PDA

View Full Version : Nearly hit by bottle while shooting...!?!



C. D. Keth
8-Mar-2007, 16:13
So I was shooting a bit today in Ogden, UT while I'm on my spring break from school. I'm in a neighborhood, neither upscale nor ghetto. Normal neighborhood. I was shooting a panorama of an out of business gas-station-turned-pizzaria when I heard someone yell something. I got out of the darkcloth just in time to see some asshole in a big truck drive by and the passenger throw two glass beer bottles at me. Neither hit me somehow but one broke across a locking ring on my tripod. Unfortunately I didn't get his plate since it was a paper temp plate and the window was too glary to read through.

Any of you guys had stuff like this happen? I fail to see what's so offensive about photography. Perhaps he is a staunch digital shooter;)

C. D. Keth
8-Mar-2007, 16:20
Thanks for moving this. I guess I had a good brainfart to put it in the buy/sell forum:o :eek:

Frank Petronio
8-Mar-2007, 16:22
I thought beer was illegal there?

C. D. Keth
8-Mar-2007, 16:27
No, the mormons just aren't supposed to drink alcohol. Or caffeine. There are plenty of non-mormon white people and former mexicans to drink beer.

John Kasaian
8-Mar-2007, 16:34
Former mexicans? How....???

C. D. Keth
8-Mar-2007, 16:37
There are a lot of legal spanish speaking people here as well as a lot of illegal spanish speaking people. It's a long way from the border but they're here.

Greg Lockrey
8-Mar-2007, 16:50
I used to get that type activity while riding my bike. If the vehicle has a temp tag, you could have the cops track that down, can't be that many temp tags in Ogden. Since you weren't hurt, they might sluff it off anyway.

Ron Marshall
8-Mar-2007, 16:52
Obviously someone who should not have been drinking beer, or driving, or out of jail. Time to invest in a padded darkcloth.

Michael Kadillak
8-Mar-2007, 16:53
Just be thankful that nobody got out of the truck to mess with you.

Even at 6'2" and 225# I carry some tactical protection for specifically these types of situations because you just never know what you may find yourself unintentionally in the middle of. I know some folks that carry very lethal grizzly bear pepper spray and others that do not mess around and carry a locked and cocked .45 auto.

As I learned a very long time ago in the Boy Scouts - Be Prepared.

Cheers!

Bruce Watson
8-Mar-2007, 16:58
So I was shooting a bit today in Ogden, UT while I'm on my spring break from school. I'm in a neighborhood, neither upscale nor ghetto. Normal neighborhood. I was shooting a panorama of an out of business gas-station-turned-pizzaria when I heard someone yell something. I got out of the darkcloth just in time to see some asshole in a big truck drive by and the passenger throw two glass beer bottles at me. Neither hit me somehow but one broke across a locking ring on my tripod. Unfortunately I didn't get his plate since it was a paper temp plate and the window was too glary to read through.

Any of you guys had stuff like this happen? I fail to see what's so offensive about photography. Perhaps he is a staunch digital shooter;)

Just goes to show that there are red-necks, hillbillies, and bubbas all over, even in Canada (ssshhh... that secret's not out yet). They have different names all over, but they are usually the same ill-educated poor folks everywhere. Despite popular opinion and hollywood stereotype, they aren't all living in the the SE of the US.

My personal favs are the Italians that tried to steal out of my friend's backpack -- just reach a hand in and take whatever they grasp. Apparently, just to do it. The moral of the story is, never photograph alone. Always have someone around to watch your back.

reellis67
8-Mar-2007, 17:03
I once had some dumb ass bounce a beer bottle off my helmet when cycling, but never more than some odd looks when out with the wood and glass. Then again, I never work close to the road - I've seen how people drive these days and have little desire to become a meat waffle.

- Randy

walter23
8-Mar-2007, 17:09
I always wear a chest-mounted dirty bomb in case I run in to that type of scenario. Guns are too primitive and finicky. If you're going to carry a weapon, do it right.



Even at 6'2" and 225# I carry some tactical protection for specifically these types of situations because you just never know what you may find yourself unintentionally in the middle of. I know some folks that carry very lethal grizzly bear pepper spray and others that do not mess around and carry a locked and cocked .45 auto.

Marko
8-Mar-2007, 17:28
I often have drunk idiots yell at me from passing cars while walking with my dog. I guess there are people out there whose only idea of fun is to get drunk, get into the car and yell and scream or throw stuff at anything that moves. Or doesn't - everything moves from their perspective, even lamp posts, after all. ;)

I think you're lucky they haven't shot at you - I have seen road signs riddled with bullet holes. Somebody either aimed at a road-side photographer and missed or they aimed at the sign and hit it...

jnantz
8-Mar-2007, 17:47
that happened to me at india point park in providence.
minding my own business and some guy chucked a beer bottle at me.
lucky for me, a cop was nearby and he confronted the guy ( who worked
at the outdoor advertising co. around the corner from where i was standing ) ...
seems this guy had a history for doing that, and was "spoken to" by the same
policeman, a day or 2 before for the same thing.

naturephoto1
8-Mar-2007, 17:52
Christopher,

Glad you weren' t hurt and that the photo gear was either undamaged or minimially damaged.

Rich

C. D. Keth
8-Mar-2007, 18:04
Christopher,

Glad you weren' t hurt and that the photo gear was either undamaged or minimially damaged.

Rich

Yeah, I came away form it just really pissed off. Nothing was damaged. For the record, feisol CF tripods can withstand beer bottle attacks.

SAShruby
8-Mar-2007, 18:39
Where do you people live? Free country? OMG.

Definitely some people do not understand what freedom is...

Brian Ellis
8-Mar-2007, 18:40
Sounds like the 21st century version of the d___heads who thought they were being clever by yelling "fore!" in the middle of my swing as they drove by the golf course. Glad you weren't hurt, too bad you couldn't get a license number. I never really think about something like that happening and it never has. My concern in urban areas is someone grabbing my backpack while I'm under the darkcloth.

Uri Kolet
8-Mar-2007, 19:16
My friend and I solved that problem by handcuffing the LF baby buggy to the ankle when under the dark cloth!

Ed Richards
8-Mar-2007, 19:51
> The moral of the story is, never photograph alone. Always have someone around to watch your back.

Not many of us have that luxury. What is grizzly bear pepper spray? The 45 is more familiar, living in a carry state. (But, so far, I have resisted the temptation to get a gun. Mostly I try to blend in and look like just another red neck.)

Marko
8-Mar-2007, 19:57
> The moral of the story is, never photograph alone. Always have someone around to watch your back.

Not many of us have that luxury. What is grizzly bear pepper spray? The 45 is more familiar, living in a carry state. (But, so far, I have resisted the temptation to get a gun. Mostly I try to blend in and look like just another red neck.)

Whatever you carry, you'd better know how to use it. And if you use the .45 right, you might well end up doing some really serious time unless you can prove that the schmuck pulled one first.

A bear spray might be as efficient and nobody has ever gone to jail for using it. All you'd have to prove is that you were reasonably afraid.

MenacingTourist
8-Mar-2007, 19:59
I thought beer was illegal there?

Nope, just dancing :)


Seriously, I'm glad our mate wasn't beaned in the head with that bottle. I lived for a long time in Utah and Mormons have thier fair share of idiots just like anyone else. Hard to say the dude in the truck was Mormon though.

Come to think of it, I never did like Ogden much and generally tried to avoid it. Ogden used (1920's-1950's) to be quite the happening city with all the rail lines and supporting infastructure, but now it's (in my opinion) the armpit of Utah.

Toyon
8-Mar-2007, 20:03
Some nasty idiot pissed off by one of his wives.

Jack Flesher
8-Mar-2007, 20:09
I am reminded of advice I got a long time ago. I apply it whenever trying to understand seemingly ridiculous occurances and it usually explains most of them...

"People are stupid. And they vote."

Kirk Gittings
8-Mar-2007, 20:21
I've been shot at. I set up the 4x5 and was sitting in my car waiting for the light to get right. The bullet hit my windshield and past just to the left of my head. Does that count?

walter23
8-Mar-2007, 20:59
I've been shot at. I set up the 4x5 and was sitting in my car waiting for the light to get right. The bullet hit my windshield and past just to the left of my head. Does that count?

You've got to be kidding. Shot at, at random? What the hell?

Jim Rice
8-Mar-2007, 21:13
That counts. Just saying.

Kirk Gittings
8-Mar-2007, 22:08
I was shooting architecture for an architect client in a bad part of town at twilight. I'm not sure what the beef was or with who. I'm just saying.

Robert Hall
8-Mar-2007, 22:09
See what happens when you don't call a local to help you out with these situations?

:)

Frank Petronio
8-Mar-2007, 23:12
I think they must have smelt the Rochester on you. Another angry Kodak shareholder...

You weren't wearing yellow and red were you?

(The old school Kodak management team was mostly U of U grads and Mormon -- former CEO Kay Whitmore is a big mucky-muck in LSD... errr LDS.)

Duane Polcou
8-Mar-2007, 23:52
I was photographing once on a promontory about 1/4 mile into the Grand Canyon near Desert View. To access this spot (and return) you had to negotiate a narrow ledge
between a large boulder obstacle and thin air. Once set up, a trio of annoying Europeans showed up and intentionally stood in between my camera and the promontory edge, obviously to annoy me. Despite politely commenting "okay, jokes on me, could you please move?" they refused to even acknowledge my presence. I was invisible. I hastily broke down, packed up, and left. Upon their return, guess who was waiting for them at the narrow ledge? I told them if they could get by me, they could pass. I'm 6' 1", 210, with a menacing metal tripod. Suffice it to say, they were not. I made those son's a B's wait a full hour until total darkness before I left, with my flashlight. I think they had a lighter. Those anger management classes my ex wife made me spring for never really took hold.

gregstidham
9-Mar-2007, 06:12
I have found a lot of dumb people think you are shooting for television. Some of you may laugh, but I have spent a lot of time in recent years shooting video for television and the reaction is the same. Even as a newspaper photographer I was asked often "what station are you with"?

