| << . 1 . 2 . 3 . 4 . 5 . 6 . 7 . 8 . 9 . 10 . 11 . >> |
| Author |
Message |
Borrego
Member
|
# Posted: 12 Dec 2012 09:50pm
Reply
Quoting: Anonymous The more information you post the worse it gets. So your neighbor was in the area when you fired that shot. All those kids are adults with children they know who you are but you don't know who they are since you decided to shoot insted of talk to them. I can imagine the bad reputation you have with them.
Why don't people post their 'real' monickers? How many anonymous's do we have on here anyway? Can't you pick any name that fits better? Most forums do not allow this. Admin, police your site??? I just don't see calling people out when you can't man up enough to put yourself out there. IMO.
|
|
TomChum
Member
|
# Posted: 12 Dec 2012 10:45pm
Reply
Owen don't worry about Anon. I and most everyone else here would be lucky to have you as a neighbor!
|
|
EvoQ
Member
|
# Posted: 13 Dec 2012 06:27am
Reply
I would NEVER employ a Gun to settle a Dispute.
As a matter of Fact I walk away from every argument that get's heated to the point of raising voices. I feel at the point when someone starts to yell or get emotional then at that point all common-sense has left.
Emotions are What Get Most People into situations in the first place. I avoid at all costs any sort of conflict, it is not worth my life nor someone else's life just so that one of us can say they bested the other.
Pride is a Sin/Downfall, one the 7 Deadly Sins with Greed at the very Root or Top of the List. I have learned in my age that when Emotions appear then I disappear from the area.
To Me a Gun is a Tool to ONLY Defend oneself and Only in a purely Defensive manner. Nothing else should ever be considered in any situation.
The key is to Never let a Situation Escalate; in that it is best to do whatever necessary to De-Escalate that situation.
If it means backing down with your tail between your legs then so be it. I am not going to harm someone or have they harm me or mine over some silly childish Pride Battle, with whom has the Bigger Pen!s.
My Grandfather taught me at a Very Young Age to Work/Use my Head/Mind/brain in ever facet of my life.
"Son; Work Smart, Not Hard 100% of the time"
I'll take Common sense any day of the Week and I might add taking a Gun to a disagreement is NOT Common Sense at all, Far/far from it IMHOpinion.
|
|
OwenChristensen
Member
|
# Posted: 13 Dec 2012 07:24am - Edited by: OwenChristensen
Reply
You see there's the real problem. I don't think of guns as protection at all. They're for hunting.
The original topic here was what do you use for protection at your cabin. At the cabin I don't need protection. I do carry a pistol at all times, but it's to shoot porcupines. Except for that one incident 35 years ago even my home is quite calm.
I understand some people here can get nervous and a weapon is their legal right. I was raised to respect others and my children were raised that way too. We would never be found in someone's backyard. We wouldn't be found entering someone's home, drunk or otherwise.
I guess there might be areas of a big city I'd feel uncomfortable, but I don't go there. If I did maybe I'd feel better armed.
|
|
Anonymous
|
# Posted: 13 Dec 2012 10:55am
Reply
Really hate to hijack the subject, but here's food for thought.
Imagine a brawl in the bar or a confrontation between neighbors:
- Scenario A) No guns in the country. Worst case - a blue eye and a broken rib
- Scenario B) Everyone has guns. Worst case - dead people, shot in a moment of anger
What guns do, they elevate the level of conflict consequences, to the ultimate lethal end.
Anyway, let's don't make this tread and forum a debate on gun ownership - it's an ideological issue, everyone has an opinion.
So back to the subject - protection at the cabin.
What if there is a real threat from bears, wild dogs, or just drunk idiots - assuming guns are not the solution, then what is? That is the question.
Perhaps, a bear pepper spray?
|
|
Dillio187
Member
|
# Posted: 13 Dec 2012 11:06am
Reply
really?
kung fu?
|
|
Anonymous
|
# Posted: 13 Dec 2012 11:13am
Reply
Maybe.
