JohnRich 4 #1 August 25, 2011 News:National Parks No Less Safe with Legal Concealed Carry "In early 2010, National Parks opened their doors to those carrying concealed firearms. Naturally, the Brady Campaign went nuts and started prognosticating about the trees of liberty being refreshed with not so metaphorical blood of patriots. Now, over one year later, a Freedom of Information Act request submitted by Herschel Smith has the hard and fast facts about reported crimes in our nation’s parks. And I have to say, the numbers don’t look good for the Brady bunch..."Full story: http://thetruthaboutguns.com/2011/08/foghorn/new-numbers-indicate-national-parks-no-less-safe-with-legal-concealed-carry/ Gosh, no murder sprees, no bodies lying everywhere in the woods, no shootouts over campfires - who'da thunk it? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lefty 0 #2 August 25, 2011 I, for one, am totally surprised by this information. It's not like the data from the past few decades has been showing us similar trends or anything. Though, as one of the comments in the link states, "Being a gun control advocate means never having to admit you’re wrong." Provoking a reaction isn't the same thing as saying something meaningful. -Calvin Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Belgian_Draft 0 #3 August 25, 2011 Maybe not shooting deaths, but there has been a rash of deaths in Yosemite this year. Anti-rights people will find some way to connect those deaths to the change in gun laws.HAMMER: Originally employed as a weapon of war, the hammer nowadays is used as a kind of divining rod to locate the most expensive parts adjacent the object we are trying to hit. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JohnRich 4 #4 August 25, 2011 QuoteMaybe not shooting deaths, but there has been a rash of deaths in Yosemite this year. Anti-rights people will find some way to connect those deaths to the change in gun laws. One was a grizzly bear attack - he might have lived if he had a gun available with which to defend himself. Liberals prefer defenseless hikers. I wonder if they also perfer that railings not be installed above the waterfall, or if rock climbers not use pitons and safety ropes? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
quade 4 #5 August 25, 2011 Quote One was a grizzly bear attack - he might have lived if he had a gun available with which to defend himself. JR, what caliber would you recommend a person carry to ensure they can safely protect themselves from grizzly bear attack? http://www.fws.gov/mountain-prairie/species/mammals/grizzly/bear%20spray.pdfquade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #6 August 25, 2011 Quote Quote One was a grizzly bear attack - he might have lived if he had a gun available with which to defend himself. JR, what caliber would you recommend a person carry to ensure they can safely protect themselves from grizzly bear attack? http://www.fws.gov/mountain-prairie/species/mammals/grizzly/bear%20spray.pdf As large as possible, and as the very last resort even after spray. A gunsmith that makes 'guide guns' for Alaskan bush pilots bases them off the 45-70 lever action and goes up from there.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
christelsabine 1 #7 August 25, 2011 Quote Quote Maybe not shooting deaths, but there has been a rash of deaths in Yosemite this year. Anti-rights people will find some way to connect those deaths to the change in gun laws. One was a grizzly bear attack - he might have lived if he had a gun available with which to defend himself. Liberals prefer defenseless hikers. I wonder if they also perfer that railings not be installed above the waterfall, or if rock climbers not use pitons and safety ropes? Holy Moly. That's one idiotic reply, unsurpassed. I never ever read such a lot of crap on so few square centimeters. dudeist skydiver # 3105 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
quade 4 #8 August 25, 2011 QuoteA gunsmith that makes 'guide guns' for Alaskan bush pilots bases them off the 45-70 lever action and goes up from there. Yet the professionals that have the absolute most experience in dealing with grizzlies say the spray is the most effective solution. Hmmm, go fig.quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Skyrad 0 #9 August 25, 2011 Quote Liberals prefer defenseless hikers. So do Grizzle bearsWhen an author is too meticulous about his style, you may presume that his mind is frivolous and his content flimsy. Lucius Annaeus Seneca Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #10 August 25, 2011 QuoteQuoteA gunsmith that makes 'guide guns' for Alaskan bush pilots bases them off the 45-70 lever action and goes up from there. Yet the professionals that have the absolute most experience in dealing with grizzlies say the spray is the most effective solution. Hmmm, go fig. Where did he claim that a gun was the most effective solution for the situation?Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
quade 4 #11 August 25, 2011 QuoteQuoteQuoteA gunsmith that makes 'guide guns' for Alaskan bush pilots bases them off the 45-70 lever action and goes up from there. Yet the professionals that have the absolute most experience in dealing with grizzlies say the spray is the most effective solution. Hmmm, go fig. Where did he claim that a gun was the most effective solution for the situation? Where did he suggest using a spray? He didn't. He suggested using a gun as if that is the answer to all life's problems. It isn't.quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #12 August 25, 2011 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteA gunsmith that makes 'guide guns' for Alaskan bush pilots bases them off the 45-70 lever action and goes up from there. Yet the professionals that have the absolute most experience in dealing with grizzlies say the spray is the most effective solution. Hmmm, go fig. Where did he claim that a gun was the most effective solution for the situation? Where did he suggest using a spray? He didn't. He suggested using a gun as if that is the answer to all life's problems. It isn't. He didn't make THAT claim, either. Go fig.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
