Have you ever...

[Kanani]

Originally Posted by iceman5

So every time someone attacks / robs me I should just stand there and let them? I shouldnt defend myself?

No thanks. I'd rather be dead.

Your reasoning is the same mentality that allows peopel to put their head between the knees and wait to be shot as they hear some crazed gunman shooting one person after another as we've seen at Virginia Tech and at other schools and malls.

In the examples above, no one was robbed, no bullets hit anyone's person or property and "Technically" no one was "attacked".

You state, "No thanks. I'd rather be dead". My choice would be to live. That's why people have the ability to make choices and that's how those choices effect one's life and quality there-of.

Let me ask you something, if a gang of thugs were driving down your street firing guns into the air (as is common in some areas), would you run into the house, grab a gun and start shooting at them? (This scenario assumes that no one has been shot, as in the cases above).

Your comment, highlited in green does not dignify a responce. It is pure ignorance and has nothing to do with the topic or any of the posts there-in.

[Pura Vida]

Originally Posted by Seeratlas

Nope ... China.

Now, If I'm an 'idiot', who the hell are you? <spits>

seer

Sterling Hayden would be proud.

Why would even argue this foolishness?

[GordMay]

Let's keep this (at least) civil, if not friendly.
Happy Holidays, all!

[Benny]

Another gun thread with no resolution and beginning to degrade to name calling.

As in past similar threads, this one will probably deteriorate to a level most of us do not want to see as part of this forum so maybe one of you mods or admins will nip it in the bud and cancel it.

Maybe there should be a full vote on whether to allow any more gun threads at all. Most of us probably feel - at least I do - that this topic in all it's forms has been flogged to death already and there is probably little 'new' information of value to discuss. Any new members after the vote wishing to post on this subject can be made aware of our history with it and reasons for denying new threads.

Some may advocate the 'freedom of speech' notion about my comments however, this forum is not governed by the constitution of any country and if enough of us (majority) would like to see the subject banned, it would be reasonable to do so. What do you think?

[liberty16]

I liked reading the different opinions. I found this thread to be pretty productive despite the emotions. I doubt anyone is scarred because someone on a internet forum heatedly disagreed with them.

[Kanani]

Originally Posted by liberty16

I liked reading the different opinions. I found this thread to be pretty productive despite the emotions. I doubt anyone is scarred because someone on a internet forum heatedly disagreed with them.

That depends....I have been having nightmares about some guy on my balcony, naked (except for a cape), wearing a helmet and swinging a shot-gun wildly in the air.....

[iceman5]

Originally Posted by Kanani

In the examples above, no one was robbed, no bullets hit anyone's person or property and "Technically" no one was "attacked".

You state, "No thanks. I'd rather be dead". My choice would be to live. That's why people have the ability to make choices and that's how those choices effect one's life and quality there-of.

Let me ask you something, if a gang of thugs were driving down your street firing guns into the air (as is common in some areas), would you run into the house, grab a gun and start shooting at them? (This scenario assumes that no one has been shot, as in the cases above).

Your comment, highlited in green does not dignify a responce. It is pure ignorance and has nothing to do with the topic or any of the posts there-in.

If a gang of thugs were driving down my street firing guns into the air, I would go inside and call the police (and I AM a police officer). Why would I go get a gun and shoot at them? And why would you think that based on my post?

My comments in green DO have something to do with this discussion. They refer to the attitude that we as people should stand by and do nothing when someone approaches us in a threatening manner and are armed.

If someone on the open water approaches my boat while displaying a weapon and Im armed, I am certainly not going to just let them board my boat and do whatever they want to do and hope they dont kill me. That "lay down and give up" attitude is what I was referring to when I made the comments in green. I wasnt trying to desecrate the memory of anyone who has been killed by crazed gunmen in the past few years. I was only meaning to say that alot of those people couldve been saved if someone hadnt just "layed down and given up".

[Benny]

Iceman - firstly let me laud your career choice in that most of us would not contemplate being a police officer and all the dangers and personal sacrifice that entails. As far as I'm concerned, they can't pay you and those like you enough to do what you do day in and day out as a 'normal' job.

