Personal Protection

[gjhunter01]

12 hours ago, Big5er said:

 

My life and that of my family and friends come FIRST...period. My property comes next, and yes, my car, my truck, my rims and my television are all more valuable than a thief.

 

There is no way that saving property is worth shooting somebody, even a thief. Even policeman with all their training make bad decisions when a gun is drawn, stun guns are better. A lot of macho people think they can handle shooting someone, it's not easy, just ask a WWII vet or any combat vet. Shooting someone will change your life. I know, someone will respond that it's better than dead, are you sure?? Why are vet suicides so high.

Greg

[whj469]

I don't boondock in remote places but I always carry a handgun. I have never had to use it but all of the training that I have had over the years regarding hand gun use have told me that if you feel a need to pull the gun you had better be ready to use it. FYI in Texas it is now called a license to carry handgun and no longer a concealed handgun license. It seems that we are allowed to carry the gun openly.

[jc2]

Wonder how many hours of training, in states that allow open carry/concealed carry, are required before a person is allowed to do so?   4hrs, 8hrs, 16hrs? 

[Yarome]

I'm not going to get in on the philosophical side of this thread, but as for part of the OP's questions... You shouldn't be concerned. As others have mentioned... boondocking out in the sticks IS much safer than city or CG camping. You're more in danger from wildlife than from a person intent on doing you harm. In that respect it's a good idea to have something in the holster.

And... they are also correct. It's safe to assume that nearly all backcountry boondockers are armed.

I will chime in on one aspect of the shotgun issue. One really great thing about a shotty is that you are able to load multi types of loads. My people popper is loaded 2 3/4" rocksalt/#6 shot/#6 shot/3" 00 buck x2. That gives you the option to escalate or to cycle quickly up based on threat severity.

The only other remark... the further out you go and the more isolated you are the reasonable expectations and etiquettes get much more stringent. Ie., your miles from nowhere, it's the middle of the night, and someone is knocking on your door (as someone mentioned earlier).

That's a MASSIVE no no! You never enter another man's camp without announcing yourself from a respectful distance and wait to be invited forward (of course, that applies during daylight hours as well). Someone at your door is either ignorant or means to do ill. Don't turn on any interior lights, don't approach your door, view from a side window and exercise extreme caution. Meaning... if you got one... you better have it in your hand. 

A really good investment is a motion activated porch light. In the pitch of night it's a great alert system and also acts to ruin the vision of anyone approaching while allowing you to see clearly.

I'm not saying anything like that is likely to happen, but.. an ounce of prevention, right?

 

[Twotoes]

20 hours ago, chirakawa said:

If you're going to play lawyer, you might want to learn how to spell Supreme Court.

I'm not playing lawyer I are one lol lol lol. So big deal I made a typo. 

[Big5er]

8 hours ago, gjhunter01 said:

There is no way that saving property is worth shooting somebody, even a thief.
Maybe your property isn't, but I worked hard for mine, and it will not disappear without a fight.
Even policeman with all their training make bad decisions when a gun is drawn, stun guns are better. 
Have you ever been Tased? I have and it doesn't work on a lot of people. It also has a limited range and you cannot engage multiple people simultaneously . You can Tase one and then another (if you have a spare cartridge) but as soon as you stop tasing the first guy he is back in the fight. Plus when I retire, I have to turn the Taser in...the guns are mine.
A lot of macho people think they can handle shooting someone, it's not easy, just ask a WWII vet or any combat vet. Grandpa talked a lot about Germany in WWII, never seemed to have any issues. Didn't seem to have problems popping a few rounds of buckshot at some car thieves in his later years either. He never seemed real "macho" to me, just self confident. You seem to refer to people that carry or use firearms as "macho" and "heroes". Just because a hand gun isn't for you, why do you find it necessary put down people that chose to carry?  Shooting someone will change your life. So will being a victim of violent crime.  I know, someone will respond that it's better than dead, are you sure?? Why are vet suicides so high. There have been many studies on vet suicide rates. The most they ever agree on is PTSD, which they credit for a large variety of things, but shooting people seems to rarely be one they mention. They seem to think older, retired vets miss the "structured" life after the kids are gone and the spouse too. But if shooting someone is so live altering and the cause of veterans committing suicide (as you suggest), then why don't we have gang members and drug dealers doing it by the handful? 

