Legit need for a gun as protection in the woods?

Don Rearic said:
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.
Click to expand...

Some great thoughts in this thread. Especially on the prices of the liberties we enjoy.

Keep in mind in-depth discussions that do not include insults and actually follow rules and not reporting things that the reporter is also guilty of doing minutes later are more than welcome. Has nothing to do with logic. Has everything to do with following some simple rules and guidelines instead of ignoring them. Most of the time each of us is 100% in control as to when something goes bad on a forum.
 
Once you experience a situation where a gun is needed/useful to defuse a situation or save someone, you will no longer question why. You still may not carry one all the time, but you understand the reality of why.

All one can hope is that someone does not look at the issue, and then find themselves thinking with their last thoughts -- huh, now why did I rationalize I would never NEED a gun again......
 
I am sure that many people have thought something quite similar to that in their last moments. Others were probably hopeful to the very end that the animal, two or four legged, was not going to actually kill them.
 
We unfortunates in CA, are repressed by many anti gun activists. Dianne Feinstein is one of the worst. Her claim to fame was having 2 of her fellow workers killed by Dan White. She has a CCW and bodyguards. She lives in an upscale neighborhood and feels that we shouldn't be able to protect ourselves. If she lived in some of the neighborhoods like we do, I guarantee she would look at things differently. CCW's are hard to get in California, if not impossible. Now she wants to add to an increasingly growing list of firearms that are illegal. What a POS!
 
I've just recently discovered that CCWs issued by other states are also not valid in CA. :thumbdn::grumpy:
 
I and my family have had several instances where guns were needed!

1) My dad, back in the early 70's was walking in the woods in the fall and ran into (almost literally) a black bear. The bear snarled and growled. My dad only had a wimpy (ok, lets not get all bent outta shape over that joke) 45, 1911 but he took it out and let off one warning shot and the bear decided he didn't like that racket, and took off hell bent for election.

2) On a camping trip when I was about 12, we were at a state park in northern MN and were sleeping in our camping trailer when a bunch of bikers pulled in crankin on their throttles at about 2 or 3 AM. My dad, back in the day, was a real hard-azz and took no sh*t from anyone... he got out of the camper with a lever action 30-30 and cranked off a round through the trees..... to catch their attention I guess. The decided to ride on and find another place. By the time his round went off, my uncle was also out of their camper with his Model 29 S&W ready to go. ha ha

3) My brother and I were small game hunting when a skunk came at my brother on a dead run... never saw that before! He must have been rabid.... anyway, 2 rounds from a 12 guage at WAY TO CLOSE range sent him on to the happy stinking grounds.

Let's put it this way... in the woods/nature, there is no reason not to be prepared. Sure, we hopefully/probably will never need it, but isn't it smarter to have it and not need it, than the other way around?

The way this world is now, it's nuts to go in the great outdoors without a gun.... no i'm not paranoid... why should I be, I have the gun! ha ha
 
I believe it was Maryland's AG who was asked by a reporter over this last summer, when speaking of gay marriage needing to be recognized in Maryland if it was passed in another State, "What about handgun carry permits from other States? Shouldn't they also be recognized by Maryland?" The reason it was asked was because they are comparing a gay marriage and the license obtained for it having to be recognized in other States as a Driver's License is recognized. The answer was a very fast, "No."

Being a control freak and a hypocrite goes hand in hand really.
 
Don Rearic said:
I believe it was Maryland's AG who was asked by a reporter over this last summer, when speaking of gay marriage needing to be recognized in Maryland if it was passed in another State, "What about handgun carry permits from other States? Shouldn't they also be recognized by Maryland?" The reason it was asked was because they are comparing a gay marriage and the license obtained for it having to be recognized in other States as a Driver's License is recognized. The answer was a very fast, "No."

Being a control freak and a hypocrite goes hand in hand really.
Click to expand...

Spot on as usual, Don.

If Los Angeles is supposedly the gang capital of the US, why don't you ever hear politicians refer to this as one of the biggest problems in our city/country? They resign themselves to accepting gangs having guns and cutbacks in law enforcement while taking away our 2nd amendment rights. I guess the only skill needed in the future will be to draw chalk lines at crime scenes.
 
Last edited:
Don Rearic said:
I believe it was Maryland's AG who was asked by a reporter over this last summer, when speaking of gay marriage needing to be recognized in Maryland if it was passed in another State, "What about handgun carry permits from other States? Shouldn't they also be recognized by Maryland?" The reason it was asked was because they are comparing a gay marriage and the license obtained for it having to be recognized in other States as a Driver's License is recognized. The answer was a very fast, "No."

Being a control freak and a hypocrite goes hand in hand really.
Click to expand...

Isn't that peachy? :thumbdn: Gotta love certain things about this state. :mad:
 
Well, the reporter just made a total ass out of the guy, you know? Showed him for what he was, a total hypocrite. Especially when you consider how many people are killed by careless or criminal drivers. If you honor a driver's license from another State with all of the deaths associated from motor vehicles and you eliminate all of the emotional arguments from it all, it's really not a big deal to accept out of State handgun permits, to honor them. The law here clearly states that a law enforcement officer passing through or sojourning in the State can carry without a Maryland permit. This is also something that Washington, D.C. does not allow for Maryland law enforcement officers who are visiting The District...but we allow D.C. officers to live and commute here on their D.C. credentials. How can the State be so sure that the training and safety standards for a police officer from a State that doesn't have a lot of funds for such things is going to be any safer than one of our own Citizens? It's not even anti-gun, it's anti-Citizen. Maryland allows it for police officers.