You and some of the other members are fairly new to this forum and so have not been part of previous gun threads which basically developed into low grade name calling or vectored into more of the right to bear arms argument than anything to do about boating. They all started off with a boating connection but they eventually developed into personal choice and ideals on the entire firearm issue. This is why most of us are frankly uninterested in having this kind of thread develop again. It usually leads to polarization of some of the members and in some cases, members have quit the forum as a result of the flaming and personal acusations which can ultimately occur.

The admins can correct me if I'm overstepping my bounds but most of us wish to maintain this site as a 'boating' site which all can enjoy and express their opinions usually in a constructive manner. Nothing wrong with spirited debate on the many boating related issues and problems brought forward but the firearms issue seems to always bring out the worst in some members behaviour due to it's emotional nature. In case any are wondering, I own 6 firearms, 2 crossbows and one compound bow and am quite proficient in their use both in hunting and target practice. I believe that the use of any firearm or potential weapon is strictly a personal choice not to be foisted on others either pro or con in a forum such as this. There are many gun and related forums out there where the firearms issues can be debated ad nauseum. This forum has already entertained several extensive threads on the question of firearms and boats. I personally do not want to see any members deliver or take the brunt of any maliciuos or uncalled for personal remarks stemming from their opinion on any topic. It just seems that the firearms issue is one that usually leads to this happening.

My thoughts on restricting firearm threads are based solely on the hope that doing so will prevent these problems and not any wish to curtail anyones right to post or express their opinions as they see fit. I have not been shy about expressing mine. We boaters share a special cammeraderie and hopefully will not allow these types of issues to cause tensions between members unnecessarily.

I believe we all have a responsibility to ensure that we do not cross the courtesy line when interacting with others. If we can practice restraint in tense and emotional exchanges here on this forum, there is no reason we cannot discuss any subject whatsoever - as long as it is related to boating - intrinsically and not as a lead in to put forward personal opinions on non-boating related issues.

[TaoJones]

I posted the following on the "From Guns to Active Intelligent . . ." thread this morning, but that thread's been closed.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Quote:
Originally Posted by cat man do
Guns are for one thing only............ KILLING

How can that be good?

Dave

* * * * * * * * *

Quote:
Originally Posted by swami maximus
Cat man: i suppose it depends on which side of the barrel one stands...

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

I have a friend who is a 30+ year detective on a police department in a large American city. His home sits on ten acres well beyond the outskirts of the city, in a more rural county. The area is developed, but every home sits on a minimum of five acres.

One afternoon, he noticed an unfamiliar car stop along the gravel road into the area, adjacent to his land. Three people got out of the car and walked from road level down onto his property, one carrying a shovel.

He took his Glock 9mm, told his wife to keep an eye on the people, got into his truck and drove the half-mile or so to where they had pulled over.

He stopped a little way from their car, got out with his gun in his right hand, hanging down and concealed behind his right thigh. As he approached them, he could see the trio was a woman, a young man of about 18 (holding the shovel), and a little girl of about 8. They turned to look at him as he walked to the edge of the road, about six feet higher than the group.

"This is private property," he told them, "You're on my land." The young man didn't take this well, and started up the slope toward my friend, still carrying the shovel. My friend says that had the young man, clearly upset, gotten all the way up to the road level, the gun was coming out, and when a cop shows his weapon, he uses it.

Fortunately, before that happened, the woman spoke up, saying, "I'm sorry. We didn't know. We'll leave."

It was then that the little girl, sobbing, held up a shoe box, and said, "My hamster died."

"We just wanted to bury him in the mountains," the girl's mother said. "We'll look for another place."

Now that he understood the situation, my friend told them it would be OK to bury the hamster right there, but to bury it deeply because the coyotes would dig it up otherwise. He got back in his truck and drove home without the people ever having seen the gun.

When he first told me about this, I could see that it haunted him. His wife said it ruined his whole weekend. I can only imagine how everyone involved would have had their lives irrevocably shattered had that young man taken those last couple of steps up to the road.

