# Do you carry....protection?



## eyeye (Jan 1, 2009)

By protection I mean; mace, pepper spray, knife, gun, tazer, etc?

I ask because I am a chicken when it comes to "iffy" areas that I would love to shoot in but am worried about my gear attracting unwanted attention (i.e. mugging).  I have never carried anything for protection before and doubt I would start now but I am wondering if alot of photographers do or if people are just braver then I am?


----------



## skieur (Jan 1, 2009)

eyeye said:


> By protection I mean; mace, pepper spray, knife, gun, tazer, etc?
> 
> I ask because I am a chicken when it comes to "iffy" areas that I would love to shoot in but am worried about my gear attracting unwanted attention (i.e. mugging). I have never carried anything for protection before and doubt I would start now but I am wondering if alot of photographers do or if people are just braver then I am?


 
No, I never carry protection, because if it becomes necessary then you have already messed up, through poor decision-making and any protection that you are carrying will not really help.

Having done photojournalism, I do not carry a lot of equipment into some areas.  Getting the shot can be done with a small compact or pocket camera with a wide angle 2.8 fixed zoom to telephoto. (I have both, as well as DSLRs)  Even with a DSLR, I put an all purpose 2.8 zoom on it and carry it in a small anonymous case when I am not using it.

Don't look like a victim and plan what you are going to wear.  I was totally left alone in one area, because I was mistaken for an undercover cop.  Avoid rings and fancy watches.  Don't look like a college kid.  Avoid photographing alone in some areas.  I have always had a well-trained larger dog that I can take with me too.  Take a look closely at the area before you even enter it and don't get tunnel vision when you take pictures.  Always be aware of what is happening all around you.

Just a few pointers, I am sure that others can help as well.

skieur


----------



## patrickt (Jan 1, 2009)

Never have and never will. The only problem I've ever had was with a group of drunks when I was shooting a full moon over a church. It was late and not many people were out. The problem didn't get physical and I'll probably take photos at night at the church again.


----------



## Stranger (Jan 1, 2009)

There are a lot of "punk" kids in my area and around the places I sometimes shoot. I'm never too worried but I do generally do keep a blade in my pocket just for reassurance. I am disabled though and when it comes to fighting, only one of my arms is capable of doing anything. I guess the thought of having a blade in that hand might help the situation if it were to ever come up. 

Thinking about it, I bet a lot of nature phootographers carry a knife on them or in their camera bag for general survivor gear and cutting things...  Hmm, maybe because mine is a butterfly knife I feel its more protection aimed though I have only pulled it out for general purposes


----------



## Overread (Jan 1, 2009)

On knives - from what I have heard most people that are stabbed with a knife are stabbed with their own knife. I would say that unless your Crocodile Dundee and own a "proper" knife and know how to use it then its not going to be any safer with or without one and having one might earn you yet more trouble

as for nature photographers - that knife is more for cutting back bits of plant and cutting other things - I very much doubt that its for defence


----------



## Stranger (Jan 1, 2009)

Ya know, i always heard that to lol.

Thats the general purposes i usually use mine for as well. Though I am skilled with my blade (but then again, its a butterfly knife and by skilled i mean all the fancy twirling and trickery... probably not helpful in a real "fight") the 13 and 14 year old kids who mess with people around here would move on by the site of it I think. Anyone I dont think I could handle with it would probably get a free camera from me if they really pursued it after perhaps a small confrontation with the knife securely hidden and unused.

 brain power will beat any weapon i think


----------



## epp_b (Jan 1, 2009)

> No, I never carry protection, because if it becomes necessary then you have already messed up, through poor decision-making and any protection that you are carrying will not really help.


Right, because muggers use logic?  Um...


----------



## anubis404 (Jan 1, 2009)

I am not a trained knife fighter, and until I am, I do not carry a knife. I thought about a stun gun, but if someone grabs me it's useless. I thought about an air taser, but they're way too expensive. So I carry mace, all the time when I'm out shooting. Its an easy, cheap, and effective insurance policy to protect myself and my gear. I don't see a reason not to carry it.


----------



## RauschPhotography (Jan 1, 2009)

eyeye said:


> By protection I mean; mace, pepper spray, knife, gun, tazer, etc?
> 
> I ask because I am a chicken when it comes to "iffy" areas that I would love to shoot in but am worried about my gear attracting unwanted attention (i.e. mugging).  I have never carried anything for protection before and doubt I would start now but I am wondering if alot of photographers do or if people are just braver then I am?



Not yet. I've got my paperwork ready for my permit to carry, but have to wait until September (I'm not quite 21 yet). To me, it's not even a matter of protecting myself during photography sessions in bad areas, it's a matter of protecting myself, period. Honestly, if I'm in a bad area (or even a good area, for that matter) and things go downhill, and my life becomes in serious danger, I'm not going to let that happen. I could go on forever on this subject, but I'll save you the rant


----------



## matt-l (Jan 1, 2009)

Overread said:


> as for nature photographers - that knife is more for cutting back bits of plant and cutting other things - I very much doubt that its for defence



:thumbup::thumbup: Right you are! If i ever have one, its because i know i'll need it for this reason.


----------



## Easy_Target (Jan 1, 2009)

I vaguely recall seeing a thread like this a long while back.

Regardless of whether I were doing photography or not, I'd carry. The problem is my local laws make it illegal for me to defend myself from harm in any reasonable or logical way. (I live in New York City)


----------



## Joe&Caroline (Jan 1, 2009)

I have always wanted to carry but never had the Balls and now with a toddler in the house I dont think I need somthing else to worry about but ai still worry about prtecting my family . I t is a catch 22 situation I guess I still choose not too because I dont want the responsibility of possibly having to take another human life.!!!


----------



## lids369 (Jan 1, 2009)

another?


----------



## Josh66 (Jan 1, 2009)

I always have at least one knife on me (usually two), plus another in my camera bag (plus a multi-tool, that has a knife on it).

So, if I have my bag with me - I have at least 4 blades to choose from.

I don't carry any of them for protection though...  They're just tools.

There is only one time that I can remember taking a gun with me for the specific purpose of defending myself.  There have been plenty of other times that I had a gun - but like the knives, it wasn't for protection.


----------



## Joves (Jan 1, 2009)

I live in Az so yeah I carry. Out in the open even. Im mostly in the back country anyhow. I have only had to shoot a couple of critters over 20 some years. Two of them were rabid and another chose to attack despite my discharging a round in the ground in front of it. I also carry a knife. To me they are merely tools.


----------



## abraxas (Jan 1, 2009)

I keep knives (I have an obssesion for Swiss Army knives) in my bag, glove box, backpacks, on the floor and in numerous boxes in the truck I use for camping. When camping I like to keep the hatchet I use for splitting firewood nearby until I get used to sitting there (I usually camp by myself).  I don't go into cities to shoot, but do the beach thing once or twice a year. I have the advantage of looking dangerous to the people that look dangerous.Scowling is my best proactive defense.


----------



## eyeye (Jan 1, 2009)

Alot of interesting opinions.  I think being female and just not looking tough makes it scarier.  I just hate to be shooting alone at all.


----------



## panocho (Jan 1, 2009)

You guys scare me! Knives...! GUNS!!!! 

To me, troubles start the moment you consider taking with you some any kind of weapon. That's when I'd think I need protection!

If in a dangerous situation, I rather use my mind to act wisely and, if needed, my feet to get rapidly out of there. And if none of those help, I really believe taking some weapon out would but making things worse -worse meaning more dangerous for _everyone_ involved.

Finally, and not trying to add any joke, why not consider your camera as a last-last resort for unavoidable self-defence? Won't work if you have a pocket compact camera, but then again one of those wouldn't likely attract anyone's attention very much, so I suspect you're talking about some larger SLR. And this can become a real menace if holded from the strap and...


