Safety

[Jim2007]

Hi All.. Maybe it is just me but I am getting concerned about our personal safety at camp grounds. Should a camper carry a weapon(gun)in the camper? Currently I do not. Jim2007

[WTP-GC]

TwinTurbo wrote:

am1958 wrote:

myredracer wrote:
I'll never understand the obsession and fascination with firearms throughout the US, how easy it is to get them and how so many defend their need & right to bear arms. It's frightening to think how many around you may have a gun wherever you go in the US. We only go to "civilized" commercially operated CGs and have never felt threatened in any way.

As a Brit I often have cause to argue the American gun culture with Brits/Europeans/Canadians. The one thing that has struck me after many years and many discussions is the fact that, like you, they will never understand the American mindset. As a block you all believe that the European/British/Canadian way is _the_ way with utter disregard for the plain fact that people came/come to America precisely because they want(ed) get away from that mindset.

Until you can understand the underlying reason for their ancestors leaving those countries to come here and passing those traits down to the subsequent generations you will not be able to understand why most Americans hold up the Constitution and the Bill of Rights as _the_ standard for freedom in the world and that one of the main tenets of the Founders was that all men have the right to be armed for the purpose of protection against danger up to and including a tyrannical government.

The majority of Americans fully understand that the Second Amendment is the only one that assures all the other amendments can stand and for that reason alone it has it's purpose and thus it is probably the most important. Without it all the others are simply scribble on a piece of paper in the eyes of a potential dictator.

A very accurate and impressive post.

B.C. people, read this post and then reread it.

The last statement in that post is right on the money. Any "right" can be subverted if the people don't have the ability to suppress those who subvert. Heck, even an entire nation has no lasting strength if the people cannot provide for the protection of the homeland.

[TwinTurbo]

am1958 wrote:

myredracer wrote:
I'll never understand the obsession and fascination with firearms throughout the US, how easy it is to get them and how so many defend their need & right to bear arms. It's frightening to think how many around you may have a gun wherever you go in the US. We only go to "civilized" commercially operated CGs and have never felt threatened in any way.

As a Brit I often have cause to argue the American gun culture with Brits/Europeans/Canadians. The one thing that has struck me after many years and many discussions is the fact that, like you, they will never understand the American mindset. As a block you all believe that the European/British/Canadian way is _the_ way with utter disregard for the plain fact that people came/come to America precisely because they want(ed) get away from that mindset.

Until you can understand the underlying reason for their ancestors leaving those countries to come here and passing those traits down to the subsequent generations you will not be able to understand why most Americans hold up the Constitution and the Bill of Rights as _the_ standard for freedom in the world and that one of the main tenets of the Founders was that all men have the right to be armed for the purpose of protection against danger up to and including a tyrannical government.

The majority of Americans fully understand that the Second Amendment is the only one that assures all the other amendments can stand and for that reason alone it has it's purpose and thus it is probably the most important. Without it all the others are simply scribble on a piece of paper in the eyes of a potential dictator.

A very accurate and impressive post.

B.C. people, read this post and then reread it.

[TwinTurbo]

garyhaupt wrote:

TwinTurbo wrote:
Seems like a relatively civil discussion that is relevant to a fair number of members on this site. Honestly, I'm impressed and a little proud of the support on this forum.

Buuuuuut we have to protect sensitive feelings and all. I'm sure you'll have your wish and it will be locked soon.

I was not advocating this being locked..not at all. Was purely an observation and if you can't handle that, block my name and then you don't need to be bothered.


Gary Haupt

Your post seems to imply that this should be locked. You even went so far as to state there is biased moderation in play. That's more than a simple observation, that's an accusation.

And don't worry, I don't have sensitive feelings and am not offended by your opinions.

[WTP-GC]

Cloud Dancer wrote:
If only there was a way of preventing insane people from having access to guns.

Don't worry, there are laws to prevent this............................................................................................................

[WTP-GC]

NYCgrrl wrote:

The Constitution has been amended...at least 25 times in the life of the document but the right to bear arms remains and thus is the current law of the land. You want guns to maintain your militia fine by me but not a right I need to exercise. Pretty sure I said that on page one of this thread.

