Breaking Bad ... Scouters

[walk in the woods]

You definitely are knowledgeable. I think you may have missed my point. Here's my reasoning.

• Lightning and Dogs kill far more people yearly than Bear attacks. 

It would stand to reason that there many more dog attacks than bear attacks, since dogs are more common than bears. Considering that a bear is a stronger, more lethal animal than the average dog, bears should kill a higher number of bear attack victims than dogs kill dog attack victims. Therefore it would make more sense to carry a defensive option on your evening walk with the Wife, or during your next visit to the city, in order to be prepared in the event of dog attacks since they are far more likely to happen, even if each canine-homo sapiens interaction is less likely to be lethal. 

[...]

Knowing that I've done everything possible to make a bear encounter as unlikely as I can, I deem carrying a weapon able to fight a bear unfeasible. The chances are so remote, and carrying such a weapon so cumbersome(and in some places illegal,) that it doesn't make sense for me.

[...]

There's a chance right now, sitting in urban Cincinnati Ohio, that I could be the victim of terrorism or gang related shootings. I don't wear a bulletproof vest every day because I weigh the statistical likelihood of those events happening around me versus the cost and inconvenience of wearing a bullet proof vest every day. I view weapons in the back country in a similar way. There are definitely places where it might be appropriate, (as there are some situations and places in the US where wearing a vest would be helpful.) but for most people in most situations, it's just unnecessary. 

And that is the beauty of liberty.  Stosh can weigh the risks/rewards and make his decision, Sentinel gets to do the same thing, and they both get to enjoy the trail.  If they come to different conclusions they take the personal responsibility for those decisions!  Ain't it beautiful!

[Stosh]

@@Sentinel947

 

You and I area on the same page!

 

You definitely are knowledgeable. I think you may have missed my point. Here's my reasoning.

• Lightning and Dogs kill far more people yearly than Bear attacks. 

It would stand to reason that there many more dog attacks than bear attacks, since dogs are more common than bears. Considering that a bear is a stronger, more lethal animal than the average dog, bears should kill a higher number of bear attack victims than dogs kill dog attack victims. Therefore it would make more sense to carry a defensive option on your evening walk with the Wife, or during your next visit to the city, in order to be prepared in the event of dog attacks since they are far more likely to happen, even if each canine-homo sapiens interaction is less likely to be lethal.   Because an evening walk with my wife is not a BSA activity, I do carry a weapon for such a situation.  Also when the Mrs. and I go for a walk in the evening we normally take our own dog along which further increases our chance of having an encounter with another dog.  In this case I carry two guns, a 9-mm for lethal protection and a BB gun to ward off aggressive, threatening dogs non-lethally.  You are correct, the number of dogs in the neighborhood outnumber the bears.  However, I now live in the country and my encounter with more aggressive farm dogs and even the possibility of bears has increased.  The more I walk, the more I identify the aggressive farm dogs, the more I learn about what areas to avoid confrontation.  Bears on the other hand, will always be a chance encounter.  Be Prepared.

 

You are certainly a more experienced outdoorsman than I am.

• Like you do, I take precautions in bear country and follow bear protocol in order to lessen the chances I will encounter a bear.

Knowing that I've done everything possible to make a bear encounter as unlikely as I can, I deem carrying a weapon able to fight a bear unfeasible. The chances are so remote, and carrying such a weapon so cumbersome(and in some places illegal,) that it doesn't make sense for me.  Yes, I am knowledgeable, there's no such thing as too much training when it comes to being prepared for any situation in life.  I even put up with the ridicule and suspicious glances from strangers.  It always makes me chuckle remembering the time I was at Yellowstone and the Old Faithful parking lot was packed so we parked at the next area north of the area.  We had a easy walk into the area from where we parked.  The Mrs. and I were walking along talking loudly and when we didn't have anything to say, we were singing loudly.  We met an older couple coming our way and they looked at us like we both grew a third eye.  I smiled at them and said, that we had made enough noise that the rest of the trail back to the parking lot shouldn't have any bears, but be careful anyway.  The Mrs. and I went on about 50 yards and stopped and got real quiet.  We could hear them singing.    My first defense is knowledge, my last resort is my weapon.