My solution - work fast and move on. If I have to shoot along the side of a road I try to position myself behind my vehicle while working.

Per Madsen
9-Mar-2007, 06:41
I have found a lot of dumb people think you are shooting for television. Some of you may laugh, but I have spent a lot of time in recent years shooting video for television and the reaction is the same. Even as a newspaper photographer I was asked often "what station are you with"?

Same for me. Some moron shows up and ask "What TV chanel are you from ?" or
"Can you record me for television ?" but at least they don't throw bottles or stones after me.

I have only had "the bottle experience" when I am using my 35 mm camera and usualy from drunks which can't hit anything from 10 meters in broad daylight.

MIke Sherck
9-Mar-2007, 06:54
I have found a lot of dumb people think you are shooting for television. Some of you may laugh, but I have spent a lot of time in recent years shooting video for television and the reaction is the same. Even as a newspaper photographer I was asked often "what station are you with"?

My solution - work fast and move on. If I have to shoot along the side of a road I try to position myself behind my vehicle while working.

Years ago I bought a large backpack from the local military surplus store. I needed something large enought to carry the B&J 5x7 tailboard I was using at the time and they had a nice large canvas pack which I thought I could modify to suit. I took it up to the old fellow at the counter (do you remember the movie "Porkies"? There was this scene in a deep-south bar where they had a guy up on a balcony sitting behind a machine gun, in case things got a little out of hand, I guess. That sort of a place.) Anyway, he asked what TV station I was with and I told him that I wasn't a television cameraman, just a dirty amateur photographer. "Oh," he said. "For you, $10. If you were one of those TV guys it would be $40." :)

Mike

Brian Ellis
9-Mar-2007, 08:29
My friend and I solved that problem by handcuffing the LF baby buggy to the ankle when under the dark cloth!

The idea being to provide them with the added thrill of getting you as well as your gear? : - )

Daniel Grenier
9-Mar-2007, 08:38
You guys down south get all the excitement! After 25 odd years of shooting LF all I ever got is the odd honker. How boring!

Colin Graham
9-Mar-2007, 08:51
Yeah, I don't set up much on road shoulders any more. A lot of chin music from sideview mirrors. I had one guy honk and buzz me with his pickup on a snowy morning, loose control and end up in a ditch 100 yards down the road. That was pretty sweet.

Doug Dolde
9-Mar-2007, 09:01
I was shooting up above Ojai a few years ago in the Sespe Wilderness area, I wasnt intruding on private property and was pretty close the road. I heard a shot and then the bullet breaking the air close enuff to hear. There were a few cabins nearby...and a target shooting range but the shooting range wasnt that close...

Michael Alpert
9-Mar-2007, 09:21
This thread is full of odd ethnic and racist slurs. Even the definition of a "normal" neighborhood seems off-base; then it gets worse. Read back through what has been written here. Some of you guys are in trouble, even without anyone throwing anything at you.

Michael Kadillak
9-Mar-2007, 09:39
> The moral of the story is, never photograph alone. Always have someone around to watch your back.

Not many of us have that luxury. What is grizzly bear pepper spray? The 45 is more familiar, living in a carry state. (But, so far, I have resisted the temptation to get a gun. Mostly I try to blend in and look like just another red neck.)

UDAP.com

They carry it in Glacier and Yellowstone as standard equipment for employees in the field.

Brian K
9-Mar-2007, 09:55
I've been fortunate enough not to have someone throw a bottle at me while shooting, but last year, in Utah as well, I had a bullet whiz by me. I'm sure it wasn't intentional, I was in an area frequented by people hunting and plinking and there was continual gunfire in the back ground.

As I often work at roadside I have a bigger problem with tractor trailer drivers who fly by at 80-mph and don't bother to move to the further lane, which is law in many states, only to be blasted by a huge gust of air, sufficient to knock over a camera on a tripod ( I sand bag my tripod) and send ground schrapnel flying at me. I really think that some of these guys actually speed up just to mess with me.

I always carry Bear Spray, not intended to use as defense against people, although I guess it could come in handy in that case, but it is not practical, and highly illegal to carry a firearm through multiple states, national parks or into Canada, whereas Bear Spray is legal.

John Kasaian
9-Mar-2007, 10:02
This thread is full of odd ethnic and racist slurs. Even the definition of a "normal" neighborhood seems off-base; then it gets worse. Read back through what has been written here. Some of you guys are in trouble, even without anyone throwing anything at you.

I agree. The ex-mexican remark strikes me as particulary obnoxious. While I'm glad you weren't hurt by the incident, labelling your attackers as an ethnic group for no purpose other than to slur hispanics is nonsense if not vindictive.

walter23
9-Mar-2007, 10:21
I actually read that as sort of a demographic breakdown of the state in response to "isn't it just Mormons" but I guess in the context of this thread I could see how you'd read it that way. All I can say is that reading these posts makes me glad I don't live in whatever lunatic regions of the world that kind of stuff happens in. I've never had an incident while out shooting stuff. Curiosity at most. Occasionally crackheads or hobos making weird remarks (you surveyin? is that a digital?). Non-crackheads in my city are too busy looking fashionable and aloof to visibly notice guys with weird cameras.


I agree. The ex-mexican remark strikes me as particulary obnoxious. While I'm glad you weren't hurt by the incident, labelling your attackers as an ethnic group for no purpose other than to slur hispanics is nonsense if not vindictive.

Mattg
9-Mar-2007, 20:58
I can't imagine living in a country where any moron is allowed to have a gun, being shot at while taking a photograph must be a very fightening experience. It just seems so perverse that people are allowed to endanger other people's lives in such a casual manner (I know they're not "allowed", but they are given the means and seem able to avoid prosecution).

What else gets you shot at, swimming at the beach, taking a wrong turn?

We have a our fair share of morons in Sydney too, and there is a problem with some criminals having access to handguns, but I've never been hassled by anyone even though I shoot at night and by myself. I'd have absolutely no qualms about standing by the side of the road either, as I do on occasions. There are still areas where I wouldn't do this by myself at night but they are few and far between.

eddie
10-Mar-2007, 04:48
Whatever you carry, you'd better know how to use it. And if you use the .45 right, you might well end up doing some really serious time unless you can prove that the schmuck pulled one first.

A bear spray might be as efficient and nobody has ever gone to jail for using it. All you'd have to prove is that you were reasonably afraid.

hhhhmmmm? 45 sounds good to me. as for the pepper spray comment. in NY pepper spray is considered a deadly weapon because you can die or sustain serious physical injuy. so in the eyes of the law you are in just as much trouble pulling pepper spray (and using it) as you are pulling the 45. some advantages of the 45 over pepper spray are that the wind never blows the lead it back into your face unlike pepper spray. and is it is easier to reload the 45!

but i agree, no matter what you pull you better know the law, your rights, and you better be right. just remember it is always better that the judge only hears your side of the story! double tap! another thing to keep in mind it that it is better to be tried by 12 than carried by 6!

eddie
10-Mar-2007, 04:54
This thread is full of odd ethnic and racist slurs. Even the definition of a "normal" neighborhood seems off-base; then it gets worse. Read back through what has been written here. Some of you guys are in trouble, even without anyone throwing anything at you.

yeah! whatever! seems to me that you can call a spade a spade. if it was a mexican then say it. a german say it. F@#$ that PC shit. if a mexican stole my stuff or threw a bottle at me that is exactly how i will tell the story. if it were a white guy i will say that! maybe the ethnic groups should do a little bit in changing others perseptions about their group by working to change that....like family values! if Mama from group "X" would give her son a beating for acting like an asshole or a thief then maybe the son will stop those actions....if he stops the actions then others would not be so inclined to slur group "x"

Brian K
10-Mar-2007, 05:22
Matt if you drive in the American west often you'll notice that the vast majority of road signs in rural areas, even suburban areas, are full of bullet holes. Those bullets didn't politely stop after they hit the sign, most of them kept going and for quite some distance, also consider how far the bullets that missed the sign went. America is a gun crazy society, one politician's solution, after another Columbine like school gun slaughter, is to arm all the teachers. That's the American solution to too many guns in the hands of too many people, give them more guns. Like a teacher doesn't have has much chance of going "postal"(the commone expression coined by postal workers who brought their guns to work and killed co-workers).

When I'm on a shooting trip, photography not guns, I wear bright red jackets, I also wear bright red as I shoot at the roadside very often. I was wearing red when the bullet blew by me, but a bullet can go a very long distance and follows an arc, the shooters might not have known, or seen that some guy was half a mile away behind a ridge and as I was at lakeside I guess they thought the bullet would just end up in the lake. But it did make me wonder, a foot or two left or right in my choice of camera angle and I might not be here.

As for the whole "Mexican" aspect of the OP's story, they probably weren't mexicans, they might have been digital photographers, most likely from Luminous landscape, who were enraged to see someone using a dark cloth, clearly not a drone like convert to the digital ideology.

Jim Jones
10-Mar-2007, 07:26
[QUOTE=Mattg;224162]I can't imagine living in a country where any moron is allowed to have a gun, being shot at while taking a photograph must be a very fightening experience. It just seems so perverse that people are allowed to endanger other people's lives in such a casual manner (I know they're not "allowed", but they are given the means and seem able to avoid prosecution). . . .
QUOTE]

Firearms are tools, and useful tools. It's been only three days now since I've had cause to use one for varmint control. Firearms are inherently safer than automobiles, chain saws, and many other tools. Being stupid isn't illegal. If we outlaw firearms, automobiles, chain saws, and the undesirable people who misuse them, where will it stop? I'm old enough to remember a country that began eliminating "undesirable people" in the 1930s. This insanity was finally halted in 1945 at the cost of millions of more desirable lives. It's better to tolerate a few morons in a free society than to lose the freedom to travel, photograph, and make the most of our lives.