The 2nd Amendment has nothing to do with "maintaining" a militia. It does, however, deal directly with the ability to form a militia in effect for the security of a free state by allowing THE PEOPLE to keep and bear arms. An effective militia cannot be formed unless the citizenry has the right to arms. Syntax and punctuation is critical in this case to have an adequate understanding.

NYCgrrl wrote:

Interestingly enough it's the same type of argument you used in an earlier post: a biased and emotional video to make your case for why guns are needed by the citizenry.
Strange, how that doesn't work for another poster in your opinion;).

If you believe that mob violence against innocents is meant to create an emotional bias, then so be it.

NYCgrrl wrote:

Me? I prefer gun free zones in my life such as whilst praying, waiting for public transport, sleeping,etc. Gives me some relief from day to day cares w/o feeling there is a boogey man lurking behind every bush.

You're either demonizing lawful and responsible gun owners or suggesting that criminals actually care about laws...or both.

The question about respecting other people's property rights (in terms of gun free zones) gets sticky in a hurry. If you happen to find yourself in an establishment that forbids them, is it then better to leave your firearm in your car in a non-secure parking lot? We recently visited a place that had a no-gun policy on certain parts of the property, but not others. I've always found it best to just carry on (pun intended) in such situations instead of increasing potential risk caused by mis-use of firearms by those who could break into your vehicle.

Currently the best solution (IMO) is to have rules like many states (my good ole FL included), where a "no guns allowed" sign doesn't have the force of law unless the property owner (or their representative) asks you to leave and you refuse to do so. This way, you're still legally respecting the property rights of others even if you initially choose to carry. But of course, the idea of "concealed" means that folks ought not easily be able to CONFIRM you're carrying a firearm. I, nor anyone I know, has ever been asked to leave somewhere because of carrying a firearm.

This relates entirely to campgrounds as well. We camp often in Georgia State Parks. Georgia is an open-carry state. As recently as 18 months ago, the state parks had signs banning firearms. Now, they've changed the signs to allow for properly licensed individuals to carry in accordance with state law. Georgia reciprocates with FL and many other states, and they also establish "no guns allowed" signs as not having the force of law.

[Cloud_Dancer]

There's no limit to the fascinations of man, SOME of which I don't understand either. However, guns as a hobby is very legit. I understand it just fine (I have a few myself). If only there was a way of preventing insane people from having access to guns.

[am1958]

myredracer wrote:
I'll never understand the obsession and fascination with firearms throughout the US, how easy it is to get them and how so many defend their need & right to bear arms. It's frightening to think how many around you may have a gun wherever you go in the US. We only go to "civilized" commercially operated CGs and have never felt threatened in any way.

As a Brit I often have cause to argue the American gun culture with Brits/Europeans/Canadians. The one thing that has struck me after many years and many discussions is the fact that, like you, they will never understand the American mindset. As a block you all believe that the European/British/Canadian way is _the_ way with utter disregard for the plain fact that people came/come to America precisely because they want(ed) get away from that mindset.

Until you can understand the underlying reason for their ancestors leaving those countries to come here and passing those traits down to the subsequent generations you will not be able to understand why most Americans hold up the Constitution and the Bill of Rights as _the_ standard for freedom in the world and that one of the main tenets of the Founders was that all men have the right to be armed for the purpose of protection against danger up to and including a tyrannical government.

The majority of Americans fully understand that the Second Amendment is the only one that assures all the other amendments can stand and for that reason alone it has it's purpose and thus it is probably the most important. Without it all the others are simply scribble on a piece of paper in the eyes of a potential dictator.

[Boon_Docker]

myredracer wrote:

I'll never understand the obsession and fascination with firearms throughout the US,

It is called the Marshall Dillon Syndrome. :B

[myredracer]

garyhaupt wrote:
Just an observation...a post about climatre change lasted 6 pages, and there was the usual amount of pro-con comments. I don't think, but I could be wrong, there was any discussion about shooting or killing of people. This thread has gone on now for 13 pages and the it is filled with refrences to that very thing.

Geeez...just a little biased here, Moderator?


Gary Hupt

And topics like politics, religion and abortion are totally forbidden. The mere hint or innuendo of politics and it gets poofed in the blink of an eye. A thread on politics and current world affairs would be much more informative, interesting and maybe even entertaining.

