Legit need for a gun as protection in the woods?

[Cpl Punishment]

Well, he use correct grammar. . .just a poor set of words.

Unless he meant to infer that if someone hasn't had to use a gun in the wilderness, then they have no need.

I don't think he meant that, so I didn't say anything about it until the issue came up.

 

[PayetteRucker]

Don's outlook pretty much mirrors mine to the T.

 

[Don Rearic]

I doubt the OP is one of the folks trying to impose things though.
Maybe he just chose an unfortunate word? Perhaps "real life use" would have worked better than "legitimate use".

Some words may be too loaded with associations to be used other ways, which is something I'll try to keep in mind for my own use of words...

I don't particularly think that the OP, "On The Edge" is out to ban guns or otherwise "control" them. A lot of people use the language that they have heard when it comes to some subjects. He chose an unfortunate word. Then again, perhaps he believes in gun ownership in the home only, not under the jacket or on the trail, one never knows until one is told.

I agree to the Nth, no if's or buts on that one, great point.:thumbup:

Apparently once in a while I get something right. Don't tell anyone...

 

[imaginefj]

I have never had to suffer through a housefire, but I have a fire extinguisher and a smoke detector. I have never suffered from carbon monoxide poisoning, but I have that detector as well. Anyone that cannot see the similarities is hopeless to preach to. If folks from other countries want to conduct themselves in certain ways, that's fine. It's when they tell us how violent we are and then try to tell us how we should defend ourselves, that's when I used to draw the line.

As of late, however, I don't much care to discuss such things in-depth. I have learned through extremely bitter experience that having logical, reasonable and intelligent debates with emotional people never goes anywhere but some place bad.

Me too...

 

[braillediver]

If I want to it’s “legitimate” enough for me- I don’t need a reason.

Here in Washington State we've had more than one apparently "random" killing on the local hiking trails. 2 women were shot dead just up from a trailhead 2-3 years ago. Combine that with the transients who live out in the woods around here = a “legitimate” reason to carry.

There was one guy who stopped to help some one who was stuck on a trail. On his way back he stopped to see if they got out and they killed him. Another guy helped some kids who had broken down out near Mt Pilchuck- they shot and killed him too.

 

[Don Rearic]

If I want to it’s “legitimate” enough for me- I don’t need a reason.

We have the benefit of not having to rely on or cite something so whimsical as a "want" or a "desire." We have a Right to be armed. Many of us are denied this Right by the very same people who speak eloquently about what they consider to be "Civil Rights" and "Human Rights." They are a stench and a pox on our country, to say the very least about them.

 

[Mitchell Knives]

I believe that you should always carry a firearm where ever you go. It's simply responsible behavior. It's not paranoia, it's being prepared. I can't imagine going through life unarmed.

There have been a few times when I was really glad to be carrying.

 

[on_the_edge]

Folks, I've been away since I originally posted and imagine my surprise at all the responses when I checked in. To those who might be questioning my motives here, there is nothing sinister going on. I am not advocating for taking/having/using or not taking/having/using a weapon while in the woods.

What made me think about the question in the first place is that I have a buddy who is taking a little tour of this country on his motorcycle. He does not have a gun with him, but that has not stopped him from camping just about anywhere he legally can, even though some places are clearly more dangerous than others. He has stayed in the backyards of people he just met, at rest stops, and done a bit of guerilla camping as well. Not once has he been put in a position where he felt like he needed a gun. He is almost five months into this journey of his and he has not encountered one bit of trouble from animals or humans.

As part of my job, I have to carry a gun. I am not in uniform and as such, look pretty much like the average "joe". I and my colleagues work on the 5th and 6th floors of a building in which, for a time, the entire first floor was a bank. Because we don't really advertise that we are in that building, a lot of folks don't really know it. Would it surprise anyone if I told you that over the course of approximately six years, there were several bank robberies at that first-floor bank?? I suspect not. But it might surprise some folks if I said that there are over 70 of us that work in that building and never once was one of us in or near that bank when it got held up. To me, that sounds crazy, but maybe it's not. Maybe the actual need to use a gun to protect oneself, wherever one might be, is more fiction than reality. Maybe...

And so that is why I asked. I'm almost 45 years old with nearly 20 years of law enforcement experience. I know that law enforcement folks need guns, but I can't think of too many stories where a gun actually saved someone (non-LEO) that I have been personally involved in. Sometimes, things are actually worse with the presence of a firearm than without. But again, I don't know everything and so thought i might ask a group of folks here who are mainly non-LEOs, but who might be in a position where they actually DID need a gun.