Greg Lockrey
10-Mar-2007, 07:39
Firearms are tools, and useful tools. It's been only three days now since I've had cause to use one for varmint control. Firearms are inherently safer than automobiles, chain saws, and many other tools. Being stupid isn't illegal. If we outlaw firearms, automobiles, chain saws, and the undesirable people who misuse them, where will it stop? I'm old enough to remember a country that began eliminating "undesirable people" in the 1930s. This insanity was finally halted in 1945 at the cost of millions of more desirable lives. It's better to tolerate a few morons in a free society than to lose the freedom to travel, photograph, and make the most of our lives.

Here, here Jim. Beautifully put. My sentiments exactly.;)

John Kasaian
10-Mar-2007, 09:10
yeah! whatever! seems to me that you can call a spade a spade. if it was a mexican then say it. a german say it. F@#$ that PC shit. if a mexican stole my stuff or threw a bottle at me that is exactly how i will tell the story. if it were a white guy i will say that! maybe the ethnic groups should do a little bit in changing others perseptions about their group by working to change that....like family values! if Mama from group "X" would give her son a beating for acting like an asshole or a thief then maybe the son will stop those actions....if he stops the actions then others would not be so inclined to slur group "x"

eddie,

There was no mention of any ethnic group in the original post. The photographer clearly didn't identify who had thrown the bottle, only a description of the vehicle. If the perp in fact was a mexican or hispanic (or any other identifiable group) then the description would be more pertanent to the issue. What I find objectionable is how handy the term "ex-mexicans" if found when the topic of violence comes up. In my town there are gangs of hispanics, asians, blacks and whites all equally dangerous and obnoxious. Bad guys come in all colors and origins. So do the good guys. Off handed remarks such as that made about "ex-mexicans" is ignorant and insulting to people from mexico.

Hell, its racist.

Fortunately we are still within our rights to be "ignorant and insulting" but we shouldn't be surprised when someone else points out that such comments are in fact "ignorant and insulting."

Brian K
10-Mar-2007, 10:21
Firearms are tools, and useful tools. It's been only three days now since I've had cause to use one for varmint control. Firearms are inherently safer than automobiles, chain saws, and many other tools. Being stupid isn't illegal. If we outlaw firearms, automobiles, chain saws, and the undesirable people who misuse them, where will it stop? I'm old enough to remember a country that began eliminating "undesirable people" in the 1930s. This insanity was finally halted in 1945 at the cost of millions of more desirable lives. It's better to tolerate a few morons in a free society than to lose the freedom to travel, photograph, and make the most of our lives.



Jim, according to the US Dept of Justice, in the period from 1991 to 2001 the number of people killed by firearms in the US was 374,444. That's more people killed in the US by firearms than we lost during ALL of WWII. We lost 58,193 Americans during the 12 years of the Viet Nam war.

In the US during the period from 1991-2001 the yearly average was 34,040 firearm deaths. During the entire 12 years of the Viet Nam war, the average comes to 4849 fatalties per year. We are losing 7 times as many Americans a year at home to gun violence than we lost per year in Viet Nam. These deaths, and the several times number of serious but not fatal injuries also exact a huge cost to the country both financially and in infrastructure ( more hospitals, more prisons, more medical costs, more police).

Coincidently at the start of the Clinton administration in 1993 gun deaths were 39,595, by the end of the Clinton administration gun deaths dropped to 28,663. A 28 percent drop. During the Clinton years tougher gun laws were enacted, waiting periods were enacted and background checks were enacted. During the first year of the Bush II administration, 2001, the number rose to 29,573.

Canada has far fewer deaths by firearms or murder by firearms per capita than in the US. In the US the murder by firearm rate is 8 times higher. In western Europe death by firearms rates are also vastly lower than in the US. In the UK during 1993 the rate per 100,000 population was .52, that is not even one death per 100,000. During the same time in the US the gun deaths per 100,000 was 15.22 (according to the Oxford Journal). Are we 30 times more homicidal than the Brits and Scots? 30 times more indifferent to the value of human life? Or is it that they have far stricter gun control laws. As for the argument that it's guns that protect our rights, well the Brits have MORE rights than we do. They still have Habeas Corpus, they still have protection from wiretap without just cause and court order and they can not be held in prison without due process. Basically they have less guns, vastly less gun deaths and more rights. Am I the only one who thinks there's a gun problem in the US?

BTW the whole notion that keeping a gun at home keeps us from losing our democracy to the government is really ill thought out. It made sense in 1776 but doesn't quite work in 2007 when the government has jet fighters, Abrams tanks and aircraft carriers. Also the reference to Nazi Germany, Hitler didn't seize power by force, which as the misguided theory goes might have been stopped by a well armed civilian population, he was elected. He used fear tactics,scapegoating and false patriotism to gain support from the german people. Upon his election he stripped away rights, such as the German version of habeas corpus and instituted illegal searches and seizures. Sound familiar?

Marko
10-Mar-2007, 11:26
hhhhmmmm? 45 sounds good to me. as for the pepper spray comment. in NY pepper spray is considered a deadly weapon because you can die or sustain serious physical injuy. so in the eyes of the law you are in just as much trouble pulling pepper spray (and using it) as you are pulling the 45. some advantages of the 45 over pepper spray are that the wind never blows the lead it back into your face unlike pepper spray. and is it is easier to reload the 45!

but i agree, no matter what you pull you better know the law, your rights, and you better be right. just remember it is always better that the judge only hears your side of the story! double tap! another thing to keep in mind it that it is better to be tried by 12 than carried by 6!

I think you missed my point. I didn't say .45 was bad, not by any stretch. What I sad was:

1. You shouldn't use it if you don't know how.

2. If you kill him, you will do time, unless you can prove he pulled one on you first.

You seem to be saying that it is better to be judged by twelve than carried by six, which is fine in theory, but these days they tend to be very liberal with time, so a 15 or 20 years in a brig makes the difference between the two pretty academic.

As for NYC laws, it would have to be one realy unlucky thug to be equally alergic to pepper srpay as most people are to .45... ;)

Marko
10-Mar-2007, 11:45
Jim, according to the US Dept of Justice, in the period from 1991 to 2001 the number of people killed by firearms in the US was 374,444. That's more people killed in the US by firearms than we lost during ALL of WWII. We lost 58,193 Americans during the 12 years of the Viet Nam war.

In the US during the period from 1991-2001 the yearly average was 34,040 firearm deaths. During the entire 12 years of the Viet Nam war, the average comes to 4849 fatalties per year. We are losing 7 times as many Americans a year at home to gun violence than we lost per year in Viet Nam.

Which means that Americans know their guns and know how to use them much better than most anyone else and certainly better than the Japanese, Vietnamese or the Iraqis.

Perhaps we should have more wars, then? That way we would kill more of our enemies (which seem to be proliferating these days) and less of each other, and besides, wartime laws are much simpler, easier and cheaper to apply and enforce...

:D:rolleyes:

(NOTE: This was a sarcasm! Please do not flame!)


Am I the only one who thinks there's a gun problem in the US?

Well, I've been around guns since I was five. I do know how to shoot them, and pretty well if I do say so. That's why I don't have one and probably never will. If I had it, I would sooner or later get myself into a situation where I would have to use it. And if I used it, I wouldn't aim to miss, that's for sure.

Ever seen what a .45 does to a human head? I guarantee you that's something that would haunt you for years, provided you were not a psycho. I definitelly would not want to bear something like that on my conscience simply because having a gun allowed me to not back out of a conflict from which I normally would.

So, no, I think we don't have a gun problem in the U.S., I think we have people problem. Far too many people couldn't care less about their fellow human beings and would kill them as easily as I would slap someone in the face. Banning guns doesn't matter much, they will soon find other ways to harm each other.

To illustrate the point, Switzerland has more guns per capita than almost any other country, including the U.S., most of them legal and many of them the real kind, full automatic assault rifles. Their reservists just keep them at home, believe it or not. And yet, Switzerland is as safe as their banks.




BTW the whole notion that keeping a gun at home keeps us from losing our democracy to the government is really ill thought out. It made sense in 1776 but doesn't quite work in 2007 when the government has jet fighters, Abrams tanks and aircraft carriers. Also the reference to Nazi Germany, Hitler didn't seize power by force, which as the misguided theory goes might have been stopped by a well armed civilian population, he was elected. He used fear tactics,scapegoating and false patriotism to gain support from the german people. Upon his election he stripped away rights, such as the German version of habeas corpus and instituted illegal searches and seizures. Sound familiar?

That's all nice and dandy, but when the biggest threat is your neighbour and your city has slightly over 2 (two) police officers per 1,000 people, it's getting close to the Wild West. One way is to educate everybody and we all see where that is going these days, so the other option is to let everybody legally carry. Perhaps then everybody would think twice before pulling, because the other guy might just be better with it.

Colin Graham
10-Mar-2007, 13:17
Racism, guns, the trade deficit, global warming, gas dependency, health care, the war in iraq. Do we have any problems we can fix?

Frank Petronio
10-Mar-2007, 14:00
BTW the whole notion that keeping a gun at home keeps us from losing our democracy to the government is really ill thought out. It made sense in 1776 but doesn't quite work in 2007 when the government has jet fighters, Abrams tanks and aircraft carriers. Also the reference to Nazi Germany, Hitler didn't seize power by force, which as the misguided theory goes might have been stopped by a well armed civilian population, he was elected. He used fear tactics,scapegoating and false patriotism to gain support from the german people. Upon his election he stripped away rights, such as the German version of habeas corpus and instituted illegal searches and seizures. Sound familiar?

Bullshit. Iraq alone proves that civilians with handguns can effectively fight a vastly superior Army. Certainly not in a traditional battle, but as a stalling tactic that frustrates the enemy until the cowards at home grow impatient and call the troops home.

More guns in the hands of good citizens reduces crime and evens the odds against the bad guys who would otherwise have an advantage. Every kid should be taking target practice and gun safety classes IMHO.

Greg Lockrey
10-Mar-2007, 14:33
Bullshit. Iraq alone proves that civilians with handguns can effectively fight a vastly superior Army. Certainly not in a traditional battle, but as a stalling tactic that frustrates the enemy until the cowards at home grow impatient and call the troops home.

