survival as an American tourist
book...@yahoo.com
editor. I notice that fanny packs and typical American behaviors are
biggies. I didn't know a photocopy of my passport is accepted. I've
CAPITALIZED the topics.
(quote)
Minimize the Risks You're Likely to Encounter
Here are some precautions you can take to minimize the risks of crime
while you're traveling.
Seek protection in numbers. Whenever possible TRAVEL IN GROUPS of two
or more. Never get into a taxi with a passenger already inside, even
when offered a chance to split the fare. The driver and the
"passenger" may be in cahoots.
LOWER YOUR PROFILE. Americans -- or other affluent tourists, for that
matter -- are prime targets. So, as much as you may be proud to be an
American, the prudent traveler tries to maintain a low profile in this
regard. Avoid American logo merchandise and loud Hawaiian shirts,
minimize the amount of jewelry and other trappings of wealth you
display, and try to converse in public at a volume level that doesn't
alert everyone for hundreds of feet that you're from the States.
According to Chris McGoey of McGoey Security Consulting and the Crime
Doctor Web site, bright white sneakers are also dead giveaways of your
U.S. nationality.
As part of maintaining a low profile, do not carry your valuables in
a FANNY PACK. Time was when this was the recommended choice to foil
pickpockets, as it was always in view and the contents were protected
by a zipper. Now, according to security consultant Mulvenna, there is
a phrase used by thieves to describe fanny packs: "One Stop Shopping."
NEVER PUT YOUR VALUABLES where you can't see them, or where they are
too easy for a thief to quickly snatch and run. The worst choice of
all is a BACKPACK, which can be opened surreptitiously or slit without
any clue to the bearer. Men should not carry their wallet in their
back pockets for the same reason. Women should not carry their purses
over their shoulders; they should carry them across their chests.
McGoey cautions that money belts are not a good idea if they are
visible as a bulge at your waistband or if you have to practically
undress to get out some cash to buy a snack or souvenir. He prefers
wearing clothing with multiple deep front pockets, secured by buttons
or zippers, which are harder to get into.
MINIMIZE YOUR LOSS in the event you are victimized by a thief. Take
just one or two credit cards and a minimal amount of cash ashore with
you. Unless absolutely unavoidable, never go ashore with your actual
passport; bring a photocopy of the data pages. Spread out your
valuables among your various pockets and bags, as well as among
members of your travel party.
PHOTOCOPY all important information including your passport's data
pages, both sides of your credit cards, travel itinerary, other IDs
and contact information. Leave one copy of those pages with a friend
or relative back in the States and another in your cabin's safe. In
the event of a theft, you can have the info faxed to the U.S. embassy
to get an emergency replacement passport and will have the contact
number of your credit card company so you can cancel your card and get
a new one.
Carry a MUGGERS WALLET. This is a cheap wallet with a small amount of
money, a credit card, business cards, etc. that you give to a robber
while keeping your actual funds and important docs concealed. Hand
over the "mugger's wallet," and immediately hightail it!
Carry a DISPOSABLE CAMERA ashore, even if you bring your brand-new
12-megapixel digital with you. If you want to have someone take your
picture, hand them the disposable, not your good camera.
STAY SOBER. Many cruise ports, especially in the Caribbean and Mexico,
are renowned for their bar scene. But with your judgment impaired due
to alcohol, you're more likely to be taken advantage of by a thief or
scam artist. If you plan on partying in port, either keep the drinks
to a minimum or assign one person in the group to stay sober and watch
out for the interests of everyone else.
Hiring a taxi or local guide can be a wonderful way to explore -- but
you can also end up getting fleeced. Consider finding a REPUTABLE
GUIDE or tour service online and booking in advance. If not, look for
or ask about licensing, or go to a big hotel and ask the concierge to
hail you a cab or recommend a guide. Otherwise, just use your best
judgment and be on alert.
Taken together, this litany of warnings makes tourist travel seem
fraught with dangers -- but, as we stated at the start of this
article, travel abroad is hardly more dangerous than visiting any city
close to home. THE PRUDENT TRAVELER remains aware of his or her
surroundings and acts intelligently and with discretion. In the final
analysis, when it comes to crime, the best defense is common sense.
(unquote)
terryc
> I didn't know a photocopy of my passport is accepted.
The idea is that the copy should at least provide all the details they
need to check you really did have one. Over here, you could get it
signed by a Justice of the Peace to certify it is a legitiate copy.
Might assist in the credibility stakes.
robert bowman
> Carry a MUGGERS WALLET. This is a cheap wallet with a small amount of
> money, a credit card, business cards, etc. that you give to a robber
> while keeping your actual funds and important docs concealed. Hand
> over the "mugger's wallet," and immediately hightail it!
My favorite muggers wallet was a wraparound holster for the AMT Backup. It
printed just like a wallet so the mugger would be happy when you fished it
out. For a short while, at least.
Gunner Asch
wrote:
You carry a Backup too? Which one...380 or the .45?
I carry the .45 DAO everywhere I go, everyday and have for years.
Gunner
I am the Sword of my Family
and the Shield of my Nation.
If sent, I will crush everything you have built,
burn everything you love,
and kill every one of you.
(Hebrew quote)
robert bowman
> You carry a Backup too? Which one...380 or the .45?
The .380. I saw it sitting on a pawnshop shelf years ago and couldn't
resist. I've got big hands, and it just about vanishes in them. .380 isn't
much, but it beats .32. The only good thing about .32 is it was the only
thing on the shelves after every other caliber was stripped bare during the
Obama Blue Light Sale.
Gunner Asch
wrote:
>Gunner Asch wrote:
Does your .380 shoot ok? The AMTs in .380 have a very very bad history
in jams, failures to feed and whatnot. Some took a fair amount of
gunsmithing to get them reliable enough for the street.
Gunner Asch
<H.I....@debian.user.invalid.org> wrote:
>In witness thereof, Gunner Asch stated:
>> On Tue, 19 Oct 2010 08:06:27 -0600, robert bowman <bow...@montana.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>Gunner Asch wrote:
>>>
>>>> You carry a Backup too? �Which one...380 or the .45?
>>>
>>>The .380. I saw it sitting on a pawnshop shelf years ago and couldn't
>>>resist. I've got big hands, and it just about vanishes in them. .380 isn't
>>>much, but it beats .32. The only good thing about .32 is it was the only
>>>thing on the shelves after every other caliber was stripped bare during the
>>>Obama Blue Light Sale.
>>
>> Does your .380 shoot ok? The AMTs in .380 have a very very bad history
>> in jams, failures to feed and whatnot. Some took a fair amount of
>> gunsmithing to get them reliable enough for the street.
>>
>
>Exactly why I traded mine in for S&W .38spl.
Now the 45 version...that generally worked well out of the box..and if
not..didnt require much more than a Dremal tool and about 15 minutes to
get it working just hunky dorey.
Ive carried mine for over 12 yrs nearly every day, and have fired about
1500 rounds through it trouble free. Im quite comfy with it as my
tuckaway, with a spare mag tucked in a back pocket.
And Ive got...ah...."several" tuckaways to choose from.
But then..thats just me.
Gunner
greylock
wrote:
>On Tue, 19 Oct 2010 08:06:27 -0600, robert bowman <bow...@montana.com>
>wrote:
>
>>Gunner Asch wrote:
>>
>>> You carry a Backup too? �Which one...380 or the .45?
>>
>>The .380. I saw it sitting on a pawnshop shelf years ago and couldn't
>>resist. I've got big hands, and it just about vanishes in them. .380 isn't
>>much, but it beats .32. The only good thing about .32 is it was the only
>>thing on the shelves after every other caliber was stripped bare during the
>>Obama Blue Light Sale.
>
>Does your .380 shoot ok? The AMTs in .380 have a very very bad history
>in jams, failures to feed and whatnot. Some took a fair amount of
>gunsmithing to get them reliable enough for the street.
>
I have two from quite a few years ago.
One was sent back due to problems. Got it back working fine.
'
Both now seem to work very well - of course I don't really shoot them
a lot. But neither has given me trouble in the last 10 or 15 years.
Gunner Asch
wrote:
>On Tue, 19 Oct 2010 12:49:09 -0700, Gunner Asch <gunne...@gmail.com>
>wrote:
>
>>On Tue, 19 Oct 2010 08:06:27 -0600, robert bowman <bow...@montana.com>
>>wrote:
>>
>>>Gunner Asch wrote:
>>>
>>>> You carry a Backup too? �Which one...380 or the .45?