----------



## Battou (Jan 1, 2009)

I've been known to carry bladed weapons pending the shoot locations. I've even gone so far as to carry a full 42" sword into the woods known to have have some aggressive wildlife in the aria. As far as suburban photography goes, my camera it self is more often than not a sufficient weapon. At 760 g body alone it's a headach maker for anyone stupid enough to try something. When out photographing at night in town, I often carry a 6D Maglight flashlight as my preferred protective peice with a 8" knife as backup.

As for use, I've encountered a bear but I don't think it noticed me so it's moot as I did not need to do anything but walk away. I've had to use the flashlight twice, A drunk fool thought about being stupid but thought better of it when I blinded him light and asked if he really wanted to try something. The second was an encounter with a rent-a-cop when I returned the favor after he blinded me with his spotlight wile I was setting up in the middle of the road. I've never had to swing it, letalone drop it though, I'd like to keep it that way.


----------



## Mike_E (Jan 1, 2009)

You really should only carry a weapon when wildlife are a concern.

In areas where the two legged beasts are dangerous, the best bet is to make like a rabbit- keep an eye on everything that could even remotely be a threat and when you see something that really is...  Run like the wind.  

This isn't cowardice, just self preservation.   There is always somebody badder than you are and if you let them get too close you won't find out who it is until it's too late.


BTW if you would like to make a Taser out of a disposable camera, try here..
http://www.ehow.com/how_2049857_taser-from-disposable-camera.html


----------



## abraxas (Jan 1, 2009)

eyeye said:


> Alot of interesting opinions.  I think being female and just not looking tough makes it scarier.  I just hate to be shooting alone at all.



Understandable.  My knives are just because of my obssesion- sort of like hats (yes, I have as many hats as I do knives).  I stay in environments I'm comfortable with, and I am comfortable with spending days at a time alone out in the desert, where I am familiar with the environment and possibilities, which is what I recommend.  I do not think I would be comfortable with going into an area where I felt I would have to pack a firearm.  In my case mountain lions can be a concern, so far I just carry a buck knife.

Women have a whole different set of concerns beyond mine.  Whatever it takes to feel safe.  I would however, recomend (trying) staying out of areas where you feel you would have to carry a deadly weapon.  If at all possible, always have someone with you.


----------



## McQueen278 (Jan 1, 2009)

I'm a CPL holder and I carry a Glock 26.  I prefer to run first though.


----------



## Joves (Jan 1, 2009)

Mike_E said:


> You really should only carry a weapon when wildlife are a concern.
> 
> In areas where the two legged beasts are dangerous, the best bet is to make like a rabbit- keep an eye on everything that could even remotely be a threat and when you see something that really is... Run like the wind.
> 
> This isn't cowardice, just self preservation. There is always somebody badder than you are and if you let them get too close you won't find out who it is until it's too late.


I disagree on the two legged variety. I have lived and worked in many bad urban areas. I have had CCWs in every place I have ever lived. In some of the worse areas my sidearm was on my lap the whole time. Also Nataion Parks/Forests have become dangerous in some area due to pot growers and meth labs. It is sad true but it is reality. The world is not a friendly place.


----------



## tirediron (Jan 1, 2009)

I always have at least one knife in my bag, solely for use as a tool.  The only person I'm going to hurt if I try to use it as a weapon is me.   Seven and a half pounds of Manfrotto tripod laid upside someone's head however is going to be (1) Non-lethal, and (2) A LOT more effective.  That said, I've photographed alone in the National City area of San Diego, the slums of Chennai, India, and fairly remote areas in the Canadian Rockies.  Never once have I felt even the slightest concern of attack.  If I did, well, I'm going to bet that I can run faster scared that he/they can mad.


----------



## Kegger (Jan 1, 2009)

I carry an HK USP .45 at all times. Shooting or not. 

Being a soldier, yes my situational awareness is excellent, but I also realize I can't always run from danger. So I shoot back if necessary.


----------



## Overread (Jan 1, 2009)

IF all else fails just make sure to invest in high quality glass!
That way you get the shot
That way insurance is a must 
A 70-200mm f2.8L hits a lot harder than a sigma 70-300mm 

course there are also quality triods and monopods - the monopod is probably better as its easier to hit with and you don't have to fold it up first


----------



## Josh66 (Jan 1, 2009)

Kegger said:


> yes my situational awareness is excellent



I think this is the most important thing.  It always gets me how many people have no clue what is going on around them...

No matter what I'm doing, I'm constantly observing my surroundings.
Being aware of the things/people around you can help _a lot_ in avoiding danger entirely.


----------



## Kegger (Jan 1, 2009)

Presenting yourself as a "hard target" plus situational awareness are the two best things you can do to protect yourself.

People always look at me funny, because when I see or meet someone I look at their hands before I look at them. Good habit to have and has saved my butt on a few occasions.


----------



## Peanuts (Jan 1, 2009)

No I don't carry anything.  First, I am quite certain in most cases in Canada it is illegal (for the 'harder' things like guns.. not meaning pepper spray), second, I have no idea how to use them.  That being said, I have been meaning to take a self defense course.. hmm.


----------



## Joves (Jan 1, 2009)

Kegger said:


> Presenting yourself as a "hard target" plus situational awareness are the two best things you can do to protect yourself.
> 
> People always look at me funny, because when I see or meet someone I look at their hands before I look at them. Good habit to have and has saved my butt on a few occasions.


 
Agreed! I grew up in Detroit so I grew up with situational awareness. I too am amazed at how most people just go about life not knowing what is going on around them. I have a habit of looking at peoples shoulders from time to time when talking to them in bars or, public gatherings. It is where I watch for them for any agressive movement.
And Peanuts that is a good idea.


----------



## Kegger (Jan 1, 2009)

You ain't kidding about how people don't see what they don't want to.

I was in Nashville when some guy walked up to me, on my gun side, pulled a knife and told me to give him my wallet. When I drew, he freaked and ran off.  

I open carry, so my gun isn't hidden, and it's a large frame handgun. People are blind to the obvious.


----------



## MissMia (Jan 1, 2009)

abraxas said:


> Women have a whole different set of concerns beyond mine.  Whatever it takes to feel safe.  I would however, recomend (trying) staying out of areas where you feel you would have to carry a deadly weapon.  If at all possible, always have someone with you.



I carry an automatic knife in my pocket when I'm out alone. Otherwise I have been known to travel with an armed bodyguard (husband) when going into isolated areas. I'm pretty sure he won't let me take the REC7 with me!


----------



## Iron Flatline (Jan 1, 2009)

Photography is a hobby. Why are you spending time in areas where you feel threatened? How is that a good time?


----------



## eyeye (Jan 1, 2009)

Well I want to travel and photograph in central america at some point.  I have traveled pre-photography and it isnt always safe.  I had a 12 year old boy threaten to kill me right in front of a police station.  He was scared and desperate but it taught me to not chat up people asking for a hand out.  They don't want to be your friend.  Anyway, thats another story.

But being female and living in a city, lots of places dont feel safe.  Many dont feel really dangerous either.  An example is a big city park.  There are lots of isolated places and lots of homeless people.  People have been attacked in the past, although its rare.  I dont feel comfortable going there alone.  Another example is seeing a photo you must have but you arent sure of the neighborhood or the local people's reaction to you.

These are just some of the situations that I am thinking of.  Many times I would like to shoot a photo but it doesnt feel safe.  I think if you are a strong guy, it might be even a strange consept.  But when you are a 30 year old female who couldnt fight off an angry kitten, its something always in the back of your mind.


----------



## MBasile (Jan 1, 2009)

I don't travel really for photography, and Monterey isn't a dangerous place. However, I think if I were to travel to shady areas, I'd feel safest with someone else going with me, to keep an eye out while I'm focused on the shot.


----------



## kundalini (Jan 1, 2009)

I've got a D300, gripped and with the 70-200mm lens mounted.... that can be a lethal weapon.  