Had that actually happened, one young man would be dead, and two entire families would have had to bear the overwhelming burden of his death, all because of a mistaken assumption.

So while it certainly matters which end of the gun a person is on in the split-second when it's fired, in the aftermath, it may not matter at all.

TaoJones

[pjbsailing]

Originally Posted by GordMay

Keith:
Perhaps the locals, seeing your Starts & Stripes flying and suspecting your geniality, feared that you might be armed & dangerous, and displayed their weapon to discourage any paranoid reaction you may inflict upon their benign enjoyment of their national waters.
Then again, maybe not ...

That's why I carry a Canadian flag. Everyone likes Canadians!

[iceman5]

I totally respect all rules of any site I post on. I understand some people not wanting to discuss firearms in the context of boating, however, there appears ot be a "firearms" section of this forum in which this thread is running. Also, anyone who doesnt wish to discuss firearms, can just not open the thread. Problem solved.

I wasnt trying to start a fight with anyone and didnt call anyone any names. I was just a bit surprised by a couple of the posts and I responded.

I would also like to make a response to the person who posted the story of the 30 year detective who confronted the family on his property. Im quite sure if the officer ended up having to shoot the guy with the shovel, he would not feel good about it. Ive been in 2 shootings myself. However, if he had to shoot the guy, it wouldnt be been over a misunderstanding that would cause the officer to feel guilty for years. It wouldve been because a maniac attacked him with a shovel. What is he suppossed to do? Just stand there and get hit in the head with a shovel? I dont think so.

Thanks for the kind comments about my profession, Benny.

[44'cruisingcat]

Originally Posted by Seeratlas

Second time was more unique. In the middle of a big storm about 400 miles somewhere off the coast of Washington State/Oregon (not sure where we were, i.e. before gps ; we were in a storm had been running for our lives for some time, I picked up a pursuing vessel on radar coming up astern. It's a long story, but the short version is that after having failed to acknowledge or answer my repeated hails on a number of frequencies, and my having advised a US Navy vessel who was monitoring my calls, but not close enough to help, I advised that I was anticipating an imminent attack by an unknown vessel, in international waters. The USN vessel advised that he had similarly tried to hail the vessel on the mil channels and received no response. I then advised that I was prepared to repel boarders and was well armed and competent and intended to do so should the vessel continue to advance and not id itself and intentions. I watched the radar as the pursuing vessel advanced, but even at 400 meters in the dark of the storm it was invisible to me as all lights on board her had been extinguished. At about 50 yards, it veered to my starboard slightly and a huge spotlight appeared from above sweeping my decks. I had expected same and had my shooting eye protected. In any event I had a clear shot at the man operating the spot and i advised over the radio that either the light went out or I would kill the fellow manning the spotlight. The light went out, the ship surged forward alongside to starboard and accelerated past me as all ships lights came on.

It was a United States Coast Guard Cutter, but I could not get its number.

They refused to answer my hails, or those of the USN vessel who had them on radar and confirmed the incident. The on duty Officer on the USN vessel advised that he would file an incident report and I gave him my, and my us Documented vessel's information. The cutter swung off to starboard and took off into the night, having never said a single word.

I filed a report when I reached San Francisco. To this day the USCG has denied any of their vessels were in the vicinity and refused to acknowledge the incident.

I was both physically capable and mentally prepared to fire on that ship and would certainly have killed the crewman manning that light and taken the light out thereafter. Whomever was in command of that cutter was a fool. DOD types have told me it most likely was some kind of drug interdiction ship as there was a lot of mothership to fast boat drug running transfers reported off that coast during that season. Also a number of large cruising type sailboats (mine was 54 foot) were reported missing and suspected of having been pirated, used to bring loads in towards shore then sunk leaving no trace.

In any event, there you go.

seer

Sound like a very good case for not having a gun aboard. I can't see any way in which you having a gun improved this situation, and it could have made it much much worse. If you had fired, and killed the seaman at the light, you would either have been shot in return, or sunk, or arrested, tried, and jailed for murder.