More guns in the hands of good citizens reduces crime and evens the odds against the bad guys who would otherwise have an advantage. Every kid should be taking target practice and gun safety classes IMHO.

Where I agree with you in principle, but if you really piss off an Army, they'll just drop a big bomb on your neighborhood just to get to you.:eek: You can have a "stalling tactic" only with an Army whose hands are tied.

Automobiles kill more people than all methods combined. Even worse rates in other countries than here in the US of A. When are we going to ban the auto? :D

While we're at it, how about them swimming pools? They kill more kids than the either of the above two.

Frank Petronio
10-Mar-2007, 14:54
i think bicycles are pretty dangerous too, especially those bike messangers

keith english
10-Mar-2007, 14:58
I have had a redneck in a pickup truck yell "Get a job!" while I was shooting LF beside the road. Guess it's just a sign of his lack of intelligence. I figure is he was as smart as me he would be doing LF photography. I think if the cops see anyone throw a bottle out a window at someone thy should be arrested for assault, no questions asked.

Greg Lockrey
10-Mar-2007, 15:40
i think bicycles are pretty dangerous too, especially those bike messangers

Yeah....forgot about them.:eek:

Greg Lockrey
10-Mar-2007, 15:41
I have had a redneck in a pickup truck yell "Get a job!" while I was shooting LF beside the road. Guess it's just a sign of his lack of intelligence. I figure is he was as smart as me he would be doing LF photography. I think if the cops see anyone throw a bottle out a window at someone thy should be arrested for assault, no questions asked.

Hey...I got a truck! I resemble that remark...I ain't no redneck neither.:p

Mattg
10-Mar-2007, 18:21
Hi Jim,
yes we do have guns here and they're in the hands of farmers, professional hunters (culling), registered sporting shooters, police and army....and a relatively small number of criminals!

I grew up with guns as I lived in the country, my grandfather fed his family on duck and rabbit in the very hard years after WWII, I have no problem with guns in their place.

I can't see how city life requires the use of firearms, unless everyone else also has firearms.... I'm just surprised that it's seen as acceptable for so many people to have them. I've never been shot at while taking a photo, not accidently by hunters nor purposely by morons and there's a reason for that. This isn't a criticism of The United States, just an observation that two people there have narrowly missed being killed while taking photographs.

It's also true that I've never had a beer bottle thrown at me while taking photographs and we do have a lot of beer here.

Brian K
10-Mar-2007, 19:39
Bullshit. Iraq alone proves that civilians with handguns can effectively fight a vastly superior Army. Certainly not in a traditional battle, but as a stalling tactic that frustrates the enemy until the cowards at home grow impatient and call the troops home.

More guns in the hands of good citizens reduces crime and evens the odds against the bad guys who would otherwise have an advantage. Every kid should be taking target practice and gun safety classes IMHO.

Frank, a stalling tactic only works against an adversary that cares about the amount of casualties. Totalitarian governments such as Hitler's, Stalin's, Saddam's etc don't care how many of their own people they kill, or how many of their troops die on their behalf. Stalin purged ( killed or imprisoned) tens of millions of his own people, some estimates go as high as 20 million. If a totalitarian gov't seized control of the US do you really think they'd be as careful with civilian casualties as we are in Iraq?


The Iraqis aren't using handguns, they have automatic weapons, RPG's, heavy machine guns, mortars and vast supplies of explosives. Do you think we should supply the civilian population of the US with these same types of weapons just in case? That would be great, the next time high school kids decide to murder their fellow students they can use an RPG. Also the Iraqi insurgents are hugely populated by former members of the Iraqi army who, in the very first act of the Iraqi provisional gov't (Paul Bremer) fired 300,000 Iraqis soldiers. Nothing like 300,000 highly trained heavily armed unemployed and pissed off young men to make trouble. BTW the insurgency started 3 days after the disbanding (firing) of the Iraqi army.


I'm just curious how many people here personally knew someone murdered with a firearm. I knew two, one was an armed, on duty police officer.

Marko
10-Mar-2007, 20:25
One of the first marks of a totalitarian regime is to ban personal weapons. I don't think they would bother if it really didn't matter to them.

IMHO, there is no weapons problem, only people problem. Most gun crimes are comitted by using illegal weapons in the first place.

As someone who have been shot at, I am very positive that it was a human who pulled the trigger, the gun didn't discharge spontaneously.

Brian K
10-Mar-2007, 20:53
One of the first marks of a totalitarian regime is to ban personal weapons. I don't think they would bother if it really didn't matter to them.

IMHO, there is no weapons problem, only people problem. Most gun crimes are comitted by using illegal weapons in the first place.

As someone who have been shot at, I am very positive that it was a human who pulled the trigger, the gun didn't discharge spontaneously.

Actually one of the first things a totalitarian regime does is disband or take control over the press. Maybe it's a free press that causes all those gun homicides?

Where do you think illegal guns come from? They are either bought legally, or bought legally and then sold illegaly or are stolen from gun owners, so in reality all guns used in crimes start as legal guns.

Greg Lockrey
10-Mar-2007, 21:08
I'm just curious how many people here personally knew someone murdered with a firearm. I knew two, one was an armed, on duty police officer.

We had a neighbor a couple of weeks ago that was an undercover cop get killed by a 15 year old. Very sad thing.

In my personnal experiance, my former wife and a neighbor had a long standing feud that boiled to a point where the neighbor's "boyfriend", more like pimp, was going to show how macho he was and pulled out a gasoline can and lighter and threatened to "light" my wife and house up. When I pulled my Thompson Center Contender pistol and chambered a 45/70 round, and told him that I was going to blow off his head if he didn't drop the can, he literally pissed his purple satin pants. I asked the wife "can I shoot this one Momma?" Figuring that I was crazier than he was he gathered up the rest of his "girlfriends" and headed back to where ever he came from. Nobody got hurt, there is something about seeing a 45/70 dropped into a chamber of a pistol and then pointed at your head that makes you very docile very fast. Now if I called and waited for the cops, my house would have been burned to the ground by the time they got here from 20 miles away. No, I think I'll just keep my pistols, thank you.

Brian K
10-Mar-2007, 21:36
We had a neighbor a couple of weeks ago that was an undercover cop get killed by a 15 year old. Very sad thing.

In my personnal experiance, my former wife and a neighbor had a long standing feud that boiled to a point where the neighbor's "boyfriend", more like pimp, was going to show how macho he was and pulled out a gasoline can and lighter and threatened to "light" my wife and house up. When I pulled my Thompson Center Contender pistol and chambered a 45/70 round, and told him that I was going to blow off his head if he didn't drop the can, he literally pissed his purple satin pants. I asked the wife "can I shoot this one Momma?" Figuring that I was crazier than he was he gathered up the rest of his "girlfriends" and headed back to where ever he came from. Nobody got hurt, there is something about seeing a 45/70 dropped into a chamber of a pistol and then pointed at your head that makes you very docile very fast. Now if I called and waited for the cops, my house would have been burned to the ground by the time they got here from 20 miles away. No, I think I'll just keep my pistols, thank you.

You could have also called the cops and he would have been arrested, instead he is out and about and can just as easily as you he can go buy a gun and pay you a visit. He doesn't even have to be a good sport and warn you, he can just lay in wait for you and kill you. This scenario happens all the time. About 10 years ago a japanese tourist who was on his way to a costume party wandered into the garage of the wrong house, he was shot dead by the owner who also didn't realize that the young japanese man did not understand english. Statistically the gun owner is more likely to be killed by his own gun than is the intruder.

Greg Lockrey
10-Mar-2007, 21:49
You could have also called the cops and he would have been arrested, instead he is out and about and can just as easily as you he can go buy a gun and pay you a visit. He doesn't even have to be a good sport and warn you, he can just lay in wait for you and kill you. This scenario happens all the time. About 10 years ago a japanese tourist who was on his way to a costume party wandered into the garage of the wrong house, he was shot dead by the owner who also didn't realize that the young japanese man did not understand english. Statistically the gun owner is more likely to be killed by his own gun than is the intruder.

All true! Arrested for what? My word against his? I spent two years in combat, I still look over my shoulder. After about 20 years, I'm still waiting for that "gypsie caravan" to come back. I don't think they're coming, do you? The number of people killed with their own guns is still less than drown in their own swimming pools and there is way more households with guns than have pools, so your point is? I live out in the boonies, there isn't time to wait for cops.

Hell, I kicked a polititian off my property last election season that I don't agree with politically and she called the cops on me because she felt "threatened". After a half hour wait they showed up and I explained to them that I don't want "commies" on my property and she refuses to leave. They escorted her off and told her that she was trespassing. That took a half hour and she felt "threatened" and she is a polititian to boot. Just how fast do you suppose they will come if just me or my wife that makes the call?

Marko
10-Mar-2007, 22:09
Actually one of the first things a totalitarian regime does is disband or take control over the press. Maybe it's a free press that causes all those gun homicides?

Not to nitpick, but turning the press into a roadkill is one of the things totalitarians do to become a regime. Along with dismissing all personal rights and beefing up the military.

Once they get into power, they start doing things that help them stay there, such as beefing up the police, banning personal weapons and criminalizing speech.


Where do you think illegal guns come from? They are either bought legally, or bought legally and then sold illegaly or are stolen from gun owners, so in reality all guns used in crimes start as legal guns.

So, I take it there is no gun crimes in, say, England? How about Switzerland?

Brian C. Miller
10-Mar-2007, 23:44
About 10 years ago a japanese tourist who was on his way to a costume party wandered into the garage of the wrong house, he was shot dead by the owner who also didn't realize that the young japanese man did not understand english.
I remember that a number of years ago in Louisiana a Japanese exchange student was shot dead after terrorizing a man and woman in their house. He was a fan of some Japanese fright show, and he liked to frighten people and then photograph their expressions. The student ran around the house, screaming and banging on the doors and windows, while his American friend told him not to do that. When the man opened his door, the student rushed him. The man was carrying his gun, and shot because he thought that the student was about to kill him. While the student was only holding a camera, I assure you that just about anything being held looks like a lethal weapon, even a beer can. The man was brought to trial, and found innocent of murder.