Neighbor kung fu vs. you kung fu. Consequence? A blue eye and a broken rib.
Now give you and your neighbor a gun. Consequence? At least one is dead, another in prison, family tragedies on both sides.
What scenario do you choose?
|
|
EvoQ
Member
|
# Posted: 13 Dec 2012 11:43am - Edited by: EvoQ
Reply
I have posted all along that a Large Dog I consider as a Must Have for living out in the wilds. Now my idea of wilds is at least a 30 minute drive back to civilization. Wilds also would be where a Bear could maul or eat me. The cabin down on the river where I can wave to my neighbor is a Totally Different scenario and one where a Gun would be the absolute Last Thing I would consider for Protection.
I'll say it again a Gun is the Absolute Last Ditch tool I would use.
A Large Dog would most likely scare most people away and a Large Dog too would more than likely scare away most large Mammals(Bear Mnt.Lion,etc.)
And when I say Large Dog I don't mean some 30 lb Dog either. My Great Pyrenees weighs in at 130lbs and being a female she is slightly smaller than Males. I lost my Male Pyrenees last year of old age (17yrs)and he was at his prime at 160lbs. I have seen photos from Norway where Great Pyrenees fighting off Very Large Grizzly Bears.
Here is also a very good multi event account of Great Pyrenees fighting off Grizzlies and other Large Predators.
Link Here
I know I am Biased; but these Great Pyrenees are the best Dogs one can have in a cabin in the back woods. They Love people, are wonderful with children, a true family dog, but then again they are working dogs. Bred for the Mountains to protect the fortresses in the Pyrenees Mountains of France/Spain. My Great Pyrs have been both beautiful, wonderful companions but also Highly Protective.
You would never guess such a Sweet and Loving Animal could go at it and Protect your Family at all costs like these dogs can and will do.
|
|
|
Dillio187
Member
|
# Posted: 13 Dec 2012 12:04pm - Edited by: Dillio187
Reply
Quoting: Anonymous Maybe. Neighbor kung fu vs. you kung fu. Consequence? A blue eye and a broken rib. Now give you and your neighbor a gun. Consequence? At least one is dead, another in prison, family tragedies on both sides. What scenario do you choose?
how about a neighbor that knows kung fu trying to rape my wife? Now, give my wife a gun. One less slime ball in this world.
Your argument is full of holes. I find it hard to take someone seriously who won't even register for the forum to post their opinions, so I'm left to assume you're just a troll hiding behind a keyboard.
|
|
wakeslayer
Member
|
# Posted: 13 Dec 2012 12:20pm
Reply
I struggle with the ANON posting on here. I get it if you forget your login, and I have seen people say so, but say who they are. When it is used as a shield, I think it is silly. If you have a conviction, it is yours, and you should not be afraid of your own thinking.
With respect to Oregon's mall incident, the problem is that no one was prepared to address the situation on the spot. The kid who was the shooter was likely a legal owner and passed the requirements to be so. I can spout all the pro rhetoric that everyone does, but at the end of the day, one person could possibly have neutralized him in moments, and prevented one or more deaths and injury to innocent people.
I think bashing Owen for something 35 years ago is stupid. It was 35 years ago. Times were different, politics are different. Obviously, there was a perceived threat, as he had company on patrol.
We can all agree to disagree, but, I know where I stand, and am not going to change my position any time soon on the subject.
|
|
wakeslayer
Member
|
# Posted: 13 Dec 2012 12:25pm
Reply
Quoting: Dillio187 how about a neighbor that knows kung fu trying to rape my wife? Now, give my wife a gun. One less slime ball in this world.
Why my wife is prepared at all times.
|
|
PA_Bound
Member
|
# Posted: 13 Dec 2012 12:38pm
Reply
[Quoting: Dillio187 how about a neighbor that knows kung fu trying to rape my wife? Now, give my wife a gun. One less slime ball in this world.