>>>
>>>The .380. I saw it sitting on a pawnshop shelf years ago and couldn't
>>>resist. I've got big hands, and it just about vanishes in them. .380 isn't
>>>much, but it beats .32. The only good thing about .32 is it was the only
>>>thing on the shelves after every other caliber was stripped bare during the
>>>Obama Blue Light Sale.
>>
>>Does your .380 shoot ok? The AMTs in .380 have a very very bad history
>>in jams, failures to feed and whatnot. Some took a fair amount of
>>gunsmithing to get them reliable enough for the street.
>>
>
>I have two from quite a few years ago.
>
>One was sent back due to problems. Got it back working fine.
>'
>Both now seem to work very well - of course I don't really shoot them
>a lot. But neither has given me trouble in the last 10 or 15 years.
Cool!
Type "Amt .380" into google and there are a shitload of horror stories
about it.
AMT is long gone of course, but...it wasnt one of their better
offerings.
Glad they are working out for you.
Gunner
robert bowman
> Does your .380 shoot ok? The AMTs in .380 have a very very bad history
> in jams, failures to feed and whatnot. Some took a fair amount of
> gunsmithing to get them reliable enough for the street.
Yes, with a modification. I superglued a thin piece of aluminum to the
bottom of the magazine where the catch hods it. That made all the
difference in the world and came from the scientific process of
saying "Gee, if I push up on the magazine it feeds a lot better." I don't
think it had ever been cleaned when I got it, so I just attributed it to
wear and tear.
Gunner Asch
wrote:
>Gunner Asch wrote:
Still got super glue under it? Drill a hole and put at least (1) pop
rivet (stainless steel) through the spacer/mag bottom.
Ive had superglue go dead over the years when encountering gun
oil/solvents etc etc.
Or one or two of those tiny little fasterners that one finds holding
data plates on machinery. Looks like a tiny little nail with a corkscrew
body. I have a shitload of those, send me an email addy and Ill stick a
bunch in an envelope and mail you some.
They work quite well for this sort thing
Gunner
Gunner
"Not so old as to need virgins to excite him,
nor old enough to have the patience to teach one."
robert bowman
> Still got super glue under it? Drill a hole and put at least (1) pop
> rivet (stainless steel) through the spacer/mag bottom.
Yes. The superglue was a temporary expedient to try the spacer. It worked,
didn't fall off, so I called it good. I'm old school, if it ain't broke
don't fuck with it. I'm living in something that was going to be a
temporary housing solution for the winter -- the winter of '89.
> Or one or two of those tiny little fasterners that one finds holding
> data plates on machinery. Looks like a tiny little nail with a corkscrew
> body.
I've got a little brown envelope of those around someplace. Of course,
having a vivid visual memory of them in their little envelope doesn't mean
that I can find the safe place where I put it in less than 3 weeks, and
only when looking for something else I squirreled away. The question then
is "I was looking for those. Now, what did I want them for?"
I've got not so fond memories of drilling a cast iron hydraulic press platen
for a nameplate, and then trying to drive those damn things in with a ball
peen. I'm pretty good with fine work, but fine work with a big hammer is
different.
Gunner Asch
wrote:
>Gunner Asch wrote:
Ayup. I made up a tool out of a cut off, round shanked screwdriver,
with a shallow hole drilled in the end of the shank for that. Leaves
enough sticking out to get it aimed square into the hole..then tapping
it drives it about half way in. Then I stick a slug made from drill rod
in the shank..and hammer it the rest of the way home. The last little
bit goes in with a flat nosed punch.
I hate bending them over..hate it worse when I bust one off and have to
redrill it out..never does line up and then you get an oval hole....
Gunner
book...@yahoo.com
wrote:
>On Tue, 19 Oct 2010 08:06:27 -0600, robert bowman <bow...@montana.com>
My handgun is no trouble and does all that I ask it to do--which is
nothing, because I don't have one. Instead of the .44 magnum I used
to have, I have a short-barreled shotgun for home defense. Outside, I
don't expose myself to muggers or nut-cases. If cornered, I hand over
all my cash, the car, etc..
If I have another pistol, it might be one to watch movies with, like
the retro version of the WW-II Beretta 76 in .32, .380, 9mm short, or
whatever. It's the gun James Bond retired for the Walther PPK. Price
new is like $450, authentic original might be more. Has a tip-up
barrel so you can load and unload without the action or clip. Supposed
to have good accuracy.
book...@yahoo.com
Gunner Asch
Well.....if handing over everything and then having the guy(s)
shoot/stab/beat/bash you works for you...so be it.
Its not up to us to protect you, or even after all this time,
advise/warn/suggest you actually be proactive about your personal public
defense.
>
>If I have another pistol, it might be one to watch movies with, like
>the retro version of the WW-II Beretta 76 in .32, .380, 9mm short, or
>whatever. It's the gun James Bond retired for the Walther PPK. Price
>new is like $450, authentic original might be more. Has a tip-up
>barrel so you can load and unload without the action or clip. Supposed
>to have good accuracy.
Or you could get something that actually works for stopping bad guys
with..but...it might not be fun to watch movies with.
As for myself..when I watch movies, I have dogs, cats or lady friends to
snuggle with.
Gunner
greylock
wrote:
They've worked well - however, it might be relevant that they are the
DA .380's = not the SA version they made
Ugly - heavy by modern standards - fairly shitty trigger pull - but
very dependable
Gunner Asch
wrote:
My daily carry is the .45 version of yours. Heavy..heavy trigger pull.
But I can keep 5 in a playing card at 15 yrd, which is good enough, and
can do it very quickly...under 3 seconds. Up close and personal...I can
empty the gun center of mass in well under 1.5 seconds.
It certainly isnt for everyone, but it certainly works for me, when I
cant carry a 1911.
Gunner
robert bowman
> Well.....if handing over everything and then having the guy(s)
> shoot/stab/beat/bash you works for you...so be it.
I've never been in that situation so I can't say for sure, but I don't think
I'm wired that way. It's not even really about the contents of my wallet or
my car, it's about somebody fucking with me.
robert bowman
> I hate bending them over..hate it worse when I bust one off and have to
> redrill it out..never does line up and then you get an oval hole....
We used a lot of those black and white laminated phenolic tags to label
solenoid valves and so worth. They didn't stand up too well to rework. We
eventually bought a Green engraver so we didn't have to wait for somebody
else to make replacements. Then all we had to do was find one of our
snuffies that could spell.
book...@yahoo.com
wrote:
This is an important survival issue, IMO, because even without the
problems of carrying a weapon around constantly, it comes down to your
health or your money. I'm saying that in a majority of instances, you
should not try to get the upper hand on a gunster, even if you're
armed. Add up all the factors, including the possibility of losing
body parts, and it comes out that rolling over and playing dead is
more viable, IMO. And you shouldn't pull your weapon unless planning
to shoot to kill. And you shouldn't go physical in other ways when
armed.
Worst case scenario might be what you do if armed and attacked by
someone dangerous. Shoot him and you are seriously compromised the
legal repercussions. Even the police are second-guessed in these
situations.
Also, have to consider the possibility that someone will take your
weapon away from you and use it on you.
>As for myself..when I watch movies, I have dogs, cats or lady friends to
>snuggle with.
A good way to go if you're going physical, not like the wealthy rock
star who shoots the TV set.
book...@yahoo.com
wrote:
>Gunner Asch wrote:
You have to live to fight again another day, IMO. Can't be getting
stuck into other people's ego Tar Babies that turn you into road kill,
IMO.
Gunner Asch
wrote:
>Gunner Asch wrote:
The OP seems to have made up his mind. Suicide by helpfulness if pushed.
Far far too many badguys today decide they dont want a living witness to
ID them in court, or simply want to kill someone after robbing them. Two
item power trip.
Shrug..and its fascinating he posts on a Survival newsgroup.....
Gunner Asch
wrote:
>Gunner Asch wrote:
Ayup. Ive got a Gorton 3-Z pantograph..makes nice! laminated tags if you
could lay out the patterns and spell properly <G>
Gunner Asch
Ive carried a gun for ...hum...40 yrs the last 27 with a permit. On 6
occasions, Ive had to present it to prevent serious harm coming to me or
others I was with.
