat 7 (will really need it hauling this kit), 3 sets of clothes, 200 wt fleece jacket (w/shoulder reinforcements), fleece pants, full rain suit, 10 liters of water (with filter and chemicals), a bunch of food, the 10 essentials plus giant first aid kit (all bombproof), a crowbar (hey, you never know) and a big 8000 cu inch pack from Mystery Ranch to carry it all.

Plus, being on BPL...make sure you wear Keds with the above.

(PS - don't forget to cut the tongue out of the Keds to shave a couple oz's)

(PPS - No toilet paper)

Edited by hknewman on 08/31/2011 17:51:35 MDT.

Fred Thorp
(BFThorp) - F
Yawn - yes on 09/01/2011 07:12:42 MDT Print View

@ Dave

"I admit I haven't read all of this (most recent) gun thread, but I doubt there's a whole lot of "i hate your gun-toting freedom!" talk in anyone's posts above."

Just a lot of down the nose sarcasm.

Hi. My name is Fred, and apparently I'm a dumbass.

Mike M
(mtwarden) - MLife

Locale: Montana
unsubscribed on 09/01/2011 08:05:32 MDT Print View

we have folks on this site that deal with bears on a routine basis as part of their vocation; we have folks on this site that routinely hike in areas of dense grizzly populations; we have folks on this site that carry a weapon daily as part of their vocation; we have plenty of folks on this site that are very serious hunters who fully subscribe to UL theories- feel free to dismiss all of their advice and instead carry a 10 + lb short barreled Mossberg so your not plucked out of your tent by a bear, lion or the boogey man

Aaron Benson
(AaronMB) - F

Locale: Central Valley California
Re: Re: Re: Solo Wilderness Security on 09/01/2011 08:41:42 MDT Print View

I think I'll leave the Casull at home and pack my higher-caliber keyboard.

EDIT: It's lighter anyway.

Edited by AaronMB on 09/01/2011 08:44:54 MDT.

Joseph Reeves
(Umnak)

Locale: Southeast Alaska
Punch the bear on 09/01/2011 18:28:30 MDT Print View

Nice story about a neighbor here in Juneau...


http://www.alaskadispatch.com/article/fighting-alaska-bears

Gordon Smith
(swearingen) - MLife

Locale: Portland, Oregon
Kel-Tec on 09/03/2011 21:38:04 MDT Print View

I am not a gun guy. If I were a gun guy, posed with the original question in this thread, I think I'd take a serious look at the Kel-Tec PF-9

Edited by swearingen on 09/03/2011 21:40:56 MDT.

Dean F.
(acrosome) - MLife

Locale: Back in the Front Range
Re: Re: Begin Rant on 09/03/2011 22:06:43 MDT Print View

@ Rog

Why are you arguing with me? Out of principle? I AGREE with you, you dizzy limey! :) So note the date- it must be an auspicious one. But I do think that you underestimate the human ability to anticipate danger. I'm generally not concerned about common criminals, anyway- I'm worried about crazies and morons. But I still almost never carry a gun. I mean literally maybe once or twice a year I'll cart one along, including both hiking or just about town. (Present circumstances excepted, of course. I'm never far from my M9 nowadays...)

Sorry it took me so long to respond, by the way- busy.


@ David Olsen

Page Not Found.

But, do you really want to debate terminal ballistics with me? An Army trauma surgeon? Bold.

:)

I don't want to sound like I'm ridiculing your opinion, but I'm sorry, a .44 magnum is NOT an equivalent stopper to a .300 Weatherby magnum. Mere depth of penetration isn't all. It is an important MINIMAL requirement, but it is not everything. Certainly a bullet has to penetrate deep enough to reach a vital structure- the FBI demonstrated that. However, almost any rifle round does significantly more damage than almost any pistol round including the beloved .44 Magnum, mostly due to the creation of temporary cavities from the higher-velocity projectile. (But I will certainly agree that terminal ballistics is a VERY complex subject.) I recommend "Ballistic, Blast, and Burn Injuries" which is published by the Borden Institute. Granted it was written quite a while ago, but it is a pretty good overview of most of the relevant studies. It can be hard to find- kind of a niche subject- but I think it is online at:

http://www.bordeninstitute.army.mil/published_volumes/conventional_warfare/conventional_warfare.html

If you get through that one and want some more I can make other recommendations.

Not to mention that if your data says that a .44 Magnum penetrates deeper than a .45-70 my fist instinct is NOT to say "Huh, the .44 Magnum penetrates deeper." My FIRST instinct is to question that data. That sounds like someone fudging things, like maybe using some modern and fully jacketed overpowered .44 round, but an older, cast lead, black-powder .45-70 round. I mean, the .45-70 projectile is both FASTER and HEAVIER than any typical .44 Magnum load. Also, was that .44 Mag fired from a pistol or from a rifle? Because barrel length makes a difference- from a rifle the .44 Magnum isn't far from being an acceptable cartridge.

EDITED- because that was just TOO LONG. See- I can exercise self-restraint! :)

Edited by acrosome on 09/03/2011 22:29:20 MDT.

Roger Dodger
(RogerDodger) - F

Locale: Wess Siide
Re: Times are changing (pot farmers in the National Forest) on 05/07/2012 14:44:59 MDT Print View

http://www.justice.gov/usao/cae/news/docs/2012/04-30-12Rosas-FigueroaSentence.html

very smart how they found out the identity.

triangulated the cell phone signal to the pot farm.

after prison sentence, then he gets deported back to Mexico.

Edited by RogerDodger on 05/07/2012 14:45:31 MDT.

Roger Dodger
(RogerDodger) - F

Locale: Wess Siide
Re: Re: Times are changing (pot farmers in the National Forest) on 07/20/2012 16:17:06 MDT Print View

There were big drug pot farm busts in a many of the Calif national forest during the weekend before the 4th of July. the holiday timing was intentional, when most people were not reading the news, so as not to attract controversial political debates.

but not all busts are big operations. Here's a new one from today. Apparently 1,800 marijuana plants are considered a small operation.

http://idyllwildtowncrier.com/2012/07/20/small-marijuana-grow-eradicated-near-lake-hemet/

So for the BP people here that like to cut bush, go off the assigned trail and stealth camp. keep this stuff in mind, and what you need to pack to mitigate any encounter risks.

Edited by RogerDodger on 07/20/2012 16:17:55 MDT.

M B
(livingontheroad) - M
violence on 07/20/2012 17:23:37 MDT Print View

They have been busting pot farms on forest land for decades. Usually easy to spot from the air.

You have to remember 2 things:

1) if its not ready at hand, it probably wont do you any good
2) if it is, it could be taken and be used against you.

The percentage of foul play affecting hikers in remote areas is not large. Yes, its possible. So is being hit in the head by a meteorite, but you arent afraid to go outside are you?

In all likelihood, you are safer in the outdoors, than you are in your own house.

John S.
(jshann) - F
Re: violence on 07/20/2012 19:23:31 MDT Print View

"In all likelihood, you are safer in the outdoors, than you are in your own house."

or in a movie theater apparently.

Brian Johns
(bcutlerj) - M

Locale: NorCal
I must have missed the reports. on 07/20/2012 19:54:17 MDT Print View

Grew up shooting, and still own rifles and pistols, but I would not advise a friend to take one backpacking. If you go into the woods looking for trouble, that's likely what you'll find. For the most part, I have NEVER felt I needed a gun, even in the seediest parts of North Georgia it's pretty easy to get beyond the most awkward encounters. I just don't ever remember seeing anything too troubling in the backcountry. Downtown Atlanta, now, that's a different story. To me, guns aren't for backpacking unless you intend to shoot your food. How many milllions of people hike each year and only make new friends? how many of these "reports" do we hear about? I refuse to live in fear. I had a friend that always worried something would go wrong, and it always did. YMMV

Edited by bcutlerj on 07/20/2012 19:57:11 MDT.

a b
(Ice-axe)
Mutual Arisings on 07/20/2012 20:46:43 MDT Print View

One of the greatest lessons i have learned recently is how much my attitude affects the world I percieve around me.

I am not a trained scientist.
As an amateur i know these things are not supported by science.. yet there is something to this idea of mutual arisings the Buddists speak of.

There is always the unknown or random factor of becomming a victim of violence.
Then there is "looking for trouble".. and finding it!

If you look for fault in your world you will most assuredly find it.

Yea, i get accused of being a "honey dripper" or an Ostrich burying it's head in the sand at times...

Like i said.. only recently (2009 PCT) have i discovered a connection to my attitude and the reality i find in the world around me.

Hiking long distances brings this effect into Bas relief.

Hostility begets hostility.

Kindness begets Kindness.

What exactly do the atoms know of these things and how could any connection possible exist between these "higher" concepts of conciousness and the subatomic world?
Uh.. I dunno.
I just know there is something there.. something more than mere chance can explain.

As ye sow, so shall ye reap.
Not exactly a bible thumping man, but I must admit a fundamental truth even when i don't understand the mechanism behind it.
.Wizard Island Crater Lake, Oregon

Steven Paris
(saparisor) - M

Locale: Pacific Northwest
Solo Wilderness Security: animals + bright colors on 07/20/2012 20:53:35 MDT Print View

Setting aside safety against strange people encountered in the backcountry or trailhead parking lot (whether scruffy or packing heat on a hip), I have a question/thought about encounters with bears and mountain lions.

A cursory search ("can bears see color?") yields this: bears do see in color, particularly well in blues + greens and have excellent, close range vision, but maybe not so much at longer distances. Here's three of the first sites that popped up:

http://www.bear.org/website/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=168&Itemid=38
http://www.americanbear.org/senses.htm
http://www.adfg.alaska.gov/index.cfm?adfg=wildlifenews.view_article&articles_id=136&issue_id=25

So, here's my question for the kind of encounters we mostly talk about, with an animal close to enough but not immediately attacking us: Wouldn't a good first step, when you see a bear or mountain lion on the trail, be to pull out a brightly-colored jacket (like those red and yellow and lime wind shirts we all have in an outside pocket anyway) and maybe hold it up and fill the space above your head? This would make you look larger and, well, something to avoid. Nature already has a way of indicating danger with bright colors. Next step would be to back away without running and finally, bear spray.

This makes sense to me. What do you think?

As for the "friend" above who is worried about a mountain lion attacking them in a tent at night, if that happened, I think no one would be able to find any gun quick enough, especially as the cat will go for the jugular fairly quickly. At least that's my understanding.

Doug Smith
(Jedi5150) - F - M

Locale: Central CA
Re: I must have missed the reports. on 07/20/2012 20:54:48 MDT Print View

"I refuse to live in fear. I had a friend that always worried something would go wrong, and it always did. YMMV"

I understand your viewpoint Brian.

Since this thread has gone on for 7 pages, I figure I might as well throw my own 2 cents in like everyone else. ;-)

For me, carrying a gun is not about living in fear. I agree with those who think the odds of needing a firearm while hiking are slim to none. Yet I always carry one. Carrying firearms has become second nature to me after more than a decade of being in a line of work where I need one. In fact, grabbing the pistol before I head out the door takes no more thought than grabbing my car keys, wallet, and cell phone (actually, I sometimes forget the cell phone but never the handgun hahaha).