Anon... this is where your argument falls apart. A neighbor, whether he knows kung-fu or not, is not likely to take me on (6'4"x 250lbs)- so I'm not worried about that. My 5'1"x120 wife or, even more likely my 15yo daughter, is a different consideration. When they're around... I carry. End of story.
|
|
TomChum
Member
|
# Posted: 13 Dec 2012 12:49pm - Edited by: TomChum
Reply
Quoting: wakeslayer We can all agree to disagree, but, I know where I stand, and am not going to change my position any time soon on the subject.
Yes Mike the gun dispute is a tough one for sure. If gasoline were just discovered yesterday, do you think they'd let anyone handle it at all? Such as a pimply kid at the mini-mart? Everything has its perspective for sure.
Worry does shorten your life, and does reduce your satisfaction. If you worry a lot that other people are going to harm you; you will shorten your life. Some people feel that a gun actually lessens their worries, but by what they talk about; it's clear they carry much more worry than other people. Just listen a bit, they trade these worries with their friends, then the friends go repeating 2nd, 3rd, 4th and nth-hand worries on and on and on until you think North America is practically a war zone. North America is not that bad. If it was that bad there would be no life-insurance salesmen. The safer society is, the more life insurance salesmen there are because they KNOW the numbers.
With regards to guns, I just like to shoot stuff, I can't imagine actually protecting myself with it, I've never needed to in 50+ years, and the times maybe I could have used it, I'm certain it's better there was no gun around.
=================
Regarding dogs at the cabin. Not a MUST have for me. Guests often bring a dog. I enjoy the companionship of a friendly dog too, but not so unconditionally  . I love being around my kids though, which dog-folk might consider to be about the same scenario.
Here's the stuff I like.
1) That my city-guests can let some dogs run around without a leash. The person is 'free' somewhat, for small portions of time.
2) I like it that the kids can go off with the dog, for the protection a dog would provide (make a big fuss if cougars come around).
It's not my preference to entertain dogs, but so many people have them it's either endure the dogs or endure the solitude (= no guests!). Dogs definitely change the scene, for sure it's not as peaceful.
1) They chase away all the wildlife that I very much enjoy coming around
2) They dig holes, churn my firm, pine-needle covered woodland 'yard' into dust that is now loose and blows around the rest of the summer. Until my pine-needle carpet returns, its mud when wet.
3) If there were any wildlife footprints to be seen, which I enjoy finding, they are now obliterated by dog footprints, for weeks to come.
4) We can't leave the dog tied up and go for a dirtbike ride
5) Dogs get pissed off when tied up at an unfamiliar area and chew stuff up like the boards on my cabin porch.
Anyway having a dog doesn't really work for me but I understand a lot of folks like them. The protection is true but at a cost like everything.
|
|
Anonymous
|
# Posted: 13 Dec 2012 02:02pm
Reply
If you ever need to use your weapon to protect your family or yourself you won't have much time to react. If you kill someone defending yourself depending upon the state you live in you may spend the night in jail. Will need to hire a lawyer and go to court. The family of the "victim" will sue you for wrongful death. So you better make sure you can prove your life was at risk before you kill another person. It will cost you tens of thousands of dollars to clear your name. I learned all of this in a class that was required before I could get my permit to carry. It was taught by a ex police officer that had seen this senerio happen to countless people defending themselves.
|
|
Scott_T
Member
|
# Posted: 13 Dec 2012 02:04pm
Reply
Quoting: Malamute The majority of "accidental" deaths I've heard of are actually negligent discharges.
Probability and Statistics. Possession of gun means increased risk of accident or negligent discharge. No gun=no accident. I think the equation is that simple.
I own firearms and accept the risks. Taking them for granted or neglecting to keep them out of reach of children is a recipe for disaster.
|
|
MtnDon
Member
|
# Posted: 13 Dec 2012 02:25pm
Reply
Quoting: Anonymous Perhaps, a bear pepper spray?
bear spray can work on bears . Would be very effective on people, but that use is illegal.
At times it is difficult to keep those living in the USA separate from other countries with more restrictive laws. I think that is important as the rules are very different on gun ownership from country to country. Also quite different state to state and even city by city.
