Another assault on the Met Branch Trail

[dasgeh]

@baiskeli 99360 wrote:

Well, yes, nobody said arming yourself would always work, but would you expect them to be safer unarmed?

I believe most empirical studies say, yes, they would have been equally safe or safer unarmed.

[baiskeli]

@lordofthemark 99351 wrote:

The advantage of the latter is that at least I can expect a lot of focused expertise on it. I would expect that every angle, including studies supporting both sides would be presented. I am not an expert on the impact of concealed carry laws, and am reluctant to get involved in such a discussion where there is one person expert who may also have an agenda. I guess (in answer to Dismal) I am a bit of (I think) a Deweyan – I expect the biases of experts to get sorted out in vigoruous, informed discussion. But having multiple informed discussants, with a range of biases, would seem to be important for that to work.

I tend to think of it in personal terms – what would I want in that situation? Would I be thinking about statistics and studies when someone is coming at me with a baseball bat? I don’t know if that’s smart on my part, or just reactionary. I guess when people talk about things that can go wrong, I would respond that you have to consider risk vs. benefit, and reduce your own risk through training and responsibility. If we can train cops to come use guns to protect us (or to help the ambulance get to us after the fact) and not hit a bystander or have the gun taken from him/her, I should be able to learn how to defend myself the same way.

[Crickey7]

I don’t object to this thread. It’s been civil. More importantly, unless we can find a solution to the safety problems on the MBT, people are in fact going to ask what steps they can take.

We can lose bike infrastructure a few different ways. One is when it becomes unsafe to use.

[baiskeli]

@dasgeh 99366 wrote:

I believe most empirical studies say, yes, they would have been equally safe or safer unarmed.

I’d need to see such studies.

I know that if I knew someone had threatened my life in that way, I would arm myself. No question. It’s a no-brainer. I don’t need a study to convince me that it wouldn’t help. I’d take the risk that it would help.

The problem I see in that situation is a false sense of security – they may have thought that carrying a gun was all they needed to do to protect themselves. I imagine having a gun in your hand makes alot of people do stupid things that backfire, as was just suggested in the Zimmerman case.

[baiskeli]

@NicDiesel 99365 wrote:

Right, most of the people I know that carry when they mountain bike or tour don’t have them readily available or loaded until they set up camp. I don’t know about the rest of you but I’m usually loaded down with a bag or panniers, a helmet, glasses, and a ton of stuff that would make accessing a weapon (any weapon) next to impossible if I got surprised on a trail. I can’t imagine someone really believing you could ride with a concealed firearm in a way that you could access it if the situation presented itself.

There are holsters for that, including bike-mounted ones.

[Orestes Munn]

I think the public safety question is unlikely to be settled, pro or con, in the foreseeable future, especially in the present explosive political atmosphere and the remarkable distrust between the sides. Moreover, I doubt that any factual demonstration would change many minds, given that it is, at bottom, a question of rights and beliefs for many people in both factions. I know my own opinions have much more to do with my upbringing and general belief system than any empirical data.

[NicDiesel]

@baiskeli 99369 wrote:

The problem I see in that situation is a false sense of security – they may have thought that carrying a gun was all they needed to do to protect themselves. I imagine having a gun in your hand makes alot of people do stupid things that backfire, as was just suggested in the Zimmerman case.

If you need to carry a firearm at all times to protect yourself in your day-to-day life you need to do some self-evaluation unless you are “in theatre” or are exploring gentrification in Camden, NJ. It’s a violent world, at times, and if a place has a reputation for being violent avoid it unless you like violence. It’s not that difficult.

[NicDiesel]

@baiskeli 99370 wrote:

There are holsters for that, including bike-mounted ones.

If I’m not in Texas and I’m riding next to someone with a bike mounted holster that’s loaded I’m finding a new place to ride.