Using the grey matter between your ears should be all that's needed.


----------



## Garbz (Jan 1, 2009)

Yeah I can't wait to get mugged once when I am out just so I can see what kind of damage the LCD of my D200 does to a mans face, or just how far I can shove my manfrotto down his throat.


----------



## Josh66 (Jan 1, 2009)

I don't know if I could ever use my camera as a weapon...


----------



## Mike_E (Jan 1, 2009)

1.  Use your brain

2.  Don't carry anything you are not trained to use.  (Really, don't!)

3.  Use your brain.

4.  See 1, 2 and 3.

5.  Insure your equipment and don't worry about it if someone else wants it bad enough to take it.

6.  See 1, 2, and 3.


----------



## henkelphoto (Jan 1, 2009)

Hi guys!

  Wow, some really funny (as in odd) responses here. I have been a photo editor in some dangerous cities (L.A., Wash. D.C., and Vegas). I have never advocated anyone carrying a firearm or knife while on assignment. First off, it (a weapon) gives you a false sense of security, i.e., you'll go into an area that you would have given a wide berth to without the weapon. Second off, as mentioned above, you should never carry something unless you are well trained to use it. Third, are you going in as muscle or as a photographer? There is no way you can keep a weapon ready for use and be a working photographer at the same time. When I was working in L.A. we were covering the Rodney King riots (AP). We always sent two photographers out in one vehicle. One photographed while the other watched his back. 

  Just remember, a gun in your pocket won't protect you from the brick hitting the back of your head while you are focusing on a scene in front of you. 

  As for using your camera equipment as a weapon, yes, in some instances that could work, however it's good to remember the old adage: "Don't bring a knife to a gun fight." In other words, if someone has something more dangerous than your manfrotto tripod, don't think you'll be able to scare a kid high on crack with a knife, gun or even a piece of broken glass from attacking you. Best is to give him your gear, wallet and back away from the situation. 

  Having said all that, the bottom line in self-protection (not just while photographing in iffy areas) is, "It's better to be judged by 12 than carried by 6."


----------



## skieur (Jan 1, 2009)

epp_b said:


> Right, because muggers use logic? Um...


 
As the saying goes, don't carry a weapon and certainly don't pull one out, unless you are prepared to use it.  If you use it, be prepared to be charged with assault, battery, murder etc., and be ready to prove mugging, self-defence etc.  That may require a lawyer and lots of money.
Moreover unless you are trained to fight with a knife, expect to get stabbed or severely cut by any opponent who also has a knife.  If you pull out a knife to "protect" yourself and he pulls out a gun, you are dead.

Avoid getting into any confrontation in the first place and certainly don't carry "protection" because it is NOT protection unless you are extremely well-trained.

skieur


----------



## xtort- (Jan 1, 2009)

panocho said:


> You guys scare me! Knives...! GUNS!!!!
> 
> To me, troubles start the moment you consider taking with you some any kind of weapon. That's when I'd think I need protection!
> 
> ...



Hitting a mugger with your camera is going to make the situation worse- You are going to piss him off.  What was only a transaction in his mind is now personal.  Instead of losing your money, you are now going to get hurt or killed.  People that rob and mug are generally addicts who are desperate for their next fix.

I seriously doubt that anyone here goes out looking for trouble, but some of the places we can find ourselves in are also places where we could be easily become a victim, and are already marked as such because we are out of place.


----------



## xtort- (Jan 1, 2009)

O|||||||O said:


> I think this is the most important thing.  It always gets me how many people have no clue what is going on around them...
> 
> No matter what I'm doing, I'm constantly observing my surroundings.
> Being aware of the things/people around you can help _a lot_ in avoiding danger entirely.



Agree completely.


----------



## Johnboy2978 (Jan 1, 2009)

I'm another CWP holder here, and there is always a Sig Sauer 226 in my glove compartment.  It rarely comes out of there and almost never when photography is involved.  I did take it a few months ago when I was out in the country shooting waterfalls though.  Just didn't feel comfortable hiking several miles in the boonies along with $1500+ in gear.  I have never really had much of an occasion to take it out of the car, but wouldn't hesitate to use it if the need arose.   I'm a fairly good shot up to 30 yards.


----------



## Phranquey (Jan 1, 2009)

Impressive......This has maintained a civil tone without turning into a bash fest.......:thumbup:

I do carry a firearm, but am also of the opinion that it should only be done with the proper training, not just 8-10 hours in the classroom and a 1/2 day at the range.



kundalini said:


> Using the grey matter between your ears should be all that's needed.


 
I wish the world was truly that simple...


----------



## astrostu (Jan 1, 2009)

[I haven't read the rest of this thread, only the first post.]

I carry a high-power green laser pointer.  Works for me.


----------



## eyeye (Jan 1, 2009)

astrostu said:


> I carry a high-power green laser pointer.  Works for me.



Have to say you lost me here.


----------



## JerryPH (Jan 1, 2009)

eyeye said:


> By protection I mean; mace, pepper spray, knife, gun, tazer, etc?
> 
> I ask because I am a chicken when it comes to "iffy" areas that I would love to shoot in but am worried about my gear attracting unwanted attention (i.e. mugging).  I have never carried anything for protection before and doubt I would start now but I am wondering if alot of photographers do or if people are just braver then I am?



Ever walk near a big dog barking at you?  Feel comfy?  Not likely, I bet.  And if you went near that dog, it would bite you in a second.

Human predators are the same.  They smell fear and attack those that emanate that emotion.

I personally do not believe in asking for trouble... however there are those that like to push the envelope.  In your case, I would say... there are better things to take pictures of other than things that place you in danger.

If you really must, rather than use a weapon that can easily be taken away from you and used against you... don't go... or at the VERY least, don't go alone.  There is security in numbers.

I find that a bit of a foolish question... I just personally find it foolish to place myself in ANY place that I could hurt myself or someone else for the sake of a picture.  Life is irreplaceable... what is that picture worth to you in the end?


----------



## astrostu (Jan 1, 2009)

eyeye said:


> Have to say you lost me here.



Blindingly bright.  Non-lethal, non-physical damage-infliction.


----------



## abraxas (Jan 1, 2009)

MissMia said:


> ... I'm pretty sure he won't let me take the REC7 with me!



Not even if you accessorize with a beret and bandoliers?



Iron Flatline said:


> Photography is a hobby. Why are you spending time in areas where you feel threatened? How is that a good time?



That's why I've never understood discussions like this.  Moving on ,...


----------



## Easy_Target (Jan 1, 2009)

eyeye said:


> Have to say you lost me here.


Works the same way a maglight would as mentioned earlier. Blinds the person with bright light.


----------



## Battou (Jan 1, 2009)

Iron Flatline said:


> Photography is a hobby. Why are you spending time in areas where you feel threatened? How is that a good time?



How do people enjoy free climbing?

To some it's the inherent risk associated that they find the most exillerating aspect of their hobby. I can't say that this is the case here but, it is something to ponder for a minuet.


----------



## *Knowledge* (Jan 1, 2009)

I punch hard and run fast.


----------



## eyeye (Jan 1, 2009)

If no one went anywhere even slightly dangerous, then no one would go anywhere at all.


When I do make it back to central america I will hire a driver/guard (they are always packing anyways)/assistant.


----------



## MissMia (Jan 1, 2009)

abraxas said:


> Not even if you accessorize with a beret and bandoliers?



There's an idea for a self portrait! :mrgreen:


----------



## Phelan (Jan 2, 2009)

astrostu said:


> Blindingly bright.  Non-lethal, non-physical damage-infliction.



I don't know that I'd classify the ability to cause permanent blindness as "non-physical damage" and a green laser will do so quicker than a red laser.

Almost always have a knife on my person, I feel naked w/o one.  Never have used whether I'm carrying or not as a factor in going to an area; if you don't feel safe in an area unarmed you probably shouldn't be going in by yourself.  