Because of an oath that I swore, I have a duty to act 24/7, 365 days per year. That means that if I ever come across someone who is being victimized, I don't get to leave, run away, or watch and call 911, etc. I have to act. With that responsibility, the thought of me ever needing a firearm to defend someone else's life and not having one is a scary thought. It would suck to know that I failed to save someone that I could have,simply because "I probably won't need it", or "that extra 1.5 lbs is too heavy".

Just my .02

Now as to the original question of safety while hiking, if it is something you are concerned about, OC spray (pepper spray) is often very effective on animals. I've used it countless times on vicious dogs (with varying degrees of success).

Edited by Jedi5150 on 07/20/2012 22:14:33 MDT.

Charles Potter
(cpotter12)

Locale: Northern Cal
Re: Solo Wilderness Security on 07/21/2012 00:57:43 MDT Print View

I have no axe against guns. I question though the premises in your introductory paragraph that set the background of your question. Unless you are in an inherently dangerous environment, you do not need to pack a gun. Bear spray apparently will stop a bear so it will probably stop a human. If the other human has planned things correctly though, as someone else mentioned, you are probably going to die anyway. I think what you are really getting at here is peace of mind in the backcountry. Google what actually kills people in the wilderness and you will find assaults by animals or humans to be very very low, almost a statiscal non-event. I'm not saying you are not entitled to peace of mind, but if the real risks we face in the wilderness do not call for a handgun, then carrying equipment that you are statiscally not going to use is, well, uh useless. Carry what you are really going to use. I suspect you know what can stop a human, what lightweight handgun can stop a charging bear? Bear spray is designed to do that. In the end, we have an endless supply of humans and a very limited supply of bears. I don't mind a few sprayed bears, but please at least in protected areas save your bullets for the occasional deranged human you probably won't encounter. Again, I'm not against packing, just save it for hunting season. Of course I say all of this as a very fit and strong man. If I were a petite woman, the peace of mind element can be a game changer.

Larry De La Briandais
(Hitech) - F

Locale: SF Bay Area
To carry or not on 07/21/2012 12:06:50 MDT Print View

I considered carrying a handgun when my wife went with me to Yosemite. I was responsible for protecting her after all. I decided that if I felt I should carry a gun to protect her then I shouldn't take her. Since it is perfectly safe in Yosemite I didn't take it. :)

Roger Dodger
(RogerDodger) - F

Locale: Wess Siide
[..] on 07/21/2012 12:22:17 MDT Print View

[..]

Edited by RogerDodger on 05/08/2014 01:00:22 MDT.

Doug Smith
(Jedi5150) - F - M

Locale: Central CA
Re: Re: violence (reply to M B) on 07/21/2012 12:34:47 MDT Print View

"Since your area is safe, great, nothing to worry about. But Calif pot farming is Not by hippies, its serious mexican drug cartel enterprise."

Very true. Our neighboring allied agency got in a gunfight with Mexican national pot farmers just last week (fortunately the good guys won).

State and National Park rangers get in more officer involved shootings per officer than just about any other type of law enforcement agency. Wanted felons and fugitives like to camp in parks because they are less traceable than hotels or motels since they don't require ID for check in. I've personally responded to at least two (off the top of my head) shootings in progress at State Parks that friends of mine were involved in.

I'm not saying that backpacking is as dangerous as walking around town, but I agree with Roger's point that there are bad people in the world (I meet them daily) and trying to pretend they don't exist will not ensure your safety. Now let me clarify, among criminals, most are normally decent people who have poor judgement and descision making skills. Some on the other hand, are genuinly bad people.

In the county where I work, we have two sexual predators who have been stalking women on hiking trails in the state parks (currently). Neither have been apprehended yet. The bottom line is whether you choose to carry OC spray, a gun, or none of the above...please don't have the "it could never happen to me" attitude.

Edited by Jedi5150 on 07/21/2012 12:47:12 MDT.

Katharina ....
(Kat_P) - MLife

Locale: Pacific Coast
Re: Re: Re: violence (reply to M B) on 07/21/2012 12:46:25 MDT Print View

The above is just one more (big) reason to legalize it.

Craig W.
(xnomanx) - F - M
Solo Wilderness Security on 07/21/2012 12:59:26 MDT Print View

"As ye sow, so shall ye reap.
Not exactly a bible thumping man, but I must admit a fundamental truth even when i don't understand the mechanism behind it."


Pffff.

Never a truer statement when we're trying to judge people.

...but it quickly borders on the completely absurd when taken with the fact that really bad things still happen to perfectly good people or children.

__________________________________________________


Guns are here to stay, like it or not. We've got guns coming out our f@ckin ears in this country. Having an AR15 and 6000 rounds stockpiled = Freedom. Yay.
And before we start wagging a big Red White and Blue finger at Mexico, don't forget which country makes or sells the guns and ammo their cartels use and has an insatiable appetite for the drugs they produce.

Edited by xnomanx on 07/21/2012 13:11:08 MDT.

Tom Kirchner
(ouzel) - MLife

Locale: Pacific Northwest/Sierra
Re: Re: Re: violence (reply to M B) @ Doug on 07/21/2012 14:00:26 MDT Print View

"Very true. Our neighboring allied agency got in a gunfight with Mexican national pot farmers just last week (fortunately the good guys won)."

Would you happen to know if they've cleaned out the Mexican operation in the SW quadrant of Sequoia NP yet? Just SW of Mineral King?

Justin Baker
(justin_baker) - F

Locale: west coast best coast
Re: To carry or not on 07/21/2012 14:18:08 MDT Print View

I think the right mindset is to avoid hiking areas where you think you might need to carry a firearm, and carry anyways in areas where you think you don't think you need to carry.

M B
(livingontheroad) - M
security on 07/21/2012 15:05:17 MDT Print View

I grew up in an area in the southeast US, in the middle of millions of acres of paper company timberland and National forest lands. I remember as far back as the 70s the police busting pot farms in the woods, staking them out until the operators came to visit and were apprehended. Many of the sites were booby-trapped even back then.

At one time they were simply farmed like any other crop, in openings and clearings. Then they started to scatter them amongst the trees so they would be harder to spot. If you have never flown low and slow over the woods, you would be amazed what you can see, that is how biologists count deer density in some areas. It is still a very effective way to spot illicit crops. In the SE there is no need for irrigation operations.

I have no problem with anyone carrying anything they want. Your most valueable weapon is the one between your ears, not the one in your hand.

Randy Nelson
(rlnunix) - F - M

Locale: Rockies
Pot farms on 07/21/2012 19:32:54 MDT Print View

"I dont see a pot farm until Im near it."


So how many have you seen? Where were they? Might be useful information to pass on.

Richard Scruggs
(JRScruggs) - MLife

Locale: Oregon
Re: Pot farms on 07/21/2012 20:08:49 MDT Print View

The possibility that someone might "pass it on" is one thing that contributes to the risks created by mj grows in wild places.

From an NPR report in 2009:

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=103866520

And LNT isn't part of the growing progam. From a CBS article in 2010:

http://www.cbsnews.com/2100-201_162-6255189.html

Edited by JRScruggs on 07/21/2012 20:14:23 MDT.

Thomas Dean
(tomdean@gwi.net) - MLife

Locale: Four Corners
Solo Wilderness Security on 07/21/2012 20:41:07 MDT Print View

I said I'd never carry a handgun in the wilderness, until I ran into an unusual man with a large revolver strapped to his hip, in some deserted badlands where no one goes. He was weird in a scary way, talking disconnectedly. We spent a few uncomfortable minutes together until a violent squall gave me an opportunity to leave him behind, a lucky break I was grateful for.

The next couple of trips out, I didn't sleep too well thinking about that guy. The memory doesn't bother me when I'm hiking on trails with reasonable foot traffic - when people will be along every couple of hours. I feel okay taking my chances. But I decided to carry my own weapon when I'm really going to the middle of nowhere.

There's not much point dragging an automatic pistol through mud, so it pretty much has to be a revolver. And my aim is much truer with a double-action revolver. So, after sifting through the options, I gave up on ultralight and got a 3-pound revolver (heavier than my SMD Skyscape Trekker plus Exped UL Synmat 7). I now carry a classic .357 SA/DA with a four-inch barrel. It sits comfortably on my leg and out of the way of my pack straps.

All that said, it changes my hikes negatively. I think about danger and violence much more than I want to, which is the opposite of the point to getting out. I expect that when my scary experience fades a bit, I will go back to carrying nothing more dangerous than a lighter.

Roger Dodger
(RogerDodger) - F

Locale: Wess Siide
Re: Pot farms (reply to Randy Nelson ) on 07/22/2012 00:02:40 MDT Print View

> Randy Nelson
> So how many have you seen? Where were they? Might be useful information to pass on.

In the San Jacinto mountains (CA) a friend and I were going off the official trail, the location was published in a later drug bust. it was north + north+west of the peak, following an old map that had potential for a shortcut trail, that is currently not published on new maps. We figured it could be overgrown with bushes, but on the upside we would have zero crowds, new vista points, and well, an adventure.

We go to a spot that had a few mj plants. not perfect rows of corn. then some rusty cans. We figured that the forest service had zoned off the trail to allow the vegetation to regrow. So we're not botanical scientists, we debated if they were leaves-of-three leave-it-be, a fig or maple leaves, we were trying to explain to ourself why they weren't pot plants. yup, we were naives at the time. Didn't see a farmer at the spot, but it is funny that on another week, a random Wednesday that I faked a sick day, I saw 4 guys stereotypical of the California gardener look, with some shovels and pick axes on the main trail. Again, naive me, thought they were probably the prisoners-doing-community-service trail maintenance guys, didn't want to strike up conversation. An after thought was the lack of the forest service green uniform, and if they were prisoners on the job, they had no prison guard.

anyways, a year or so later, read that the forest service located the farm, not because of the choppers and aerial views, but the water company below the mountain had a spike in e.coli in the water supply, traced it back to pot farmers having a camp at that location up the mountain. They were "dropping off the kids at the pool" and the fecal output was polluting the drinking water for Palm Springs.

I doubt that the PF would return to the same unlucky location in the future, now that it is monitored by multiple agencies.

In retrospect, the encounter could have been different if we had surpised the guys at the farm site doing actual farming, surrounded by mj plants. I suppose they would object to us snapping photos of the vistas and their nature backdrop.

Edited by RogerDodger on 07/22/2012 00:15:16 MDT.

Drew Jay
(drewjh) - F

Locale: Central Coast
Bear spray on 07/22/2012 03:21:57 MDT Print View

Not sure if this has been mentioned, but using bear spray on a person is illegal in the state of CA and several other states, even in self defense. Pepper spray in excess of 2.5oz is prohibited - bear spray is only legal because it is registered as a pesticide.

Edited by drewjh on 07/22/2012 03:33:11 MDT.

Heath Pitts
(heathpitts) - F

Locale: Nashville
RE: Bear Spray on 07/22/2012 08:36:27 MDT Print View

I personally wouldn't care whether spraying bear spray on a person is legal or not if that's the only way that I had to defend myself. I would only hope that I wasn't the person that I sprayed :)

M B
(livingontheroad) - M
spray on 07/22/2012 09:40:41 MDT Print View

Its not lethal, and someone that threatened you enough to warrant being sprayed certainly isnt going to "turn you in" . If that was my best means of defense at the moment, I wouldnt hesitate either.

