Should Cyclists Pack Guns?

On Apr 19, 11:51 am, Just A User wrote:
Upon mentioning VA Tech, I have to put in my two cents, Cho was a wack
job, but personally I think the right to bear arm part of the
constitution needs to be re thought. In countries, such as the U.K.
where gun control laws are very strict, they don't have incidents like
those at the campus on Monday.

It absolutely does not need to be "re thought". It chafes already that "the
right to bear arms shall not be infringed" somehow came to mean "you can
keep small arms if you don't overly frighten your neighbors".

On 1 May 2007 11:53:51 -0700, evelyn wrote:

On Apr 19, 11:51 am, Just A User wrote:
Curtis L. Russell wrote:
On 19 Apr 2007 08:34:20 -0700, donquijote1954
wrote:

I guess we cyclists are too pacific for that (or just that we aren't
Republicans), but in light of all that violence out there, shouldn't
we rethink our strategy (everyone to himself) and get together to
launch a good nonviolent campaign?

I don't expect 'normal' from you, but don't you find this just a
little bit tasteless considering what just happened on the Virginia
Tech campus?

And using 'Republicans' must be your way to compensate for not being
able to actually make a complete, cogent thought on your own. I'm sure
there are some reflexive 'thinkers' such as yourself that will think
you made some point or another.

Curtis L. Russell
Odenton, MD (USA)
Just someone on two wheels...

Upon mentioning VA Tech, I have to put in my two cents, Cho was a wack
job, but personally I think the right to bear arm part of the
constitution needs to be re thought. In countries, such as the U.K.
where gun control laws are very strict, they don't have incidents like
those at the campus on Monday.

Now as to cyclists packing heat, thats just extra weight I don't want to
carry around on my rides.

Ken- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Hi! I just read a couple of the items here...but I am a cyclist who
packs. I have a 38 revolver that fits right into a fanny pack that I
wear when I ride. I am a female and ride in rural areas by myself
(haven't found a riding partner yet!) and I will not be a woman who
goes out for a ride or a run and not come back.

Rock on !

I am not concerned
with time or the extra weight that the gun adds. I would rather be
safe than sorry.

Think of it as a weight on a training belt - people pay good
money for that stuff ! :-)


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. I do agree that it is too
easy to get guns in the US, and there are too many out there.
Thanks,
Evelyn Ziennker-Lee
Virginia

--
Click here every day to feed an animal that needs you today !!!
http://www.theanimalrescuesite.com/

Paul ( pjm @ pobox . com ) - remove spaces to email me
'Some days, it's just not worth chewing through the restraints.'
'With sufficient thrust, pigs fly just fine.'
HVAC/R program for Palm PDA's
Free demo now available online http://pmilligan.net/palm/

On Tue, 1 May 2007 14:26:31 -0500, "Mike Young"
wrote:

On Apr 19, 11:51 am, Just A User wrote:
Upon mentioning VA Tech, I have to put in my two cents, Cho was a wack
job, but personally I think the right to bear arm part of the
constitution needs to be re thought. In countries, such as the U.K.
where gun control laws are very strict, they don't have incidents like
those at the campus on Monday.

Yes, in fact, they do.


It absolutely does not need to be "re thought". It chafes already that "the
right to bear arms shall not be infringed" somehow came to mean "you can
keep small arms if you don't overly frighten your neighbors".


--
Click here every day to feed an animal that needs you today !!!
http://www.theanimalrescuesite.com/

Paul ( pjm @ pobox . com ) - remove spaces to email me
'Some days, it's just not worth chewing through the restraints.'
'With sufficient thrust, pigs fly just fine.'
HVAC/R program for Palm PDA's
Free demo now available online http://pmilligan.net/palm/

evelyn wrote in
ps.com:




Hi! I just read a couple of the items here...but I am a cyclist who
packs. I have a 38 revolver that fits right into a fanny pack that I
wear when I ride. I am a female and ride in rural areas by myself
(haven't found a riding partner yet!) and I will not be a woman who
goes out for a ride or a run and not come back. I am not concerned
with time or the extra weight that the gun adds. I would rather be
safe than sorry.
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.

Uh,the Second Amendment is not about hunting or sporting.It's about having
the means to "alter or to abolish" a government gone bad,as it states in
the Declaration of Independence. It's not about "need",either.Government
does not get to determine what law abiding citizens "need" or don't need.

And sometimes,it's necessary to kill a bad guy.
(and why do YOU carry a gun then?)

Are you aware that to legally OWN a machine gun,one must have a REGISTERED
MG,and be background checked,fingerprinted,pay a $200 Federal tax,and get
the approval of a local law enforcement official(LEO)? And in some
states,you STILL can't own a full-auto weapon.
The number of legal registered MGs is FIXED,and one cannot buy NEW full-
auto firearms since 1968.(excluding government and LEOs)

Also,only ONE legally owned,registered machine gun has been criminally used
since the 1934 NFA was enacted.

However lots of people DO own full-auto firearms,and shoot them for
sport.They are VERY expensive because of the limited supply of *registered*
weapons.
Any time you see or read about machine guns being used in crimes,they are
not LEGALLY OWNED,and were likely smuggled into the US,or illegal
conversions of legal semi-auto guns.