I myself was almost in the same situation. One night I was woken from sleep by some woman banging on my door, and screaming "Get out of my head!" I lived in a tiny apartment, and there was nowhere to go. I got my gun and pointed it at the door. The only thing that went through my head was to say, repeatedly, "Hello?" The woman tried the door, and it opened. At that moment my hand clenched, and if my finger had been on the trigger she would have had a bullet in her face. As it was, she saw the gun, closed the door, and took off. I'm really glad it ended that way.

Frank Petronio
11-Mar-2007, 06:42
Statistics don't mean much to me when it is 3am and there is a drunk at the door and nearest neighbor is 1000 yards away.

But a shotgun is usually just as effective an visual aid.

Brian K
11-Mar-2007, 08:27
I remember that a number of years ago in Louisiana a Japanese exchange student was shot dead after terrorizing a man and woman in their house. He was a fan of some Japanese fright show, and he liked to frighten people and then photograph their expressions. The student ran around the house, screaming and banging on the doors and windows, while his American friend told him not to do that. When the man opened his door, the student rushed him. The man was carrying his gun, and shot because he thought that the student was about to kill him. While the student was only holding a camera, I assure you that just about anything being held looks like a lethal weapon, even a beer can. The man was brought to trial, and found innocent of murder.


[edit]The Hattori Shooting

Born in Nagoya, Japan to Mr. Masaichi and Mrs. Mieko Hattori, Yoshihiro was 16 years of age when he went to Baton Rouge as a participant in the AFS student exchange program; he had also applied, and received a scholarship from the Morita Foundation for his trip. He was the middle child between a brother and a sister, and is depicted as a lively youth who belonged to his high school rugby team. He also had a favorite hobby of fishing. (Fujio 2004)
[edit]Fatal incident
Having been in the US for only two months, 16-year old Hattori received an invitation along with his homestay brother, Webb Haymaker, to a Halloween party organized for Japanese exchange students on October 17, 1992. Dressed in a tuxedo imitating John Travolta from Saturday Night Fever, Hattori was riding in a car driven by Haymaker. Upon their arrival at the Peairs' residence in the quiet working class neighborhood, the boys mistook the similar address and the Halloween decorations on the house as the actual site of their party, and proceeded to step out and walk to the front door. (Fujio 2004; Harper n.d.)
Hattori and Haymaker rang the front doorbell but began to return to the street where Haymaker had parked after no one responded to the ring. Inside the house, however, Mrs. Bonnie Peairs had opened and peered out the side door and saw two boys whom she did not recognize. Mrs. Peairs, startled, backed up inside, locking the door, and then turned to tell her husband, "Rodney, get your gun". Hattori and Haymaker were still pondering the situation as they neared their car when the carport door was opened again, this time by Mr. Peairs, armed with a stainless steel revolver, yelling "Freeze." Simultaneously, Hattori stepped towards him saying "We're here for the party," unaware of the imminent danger. Haymaker, seeing the weapon, shouted after Hattori, but his warning was futile as Peairs had already fired his weapon and run back inside locking the door again. (Kernodle 2002; Fujio 2004; Harper n.d.) Hattori had been shot in the chest at close range and was still alive as Haymaker rushed to him. Haymaker ran to the home next door to the Peairs' house for help and to call for an ambulance. Neither Mr. Peairs nor his wife came out of the locked-up house until the police arrived, about 40 minutes after the shooting, and Mrs. Peairs shouted to a neighbor to "go away" when the neighbor called for help. One of Peairs' children later told police that her mother asked, "Why did you shoot him?".
The shot had pierced the upper and lower lobes of Hattori's left lung, and exited through the area of the seventh rib; he died in the ambulance minutes later, from loss of blood. [1]
[edit]The Trial
At the trial, Peairs testified about the moment just prior to the shooting: "It was a person, coming from behind the car, moving real fast. At that point, I pointed the gun and hollered, 'Freeze!' The person kept coming toward me, moving very erratically. At that time, I hollered for him to stop. He didn't; he kept moving forward. I remember him laughing. I was scared to death. This person was not gonna stop, he was gonna do harm to me." Peairs testified that he shot Yoshi once in the chest when the youth was about five feet away. "I had no choice," he said. "I want Yoshi's parents to understand that I'm sorry for everything."
District Attorney Dori More concentrated on establishing that it had not been reasonable for Peairs, a 6-foot-2, well-armed man, to be so fearful of a polite, friendly, unarmed, skinny, 130-pound boy, even if he came to the door unexpectedly, that he was not justified in using deadly force. More stated, "It started with the ringing of the doorbell. No masks, no disguises. People ringing doorbells are not attempting to make unlawful entry. They didn't walk to the back yard, they didn't start peeking in the windows."
"You were safe and secure, weren't you?" More asked Peairs during his appearance before the grand jury. "But you didn't call the police, did you?"
"No sir." Peairs said.
"Did you hear anyone trying to break in the front door?"
"No sir."
"Did you hear anyone trying to break in the carport door?"
"No sir."
"And you were standing right there at the door, weren't you - with a big gun?"
Peairs nodded.
"I know you're sorry you killed him. You are sorry, aren't you?"
"Yes sir."
"But you did kill him, didn't you?"
"Yes sir."
Peairs testified in a flat, toneless drawl, breaking into tears several times. A police detective testified that Peairs had said to him, "Boy, I messed up; I made a mistake."
The defence, however, was able to establish that Peairs was in large part reacting reasonably to his wife's panic. Peairs's wife testified for an hour describing the incident, during which she also broke into tears several times. "He was coming real fast, and it just clicked in my mind that he was going to hurt us. I slammed the door and locked it. I took two steps into the living room, where Rod could see me and I could see him. I told him to get the gun." Peairs did not hesitate or question her, but instead went to retrieve a handgun with a laser sight which was stored in a suitcase in the bedroom, which he said "was the easiest, most accessible gun to me."
"There was no thinking involved. I wish I could have thought. If I could have just thought," Mrs. Peairs said. [2]
The trial lasted seven days. After the jurors deliberated for three and a quarter hours, Peairs was acquitted under Louisiana's "Kill the burglar" [3] statute. [4]
In a later civil action (95 0144 (La.App. 1 Cir. 10/6/95), 662 So.2d 509), however, the court found Peairs liable to Hattori's parents for $650,000 damages [5], which they used to establish two charitable funds in their son's name; one to fund U.S. high school students wishing to visit Japan, and one to fund organizations that lobby for gun control. [6]
[edit]Afterwards

After the trial, Peairs told the press that he would never again own a gun.
Japanese were shocked not only by the killing, but by Peairs' acquittal. Shortly after the Hattori case, a Japanese exchange student, Takuma Ito , and a Japanese-American student, Go Matsura, were killed in a carjacking in San Francisco, California, and another Japanese exchange student, Masakazu Kuriyama was shot in Concord, California. Many Japanese reacted to these deaths as being similar symptoms of a sick society; TV Asahi commentator Takashi Wada put the feelings into words by asking, "But now, which society is more mature? The idea that you protect people by shooting guns is barbarian."
1.65 million Japanese and one million Americans signed a petition urging stronger gun controls in the US; the petition was presented to Ambassador Walter Mondale on November 22, 1993, who delivered it to President Bill Clinton. Shortly thereafter, the Brady Bill was passed, and on December 3, 1993, Mondale presented Hattori's parents with a copy. [7] [8]
Questions of implicit racism in the acquittal of Peairs were further stimulated when, shortly afterwards, a homeowner named Todd Vriesenga, inside his house in Grand Haven, MI, similarly shot and killed a 17 year old named Adam Provencal through the front door. Vriesenga received a 16 to 24 month term for "reckless use of a firearm resulting in death", causing both Japanese and Asian-American advocacy groups to speculate on whether the difference between Vriesenga's conviction and Peairs' acquittal was related to the race of the victims. Ironically, other groups publicly stated that Vriesenga should have been convicted of the more severe charge of felony manslaughter.[9]

So basically if you are a paranoid, fearful, or terrified person, and in your own mind feel threatened by someone you can legally kill them. Shoot first, ask questions later.


I myself was almost in the same situation. One night I was woken from sleep by some woman banging on my door, and screaming "Get out of my head!" I lived in a tiny apartment, and there was nowhere to go. I got my gun and pointed it at the door. The only thing that went through my head was to say, repeatedly, "Hello?" The woman tried the door, and it opened. At that moment my hand clenched, and if my finger had been on the trigger she would have had a bullet in her face. As it was, she saw the gun, closed the door, and took off. I'm really glad it ended that way.


So Brian, you were in your apartment, behind an un-locked door, when a crazy woman was banging on your door and then entered. Was she armed? Was she bigger/stronger than you? Imagine how your life, and hers would have chnaged for the worse if you had pulled the trigger. Why was your door unlocked if you felt your environment was unsafe? Here's a thought, instead of using a gun to protect yourself why not just put a lock on the door, or even get some pepper spray.

Brian K
11-Mar-2007, 09:00
All true! Arrested for what? My word against his? I spent two years in combat, I still look over my shoulder. After about 20 years, I'm still waiting for that "gypsie caravan" to come back. I don't think they're coming, do you? The number of people killed with their own guns is still less than drown in their own swimming pools and there is way more households with guns than have pools, so your point is? I live out in the boonies, there isn't time to wait for cops.

Hell, I kicked a polititian off my property last election season that I don't agree with politically and she called the cops on me because she felt "threatened". After a half hour wait they showed up and I explained to them that I don't want "commies" on my property and she refuses to leave. They escorted her off and told her that she was trespassing. That took a half hour and she felt "threatened" and she is a polititian to boot. Just how fast do you suppose they will come if just me or my wife that makes the call?


Greg do over 34,000 Americans die in pools every year?