Roger Dodger
(RogerDodger) - F

Locale: Wess Siide
Re: Bear spray (Reply to Andrew Harris) on 07/22/2012 12:04:34 MDT Print View

A good valid point about the legality of the tools used for self-defense.

In the context of this thread:
self-defense against non-US citizens illegal pot farmers on federal public land, will likely not result in prosecution against the sprayer.

Having said that, there are bizarre lawsuits and the greedy lawyers that promote them.

Regardless of the tool of choice for self-defense, the defender should be very comfortable accepting the full consequences.

wiiawiwb wiiawiwb
(wiiawiwb) - F
Withdrawn on 07/22/2012 20:53:40 MDT Print View

Withdrawn....

Edited by wiiawiwb on 07/22/2012 20:59:59 MDT.

Roger Dodger
(RogerDodger) - F

Locale: Wess Siide
Re: Re: Re: Times are changing (pot farmers in the National Forest) on 09/09/2012 15:57:05 MDT Print View

As I was saying...

Its a jungle out there. Be careful.

http://idyllwildtowncrier.com/2012/09/07/agents-remove-12000-to-15000-marijuana-plants-from-three-lake-hemet-areas/

Samuel C. Farrington
(scfhome) - M

Locale: Chocorua NH, USA
Wilderness Security on 09/09/2012 20:29:40 MDT Print View

Since my earlier sarcastic post, the issue haunted me a bit and became food for thought. This summer's solo trek was in a very mountainous Wilderness Area where the Forest Service has abandoned many trails, and much of it has become inaccessible.
Not surprisingly, only two other people were seen during a six day period.
Not a bad place for an enterprising criminal to set up shop.
On the other hand, there was a raid some years ago on a MJ patch just a short distance behind my home in the National Forest. Evidently, planes can spot the plants, and law enforcement watched the location until the growers made a visit.
And I've also observed strange folk hanging around suspicious vegetation while hiking on the borders of Wilderness Areas.

So apparently, it can happen anywhere, especially in locations well removed from public trails. Not to mention the movie, "Deliverance," and how it still affects people. Since I frequent remote areas, I suppose the question really is whether to be armed should I come across such folk.

My own personal decision is NOT. Based on past experience, including a mugging with a razor blade held to my neck in the city, survival intact is more likely when the other guy(s) don't feel threatened, even if they are hyped on heroin, as they were. This is contrary to episodes about crazed killers seen frequently on crime shows on TV, but TV is not reality. But others feel differently, and it is not unusual to see people armed here in the White Mountains, and commonplace to see firearms with horsepackers in the Rockies. I just accept it as part of the era that I live in. If the incidence of harm to backpackers were considerable, the decision might be different.

As far as justifiable homicide involving self defense is concerned, it should be noted that the shooter usually has the burden to present evidence. As shown by the recent widely publicized case in Florida, innocence or guilt is often very unclear no matter what the law is in the particular state.

BTW, came up with two more super shooters, The Ungine and the AUG, the latter of which packs down enough to conceal in the foam in a camera case. The Ungine came from William Diehl in "Chameleon," and the AUG from one of David Stone's novels. It is illegal, of course, to possess them in the USA. There was also a great little 'zip-strip' gun used on an assassin by Werner in one of Len Deighton's novels that would fit the bill for backpacking light.

Ryan Waller
(walla623) - M
My Friends "Little Friend" on 09/12/2012 21:38:55 MDT Print View

So first off hi! I've been looking around here lately soaking in everything there is to learn.

I live in a part of the country that makes gun ownership and concealed carry very easy. Consider checking out the Springfeild XDS(45cal). I've been very happy with my service model XD9 and found it to be very reliable. I've had a chance to put about 200 rounds through the new XDS last week and loved every minute of it. Soon to pick one up I liked it so much! At 5+1 I look at it as a 6 shot revolver that is much more practical to reload. You can take 11 rounds of 45 ACP with you with only two of the small mags. Reloads take only seconds from a well though out concealed mag holster. I will soon be switching my hiking gun to this this as soon as I get my own and get some more familiarity with it.

Again, thank you everyone for providing such a large wealth of knowledge. I hope to contribute towards it in the future with my constant tinkering.

drowning in spam
(leaftye) - F

Locale: SoCal
Re: Bear spray on 09/12/2012 21:48:44 MDT Print View

Pepper spray in excess of 2.5oz is prohibited - bear spray is only legal because it is registered as a pesticide.

It took me a while to figure that out when ordering pepper spray online. The sites I tried merely said they could not ship a particular item to California.

Peter Evans
(NLslacker)
Canadian POV on 02/19/2013 20:49:33 MST Print View

The only place I would ever consider carrying a gun is in the high arctic (polar bears).

Canadian here, not dumping on USA, but... I don't want to travel in a country where so many people carry guns.
Honestly I think it's crazy. Yes, there are occasional gun incidents in some of the bigger cities (guns brought from the US).
But the amount of people getting shot in Canada is pretty low, and we have a pretty safe society.

I doubt I am the only person reluctant to go to the US because of the gun culture.

//EDIT: I'd like to clarify that my concern is not just for getting shot... guns can be used to intimidate and coerce.

Edited by NLslacker on 02/19/2013 20:51:51 MST.

Edward Jursek
(nedjursek@gmail.com) - M

Locale: Pacific Northwest
Solo security on 02/19/2013 21:41:55 MST Print View

I researched pack guns and settled on a Glock 10mm as the only reasonably affordable gun at a reasonable weight with enough stopping power for Grizzlies. The 10mm is a handful. I also researched bear spray, and I am convinced that spray is a much more effective deterrent for bears. As for 2 legged threats, I feel the risk is much, much smaller then other back country hazards like hypothermia, dehydration, or the drive to and from the trail head. For perspective, I often hike with a buddy who is a FBI agent and he does not take a gun along. He says the risk is way too small to justify the weight and trouble. For that matter, the cheese burger I had today is way more dangerous for me than my reliance on bear spray in the back country.

Samuel C. Farrington
(scfhome) - M

Locale: Chocorua NH, USA
guns & BP on 02/19/2013 21:57:36 MST Print View

Peter,
I've been backpacking in Colorado in the summers since the 1970s, and it was only in that decade, in the Weminuche wilderness near the Rincon, that I ran into a bunch of kids camped just above timber line shooting off firearms. As I climbed towards timber line, an occasional bullet zipped by. On reaching their camp site near the crest, I asked them why they were discharging firearms when they might kill somebody.
'Oh, we saw you coming," they replied. There was considerable liquor in evidence.

With the exception of that incident, I can't recall ever seeing firearms while backpacking in Colorado wilderness areas, unless worn by a ranger (usually not the case) or rifle sheathed on a horse ridden in an occasional horsepacking party.

So while I grant you firearms are more prevalent in the US generally, and that I do not hike after the hunting seasons begin in September, I nevertheless think you may be a little more apprehensive than you need to be. I've found the lightning storms to be a way bigger threat to safety.

Justin Baker
(justin_baker) - F

Locale: west coast best coast
Re: Solo security on 02/19/2013 22:10:32 MST Print View

Honestly, I'm just worried about running into marijuana fields or meth labs and the people involved in them. You hear about a lot of criminal things happening in the California woods. Maybe it's just hype, but I do plan on getting a handgun safety permit and learning how to use a pistol in defense specifically for backpacking.

Craig W.
(xnomanx) - F - M
Re: Re: Solo security on 02/19/2013 22:46:56 MST Print View

"Honestly, I'm just worried about running into marijuana fields or meth labs and the people involved in them. You hear about a lot of criminal things happening in the California woods. Maybe it's just hype, but I do plan on getting a handgun safety permit and learning how to use a pistol in defense specifically for backpacking."
______________________________

Carrying concealed is a crime without a CCW- which very few people in CA can get.

Carrying open and loaded...How often do you see people packing pistols while hiking in CA? Now you'll be the one out in the woods that other hikers see and think is the pot farmer...

If you're still determined, good luck even figuring out the legalities of where you can carry a pistol open, loaded, and legal in CA.

Roger Dodger
(RogerDodger) - F

Locale: Wess Siide
Re: Re: Solo security on 02/19/2013 22:50:14 MST Print View

Justin,
You are justified. The US Forest Service website tries not to make a big deal, but on a monthly basis they arrest illegal invaders from the Southern countries that farm drugs and dont care about the US gun free zones.

You picked a weird time to get into this, the recent news has created a mad shortage on inventory, and the few available are triple the cost.

I can recommend you rent different types at a gun range to practice, then you find the right fit and caliber and function for your need.

And if you decide to carry, in CA, you will most likely be carrying, loaded, concealed and illegal, but that is the price of safety insurance. Be sure to fully accept the legal, moral and punishment consequences.

Edited by RogerDodger on 02/19/2013 23:30:13 MST.

Roger Dodger
(RogerDodger) - F

Locale: Wess Siide
And another Couple of attacks on 02/19/2013 23:17:43 MST Print View

Ritzy rich area of Orange County, low crime, until an illegal invader grabbed a solo woman hiker by the hair and tried to DRAG her into the bushes, she got away but caught her twice, until a good samaritan solo hiker luckily came up and freed her. Bad guys and predators lurk in the supposedly nice rich safe areas too.

http://www.ocregister.com/news/amormino-408794-woman-along.html

http://www.ocregister.com/sports/spray-414287-pepper-attacker.html

Good luck with whatever you decide on.

Justin Baker
(justin_baker) - F

Locale: west coast best coast
Re: Re: Re: Solo security on 02/19/2013 23:40:17 MST Print View

To my knowledge, I can carry a pistol into a national forest or blm land. There shouldn't be an issue with that. State Parks or National parks are a no go.

I guess you could get into trouble if there is a "hunting only" rule for firearm carry. In that case, I could carry a hunting license and use that as a justified use. Rabbits are in season all year long, for example. But that shouldn't be an issue in the first place. I have wanted to try out some short range hunting with a pistol anyways.

I'm not some kind of paranoid gun nut. I wouldn't carry a firearm everywhere, probably not even most of the time, just if I felt the area and situation warranted it. I'm not going to bring a pistol into a high alpine wilderness area, that would just be silly.

Edited by justin_baker on 02/19/2013 23:40:52 MST.

Peter Evans
(NLslacker)
Re: And another Couple of attacks on 02/20/2013 00:14:42 MST Print View

http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/mexican-crime-american-guns/story?id=11574583

Where do these people you are afraid of get their guns?

USA

Where do Canadian criminal gangs get their guns?

USA

The American gun problem is our problem too.

Roger Dodger
(RogerDodger) - F

Locale: Wess Siide
Re: Re: Re: Re: Solo security on 02/20/2013 00:15:31 MST Print View

I agree with you on the unfortunate label of crazy paranoid gun nut.

For me, I do not carry concealed when bp with a trail partner, or even on hiking trails that I know to be busy.

I do carry when backpacking solo, and I plan to deviate from the official trails and camp where I think I'm out of sight. I think about the US and Russian submarines that both thought they were stealthy and alone in the mariana trench, they both ended up colliding. It could happen to me and another person also trying to be stealthy, looking for the same opportunity to camp away from the trail.

Animal threat. I make no distinction between 2 or 4 legged. A threat is a threat.