 

 

[Yarome]

Big5er... AMEN, brother! 

[markandkim]

Big5er, again well said. My father (WW2), my son and I are all combat vets. I have been tased and so has my son, who now is a highway patrolman in MO.

As with my son, PTSD for him was due to guilt of not being able to save some of his guys in Afgahnastan during his  2 tours there. He never hesitated to kill the enemy who was shooting at them.  Alot of this has nothing to do about what happens to the enemy, but more about not being able to protect those dedicated at protecting you. A little hard to explain.

[remoandiris]

On 6/14/2017 at 6:08 AM, markandkim said:

National CCW is coming soon. It will pass even with many DEM's on board, especially from southern states. 

What is your definition of "soon"?  Nat CCW isn't even on the agenda.

[remoandiris]

21 hours ago, gjhunter01 said:

I know, someone will respond that it's better than dead, are you sure??

Are you REALLY implying it would be better to allow a bad guy to KILL YOU than to save your own life?  Is that what you're meaning here?

[Kirk W]

On 6/10/2017 at 8:55 PM, DunellenGuy said:

-FOR THOSE WHO CARRY: Have you ever had a time when RVing when you've felt the need to take out your gun for defense, even if you didn't have to shoot it? What happened?

-FOR THOSE WHO DON'T CARRY: Have you ever been in a remote setting and felt you were in danger from other human beings, and wished you had a gun for personal protection? How did it turn out?

2

We are never going to settle the gun question here on the forums, so let's get back to answering the question that was asked. 

[grumpydoc]

A little late to the discussion and a little off topic but please allow me to express a somewhat contrarian concern about supporting any call for a national or federal CCW law. I am happy with my KY state issued CCW permit, straight forward process,quick, inexpensive and easily renewed in five years. Yes it is not honored in all 50 states but I have reciprocity in most of the places I frequently travel.  Why does a national law worry me, let's imagine how politicians in DC might write it.  First it likely would make all state issued permits null and void, thus taking away a states right.  Federal permits would likely be controlled by a new  federal dept which will have power to write all rules and regulations.  Whose rules/regs do you think they will emulate, how about Chicago, NYC or Calif? Will the law mandate that permits be on a SHALL issue basis or justifiable need. How would this new federal bureaucracy be funded?  Will it be required to be self funding?   What will that do to costs?  I could go on about concerns of a federal law but the point is federal bureaucracy has a way of taking something simple and making it difficult.  What I think we would better off with is a situation analogous to Drivers License where states retain the authority to issue/regulate/enforce and there is nation wide reciprocity.  Unfortunately not likely to happen anytime soon. Be careful what you wish for!  Thanks for listening, Best Wishes, Jay  

[Pat & Pete]

1 hour ago, grumpydoc said:

A little late to the discussion and a little off topic but please allow me to express a somewhat contrarian concern about supporting any call for a national or federal CCW law. I am happy with my KY state issued CCW permit, straight forward process,quick, inexpensive and easily renewed in five years. Yes it is not honored in all 50 states but I have reciprocity in most of the places I frequently travel.  Why does a national law worry me, let's imagine how politicians in DC might write it.  First it likely would make all state issued permits null and void, thus taking away a states right.  Federal permits would likely be controlled by a new  federal dept which will have power to write all rules and regulations.  Whose rules/regs do you think they will emulate, how about Chicago, NYC or Calif? Will the law mandate that permits be on a SHALL issue basis or justifiable need. How would this new federal bureaucracy be funded?  Will it be required to be self funding?   What will that do to costs?  I could go on about concerns of a federal law but the point is federal bureaucracy has a way of taking something simple and making it difficult.  What I think we would better off with is a situation analogous to Drivers License where states retain the authority to issue/regulate/enforce and there is nation wide reciprocity.  Unfortunately not likely to happen anytime soon. Be careful what you wish for!  Thanks for listening, Best Wishes, Jay  

Good points , all . 

[Big5er]

5 hours ago, Pat & Pete said:

Good points , all . 

Except for the fact that they are mostly wrong. The current bills being looked at simply require all States to honor the handgun permit of the specific individuals home State much the same way they honor your home States drivers license. If your State says you can carry, then you can carry.  Sort of like Jay mentioned at the end of his post. It would simplify a licensed handgun owner being legal here, here and here but not there. 