And your gun if carrying should always be your last line of defense.


----------



## TheLogan (Jan 2, 2009)

what ever happened to taking pictures of the pretty flowers in one's own back yard?


----------



## abraxas (Jan 2, 2009)

MissMia said:


> There's an idea for a self portrait! :mrgreen:



I had to look back--

Thanks for the suggestion, but sorry, I look quite odd in a beret. Sort of like a human toadstool. :shock:


----------



## Garbz (Jan 2, 2009)

Most of this is really a non issue. The chances of being mugged while flipping through your iPod in a dark alleyway is high, taking a photo with a small point and shoot camera that can easily be snatched, equally high.

But carrying a large camera with a huge lens which has little street value, and most importantly is heavy and hard to run away with is an entirely different story.

One of my big scary friends had an ipod stolen right out of his hands and then couldn't catch the perp. But one of my tiny harmless friends had his laptop bag stolen from next to him, and the other guy got no further than 10 meter before getting horridly beaten down because running with a large bag is somewhat difficult.


----------



## KD5NRH (Jan 2, 2009)

Phelan said:


> And your gun if carrying should always be your last line of defense.



Yes, but deadly force with a knife is still just as deadly, and much harder to do.  I carry pepper spray and a kubotan for those who can be persuaded, and a .357 snub for those who can't.  I've had some practice with knives, but I don't see the reason to add in another step that has no legal or tactical advantage over the firearm.

As for those who say just run away, knee replacements are expensive even with good insurance, and I'm still at the point where it would almost certainly have to be redone at least once before I'm too old to care.  As a security officer who can't run, I'd say my situational awareness is well above average, (especially when I see such shining examples of the average around me) but I still can't predict everything that's going to happen.  My safety, and that of my wife and daughter, takes precedence over the equipment, but that doesn't mean I'm going to trust someone who's already threatening our safety to just take what he wants and leave us unharmed.  There are just too many examples to the contrary.


----------



## Slaphead (Jan 2, 2009)

God I must live in eutopia compared to you lot - I  never feel threatend at all - Hell even a mugging makes front page news here. Sure I carry a knife but it's packed in the bottom of my camera bag, used only as a tool, and would never be useful as a weapon as it would take too long to get out.

I do carry a monopod occaisionally but I would never think to smack somebody around the head with it.

My Kung fu teacher always said to me that whenever I was threatened that I should employ the "rapid shifting weight stance" - translated to "run like hell" and to only fight when there was no other available option.


----------



## KD5NRH (Jan 2, 2009)

Garbz said:


> But carrying a large camera with a huge lens which has little street value, and most importantly is heavy and hard to run away with is an entirely different story.



Huh?  Just a minute ago people were advocating running away carrying the gigantic huge 24x36 mahogany and steel view camera that we've now somehow barely managed to lug to the location with a furniture dolly and six helpers.

When I'm walking around shooting, I generally use the lightest body I own with an 18-70.  Total weight with batteries is not much more than a couple cans of soda.  Even if I put a longer lens on there it's still not going to be too heavy, or I would have picked a location I could drive right up to.


----------



## panocho (Jan 2, 2009)

xtort- said:


> Hitting a mugger with your camera is going to make the situation worse- You are going to piss him off.  What was only a transaction in his mind is now personal.  Instead of losing your money, you are now going to get hurt or killed.  People that rob and mug are generally addicts who are desperate for their next fix.
> 
> I seriously doubt that anyone here goes out looking for trouble, but some of the places we can find ourselves in are also places where we could be easily become a victim, and are already marked as such because we are out of place.



I was speaking of a last resort. Notice that before I wrote use your brain and your feet. So if none of these work, then instead of carrying a dangerous weapon, why not the camera itself, so that you can activate option one, i.e., your feet.

But of course, when I say first use your brain it basically means: let the camera go. To me, carrying any weapon only means seriously increasing the possibilities of things ending much worse.


----------



## pez (Jan 2, 2009)

Slaphead said:


> God I must live in eutopia compared to you lot - I never feel threatend at all - Hell even a mugging makes front page news here. Sure I carry a knife but it's packed in the bottom of my camera bag, used only as a tool, and would never be useful as a weapon as it would take too long to get out.
> 
> I do carry a monopod occaisionally but I would never think to smack somebody around the head with it.
> 
> My Kung fu teacher always said to me that whenever I was threatened that I should employ the "rapid shifting weight stance" - translated to "run like hell" and to only fight when there was no other available option.


I've studied and practiced TaiChi and Shaolin for almost 30 years, and I totally agree with the "run like hell" advice. Few things are worth a fight other than the safety of you or your loved ones (including pets). One of the many benefits of martial arts training is the art and wisdom of avoiding a fight. Diplomats would be well served to study a martial art discipline.
That said, stuff happens- just read the headlines. Almost anything can serve as an effective weapon to some degree- you might practice using a camera (er, perhaps an old junk camera, lol) that way, like practicing a fighting form. However, I live where a CCW can be had so I have retained a carry license for decades. I see no reason not to take advantage of what is arguably the most effective type of weapon legally available to me, if and when I feel it is warranted. It is my choice and also my responsibility, and never something one should do without commensurate thought and training. Odds are very much in my favor that I'll never need _any_ weapon, although once long ago- 1978, I think- I was robbed of a SLR at gunpoint in downtown Atlanta early on a Sunday morning. I look at it like fire insurance for your home- you don't _plan_ to have your home burn to the ground, and you do everything in your power to ensure that it never happens. But you bloody well buy that fire insurance.


----------



## panocho (Jan 2, 2009)

Phranquey said:


> I wish the world was truly that simple...



Sure sometimes it's not, but I really can't see how in the world carrying a weapon makes things "simpler".

Some here are confessing they carry guns and are willing to use them. "As a last resort", and so, but willing to, anyway. That scares me. It is very easy that in the heat of the moment that willingness arises as a not-really-last resort. Experience proves so. And so you shoot. And someone gets shot -might as well be yourself. Someone might be dead by now -but you keep your camera! Mmmmm... that sounds clever... :er:


----------



## panocho (Jan 2, 2009)

pez said:


> It is my choice and also my responsibility, and never something one should do without commensurate thought and training.



And you do the thinking in the few seconds that take for you to use or not to use the gun, right?


----------



## Garbz (Jan 2, 2009)

Slaphead said:


> God I must live in eutopia compared to you lot



Americans, what did you expect.

<runs and hides before they come with their guns >


----------



## Phelan (Jan 2, 2009)

KD5NRH said:


> Yes, but deadly force with a knife is still just as deadly, and much harder to do.  I carry pepper spray and a kubotan for those who can be persuaded, and a .357 snub for those who can't.  I've had some practice with knives, but I don't see the reason to add in another step that has no legal or tactical advantage over the firearm.



Wasn't meaning to imply that a knife was less lethal (or even that one should be used for defense, IMO if you're close enough to use a knife you've already screwed up) than a gun.  I carry a knife for utilitarian reasons, opening things, breaking down boxes, cutting wiring, etc.


----------



## Kegger (Jan 2, 2009)

panocho said:


> Sure sometimes it's not, but I really can't see how in the world carrying a weapon makes things "simpler".
> 
> Some here are confessing they carry guns and are willing to use them. "As a last resort", and so, but willing to, anyway. That scares me. It is very easy that in the heat of the moment that willingness arises as a not-really-last resort. Experience proves so. And so you shoot. And someone gets shot -might as well be yourself. Someone might be dead by now -but you keep your camera! Mmmmm... that sounds clever... :er:



I carry my weapon because it does make things simpler. If I end up in a confrontation with someone who is willing to take my life for whatever reason, why should I have to rely on my feet. If he has a gun he'll just shoot me in the back.