I totally agree with your desire to kick a trespasser off your property, however I assume from your writing, and the nature of our discussion, that you pulled a gun on her in order to get her off your property. Was she armed? Did she threaten you? Or was she just a pain in the ass? If she wasn't a "commie" would you still have pulled a gun on her? Would you have shot her for trespassing? I think you may have something here though, all i need do is shoot a few of the Jehovah's Witnesses that come by trying to sell me the "Watchtower" and that will dissuade them from ringing my door bell ever again.

I travel all over the American west, sometimes it is very unclear if you are on public or private land. Cattle are frequently grazed on open public lands, these lands may have fences and cattle guards but are public lands. It is very easy for me to accidently be on private land while I'm shooting photos, should I fear being killed while using my zoneVI spot meter? I've already dodged one bullet while shooting, do I need to add body armour and a kevlar helmet to my camera gear?

As a point of comparision I was in Iceland in a rural area, I drove down a long road, what I thought was a public road, and stopped to take photos. A short while later a farmer drives up on a tractor, he politely says that I'm on his farm and asks what I'm doing. I apologize for my error and state that I'm a landscape photographer. He then suggests a better angle on his land and volunteers to drive me to this more rugged spot on his tractor.

Ole Tjugen
11-Mar-2007, 09:02
So, I take it there is no gun crimes in, say, England? How about Switzerland?

Of course there are some. And in Norway too - the most "heavily armed" western country after Switzerland.

But there are surprisingly few when the number of weapons is taken into account.

UK is largely "disarmed", and has been for a very long time.

Ed Richards
11-Mar-2007, 09:04
> So basically if you are a paranoid, fearful, or terrified person, and in your own mind feel threatened by someone you can legally kill them. Shoot first, ask questions later.

The law on this varies hugely from state to state. LA is at one extreme, most states are more restrictive, some much more so. Most require the person to be in the house. The MI verdict probably had more to do with differing state law than racial characteristics of the victim, although racial issues cannot be ignored. Remember, the only cases that get press coverage are the ones where the shooter goes free, so it is hard to generalize from press reports to what happens in the average case.

Andre Noble
11-Mar-2007, 09:19
...I know some folks that carry very lethal grizzly bear pepper spray and others that do not mess around and carry a locked and cocked .45 auto.
Cheers!

...and those who carry Vexor spray and a cocked and locked .40 subcompact Glock:)

Andre Noble
11-Mar-2007, 09:34
I wear bright red jackets, I also wear bright red as I shoot at the roadside very often. I was wearing red when the bullet blew by me...

Seems like a a bullet proof vest, any color, is a better bet.

Marko
11-Mar-2007, 10:15
Of course there are some. And in Norway too - the most "heavily armed" western country after Switzerland.

But there are surprisingly few when the number of weapons is taken into account.

UK is largely "disarmed", and has been for a very long time.

That was my point - there's more violent crime per capita in UK than in Switzerland AND Norway combined, despite being "disarmed", as you put it.

I still maintain that it's all about people, not guns per se. Also, let's not forget that Europe is a 100% civilized continent, meaning that there is no true wilderness left there since the Middle Ages. North America still has lots of it, some of it protected as National Parks.

A person in Island, to take an example from a previous post, has no reason, not even an historical one, to be weary of strangers. The last dangererous people there were the Vikings and today's Islanders are their direct descendants.

The Wild West, on the other hand was still there a hundred years ago. Until recently, people who could remember it first hand were still alive.

walter23
11-Mar-2007, 10:17
yeah! whatever! seems to me that you can call a spade a spade. if it was a mexican then say it. a german say it. F@#$ that PC shit. if a mexican stole my stuff or threw a bottle at me that is exactly how i will tell the story. if it were a white guy i will say that! maybe the ethnic groups should do a little bit in changing others perseptions about their group by working to change that....like family values! if Mama from group "X" would give her son a beating for acting like an asshole or a thief then maybe the son will stop those actions....if he stops the actions then others would not be so inclined to slur group "x"


That's absurd. Immigrant families, in my experience, are almost universally more close-knit than the white Canadian and American ones I know. Try dating an East Indian girl if you don't believe me. Her parents won't approve, and that will *actually matter to her*. And the Mexicans I know generally have a much better work ethic than any of the white trash around here. Immigrants are generally motivated people who worked hard to get to the country they decided to settle in; white trash don't have that motivation, and even more amusing, feel entitled by virtue of the location of their birth and nothing else. Like being born in Buttf**k Idaho is some kind of accomplishment or something.

walter23
11-Mar-2007, 10:37
It made sense in 1776 but doesn't quite work in 2007 when the government has jet fighters, Abrams tanks and aircraft carriers.

In that respect, I think everybody should have a right to bear anti-tank munitions, SAM launchers, and weaponized unmanned aerial drones.

walter23
11-Mar-2007, 10:51
[edit]The Hattori Shooting



Useful stuff to remember next time I'm in the USA. I'm pretty nonchalant about trespassing in situations where it's not going to bother anybody. So long as I'm not invading privacy or scaring people I'll wander around "their" land (I mean farmland, large yards if I need access to a riverbank (which is public land up here), etc). I carry my attitudes with me and I should remember that in the USA it could get me killed.

Yeesh. And here I was afraid to visit Guatemala....

You guys have no idea what you're missing. I'll give you a strong hint: it's "not being afraid of everybody around you."

Ron Marshall
11-Mar-2007, 11:12
Guns are just tools, very dangerous tools that need to be treated with great respect.

My father taught me to shoot when I was ten. Before I was permitted to chamber a round he drummed into my head four rules: always assume a gun is loaded; never point a gun at a person; always be aware of what is behind your target; clear the action and lock-up the weapon after use.

Many shootings are accidental and occur because people arn't properly trained and don't repect their guns.

A friend of a friend was hosting a party and was showing his shotgun to my friend. He was waving the gun around the room and my friend told him not to point the gun. Then the guy said "No problem, it's not loaded". He then pointed the gun away from my friend and pulled the trigger, promptly blowing out his kitchen window. No one was hurt, but it took lots of begging for the cops not to charge him.

I have met this guy, he is a reasonable and intelligent person, just not respectful of his guns, and hence other peoples safety.

Brian K
11-Mar-2007, 13:34
So, I take it there is no gun crimes in, say, England? How about Switzerland?

Marko here are the 1993(only year for all) figures for Gun deaths per 100,000 population,this is according to the International Journal of Epidemiology;

USA 15.22 Guns, Guns,Guns!!!!!!
Switzerland 6.4
Norway 4.39
Scotland .58
England & Wales .46 No Guns!

Notice a trend?

In the US over the last 20 years we average about 3000 gun related deaths every month. That's a 9/11 every month, year after year. In Iraq, probably considered by most to be the unsafest place on the earth right now, they are losing about 3000 people a month to violence (explosives included). Wow we do have something in common with Iraq!

A foot to the left or right and I would have been a statistic, not that it would have mattered to me because when you're dead you're dead, but what it would have done to my wife, parents, siblings, friends, well that does give me great distress.

The problem with guns is not the guns, it's the people. It's far harder to drive a car than it is to get a gun. A car which is a necessity in life requires training, testing, insurance, registration, even an eye test. Prior to the Brady bill, to buy a gun in the US all you needed to do was go to a store, fill out a yellow form that asks you if you are a felon and if you are mentally ill, and then they hand you a gun. Now at least there is a 3 day waiting period, which means that when you lose your head and want to kill your neighbor you have to wait 3 days to get satisfaction. But maybe,just maybe, you'll cool off over those 3 days and won't kill someone. Also if you are a criminal they have time to check you out. And that law is why during the Clinton years gun deaths dropped 28 percent. As I stated above the real problem is not the guns but the people and since we seem incapable of properly screening the people, our only solution is to better regulate the guns.

Michael Alpert
11-Mar-2007, 13:58
Cartier-Bresson wrote somewhere that the only thing that photographers have in common is that they all use cameras. Any rational reader of this discussion would have to agree. That's the reason this forum is at its best when it confines itself to its primary subject: photography.

Marko
11-Mar-2007, 15:10
Marko here are the 1993(only year for all) figures for Gun deaths per 100,000 population,this is according to the International Journal of Epidemiology;

USA 15.22 Guns, Guns,Guns!!!!!!
Switzerland 6.4
Norway 4.39
Scotland .58
England & Wales .46 No Guns!

Notice a trend?


Yes, there is a clear correlation between UK on one hand and Switzerland and Norway on the other. The difference is exactly of one order of magnitude and could be explained away by the rate of accidents, such as the one Ron described.

But it is interesting to note that although there are no legal guns in UK, there are still gun deaths.

On the other hand, the difference betwen Switzerland and Norway on one hand and the U.S. on the other definitely does not bear correlation to guns per capita figure.

You and I seem to agree on people as the cause of the problem, it is only that we disagree about the methods to handle it. My preferred method is education and yours is regulation.

Perhaps the truth lies somewhere in the middle as it usually does?

Greg Lockrey
11-Mar-2007, 15:30
Greg do over 34,000 Americans die in pools every year?

I totally agree with your desire to kick a trespasser off your property, however I assume from your writing, and the nature of our discussion, that you pulled a gun on her in order to get her off your property. Was she armed? Did she threaten you? Or was she just a pain in the ass? If she wasn't a "commie" would you still have pulled a gun on her? Would you have shot her for trespassing? I think you may have something here though, all i need do is shoot a few of the Jehovah's Witnesses that come by trying to sell me the "Watchtower" and that will dissuade them from ringing my door bell ever again.

I travel all over the American west, sometimes it is very unclear if you are on public or private land. Cattle are frequently grazed on open public lands, these lands may have fences and cattle guards but are public lands. It is very easy for me to accidently be on private land while I'm shooting photos, should I fear being killed while using my zoneVI spot meter? I've already dodged one bullet while shooting, do I need to add body armour and a kevlar helmet to my camera gear?