You need to think it thru. Will you be ok to shoot and kill a bad guy stranger? Then what? Will you report the event and face the legal consequences, jail and financial responsibility, or disappear and leave the corpse for someone else to find? I don't want to know your answer, but you need to think it through, and be ok with the outcome the rest of your life. The other potential outcome of non self defense, is living the rest of your life with the outcome of being helpless and victimized. Its ugly either way, but one is uglier.

I'm not out there looking for trouble or to pretend I'm a movie star fighting the entire Mexican drug cartel like Arnold. But enough to get myself out of trouble from a 2 person threat, whether pot farmer or serial killer hiding out in the forest, or a pack of coyotes that have gotten desperate and bold. Practice your breathing and aim. Also note that target practice at the range, does not compare to training with adrenalin... But you gotta start somewhere.

Chance favors the prepared.

Roger Dodger
(RogerDodger) - F

Locale: Wess Siide
Re: Re: And another Couple of attacks on 02/20/2013 00:23:41 MST Print View

Peter Evans.

Criminals will find the path of least resistance. If drug cartel could not get them from the US, they will buy them from Columbia, or the Phillipines, or Austria etc.. Or manufacture their own equipment. Drug money is big money. Big money buys anything.

Where does the Russian mob get their guns? Not the US. Doesnt matter the source.

Peter Evans
(NLslacker)
Strict gun laws on 02/20/2013 00:31:17 MST Print View

Canada has criminals with guns... we also have strict gun laws.
There is much less gun crime here than in the US (normalized for population)

Stats

http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/85-002-x/2008002/article/10518-eng.htm

Justin Baker
(justin_baker) - F

Locale: west coast best coast
Re: Re: And another Couple of attacks on 02/20/2013 00:38:06 MST Print View

Well, they certainly don't want a gun store and buy them. Buying a firearm in a store requires citizenship and a quick background that filters out felons.

Maybe they get them from the gun show loophole. Private sale of firearms with no paperwork, just hand over the cash and buy, is legal in many states. Personally, I think this shouldn't be legal. The media is so focused on demonizing scary looking military style rifles that they ignore real issues like this.

I don't understand why you call it a "gun problem". I guess it's a problem if your country doesn't allow self defense with a firearm and only the criminals have them. If nobody in the world owned guns then criminals would be using knives and machetes. Why is that any better or worse? Firearms are great self defense tools that require a minimal amount of training compared to hand to hand weapons. Someone who is small or physically weak has a good chance at defending themselves against someone who would normally overpower them with brute force.

Roger Dodger
(RogerDodger) - F

Locale: Wess Siide
[..] on 02/20/2013 00:39:25 MST Print View

[..]

Edited by RogerDodger on 05/08/2014 00:59:16 MDT.

Justin Baker
(justin_baker) - F

Locale: west coast best coast
Re: Strict gun laws on 02/20/2013 00:44:23 MST Print View

Gun crime statistics are irrelevant. How somebody kills someone doesn't matter, they still killed them. You should be looking at the total homicide rate. Yes, the united states tops that list but we have more crime in general. We also have gangs, an open border, and drug cartels running loose. We also have a very unequal wealth distribution compared to other western countries which I'm sure leads to criminal activity.

Peter Evans
(NLslacker)
Move this thread to chaff please. on 02/20/2013 00:45:13 MST Print View

I give up... this is an ultralight backpacking forum and this thread is discussing the right pistol to take into the back country.
I don't need self defence because no-one is attacking me... even if they were to attack me, 99.99 % chance they don't have a gun. (outside of the US)

This debate is un-winnable because many can't seem to imagine a world without constant confrontation and fear.

My $0.02

A Canadian

Roger Dodger
(RogerDodger) - F

Locale: Wess Siide
Re: Re: Re: And another Couple of attacks on 02/20/2013 00:45:30 MST Print View

Justin,
The guy named Colt (inventor of Colt) called it the great equalizer, for the reasons you stated. A strongman, elderly or petite lady are all equally able to protect themselves... From each other.

Justin Baker
(justin_baker) - F

Locale: west coast best coast
Re: Move this thread to chaff please. on 02/20/2013 01:01:19 MST Print View

You started the debate Peter.

Peter Evans
(NLslacker)
Unwinnable Debate on 02/20/2013 01:04:38 MST Print View

It is an un-winnable debate because when presented will well documented evidence that goes against your world view... you declare it irrelevant.

I roll my eyes in your general direction.

Edited by NLslacker on 02/20/2013 01:05:44 MST.

Roger Dodger
(RogerDodger) - F

Locale: Wess Siide
Its ok to leave this thread, if you dont like it. on 02/20/2013 01:05:57 MST Print View

Peter,
This thread is not about requiring you to carry or to convince you to change your mind. Do what you will.
For others that are interested, and want to learn more, this is the thread. I definitely learned more from discussing with others.
Its totally ok to have opposing views, we are not clones.
Your opinion disagrees with this thread, that is ok. please disregard it.
No hard feelings, we may completely agree on another thread/ topic.

Peter Evans
(NLslacker)
Agreed on 02/20/2013 01:07:52 MST Print View

Looking forward to it... no hard feelings.

Justin Baker
(justin_baker) - F

Locale: west coast best coast
Re: Unwinnable Debate on 02/20/2013 01:14:15 MST Print View

Yes, I think that firearm related homicide statistics are irrelevant. Overall homicide rates, regardless of the weapon used, are the important thing to look at. If firearm related homicides go down and homicides not related to firearms go up, what was accomplished?

I agree that this isn't the right place to get into a debate, there are other threads just for that.

Peter Evans
(NLslacker)
Here is the right place :) on 02/20/2013 01:27:58 MST Print View

http://www.backpackinglight.com/cgi-bin/backpackinglight/forums/thread_display.html?forum_thread_id=73735

Paul Hatfield
(clear_blue_skies) - F
Evidence on 02/20/2013 03:09:09 MST Print View

Mr. Evans, despite extensive research on the topic by the public health community over the last fifty years, there is no demonstrated correlation between civilian ownership of firearms and homicide rates.

I suggested reading the National Academy of Sciences book on firearms and violence if you are interested in this topic.

The only link which is supportable by evidence is that availability of firearms is associated with a higher percentage of suicides by firearms (but not with suicide rates as a whole.) To give a concrete example: Japan has a suicide rate dramatically higher than the U.S, despite firearms being virtually unobtainable. In fact, the combined murder and suicide rate of Japan is much higher than the combined murder and suicide rate of the U.S.

You gave the example of Canada, Australia, and the U.K. in the graph you posted. In scientific jargon, that is known as cherry picking. One could give the counter-example of Iceland... which happens to be vastly safer than Canada, Australia, or the U.K., but has very high firearms ownership. Or on the opposite side of the spectrum, numerous countries with no civilian ownership of firearms, but very high homicide rates.

Crime is a complex socio-economic issue. Trying to pretend otherwise is probably a waste of everyone's valuable backpacking time.

Nick Larsen
(stingray4540) - F

Locale: South Bay
Re: Re: Re: Re: Solo security on 02/20/2013 03:34:44 MST Print View

"To my knowledge, I can carry a pistol into a national forest or blm land. There shouldn't be an issue with that. State Parks or National parks are a no go. " - Justin

Justin, please do NOT rely on "your knowledge". Rely on the law if you want to stay out of jail.

If you have any questions about gun laws in california, all your questions will be answered by a visit to www.calguns.net they have a very helpfull forum, but most of your questions can be answered with a search.

You can only carry a firearm without a permit if you are on your way to hunt or fish. And this IMO is a sticky exception to base your justification on.

A carry permit is not impossible to get in California however! There is hope! But, it depends on what county you live in. Permits are issued by your county Sheriff, and it is totally up to them. If you visit Calguns, you can find out if your county freely issues, like Fresno or Sacramento, or NEVER issues, like Santa Clara county.
Even so, there is still hope! There are currently several lawsuits against individual Sheriffs, Santa Clara county included. If these are won, then CA may be on its way to a shall issue state.

Just, please do your research.I don't want you to end up in jail for being ignorant.

Paul Mason
(dextersp1) - F
Why no hate for tobbaco on 02/20/2013 06:45:33 MST Print View

"In the United States, smoking is responsible for about one in five deaths annually (i.e., about 443,000 deaths per year, and an estimated 49,000 of these smoking-related deaths are the result of secondhand smoke exposure)"
http://www.cdc.gov/tobacco/data_statistics/fact_sheets/fast_facts/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_causes_of_death_by_rate

Why all the talk about guns when there are so many easily actionable killer that could be addressed first.

And why all the talk about assault rifles?
http://washington.cbslocal.com/2013/01/03/fbi-hammers-clubs-kill-more-people-than-rifles-shotguns/
"In 2011, there were 323 murders committed with a rifle.

Edited by dextersp1 on 02/20/2013 06:48:28 MST.

Nick Larsen
(stingray4540) - F

Locale: South Bay
Re: Why no hate for tobbaco on 02/20/2013 07:32:26 MST Print View

To add to Paul's post:

Traffic deaths that were alcohol related in 1998 15,935 (http://www.madd.org)

Murders by guns in the US for 1998 9,143 (1998 Uniform Crime Report)

CDC's website numbers from 2009: (suicides removed from all categories)

All transport: 38,334
Poisoning: 35,194
Fall: 24,877
Firearms: 12,612

Perhaps we should make everyone wear a helmet, ban cars, and make you get a permit to own poisonous substances? If you really want to save lives that is...


Oh, and hammer and clubs killed more people in 2011 than rifles.

Edward Zwibel
(YetiEddie) - MLife

Locale: Sunny San Diego
+1 to each their own on 02/20/2013 08:38:52 MST Print View

As a legal carry guy everywhere, (Law Enforcement). I literally wear one at all times. EXCEPT in the back country. So it's quick wits, bear spray, best practices and common sense. I find the people to be amenable, friendly, even going out of their way to be so. It was once said "We pack our fears". But again, to each their own!

Ian B.
(IDBLOOM) - MLife

Locale: PNW
Re: Solo Wilderness Security on 02/20/2013 09:21:24 MST Print View

FWIW I only carry as permitted by law. I haven't been on an adventure yet worth dying or receiving a felony for.

I backpack with children in mountain lion country. In this scenario, I carry a gun in lieu of OC spray. I carry a Glock 26 and have >20 years extensive firearms training. This pistol is compact, carries 10 rounds in my smallest mag (will accept a 30 rounder if necessary), and I pack 9mm jacketed hollow points. I've shot this weapon enough to ensure I can shoot 12" shot groups at 25 yards under duress. There may be lighter options out there but I'm not willing to compromise on the performance of this pistol.

IMO OC spray is better than a firearm for bear defense; where I live, black bear and mountain lion territory overlap. While black bears are capable of killing me, I'm less concerned about being attacked by a bear and more concerned about my kids getting jumped by a mountain lion. If I'm traveling with kids AND another adult, I'll usually throw my bear spray to the other adult and carry the pistol. If I'm traveling solo, I'll only carry if I'm in an area prone to covert meth labs and marijuana grows. I'm 6'3 so while it's not impossible for a mountain lion to attack me it isn't very likely either.

I follow normal protocols when hiking with kids in mountain lion country and keep them close and in front of me so they don't get jumped from behind.

