Firearms on Ground team

[lordmonar]

Sure it's a liability. But personally, I'd rather be a liability than come face-to-face with a charging Grizzly without any means of defense.

Really?   How many bear attacks has CAP had in its life time?   I do know of at lease one incident where one CAP guy shot another CAP guy on accident.

So.....no.

The one incident I know of was during WWII and during the changing of the guards one CAP member fatally shot another CAP member with an 'unloaded' .45 automatic.

That's the one I'm talking about.  I remember someone from CAP History posting the scan of the original document.

[abdsp51]

IMO i think carry should be allowed unless specifically prohibited.  Here is Az specially my part there are plenty of threats and help is not always right around the corner or up the road.   

[lordmonar]

IMO i think carry should be allowed unless specifically prohibited.  Here is Az specially my part there are plenty of threats and help is not always right around the corner or up the road.

On one level I agree with you.....but you also have to think about the corporate liability in this situation.
Allowing weapons except when prohibited (I assume you mean by law) make CAP liable for all the actions of its members.....and the military as well during AFAMs.    I don't think we really don't want to go down that route.....as a simple cost/risk analysis there is not any real need and we introduce a fairly catastrophic risk.

[Eclipse]

IMO i think carry should be allowed unless specifically prohibited.  Here is Az specially my part there are plenty of threats and help is not always right around the corner or up the road.

Plenty of "threats"?

Again, if that is truly the case, the ORM is too high for a CAP activity, regardless of whether you're talking about a meeting night or a mission.

[abdsp51]

IMO i think carry should be allowed unless specifically prohibited.  Here is Az specially my part there are plenty of threats and help is not always right around the corner or up the road.

Plenty of "threats"?

Again, if that is truly the case, the ORM is too high for a CAP activity, regardless of whether you're talking about a meeting night or a mission.

This part of the state and south is part of the drug corridor. 

[abdsp51]

On one level I agree with you.....but you also have to think about the corporate liability in this situation.
Allowing weapons except when prohibited (I assume you mean by law) make CAP liable for all the actions of its members.....and the military as well during AFAMs.    I don't think we really don't want to go down that route.....as a simple cost/risk analysis there is not any real need and we introduce a fairly catastrophic risk.

I get liability, there was talk of us having to take on a unit right on the border here, and that would have required travel to the area.  Told the CC unless I'm allowed to carry not going that area is not worth the personal risk.

[LSThiker]

There is also the possibility of implying a show of force.

Either way, it is interesting reading some comments on this thread. I no longer carry a CHG, although in my state it is not required to be concealed. However, I have come to the conclusion not carrying one allows my brain to listen to my my fight/flight response so I continue to avoid situations where I need a gun.

As far as the wild, never been in a situation where I needed a gun (barring for the purpose of hunting). In urban environments, I have learned to either avoid those situations or always have a plan of escape. I found that I think more clearly without carrying. Most dangers are really just perceived than actual risk, at least in the US.

[LSThiker]

Told the CC unless I'm allowed to carry not going that area is not worth the personal risk.

And by carrying it made the personal risk worth it?  How did that happen?

[abdsp51]

Told the CC unless I'm allowed to carry not going that area is not worth the personal risk.

And by carrying it made the personal risk worth it?  How did that happen?

The unit folded so nothing occurred but I would not goto that town without carrying.

[lordmonar]

Told the CC unless I'm allowed to carry not going that area is not worth the personal risk.

And by carrying it made the personal risk worth it?  How did that happen?

The unit folded so nothing occurred but I would not goto that town without carrying.

And there you go.....ORM in action! 

[Private Investigator]

Told the CC unless I'm allowed to carry not going that area is not worth the personal risk.

And by carrying it made the personal risk worth it?  How did that happen?

The unit folded so nothing occurred but I would not goto that town without carrying.

And there you go.....ORM in action! 

And I did not think anybody listen to the monthly Safety Brief, now that is ORM   :clap:

[Devil Doc]

Ehh, The VA gets mad when I carry my lil Deer Skinner, they freak out over everything.

You'd be paranoid too if you knew that:  At some point in their lives, 90% of the people in the building you work in got paid to kill people and break their stuff, and are probably po'd about something that happened that day...

Which is why I refuse to be in uniform with an empty holster.

Working in Mental Health, has nothing to do with it

[blackrain]

As long as I take my meds I don't worry about PTSD . The VA said so it must be true.

Trained adults should be able to carry as threats come in 2 and 4 legged forms and they can come at any time. Not paranoid just prepared. BTW I was trusted to carry locked and loaded in government buildings and schools in Afghanistan. Kids and  adult civilians all around and I never shot anyone unintentionally along with the international incident that would have followed. Yet in my own country I can't be trusted to carry.

Sorry gents but bad guys don't care about the law. And the bad guys have a harder time aiming when I'm shooting back.

[LSThiker]

Comparing the US to Afghanistan or even Iraq (where I was), is like comparing a tree to a weed. Sure they are both plants, but that is about as close as you can get

[Eclipse]

The average person, with the bare minimum concealed carry training, is as likely to shoot himself, an innocent bystander, or the sky as the "bad person".