As a point of comparision I was in Iceland in a rural area, I drove down a long road, what I thought was a public road, and stopped to take photos. A short while later a farmer drives up on a tractor, he politely says that I'm on his farm and asks what I'm doing. I apologize for my error and state that I'm a landscape photographer. He then suggests a better angle on his land and volunteers to drive me to this more rugged spot on his tractor.


I didn't pull a gun on the trespasser since I wasn't being threatened, sorry if you got that impression. (The gun incident was when a punk thought he was going to be macho and burn up my former wife with gasoline. That was 20 some years ago.) She refused to leave after I asked her three times and pointed out to her that she was tresspassing. She said that she wasn't trespassing because she "was a political person and had a right to be on my property whenever she wanted and I can't tell her to leave." There is no accident about being on private property in this case, it's a small 150x200 ft lot with my house. She even knew who I was by name from some sort of list she had even though I have an unlisted number. She was the one who felt threatened apparently of my 6 ft/ 265 lb size and scruffy look.:eek:

On the swimming pool thing....take the number of households and divide it into the number of pool deaths, you'll fnd that the number is larger than the number of housholds with guns.

I'm not about banning pools, three wheelers, chain saws, or my guns. I am very safe with all of my tools. And just because there are illresponsible people that we have to allow to coexist with us doesn't give the right of the government to determine what I should or should not be allowed to constitutionaly posses. I am not looking to have fully automatic assault weapons either. I was however trained on 40mm twin barrel canons...I just don't see the need for one at this time. If there happens to be a war here on continental US of A, I do plan on being able to get one. ;)

Andre Noble
11-Mar-2007, 17:50
Red Neck Pickup v. Yuppie BMW

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lh_gL7Az53o

My 1st impression was that it's a fake video, which may be true. It doesn't make sense until the" must-see" ending. The Yuppie's ability to control his emotions vs. Redneck inability may explain why yuppie has dough for a Beemer, and Redneck does not - assuming it's legit.

walter23
11-Mar-2007, 19:43
Red Neck Pickup v. Yuppie BMW

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lh_gL7Az53o

My 1st impression was that it's a fake video, which may be true. It doesn't make sense until the" must-see" ending. The Yuppie's ability to control his emotions vs. Redneck inability may explain why yuppie has dough for a Beemer, and Redneck does not - assuming it's legit.


It was believable up until the ending. BMW-boy is a bad actor; his intonation was all off. Sounded like he was reading a script, not in a heated situation with a couple of rednecks, and not like a guy staying cool in a tense situation... just like a guy reading a script.

Plus, the country music & big ole' suspenders was a little too fortuitous to be real.

And concealed handguns are pretty rare up here, not that that's proof that it's a fake, but it certainly conspires with the other factors. It's probably a prop.

C. D. Keth
12-Mar-2007, 10:46
This thread is full of odd ethnic and racist slurs. Even the definition of a "normal" neighborhood seems off-base; then it gets worse. Read back through what has been written here. Some of you guys are in trouble, even without anyone throwing anything at you.

I don't see how my definition of a normal neighborhood was off-base. It could, however, conflict with your (or anyone else's) definition of a normal neighborhood, but I don't see the problem in that. Also, my description of the population of northern Utah is pretty accurate. It wasn't a racial slur in any way.

Anyway, sorry I apparently started a gun-control thread:rolleyes: :confused:

Michael Alpert
12-Mar-2007, 11:17
Christopher,

"Normal" often suggests that everything else lacks normality. Historically, it has been a loaded narrow-minded term; for example, it was used to justify criminal acts in 1930s Nazi Germany. You have used the term innocently, and I do not fault you except for your word-choice. I think that on reflection you will see how troubling the term can be when used broadly.

I, with you, am sorry that this thread has moved down a slippery slope.

C. D. Keth
12-Mar-2007, 12:54
Christopher,

"Normal" often suggests that everything else lacks normality. Historically, it has been a loaded narrow-minded term; for example, it was used to justify criminal acts in 1930s Nazi Germany. You have used the term innocently, and I do not fault you except for your word-choice. I think that on reflection you will see how troubling the term can be when used broadly.

I, with you, am sorry that this thread has moved down a slippery slope.

Eek. Can't "normal" mean "the usual, in my experience" anymore?

Scott Davis
12-Mar-2007, 13:20
Christopher- actually, it probably can't anymore. Any one person's vision of Normal is now so limited in this increasingly globalized world that it is inherently flawed- your determination of "normal" will no longer jibe with even your neighbor's version of normal, since they may very well be from the polar opposite side of the globe and think that eating barbecued tarantulas by the light of the new moon while wearing purple lampshades and nothing else is "normal" behavior. There is customary, but there is no more "normal".

C. D. Keth
12-Mar-2007, 15:09
*sigh* I'm twenty-one years old and my manner of speech of going out of style already.:(

Marko
12-Mar-2007, 16:05
So, what do we call our normal lenses now?

naturephoto1
12-Mar-2007, 16:07
So, what do we call our normal lenses now?

The usual. ;)

Rich

Tony Lakin
12-Mar-2007, 16:16
I often have drunk idiots yell at me from passing cars while walking with my dog. I guess there are people out there whose only idea of fun is to get drunk, get into the car and yell and scream or throw stuff at anything that moves. Or doesn't - everything moves from their perspective, even lamp posts, after all. ;)

I think you're lucky they haven't shot at you - I have seen road signs riddled with bullet holes. Somebody either aimed at a road-side photographer and missed or they aimed at the sign and hit it...

Hi
They shoot at road signs here on the little old Isle Of Man sometimes with interesting results, see photo.

Greg Lockrey
12-Mar-2007, 16:43
*sigh* I'm twenty-one years old and my manner of speech of going out of style already.:(

21! I have skivvies older than that.:eek:

Scott Davis
12-Mar-2007, 19:24
Greg- as long as you've washed them in that 21 years :) If you haven't, we don't wanna know... :D

C. D. Keth
12-Mar-2007, 20:21
21! I have skivvies older than that.:eek:

Heh. I had one old timer say to me, "You mean you kids use stuff without batteries still?" when I had my old Korona 5x7 out for a spin. ;)

Greg Lockrey
12-Mar-2007, 21:11
Heh. I had one old timer say to me, "You mean you kids use stuff without batteries still?" when I had my old Korona 5x7 out for a spin. ;)

:) :)

Greg Lockrey
12-Mar-2007, 21:12
Greg- as long as you've washed them in that 21 years :) If you haven't, we don't wanna know... :D

WHa...you're supposed to wash 'em?:eek:

Keith Pitman
17-Mar-2007, 18:58
Friends and I had a couple of guys point guns at us when we driving out of a "hollar" in West Virginia after spending the night in an old house we had access to. No itchy trigger fingers, but a bit threatening. We went back there a few times. I guess you're bolder when you're young.

dslater
17-Mar-2007, 21:53
So I was shooting a bit today in Ogden, UT while I'm on my spring break from school. I'm in a neighborhood, neither upscale nor ghetto. Normal neighborhood. I was shooting a panorama of an out of business gas-station-turned-pizzaria when I heard someone yell something. I got out of the darkcloth just in time to see some asshole in a big truck drive by and the passenger throw two glass beer bottles at me. Neither hit me somehow but one broke across a locking ring on my tripod. Unfortunately I didn't get his plate since it was a paper temp plate and the window was too glary to read through.

Any of you guys had stuff like this happen? I fail to see what's so offensive about photography. Perhaps he is a staunch digital shooter;)

Chris,
back when I was in college at Boston University, I was once walking home from a bar when someone hit me in the chest with a full beer can. The car it came from was going about 50MPH - left a hell ofa bruise and sure did hurt. I'm not sure your attack had anything to do with photography. You were probably just a convenient target.

Sylvester Graham
25-Mar-2007, 19:23
If anyones read Susan Sontag's book on photography, she suggests the camera is just a modern replacement for a gun. Not in the U.S. it ain't.

Turner Reich
25-Mar-2007, 22:47
First the US sends troops to war without the proper armor and now photographers are going out without proper armor. I set up a dummy camera with the dummy under a dark cloth, they usually hit the dummy instead of me.

I guess in your case there is no solution. You can bring people but how practical is that? You can bring a gun or pepper spray but how can you shoot pepper spray at people in a moving car? You could try to shoot at the people in the car but what's that going to do. So what if you kill a car full of fools. They will probably send you to the electric chair.

The conclusion is to get killed in the process of photographing. Or you can do what the Israels do and track them down and eliminate them one by one.

There is not a dam thing you can do to get justice is there?

Cliff Baldwin
1-Apr-2007, 12:05
Find out whee they live and tell their moms.

Ben R
12-Apr-2007, 10:50
Someone once suggested wearing high visibility yellow glow jackets, the kind worn by workers. The idea is that people just think you are a surveyor or something and don't hassle you for being in the middle of the road, etc.

Could be worth a try...

alanps
12-Apr-2007, 12:00
I was working on a survey of a North London borough years ago - and was setting up camera behind a row of shops - suddenly a big guys jumps out of a car and chases me off - seems he thought I was photographing his drug dealing!

C. D. Keth
12-Apr-2007, 14:30
Someone once suggested wearing high visibility yellow glow jackets, the kind worn by workers. The idea is that people just think you are a surveyor or something and don't hassle you for being in the middle of the road, etc.

Could be worth a try...

Not a bad idea. Though it could backfire and just make me easier to aim at ;)

Marko
6-May-2007, 11:54
Apparently, a photographer can be seriously harmed, even killed, while doing nothing more than taking photos on the public beach in broad daylight, no guns or other arms involved. All it takes is being noticed by a sufficiently psychopathic individual.

http://the.honoluluadvertiser.com/article/2007/May/04/ln/FP705040371.html

RDKirk
6-May-2007, 11:58
A bear spray might be as efficient and nobody has ever gone to jail for using it.

You will in DC.

RDKirk
6-May-2007, 12:11
Prior to the Brady bill, to buy a gun in the US all you needed to do was go to a store, fill out a yellow form that asks you if you are a felon and if you are mentally ill, and then they hand you a gun. Now at least there is a 3 day waiting period, which means that when you lose your head and want to kill your neighbor you have to wait 3 days to get satisfaction. But maybe,just maybe, you'll cool off over those 3 days and won't kill someone. Also if you are a criminal they have time to check you out.