So, for all the stories you folks have related, thank you for those. I guess my buddy is probably more lucky than anything else doing what he is doing. Hopefully, the remaining 6 or 7 weeks of his journey will be as safe for him as the first several.

 

[fixer]

Folks, I've been away since I originally posted and imagine my surprise at all the responses when I checked in. To those who might be questioning my motives here, there is nothing sinister going on. I am not advocating for taking/having/using or not taking/having/using a weapon while in the woods.

i think what set some people off wha that the phrasing you used was re markedly similar to the way some of the antis demand gun owners to justify a "need" for the gun, or carrying the gun.

What made me think about the question in the first place is that I have a buddy who is taking a little tour of this country on his motorcycle. He does not have a gun with him, but that has not stopped him from camping just about anywhere he legally can, even though some places are clearly more dangerous than others. He has stayed in the backyards of people he just met, at rest stops, and done a bit of guerilla camping as well. Not once has he been put in a position where he felt like he needed a gun. He is almost five months into this journey of his and he has not encountered one bit of trouble from animals or humans.

well, had i known that before he left, i would have suggested he check out www.advrider.com for motorcycle adventure related stuff. most of the folks over there are good people, but some of the gun threads get a bit biased. frankly i'm somewhat surprised that everyone here has been civil and that common sense seems to be actually fairly common around here.

some people project confidence and remain aware of their surroundings. those people usually don't get targeted by predators. it's likely that your buddy is one of that type and the remainder of his journey will be peaceable. unfortunately, sometimes you just stumble into the wrong situation, or it stumbles into you and that can limit your options.

 

[Don Rearic]

There is absolutely nothing I could add to the OP's statement that would be productive at this point.

 

[Bigfattyt]

You usually don't hear about the incidents where a civilian carrying a gun and having cause to use it, unless some one gets shot.

I have never had to display a firearm in the woods.

I have twice in my own home. Dude tried to climb into my little sisters window when the folks were out of the country. He tried the front door, several windows, and when he tried the back door. He tried to force the door. I had a .30 carbine AMT pointed at his head when I flipped on the light. I was 16 years old at the time. The response time for police in my town is not too bad, but probably at least 10 minutes if I am lucky enough to have one close.

As a police officer, you might not have ever been mugged (I have by a group).

In bear/cougar country I do like having at least one item that goes bang, in a caliber sufficient to do the job.

Had a friend raped while her boyfriend had to watch. No gun there, but he could have shot the guy's head off at any point during the rape if he had had a gun. The guy had a dull little kitchen knife.

One thing I can say, is there is never a cop around when you will really need one. That is by definition. If the police were already there, you would not have needed them.

You can call, and hope they can catch whom ever kills you or a loved one, or be prepared.

If you look at the number of people killed in this country, and compare that with the number of police officers killed, you have a much much better chance of being killed or hurt as a citizen.

Growing up, I had at least 10 deaths within a block and 1/2 of my house. Family of 4 killed one block away with an axe. Guy chopped a hole in their front door, walked in and chopped them up with the axe. No guns in the house. It was a tweaker just trying to rob them.

That same dude would have made it just through the front door in my house before getting a clip dumped in him by my dad, and me on back up. I always had a gun in my room as well. I put it away every morning before school, in the safe.

I have had a drive by on my own house as a teenager. My older brother got messed up by a dude who sucker punched him. The police were right there. Had already warned the guy to go home, then drove around the corner. The fight was over by the time they made it back around the block.

Same guy came by the house later that night and did a drive by.

We went out and saw blood all over my brother's rig, and paired with the bullet hole, we were concerned.

I have been a prosecutor, and private criminal defense attorney, and public defender, so maybe I am just a bit more aware of crime than some.

I just had to chase a car full of guys out of my drive way the other night. Trust me, no one has a legitimate right to be in my driveway at 2 am taking pictures into the garage (I was up late, and had not locked the place up yet).


You might say, well, sure, in town, you might need your gun.

I would say that you will just as likely need it out where there is absolutely no one to help you.

A recent national story of a couple escaped convicts. They were in for homicide, broke out and killed some people to get their rig. They were finally caught in the boonies. They had been in Yellowstone Park. People to prey on, but not to many guns there. Most don't know that you can now carry in the National Parks again!

 

[Erasmus]

Well, in Southern California, it isn't "The Woods", so much as "The Desert".