Not every state allows open carry. Mine does. The simple fact that anyone can see a handgun on my belt is a huge deterrent. Better than concealed carry in many ways.
Dogs: I like dogs in general. I used to own one, had her from a pup to her death as a 13 year old. I'd like another at times. But they also don't fit well into many aspects of our life at present. So no dog(s) for us.
Worry or any emotional stress shortens your life. Of that I am convinced. I don't worry much, am much more relaxed than when I worked in the world of large corporations.
Anon: I really don't understand most of the folks who "hide" behind anonymity. We don't have to give real names. It is so easy to register a new name if one forgets their old password. All that is needed is another email address and those are a dime a dozen, or free. At times I think we should all try our best to not even acknowledge the presence of ANON. Hard to do though when ANON frequently make controversial posts.
|
|
wakeslayer
Member
|
# Posted: 13 Dec 2012 02:35pm - Edited by: wakeslayer
Reply
Where is the line supposed to be drawn on who can and who cannot purchase, possess, shoot, and carry a weapon?
I don't have an abnormal worry about anything.
It is legal to have what I have, and to do what I do with them. I am a law abiding, level headed citizen. I have been trained by my father since I was a child on safety and skill, taken and passed the required courses, and had the local sheriff sign off. I obey local laws here in MN, Idaho, and other states I travel to. Regardless of my opinion of say, Illinois' laws, I follow them. I am aware of the consequences surrounding any incident that could occur. I am also acutely aware of the consequences of not being able to do anything to protect myself or my loved ones.
I do not have an expectation of being robbed, stabbed, assaulted, shot, or anything. Nor did the people at the mall in OR. Or the people at Gabby Giffords meet and greet.
This stuff doesn't not happen.
|
|
Anonymous
|
# Posted: 13 Dec 2012 07:21pm
Reply
Reguarding Anon posters. Some of us like to remain Anon. We have our reasons. Many famous authors in history have made the choice to remain Anon. Does this mean you refuse to read their work? IMO we are all Anon on here since the names are made up you are just as Anon as I am.
|
|
Thunder9
Member
|
# Posted: 13 Dec 2012 07:24pm
Reply
Bingo! I couldn't have stated it any better wakeslayer.
|
|
Thunder9
Member
|
# Posted: 13 Dec 2012 07:36pm
Reply
My carry piece is a Bersa Thunder 9 Ultra Compact. When wearing casual attire or a suite as required for my employment I switch to my Bersa 380 Thunder.
|
|
Anonymous
|
# Posted: 13 Dec 2012 07:38pm
Reply
Those two places you mention and many other places where there are large gatherings prohibit the possession of concealed weapons. So many people on this site are nonchalance about protecting themselves with weapons. Yes you can do everything to the letter of the law (defending yourself)but when you kill someone with a gun you will have consequences to pay.
|
|
MtnDon
Member
|
# Posted: 13 Dec 2012 08:30pm
Reply
Quoting: Anonymous Many famous authors in history have made the choice to remain Anon.
Wrong. They use pen names, which is exactly what myself and everyone else who does not use anonymous is doing.
|
|
OwenChristensen
Member
|
# Posted: 13 Dec 2012 08:31pm - Edited by: OwenChristensen
Reply
Two men with guns don't argue. They are polite.
|
|
Dillio187
Member
|
# Posted: 13 Dec 2012 08:37pm
Reply
I'd rather be judged by 12 than carried by 6.
|
|
Malamute
Member
|
# Posted: 13 Dec 2012 10:46pm - Edited by: Malamute
Reply
Quoting: wakeslayer ....Where is the line supposed to be drawn on who can and who cannot purchase, possess, shoot, and carry a weapon?....
Good question. When bad things happen, there's often a public outcry "We need to DO something!!"
Well, we already have a lot of laws about guns, and laws about murder. Those that choose to break the laws, then the laws have little effect on the, the laws only affect those that choose to obey them. Make lwas against guns, and people that want them will still be able to (if you dont agree with that, how have the laws against drugs worked out?). The honest ones obeying the laws will be disarmed, the criminals and murderers will find ways to get them.