As a soldier, I stand and fight in my job. And that carries over to my regular life. If my life or the life of anyone else in my immediate vicinity, is threatened; I'm going to use my gun. Whether it be to stand someone down, or put two in their chest. As long as I go home alive, and everyone else does as well, then I succeeded in making it through another day. 

"I'd rather be judged by 12, than carried by six" is the truest statement to my reasoning.


----------



## SrBiscuit (Jan 2, 2009)

CCW holder here.

Glock19.
it's never come out and likely never will, but it's there.

and just to add a comment to panocho's statement above...
those of us who do carry legally MUST understand the laws and ramifications of our actions. you cant shoot to protect property. those who would shouldnt be carrying (though i agree many who shouldnt still do)

well stated kegger.


----------



## inTempus (Jan 2, 2009)

I carry a Ruger LCP in my pocket everywhere I go.  When I'm out with my family I always have a 1911 concealed.   It's far better to have and not need vs. need and not have.  ([ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M1u0Byq5Qis]Perfect Example[/ame])

Chances are I'll never have to use a firearm in a fight.  I've been in several situations where someone got in my face and acted as though they wanted to fight, and I've tactfully backed them down without ever disclosing I was armed.  Just because you have a weapon doesn't mean you must use it.


----------



## SpeedTrap (Jan 2, 2009)

I could not carry any sort of weapon, I just won't.  I have been in places all over the world and I can't think of one time in my life having a knife or gun or any sort of weapon would have helped.  

It is just gear, if someone really wants it that bad and wants to mug me, I will give it to them without a fight, that is what insurance is for (I have been mugged twice).

But I can imagine if I had pulled a weapon things could have ended much worse than a police report and $100 taken (I have never had my gear on me when mugged).

Does it suck, yes!,  
Do you feel horible after, Yup!, 
Would I feel better if I injured myself or took someones life, Not a chance!

I figure you never know what drives someone to agression and you never know how far someone else is willing to go, so why even chance it.

The only time I carry a knife is when back packing, and that has nothing to do with protection.


----------



## inTempus (Jan 2, 2009)

SpeedTrap said:


> I figure you never know what drives someone to agression and you never know how far someone else is willing to go, so why even chance it.


Ironically, that's exactly why I carry a weapon.  You may be willing to forfeit your life on principal, I however will fight to the death to my it home to my family at night.

Also, God help the poor soul that threatens the life of my child or wife.  

You got lucky in that when you were mugged the mugger didn't decide to leave no witnesses.  If you crack open a newspaper (in the US) you will see countless stories of people who weren't so lucky.

I will never put my life or the lives of my family in the hands of some street thug and trust they will be pacified by my surrendering my property to them.  If they have a weapon and they threaten me, I will respond with deadly force.

As another poster mentioned in here, he's a Soldier.  I'm a former 0311 Infantry Marine and I will not back down when threatened.  If you threaten me, you damn well better be ready for the consequences.


----------



## Jklersy (Jan 2, 2009)

My very close friend is a police officer and I have trained in fire arms with him for over 2 years.  I do not carry a gun because I have never felt comfortable knowing that I might have to make a choice to take someones life.  I can draw and fire all shots in the torso of my paper target from 10 yards and know all the police tactics, stances and "rules of engagement".  I enjoy shooting for the skill and raw power that is pulling the trigger.  I have thought about getting into competition shooting and am very comfortable around firearms.

I have carried a knife and have been trained in self defence against bladed and blunt weapons.  I have also been trained in hand to hand combat, not to kill but to subdue.  I am a relatively small person, 5'9" 150lbs, and have found that if I stand "tough" and make eye contact that my confidence has been my best defence.

I have gone into N Mpls, which can be a pretty rough place, with nothing more than my rebel XT and nifty fifty.  I was bothered a little by some "locals", to be polite, and I just respectfully held my own and walked away.

Short of the long of it, if you are nervouse or scared, it shows.  Community colleges teach self defence courses.  You can get weapons training in any major city in the US.  You have learned how to use your camera to the best of your ability, maybe you should consider learning what your body can do as well.  It will better your life, I promise.


----------



## Phranquey (Jan 2, 2009)

tharmsen said:


> God help the poor soul that threatens the life of my child or wife.
> 
> I will never put my life or the lives of my family in the hands of some street thug and trust they will be pacified by my surrendering my property to them. If they have a weapon and they threaten me, I will respond with deadly force.


 
:thumbup: Could not have said it better myself




Jklersy said:


> I have thought about getting into competition shooting and am very comfortable around firearms.


 
Be careful with this......If you thought photography was addictive & expensive... 

I shot competition for almost 15 years, and quickly got into reloading to get that last little bit of accuracy, and it wound up saving me a boat-load of $$ on my high volume pistol ammo as well.  Now I have big buck in the reloading equipment, which has turned into an evil hobby all it's own.


----------



## SpeedTrap (Jan 2, 2009)

tharmsen said:


> I will never put my life or the lives of my family in the hands of some street thug and trust they will be pacified by my surrendering my property to them. If they have a weapon and they threaten me, I will respond with deadly force.


 
This is why I like living in Canada, we have our problems and it is not utopia, but most of the time it is so cold that carrying a weapon is not an option, metal agaist skin is too cold in the winter. (it is -30 Deg C today)

Given where I live there are not many problems, so I do not give it much thought.


----------



## kundalini (Jan 2, 2009)

SpeedTrap said:


> , but most of the time it is so cold that carrying a weapon is not an option, metal agaist skin is too cold in the winter. (it is -30 Deg C today).


 The cold weather up there is the only reason my ass isn't there.  I am repulsed by the gun waving here in the states.  I staunchly defend their rights to do so, as a former sportsman myself, but I am not part of that population of psuedo bravado.  In my day I could knock a bullfrog back onto the bank from 40 yards away with only iron sites and fry his legs up for dinner, I hunted quail, dove and rabbit because I liked the taste of the meat, but most of the testosterone being spewed has nothing to do with (to use a phrase from Mr. Nugent)  "kill it and grill it".  Unless you are fully trained to use a weapon and further accepting the disposition of taking another human life.... there is too much BS going on here.  I say, smoke a joint.... and chill out, if that's what it takes...... regardless, get yourself grounded and realize that possessions are merely material temporaries and can easily be replaced.

*steps down from soap box*


----------



## Joves (Jan 2, 2009)

panocho said:


> And you do the thinking in the few seconds that take for you to use or not to use the gun, right?


 Actually yes. I had a guy try and open the door on the work van I was driving through South Central LA. I had a CCW at that time and, always had it on my lap in certain areas. I pointed in his direction, he saw it and beat feet away from me. My helper almost messed his pants over the whole thing. I have been carrying a sidearm since I was 21 and, have yet to have to shoot one person. I have worked in very dangerous areas of a few major cities so, yes I will continue to carry. 
 Now I travel the Az back country and, except fpr a few areas where you cant carry ( native reservations ), I have a firearm always. We have animals that get rabies and some who are just plain ornery. Most of the time I dont even have to shoot them. A round shot into the ground flushes most off. Id rather be armed and not need the weapon than being unarmed and, not have it.


----------



## JerryPH (Jan 2, 2009)

Joves said:


> Id rather be armed and not need the weapon than being unarmed and, not have it.



Same with me... except I apply that saying to condoms... LOL!


----------



## pez (Jan 2, 2009)

panocho said:


> And you do the thinking in the few seconds that take for you to use or not to use the gun, right?


Duh :roll: but on one level, a good question. The vast majority of incidents involving firearms used in self protection never escalate into the firing of a weapon, as the mere presence of the weapon, along with the obvious will to use it, is often sufficient to stop the attack or threat. I am here to testify that staring down the dispenser end of a barrel is a highly effective buzz killer. So yes, in this region my innate right to make that decision is still somewhat protected by law. EDIT: sorry if that was too political for this forum- I'll get out of this thread now...