[baiskeli]

@NicDiesel 99372 wrote:

If you need to carry a firearm at all times to protect yourself in your day-to-day life you need to do some self-evaluation unless you are “in theatre” or are exploring gentrification in Camden, NJ. It’s a violent world, at times, and if a place has a reputation for being violent avoid it unless you like violence. It’s not that difficult.

Well, yes, it is difficult sometimes. Some people want to ride their bikes home, or collect change as part of their job, or whatever. And some people can’t afford to move or get a job in a safer area. If it were that easy to avoid being a victim of crime, we’d have very little crime.

[Tim Kelley]

[baiskeli]

@NicDiesel 99373 wrote:

If I’m not in Texas and I’m riding next to someone with a bike mounted holster that’s loaded I’m finding a new place to ride.

If I knew the person, I would ride with someone with a bike-mounted holster on the Met Branch trail, but I’d ride behind him.

[NicDiesel]

@baiskeli 99374 wrote:

Well, yes, it is difficult sometimes. Some people want to ride their bikes home, or collect change as part of their job, or whatever. And some people can’t afford to move or get a job in a safer area. If it were that easy to avoid being a victim of crime, we’d have very little crime.

Now you’re on the Dulles Troll Road.

[lordofthemark]

@baiskeli 99367 wrote:

I tend to think of it in personal terms – what would I want in that situation? Would I be thinking about statistics and studies when someone is coming at me with a baseball bat? I don’t know if that’s smart on my part, or just reactionary. I guess when people talk about things that can go wrong, I would respond that you have to consider risk vs. benefit, and reduce your own risk through training and responsibility. If we can train cops to come use guns to protect us (or to help the ambulance get to us after the fact) and not hit a bystander or have the gun taken from him/her, I should be able to learn how to defend myself the same way.

I thought we were discussing what DC law should be, not what an individual should do. I will say what I do – I have never ridden the MBT, and do not intend to except at busy times, or as part of a convoy or group ride or trail patrol.

However I am almost as cautious about the Holmes Run Trail in Va, where IIUC there have also been several incidents (though no cyclist victims, AFAIK) and that despite Va being a CCW state (IIUC.)

I am more interested in a discussion of things that can be done to improve conditions on all the more crime ridden trails in the region – including better design, more critical mass, and things that WABA and others can do like organizing patrols and convoy/slugging systems, than in reviewing the more general debates about gun laws (I also do not think this is the place to discuss the root causes of crime, the competence of Cathy Lanier, etc)

[jabberwocky]

@baiskeli 99369 wrote:

I’d need to see such studies.

Me too. I have no particular dog in that fight, but I’ve never seen anything that showed concealed carry laws affected crime rates much either way. I don’t see it as some sort of crime solution, but nor do I see it as something dangerous. FWIW, a few states (texas and florida, I think) tracked crime commited by CHL holders vs the general population when their laws were enacted, and found they were less likely to commit crimes than the populace at large. Which shouldn’t be surprising, since anyone with a CHL is by definition someone who can pass a background check.

@baiskeli 99369 wrote:

The problem I see in that situation is a false sense of security – they may have thought that carrying a gun was all they needed to do to protect themselves. I imagine having a gun in your hand makes alot of people do stupid things that backfire, as was just suggested in the Zimmerman case.

Right. We are getting even further off topic here, but as a gun owner, I’ve talked with a few people considering a firearm for defense for various reasons (stalker who had made threats, previous robbery, etc). I told them it can be part of a solution, but you need to learn how to use it safely, know the various laws around their use (both for practice and for self defense), practice relatively frequently, and understand that their usefulness as a defense tool is very much dependent on your situational awareness. Its not a magical anti-crime talisman. If you’re going to treat it as such, you are probably better off without it.

[lordofthemark]

BTW, the big simple thing DC can do for the MBT is to finish the damn thing, so its more attractive to (mostly fit and male?) fast cyclists. More eyes on the trail, more deterrence.

[Author]

Posts