I seriously doubt that you intimidated the CG into leaving you alone. For one thing, it would take a remarkable marksman (which I'm sure you are) to hit someone standing behind a powerful searchlight, from 50 yards, from the deck of a small boat in a "big storm". But if you had fired your gun, even if you missed, you would have opened up a whole world of unpleasant consequences for yourself.

[TaoJones]

Originally Posted by iceman5

I would also like to make a response to the person who posted the story of the 30 year detective who confronted the family on his property. Im quite sure if the officer ended up having to shoot the guy with the shovel, he would not feel good about it. Ive been in 2 shootings myself. However, if he had to shoot the guy, it wouldnt be been over a misunderstanding that would cause the officer to feel guilty for years. It wouldve been because a maniac attacked him with a shovel. What is he suppossed to do? Just stand there and get hit in the head with a shovel? I dont think so.

Perhaps I unintentionally left the impression that the young man was "attacking" my friend with the shovel. If so, that impression is incorrect. The young man wasn't wielding the shovel like a baseball bat or an axe. He was merely holding it in his hand.

He was advancing toward my friend, saying "We weren't doing anything wrong," and he was clearly upset, but he did nothing that a reasonable person would have considered threatening. He never got up to the road level, and if he had, he was still several feet away.

The young man was merely doing what males do in most societies. "Protecting" his mom and little sister from a stranger by stepping forward and verbally defending what they were doing (they never knew my friend was a cop).

It is interesting, though, how quickly you jumped to the conclusion that the young man was "a maniac" who "attacked" my friend. It is that mindset that makes lethal weapons, in the hands of untrained boaters, tragic accidents waiting to happen.

If a "peace" officer is prone to shooting first, and asking questions later, no one is safe.

TaoJones

[iceman5]

I said IF he had to shoot the guy it would because he was being attacked by a maniac with a shovel.

I didnt say the guy was a maniac. How would I know that if i wasnt there? He obviously must not have been.

Shooting first and asking questions later does in fact cause tragic results, but that has nothing to do with boaters having guns. It has to do with a fool with a gun who happens to also own a boat.

By the way, I dont own a boat yet but when I do buy mine, I probably wont have a gun on board outside the US due to what Ive read in this thread. Not because having one puts me at greater risk or anything like that, but because from what Ive read, the hassles apparently outweigh the rewards of having one since it seems the odds of needing it are pretty low.

It just bothers me that most of the arguments being presented have nothing to do with guns and boats but just guns in general. Its legal in my state to have a gun in your car. I see no reason not to have one in your car as long as youre trained in how to use it and more importantly , in gun safety. You are not more likely to be in danger just because you have a gun.....in your car or your boat. Arguments like "you have obligated your attacker to kill you" when you produce a gun of your own make no sense to me. Ive seen numerous people killed while being robbed even though they did exactly what the robber told them to do. You never know what a criminal will do when he has you at gunpoint. I for one, dont plan to just sit there and hope he doesnt kill me.

[David_Old_Jersey]

Although I am in the "Guns are bad" camp (kinda) this is possibly because although our gun laws are quite liberal (no English style hand gun ban) and some people do have a fair old collection (including very heavy calibre that would give Rambo a hernia )........I do not live in a society where as soon as I see a woman and a small child accompanied by a man (even with a shovel ) that I would feel threatened enough to draw a gun. It's kinda cool living in a world where this is not needed and I find the alternative very sad.

But I do understand and accept that in certain parts of the world this fear is warranted and that having a gun to hand is the sensible thing to do. IMO very sadly so.

But interestingly although having spent a fair bit of time in a few bits of the 3rd world (albeit sans boat) I can't say that I have ever even felt the desire to start shooting my way outta trouble. and I have managed to get myself into more than a few "scrapes" and not always as an innocent bystander , all of which I have managed to survive and where I know the application of lethal force by me to sort out an immediate problem would not have helped and in fact would have made things far far worse. Not to say that the ability and willingness to inflict force, whether lethal or not does not help in some situations - but IME this has not required an immediate John Wayne style approach......of course I have not yet encountered any armed Pirates on the high seas...........

IMO / IME the best self defence mechanism is using yer brain.