[grumpydoc]

Thanks for your insight 5er.  You sorta made my point, as I said, be very careful what you ask for, or more importantly support or accept.  Nation wide reciprocity would preserve States right to issue and solve many of the current issues.  A new Federal bureaucracy, might easily become a potential nightmare for gun owners/CCW permitees.  I'm currently not a fan.  Never had any problem for the past 35 years getting a CCW in VA and KY.  I'd like to keep them Best Wishes, Jay 

[k4rs]

On 6/10/2017 at 9:55 PM, DunellenGuy said:

So, here's the question:
-FOR THOSE WHO CARRY: Have you ever had a time when RVing when you've felt the need to take out your gun for defense, even if you didn't have to shoot it? What happened?

 

In 13 years of full time RV'ing, and many other years of part time RV'ing. the only time I came close to using a firearm was in a road rage incident on an Interstate highway.  During a traffic jam with slow stop and go, an idiot passed me on the right shoulder and then tried to pull into my lane when there was no room.  I locked up the brakes and hit the horn.  The idiot came to a stop diagonally in my lane and I almost T-boned him.  He became enraged and exited his vehicle swinging a tire iron.  As he approached the front of my truck I opened the door and stepped onto the running board.  I told him "That's close enough".  I doubt he ever saw the .45 auto in my hand behind the door but he did sense my resolve and paused long enough to come to his senses.  After a few moments, he spit on my hood and then returned to his vehicle.

Safe Travels...

   

[spindrift]

On 6/14/2017 at 6:04 PM, Big5er said:

 

 

And there's my warm smile for the day...

Thank you Big5er.

[Vladimir]

For some reason the very act of towing a RV makes some drivers insane.

That said. I polled a bunch of Forest Service folks and they estimated that 80% of people on the National Forest in the rural west are carrying. That is a very large number!! 

I NEVER felt the need to carry a gun, except during hunting season. It is hard to hunt upland birds without a shotgun.

There is no doubt that the "clients" on public land have changed over the past 40 years.  Just last week I had a guy confront me about running a generator at 6:00 pm on state wildlife land. I pointed out the rules and regulations and invited him to drive with me to the managers office if he wanted to continue the conversation. He did come by later and apologize. Not sure if it was heartfelt or the fact I knew the manager for the area.

I have taken to carrying Bear Spray. I don't carry guns except during hunting season. I do have a very large hunting dog that camps with me and many times camp with other friends. I do camp by myself a lot.

Carrying a gun is a awful responsibility. You have to know how and when to use the gun and when you look at all the law enforcement incidents do you think you could do a better job??

The good news is incidents are far and few in between. The bad news is your on your own in my cases. The correct decision might be right for you and wrong for somebody else.

For me I will continue to carry only bear spray and I will continue to camp by myself. Odds are in your favor that you will be just fine.

[Kirk W]

2 minutes ago, Vladimir said:

Carrying a gun is a awful responsibility. You have to know how and when to use the gun and when you look at all the law enforcement incidents do you think you could do a better job??

The good news is incidents are far and few in between. The bad news is your on your own in my cases. The correct decision might be right for you and wrong for somebody else.

Very well stated.  

[SuiteSuccess]

On 6/11/2017 at 10:13 AM, TCW said:

I would not be so sure of that. Look at these videos of buckshot penetrating a steel entry door and #5 shot penetrating a steel door. I feel pretty confident that given the maximum distance one can actually be from a wall in all but the largest RVs, it is very likely that either the buckshot or 5 shot would at the very least exit the RV.

If penetration is your concern, frangible ammunition like that carried by the Air Marshals is an alternative.

Two points.  #71/2 quail or dove load will severely injure or kill at close range.  Will not have same penetrating power as #5, so like Yarome 2-#7 1/2, 2- #6, followed by 2- #00 is in my 12 gauge pump at home.  Point #2 be aware frangible is not a good option in cool or cold weather as a heavy coat or even layered clothing can stop the round.

For those who choose to carry a handgun, look at the Taurus Judge or S&W Govenor.  Shoots .45 or 410 shot shells.