 

Local situations, individual knowledge and experience. I may be victim to a bear attack, and know in my final moments "****, Stosh was right." I could change my mind, bring a weapon, get cornered by a bear, fight and lose, even with a weapon. I could also bring the weapon, and not have access to it at the right time, and get mauled anyways. I could also fight off a bear a win. That's probably the least likely scenario. If I get in a throw down with mama Grizzly, she's a far better killer than I can ever be. 

 

There is one last scenario, and that's where I don't bring a weapon, I follow bear procedures, I don't see a bear, and If I do, I do the usual things one is supposed to do when confronted by a bear, and I live. This is the most statistically likely outcome of a bear human encounter.   Sometimes I play the odds and win, sometimes I've played the odds and lost.  Losing isn't as much fun as winning.  Be Prepared.

 

There's a chance right now, sitting in urban Cincinnati Ohio, that I could be the victim of terrorism or gang related shootings. I don't wear a bulletproof vest every day because I weigh the statistical likelihood of those events happening around me versus the cost and inconvenience of wearing a bullet proof vest every day. I view weapons in the back country in a similar way. There are definitely places where it might be appropriate, (as there are some situations and places in the US where wearing a vest would be helpful.) but for most people in most situations, it's just unnecessary. 

Anything is possible. But we can't be completely prepared for every possible scenario we may ever encounter in life. We minimize our risks, and improvise if something goes south, and let the chips fall where they may. 

 

Sentinel947

 

At my age, I'm more likely to die on the trail from a heart attack than a bear attack.  So my Mrs. knows CPR, I take my medicine, get exercise, learn new songs and carry a weapon whenever I am able.   Be Prepared. 

Edited January 25, 2016 by Stosh

[Sentinel947]

@@Sentinel947

 

You and I area on the same page!

I think so! You just go a few steps further than I am willing to. As usual, our disagreements are generally only a few degrees of separation. For somebody in the 20-30 age category, the highest chance of dieing in the back country is probably "do something stupid." That's a pretty wide range of things to prepare for.   

 

@@Krampus, I'll keep the advice in mind. I've never been to Alaska. 

[Stosh]

I think so! You just go a few steps further than I am willing to. As usual, our disagreements are generally only a few degrees of separation. For somebody in the 20-30 age category, the highest chance of dieing in the back country is probably "do something stupid." That's a pretty wide range of things to prepare for.   

 

@@Krampus, I'll keep the advice in mind. I've never been to Alaska. 

 

I believe it's very difficult to express in words many of the small variations and nuances of words when  used purely as written.  Of course typos don't always help much either.

 

I for one never think of anything on a forum as "disagreement".  That may be hard for some to accept, but it's true.  I see many different viewpoints on issues that need to be seen in those different ways.  Too often one tends to think as Greek philosophical when they used linear logical.  By this it is meant one starts from an idea and works step by step to a logical conclusion.  The conclusion reached is what one deems is good or favorable or right (either correctly or morally).  Greek dominated cultures, i.e. European and European descendant tend to be this way.  But other cultures think differently and in many instances process information differently.  Orientals think and process differently, as do Hebraic cultures.  As a trained theologian to have been exposed to these other philosophies and end up using them from time to time.  One of the things about the forum is that if one can stay on topic it becomes rather fascinating to see how everyone approach subjects from our many different backgrounds which gives a richer view of the issue than our myopic self-approach.   

 

Occasionally one may get a bit entrenched and a bit defensive if others don't see the world through our rose colored glasses.  But if one is open to see other possibilities that one has concluded is logically wrong, yet others can often see in other situations different than the first person, they may in fact be logically correct as well.  So any original premise that is concluded as something wrong, iss always wrong may not always hold true.

 

Forums offer the unique opportunity to see the myriad of ideas out there on scouting and what works for one will indeed fall flat for the next guy.  But if someone has fallen flat on their face, seeing other options out there is a god-send.

 

This is why I would never use the word "disagreements" to describe the sharing of ideas on forum.  The only part that becomes bothers is when the comments slip off topic and take on a negative tone to the one making the comment.  To state that someone is a _ (insert your favorite derogatory word here)__ just because they see the world different than others tends to fall outside the Laws of Scouting and even good forum decorum.

