Should Cyclists Pack Guns?

In article ,
Turby wrote:

Yeah, it is. The statistics say that one out of three women in America
will be sexually assaulted in her lifetime.

Using some definition of "sexual assault" which includes crude
come-ons, I'm sure. Or finding out the Mercedes was borrowed.
--
There's no such thing as a free lunch, but certain accounting practices can
result in a fully-depreciated one.

In article .com,
evelyn wrote:

How broad do you want? Being touched, groped, penetrated or
sodomized, I call all that rape if I don't want it.

Then get a better definition, because you're cheapening the word
"rape".
--
There's no such thing as a free lunch, but certain accounting practices can
result in a fully-depreciated one.

On May 2, 2:14 pm, (Matthew T. Russotto)
wrote:
In article .com,

evelyn wrote:

How broad do you want? Being touched, groped, penetrated or
sodomized, I call all that rape if I don't want it.

Then get a better definition, because you're cheapening the word
"rape".
--
There's no such thing as a free lunch, but certain accounting practices can
result in a fully-depreciated one.

maybe i should clarify: being touched, groped, penetrated or
sodomized, I call all that SEXUAL ASSAULT if I don't want it. does this sound better? You are right, I don't want to cheapen the word "rape"

evelyn wrote:

BUT....As I agree that I have the right to carry a gun, I don't agree
with owning the crazy machine guns, we don't need them, hunters don't
need them; the sole purpose is to kill.

What's your 38 for? Face it, some people just need killin'. You are stupid...yea, I carry my gun so that I can shoot people when I'm out riding my bike! Yep, thats me.

Again, you are an idiot. I carry my legal gun (I have passed all the
requirements for carring it) so that I am protected. You must know
that there are rapist and murderers everywhere and I would use my gun
for protection.

Exactly. Like I said, some people just need killin'. That would be
the rapists and muggers...

I am not going out for a bike ride and looking to
shoot someone!

Of course not.

DPH

"evelyn" wrote in message
ups.com...
On May 2, 1:44 pm, Patrick Lamb wrote:
(newsgroups trimmed a bit...)

wrote:
On May 2, 12:10 pm, Turby wrote:
On 2 May 2007 07:23:29 -0700, wrote:

Again - so many fearful people in this country. It's kind of sad.
Yeah, it is. The statistics say that one out of three women in America
will be sexually assaulted in her lifetime.

Oh? Do you have a citation for that? I'd like to see it. For it to
be true, the definition of "sexually assault" must be very broad,
indeed!

I've seen similar statistics before. Doesn't mean it's right, but it's
become (becoming?) conventional wisdom.

But even if true (which I seriously doubt) ISTM the solution isn't for
all women to pack guns all the time.

If you take 70 years as the mean life span, and 1/3 of the women in the
US are assaulted, you're chance of being sexually assaulted today is
something like 1 out of 75,000. It wouldn't be worth it to me to pack a
pistol every day, given that remote a chance, but if one was a regular
patron of the Fearmonger's Shop like "evelyn" seems to be, maybe one
might think it worthwhile for onesself.

Pat

What do you suggest women do? I've taken self defense classes, karate
classes and finally a class to be certified to carry a fire arm. I'm
not living in the fairy tale world where nothing bad ever happens.
Even in rural, country communities, crime can occur. I don't think
there is any problem with women carrying guns.

Evelyn


I can't believe all these fruitcakes are blasting you for wanting to carry
some personal protection when you are out alone, you're smarter than they
are. You have every right to do whatever you feel is necessary, it's none
of their business. A .38 is excellent personal defense gun for a woman,
might be a little lightweight in some instances but with 125 grain hollow
points, quite effective. Keep carrying it and don't worry about this
bunch.

On May 2, 1:07 pm, evelyn wrote:
On May 2, 1:00 pm, wrote:

On May 2, 12:10 pm, Turby wrote:

On 2 May 2007 07:23:29 -0700, wrote:

Again - so many fearful people in this country. It's kind of sad.

Yeah, it is. The statistics say that one out of three women in America
will be sexually assaulted in her lifetime.

and if I carry my gun while riding/running in a rural area, I will be
able to protect myself!



Oh? Do you have a citation for that? I'd like to see it. For it to
be true, the definition of "sexually assault" must be very broad,
indeed!

How broad do you want? Being touched, groped, penetrated or
sodomized, I call all that rape if I don't want it.

Well, if "being touched" qualifies as sexual assault, I suppose that
_would_ make one out of three American women victims!

I could bump into a woman in a grocery and be guilty of sexual
assault! Who knew? I just hope I won't get shot for it.

Hmm. Maybe the world really is a dangerous place after all! ;-)

Isn't it easy for
men to say these things. I don't think that a man getting ready to go
for a ride will ask himself if he will get hurt or raped while out by
himself.

Sorry, I still think you're paranoid. I know _many_ women who ride
their bikes by themselves. _None_ of them carry guns, nor have they
ever needed one, AFAIK. (And yes, I do believe they would tell me.)