On several occasions..the cops, when notified (which I seldom do) were
stunned that Id not shot the perps. They were Bad People, with long
criminal records and the cops told me frankly..they thought I was nuts
for not having lit them up.
But I controlled the situation. With luck, Ill never again have to kill
someone in combat, either on the battle field, or on the street. But at
NO time am I not fully prepared to do exactly that if the situation
comes uncunted.
And its been my experience that with the proper method of reporting,
being interviewed etc etc..one generally gets a pat on the back and no
issues come from it.
Remember....
"I was attacked and had to defend myself" followed IMMEDIATLY by
"I cant speak to you any more until Ive contacted an attorney"
Period. End program. Full stop.
And then contact a 2nd Amendment friendly attorney. It might cost you
$150-300. Shrug.
Beats having your next of kin holding car washes to come up with enough
money to buy you a box and a plot of land to bury you in.
Its worthless to be a survivalist..if you are not prepared and WILLING
to do what it takes to survive.
And for those who do have to present a firearm..you have two choices if
there are no shots fired...
You can hold them for the cops or you can let them go. I would however
make sure the perps ID stays with you and you either turn it into the
cops with a complaint..or stick it in the trash can a few weeks later.
Im a big fan of turning them over to the cops along with a signed
statement (having my Lawyer draw it up and deliver it)..and letting the
system deal with them. Kids...thats another story..that is entirely up
to you. But at the least...impress on them that they could be dead,
instead of sitting there hands on their heads, gun pointed in their
direction. Having them strip naked or to their skivies...tends to
impress on them just how serious their situation really is.....and then
running them off, keeping their clothing and ID..telling them that their
parents can come for it....tends to really really leave a mark in their
mush filled skulls that lasts for a very long time.
Particularly if you put your phone number in magic marker on their
foreheads before you let them run.
Shrug.
Gunner Asch
Indeed. However...letting the bastards kill or maim you really doesnt
help your case very well..........
book...@yahoo.com
>
>Ive carried a gun for ...hum...40 yrs the last 27 with a permit. On 6
>occasions, Ive had to present it to prevent serious harm coming to me or
>others I was with.
Are you in the "walk softly and carry a big stick" category of
concealed permit holders, or is your behavior different because you
are carrying? My idea is to change my behavior away from any
confrontation (eye contact) with gangsters or teenagers with a gun.
Test case: does one stay out of bars and unlit alleys instead of
carrying a gun? I say yes, because the odds are against you in too
many ways when someone else is "calling the shots."
>On several occasions..the cops, when notified (which I seldom do) were
>stunned that Id not shot the perps. They were Bad People, with long
>criminal records and the cops told me frankly..they thought I was nuts
>for not having lit them up.
>But I controlled the situation. With luck, Ill never again have to kill
>someone in combat, either on the battle field, or on the street. But at
>NO time am I not fully prepared to do exactly that if the situation
>comes uncunted.
>
>And its been my experience that with the proper method of reporting,
>being interviewed etc etc..one generally gets a pat on the back and no
>issues come from it.
I think burglars and muggers are scared by the possibility they'll be
shot, so are that much more likely to shoot first. Possibly there's a
state of mind issue involved here to work with.
Plus, if out-shot and sent to prison for the crime, they can sue you
for damages in civil court for "excessive force" or something, getting
a jailhouse lawyer to ask a judge to let them into court with a case,
which if accepted automatically allows them to be represented by a
court appointed lawyer, all at public cost. In other words, even just
defending yourself in your own home by hitting a burglar with a golf
club can cost you, let's say maybe $10,000 for clipping off an ear.
Pull your gun in a bank during a hold-up, and you could end up being
shot for being part of the gang, etc., then maybe charged and sent to
prison.
So it's not just the bad guys who would kill you to prevent your
testifying against them, but the G. Gordon Liddey scheme that you must
shoot to kill, too, for the same reasons. Other type situation
calling for extreme action would be where an abduction is in progress,
I assume. A "drop weapon" is a planted gun left with the victim to
prove in court your self-defense.
My whole argument seems to be that survival strategy has to include
avoidance of bad situations for the sake of your own self as well as
those who depend on you, plus that you get bad consequences and
effects to cope with. A reasonable compromise seems to be for the
survivalist to be very competent with handling firearms, have one at
home, but know when to hold 'em and when to fold 'em.
It's just possible that if presented with a crime going down in front
of by an armed thug, you shouldn't interfere, even if armed yourself.
And the odds are better if you are working as a team with others.
That's why I would like to see cops always working with a partner at
least. Neighbors should communicate about what they are likely to do.
robert bowman
> You have to live to fight again another day, IMO. Can't be getting
> stuck into other people's ego Tar Babies that turn you into road kill,
> IMO.
We aren't talking rational here. When the adrenaline starts to flow, you do
what you have to do. I mean 'have' quite literally, not as a figure of
speech.
Gunner Asch
>(snip)
>>
>>Ive carried a gun for ...hum...40 yrs the last 27 with a permit. On 6
>>occasions, Ive had to present it to prevent serious harm coming to me or
>>others I was with.
>
>Are you in the "walk softly and carry a big stick" category of
>concealed permit holders, or is your behavior different because you
>are carrying? My idea is to change my behavior away from any
>confrontation (eye contact) with gangsters or teenagers with a gun.
>Test case: does one stay out of bars and unlit alleys instead of
>carrying a gun? I say yes, because the odds are against you in too
>many ways when someone else is "calling the shots."
Of course Im in the walk softly catagory. Anything else is foolish. And
its a well proven fact that the vast majority of those who carry
legally..also walk softly.
This is not something you know very much about, is it?
And no. I dont avoid any place. Why should I? I dont live in Condition
White. I go where I choose to go, when I choose to go. Never looking
for trouble, but trouble often looks for citizens. Else there would not
be any crime rate at all, would there?
>
>>On several occasions..the cops, when notified (which I seldom do) were
>>stunned that Id not shot the perps. They were Bad People, with long
>>criminal records and the cops told me frankly..they thought I was nuts
>>for not having lit them up.
>
>>But I controlled the situation. With luck, Ill never again have to kill
>>someone in combat, either on the battle field, or on the street. But at
>>NO time am I not fully prepared to do exactly that if the situation
>>comes uncunted.
>>
>>And its been my experience that with the proper method of reporting,
>>being interviewed etc etc..one generally gets a pat on the back and no
>>issues come from it.
>
>I think burglars and muggers are scared by the possibility they'll be
>shot, so are that much more likely to shoot first. Possibly there's a
>state of mind issue involved here to work with.
Actually...you are again wrong. The average burglar and mugger doesnt
believe they will intersect with an armed and prepared individual. In
fact..countless jail house interviews with groups of them show that to
be their biggest fear and they study those that look "helpless" and pick
them out, rather than folks at random. The "not looking them in the
eye" bit is one of the signs they pick for a new victim.
Look the bastards in the eye, keep your head up and moving, watching,
moving. They will generally go on to a weak victim. You are obviously
not very experienced ....you may wish to study up on it, before you
profile yourself into a shitload of bad things.
>
>Plus, if out-shot and sent to prison for the crime, they can sue you
>for damages in civil court for "excessive force" or something, getting
>a jailhouse lawyer to ask a judge to let them into court with a case,
>which if accepted automatically allows them to be represented by a
>court appointed lawyer, all at public cost. In other words, even just
>defending yourself in your own home by hitting a burglar with a golf
>club can cost you, let's say maybe $10,000 for clipping off an ear.
Most states have enacted Hold Harmless laws, often called "make my day"
laws, which prevent the perp from suing the victim who shot their ass
off.
>
>Pull your gun in a bank during a hold-up, and you could end up being
>shot for being part of the gang, etc., then maybe charged and sent to
>prison.
Wow...so does that mean you dont grab money and run out the door with
the gang? Or will they figure that you and them had a sudden change of
opinion and you shot them?
>
>So it's not just the bad guys who would kill you to prevent your
>testifying against them, but the G. Gordon Liddey scheme that you must
>shoot to kill, too, for the same reasons. Other type situation
>calling for extreme action would be where an abduction is in progress,
>I assume. A "drop weapon" is a planted gun left with the victim to
>prove in court your self-defense.
Blink blink...blink.....