Basically, it's a mess. This State has everything! We have beautiful mountains, wonderful ocean and bayside beaches, swamps, flat woodlands and while there really are places that are more hostile to freedom...this place just isn't the Maryland that I grew up in.

After my Dad died in 1982, you could still walk up the street with a pump shotgun and disappear into the woods in Anne Arundel County. The police were smart enough to see that the action was open if you were smart enough to have it open and they would drive right past you, now that is a SWAT Call-out and, no, I really don't think we are "better off" for this and I don't think it is necessary at all.
 
Yes there is a realistic need for a gun in the woods , just take a real world scenario look at what has happened in the woods and then factor in the many incidents that go unreported for fear of being turned into the bad guy and there you go sorta like the grimm brothers without the fairies.
 
Don Rearic said:
Not allowed to disagree, so I won't.
Click to expand...

Not the case at all. Hurling insults detrimental to this community, trolling and childish reporting of posts is what what is frowned upon. Reasonable discussion and the handling of disagreements in a respectful adult manner is a great way to learn efficiently.
 
Bastid said:
Not the case at all. Hurling insults detrimental to this community, trolling and childish reporting of posts is what what is frowned upon. Reasonable discussion and the handling of disagreements in a respectful adult manner is a great way to learn efficiently.
Click to expand...

No, I was talking about disagreeing with you, Gus. People are not allowed to vehemently disagree with moderators, it's oftentimes referred to as "sassing a mod" now.

"Childish reporting of posts?" You have to be joking. That particular set of rules you are talking about are the ones I despise. Note: Not all rules, those rules. Why are they "childish?" Because I feel as though I am back in elementary school or junior or senior high school where you cannot defend yourself and have to run to a teacher and tattletale on someone else instead of just saying what had to be said or doing what had to be done. I paid the price for that behavior then and I do it now. In other words - all reporting of posts is "childish" because the rules state you have to act in a childish manner and tattletale on another person as if they were a child saying something that you didn't like on the playground.

When you reach adulthood, someone flips you the bird in traffic, you can do one of two things, you can throw them a bone right back at them or verbally hurl an insult or you can ignore them. What you do not do is call 911 and report them to the authorities because they were mean to you. This would be childish and this is why the rules are childish.

To be fair to you, I have been a moderator before and I don't think you can have "fair" rules when it comes to this but I certainly don't appreciate you and a couple others abusing your own privileges by basically insulting me. You break your own rules. If you don't like what I say, fine. If you don't like me, fine. If you don't like the fact that I don't respect this particular rule, that's fine, too. I'm not a troll, however. You were looking around to see what I have been writing, that's why you ended up in this thread outside of your basic area of interest. You're hunting. Then you quote me and drop a statement which is bait, which is also trolling.
 
To address the OP; all one has to do is google the carreer of serial killers like Gary Jilton, and the question should answer itself.

Then look up how many murders have taken place on the A.T.

Carl.
 
Uh Don.

Some actual facts for you to consider.

One, many times what you say is useful and correct. Many times what you say is insulting to others, escalates a bad situation and is a detriment to this community.

When you report a post and turn around and do the same exact thing as the poster you reported it is not what I would term adult behavior. It is the behavior of a childish nature.

That is what I am referring to when it comes to my use of the term "childish".

When a person continues bad behavior over and over and over again over a period of years they are a TROLL.

These are not just my opinions or the opions of a couple of people, they are the opinions of many including the owner of this site.

P.S. I do not have the time to hunt you.

As far as a couple of people.
Your infractions have come from Cougar Allen, Spark, myself, Glockman, Esav, Brian Jones and others. Just about the entire mod staff here. That is far more than a "couple of people" it is 8 people at least. You are not the victim Don no matter how you try to portray things.
 
Last edited:
I worry more about 2 legged threats than 4 legged. In a rural area, meth has become more of a problem since I was a kid. My dad works in the ag business and anhydrous ammonia is stolen by meth cooks on a regular basis. While out hunting, lots of people have found holes in the ground where makeshift meth kitchens have been set up. Guys out hiking have come across dome tents set up with meth kitchens still set up.

I don’t like the word paranoia when it pertains to firearms for personal defense. Am I paranoid because I carry emergency gear on day hikes? Firestarters, emergency shelter, etc? I mean the chances of having to use it are extremely low.

I have made carrying a firearm part of my daily life. It isn’t always comfortable, or easy and some times it can be a pain in the butt, literally and figuratively. With that said, the chances of ever needing it are almost non-existent, but the consequences of NOT having it when I need it are far greater.

Carry a firearm isn’t for everyone, but it is for me and my family.

I once read something like "I'm not worried about the guy out to get me, I'm worried about the guy out to get anybody."
 
Well, it's fairly simple, I cannot win so why fight a battle you cannot win? You have redefined what a "troll" is so you can call me a troll. Which is breaking your own rules against insulting people. So, whatever man. When I was a moderator here, that wasn't what a troll was at all. So, again, carry on. The show runner defines what things are and you have done so. So be it.
 
Legit need for a fire extinguisher in your kitchen thread....

I mean really how many people do you know who have had to use an extinguisher in their house???

Doesn't keep me from having two fire extinguishers in my house and whether or not my need is "legit" it doesn't keep me from carrying 24X7.

If I carry or not it doesn't affect you unless you pose a threat of death or serious bodily harm to me or mine while I am in public or you threaten me or mine in any way while I am on my property.
 
No argument here. I am just discussing actual facts and obvious long term behavior which has racked up infractions from many mods.

If you chose not to call that behavior trollish that's OK. The rest of us know exactly what it is. We have seen it too many times.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top