quade 4 #13 August 25, 2011 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteA gunsmith that makes 'guide guns' for Alaskan bush pilots bases them off the 45-70 lever action and goes up from there. Yet the professionals that have the absolute most experience in dealing with grizzlies say the spray is the most effective solution. Hmmm, go fig. Where did he claim that a gun was the most effective solution for the situation? Where did he suggest using a spray? He didn't. He suggested using a gun as if that is the answer to all life's problems. It isn't. He didn't make THAT claim, either. Go fig. "as if" Reading and comprehension . . . as if.quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
christelsabine 1 #14 August 25, 2011 Quote .... Where did he claim that a gun was the most effective solution for the situation? Who is *he* ??? dudeist skydiver # 3105 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #15 August 25, 2011 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteA gunsmith that makes 'guide guns' for Alaskan bush pilots bases them off the 45-70 lever action and goes up from there. Yet the professionals that have the absolute most experience in dealing with grizzlies say the spray is the most effective solution. Hmmm, go fig. Where did he claim that a gun was the most effective solution for the situation? Where did he suggest using a spray? He didn't. He suggested using a gun as if that is the answer to all life's problems. It isn't. He didn't make THAT claim, either. Go fig. "as if" Your OPINION of John's view on guns is immaterial. Using it as a basis to attack his post is dishonest. QuoteReading and comprehension . . . as if. Reading and comprehension...like asking why bear spray isn't mentioned in a thread about guns in national parks and the lack of bloodshed that was predicted by the Brady folks?Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
quade 4 #16 August 25, 2011 QuoteReading and comprehension...like asking why bear spray isn't mentioned in a thread about guns in national parks and the lack of bloodshed that was predicted by the Brady folks? I dunno. Why don't you ask JR why he didn't bring it up? Oh wait, is it because he believes a gun is the proper solution to a grizzly bear attack? His words in this thread seem to suggest so.quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #17 August 25, 2011 QuoteQuoteReading and comprehension...like asking why bear spray isn't mentioned in a thread about guns in national parks and the lack of bloodshed that was predicted by the Brady folks? I dunno. Why don't you ask JR why he didn't bring it up? Oh wait, is it because he believes a gun is the proper solution to a grizzly bear attack? His words in this thread seem to suggest so. So why did you bring it up in the first place? Oh wait, is it because you believe that gun advocates are bloodthirsty hicks just waiting to shoot everything in sight? Your words in this thread seem to suggest so.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
christelsabine 1 #18 August 25, 2011 Quote Quote Quote Quote Quote Quote Quote A gunsmith that makes 'guide guns' for Alaskan bush pilots bases them off the 45-70 lever action and goes up from there. Yet the professionals that have the absolute most experience in dealing with grizzlies say the spray is the most effective solution. Hmmm, go fig. Where did he claim that a gun was the most effective solution for the situation? Where did he suggest using a spray? He didn't. He suggested using a gun as if that is the answer to all life's problems. It isn't. He didn't make THAT claim, either. Go fig. "as if" Your OPINION of John's view on guns is immaterial. Using it as a basis to attack his post is dishonest. Reading and comprehension . . . as if. Reading and comprehension...like asking why bear spray isn't mentioned in a thread about guns in national parks? Entering a NP simply means: I'm well aware what could happen to me while coming close to mother nature and its kids. I simply take into account that an animal, stronger than me, would attack me. SO, WHY THE FUCK TAKING A GUN WITH ME ? Waiting to kill that animal? So why not just staying in the car and watching the beauty of the nature? If *you (or JR)* do not want wild animal around you, just go ahead and kill them, all of them - your roads will be free, your camp grounds too ..... so what! Mike, why TF don't you just shut up John's view : Fuck that! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #19 August 25, 2011 Quote Quote Quote Quote Quote Quote Quote Quote A gunsmith that makes 'guide guns' for Alaskan bush pilots bases them off the 45-70 lever action and goes up from there. Yet the professionals that have the absolute most experience in dealing with grizzlies say the spray is the most effective solution. Hmmm, go fig. Where did he claim that a gun was the most effective solution for the situation? Where did he suggest using a spray? He didn't. He suggested using a gun as if that is the answer to all life's problems. It isn't. He didn't make THAT claim, either. Go fig. "as if" Your OPINION of John's view on guns is immaterial. Using it as a basis to attack his post is dishonest. Reading and comprehension . . . as if. Reading and comprehension...like asking why bear spray isn't mentioned in a thread about guns in national parks? Entering a NP simply means: I'm well aware what could happen to me while coming close to mother nature and its kids. I simply take into account that an animal, stronger than me, would attack me. SO, WHY THE FUCK TAKING A GUN WITH ME ? Waiting to kill that animal? So why not just staying in the car and watching the beauty of the nature? If *you (or JR)* do not want wild animal around you, just go ahead and kill them, all of them - your roads will be free, your camp grounds too ..... so what! Mike, why TF don't you just shut up John's view : Fuck that!Thanks for proving the point I made directly above. Just because you *THINK* (for certain values of the word) that any pro-gun American just wants to shoot any/everything they come across doesn't make it true.