----------



## jstuedle (Jan 2, 2009)

First, anyone who thinks they can avoid all lethal or dangerious situations is either dreaming or an idealist. In the best of places the worst can happen, simply a fact of life in the modern world. I would advise you to be aware of everything around you at all times. Keep both eyes open, one for the viewfinder and the other on your surroundings. Also, don't take unessary risks, a generious amount of common sense goes a long way. No image is worth risking that most presious to most of us. And if you have the oportunity never shoot (a camera) in questionable areas alone. JMHO.

 I have carried when in the field, my preference either a Colt Gov. Md 70 .45 ACP or a S&W Md 25-5 .45 long Colt. As most who do the same, I concider the gun as a tool and not generally for protection. I have however come very close to using a D1X as a weapon about 5 years ago. I was shooting a band and was on the dance floor surrounded by drunk 20 somethings. (why don't kids learn to handle their liquor?) While framing a shot, hands came out of nowhere and attempted to take my camera from me. A D1X w/35-70 2.8 and a hex Bogan quick change plate would hurt, bad! I pulled it back with my right hand and grabbed his collar with my left. I am quoted as saying "Dude, I will beat you to a bloody pulp with this thing, then gladly take a picture of your dead lifeless body with it". He retreated with great haste.


----------



## Phelan (Jan 2, 2009)

SpeedTrap said:


> This is why I like living in Canada, we have our problems and it is not utopia, but most of the time it is so cold that carrying a weapon is not an option, metal agaist skin is too cold in the winter. (it is -30 Deg C today)
> 
> Given where I live there are not many problems, so I do not give it much thought.



That's why you get a holster with leather between the frame and your body, makes it more comfortable no matter the weather honestly.



			
				kundalini said:
			
		

> Unless you are fully trained to use a weapon and further accepting the disposition of taking another human life.... there is too much BS going on here. I say, smoke a joint.... and chill out, if that's what it takes...... regardless, get yourself grounded and realize that possessions are merely material temporaries and can easily be replaced.



Fully trained like the NYPD who hit their intended targets only ~38% of the time at engagements of less than 20 feet?


----------



## Josh66 (Jan 2, 2009)

Phelan said:


> Fully trained like the NYPD who hit their intended targets only ~38% of the time at engagements of less than 20 feet?



Just don't pull out your cell phone at your wedding.  You might get 8 full magazines fired at you (at least only 10 or so rounds will actually hit you though...).


----------



## Kegger (Jan 2, 2009)

Phelan said:


> That's why you get a holster with leather between the frame and your body, makes it more comfortable no matter the weather honestly.



Leather gets cold and hardens, making it hard to draw. I prefer Kydex, works better 100% of the time. 

But you can't argue against the aesthetics of a good leather holster.


----------



## Phelan (Jan 2, 2009)

Kegger said:


> Leather gets cold and hardens, making it hard to draw. I prefer Kydex, works better 100% of the time.
> 
> But you can't argue against the aesthetics of a good leather holster.



Have you tried any of the ones with leather against the body and kydex away from it?  I've got a Crossbreed like that, but it doesn't get cold enough here to affect the leather.


----------



## Kegger (Jan 2, 2009)

No I haven't, but I have been looking into a holster I saw a while back. Leather shell but has a concealed kydex insert with trigger retention. All the look and comfort of leather, with the quick draw of kydex.


----------



## panocho (Jan 3, 2009)

Just a few comments before I leave:



Kegger said:


> I'm going to use my gun.
> 
> As long as I go home alive, and everyone else does as well, then I succeeded in making it through another day.
> 
> "I'd rather be judged by 12, than carried by six" is the truest statement to my reasoning.



Funny contradiction! Not many chances everyone going home alive when you're going to use your gun, mmm?

Sorry, but to me your statement translates "rather anyone be carried by six if only I suspect there's _any_ threaten involved to me".

It really sounds harmless when you write all those things about having but not using, almost a little convincing, but just open one of those newspapers mentioned above and you'll see how many had a far too easy finger and shot just because they "somehow" felt threatened.



tharmsen said:


> It's far better to have and not need vs. need and not have.  (Perfect Example)



I started to watch the video; left it the moment the woman mentioned something like "a mad man entered and started to shoot". Wow, and that sounds to you like an argument for being armed!!  :shock:  Funny, it sounds to me. Do you really cannot see that that man was one of those "better to have and not need vs. need and not have"?!? And he went mad. And since he carried a weapon as the most natural thing in the world, he probably killed a lot.

People with weapons going mad and killing people is not at all a rare thing. Because people going mad happens far too often. The real big problem is when they are so easily armed. And yet for you the possibility of carrying a weapon seems to imply protection! :er: Funny...



SpeedTrap said:


> I could not carry any sort of weapon, I just won't.  I have been in places all over the world and I can't think of one time in my life having a knife or gun or any sort of weapon would have helped.
> 
> It is just gear, if someone really wants it that bad and wants to mug me, I will give it to them without a fight, that is what insurance is for (I have been mugged twice).
> 
> ...



:thumbup:  :thumbup:  :thumbup:



jstuedle said:


> First, anyone who thinks they can avoid all lethal or dangerious situations is either dreaming or an idealist. In the best of places the worst can happen, simply a fact of life in the modern world.



Curious I really started reading this post convinced you were making a point against carrying a weapon! A good point!! But it was the other way round... Again: funny. Because that's precisely how it sounds to me all that about carrying a weapon but having the perfect control for only using it when extrictly necessary, etc: it sounds dreaming or idealist.

You're totally right: in the best of places the worst can happen. That's precisely what seems happened in that cafeteria, from the video link above. But, again, you guys are right: that proves guns help protecting people :er:




Garbz said:


> Americans, what did you expect.
> 
> <runs and hides before they come with their guns >



Chapeau, Garbz!!

And now I'll leave this thread and try to concentrate back on cameras alone. When it gets to the aesthetics of the way carrying a lethal weapon, it's the moment for me to stop discussing and get out of here


----------



## Iron Flatline (Jan 3, 2009)

Johnboy2978 said:


> I'm another CWP holder here, and there is always a Sig Sauer 226 in my glove compartment.  It rarely comes out of there and almost never when photography is involved.  I did take it a few months ago when I was out in the country shooting waterfalls though.  Just didn't feel comfortable hiking several miles in the boonies along with $1500+ in gear.  I have never really had much of an occasion to take it out of the car, but wouldn't hesitate to use it if the need arose.   I'm a fairly good shot up to 30 yards.


Fascinating. You enable the option of taking another person's life over $1,500?


----------



## Arch (Jan 3, 2009)

By now this thread would usually be locked. I think many of you know we do not allow Gun use debates on this forum... everytime someone makes a post it is always from thier own perspective... from thier own areas of the world... these things simply do not apply to other people from around the world, so like politics, trying to force your opinion on people is futile.
However on this occasion i am willing to leave the thread open, as long as people are full of understanding and thoughtfulness... if it turns into an 'im right your wrong' arguement then it will be locked.




jstuedle said:


> First, anyone who thinks they can avoid all lethal or dangerious situations is either dreaming or an idealist. In the best of places the worst can happen, simply a fact of life in the modern world.



I could have quoted a dozen or so people for this idea... so im not trying to single you out here... many americans have this opinion.

The point is... its not the modern world... here in England we have amongst the lowest gun related deaths in the entire world, america has by a long way one of the highest.
In england it is illegal to carry a gun, the average police officer doesn't carry a gun... virtually no gun related accidents happen... if you get mugged or attacked, the criminal will more than likely not be carring a gun.

So it makes sense that if guns are so difficult to aquire and frowned upon even by law enforcement... the chances are i will never be theatend by one.. and frankly i doubt i will ever see a real gun in my life... so no, im not a dreamer or an idealist... i simply live in an anti-gun society, and i am very very glad of that. 

I feel sorry tho for the people that don't like gun usage, that live in such a pro gun society.. it must be very difficult.


