Boondocking safety-Are you armed?

Sweet! Eight pages and we are still on. Interesting, the antgunners will never convince the progunners and visa versa. I carry whether you like it or not, you'll never know I have one but you better pray that when you are in a really bad situation someone is nearby and willing to help. Help could involve a firearm, not necessarily. But if a firearm is required you'll be thankful the armed citizen was willing to help. No law says he has to. As my neighbor in my sticks and bricks neighborhood who knows I carry and knows my house is stocked well asked, "if I'm in trouble over here will you come and help?" My answer, "I'd call 911" , but he says "that will take about 10 minutes for the police to arrive", "sorry why don't you get a weapon for your families safety", " no way I would never own a gun". There you go, I hear that quite often. I refuse to be a victim.

What has this got to do with boondocking?

LenSatic wrote:
I spent 3 years in the US Army Infantry during the Viet Nam war . . . and never fired my weapon except at the range. But I never want to be in the position Suzanna Hupp found herself in:

Hupp and her parents were having lunch at the Luby's Cafeteria in Killeen in 1991 when a mass shooting took place. The gunman, George Hennard, shot 44 people in all, killing 24 of them, including himself. The fatally wounded included both of Hupp's parents. Hupp later expressed regret about deciding to remove her gun from her purse and lock it in her car, lest she risk possibly running afoul of the state's concealed weapons laws; during the shootings, she reached for her weapon but then remembered that it was "a hundred feet away in my car." Her father, Al Gratia, feeling he "needed to do something", tried to rush the gunman and was fatally shot in the chest instead. Hupp, eventually seeing an escape through a broken window (broken by the shoulder of another fleeing victim), grabbed her mother by the shirt telling her "Come on, we have to go now!" As Hupp moved toward the only escape, she believed her mother to be following her, only to find out later that Ursula had also been killed.

LS

I spent 3 years in the US Army Infantry during the Viet Nam war . . . and never fired my weapon except at the range. But I never want to be in the position Suzanna Hupp found herself in:

Hupp and her parents were having lunch at the Luby's Cafeteria in Killeen in 1991 when a mass shooting took place. The gunman, George Hennard, shot 44 people in all, killing 24 of them, including himself. The fatally wounded included both of Hupp's parents. Hupp later expressed regret about deciding to remove her gun from her purse and lock it in her car, lest she risk possibly running afoul of the state's concealed weapons laws; during the shootings, she reached for her weapon but then remembered that it was "a hundred feet away in my car." Her father, Al Gratia, feeling he "needed to do something", tried to rush the gunman and was fatally shot in the chest instead. Hupp, eventually seeing an escape through a broken window (broken by the shoulder of another fleeing victim), grabbed her mother by the shirt telling her "Come on, we have to go now!" As Hupp moved toward the only escape, she believed her mother to be following her, only to find out later that Ursula had also been killed.

LS

rjxj wrote:

toedtoes wrote:

rjxj wrote:
They never seem to like the idea but my best recommendation for those who dont like guns is to post it on the front of their homes and RV's "No guns in here". You know, sort of like those very safe gun free zones.

You say that's your "best recommendation". Recommendation for what? What purpose does that serve other than to continue to break down civilized discussion.

Do you have a sign on your house or RV saying NO GUNS IN HERE? It's a yes or no question.

That's not what you said before - you said you recommend that people post a sign, not asking if they do.

To answer your question, no I do not. I also don't post "I don't have any knives", "I have money", "I took self defense courses","beware of dogs", and so on. I don't post signs on my house or Rv period. I don't post such a sign because I'm afraid I'll be a target, I just don't post signs. I don't even have a welcome sign or my name on the mailbox. Why would I? What does it have to do with whether one chooses to carry a weapon when boondocking?

And why get upset with someone who has stated she doesn't care if you choose to carry a gun, but she chooses not to do so and chooses not to let them in her home? I'm not infringing on anyone's rights - I'm just asking others to not infringe on mine.

The only gun regulations I'd like to see is registration (so a gun used in a crime can be used to assist in the arrest of the perpetrator), penalties for those who buy guns for someone who can't qualify to buy one themselves (same with buying alcohol for minors), and required courses. Nothing in my stand suggests taking away anyone's guns just because I don't personally like them.

But this is where the discussion dies every time. Everyone gets defensive and then it resorts to "you're trying to take away my rights" and "no one should have a gun". I had a relative tell me that banning lakes and rivers is the same as banning guns - they both can kill people. That type of argument does no one any good. One can't walk into a school with a lake in their pocket and kill grade schoolers. On the flip side, the argument "guns are evil" is just as lame. The gun was the tool used, it was the person to blame. And that's my stand - there are certain people who should not be allowed to have guns - several in my own family (I've seen their trigger finger and their unsafe handling of guns and they are a greater risk to me than some stranger in the forest).

To a large extent you are right Don. And yes cities are the high liklihood areas, but as everything from coyotes and mules find more remote transport routes, Home cookers look for hidden production locations, and in general gangs move from the bigger cities to the smaller towns, all of those types of encounters go up. I'm already 60, so I dont need too many more years of being left alone, but as each year goes by, getting that "alone" gets tougher.

The USA has a problem with guns. I don't know the solution--but what is being done now certainly is NOT working.

https://www.nytimes.com/2016/06/14/upshot/compare-these-gun-death-rates-the-us-is-in-a-different-world.html

A scatter graph of the over 45,000 incidents (so far in 2017) including over 11000 deaths.



Something to take away from the graph is that the farther you are from a high population density--the safer it appears to be. That's what boondocking is all about, yes?

Being prepared is wise.

We have multiple levels of wisdom, choosing the least required by the situation.

Boondocking without cell service way out in the woods...how many DAYS do you think they could "camp" with you, doing who knows what, before someone might come knock on your door and interrogate the person who answers?

Let that sink in before you announce your absolute safety...

Well said memtb. I drew once without firing, saved two young women in a parking garage, had one visable on another occasion and would be robbers bolted and ran. At work I had to carry frequently, long guns and handguns and still never had to actually pull a trigger. And on more than one occasion I was able to stop an incident by use of my voice only. But that voice doesn't work very well if the perp's know there are no teeth behind it.
Thieves look for easy targets, the liklihood of an armed confrontation is more harrowing than most want to be involved in, and its easier to go look for an easier mark. The fact that some folks carry, actually protects all in that in many cases it causes fear of capture or worse.
This isnt the case with gangs, where the "I'm the tough guy" mentality kicks in, but its fairly effective with one or two punks at a time.

toedtoes, The firearm is "not" always "fired" to defuse a situation. Tens of thousands of times per year a situation is defused, without a shot fired! The mere knowledge that a firearm is present, is often all that is "needed"! It is the owners responsibility to make the correct decision. But... one must be willing and capable of using "deadly force" if necessary. If you cannot, you put your life at risk, and probably just "armed" a dangerous felon. Firearm ownership for "defense" carries a great responsibility!

toedtoes wrote:

rjxj wrote:
They never seem to like the idea but my best recommendation for those who dont like guns is to post it on the front of their homes and RV's "No guns in here". You know, sort of like those very safe gun free zones.

You say that's your "best recommendation". Recommendation for what? What purpose does that serve other than to continue to break down civilized discussion.

Do you have a sign on your house or RV saying NO GUNS IN HERE? It's a yes or no question.