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Belgian_Draft 0 #20 August 25, 2011 QuoteQuoteReading and comprehension...like asking why bear spray isn't mentioned in a thread about guns in national parks and the lack of bloodshed that was predicted by the Brady folks? I dunno. Why don't you ask JR why he didn't bring it up? Oh wait, is it because he believes a gun is the proper solution to a grizzly bear attack? His words in this thread seem to suggest so. For people who can function under pressure and stress a gun most certainly can be the best answer. For some others who can't, pepper spray can be the best option. Then there is the portion of the human population that freezes under pressure. For them, it makes no difference what they carry. They will panic and die regardless. Which group do you fit in?HAMMER: Originally employed as a weapon of war, the hammer nowadays is used as a kind of divining rod to locate the most expensive parts adjacent the object we are trying to hit. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
quade 4 #21 August 25, 2011 Quote Then there is the portion of the human population that freezes under pressure. For them, it makes no difference what they carry. They will panic and die regardless. Which group do you fit in? Input from yet another person with a superman, I can do what other mortal men can not, fantasy. Hilarious.quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
D22369 0 #22 August 25, 2011 Entering a NP simply means: I'm well aware what could happen to me while coming close to mother nature and its kids. I simply take into account that an animal, stronger than me, would attack me. wow, so your ok with being lunch? I prefer to be proactive - I was a boy scout, motto- be prepared SO, WHY THE FUCK TAKING A GUN WITH ME ? Waiting to kill that animal?*** nope, you just dont get it, out there you as a human are not the top of the food chain, in comparison with a grizzly or wolf your natural weapons are a bad joke and you will be killed and eaten at their discretion unless the playing field is leveled. So why not just staying in the car and watching the beauty of the nature? *** from the car? riiiight, oh yeah, you really see nature from a road or a groomed campground. I enjoy backcountry hiking - I get to see places you will never know exist where the sounds and smells of traffic are not present and unlike you I know that bear mace is a detterence, but the lethality of a firearm is nice to have available. I have been backcountry hiking/camping for 30 years - I always carry a firearm, and I am quite happy to say I haven't ever needed to use it to defend my life nor have I ever even fired it anytime other than at a firing range - where I go the animals are very cautious of humans - they will leave once they know you are there, in a national park however they are used to humans and no longer fear us - its sad that they should fear us for our safety and their own, but its safest that way. If *you (or JR)* do not want wild animal around you, just go ahead and kill them, all of them - your roads will be free, your camp grounds too ..... so what! *** what the fuck is this statement for? nobody advocated running around wasting animals in a hail of gunfire RoyThey say I suffer from insanity.... But I actually enjoy it. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #23 August 25, 2011 QuoteQuote Then there is the portion of the human population that freezes under pressure. For them, it makes no difference what they carry. They will panic and die regardless. Which group do you fit in? Input from yet another person with a superman, I can do what other mortal men can not, fantasy. Hilarious. Thanks for proving my point, above.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,090 #24 August 25, 2011 >>Liberals prefer defenseless hikers. >So do Grizzle bears So Grizzle bears = liberals? And that begs the question of what grizzly bears like. Although if I were a grizzly bear I think I'd want to go by the Latin name. It's much cooler. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #25 August 25, 2011 QuoteQuoteMaybe not shooting deaths, but there has been a rash of deaths in Yosemite this year. Anti-rights people will find some way to connect those deaths to the change in gun laws. One was a grizzly bear attack - he might have lived if he had a gun available with which to defend himself. Liberals prefer defenseless hikers. I wonder if they also perfer that railings not be installed above the waterfall, or if rock climbers not use pitons and safety ropes? sorry to piss on all the fun you people are having, but... there are no fucking grizzly bears in Yosemite. Sadly, no grizzlies in the entire state, despite it being on our flag. Extinct over 100 years ago. That incident was thousands of miles away - I believe at Glacier NP. There have been 17 fatalities in the Yosemite this year, well above the annual norm of 12. the notables involve people crossing the railings and ignoring signs about swimming in rivers above 300 ft waterfalls. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