BTW,the Federal Gov't is missing over 600 of their guns,some machine guns.
Orlando police had two MG's stolen from a unmarked patrol car,one a
silenced machine pistol.Other PDs are missing/"lost" some of their guns.
One year,it was found that 40% of guns recovered from crimes in DC were
missing from the DC police EVIDENCE LOCKER.Police were illegally selling
guns from the evidence lockers.


I do agree that it is too
easy to get guns in the US, and there are too many out there.
Thanks,
Evelyn Ziennker-Lee
Virginia



I hope you have the proper carry permit for legal concealed carry.
Otherwise,you also are a criminal.

IIRC,open carry is legal in VA.
That means you could legally carry it in a *visible* holster,but not IN a
fanny pack.

--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
at
kua.net

Upon mentioning VA Tech, I have to put in my two cents, Cho was a wack
job, but personally I think the right to bear arm part of the
constitution needs to be re thought. In countries, such as the U.K.
where gun control laws are very strict, they don't have incidents like
those at the campus on Monday.


It's probably good they don't have guns, look at how many people already get
maimed and killed at their Soccer (Football) games without guns, with
weapons, it would be a slaughter.

Jim Yanik wrote in
:

evelyn wrote in
ps.com:




Hi! I just read a couple of the items here...but I am a cyclist who
packs. I have a 38 revolver that fits right into a fanny pack that I
wear when I ride. I am a female and ride in rural areas by myself
(haven't found a riding partner yet!) and I will not be a woman who
goes out for a ride or a run and not come back. I am not concerned
with time or the extra weight that the gun adds. I would rather be
safe than sorry.
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.

Uh,the Second Amendment is not about hunting or sporting.It's about
having the means to "alter or to abolish" a government gone bad,as it
states in the Declaration of Independence. It's not about
"need",either.Government does not get to determine what law abiding
citizens "need" or don't need.

And sometimes,it's necessary to kill a bad guy.
(and why do YOU carry a gun then?)

Are you aware that to legally OWN a machine gun,one must have a
REGISTERED MG,and be background checked,fingerprinted,pay a $200
Federal tax,and get the approval of a local law enforcement
official(LEO)? And in some states,you STILL can't own a full-auto
weapon. The number of legal registered MGs is FIXED,and one cannot buy
NEW full- auto firearms since 1968.(excluding government and LEOs)

Also,only ONE legally owned,registered machine gun has been criminally
used since the 1934 NFA was enacted.

and that was a retired police officer!

--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
at
kua.net

On 1 May 2007 11:53:51 -0700, evelyn wrote:

On Apr 19, 11:51 am, Just A User wrote:
Curtis L. Russell wrote:
On 19 Apr 2007 08:34:20 -0700, donquijote1954
wrote:

I guess we cyclists are too pacific for that (or just that we aren't
Republicans), but in light of all that violence out there, shouldn't
we rethink our strategy (everyone to himself) and get together to
launch a good nonviolent campaign?

I don't expect 'normal' from you, but don't you find this just a
little bit tasteless considering what just happened on the Virginia
Tech campus?

And using 'Republicans' must be your way to compensate for not being
able to actually make a complete, cogent thought on your own. I'm sure
there are some reflexive 'thinkers' such as yourself that will think
you made some point or another.

Curtis L. Russell
Odenton, MD (USA)
Just someone on two wheels...

Upon mentioning VA Tech, I have to put in my two cents, Cho was a wack
job, but personally I think the right to bear arm part of the
constitution needs to be re thought. In countries, such as the U.K.
where gun control laws are very strict, they don't have incidents like
those at the campus on Monday.

Now as to cyclists packing heat, thats just extra weight I don't want to
carry around on my rides.

Ken- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Hi! I just read a couple of the items here...but I am a cyclist who
packs. I have a 38 revolver that fits right into a fanny pack that I
wear when I ride. I am a female and ride in rural areas by myself
(haven't found a riding partner yet!) and I will not be a woman who
goes out for a ride or a run and not come back. I am not concerned
with time or the extra weight that the gun adds. I would rather be
safe than sorry.
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'.

I do agree that it is too
easy to get guns in the US,

No, there aren't. Having too many guns is like having too much money - its
impossible.

and there are too many out there.

Too many for what?

Dave Head

Thanks,
Evelyn Ziennker-Lee
Virginia
You have all the rights that you're willing to fight for.

Stephen! wrote:


Perhaps he was... but then again, the number of hours it took you
pedalestrians to read those few lines was that many more hours you weren't
out impeding the flow of traffic.


Quit your whining.

Bicyclists are traffic, and by definition don't impede it.

I've never been "impeded" by biyclists when I drive my car or
motorcycle, so why are you so inept that passing such a slow vehicle is
a problem?

Wayne

"Wayne Pein" wrote in message
...
Stephen! wrote:


Perhaps he was... but then again, the number of hours it took you
pedalestrians to read those few lines was that many more hours you
weren't out impeding the flow of traffic.


Quit your whining.

Bicyclists are traffic, and by definition don't impede it.

I've never been "impeded" by biyclists when I drive my car or motorcycle,
so why are you so inept that passing such a slow vehicle is a problem?

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. Every now and again,
though, a militant bunch or another blocks up the two lane suburban artery
roads here with their 15 mph asses. Traffic? Yeah, I suppose they are.
Special status in the law, however, shouldn't preclude courtesy and
consideration for others. Come to think of it, grown men wearing brightly
colored leotards have very little to say that might interest me.

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.

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


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.


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.

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