Samuel C. Farrington
(scfhome) - M

Locale: Chocorua NH, USA
attitudes about guns in CA and US on 02/20/2013 09:42:05 MST Print View

Peter E - Re your 2 cents post - Here is one yankee who agrees with you 1000%.
You could post another bar chart showing the US exports of weapons being many times greater compared to other countries. But it would be pointless, the debate being "un-winnable" as you put it. Nothing, even the worst atrocities, seems to change the gun culture here. And within it lies the seeds of our own destruction.
I have seen the engine of that self destruction up close in Vietnam, and from afar many decades later in Afghanistan. Thank you for saying so well what needed to be said.

Ian B.
(IDBLOOM) - MLife

Locale: PNW
Re: Mutual Arisings on 02/20/2013 10:21:48 MST Print View

Ice Axe-

"Kindness begets Kindness"

Truer words never spoken. I'm a huge 2nd Amd guy and have carried a weapon for a couple decades for work. I've received countless hours of "Rules of Engagement" and "Use of Force Continuum" training to understand when my life is in jeopardy and when I can use my mind and my mouth to avert trouble or deescalate an agitated person.

I look at my pistol and other weapons like other safety equipment. I've worn my seatbelt for >40 years and have never needed it. Hopefully I never will. I don't wear my seatbelt in a parking lot and I don't carry a pistol when a reasonable threat analysis wouldn't require one. It's my responsibility to understand all of the variables (e.g. prevalence of mountain lion attacks) and I bear the burden if I'm wrong.

I'm concerned when people are loaded for bear but don't correspondingly educate themselves on how, and more importantly, when to use a weapon. A local bouncer is now a convicted felon and will soon lose all of his assets for getting too aggressive with a patron. A little training, education, and common decency and he would have avoided the situation all together.

BTW I'm a huge Gandhi fan. I enjoyed visiting his museum and Smriti in India. His anthology was a wonderful and refreshing read; I'd recommend it to you if you haven't read it yet.

Dena Kelley
(EagleRiverDee) - M

Locale: Eagle River, Alaska
"Solo Wilderness Security" on 02/20/2013 10:38:12 MST Print View

Not looking to debate, just will state why I carry a firearm.

I live in Alaska, and hike in areas with high bear and moose populations. I've also, as a woman that hikes solo, had some sketchy experiences with men, particularly when they've been drinking. I have had two men come up on me openly voicing what they would do when they got to me, only to change their attitude entirely when they saw I was packing. I never had to even touch the firearm, it's mere presence on my hip was a deterrent.

I pack both openly and concealed, depending. Both are 100% legal without a permit in Alaska. Long time Alaskans don't get concerned when they pass someone with a gun. Granola type imports from California give us dirty looks though. If I know I'm hiking a trail high in that type of personality, I'll conceal my firearm to keep them from being scared. Mostly I try to get off the beaten path, however.

I do also carry bear spray, and which option I choose to use would depend on what my circumstances turned out to be.

Is it UL? Absolutely not. Do I think it's prudent? Yes. If I were hiking in a group, I probably wouldn't take a gun. I would be less likely to have problems with wildlife or people in a group. But since I hike primarily alone, I do think I have to consider my personal safety and take steps to ensure it.

Craig W.
(xnomanx) - F - M
Wonderful World, Beautiful People on 02/20/2013 10:58:12 MST Print View

"Granola type imports from California"...

"Illegal invaders from Southern countries"...

Even a little talk about whether or not to report killing a person and face the legal consequences or leave their corpse in the woods.

What a wonderful thread, rife with stereotypes galore, boogeymen, closeted xenophobia, and all that wholesome stuff.

Gun talk continues to bring out nothing but the best in people.

Brian UL
(MAYNARD76)

Locale: New England
Re: "Solo Wilderness Security" on 02/20/2013 11:02:57 MST Print View

I fully support the 2nd amendment...
but here's an idea
Maybe if hiking so dangerous that one feels they need a gun -they should think about finding another hobby? Something safe?

Justin Baker
(justin_baker) - F

Locale: west coast best coast
Re: Re: "Solo Wilderness Security" on 02/20/2013 11:37:08 MST Print View

I could say the same thing about a personal locator beacon. If you feel that you might need it, then maybe you shouldn't be doing that hike.

Doug I.
(idester) - MLife

Locale: MidAtlantic
Re: Re: Re: "Solo Wilderness Security" on 02/20/2013 11:48:47 MST Print View

"I could say the same thing about a personal locator beacon. If you feel that you might need it, then maybe you shouldn't be doing that hike."

You could, but it wouldn't be a good analogy. A PLB isn't so much for you, it's for those who might have to come looking for you.

Roger Dodger
(RogerDodger) - F

Locale: Wess Siide
Re: Re: "Solo Wilderness Security" on 02/20/2013 11:53:00 MST Print View

A person needs to identify a potential risk,
assess the risk severity and likelihood,
and mitigate that risk by:
a) accept the risk and do nothing to mitigate, accept the consequences.
b) accept the risk but do something to mitigate, lowering the potential severity.
c) don't accept the risk, stay home, then nothing to mitigate.

The risk likelihood is very low =
what are the odds that a mountain lion and drug farmer will cause me harm?


The risk severity is very high =
if a mountain lion, drug farmer or serial killer intercepts me, the harm to me would be catastrophic.

(Risk likelihood probability) x (Risk severity) = Risk score.

My personal situation assessment is that some solo trips have a higher probability and severity of risk, and those specific trips I mitigate the risk. Most trips with a trip partner are low severity and low probability that I do not need to carry.

Edited by RogerDodger on 02/20/2013 12:00:24 MST.

Dena Kelley
(EagleRiverDee) - M

Locale: Eagle River, Alaska
Re "Solo Wilderness Security" on 02/20/2013 11:55:51 MST Print View

@ Brian UL-

There's a difference between feeling it's a dangerous activity and simply going in a manner in which you feel prepared. That level of preparation varies by person. As Justin pointed out, some people take PLB's or SPOT's, some don't. Some take minimalist gear, some take the kitchen sink. Some places are, technically, safer than others. East coast hikers are pretty unlikely to encounter a Grizzly bear, for example. Even many west coast hikers are unlikely to ever see one unless they go to Yellowstone. A lot less likely than I am, where I have seen Grizzlies on hikes just a couple miles from my house, and where I've encountered black bears on my road. A wolf pack in recent years had to be eliminated because they were coming into residential areas and killing people's dogs and finally went after a couple of women who were walking on a road. Being prepared doesn't equal being afraid- it's just being prepared. I feel quite confident in the woods.

David Olsen
(oware)

Locale: Steptoe Butte
Being prepared beats having to vomit on an attacker. on 02/20/2013 12:04:13 MST Print View

"An updated advisory on the website of the University of Colorado at Colorado Springs offers female students new tactics to fend off rapists, including vomiting, urinating and telling an attacker they have a disease.
The new recommendations came Monday evening, hours after the Colorado House passed a package of gun safety bills, including one that would ban the concealed carrying of guns on college campuses."

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/headlines/2013/02/colorado-college-advises-students-to-urinate-vomit-to-stop-rapists/

David Olsen
(oware)

Locale: Steptoe Butte
Re: Re "Solo Wilderness Security" on 02/20/2013 12:12:07 MST Print View

EagleRiverDee-

Do you think pepper spray would work as deterrent for a wolf pack? We have twice as many wolves in our part of WA state as
last year. More than in Denali National Park now it is estimated. They attack peoples dogs and livestock, but haven't been any threat to people. If I am hiking with my dog and need to dissuade several animals, have you heard if pepper spray has been effective,
IE using up the can on one or two wolves and the rest leaving?

Paul Mason
(dextersp1) - F
Re: Being prepared beats having to vomit on an attacker. on 02/20/2013 12:32:47 MST Print View

So now the rapist knows the law abiding student won't be armed? Disarm the potential victim ... that make sense to someone.

Ian B.
(IDBLOOM) - MLife

Locale: PNW
Re: "Solo Wilderness Security" on 02/20/2013 12:36:22 MST Print View

Dena,

"I've also, as a woman that hikes solo, had some sketchy experiences with men, particularly when they've been drinking. I have had two men come up on me openly voicing what they would do when they got to me, only to change their attitude entirely when they saw I was packing."

There are certainly safety concerns peculiar to women which men cannot relate to. After reading one chapter in "Wild," the author described one incident on the PCT where a predator/day hiker (calm down folks! Not saying this is mutually inclusive!) came after her aggressively. Based on her description, I'm surprised that he didn't try to rape her.

I made an analogy in an earlier post that I've worn my seatbelt my entire life and I've never needed it. I wear it because the unlikely but potential consequences are so dire. I carry 100% around town for reasons unrelated to this thread or OP. I rarely carry when I’m hiking in Washington because I’m not overly afraid of black bear and mountain lions only concern me when I’m with my kids. There aren’t any moose in my area and I don’t know enough about the re-emerging wolf packs to understand if I should be concerned about them or not. I finally saw my first wolf last year near Chinook Pass.... but I digress.

People like Andrew Skurka hike the Alaska Wilderness all the time without a gun and live to see another day but the between the moose and grizzlies I personally wouldn't be one of them.

Dena Kelley
(EagleRiverDee) - M

Locale: Eagle River, Alaska
Re "Solo Wilderness Security" on 02/20/2013 12:37:39 MST Print View

David-

The women that were nearly attacked had pepper spray. They backed down the road 1/4 mile spraying the wolves with pepper spray with the wolves following them snarling and trying to get to them. The pepper spray was only partially effective and it seems the wolves were waiting for them to run out. If memory serves, what scared the wolves off finally was a vehicle that came to the women's rescue. The pack became such a problem that there was a concern that children waiting for school buses would be harmed. The local native tribe took care of the issue. This particular pack had lost its fear of humans.

Dena Kelley
(EagleRiverDee) - M

Locale: Eagle River, Alaska
RE "Solo Wilderness Security" on 02/20/2013 12:47:14 MST Print View

Ian-

Thanks for understanding my point.

And I agree with your final sentence, too!

Ian B.
(IDBLOOM) - MLife

Locale: PNW
Wolf concerns on 02/20/2013 12:55:52 MST Print View

"The pepper spray was only partially effective and it seems the wolves were waiting for them to run out. If memory serves, what scared the wolves off finally was a vehicle that came to the women's rescue."

Wow! After watching a video where a wolf pack took out a young moose while the mother was agressively trying to fight them off, I'd be toast if they thought I looked like lunch! They certainly are tough and persistant.

I've spent some time researching black bear and cougar but almost none researching wolves as I never expected to see one in the wild. I'll admit that when I finally saw one, it was very exciting but my new reality is that I should expect to encounter them and that I need better knowledge of how to react to them. Off to hit the books!

spelt !
(spelt) - F

Locale: SW/C PA
Re: Being prepared beats having to vomit on an attacker. on 02/20/2013 13:07:54 MST Print View

"An updated advisory on the website of the University of Colorado at Colorado Springs offers female students new tactics to fend off rapists, including vomiting, urinating and telling an attacker they have a disease.

Charming.

d k
(dkramalc) - MLife
Re: Wolf concerns @ Dena on 02/20/2013 13:15:02 MST Print View

Dena, I googled your words about the wolf attack on the women and only came up with a Fort Richardson incident where wolves attacked dogs being walked by 3 women (as opposed to attacking the women on their own). Is that the same incident, or a different one from the one you are talking about? Neither scenario sounds like fun...