The inevitable comments that come up in public media tend to sound like "Be reasonable, lets TALK about this, there has to be discussion". The "discussion" means, if you won't give us what we want (more restrictions on guns), you are unreasonable. It's political doublespeak, and is dishonest at best.
The bottom line is, we live in the most free country on earth, and along with that frredom comes risk. The price of freedom isn't a risk free life, freedom is messy at times, in many ways. Sadly, one of the ways is irresponsible, criminally minded, and mentally unstable peole do bad things at times, but restricting honest citizens because of what bad people may or may not do is entirely against what this country was built on. It amounts to thought crimes, and assuming many are guilty for the sins of a few.
From a recent post on Tamaras blog (Books, Bikes and Boomsticks, or View From The Porch):
"In this country, we have lots and lots of three things:
1. Guns
2. Stores
3. Crazy People
As long as those elements are around, every now and again, a 3 is going to carry a 1 into a 2 and open fire. Freedom is dangerous. You can take away the freedom and reduce the danger (although never eliminate it) or you can just accept that these things happen and conduct your life accordingly."
I agree with her perspective, and that part of the price of freedom is dealing with unplesant side effects, but I woudnt have it any other way. People say things I don't agree with, but I in no way want to restrict them in what they say. Harry Bellefonte just said in an interview that since the pres just got reelected, it was an obvious consensus, and anyone critisizing him should just be put in jail. Really? Sorry, but part of the price of freedom is that people say things we don't agree with, but it's a right they have to say it. Same with nazis. I don't agree with them, but wont try to silence them, or agree with a law to silence them, because it could be me thats silenced next. I'm truly sorry a nut went and murdered people at a mall or anywhere else (BTW, he stole the gun), but taking my or other law abiding citizens guns away won't stop it from happening again, and I shouldn't have to pay the price for someone elses crime.
When one person or group gets to decide who can or can't have guns, or what kind (or simply say nobody can so bad people supposedly cant have them), or say who can speak or what they can say, then the system is broken, and needs to be put back on track. One persons "common sense laws" are their opinion, and may not be my idea of "common sense laws in at all. When in doubt, the wisdom of the constitution and those that wrote it must take precedence. They were pretty smart, and their desire to have freedom above control and the illusion of state controlled "safety" and "order" is to be admired for their ability to see the desire of some to always tell others what to do and think. It seems things haven't changed much since they laid the foundations of this country.
I too am baffled at the abilty to post "anonymously". You never can tell if its even the same person, it could well be any number of people posting. Yes, screen names are anonymous, but not so vague as the anonymous named posts. I believe to most of us, it seems hard to relate (as in take their posts very seriously) to one that won't even take a screen name, and says they are too afraid of people online to take a screen name. Wow. Just. Wow.
|
|
EvoQ
Member
|
# Posted: 13 Dec 2012 11:27pm
Reply
There's too much NEED to prove they are right and the other is wrong. Agree to disagree and also admit that currently in this country there is way too much animosity. Lower the threshold down a few notches and everyone will be better off from that.
Points that are Very Important in Where Your Cabin is.
#1. Are there Regularly visits by Black Bear, Grizzly Bear, Mnt Lion, Coyotes?
#2. Are You alone when you are at your Cabin ?
#3. Are You far far away from civilization.
#4. What is the threat Level at your Cabin? (prob most important and only factor in your decision to carry Gun or have very Large Dog with you at all times)
The Original Post needs to be Qualified to fit in with each individuals..Needs...
The particular Threat scenario does not fit every one, so consequently each individual will have their own Needs in being able to properly defend themselves at their prospective Cabin locations.