 

It is a known fact that one's myopia gets worse as time goes by when one surrounds themselves with nothing but "Yes" men.  I  have found it far more productive to deal with people who challenge my ideas and give me a wider perspective of what's out there especially in the world of scouting where our ways of doing things has a huge impact on the minds of young adults in our care

[cyclops]

Stosh, @@cyclops stops reading when he posts or when he reaches an answer he likes most.

 

Actually, I think I responded positively to Stosh's question. I stop to sleep and sometimes I start replies again (like now) once I'm home from work and have time to do it.

 

But for the sake of these fantasy arguments, OK, let's go with Jpstodwftexas's crazy person attacking a scout camp dining hall. Let's assume that you and Stosh, maybe other leaders, are carrying concealed when the shooting starts. Stosh is already in the dining hall enjoying his salad when he hears the unmistakable sound of gunfire and screams outside the entry door. There are multiple shots outside where people are coming and going from the building and he reacts quickly getting his boys down on the floor and at the same time pulls his piece and levels out at the door, ready to fire. Sure enough a person charges through the door, gun drawn, pointing all around. Stosh ends this with a single head shot and hopes that he can somehow minimize the emotional impact on his boys and the others in the room.

But now other boys are screaming in terror and grief. They are gathered around the man whose brains are now splattered on the wall above where he went down, blood spreading over the floor.

 

When the crazy man first attacked, another adult who was also carrying concealed instantly engaged the shooter and in an exchange of gunfire, he wounded the attacker multiple times but the attacker kept calling to his 'accomplice' so the adult decided to check inside the dining hall just in case there was another perp. He had his brains blown out by mistake by Stosh who mistook him as the original shooter. That man's scouts watched their adult leader have his brains spewed over the wall and then die right in front of them. Stosh is thinking...but...but....and he too is devastated by the mistake.

 

OR, it might not be Stosh but rather some scared leader who just got their carry permit with almost no training at all and they have just made a tragic error. That's maybe even more plausible.

 

This is just as plausible as the fantasy of Stosh or some other 'hero' stopping the crazy shooter... especially IF there are multiple concealed carry adults who don't know about all the 'guns in the room'.

Other variants amount to adults even less trained than Stosh accidentally shooting boys or other adults when they accidentally fire their weapons in nervous reactions.

These 'hero' scenarios in which some hero with a gun stops a tragic crime are less and less plausible as we multiply the 'heros' in the room who are carrying, especially if they're anything like the yahoos I've observed at summer camps.

Yes, a LEO might be present. A LEO would be a very different matter. Much more highly trained. Much more analytical in the moments of crisis. Much less likely to kill innocent persons. He's a pro. The others are engaging in fantasy.

[Stosh]

The fantasy described is about as unrealistic as the assumption a crazed person would be shooting up the mess hall.

 

First of all I don't like salads, I'm a meat and potato guy.

 

Secondly in an active shooter situation the first thing one must do is avoid the shooter, get people to the exits and safety ASAP, even before the shooter enters the room if possible.  Then deny, the shooter access to those you're trying to protect, barricade doors, cover windows, etc.  keep the boys moving to safety.  One's last resort is to defend. 

 

Yes one needs to mentally prepare oneself for such a situation.  That means that one is to mentally rehearse over and over what one would be capable of doing.  I am a long-gun person.  I don't do well with handguns but I know the basics of shooting.  Target acquisition, watch the background, finger off the trigger until ready to shoot, relax, make every shot count, shoot to kill, etc. are all things that translate between long and hand gun shooting.  The last thing that I train myself mentally for is the fact that when I pull the gun from my holster, with the skills I have (less than professional) I will probably not survive the situation, but I'm going to do my best to stop the threat to others anyway. 

 

Taking on a 800# grizzly or even a 600# black bear with a 9mm handgun means I have to get in close.  Shooting a bear point-blank in the head with a 9mm may only stun it.  A 9mm is not a powerful gun.  So don't quit until the 17 rounds are gone, then reload another magazine.  I have seen an example of a black bear surviving a shotgun blast to the face at point blank and surviving.  Have no idea whether the duck hunter did or not.