Dena Kelley
(EagleRiverDee) - M

Locale: Eagle River, Alaska
@ D K on 02/20/2013 13:32:57 MST Print View

d k -

I had recalled it as two women, but I do recall they were walking their dogs and it was on a road on Ft. Rich so I would say that is very likely the same incident. It's been a few years so my memory on the people count must have been faulty. The same pack had also started encroaching on Eagle River (which is adjacent to Ft. Rich and is the town I live in) and coming into a residential area there. It was for both of those reasons that the local Native tribe (actually called a Native Corporation, up here) took the issue into their own hands. People's lives were at risk.

Here's a link to articles in regards to this wolf pack:

http://www.adn.com/2008/01/02/243761/dec-21-wolves-blamed-in-two-eagle.html

http://www.adn.com/2010/11/07/1542141/bolder-wolves-fray-residents-nerves.html

Edited by EagleRiverDee on 02/20/2013 13:36:35 MST.

Brian UL
(MAYNARD76)

Locale: New England
Re: @ D K on 02/20/2013 14:11:38 MST Print View

It makes sense to carry a riffle if your in grizzly country, and I can see woman packing pistols, in fact hand guns are traditionally associated with womans self defense and it makes sense.
Im just not impressed with the grown men that seem to need to carry all the time.

Ian B.
(IDBLOOM) - MLife

Locale: PNW
Brian on 02/20/2013 14:31:43 MST Print View

By all means, don't carry a gun; there is no mandate which would require you to do so. I didn't grow up in a house with guns so this is something I've adopted as a result of my profession. In all likelihood I doubt I'd carry a gun today if I'd grown up to be a Dr. or teacher (slowly fade in Mommas don't let your babies grow up to be cowboys..). Having a front row seat to human depravity will warp your perception of the world and feelings of security.

I realize that to someone who has no interest in ever carrying a gun and who has never needed one, the act may seem odd. What I can tell you is that the weight of the gun disappears after a while (like a bulky wallet or watch) and it seems stranger when it's missing. My pistol is very concealable and I don't even notice it any more.

Brandon =Þ
(Beeen) - MLife

Locale: California
hole-y on 02/20/2013 15:12:39 MST Print View

I'd consider taking a gun backpacking, but it probably wouldn't work after I drilled a bunch of holes in it.

Luke Schmidt
(Cameron) - MLife

Locale: The WOODS
Re hole-y on 02/20/2013 15:48:06 MST Print View

I want them take one of those small 5 shot .357 revolvers and convert it into a 4 shot .44 magnum! Yes I know how hard that would kick.

On a more serious note I just thought of another upside to bear spray. I've heard plenty of stories of people who hesitated to shoot a gun during a bear attack because they were afraid of hitting the victim. With bear spray you can just spray away.

Roger Dodger
(RogerDodger) - F

Locale: Wess Siide
Re: Re hole-y on 02/20/2013 16:03:05 MST Print View

Spray doesn't work:
1) when it's windy
2) when victim is inside the tent, attacking bear/wolves/serial killer outside
3) when wolf is already biting your jugular artery or attacker penetrating your privates

Gun doesn't work:
1) when you didn't buy one.
2) when you own one but left it at home.
3) when you own one but not trained to use it.

Ian B.
(IDBLOOM) - MLife

Locale: PNW
Re: Solo Wilderness Security on 02/20/2013 16:41:11 MST Print View

nm

Edited by IDBLOOM on 02/21/2013 07:12:04 MST.

d k
(dkramalc) - MLife
Re: @ D K on 02/20/2013 17:05:00 MST Print View

Thanks, Dena - also found links to a 2010 article on a man who was killed by wolves outside a village on the Alaska peninsula, very enlightening.

HK Newman
(hknewman) - MLife

Locale: Western US
Re: Re: Re hole-y on 02/20/2013 17:15:18 MST Print View

Spray doesn't work:
1) when it's windy
2) when victim is inside the tent, attacking bear/wolves/serial killer outside
3) when wolf is already biting your jugular artery or attacker penetrating your privates

Gun doesn't work:
1) when you didn't buy one.
2) when you own one but left it at home.
3) when you own one but not trained to use it.


So far none of my trips to the 4 corners states or California in the past 25 years have involved a wilderness reenactment of "Custer's Last Stand" with assorted growling beasties surrounding my tent and being held at bay by a spork (or by the smell of my hiking socks).

Maybe Anaheim is different, though. :-)

Think it's easy to overblow the danger or demonize others. If in the arctic, having valuables, or walking in a high crime area, then an appropriate firearm may be wise in a solo situation ..or not.

Reminds me of that movie Jumanji ...

Jumanji

ed: cell phone fat fingers

Edited by hknewman on 02/20/2013 18:59:18 MST.

Tom Kirchner
(ouzel) - MLife

Locale: Pacific Northwest/Sierra
Re: Re: Mutual Arisings on 02/20/2013 17:50:01 MST Print View

"BTW I'm a huge Gandhi fan."

The mention of Ghandhi in the context of this thread brings to mind an observation he once made when asked what he thought about Western civilization. He replied that he thought it would be a good idea.

Bob Gross
(--B.G.--) - F

Locale: Silicon Valley
Re: Re: Re: Mutual Arisings on 02/20/2013 17:56:01 MST Print View

"The mention of Ghandhi in the context of this thread brings to mind an observation he once made when asked what he thought about Western civilization. He replied that he thought it would be a good idea."

Ghandi never quite made it as a headliner in Vegas.

--B.G.--

Roger Dodger
(RogerDodger) - F

Locale: Wess Siide
[..] on 02/20/2013 18:29:06 MST Print View

[..]

Edited by RogerDodger on 05/08/2014 00:58:29 MDT.

jeffrey armbruster
(book) - M

Locale: Northern California
solo wilderness insanity on 02/20/2013 19:09:04 MST Print View

edit

Edited by book on 02/20/2013 19:11:30 MST.

Eric Blumensaadt
(Danepacker) - MLife

Locale: Mojave Desert
Titanium .44 mag revolver... on 02/21/2013 00:02:18 MST Print View

... with a 4 inch barrel.

S&W or Tarus

Nuff sed.

Ian B.
(IDBLOOM) - MLife

Locale: PNW
Re: Re: Re: Re: Mutual Arisings on 02/21/2013 00:03:26 MST Print View

"The mention of Ghandhi in the context of this thread brings to mind an observation he once made when asked what he thought about Western civilization. He replied that he thought it would be a good idea."

So true Tom!

Edited by IDBLOOM on 02/21/2013 00:26:43 MST.

Ian B.
(IDBLOOM) - MLife

Locale: PNW
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Mutual Arisings on 02/21/2013 00:08:10 MST Print View

"For how I like to live my life... Die with your boots on with dignity, is far better than dying as an old man wearing a turban diaper."

Such bravado! Well done sir!

JK! I prefer "Madame, tomorrow I'll be sober but you'll still be ugly!" but as you said you do you I do me.

Nothing wrong with Churchill but I've hit a point in my life where babysitting adults who do not know how to behave is becoming tiring so I found the peaceful ways of Gandhi to be very inspiring in an otherwise ugly world.

Take care.

Edited by IDBLOOM on 02/21/2013 00:17:53 MST.

Paul Mountford
(Sparticus) - MLife

Locale: Atlantic Canada
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Mutual Arisings on 02/21/2013 00:38:54 MST Print View

"I have no respect for Ghandi or passive resistance (aka passive victim) ...
I'm a huge Winston Churchill fan."

Another quote attributed to Churchill that is pertinent to this thread:

“A gentleman rarely needs a pistol, but when he does he needs it very very badly.”

Ghandi’s method of passive resistance did manage to pluck the last jewel of the British Empire and probably deserves a little respect; however, I'm with you in that Churchill's world view more accurately reflects its state today.

Ian B.
(IDBLOOM) - MLife

Locale: PNW
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Mutual Arisings on 02/21/2013 06:48:22 MST Print View

Churchill is certainly a man for the real world. No doubt about that.

Tom Kirchner
(ouzel) - MLife

Locale: Pacific Northwest/Sierra
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Mutual Arisings on 02/21/2013 18:02:04 MST Print View

"For how I like to live my life... Die with your boots on with dignity, is far better than dying as an old man wearing a turban diaper."

He who prefers to die with his boots on will likely get his wish, and soon be forgotten. Gahdhi on the other hand, while he died violently for an ideal, lived to a ripe old age and to this day is venerated by countless hundreds of millions, if not in the billions, of people inspired by his appeal to us to listen to our better angels. Among others, he was a guiding light for MLK. Enough said.

I hope you do not get your wish, just to be clear.

Roger Dodger
(RogerDodger) - F

Locale: Wess Siide
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Mutual Arisings on 02/21/2013 19:12:05 MST Print View

For some, living a long life but on their knees, is acceptable.

We all die. Quality of life matters TO ME, more than quantity of years.

Generally speaking, and all analogies have their limits, a zebra cannot be tammed or enslaved, will live free or die.

whereas a donkey and a mule will live a long life, as a hard working slave beast of burden.

If the world had more of the zebra's resistance to slavery, then the implementation of slavery, oppression and tyranny would be labor intensive and fruitless.

Like I said, it's an analogy. I'm sure somewhere a zebra has been domesticated partially, but that is rare and uncommon.

My point is that Ghandi was a domesticated mule. That is not the life for me.

Lyan Jordan
(redmonk)

Locale: Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem
Solo Wilderness Security on 02/21/2013 19:17:01 MST Print View

If you haven't demonstrated and been arrested, you *are* living on your knees.

jerry adams
(retiredjerry) - MLife

Locale: Oregon and Washington
Re: Mutual Arisings on 02/21/2013 19:23:10 MST Print View

but your comment "wearing a turban diaper" is just gratuitous bigotry

it's okay to argue whether peaceful or armed resistance is more effective. You can find examples of peaceful resistance being effective like Ghandi, Mandella, or MLK. On the other hand, the U.S. was more formed by armed resistance.

You can find many examples of armed resistance not being so effective like Syria right now. Or our civil war - maybe we would be better off today split into two countries.

Craig W.
(xnomanx) - F - M
Mutual Arisings on 02/21/2013 19:23:40 MST Print View

Roger Dodger, I'm beginning to fear you're actually serious about all this.

Tom Kirchner
(ouzel) - MLife

Locale: Pacific Northwest/Sierra
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Mutual Arisings on 02/21/2013 20:29:17 MST Print View

"For some, living a long life but on their knees, is acceptable.

My point is that Ghandi was a domesticated mule. That is not the life for me."

It is evident that you understand very little about the life of Gandhi. In fact, he raised an enslaved nation from its knees by the moral force of passive resistance while the British were dying with their boots on by the millions. When they had finished their dying, they no longer had the psychological, or even military, wherewithal to resist that moral force, and India became a free nation.

But you are surely right about one thing: that is not the life for you. Fight on, then, but against who? And for what?

Edited for content.

Edited by ouzel on 02/21/2013 20:30:03 MST.

Roger Dodger
(RogerDodger) - F

Locale: Wess Siide
[...] on 02/21/2013 21:22:24 MST Print View

[...]

Edited by RogerDodger on 11/01/2013 16:14:44 MDT.