>
>My whole argument seems to be that survival strategy has to include
>avoidance of bad situations for the sake of your own self as well as
>those who depend on you, plus that you get bad consequences and
>effects to cope with. A reasonable compromise seems to be for the
>survivalist to be very competent with handling firearms, have one at
>home, but know when to hold 'em and when to fold 'em.
So in other words..its a survival thingy to make yourself look and Be as
helpless as possible, so they wont kill you (hopefully) when they strip
you down to your skivies and steal everything you own. Right?
>
>It's just possible that if presented with a crime going down in front
>of by an armed thug, you shouldn't interfere, even if armed yourself.
Indeed it is. On the other hand..can you live withyourself if the victim
is badly hurt or killed and you stood there with your dick in your
hands rather than the gun in your holster?
>
>And the odds are better if you are working as a team with others.
>That's why I would like to see cops always working with a partner at
>least. Neighbors should communicate about what they are likely to do.
The odds of what?
And you do know that seldom are cops held up and robbed, while in
uniform..right?
>
I wonder why that is? Maybe its because they are carrying a gun?
While you on the other hand..refusing to meet the bad guys eyes as you
walk down the street, hunched over and in Prey Mode....expect to have
them ignore you...right?
How old are you? early 80s?
Irv
This turned into a cool thread... I have to go with Bookburns modality,
at least for now unless I get a handgun. Even now I'm only in process
of getting a shotgun, my first gun at age of 50. I was brainwashed from
childhood against guns by my parents. But this was in Fairbanks, all our
neighbors had guns and I appreciated gun ownership, but one is afraid of
what one has no experience with. And I don't recall anyone ever asking
me to go shooting, untill now, so I guess I had a gun phobia. I know
how play dead, but I like the choice. Another wierd thing about me,
my parents we're sort of atheist, but I immediately began believing,
privately. So I've a religion, sort of space-christian, but you've
never heard of it- so that completely defines my views on survivalism,
as I imagine any religion could do to a follower. My religion affirms
self defence, and has nothing against guns, but would ask that one use
one's brain and even spirit when possible. And I believe in "Survival"
after physical death, but you loose a lot of memory and there's nothing
quite like this level. So physically I'm not situated the best for
survival, but I try, I buy survival related items and follow my
religion. I believe the US is going to crash very hard, and that
someday a messiah will come to stay and order things worldwide, but
I've no idea of the timing. I think a good survival mechanism would
to be to learn a couple asian languages, although i'm not doing it.
Definitely Chinese and definitely not Japanese. Can't do everything.
Physical survival is an aspect of this 1st existance, but is simply
a matter of choice after this life. The survival of cultural
civilization itself is the biggest general emergency right now.
The best of the old must be brought forward into the new.
One thing I've learned and plan to practice for "survival" is to help
others. If you give yourself to others, your family, community, or
whatever group presents itself, you should live as long as anyone,
you are valuable and will generally be protected. Groups have a
greater survival quotient. Plus it's noble and the heavens would look
with favor on such efforts. Well I could go on all day, but enough.
Les
book...@yahoo.com
wrote:
>On Thu, 21 Oct 2010 04:57:34 -0800, book...@yahoo.com wrote:
That seems to indicate where you're coming from. Author who wrote The
naked Ape lists the looking- them- in- the- eye bit as common among
animals challenging another, a sign of aggression. Cesar Malone, the
Dog Whisperer, says sometimes you look them in the eye, other times
you don't; I think because the eye-look causes more attitude,
affirming what's going down (a dog looking you in the eyes, seeking
direction is ideal). His style emphasizes being calm and assertive,
not aggressive, I think.
Many New Yorkers do believe in eye contact and challenging attitude as
a way to survive in the city among predators--which many learn to be
as a matter of lifestyle.
>Look the bastards in the eye, keep your head up and moving, watching,
>moving. They will generally go on to a weak victim. You are obviously
>not very experienced ....you may wish to study up on it, before you
>profile yourself into a shitload of bad things.
Not going into personal life experiences, but I can tell you I've
worked inside medium custody prisons alone with the bad ones, and my
style was usually communicative, seldom authoritarian, trying for
mutual respect. Come across as with an attitude in that kind of
environment and you're likely to get whupped by the guards supposedly
protecting you. Survived with inmates, not against them, really.
Survival inside prisons is not a pretty picture.
In psychology class they sometimes play with questions like, If you
came back to earth as a dog, what species would you choose to be? Some
choose cocker spaniel, some pit bull, etc..
>>It's just possible that if presented with a crime going down in front
>>of by an armed thug, you shouldn't interfere, even if armed yourself.
>
>Indeed it is. On the other hand..can you live withyourself if the victim
>is badly hurt or killed and you stood there with your dick in your
>hands rather than the gun in your holster?
If you agree that living with yourself afterward is important, I think
that's maybe the best we can do, assuming that what others think does
have some weight. I assume life in the military and life in suburbia
bring different considerations to the equation.
>>
>>And the odds are better if you are working as a team with others.
>>That's why I would like to see cops always working with a partner at
>>least. Neighbors should communicate about what they are likely to do.
>
>The odds of what?
Classic case of passenger side cop walking up on stopped car to
observe what goes on inside, while other cop approaches driver side.
Single cops get into physical contest with drunks and can't control
outcome. It's about covering each others' backs.
>
>And you do know that seldom are cops held up and robbed, while in
>uniform..right?
>>
>I wonder why that is? Maybe its because they are carrying a gun?
>
>While you on the other hand..refusing to meet the bad guys eyes as you
>walk down the street, hunched over and in Prey Mode....expect to have
>them ignore you...right?
You are navigating alertly, maybe not going down dark streets, not
locking eyes with others at the OK Corral. If necessary to
communicate with a street gang, best not to do it with an attitude of
authority but some basis for mutual respect. Then if the danger is
there, run rather than fight. Cornered, you better kowtow. Do not
trigger rage. Better if you can sing and dance.
>How old are you? early 80s?
74. I've lived all over the world and have only a few scars, mostly
from accidents. Maybe some PTS. Worst enemies have been my own
relatives. Am my own worst enemy in some ways, including going the
extra mile for another. Was a chaplain's assistant in Army. Have
gotten into beautiful trouble many times by blowing the whistle on
others. Have grave reservations about the fairness and goodness of
others when it comes to survival in the jungle, but that doesn't mean
going headhunting. bookburn
book...@yahoo.com
wrote:
>book...@yahoo.com wrote:
A remarkable idea; that it's really about adrenalin or testosterone
and surfing the wave that's in the blood. Scottish notion that It's
in the blood, sort of like sanguine Romans thought. The life of the
blood as celebrated in Spain and Portugal, in the bullfight. Sometimes
I think everyone behaves this way; the men are contestants and the
women are cheerleaders. Then everyone has sex.
Gunner Asch
Groups are great!
However..if an unarmed group encounters an armed group, guess which
group will be hooked to the plows.......
book...@yahoo.com
(snip)
Thanks for your in-put. I wonder what you think about the guy in
Fairbanks a few years ago who shot a brown bear, wounding it, when it
approached his house with kids in it? I understand the Alaska Fish
and Game confiscated his rifle and he got a suspended sentence of some
kind.
I was thinking that if he had at least the competence to kill the
bear instead of leaving the problem of tracking it down by AFS, maybe
they wouldn't have confiscated the rifle. A big .375, I think it was.
bookburn
Gunner Asch
>>
>>While you on the other hand..refusing to meet the bad guys eyes as you
>>walk down the street, hunched over and in Prey Mode....expect to have
>>them ignore you...right?
>
>You are navigating alertly, maybe not going down dark streets, not
>locking eyes with others at the OK Corral. If necessary to
>communicate with a street gang, best not to do it with an attitude of
>authority but some basis for mutual respect. Then if the danger is
>there, run rather than fight. Cornered, you better kowtow. Do not
>trigger rage. Better if you can sing and dance.
There is a vast difference between looking someone in the eyes, and
locking eyes with them. But you were aware of that. Im curious as to
why you put so much slanted world view into your responses.
How one can go from looking a man straight in the eye with no fear, but
no aggression to "locking eyes"...is fascinating.
>
>>How old are you? early 80s?