And
carrying a gun gives me some type of protection agains the weirdos out
there.

Watch out! The paranoids are after you! ;-)

- Frank Krygowski

On 2 May 2007 10:00:40 -0700, wrote:

On May 2, 12:10 pm, Turby wrote:
On 2 May 2007 07:23:29 -0700, wrote:


Again - so many fearful people in this country. It's kind of sad.

Yeah, it is. The statistics say that one out of three women in America
will be sexually assaulted in her lifetime.

Oh? Do you have a citation for that?

There are plenty of cites. It doesn't take much effort to find them.
As the CDC page points out, the stats are variable and difficult to
pin down, but the one thing that sticks out is that rapes are entirely
too common. I can't think of anyone I knew who was murdered, and
almost no one who was robbed at gunpoint, but I know numerous women
who were raped.

http://tinyurl.com/mnemk
http://www.cdc.gov/ncipc/factsheets/svfacts.htm
http://tinyurl.com/eu2pu
http://www.rainn.org/statistics/index.html
http://www2.ucsc.edu/rape-prevention/statistics.html
http://www.feminist.com/antiviolence/facts.html


--
Turby the Turbosurfer

On May 2, 2:12 pm, evelyn wrote:


I've taken self defense classes, karate
classes and finally a class to be certified to carry a fire arm. I'm
not living in the fairy tale world where nothing bad ever happens.
Even in rural, country communities, crime can occur.

Of course it _can_. We hear that sort of thinking all the time - the
fact that no, disaster is NOT literally impossible.

It's that kind of thinking that gets people driving 1000 miles because
they're afraid of flying, or never riding bikes because they're afraid
of getting hit by a car. Problem is, such thinking often puts people
into worse conditions than the one they fear. Don't fly, get in a car
crash instead (much more likely). Don't bike, die of heart disease
while sitting safe on your couch.

Just like crime, getting hit by a meteorite can occur. Having a tree
topple on you as you ride by can occur. So can having an earthquake
crack the road open and swallow you. But when the odds of a
particular danger get low enough, it's just not worth worrying about.


What do you suggest women do?

The first thing I'd suggest is simply not being afraid! It's not that
bad out there!

IMO, taking a self-defence class is fine. I believe the few bad guys
that are out there are influenced by a person's confidence, or lack of
same. Staying out of really sketchy neighborhoods makes sense to me
too (although I routinely ride through some that scare more timid
folk).

But I'm struck by the fact that I've never, ever, in 30+ years of
cycling, met a man or woman who felt the need to have a pistol ready
at their side. Somehow all those people are surviving. Maybe you
should observe what most cyclists do, and imitate that?

- Frank Krygowski

evelyn wrote:

how do you know.? I could be bigger than you or stronger than you,
you are makine lots of assumptions because I assume I am a woman. You
have no idea of what kind of person i am, what type of shape I am in,
NOTHING.


Hmmmmm....you assume you are a woman!? Drop your pants and take a
look.....if you have a penis, you are a guy. Hope this helped clear that
assumption up for you.

Unless you are one of those confused individuals who has a penis but
prefers wearing womens clothes......

On May 1, 10:21 pm, Wayne Pein wrote:
Mike Young wrote:
By law in IL, bicyclists are entitled to the full width of the traffic
lane. Most of the time, especially in the city, they tend to hug the
curb side of the curb lane, allowing motorized traffic to go by.

How thoughtful of them. I don't suppose bicyclists get any credit in
your accounting scheme for that?

Of course, you should know that there is no advantage to riding near the
side of the road, only disadvantages like poor sight lines, less
conspicuity, and motorists trying to squeeze by when its unsafe to do so.

Thank you. I want to say it in my jungle language: bicyclists get the
scraps, but that puts their life in danger. THE ONLY SAFE WAY IS TO
TAKE THE LANE! But then the lion comes and roars at you, and if you
won't budge, he swallows you.

But I guess if motorists are allowed to pass and you are a motorist its
all good for you.

The lion wants his lion's share, and still is mad that the monkey is
there at all!

Every

now and again, though, a militant bunch or another blocks up the two
lane suburban artery roads here with their 15 mph asses.

What makes you think they are militant rather than merely exercising
their right to use the lane? And why don't you pass in the oncoming
lane? Oh I know, its full of other motorists.

I think, one lane is good for taking. Taking the whole road though
puts is a recipe for trouble.


Traffic? Yeah,

I suppose they are. Special status in the law, however, shouldn't
preclude courtesy and consideration for others.

No special status. Just status.

It makes sense.


According to your logic, although bicyclists are entitled to use of the
full lane like other road users, they must be "courteous" and allow you
to use it for passing them. If they don't, then they are militant.

Come to think of it,

grown men wearing brightly colored leotards have very little to say that
might interest me.

Why would they want to talk to you? You're a selfish, illogical lout who
doesn't ride a bike unless it has a mechanical engine and who doesn't
have the sense to understand that hi viz clothing is useful.

Wayne

That's reasonable and it will make it to the Bicycle Statutes of the
revolution.