Actually, that varied greatly by state. The law in Hawaii, for instance, prior to the Brady Act was more restrictive than the Brady Act. Nor has it ever been shown that a significant percentage of gun deaths were from guns purchased within the previous 72 hours.


And that law is why during the Clinton years gun deaths dropped 28 percent. As I stated above the real problem is not the guns but the people and since we seem incapable of properly screening the people, our only solution is to better regulate the guns.

Crime in general dropped during the 90s, as did cigarette smoking and drug addiction. Were all those the result of the Brady Act? I think it's more likely the reduction in gun deaths was linked to the drop in overall crime.

RDKirk
6-May-2007, 12:15
Apparently, a photographer can be seriously harmed, even killed, while doing nothing more than taking photos on the public beach in broad daylight, no guns or other arms involved. All it takes is being noticed by a sufficiently psychopathic individual.


Indeed. Let's not forget that this topic is about being attacked with a beer bottle, not a gun...and even in a state where the use of alcohol is discouraged.

The question is why are people in many areas so likely to violence against strangers?

There have been some statistics cited for various countries, and I'd suspect that the homogeneity or heterogeneity of the different populations accounts at least part of the difference in statistical violence.

RDKirk
6-May-2007, 12:22
Chris,
back when I was in college at Boston University, I was once walking home from a bar when someone hit me in the chest with a full beer can. The car it came from was going about 50MPH - left a hell ofa bruise and sure did hurt. I'm not sure your attack had anything to do with photography. You were probably just a convenient target.

In the early 90s in Hawaii, there was a spate of people tossing pineapples from cars at other cars. I suspect the perpetrators thought it a prank, until one burst through a windshield and killed the occupant. It had been tossed from a head-on approaching vehicle, and likely the perpetrator didn't understand the physics involved.

RDKirk
6-May-2007, 12:28
Speaking of Hawaii, during the 80s, Washington DC experienced a murder every single day (two on Friday or Saturday). At the same time, the entire state of Hawaii was experiencing only 8 murders a year.

Honolulu and Washington DC are roughly the same size and have roughly the same economic distribution. Also, they are both predominantly minority (that is, non-white) and have a high level of interculturalism.

It's easier to get guns in DC, but guns are by no means rare in Honolulu.

What is, different, though, is the attitude projected by the prevailing culture (and maybe the weather counts, too).

ljb0904
6-May-2007, 16:09
I got a bottle thrown at me while riding my bike home from work. You gotta remember there's a great many angry people who need better hygiene and could probably use some plastic surgery. Carry a grenade to toss in bed of pick up trucks in such emergencies! Carry a little league slugger at all other times.

Mike Davis
6-May-2007, 16:33
It's easier to get guns in DC, but guns are by no means rare in Honolulu.

What is, different, though, is the attitude projected by the prevailing culture (and maybe the weather counts, too).

Handguns were completely illegal in the District of Columbia beginning in the mid-70's. Yet you are correct, the Murder Rate there has been as high as 41/100k population. Across the line in the wilds of VA where there were no such laws the rate was much lower under 3/100k. In "safe" Maryland with its gun control laws the murder rate was over 7/100k population. Hmmmmmmmm.

Bernice Loui
10-Mar-2013, 11:16
What else are these two really angry with in their lives that motivated them to act out in this way.. These two are not happy with their lives or their current state of mind.


Bernice



So I was shooting a bit today in Ogden, UT while I'm on my spring break from school. I'm in a neighborhood, neither upscale nor ghetto. Normal neighborhood. I was shooting a panorama of an out of business gas-station-turned-pizzaria when I heard someone yell something. I got out of the darkcloth just in time to see some asshole in a big truck drive by and the passenger throw two glass beer bottles at me. Neither hit me somehow but one broke across a locking ring on my tripod. Unfortunately I didn't get his plate since it was a paper temp plate and the window was too glary to read through.

Any of you guys had stuff like this happen? I fail to see what's so offensive about photography. Perhaps he is a staunch digital shooter;)

Roger Cole
10-Mar-2013, 11:45
Never had it happen while photographing but I've had it happen bicycling. One guy threw a beer - not an empty beer container, but a beer. He leaned out the passenger side of an approaching Jeep and lobbed it over the vehicle to my side of the road. It cam flying through the air trailing foam and completely missed. I always thought it would have been hilarious if I'd manage to grab it and yell "thanks!"

Gem Singer
10-Mar-2013, 12:19
Many changes to the economy since this thread was first posted six years ago.

People can no longer afford to throw away good beer.

Richard Wasserman
10-Mar-2013, 12:31
I have never had anything remotely bad happen to me when photographing. I work primarily in urban areas, some of which do not have the best of reputations. The people I have encountered have been nothing but curious, friendly, and interested in what I was doing. No one has thrown bottles at me—on the contrary I have been invited to share their contents.

C. D. Keth
10-Mar-2013, 14:22
Wow, this thread was dug out of the bottom of the bin.

Leszek Vogt
10-Mar-2013, 14:24
Chris, this sort of bunch exist all over US, I mean given the right conditions and these morm...urr, morons will surface even here in Seattle, which has the reputation (at least trumpeted this way) for being an educated town.

Les

Vaughn
10-Mar-2013, 15:28
Never had it happen while photographing but I've had it happen bicycling. One guy threw a beer - not an empty beer container, but a beer. He leaned out the passenger side of an approaching Jeep and lobbed it over the vehicle to my side of the road. It cam flying through the air trailing foam and completely missed. I always thought it would have been hilarious if I'd manage to grab it and yell "thanks!"

I was bicycle touring with my 4x5 in New Zealand (1986). Heading up a long hill out of Auckland a white Toyota van slowed down and matched speed with me. The side door slide opened to revel three Maoris and a keg of beer. They proceed to hand me cups of beer as I slowly made my way to the top of the hill. Nice folks!

Roger Cole
10-Mar-2013, 15:42
I was bicycle touring with my 4x5 in New Zealand (1986). Heading up a long hill out of Auckland a white Toyota van slowed down and matched speed with me. The side door slide opened to revel three Maoris and a keg of beer. They proceed to hand me cups of beer as I slowly made my way to the top of the hill. Nice folks!

I ran into some of that type too.

A friend was a cyclist AND a local police officer. Someone beaned him with a glass Gatorade bottle (remember those?) once, hit right on the stem of his Kestrel. He did get the plate, and they were quite surprised when a cop car pulled up in their driveway to discuss the incident. I think he declined to charge them criminally if they agreed to pay for the wheel he destroyed when he ran off the road due to the incident. They decided that was the better approach, even though they were shocked a wheel could cost more than they thought a bike could.

Milton Tierney
11-Mar-2013, 17:46
Welcome to the planet of the apes.

David R Munson
11-Mar-2013, 18:09
When I lived in Denton, TX, I was once riding along minding my business when I heard someone yell something that I won't repeat here, and immediately thereafter an empty 40oz bottle smashed on the street right in front of me. I actually chased them, but it was open road so alas, no chance of actually catching them.

BenJT
16-Mar-2013, 18:41
There sure are a lot of scum bags out there. I once had a used condom thrown out a car window at me and some friends.

sanking
16-Mar-2013, 21:33
In nearly four decades of running and cycling on the roads of South Carolina I have had a bunch of things thrown at me. And a few times I was run off the road . Where I live the "scum bag" are always juvenile white males. I refer to them as the "red neck" scum bags.

For the record, I am southern born and raised, and have lived most of my life in the south, so don't assume regional prejudice. Sum bags are scum bags, wherever you live, and unfortunately there seem to be a lot of them everywhere.

Sandy

Brian Ellis
17-Mar-2013, 07:26
Just goes to show that there are red-necks, hillbillies, and bubbas all over, even in Canada (ssshhh... that secret's not out yet). They have different names all over, but they are usually the same ill-educated poor folks everywhere. Despite popular opinion and hollywood stereotype, they aren't all living in the the SE of the US.

My personal favs are the Italians that tried to steal out of my friend's backpack -- just reach a hand in and take whatever they grasp. Apparently, just to do it. The moral of the story is, never photograph alone. Always have someone around to watch your back.

Rednecks? Bubbas? Good grief.

Roger Cole
17-Mar-2013, 08:09
They're also not all uneducated and poor, nor are the uneducated and poor lacking in people of kindness and hospitality by any means. I've had things thrown at me out of very expensive cars, and I've had people in very shabby cars stop to offer help when they thought (generally incorrectly, but they were being nice) that I needed it.

ROL
17-Mar-2013, 08:29
All things considered... I need to improve my aim.

Steve Smith
17-Mar-2013, 08:59
So, I take it there is no gun crimes in, say, England?

Not a lot.

No one thinks they need a gun for self defence and our police do not carry them.

If you want a gun for vermin control (farmers) or target/clay pigeon shooting then you have to apply for a licence and give good reason for owning it. It then has to be kept in a fixed, locked metal cabinet when not in use.

EDIT: I just realised how old this thread is!


Steve.

dperez
18-Mar-2013, 11:01
Very strange indeed for Utah. I've never run into any problems with locals there. Hopefully this was just a freak occurrence.

-DP

Drew Wiley
18-Mar-2013, 13:42
I've had things thrown at me. Rocks in Montana (bad for groundlgass). They resent Calif plates - think we're all from some
palm-tree lined beach and out there with the intent of buying of their ranches and developing it. I grew up with cowboys myself and can understand the resentment, but really, they're got a pretty unrealistic stereotype of Calif - which is a very
diverse state. Rocks at the Grand Canyon - unsupervised kids - good reason to avoid popular official scenic overlooks. Been
more than hassled in Utah several times (weirdo cops who belonged to the local polygamous cult), bad cops in Nevada etc,
just wanted undeserved fines for the public coffer.

dperez
20-Mar-2013, 10:35
Haha... Me too.




I just realised how old this thread is!


Steve.