Ozzy McKinney
(PorcupinePhobia) - F

Locale: PNW
Whoa. on 02/21/2013 22:23:27 MST Print View

Soooo... I clicked on this thread out of curiosity. Read the first few pages, and then the last few. Whoa.

Tyranny in the wilderness.

Colin Krusor
(ckrusor) - M

Locale: Northwest US
Strange on 02/21/2013 23:55:28 MST Print View

Roger, I completely agree with some of what you've written here. But why the "turban diaper" bit?

Loving freedom is fine. I like that part of what you said. Being racist just makes you sound like a simple-minded buffoon.

Roger Dodger
(RogerDodger) - F

Locale: Wess Siide
the "turban diaper" bit on 02/22/2013 00:22:50 MST Print View

What would you call it? underwear wrap? cotton ribbon? toga?

You can't stand up for yourself and protect your loved ones, "protect" in the true sense of chivalry, if you can't keep your pants up. Much like today's poser gangsters that wear their underwear high and their pants waist low. it's the defeatist uniform. Gandhi couldn't walk 5 mins without tripping on the robe wrap or whatever you want to call his wardrobe.

He used to wear pants in his younger academic years, he gave them up. It isn't functional, it's a statement of intentional submissiveness to attract sympathy.

My comment is unrelated to race. The rest of the people around him were the same race, they wore pants. Not everyone who is Indian wears his choice of wardrobe. Almost no one else.
Ganghi ribbon

Remember this guy in Harry Potter? The British slipped that hint in the movie.
dobby.jpg

I work with two dozen Indians on work visas, half eat chicken and 4 eat beef. The vegan Indians adore him as a god, the Indian carnivore guys have no respect for him.

For the record, MLK in his latter years was getting impatient with the results of his own passive approach and started leaning toward the Malcolm X direction of proactively taking charge.

Anyway, This thread morphed a dozen times, it's now in the philosophy stage.

To the original post about gear.

Solo Wilderness Security:
pepper spray: legal and mediocre functionality unless 1) the wind is against you, 2) you run out of spray squirts, 3) you are inside the tent, 4) the spray can is not readily accessible, 5) the attack is upon you and you spray yourself. 6) as with any pressurized canister such as iso pro stoves, the effectiveness of the spray is diminished with altitude.

revolver Ruger LCR 1) legal issues in many places. 2) will not accidentally discharge 3) weighs about 1 lb. 4) limited capacity, then reload after 5 or 6 shots. 5) low to none probably of failure or jam. 6) shorter barrel means less accuracy than longer heavier. 7) small enough to carry and packs a big output. 8) ammo effective at any altitude. 9) can be shot from inside the jacket pocket only if you are 007. 10) Rounded design with built-in trigger to slide in pants pocket concealed. better wear a good belt.

Glock 1) surprisingly accurate design, even with short barrel. 2) if carried loaded, will need a holster to protect the trigger from catching on other gear. 3) many pistol can jam, but the Glock has loyal following because it run accurate even after a torture test. 4) unlike the LCR revolver it can NOT be shot from inside the jacket pocket, the slide could catch on the cloth. 5) the joke about Glock is that it's plastic, the polymer makes it lighter. 6) there are hate forums on Glocks for their fat grip (they made a SF:small frame aka short fingers)

Edited by RogerDodger on 02/22/2013 01:10:47 MST.

Roger Dodger
(RogerDodger) - F

Locale: Wess Siide
[..] on 02/22/2013 01:17:27 MST Print View

[..]

Edited by RogerDodger on 05/08/2014 00:54:38 MDT.

Travis Leanna
(T.L.) - MLife

Locale: Wisconsin
Ghandi=diaper/mule/Harry Potter elf on 02/22/2013 01:47:48 MST Print View

"I have no respect for Ghandi or passive resistance (aka passive victim)"

"Die with your boots on with dignity, is far better than dying as an old man wearing a turban diaper."

"My point is that Ghandi was a domesticated mule."

"Gandhi couldn't walk 5 mins without tripping on the robe wrap or whatever you want to call his wardrobe."
------------------


Holy Sh!t. I'm really not sure what to say. I'm all for standing up for ones self and fighting for freedom, but your statements about Ghandi are about the Sh!ttiest things I've read in a LONG time. Seriously. Not to mention the astounding ignorance.

I really am truly sorry you think this way. It's sad.

Edited by T.L. on 02/22/2013 01:59:58 MST.

Roger Dodger
(RogerDodger) - F

Locale: Wess Siide
Re: Ghandi/diaper/mule/Harry Potter elf on 02/22/2013 02:11:57 MST Print View

Travis,
I understand your comments. In the west, we perceive the people of India as somewhat a homogeneous group. By knowing many folks from India in college and at work, albeit the age group (mostly in their 20s - 30s and few in the 40s) is a biased selection, many Indians born in India, educated in the UK and US, and working in the US have a strong disgust for Gandhi. Remember that he was shot (edit: not stabbed, thanks Travis for the accurate fact verification) by his own people.

The marketing in the US and that old movie is that he was MLK Jesus savior Elvis of India. He was a pop culture icon in his era, but a significant population of the current generation in India strongly reject his philosophy, as more Indians travel to the west and experience successful wins that were accomplished by direct strength of power.

I think more people in the West that were infatuated with the John Lennon philosophy like many hippies of the 60s 70s, feel stronger connection about the mystical East, than the actual people that live in the East every day.

I'll give you another absurd example for contrast.
Hawaiians today in Hawaii only wear tribal costumes for the tourist shows, otherwise they wear casual clothes like we do in California. President Obama is from the state of Hawaii. Let's pretend that President Obama does press conferences wearing the Hawaiian Luau tribal costumes, to make a philosophical point about simplicity and being humble. The local Hawaiians (who wear every day casual clothes) will be terribly offended by that retro wardrobe.

That is how many young Indians feel today about Gandhi's philosophy and wardrobe. It makes their culture look 500 years behind, since he is the icon but does not represent the majority of the youth.

Gandhi is not the father or king of all Indians. His philosophy doesn't speak for all or even the majority of Indians.

Edited by RogerDodger on 02/22/2013 09:36:52 MST.

Travis Leanna
(T.L.) - MLife

Locale: Wisconsin
Re: Re: Ghandi/diaper/mule/Harry Potter elf on 02/22/2013 02:52:09 MST Print View

>Remember that he was stabbed by his own people.
Ghandi was shot 3 times in the chest by Nathuram Godse. An extremest.

John Lennon was shot 4 times in the back by Mark David Chapman. An extremest.

Lincoln was shot by his own countryman. Kennedy was shot by his own government (debatable). Martin Luther King Jr was shot by his fellow American.

I guess they were all useless too since their own people murdered them.


>That is how many young Indians feel today about Gandhi's philosophy and wardrobe. It makes their culture look 500 years behind, since he is the icon but does not represent the majority of the youth.

Of course his wardrobe doesn't represent today's youth. He died 65 years ago. Do young Christian boys walk around in clothes Jesus wore? He also chose his wardrobe in direct defiance of British rule and occupation. Something today's current generation of India would have little direct experience with, since it ended 66 years ago.

India's flag, which depicts the spinning wheel, was a direct result of Ghandi's work and influence. A spinning wheel that he often made his own clothes on, in protest of British rule (boycotting foreign-made goods)

Edited by T.L. on 02/22/2013 03:29:21 MST.

Ian B.
(IDBLOOM) - MLife

Locale: PNW
Books are good on 02/22/2013 06:53:47 MST Print View

Rodger,

There are some fairly major points about Gandhi's philosophy and how he developed it over the years which cannot be covered in this thread.

With all due respect, if you feel that your current position is correct and that there is nothing else to learn then by all means carry on. If you are interested in learning about Gandhi from his own words and only want to read one book, I'd recommend this one:

http://www.amazon.com/The-Essential-Gandhi-Anthology-Writings/dp/1400030501/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1361539705&sr=8-1&keywords=gandhi%27s+anthology

I guess you'd come out the other side with more or less the same beliefs since you've spent some time developing your opinion based on your research and experiences but this book will give you a better understanding of Gandhi.

I've put myself in harms way in the defense of others, including working as a peacekeeper in the Balkans. I walked through entire villages which were wiped out and the survivors displaced. I worked as a EMT at WTC. Trust me, I get your underlying message.

I have no intention of allowing myself or any other innocent person to face harm at the hands of a predator if I can do something to stop it. On the same token, violence committed in defense should always be an absolute last resort. In the case of national defense, when diplomacy has failed or imminent danger. In the case of defense of self or the innocent, the measured act is the lowest use of force on the continuum which will resolve the issue.

+1 Glock 26.

Roger Dodger
(RogerDodger) - F

Locale: Wess Siide
The Gandhi philosophy 1946 on 02/22/2013 09:54:05 MST Print View

I was not alive in 1946, but many of the online resources were consistent on this quote by Gandhi, how he would have ended the Nazi holocaust from the Jewish victims point of view. Basically consistent with looking so miserable, to gather sympathy for an aggressor to voluntarily stop the oppression, or for someone else to take up arms in proxy defense. Here's the Ghandi wisdom quote below.


- - -
In a post-war interview in 1946, he said, "Hitler killed five million Jews. It is the greatest crime of our time. But the Jews should have offered themselves to the butcher’s knife. They should have thrown themselves into the sea from cliffs... It would have aroused the world and the people of Germany... As it is they succumbed anyway in their millions."[159] Gandhi believed this act of "collective suicide", in response to the Holocaust, "would have been heroism"
- - -

If you cannot see the flaw in his "feel sorry for me" philosophy, I cannot add further discussion.

When an aggressor has revealed himself (or her?) in a wilderness mugging, home invasion, or hiker rape, drug farm protection, they are beyond the point of sweet talking them into a compromise - that happens in the movies. In real life - people go missing, then found dead.

Sure a less lethal approach is preferred. I have scared off a coyote pack and a black bear before, but I was prepared to respond in escalation if the animal threat was persistent. Humans on the other hands, can't be easily deterred with yelling "Go Away Bear"

Edited by RogerDodger on 02/22/2013 10:11:52 MST.

Diplomatic Mike
(MikefaeDundee)

Locale: Under a bush in Scotland
Ghandi on 02/22/2013 10:15:31 MST Print View

Sometimes i despair for the future of the human race.

Ben 2 World
(ben2world) - MLife

Locale: So Cal
Re: The Gandhi philosophy 1946 on 02/22/2013 10:37:48 MST Print View

"If you cannot see the flaw in his "feel sorry for me" philosophy, I cannot add further discussion."

I can. Much depends on what resources you have. As Americans, and the world's sole superpower, it would be ridiculous for us to "throw ourselves into the sea...". We prefer to 'nuke' our enemies instead -- because we can. And so you ridicule.

But if you are the puny underdog, "live free or die" often means die.

All of us can think of examples where brave defenses bore fruit. And there are also plenty of examples where brave defenses bore death and ultimate destruction. The peaceful resistance of the Balkan states won the people their independence. The fierce resistance of the Palestinians won them little sympathy but countless deaths and suffering -- and we're talking 60+ years of zero progress.

Not saying you are wrong -- because sometimes you are right. But only sometimes. By that, I mean your view about zero tolerance for oppression and tyranny... is too simplistic. Zero tolerance? Rarely are things in life ever so black and white. And it's too easy to subscribe to 'zero tolerance' when our country is the current top dog.