----------



## inTempus (Jan 3, 2009)

Phelan said:


> Have you tried any of the ones with leather against the body and kydex away from it?  I've got a Crossbreed like that, but it doesn't get cold enough here to affect the leather.


The crossbreed holsters are outstanding, especially the inside the waistband variety.  This is my daily carry and it's amazingly comfortable.


----------



## inTempus (Jan 3, 2009)

> People with weapons going mad and killing people is not at all a rare thing. Because people going mad happens far too often. The real big problem is when they are so easily armed. And yet for you the possibility of carrying a weapon seems to imply protection! :er: Funny...


Apparently you think banning guns reduces crime.  You also apparently believe that if you can ban everything from guns to sharp objects we'll all live in utopia.  You seem to forget one key element, the "mad man".  You can ban everything under the sun, but people hell bent on hurting you or making you a victim will still do so... the only difference is you will be powerless to stop them.

You might want to read this.

#3: Gun Control Has Reduced The Crime Rates In Other Countries



> England: According to the BBC News, handgun crime in the United Kingdom rose by 40% in the two years after it passed its draconian gun ban in 1997.4





> Australia: Readers of the USA Today newspaper discovered in 2002 that, "Since Australia's 1996 laws banning most guns and making it a crime to use a gun defensively, armed robberies rose by 51%, unarmed robberies by 37%, assaults by 24% and kidnappings by 43%. While murders fell by 3%, manslaughter rose by 16%."2





> "You are more likely to be mugged in England than in the United States," stated the Reuters news agency in summarizing the study. "The rate of robbery is now 1.4 times higher in England and Wales than in the United States, and the British burglary rate is nearly double America's."6 The murder rate in the United States is reportedly higher than in England, but according to the DOJ study, "the difference between the [murder rates in the] two countries has narrowed over the past 16 years."7



Let's say we have 100 people in a room.  Out of those 100, one of them can't be trusted with a sharp object like a dinner knife.  Your proposed solution to the problem is to ban dinner knives from the group.  We'll punish the other 99 people because one person can't behave.  That strategy is how you find yourself living under government subjugation... something people of other nations might be content with but Americans fought two bloody wars to break away from.

I'll stick with my freedom and I'll be content to lock up that single malcontent verses pushing the rest of the law abiding population and in the process making them victims to that 1%.


----------



## inTempus (Jan 3, 2009)

Arch said:


> However on this occasion i am willing to leave the thread open, as long as people are full of understanding and thoughtfulness... if it turns into an 'im right your wrong' arguement then it will be locked.


Thanks.    Hopefully we can behave ourselves.



> The point is... its not the modern world... here in England we have amongst the lowest gun related deaths in the entire world, america has by a long way one of the highest.


According to recent studies two elements are at play here.

1)  Police in England misreport crimes routinely.  This is a well established fact.  They probably do so under pressure from the government.

2)  Despite these discrepancies, violent crime rates have been soaring in the UK while the United States has seen the reverse trend.  In the UK you've seen the passing of extremely restrictive (out-right bans) on firearms while during that same period in the US we've passed concealed carry laws in 38 of our 50 States.  We've taken two different approaches to solving the problem, ours is working and yours has exacerbated the problem.



> In england it is illegal to carry a gun, the average police officer doesn't carry a gun... virtually no gun related accidents happen... if you get mugged or attacked, the criminal will more than likely not be carring a gun.


You're right, the criminal will likely be carrying a knife.  Knives are not lesser weapons, they are extremely devastating weapons.  I have seen the results of both shootings and stabbings in my life first hand (in the military, not on city streets), and I can assure you there is nothing more gruesome than being attacked with an edged weapon.

It would appear your nations solution to this problem is to now ban knives... including kitchen utensils. 



> So it makes sense that if guns are so difficult to aquire and frowned upon even by law enforcement... the chances are i will never be theatend by one.. and frankly i doubt i will ever see a real gun in my life... so no, im not a dreamer or an idealist... i simply live in an anti-gun society, and i am very very glad of that.


You're content living in a culture where you're unarmed and will be imprisoned for even raising a fist in self defense.  I am honestly happy for you.  Most Americans are content living in our pro-gun culture where we can defend ourselves... where we have laws known as "castle doctrines" where if you're in my house at 2am, weapon or not, I can use whatever force I deem necessary to remove you and no charges will be filed.  In your culture you must hide in the closet and hope the intruder doesn't find you while he cleans you out of property.  If you dare attempt to defend yourself or your property, you will be locked up for as long, if not longer, than the perpetrator.  



> I feel sorry tho for the people that don't like gun usage, that live in such a pro gun society.. it must be very difficult.


While you may feel sorry for those of us living in a pro-gun culture, conversely we feel sympathy for your citizens forced to live in a culture where you will be imprisoned for defending yourself or your loved ones...  

The beauty of it is all that if either of us are not happy with our governments, we can either vote to change things or leave and find a home more suitable to our needs.

Here in the States we have the option to move freely between States.  Some States like California have laws similar to yours (and ironically where crime soars), and other States like Arizona allow people walk around with handguns on their hips in full view of the public and no one bats and eye.

As long as we have a choice, it all balances out in the end.  It's having that choice that's important to me.


----------



## Arch (Jan 3, 2009)

tharmsen said:


> That strategy is how you find yourself living under government subjugation... something people of other nations might be content with but Americans fought two bloody wars to break away from.



Dude i respect the fact that it sounds like you have complete control over your firearm, i have no doubt that you do... but the reason you need the gun in the first place is because of americas gun problem.

what you said here above is not how it is... us british are not being forced into this by our government... nor are we content with being controlled.
The fact of the matter is... the more guns which are in circulation, the more people get killed, period. You can argue the knife angle, but guns are made for one purpose only.. to kill.

This is why i did aks that people try and understand where other members are coming from.... in Enlgand the majority of us are very happy with the zero tollerance we have on guns, please dont make out like we are being forced to behave this way, its just what we know... and i do respect that in some states in the US, gun ownership is something you just know by way of life. 

As for the 100 people analogy... here's one of my own... put a group of people on a desert island offer one person a way out... they may argue, they may even fight, sure.. someone may hurt, but the chances someone will be killed is minimal.
Now throw a gun into the mix.. the first person to pick that up then has ALL the power... would he shoot?.. who knows, if someone charges at him, he may panic.
Moral of this story, when put under pressure.. or a desperate situation.. anyone can pull a trigger.
Throw that gun into the sea, everyone is back at square one.


----------



## Arch (Jan 3, 2009)

tharmsen said:


> You might want to read this.
> 
> #3: Gun Control Has Reduced The Crime Rates In Other Countries



All the stats on gun control and gun deaths i would go by are from independent sources... i wouldn't go by a single fact from a Pro gun website, sorry!

I have read tho that gun crime is reduced in recent years in America... thats great, i hope it continues... but america is still a long way ahead of england in terms of homicide.

We do have our problems over here thats for sure... dont get me wrong it is very easy to get beaten up over here, especially if your in the wrong areas.. but you will probably make it out with a black eye and brused ribs... not in a body bag.


----------



## inTempus (Jan 3, 2009)

Arch said:


> All the stats on gun control and gun deaths i would go by are from independent sources... i wouldn't go by a single fact from a Pro gun website, sorry!


If you look more closely, they are independent sources which are cited.  USA Today and other mainstream media are responsible for the reporting, it's merely echoed on the pro-gun site.



> I have read tho that gun crime is reduced in recent years in America... thats great, i hope it continues... but america is still a long way ahead of england in terms of homicide.


That's always been the case.  Different nations, different cultures.  Firearms can't be blamed for the differences in culture.  The fact remains, we've loosened our gun control laws and our crime has gone down, you've tightened yours and it's gone up.