I'll never understand the obsession and fascination with firearms throughout the US, how easy it is to get them and how so many defend their need & right to bear arms. It's frightening to think how many around you may have a gun wherever you go in the US. We only go to "civilized" commercially operated CGs and have never felt threatened in any way.

[garyhaupt]

TwinTurbo wrote:
Seems like a relatively civil discussion that is relevant to a fair number of members on this site. Honestly, I'm impressed and a little proud of the support on this forum.

Buuuuuut we have to protect sensitive feelings and all. I'm sure you'll have your wish and it will be locked soon.

I was not advocating this being locked..not at all. Was purely an observation and if you can't handle that, block my name and then you don't need to be bothered.


Gary Haupt

[ramgunner]

DiskDoctr wrote:
So if someone is planning on a multi-state, trip over several weeks, where permits and licenses may vary, keeping a firearm in your "parked home" is fine in every state.

There is a caveat to that - as long as the firearm is legal in that state and local laws do not prohibit it.

Some states/cities have laws relating to specific firearms, magazine capacity limits, or even keeping them in a functional state within your home (Heller and McDonald decisions aside, some places elect to ignore them).

[ramgunner]

As a firearms instructor, I get asked about this a lot.

First - develop your skills of Situational Awareness. Know where you are and who and what is going on around you. You can pick up on a lot of potential problems before they become an issue you need to deal with.

Second - carry yourself with confidence, and develop some skills in Command Presence. In all of the time I carried on the job, this was instrumental in never having to discharge my firearm. I can remember instances where junior folks were dealing with a subject, and the entire demeanor of that subject changed when I showed up - they realized that I wasn't playing. Even when working as an armed security guard - I had police ask me for assistance in dealing with subjects on more than on occasion because I "seemed more like a cop" to the subject. (It doesn't help that most of them want to wear a golf/polo shirt with a patch instead of uniform with a metal shield).

Third - Get some training. Learn how to handle a firearm, how to store it safely, and how they work.

Fourth - If offered, get a concealed firearm permit where you live. It may offer benefits such as RECIPROCITY and RECOGNITION.

There is a very useful app for smartphones called Legal Heat. It is your responsibility to know the laws where you are, wherever that is.

Here are some follow-up articles if you are interested...

http://rvgunner.com/slfdfnsideas.htm

http://rvgunner.com/whycarry.htm

http://rvgunner.com/gunsafety.htm

[DiskDoctr]

So if someone is planning on a multi-state, trip over several weeks, where permits and licenses may vary, keeping a firearm in your "parked home" is fine in every state.

[am1958]

NYCgrrl wrote:
I believe you are getting your information from an OPINION piece published by Fox.

The fact is the shooter choose this theater after casing it and 2 others, as well as an airport. He seemed to prefer this cineplex to others for a variety of reasons: type of seating, hours of operation and the dark interior.

In all his meticulous notes, a gun free zone advantage never was listed and he fully expected to be caught or killed. This info came out in the trial and is documented there in testimony and collected evidence (his diary).

You can believe what you wish my dear. Look at this page of Holmes notes.



The man is discussing with himself the best way to kill a large number of people. He looks at the different options and discounts most for reasons of his own. Then he decides upon the venue in the last paragraph. He specifically discounts the Airport because of the security. ie: he fully understands that where there are armed people there is the possibility that his "spree" would be cut short. His "Mass Murder/Spree" paragraph shows clearly that his intent is the maximum casualties. His other page that states that armed assistance in the form of police or National Guard is in the region of 3 minutes. Thus he has decided that he has three minutes to effect as much mayhem as possible in a place that lacks security.

I can see how you might conclude that the fact this was a gun free zone was not a care to him because it isn't in his notes. However, the fact that that fact did not appear in his notes does not prove it wasn't a factor. The fact that he took into account security at the airport does however prove that he was concerned about security.

If you really don't believe that gun free zones aren't an attractant then please explain why schools, colleges and malls feature in so many mass shootings while gun stores, police stations and Bass Pro shops are conspicuously absent from the list of places.

[TwinTurbo]

Seems like a relatively civil discussion that is relevant to a fair number of members on this site. Honestly, I'm impressed and a little proud of the support on this forum.

Buuuuuut we have to protect sensitive feelings and all. I'm sure you'll have your wish and it will be locked soon.