Ian B.
(IDBLOOM) - MLife

Locale: PNW
I've reconsidered my position on 02/22/2013 11:13:29 MST Print View

... and have decided to paint half my body blue, carry a Nerf Mace, and scream "THIS.... IS.... SPARTA!" randomly throughout the day (purposefully mixing historical events bastardized by Hollyweird.)

I think we can officially call this one a stalemate.

Happy trails all.

Roger Dodger
(RogerDodger) - F

Locale: Wess Siide
Re: Re: The Gandhi philosophy 1946 on 02/22/2013 11:28:12 MST Print View

Have you seen the size of India on a map? it's not puny. And it used to be even bigger prior to the Pakistan split.

The population of India is: 1.2 BILLION.
The population of the US is: 313 million.
The population of the UK is: 63 million.

India's population is 4 times that of the US.
India's population is 19 times that of the UK.

The land area of the US: 3.8 Million sq miles
The land area of India: 1.3 Million sq miles

India's land area is roughly 3 times smaller than the US.

So roughly 16:1 density. India is no puny country.

For perspective, and possibly humor, imagine you and your wife on a 2 seater couch in the US. If that love-seat 2-person couch represented India, it would have 32 people sitting on it.

When a nation is this dense in population - it is a super power. By population numbers alone they could have escorted the British out of the perimeter on day 1 of the occupation by swarm. 19:1 population ratio in favor of India. Instead that culture of submissiveness did them a huge disadvantage, and the Imperialism factor took advantage of that weakness.

Today - India has nuclear reactors, jet fighter planes and sattelites launched in orbit.

Like I said earlier, freedom and dignity is not for everyone. Given a choice to avoid a fight at no cost, that is the path of least resistance. But when a person or group sacrifice the dignity and safety of the people that depend on them - that is failing to be responsible.

Edited by RogerDodger on 02/22/2013 11:33:58 MST.

Ben 2 World
(ben2world) - MLife

Locale: So Cal
Re: Re: Re: The Gandhi philosophy 1946 on 02/22/2013 11:37:45 MST Print View

Again, overly simplistic in your analysis. It's seldom just population or land mass. It's whether the people are united or not. Back in Gandhi's time and before -- they weren't united. As well, the people were unarmed for all intent and purpose.

Cultural submissiveness? The various Indian kingdoms, nawabs, etc. did fight back. But they lost due to their vastly inferior armament. Would you ever consider Russians as culturally submissive? Methinks a final charge a la Churchill against the Mongols back in the 1300's would have meant annihilation. But they were smart enough to cater to their Mongol overlords for a couple of hundreds of years -- and fought back successfully when ready!

Finally -- you surely aren't arguing that "zero tolerance / armed resistance" is always the answer?? My point is simply this: there is no single solution that works every time. Much depends. If you cannot see the flaw in your "zero tolerance" philosophy, then using your own words, "I cannot add further discussion".

Edited by ben2world on 02/22/2013 11:47:20 MST.

Diplomatic Mike
(MikefaeDundee)

Locale: Under a bush in Scotland
Help on 02/22/2013 11:42:09 MST Print View

Britain had machine guns to help negotiations.
The US follows the same empire building model.
Economic 'aid' can be painful.

Roger Dodger
(RogerDodger) - F

Locale: Wess Siide
Re: Re: Re: Re: The Gandhi philosophy 1946 on 02/22/2013 12:12:57 MST Print View

Ben,
I read your comment and understand that many see "zero tolerance" to aggression as a fanatic extremist crazy talk to be discounted.

I repeat I always favor avoiding conflict when possible. However I maintain the Zebra versus the Mule analogy. The zebra is cost prohibitive to tame.

It's always emotionally disconnected and mathematically doable to justify headcount under oppression, and quantify numerically the quality of life under foreign occupation.

when it happens to someone you don't know, its just "whatever" rationalize in a variety of ways, media hype, denial, saying that there are two sides to every story, all that funny talk. Then it happens to many people you know, and the reality is clear.

Example: someone somewhere in the world gets abused. it's "whatever" but your journalist neighbor is found dead in a ditch after apparent heavy interrogation - that is real to you.

I recall a silly Far Side cartoon... Had Noah been truly wise, he would have swatted that mosquito as soon as it boarded his arc.

African Slavery started with one boat, 400 years later and countless generations and lives ruined. Same with Hitler... of course hindsight is perfect vision, stop that first Nazi mosquito (zero tolerance) before it grows into a swarm.

Daniel Fish
(daniel@fishfamilypdx.com)

Locale: PDX
... on 02/22/2013 12:14:18 MST Print View

...

Edited by daniel@fishfamilypdx.com on 06/12/2013 00:15:28 MDT.

Peter Evans
(NLslacker)
What a trainwreck this thread is... on 02/22/2013 12:33:10 MST Print View

This forum needs some active mods... This is supposed to be the gear section of an ultralight backpacking forum.
I feel I've wandered onto some militant racist survivalist forum.

As a paying customer I'm sad to see it. Just my opinion.
YMMV
NLslacker

Roger Dodger
(RogerDodger) - F

Locale: Wess Siide
Re: Solo Self Defense: Big Honkin Knife? on 02/22/2013 12:44:42 MST Print View

Daniel,

the disadvantage of a knife is that it requires arms length proximity, which is already too close against an adversary animal or human. For comedy, please refer to the Michael Jackson music video "beat it" or west side story, street gang knife fight. Knife fight does not protect against multiple assailants.

How can an aggressor disarm you of a firearm when they are 15 ft away? A knife however is only functional at point blank, in which you could be disarmed of it.

in case of a bear attack, unless you are Jules Vernes' fictional character Michael Strogoff, I don't think we have the skill to stab an attacking bear or cougar... and if you do... bear will be very upset. with you. may be John Rambo can in a movie, but not us trail hiker types.

For bear - pepper spray will give you a better chance, than hand to claws (?) knife combat with a bear. A cougar will stalk and jump you from behind silently and slice your jugular and drag you by the neck before you could hear the twigs and leaves rustle. Watch National Geographic channel, see how the cougars strike their prey with speed and accuracy.

I'm sure to many I sound like a lunatic or keyboard commando, but I'm seriously a wimp when it comes to mountain lion territory after a few attacks on bicyclists and hikers in the SoCal area in the past few years. Those deep woods isolated areas I don't go solo. No reflex or arsenal can outwit a stalking cougar.

Edited by RogerDodger on 02/22/2013 13:05:55 MST.

Katharina ....
(Kat_P) - MLife

Locale: Pacific Coast
Re: What a trainwreck this thread is... on 02/22/2013 12:48:20 MST Print View

As a paying member you can be your own mod and just skip the threads that you don't want to read; I certainly do that myself.
To request that a thread be moderated just because it makes you uncomfortable isn't really a long term solution. At least here things get discussed . Uncomfortable at times, but healthier in the long run.

Stephen M
(stephenm) - MLife

Locale: The Great Lakes Bay Region
Re: Re: What a trainwreck this thread is... on 02/22/2013 12:56:31 MST Print View

I hear you Kat.

David Olsen
(oware)

Locale: Steptoe Butte
cougar wrestler on 02/22/2013 14:18:10 MST Print View

"A former college wrestler fended off a cougar attack on a popular hiking trail in Olympic National Park by locking his legs around the animal and squeezing its throat with his hands. Phil Anderson survived the attack Friday afternoon even though he could not choke the young, 80-pound cougar into unconsciousness. "I couldn't quite get my hands around his neck to shut off his esophagus. I could see in his eyes he was going in and out. He was right on the verge of passing out, but his neck was way too muscular,"

http://community.seattletimes.nwsource.com/archive/?date=19960527&slug=2331443

I wonder if he was from WSU? Go cougs!

Roger Dodger
(RogerDodger) - F

Locale: Wess Siide
Re: cougar wrestler on 02/22/2013 15:53:33 MST Print View

David,
Thank you for the link to the article. A young cat half the weight of the muscular human wrestler, and still put up a strong attack and damage. Most would not have a chance against a mature adult cat in full weight and experienced hunting skills.

Ian B.
(IDBLOOM) - MLife

Locale: PNW
Re: cougar wrestler on 02/22/2013 15:54:58 MST Print View

Turns out the assailant is a low down no good Husky and Butch has filed a restraining order.Go Cougs

Oh yeah.... GO COUGS!

Daniel Fish
(daniel@fishfamilypdx.com)

Locale: PDX
... on 02/22/2013 22:00:07 MST Print View

...

Edited by daniel@fishfamilypdx.com on 06/12/2013 00:16:12 MDT.

Dirk R
(Dirk)
Re: Solo Wilderness Security on 02/23/2013 22:43:27 MST Print View

Daniel:

Thanks for the video, it brought some needed levity to this thread. After the crass, indefensible remark comparing Gandhi to a mule, the video and Ian's WSU Cougar photo at least made me smile.

Dirk

Matthew Hoskin
(mattgugel)

Locale: Kanangra-Boyd NP
Wilderness Security on 02/23/2013 23:29:29 MST Print View

Thankfully, here in Australia we don't need to carry an assault rifle ( either in the city or out in the bush). My biggest worry is ticks, stinging nettles, and the Dropbears!.

Roger Caffin
(rcaffin) - BPL Staff - MLife

Locale: Wollemi & Kosciusko NPs, Europe
Re: Wilderness Security on 02/24/2013 02:22:12 MST Print View

> biggest worry is ticks, stinging nettles, and the Dropbears!.
Also leeches, Bunyips, Drongobirds, and members of the Shooters Party.

Cheers

Travis Leanna
(T.L.) - MLife

Locale: Wisconsin
Re: Re: Wilderness Security on 02/24/2013 02:28:14 MST Print View

Crazy Aussies!

Roger Dodger
(RogerDodger) - F

Locale: Wess Siide
[..] on 02/24/2013 12:05:48 MST Print View

[..]

Edited by RogerDodger on 05/08/2014 00:56:11 MDT.

Ozzy McKinney
(PorcupinePhobia) - F

Locale: PNW
Aussies... on 02/24/2013 13:36:53 MST Print View

I'll admit to googling: bunyips, dropbears (which sound terrifying!), drongobirds, and Shooters Party.

None of the above were included in my only reference to Australia, Brysons "In a Sunburned Country"

Jason Elsworth
(jephoto) - M

Locale: New Zealand
Solo Wilderness Security on 02/24/2013 15:43:12 MST Print View

Here's one perspective on the Australia gun control issue.

http://theconversation.edu.au/faking-waves-how-the-nra-and-pro-gun-americans-abuse-australian-crime-stats-11678

Roger Dodger
(RogerDodger) - F

Locale: Wess Siide
[..] on 02/24/2013 15:53:09 MST Print View

[..]

Edited by RogerDodger on 05/08/2014 00:56:52 MDT.

Bob Bankhead
(wandering_bob) - MLife

Locale: Oregon, USA
Solo Wilderness Security on 02/24/2013 16:28:49 MST Print View

I was always told the most dangerous things in the Australian bush were the snakes. Supposedly some of the most venomous snake species in the world call Oz home.

Some suspect their introduction was a sneaky Kiwi terrorist attack.

Either way, that should teach you Cobbers not to irritate the Wicked Witch of the West.