Finally, as many posters have already said, it is a personal choice to carry any firearm for protection from other people.  If you do make the choice, you must be willing to use deadly force, because they are a poor scare toy except for animals, better to take other measures such as lights, sirens, sprays, Louisville Slugger.  

[TCW]

1 hour ago, SuiteSuccess said:

...Two points.  #71/2 quail or dove load will severely injure or kill at close range.  Will not have same penetrating power as #5, so like Yarome 2-#7 1/2, 2- #6, followed by 2- #00 is in my 12 gauge pump at home.  Point #2 be aware frangible is not a good option in cool or cold weather as a heavy coat or even layered clothing can stop the round...

To your points; until even small shot disperses from the wad, which depends on the components of the shell and the distance, the shot acts more like a solid projectile than light individual pellets. That is why in the video, you see some pellets around the fringe that did not penetrate the steel door, while the core of the pattern penetrated both sides of the door. This is why I mentioned that in the small confines of an RV, even small shot may at least exit the RV. From the bedroom of a Motorhome or the bedroom of a rear living space trailer/5th wheel one may be shooting toward a large area of glass which I doubt has the stopping power of even a Filon wall. Heavy clothing can also stop small shot once it is out of the wad and starts to spread and slow. Assailants wearing heavy clothing or even body armor are why training often includes one to the body, one to the head exercises. There are many considerations to take into account in both preparation and execution of a self defense plan.

[SuiteSuccess]

1 hour ago, TCW said:

To your points; until even small shot disperses from the wad, which depends on the components of the shell and the distance, the shot acts more like a solid projectile than light individual pellets. That is why in the video, you see some pellets around the fringe that did not penetrate the steel door, while the core of the pattern penetrated both sides of the door. This is why I mentioned that in the small confines of an RV, even small shot may at least exit the RV. From the bedroom of a Motorhome or the bedroom of a rear living space trailer/5th wheel one may be shooting toward a large area of glass which I doubt has the stopping power of even a Filon wall. Heavy clothing can also stop small shot once it is out of the wad and starts to spread and slow. Assailants wearing heavy clothing or even body armor are why training often includes one to the body, one to the head exercises. There are many considerations to take into account in both preparation and execution of a self defense plan.

Points well taken and absolutely correct, thanks.  No easy answers.

[Yarome]

29 minutes ago, SuiteSuccess said:

 No easy answers.

Sure there is! The first shell of shot is a side shot and goes to deflect away whatever he might be holding. Shot #2 goes low and to the legs. If he's close enough and a bit lucky, the main wad will pass to the inside and just give him a "shiny shiny bang bang". 

It's not like you're actually trying to kill a guy. Just injure to the point where they lose the will to press a poor vantage.

To note: If you did go for a body shot.. even with heavy clothing and no penetration it's still going to put him back on his heels and give him a moment of pause. JUST long enough for you to rack in a 00. That is.. if he wasn't holding a gun himself and the punch to the chest didn't cause an involuntary muscle constriction. That could ruin your weekend.

[Tahoe Shark]

36 minutes ago, Yarome said:

Sure there is! The first shell of shot is a side shot and goes to deflect away whatever he might be holding. Shot #2 goes low and to the legs. If he's close enough and a bit lucky, the main wad will pass to the inside and just give him a "shiny shiny bang bang". 

It's not like you're actually trying to kill a guy. Just injure to the point where they lose the will to press a poor vantage.

To note: If you did go for a body shot.. even with heavy clothing and no penetration it's still going to put him back on his heels and give him a moment of pause. JUST long enough for you to rack in a 00. That is.. if he wasn't holding a gun himself and the punch to the chest didn't cause an involuntary muscle constriction. That could ruin your weekend.

I'm sorry but if someone breaks into my RV when I am in it asleep or at night I will not be aiming to disable the intruder. If you decide to use a gun to defend yourself you have already decided you are in great bodily danger. My family is more important than the person putting us in peril.

[Yarome]

54 minutes ago, Tahoe Shark said:

I'm sorry but if someone breaks into my RV when I am in it asleep or at night I will not be aiming to disable the intruder.

Agreed. That's a whole nuther animal. Finding someone inside my doorway.. I would never make it to my shotty anyway. Closest in reach would be .40 S&W Hydra-Shok's center mass.