>
>74. I've lived all over the world and have only a few scars, mostly
>from accidents. Maybe some PTS. Worst enemies have been my own
>relatives. Am my own worst enemy in some ways, including going the
>extra mile for another. Was a chaplain's assistant in Army. Have
>gotten into beautiful trouble many times by blowing the whistle on
>others. Have grave reservations about the fairness and goodness of
>others when it comes to survival in the jungle, but that doesn't mean
>going headhunting. bookburn
My Dad is now 78 as I recall. He learned early in life to be confidant,
upright, look others in the eyes as an acknowledgement of their
existance, but not to push it into agression and so on. And he carries a
gun.
I learned the same very early in My life ..and I carry a gun.
Far too many fruitloops out there. But I can go into Compton, Watts,
Downey, Cottonwood Road, and not have to worry terribly much about being
assaulted. And Dad, who is much smaller and far more frail than I...can
do the same.
Dont look like a bunny..and the wolves will seek out easier prey. The
gun is for the times the rabid wolves are about.
book...@yahoo.com
wrote:
>On Thu, 21 Oct 2010 11:15:30 -0800, book...@yahoo.com wrote:
>
>>>
>>>While you on the other hand..refusing to meet the bad guys eyes as you
>>>walk down the street, hunched over and in Prey Mode....expect to have
>>>them ignore you...right?
>>
>>You are navigating alertly, maybe not going down dark streets, not
>>locking eyes with others at the OK Corral. If necessary to
>>communicate with a street gang, best not to do it with an attitude of
>>authority but some basis for mutual respect. Then if the danger is
>>there, run rather than fight. Cornered, you better kowtow. Do not
>>trigger rage. Better if you can sing and dance.
>
>There is a vast difference between looking someone in the eyes, and
>locking eyes with them. But you were aware of that. Im curious as to
>why you put so much slanted world view into your responses.
>
>How one can go from looking a man straight in the eye with no fear, but
>no aggression to "locking eyes"...is fascinating.
Some of us were probably brought up to conduct ourselves in a certain
way, such as shaking hands with a firm grip, looking someone in the
eye calmly, etc.. Making too much of that is shaking hands in a show
of strength or staring someone down. That is what gives you away. The
eye thing is confrontational to some on the make. They may "mistake"
you as the aggressor and become defensive/escalating to something bad.
If you look like the "live and let live" type, your chances of
survival are better, IMO.
>>>How old are you? early 80s?
>>
>>74. I've lived all over the world and have only a few scars, mostly
>>from accidents. Maybe some PTS. Worst enemies have been my own
>>relatives. Am my own worst enemy in some ways, including going the
>>extra mile for another. Was a chaplain's assistant in Army. Have
>>gotten into beautiful trouble many times by blowing the whistle on
>>others. Have grave reservations about the fairness and goodness of
>>others when it comes to survival in the jungle, but that doesn't mean
>>going headhunting. bookburn
>
>My Dad is now 78 as I recall. He learned early in life to be confidant,
>upright, look others in the eyes as an acknowledgement of their
>existance, but not to push it into agression and so on. And he carries a
>gun.
>
>I learned the same very early in My life ..and I carry a gun.
>
>Far too many fruitloops out there. But I can go into Compton, Watts,
>Downey, Cottonwood Road, and not have to worry terribly much about being
>assaulted. And Dad, who is much smaller and far more frail than I...can
>do the same.
>
>Dont look like a bunny..and the wolves will seek out easier prey. The
>gun is for the times the rabid wolves are about.
Not going to inject fear into my argument about a strategies of
survival with a concealed carry permit. That would be a sword that
cuts both ways. Also, a whole other question about what you do when a
sign says "No Guns Allowed"? bookburn
Gunner Asch
>>I learned the same very early in My life ..and I carry a gun.
>>
>>Far too many fruitloops out there. But I can go into Compton, Watts,
>>Downey, Cottonwood Road, and not have to worry terribly much about being
>>assaulted. And Dad, who is much smaller and far more frail than I...can
>>do the same.
>>
>>Dont look like a bunny..and the wolves will seek out easier prey. The
>>gun is for the times the rabid wolves are about.
>
>Not going to inject fear into my argument about a strategies of
>survival with a concealed carry permit. That would be a sword that
>cuts both ways. Also, a whole other question about what you do when a
>sign says "No Guns Allowed"? bookburn
If your weapon is concealed...how do they know you are armed? This of
course doesnt mean governmental buildings which is against the law to
carry in most of them.
Public buildings..stores, theaters, etc...how does anyone know you are
carrying?
Think son...think before posting such buffoonery.
They are not going to arrest you if some how you strip nekked and they
spot your weapon. They will at best, ask you to leave.
Period.
And frankly..fewer and fewer places are keeping those signs visible.
Google it..you will be fascinated how many places are starting to simply
ignore those who are legally armed.
book...@yahoo.com
wrote:
>On Thu, 21 Oct 2010 13:46:25 -0800, book...@yahoo.com wrote:
>
>>>I learned the same very early in My life ..and I carry a gun.
>>>
>>>Far too many fruitloops out there. But I can go into Compton, Watts,
>>>Downey, Cottonwood Road, and not have to worry terribly much about being
>>>assaulted. And Dad, who is much smaller and far more frail than I...can
>>>do the same.
>>>
>>>Dont look like a bunny..and the wolves will seek out easier prey. The
>>>gun is for the times the rabid wolves are about.
>>
>>Not going to inject fear into my argument about a strategies of
>>survival with a concealed carry permit. That would be a sword that
>>cuts both ways. Also, a whole other question about what you do when a
>>sign says "No Guns Allowed"? bookburn
>
>
>If your weapon is concealed...how do they know you are armed? This of
>course doesnt mean governmental buildings which is against the law to
>carry in most of them.
>
>Public buildings..stores, theaters, etc...how does anyone know you are
>carrying?
>
>Think son...think before posting such buffoonery.
>
>They are not going to arrest you if some how you strip nekked and they
>spot your weapon. They will at best, ask you to leave.
>
>Period.
>
>And frankly..fewer and fewer places are keeping those signs visible.
>
>Google it..you will be fascinated how many places are starting to simply
>ignore those who are legally armed.
>
I searched a bit and observe that the "no guns allowed" sign issue is
growing as a social dilemma. Banks and restaurants are lining up on
both sides. For instance, the NRA annual meeting in North Carolina
for 2010 met in a convention center denying guns. For NRAs
explanation how this could happen, see the site at
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/josh-sugarmann/nra-annual-meeting-no-gun_b_576680.html
If there were two equal restaurants, one denying admission of guns and
the other inviting guns, I wonder how they would compare in terms of
business after a year, how the menu would change, and what differences
in the diners?
I would try out both, just to see, but would probably feel more
comfortable in the no guns one. bookburn
deepdudu
>
>If there were two equal restaurants, one denying admission of guns and
>the other inviting guns, I wonder how they would compare in terms of
>business after a year, how the menu would change, and what differences
>in the diners?
>
>I would try out both, just to see, but would probably feel more
>comfortable in the no guns one. bookburn
I would think the food and service in the guns allowed restaurants
would be much better since the staff would fear for their lives if
they screwed something up.
Stormin Mormon
I'm much more comfortable in carry-legal restaurants. I'm much less
likely to be killed by a berzerker when the guy in the next booth can
defend himself and myself.
--
Christopher A. Young
Learn more about Jesus
www.lds.org
.
<book...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1q23c65qa9b8v9n1n...@4ax.com...
book...@yahoo.com
My guess is that the guns allowed restaurant would find itself also
for smoking, and the no guns one no smoking. Don't know what would
evolve next, maybe the no guns, no smoking one would have vegetarian
menu; the guns and smoking one would be meat and potatoes, no doubt.
Stormin Mormon
bathroom monitors, to be sure no one peed standing up.
--
Christopher A. Young
Learn more about Jesus
www.lds.org
.
<book...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:sf93c611p9cnn64fs...@4ax.com...
deepdudu
Sure. And they can serve alcohol cheap and have a morgue right out
back. Help the Darwinian thing right along.
Stormin Mormon
from carry permits. Because of the 5th ammendment protection against
self incrimination. It was an interesting thought.
I agree, that most of the area within our cities and towns are now
"gun free" by decree. Except for felons, who don't give a hoot about
those laws.
--
Christopher A. Young
Learn more about Jesus
www.lds.org
.