We go about habitually in the desert countryside heavily armed, except for recently moved in naive noobs. People are very polite, the criminals are all cowards who are afraid to start something, cause it suddenly doesn't seem worth their life once they see the pistol on your hip, and the whole family shooting high powered rifles, kids and women included.

There isn't a doubt in my mind that opportunistic (car) thieves have taken a good look at us and said "screw it, nothing they've got is worth dying for." I believe that recreational drug use drives or motivates half the crime in this state.

That's all seems pretty intangible to me, till I remember the very few times I went out unarmed, and the S(nearly)HTF.

I'm usually polite, till someone makes the hair on the back of my neck stand up.

 

[Don Rearic]

One thing I can say, is there is never a cop around when you will really need one. That is by definition. If the police were already there, you would not have needed them.

You made many good points but this is the gem that so many seem to miss.

We have been sold a bill of goods that is false, if we have more police, we will be safer.

It really cranked up during one of the last Administrations when they wanted to ban guns and give us "100,000 more police officers on the street."

Now, more than ever, these folks are primarily concerned with revenue generation as counties, towns and small cities financially tank from the lost revenue of high property taxes as the cost of homes plummet.

It's not that police don't like busting a criminal who might be attacking you, but the administrators are going to have the focus of the department elsewhere because of political pressure from above.

To put a fine point on what you said - criminals go to great lengths to avoid police contact. They watch and surveil an area to see what is going on. Only the moron goes in with no plan and it is a total mistake to think that someone who is living a life of crime is simply a moron because you disagree with their life choices. Some of them are just as clever and crafty as they are potentially violent.

 

[Albin]

I've never had a house fire, but I have several CO and smoke detectors and about a half dozen or so fire extinguishers. Pretty much the same thing with guns.

 

[trukreltrog]

You usually don't hear about the incidents where a civilian carrying a gun and having cause to use it, unless some one gets shot.

I think the media largely ignores these kind of stories, most likely because of their anti-gun bias.

But, you do see the stories in some of the gun rags.

 

[Don Rearic]

I think the media largely ignores these kind of stories, most likely because of their anti-gun bias.

John Lott did an entire book on it, it does exist.

Most journalists never read past the First Amendment, apparently.

But, you do see the stories in some of the gun rags.

Been reading them for years in The American Rifleman. Grannies who wouldn't know who Jeff Cooper or Clint Smith was if they met them in a grocery store, blasting criminals with terrible old "Saturday Night Specials" that no self-respecting "tacticool" gun owner on forums would ever touch, let alone own.

 

[Cpl Punishment]

It always warms me heart when some 93 year old Granny guns down an animal coming to victimize her with her late husband's Combat Masterpiece, or some such.

 

[Zombie Zeke]

John Lott did an entire book on it, it does exist.

Most journalists never read past the First Amendment, apparently.



Been reading them for years in The American Rifleman. Grannies who wouldn't know who Jeff Cooper or Clint Smith was if they met them in a grocery store, blasting criminals with terrible old "Saturday Night Specials" that no self-respecting "tacticool" gun owner on forums would ever touch, let alone own.

This just in...Cooper asked god for a CCW, god says yes but makes it mandatory to carry a 1911, Coop obliges.

There is a second amendment? I didn't see that on CNN.

 

[Don Rearic]

It always warms me heart when some 93 year old Granny guns down an animal coming to victimize her with her late husband's Combat Masterpiece, or some such.

Hey! I have me a Model 15! That ain't no SNS! Or should I use the real inclusive anti-gun term for them? No...better not..people can only handle so much truth at one sitting...

 

[MarineAir]

You made many good points but this is the gem that so many seem to miss.

We have been sold a bill of goods that is false, if we have more police, we will be safer.

It really cranked up during one of the last Administrations when they wanted to ban guns and give us "100,000 more police officers on the street."

Now, more than ever, these folks are primarily concerned with revenue generation as counties, towns and small cities financially tank from the lost revenue of high property taxes as the cost of homes plummet.

It's not that police don't like busting a criminal who might be attacking you, but the administrators are going to have the focus of the department elsewhere because of political pressure from above.

To put a fine point on what you said - criminals go to great lengths to avoid police contact. They watch and surveil an area to see what is going on. Only the moron goes in with no plan and it is a total mistake to think that someone who is living a life of crime is simply a moron because you disagree with their life choices. Some of them are just as clever and crafty as they are potentially violent.

Reminds me of a funny quote that makes a good point. "I carry a gun because a Cop is too heavy"