My Location is Far Far out and away from civilization, the threat level from Large Mammals is very high, so consequently I have both a Gun on hip and also my very Large Dog. My Dog is also very highly trained to stay nearby, not to run ramshackle around the property but to stay close and to constantly on lookout at all times. I am sure that your threat scenario is quite different than mine and I appreciate your needs and how yo go about defending your property and yourself and loved ones.
|
|
OwenChristensen
Member
|
# Posted: 14 Dec 2012 07:56am - Edited by: OwenChristensen
Reply
My place is deep, deep in the woods also. No real threat. We only have black bears. They are no problem, they run fast when they see us. From what I hear brown bears are a different story. I have dogs but I hate to bring them. I don't want to keep the wildlife away. The dogs don't belong there. There are no human threats either. If I was a bad guy poking around I'd be afraid to enter this guys property. You have to remember thieves are some of the timid. Humans with guns have made most large predators gun shy. If it wasn't for guns a wolf would run right up and take a bite out of you, and thieves would do the same.
Owen
|
|
wakeslayer
Member
|
# Posted: 14 Dec 2012 10:29am
Reply
Quoting: Anonymous Those two places you mention and many other places where there are large gatherings prohibit the possession of concealed weapons. So many people on this site are nonchalance about protecting themselves with weapons. Yes you can do everything to the letter of the law (defending yourself)but when you kill someone with a gun you will have consequences to pay.
<Sigh> I am not very familiar with OR laws, and am somewhat familiar with AZ's. I seriously doubt either place prohibited concealed carry. In general, court houses, county state and federal offices, universities, and hospitals are off limits. Things like NFL games, are determined more by the league than the locale. I study and know the laws of every state I visit. That is my responsibility.
There is absolutely nothing nonchalant about possessing or carrying a weapon. Period.
There are consequences to everything. I will take my chances here. I can't possibly know every scenario, or factor involved with people's thinking or actions. I have to rely on my own ability.
Anon in this case, is someone we probably know, and won't log in to this discussion with their screen name because it is a controversial topic. Same would be the case with abortion, elections, religion, etc.
Silly. Do you even know who you are? Do you keep mirrors in your house?
|
|
MtnDon
Member
|
# Posted: 14 Dec 2012 10:56am
Reply
Quoting: wakeslayer I seriously doubt either place prohibited concealed carry. In general, court houses, county state and federal offices, universities, and hospitals are off limits.
Each state has it's own laws, as well as the federal. It comes down to knowing your local laws as wakeslayer points out. Add to the variable list of no-no's are bars and package stores... and that can be confusing with some places yes to concealed or open and not the other.
Any privately owned business can also post signs in my state, NM as a notice that no firearms at all are allowed on premises. So you may find malls, etc with that prohibition. The thing is, it only works for law abiding people. ....
Chicago has had "no gun" laws on the books for a long time. And they have a high incidence of violence involving firearms.
|
|
wakeslayer
Member
|
# Posted: 14 Dec 2012 11:11am
Reply
Just as a side note. In the state of Minnesota, if you enter a business posted with a firearms prohibited sign, properly sized, contrasted, and placed, AND you refuse to leave after being asked, you will possibly be issued a $25 ticket for trespassing. Not much tooth to that law here. The fact is, police and people both want non-crazy, non-violent, capable people to be there waiting in the wings if something bad were to go down. It is filtering out who those people are that makes this difficult and controversial. Think about it. If there were some perfect means of sorting that out, EVERYONE would be for it, because there would be no risk. Back to Malamute's statements there...
Some businesses put up non-conforming signs to appease the anti folks because they don't know the difference. At a mall, for example, it would be difficult to prohibit carrying, because you have what, 100+ lessees with varying opinions. There is a lot of commerce on both sides of the fence here, and they want to please everyone and get all their money. In Moscow, ID, there is a restaurant that gives you a 10% off your bill if you are carrying.
My bank has no such posting. I asked about it once, and they would be glad you were there in the event something bad happened. Half the people there probably have guns either on their person or in their desk.
Chicago and IL gun laws are going to radically change in the next six months. In no small part due to the fact that Don states above.
|
|
| << . 1 . 2 . 3 . 4 . 5 . 6 . 7 . 8 . 9 . 10 . 11 . >> |