"H.I.T.man" <H.I....@debian.user.invalid.org> wrote in message
news:5cednZGKetBvM1zR...@bresnan.com...
I may as well be a felon because I have been barred of my rights, am
not a free man and live under the tyranny of a government hostile to
liberty! At least a dog can still carry and use it's protective
devices
in the States.
IRv
book...@yahoo.com
Yep. A good way to relax after loosening your belt would be to step
to the rear and target shoot a few rounds. Could have a 50' target
with 2" bullseye and double or nothing on dinner check if you can put
three in the black.
book...@yahoo.com
<H.I....@debian.user.invalid.org> wrote:
>In witness thereof, Gunner Asch stated:
>
>
>>
>>
>> If your weapon is concealed...how do they know you are armed? This of
>> course doesnt mean governmental buildings which is against the law to
>> carry in most of them.
>>
>> Public buildings..stores, theaters, etc...how does anyone know you are
>> carrying?
>>
>> Think son...think before posting such buffoonery.
>>
>> They are not going to arrest you if some how you strip nekked and they
>> spot your weapon. They will at best, ask you to leave.
>>
>> Period.
>>
>> And frankly..fewer and fewer places are keeping those signs visible.
>>
>> Google it..you will be fascinated how many places are starting to simply
>> ignore those who are legally armed.
>>
>
>"Those Who Sacrifice Liberty For Security Deserve Neither." - B.
>Franklin
>
>To add my 2 cents to this: another thing haters of the Constitution and
>of your God-given right to protect and defend yourself - this is truly
>about survival! - have done to imprison us, neuter our rights and
>nullify the 2nd Amendment ("shall not be infringed"), in addition to
>making us potential felons, is found here:
>
>Title 18 U.S.C �922(q), Title 18 U.S.C. �921(25) & (26), and
>Title 18 U.S.C Section 924(a)
>
>An example is this: I, after paying for the "privilege" of being treated
>like a criminal visa-vi background checks, finger printing and police
>photo, received permission to exercise what should be an un-infringed
>unalienable right to keep and bear loaded and unlocked arms in a
>concealed manner. However, because of legislation in direct contradiction
>of the 2nd Amendment, I cannot have a loaded and unlocked firearm within 1000
>feet of a school. Federal law has essentially established a 2000' diameter
>zone around schools. Doing so is a *felony* - even if I DO NOT KNOW I'm
>within 1000' of a school! Try putting your safety belt on while having an
>automobile wreck ... try loading a your locked up and unloaded firearm
>while being attacked! And, our mall is within 1000' of a school -
>making another no self-defence zone.
>There are 17 such educational institutions I know of in my area and
>many are beside main thoroughfares. Therefore, I cannot carry a useful
>firearm without violating the law and the 2nd Amendment has been nullified.
>
>Moreover, I cannot travel across much of my state with a firearm
>because when coming into town I may be with 1000' of a school. While hunting
>I have to seek out-of-the-way routes to protect myself from a possible
>felony charge. Also, I cannot lawfully go to a city park, State park
>or pass through any NWP areas with a firearm due to various state and federal
>laws which can make me a felon and imprison me for 5 years.
>
>We all know crime NEVER happens in towns, parks or along 50 mile
>stretches of open country, so why carry a firearm - right?
>
>I may as well be a felon because I have been barred of my rights, am
>not a free man and live under the tyranny of a government hostile to
>liberty! At least a dog can still carry and use it's protective devices
>in the States.
>
>This is what happens when people allow reasoning away our God-given,
>and supposedly Constitutionally protected liberties, in the name of safety
>and security.
>
>In closing, here are four quotes and a rhetorical question for consideration
>to those citizens of the Unites States reading this message:
>
>"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." - Thomas
>Jefferson
>
>"The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and
>bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in
>government." - Thomas Jefferson
>
>"For a people who are free, and who mean to remain so, a well-organized
>and armed militia is their best security." - Thomas Jefferson
>
>"Laws are made for men of ordinary understanding and should, therefore, be
>construed by the ordinary rules of common sense. Their meaning is not
>to be sought for in metaphysical subtleties which may make anything mean
>everything or nothing at pleasure." - Thomas Jefferson, letter to William
>Johnson, June 12, 1823
>
>Why don't people prefer to err on the side of life, liberty and happiness!?
In looking up the Internet sites commenting on gun carry permissions,
I noticed that the recent Supreme Court decisions are favorable to not
only federal but state laws regarding 2nd Amendment rights. The one
about home ownership of a gun in Washington, D. C., and the one
reversing Chicago's law about enforcing a gun ban.
I think what's happening is that states and municipalities are passing
right to carry laws, but with the provisions that 1) places can post
no gun admittance signs, and 2) gun carriers can legally enter
establishments service alcohol, but can't drink any.
If other people are like I am, they will end up with local laws
requiring constraint on who get to carry and where. I just had the
experience in a store of watching a young guy carrying a large
automatic in his front pants pocket, nervously tapping the butt while
he looked at merchandise. Didn't like to see a guy with two pistols
in belt holsters standing on the sidewalk in front of a house where he
said a dog had snapped at his heels earlier, and he had words with the
home owner.
Gunner Asch
You do understand that in the No Guns one...the bad people who want to
rob, steal and murder will ignore the signage completely and think that
its a far easier target than one thats not posted..right?
Which is the same reason gun shows never see robberies, homicides and
assaults, but other venues do.
Gunner
book...@yahoo.com
wrote:
Which brings up the legal question of whether someone knowingly
entering a no guns establishment with a concealed weapon, then gets
involved in a shooting, has compromised any defense rights. In some
communities they are making it a misdemeanor to enter such armed, up
to a month in jail and XX$$
Gunner Asch
Yes and? Did any of those individuals drag out their weapons and open
fire on innocents?
Did the second guy shoot the dog inside the yard? Did he shoot anyone?
Frankly..Ive carried a weapon when visiting a house that had pitbulls
that had just attacked my wife. If they had attacked me as they attacked
her ..requireing a number of cosmetic surgeries..Id have shot them in
self defense with no problem.
So in both cases above..while the carriers were doing perhaps stupid
stuff...no crimes were committed?
And yet you believe that you, unarmed and alone, are far safer than
either of those people?
Interesting world view you have there...very very interesting.
Shrug. So be it. Its your choice. Use it well and wisely.
With luck, you will never have the need to use a firearm, a seat belt, a
fire extinguisher, or a smoke detector.
But...it would be tragic for you, and for us here, if you did need any
of the above..and didnt have them. We will indeed miss you.
Stormin Mormon
jail the Good Samaritan for a year. Confiscate all his guns, and
prohibit him from owning a gun ever after.
--
Christopher A. Young
Learn more about Jesus
www.lds.org
.
<book...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:3i54c6tv53ki77b7a...@4ax.com...
terryc
> I would try out both, just to see, but would probably feel more
> comfortable in the no guns one. bookburn
Isn't that a case of who do you fear most;
fellow diner or random "thug" from street?
Over here, it is more the kitchen hygiene to be feared.
Gunner Asch
>>
>>You do understand that in the No Guns one...the bad people who want to
>>rob, steal and murder will ignore the signage completely and think that
>>its a far easier target than one thats not posted..right?
>
>Which brings up the legal question of whether someone knowingly
>entering a no guns establishment with a concealed weapon, then gets
>involved in a shooting, has compromised any defense rights. In some
>communities they are making it a misdemeanor to enter such armed, up
>to a month in jail and XX$$
since the posted signs are simply Owners Preference..like "no shoes, no
shirt, no service", making such a thing against the civil and or
criminal law, is simply buffonery, and one assumes that those
communities are antigun at the least.
Id love to see some cites.
book...@yahoo.com
wrote:
That guy was talking to passers by about his right to be on the
sidewalk and to carry arms to defend himself. Scares me to see people
in that kind of defense mode or being defensive as an attitude.
Surviving involves being more flexible and balanced than that, IMO.
Question of how mentally balanced a gun carrier should be? I have
doubts that military back from a combat zone with cerebral shock
syndrome should carry. Maybe the problem could be described as
applying military standards to civilian populations?
book...@yahoo.com
wrote:
>On Fri, 22 Oct 2010 15:10:24 -0800, book...@yahoo.com wrote:
>
>>>
>>>You do understand that in the No Guns one...the bad people who want to
>>>rob, steal and murder will ignore the signage completely and think that
>>>its a far easier target than one thats not posted..right?