[Mitchell 1969]

The average person, with the bare minimum concealed carry training, is as likely to shoot himself, an innocent bystander, or the sky as the "bad person".

Cite, please.

[Eclipse]

The average person, with the bare minimum concealed carry training, is as likely to shoot himself, an innocent bystander, or the sky as the "bad person".

Cite, please.

http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2012/12/armed-civilians-do-not-stop-mass-shootings
http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2012/09/mass-shootings-investigation
"In not a single case was the killing stopped by a civilian using a gun. And in other recent (but less lethal) rampages in which armed civilians attempted to intervene, those civilians not only failed to stop the shooter but also were gravely wounded or killed."


http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16434012
"Similar to a survey of Arizona motorists, in our survey, riding with a firearm in the vehicle was a marker for aggressive and dangerous driver behavior."

http://www.annemergmed.com/article/S0196-0644(12)01408-4/abstract
Hospital-Based Shootings in the United States: 2000 to 2011
"In 23% of shootings within the ED, the weapon was a security officer's gun taken by the perpetrator."

http://injuryprevention.bmj.com/content/6/4/263.full
Results—Even after excluding many reported firearm victimizations, far more survey respondents report having been threatened or intimidated with a gun than having used a gun to protect themselves. A majority of the reported self defense gun uses were rated as probably illegal by a majority of judges. This was so even under the assumption that the respondent had a permit to own and carry the gun, and that the respondent had described the event honestly.

"Conclusions—Guns are used to threaten and intimidate far more often than they are used in self defense. Most self reported self defense gun uses may well be illegal and against the interests of society."


http://ajph.aphapublications.org/doi/abs/10.2105/AJPH.2008.143099?journalCode=ajph
Results. After adjustment, individuals in possession of a gun were 4.46 (P < .05) times more likely to be shot in an assault than those not in possession. Among gun assaults where the victim had at least some chance to resist, this adjusted odds ratio increased to 5.45 (P < .05).

Conclusions. On average, guns did not protect those who possessed them from being shot in an assault. Although successful defensive gun uses occur each year, the probability of success may be low for civilian gun users in urban areas. Such users should reconsider their possession of guns or, at least, understand that regular possession necessitates careful safety countermeasures.

Full disclosure, I am a firearm owner myself, intend to get a CCL now that it is legal in my state, but I wouldn't consider for even a moment bringing it on a CAP activity.

[Mitchell 1969]

The average person, with the bare minimum concealed carry training, is as likely to shoot himself, an innocent bystander, or the sky as the "bad person".

Cite, please.

http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2012/12/armed-civilians-do-not-stop-mass-shootings
http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2012/09/mass-shootings-investigation
"In not a single case was the killing stopped by a civilian using a gun. And in other recent (but less lethal) rampages in which armed civilians attempted to intervene, those civilians not only failed to stop the shooter but also were gravely wounded or killed."


http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16434012
"Similar to a survey of Arizona motorists, in our survey, riding with a firearm in the vehicle was a marker for aggressive and dangerous driver behavior."

http://www.annemergmed.com/article/S0196-0644(12)01408-4/abstract
Hospital-Based Shootings in the United States: 2000 to 2011
"In 23% of shootings within the ED, the weapon was a security officer's gun taken by the perpetrator."

http://injuryprevention.bmj.com/content/6/4/263.full
Results—Even after excluding many reported firearm victimizations, far more survey respondents report having been threatened or intimidated with a gun than having used a gun to protect themselves. A majority of the reported self defense gun uses were rated as probably illegal by a majority of judges. This was so even under the assumption that the respondent had a permit to own and carry the gun, and that the respondent had described the event honestly.

"Conclusions—Guns are used to threaten and intimidate far more often than they are used in self defense. Most self reported self defense gun uses may well be illegal and against the interests of society."


http://ajph.aphapublications.org/doi/abs/10.2105/AJPH.2008.143099?journalCode=ajph
Results. After adjustment, individuals in possession of a gun were 4.46 (P < .05) times more likely to be shot in an assault than those not in possession. Among gun assaults where the victim had at least some chance to resist, this adjusted odds ratio increased to 5.45 (P < .05).

Conclusions. On average, guns did not protect those who possessed them from being shot in an assault. Although successful defensive gun uses occur each year, the probability of success may be low for civilian gun users in urban areas. Such users should reconsider their possession of guns or, at least, understand that regular possession necessitates careful safety countermeasures.

Full disclosure, I am a firearm owner myself, intend to get a CCL now that it is legal in my state, but I wouldn't consider for even a moment bringing it on a CAP activity.

Sorry, perhaps I should clarify:

RELEVANT cite, please.

[LSThiker]

Here is a ground team tip to help thwart animal attacks:  Do not take a picture of yourself with a wild animal:

http://nypost.com/2014/05/01/squirrel-attacks-teen-after-he-takes-selfie/

And yes, I refuse to use that "other word".

[Eclipse]

RELEVANT cite, please.

Every study cited, especially the first one is 100% relevent.

Can you cite a single study that disputes what I asserted?