> We do have our problems over here thats for sure... dont get me wrong it is very easy to get beaten up over here, especially if your in the wrong areas.. but you will probably make it out with a black eye and brused ribs... not in a body bag.


From everything I've read, stabbings are insanely popular as of late... and that will surely land you in a body bag.  :mrgreen:  Well, that or the hospital with some painful stitches.


----------



## inTempus (Jan 3, 2009)

Arch said:


> This is why i did aks that people try and understand where other members are coming from.... in Enlgand the majority of us are very happy with the zero tollerance we have on guns, please dont make out like we are being forced to behave this way, its just what we know... and i do respect that in some states in the US, gun ownership is something you just know by way of life.


I understand that, and even said as much in a previous post.  We have a choice as to where we live, and I'm thankful for that.

...an interesting read.



> * British Subjects Beginning To Rethink Gun Control*
> 
> By
> Erich Pratt
> ...


----------



## inTempus (Jan 3, 2009)

Arch said:


> I feel sorry tho for the people that don't like gun usage, that live in such a pro gun society.. it must be very difficult.


I wanted to further comment on this...

As you've pointed out, a majority of people in your nation want restrictive gun control laws.

Here in the States a majority of people do not want such laws.

So, you must also feel sorry for your own countrymen who wish to have their firearms returned to them who don't share your views... even though they too are in the minority.


----------



## RauschPhotography (Jan 3, 2009)

You know, in some cases, you'd be honestly lucky if they just made away with your gear. The way I see it is, if someone's going to threaten my life, I'm going to equalize it. A knife, to me, is not very logical. Would I carry one? Sure, but that's only because I'm not yet eligible for my permit to carry in Minnesota. Otherwise, it doesn't make much sense because you have to be within arms length, which is just a little too close for comfort. If someone's using deadly force, I'm going to use it. I value my life too much to NOT carry. 

The way I also see carrying is.. Well, do you wear a seatbelt? Sure you do. Is it because you actually forsee yourself being in an accident? 
(And yes, I do know it's because it's also a law.) Of course not, you'll do anything to avoid it. But there's that chance that you will get an accident and the seatbelt will save your life. Same logic applies to carrying.





SpeedTrap said:


> I could not carry any sort of weapon, I just won't.  I have been in places all over the world and I can't think of one time in my life having a knife or gun or any sort of weapon would have helped.
> 
> It is just gear, if someone really wants it that bad and wants to mug me, I will give it to them without a fight, that is what insurance is for (I have been mugged twice).
> 
> ...


----------



## abraxas (Jan 3, 2009)

Good grief, please lock this thread!

Do what you do for whatever reasons you do it. If you're going to carry a weapon, carry it.  Keep your mouth shut and keep your paranoia to yourself. 

We're all going to die anyhow- do you really think you're in on how that's going to happen?


----------



## RauschPhotography (Jan 3, 2009)

On a lighter note... 






Banana clip, anyone???


----------



## Arch (Jan 3, 2009)

tharmsen said:


> ...an interesting read.



Yes im all for giving both sides a read and try to absorb the info as best i can.. however i feel this assesment is still wrong. No matter how bad knife crimes and other crimes are, introducing the right to bear arms for british people is a step backwards. 
Just a short while back our nation was shaocked to hear a 15 y/o had got hold of a gun and fired shots towards a group of youngsters, and 11 y/o boy playing football was shot in the neck and killed.

Even if it is only a dream to live in a society totally free of guns... its still a step forward to make them illegal.

I do undertstand tho that if i did live in a rough part of america, i may feel the need to protect my family, im not sure how i would deal with that.

I have had a few requests that this thread be locked tho, so it will be done shortly.


----------



## fwellers (Jan 3, 2009)

abraxas said:


> Good grief, please lock this thread!
> 
> Do what you do for whatever reasons you do it. If you're going to carry a weapon, carry it.  Keep your mouth shut and keep your paranoia to yourself.
> 
> We're all going to die anyhow- do you really think you're in on how that's going to happen?



It's so predictable. No matter which type of forum it is, photography, motorcycles, cars, philosophy, religion, IT forums,  and a myriad of others I've been on, whenever a thread gets one or two posts relating to carrying firearms, that thread ALWAYS becomes a firearm thread. Usually it becomes a mixture of posts concerning who carry's what, and arguments over gun laws.  

It must be a fact of the human condition. Gun posts derail threads. 

I bet if someone  made a thread specifically about carrying while shooting pics, it would be a whopper of a 1000+  post thread ( assuming the conversation didn't get too spiteful, and the mods kept a loose reign on it, and didn't can it. )


----------



## inTempus (Jan 3, 2009)

abraxas said:


> Good grief, please lock this thread!
> 
> Do what you do for whatever reasons you do it. If you're going to carry a weapon, carry it.  Keep your mouth shut and keep your paranoia to yourself.
> 
> We're all going to die anyhow- do you really think you're in on how that's going to happen?


Why lock this thread?  It's quite active which means people want to take part in the discussion.

If you don't like it, you're not obligated to read it.


----------



## inTempus (Jan 3, 2009)

fwellers said:


> It's so predictable. No matter which type of forum it is, photography, motorcycles, cars, philosophy, religion, IT forums,  and a myriad of others I've been on, whenever a thread gets one or two posts relating to carrying firearms, that thread ALWAYS becomes a firearm thread. Usually it becomes a mixture of posts concerning who carry's what, and arguments over gun laws.


The OP mentioned firearms in the very first post of this thread.  I don't see why it's so surprising it continued on that course.


----------



## abraxas (Jan 3, 2009)

tharmsen said:


> Why lock this thread?  It's quite active which means people want to take part in the discussion.
> 
> If you don't like it, you're not obligated to read it.





I spent the day yesterday shooting photos.  Today I do whatever I want.


----------



## inTempus (Jan 3, 2009)

Arch said:


> I have had a few requests that this thread be locked tho, so it will be done shortly.


Party poopers!  

Gotta love the "I don't like what you're saying so I want to silence you" mentality.  :hugs:


----------



## fwellers (Jan 3, 2009)

tharmsen said:


> The OP mentioned firearms in the very first post of this thread.  I don't see why it's so surprising it continued on that course.



No it's not surprising at all. It doesn't matter if he mentioned firearms with the first post or a middle post. That's sort of my point. I'm not making judgement, just stating an observation based on years of participating in forums. I think it's an interesting phenomenon.


----------



## inTempus (Jan 3, 2009)

fwellers said:


> No it's not surprising at all. It doesn't matter if he mentioned firearms with the first post or a middle post. That's sort of my point. I'm not making judgement, just stating an observation based on years of participating in forums. I think it's an interesting phenomenon.


People are passionate about it I suppose.  It's one of those universal hot button issues.


----------



## fwellers (Jan 3, 2009)

tharmsen said:


> Party poopers!
> 
> Gotta love the "I don't like what you're saying so I want to silence you" mentality.  :hugs:



I agree with you. Lots of forums lock threads where the content digresses from the main theme of the forum. I don't generally understand that, because I know it's also a numbers game, and more posts is usually a good thing. As long as the civility level remains high, ( but not too 'pc' ), then the thread is what I would consider to be healthy. But I don't own the forum, and currently don't even pay for the priviledge of posting on it so .....

I'm on the cruisecritics form because I cruise once a year. Those mods lock threads and actually wipe them off the planet as soon as their is the slightest sign of tension.  Threads about smoking cigarettes on ships don't stand a chance. hahahaha.

Matter of fact btw, I'm heading off for a week long cruise in about an hour.


----------



## fwellers (Jan 3, 2009)

tharmsen said:


> People are passionate about it I suppose.  It's one of those universal hot button issues.



yup. 
Hey, how bout a thread on abortion.


----------



## Arch (Jan 3, 2009)

ye well.. the time has come to put a lock on this, i'll do the usual Jerry Springer ending (which people are use to when i end these hot button topics!)... look after yourselves.... and each other.


----------