>>
>>Which brings up the legal question of whether someone knowingly
>>entering a no guns establishment with a concealed weapon, then gets
>>involved in a shooting, has compromised any defense rights. In some
>>communities they are making it a misdemeanor to enter such armed, up
>>to a month in jail and XX$$
>
>
>since the posted signs are simply Owners Preference..like "no shoes, no
>shirt, no service", making such a thing against the civil and or
>criminal law, is simply buffonery, and one assumes that those
>communities are antigun at the least.
>
>Id love to see some cites.
Here's what my meta-search program comes up with.
http://www.myparkingsign.com/MPS/No_Guns_Weapons_Signs.aspx
http://www.mydoorsign.com/Door-Signs/No-Guns-Knives-Weapons-Allowed.aspx
http://www.lewrockwell.com/perry/perry32.html
http://www.seton.com/endecasearch/result/?Ntt=Gun+Prohibition+Signs&x=0&y=0
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/2377851/posts
http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=457042
http://www.allencountyohio.com/pubdownload/CCW%20SIGN.pdf
http://www.mysecuritysign.com/No-Weapons-Signs/No-Guns-Allowed-Sign/SAF-SKU-K-1209.aspx?themeid=
http://www.hooverwebdesign.com/free-printables/signs/free-printable-no-guns-allowed-sign.html
http://www.ohioccw.org/200811124115/odot-qno-guns-allowedq-sign-update.html
http://www.gemplers.com/product/63094PLL/No-Guns-Allowed-Beyond-this-Point-Sign
http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=497646
http://www.crosswalk.com/1267689/
http://nebraskanews.blogspot.com/2007/10/financial-liability-for-no-gun-signs.html
http://www.firearmstalk.com/forums/f17/response-no-guns-allowed-signs-9152/
http://www.compliancesigns.com/NHE-8318.shtml
http://forum.opencarry.org/forums/showthread.php?82112-no-guns-allowed-Goldsboro
http://www.xdtalk.com/forums/xdtalk-chatter-box/18049-how-handle-no-guns-allowed-signs.html
http://forum.pafoa.org/concealed-carry-145/93674-sign-ohio-no-guns-allowed.html
Gunner Asch
>>>experience in a store of watching a young guy carrying a large
>>>automatic in his front pants pocket, nervously tapping the butt while
>>>he looked at merchandise. Didn't like to see a guy with two pistols
>>>in belt holsters standing on the sidewalk in front of a house where he
>>>said a dog had snapped at his heels earlier, and he had words with the
>>>home owner.
>>
>>Yes and? Did any of those individuals drag out their weapons and open
>>fire on innocents?
>>
>>Did the second guy shoot the dog inside the yard? Did he shoot anyone?
>
>That guy was talking to passers by about his right to be on the
>sidewalk and to carry arms to defend himself. Scares me to see people
>in that kind of defense mode or being defensive as an attitude.
>Surviving involves being more flexible and balanced than that, IMO.
>Question of how mentally balanced a gun carrier should be? I have
>doubts that military back from a combat zone with cerebral shock
>syndrome should carry. Maybe the problem could be described as
>applying military standards to civilian populations?
I though you claimed he was talking to the owners about the dog who
snapped at him?
Make up your mind old friend.
Gunner Asch
Thanks for the listing of sites that carry No Guns signs for sale,
articles showing those signs are coming down enmass and discussions on
the subject. Nothing indicating any laws that are being broken by
concealed carry inside of such marked places and some interesting
comments, along with Ohios removing signs from government property.
I hope you werent using this to back up your position...were you?
This is the closest (and only) link that shows your intent...
http://forum.pafoa.org/concealed-carry-145/93674-sign-ohio-no-guns-allowed.html
And its been heavily modified by recent law changes shown in other of
your links.
book...@yahoo.com
wrote:
>On Fri, 22 Oct 2010 21:46:18 -0800, book...@yahoo.com wrote:
You want assurance that the posted "no guns allowed" signs are more
than buffoonery? that laws are being broken by those deliberately not
complying?
Okay, here's another list of sites that show: "no guns violation
penalties."
http://forum.pafoa.org/concealed-carry-145/93674-sign-ohio-no-guns-allowed-page-2.html
http://www.newschannel9.com/articles/brien-988439-carry-gun.html
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/josh-sugarmann/nra-annual-meeting-no-gun_b_576680.html
http://www.godlikeproductions.com/forum1/message790872/pg1
http://sycamorecreekhoghunting.com/rules.htm
http://handgunlaw.us/states/oklahoma.pdf
http://www.godlikeproductions.com/forum1/message790872/pg2
http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=497646
http://hamptonroads.com/2010/03/despite-senate-maneuvers-gun-bills-head-mcdonnell
http://www.zazzle.co.uk/no_guns_allowed_poster-228277163275621421
http://ktar.com/category/local-news-articles/20101005/Guns-allowed-at-Yavapai-County-offices/?nid=101
http://hermosabeach.patch.com/articles/city-attorney-pier-is-a-park-so-no-guns-allowed
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_laws_in_the_United_States_(by_state)
http://redondobeach.patch.com/articles/city-attorney-pier-is-a-park-so-no-guns-allowed
http://www.redstate.com/lineholder/2010/06/19/how-a-camouflage-hat-and-little-plastic-soldiers-holding-little-plastic-guns-leads-to-a-change-in-school-policy/
http://zombiehunters.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=31&t=63131
http://www.zazzle.co.uk/no_guns_allowed_innocent_dead_sticker-217394506780473308
http://forums.contracostatimes.com/topic/east-palo-alto-cop-takes-heat-for-facebook-remarks
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Concealed_weapon
http://www.azcentral.com/members/Blog/aztalkblog/tag/4
http://freelawanswer.com/law/3280-law-2.html
http://www.azcentral.com/members/Blog/aztalkblog/64142
http://www.newschannel9.com/articles/brien-988439-carry-gun.html?plckOnPage=3
My short list of typical violation penalties includes:
criminal trespass
civil action tort
revocation of gun permit
2nd violation treated as criminal act
You will enjoy the penalty at Hog hunting ranch: No Guns Allowed:
Rule violations may result in termination of hunting privileges with
no refund.
No joy for you in act of congress H.R. 2159 to deny firearms to
potential "extremists" such as those concerned about illegal
immigration, increasing federal power, restrictions on firearms,
abortion and the loss of U.S. sovereignty. Get it? They will be able
to deny you firearms by labeling you as above.
My advice: get yourself a free download of the meta-search program I
use, found at www.copernik.com
book...@yahoo.com
Well, these particular instances are open to some interpretation, but
in general, I think we should be operating as survivalists by
considering what the consequences can be.
In the case of the attack on your wife, I would be inclined to suggest
that:
1) you are probably okay with shooting the pit bulls, based on your
wife's wounds and description of the dogs;
2)you could consider shooting the dogs from a distance with a scope,
not going near them or the owners; but see my no. 4 suggestion;
3) your first response, after caring for your wife, probably should
have been to contact the police. That starts a "paper trail" that
links you personally, but makes important record of what's happening;
4) your response very likely should then include contacting an
attorney pursuant to civil action against the owners; and you follow
his/her directions;
5) maybe the last thing you do is contact the dog owners personally
about your intention of killing the dogs, because surviving means
staying clear of that kind of trouble when laws and law enforcement is
available.
>
>And yet you believe that you, unarmed and alone, are far safer than
>either of those people?
Whether or not crimes were committed by "those people" is a matter of
the law to determine, and by acting alone and with malice you
jeopardize your standing, I assume. Is this where you're coming
from--your authority to act outside the law and do quick justice? Bad
idea.
>Interesting world view you have there...very very interesting.
>
>Shrug. So be it. Its your choice. Use it well and wisely.
>
>With luck, you will never have the need to use a firearm, a seat belt, a
>fire extinguisher, or a smoke detector.
>
>But...it would be tragic for you, and for us here, if you did need any
>of the above..and didnt have them. We will indeed miss you.
People like the example of Gregory Peck in the movie about "To Kill a
Mocking Bird," where the lawyer is very careful about instructing his
daughter to be fair and legal, but turns out to be the one best able
to shoot the mad dog. When the chips are down, I'll take the US
Marines to fight for me, but like in the Jack Nicholson movie, A Few
Good Men, they can only operate within the law. bookburn
book...@yahoo.com
wrote:
>On Fri, 22 Oct 2010 21:42:56 -0800, book...@yahoo.com wrote:
>
>>>>experience in a store of watching a young guy carrying a large
>>>>automatic in his front pants pocket, nervously tapping the butt while
>>>>he looked at merchandise. Didn't like to see a guy with two pistols
>>>>in belt holsters standing on the sidewalk in front of a house where he
>>>>said a dog had snapped at his heels earlier, and he had words with the
>>>>home owner.
>>>
>>>Yes and? Did any of those individuals drag out their weapons and open
>>>fire on innocents?
>>>
>>>Did the second guy shoot the dog inside the yard? Did he shoot anyone?
>>
>>That guy was talking to passers by about his right to be on the
>>sidewalk and to carry arms to defend himself. Scares me to see people
>>in that kind of defense mode or being defensive as an attitude.
>>Surviving involves being more flexible and balanced than that, IMO.
>>Question of how mentally balanced a gun carrier should be? I have
>>doubts that military back from a combat zone with cerebral shock
>>syndrome should carry. Maybe the problem could be described as
>>applying military standards to civilian populations?
>
>I though you claimed he was talking to the owners about the dog who
>snapped at him?
>
>Make up your mind old friend.
Maybe he came back to the house with his guns after the dog owner came
out and argued with him about his dogs defending his property?
Gunner Asch
It appears that in most of those links that actually deal with firearms
carry..few of them touch on concealed carry...and how they can or cannot
detect you carrying a concealed firearm. And when they do take
offense..they can at best, ask you to leave. Which you MUST do, else the
above list of penalties can indeed be leveled.
Which are the same penalties for being asked to leave because you smell
funny, make too much noise, fart objectionably and so forth...if you
refuse to leave when asked.
>
I notice that most of your above articles mention the carrier was
carying a NON concealed weapon...in
http://www.newschannel9.com/articles/brien-988439-carry-gun.html
Your wikipedia cite was about Canada....
The Zazzle cite was from England..selling no gun stickers....
The freelaw link was about gun control and why its a bad idea....
>You will enjoy the penalty at Hog hunting ranch: No Guns Allowed:
>Rule violations may result in termination of hunting privileges with
>no refund.
Sycamore Ranch is an archery only private hunting reserve. Sold as an
archery (and fishing) only area.
>
>No joy for you in act of congress H.R. 2159 to deny firearms to
>potential "extremists" such as those concerned about illegal
>immigration, increasing federal power, restrictions on firearms,
>abortion and the loss of U.S. sovereignty. Get it? They will be able
>to deny you firearms by labeling you as above.
2159 has been in limbo since April of 2009..and isnt going anywhere...
>
>My advice: get yourself a free download of the meta-search program I
>use, found at www.copernik.com
If the above links are what it turns out...Id have to say its not worth
the bandwidth it takes to download.
Granted..this time I did a random viewing of 50% of your links...none of
which did more than confirm what I have stated repeatedly.
Sorry to bust your bubble. Shrug...your desire to exist in a gun free
world are simply not going to happen. Nor is your ability to defend
yourself from an armed criminal, no matter if he is armed with a pistol,
a knife, a rock, a katana or a sling shot going to be improved any.
Shrug again.
Gunner Asch
Oh..I did contact the police. The dogs had attacked a wetback lady the
same morning, who didnt report it because of her status..
The dogs were volutarilily given up to the animal control, who put them
down the same day.
The owners were meth users, had no money nor insurance, so I wound up
paying for her surgeries out of my pocket and going into debt for
several years, having to sell of quite a bit of personal property and
so forth. I sued the owners in court, won, but they were by that time in
jail, probation and back on meth..so while the court order
stood..probably still stands..its no good whatsoever.
I didnt carry the gun to kill the dogs, just to protect myself. As I do
every day. I did mention I have a CCW..which are rather rare in most of
California..and have had for about 27 yrs.
>
>>
>>And yet you believe that you, unarmed and alone, are far safer than
>>either of those people?
>
>Whether or not crimes were committed by "those people" is a matter of
>the law to determine, and by acting alone and with malice you
>jeopardize your standing, I assume. Is this where you're coming
>from--your authority to act outside the law and do quick justice? Bad
>idea.
Interesting you took that stance on my considering doing something
illegal. Is it because Im a "gun owner" or carry a concealed weapon that
makes you think Im a "potential criminal"? Which is it?
>
>>Interesting world view you have there...very very interesting.
>>
>>Shrug. So be it. Its your choice. Use it well and wisely.
>>
>>With luck, you will never have the need to use a firearm, a seat belt, a
>>fire extinguisher, or a smoke detector.
>>
>>But...it would be tragic for you, and for us here, if you did need any
>>of the above..and didnt have them. We will indeed miss you.
>
>People like the example of Gregory Peck in the movie about "To Kill a
>Mocking Bird," where the lawyer is very careful about instructing his
>daughter to be fair and legal, but turns out to be the one best able
>to shoot the mad dog. When the chips are down, I'll take the US
>Marines to fight for me, but like in the Jack Nicholson movie, A Few
>Good Men, they can only operate within the law. bookburn
And they have to be on hand. In most cases...the vast majority of the
cases...they arent around..and its YOU..and the bad guys.
And that sucks. Really
I hope we dont hear about your passing, or serious injury at the hands
of others.
It would upset me. Not surprise me..but it would still upset me.
Gunner Asch
Or maybe he didnt?
Can you point out some cites that prove either case?
Id be happy to read them
Gunner
"Quando Omni Flunkus Moritati"
book...@yahoo.com
wrote:
If I pump your lungs, you can breath?
book...@yahoo.com
wrote:
I'm talking survival; your talking macho; guess who's the loose
cannon?
Gunner Asch
>>>
>>>Whether or not crimes were committed by "those people" is a matter of
>>>the law to determine, and by acting alone and with malice you
>>>jeopardize your standing, I assume. Is this where you're coming
>>>from--your authority to act outside the law and do quick justice? Bad
>>>idea.
>>
>>Interesting you took that stance on my considering doing something
>>illegal. Is it because Im a "gun owner" or carry a concealed weapon that
>>makes you think Im a "potential criminal"? Which is it?
>
>I'm talking survival; your talking macho; guess who's the loose
>cannon?
Its evident your issues with firearms are far far deeper than Id
thought, if you can make that statement with a clear expression.
Macho? Then every cop, government agent, military troop etc are all
acting "macho" because they carry firearms.
Fascinating indeed.
Lets just drop the topic right here. You are starting to exhibit some
mental issues I really dont want to know about.
Gunner
>>>
>>>>Interesting world view you have there...very very interesting.
>>>>
>>>>Shrug. So be it. Its your choice. Use it well and wisely.
>>>>
>>>>With luck, you will never have the need to use a firearm, a seat belt, a
>>>>fire extinguisher, or a smoke detector.
>>>>
>>>>But...it would be tragic for you, and for us here, if you did need any
>>>>of the above..and didnt have them. We will indeed miss you.
>>>
>>>People like the example of Gregory Peck in the movie about "To Kill a
>>>Mocking Bird," where the lawyer is very careful about instructing his
>>>daughter to be fair and legal, but turns out to be the one best able
>>>to shoot the mad dog. When the chips are down, I'll take the US
>>>Marines to fight for me, but like in the Jack Nicholson movie, A Few
>>>Good Men, they can only operate within the law. bookburn
>>
>>And they have to be on hand. In most cases...the vast majority of the
>>cases...they arent around..and its YOU..and the bad guys.
>>And that sucks. Really
>>
>>I hope we dont hear about your passing, or serious injury at the hands
>>of others.
>>
>> It would upset me. Not surprise me..but it would still upset me.
>
Gunner Asch
>>>>Make up your mind old friend.
>>>
>>>Maybe he came back to the house with his guns after the dog owner came
>>>out and argued with him about his dogs defending his property?
>>
>>Or maybe he didnt?
>>
>>Can you point out some cites that prove either case?
>>
>>Id be happy to read them
>
>If I pump your lungs, you can breath?
As I stated in my last post.. your mental illness issues are coming into
play at this point..and Id just as soon drop the subject before you
exhibit even more ...issues...and embaress yourself..and your readers.
Im bailing out at this point, as I actually like you .