View Single Post
Old September 4, 2011, 10:33 PM   #39
Brian Pfleuger
Staff
 
Join Date: June 25, 2008
Location: Central, Southern NY, USA
Posts: 18,791
You also said:

Quote:
Originally Posted by NWPilgrim
When I do go, I always carry my G23, or carry the spare when I am shooting the carry one. I scope out the area before setting up, and try to bring a friend along if possible. Besides the G23 I also keep a rifle an AR15 or Garand loaded and handy, and carry it with me when I go down range to set/check targets. If a friend is along I make sure they understand to keep an eye out for approaching vehicles when I am shooting.
So, you try to bring a friend and, when you do, you give them explicit instructions to be on the lookout for approaching vehicles.

My apologies. It's not that you WON'T go shooting without a lookout in case someone wants to kill you, you just TRY NOT TO.

I mean no offense. Really, I don't. What you call "prudently cautious", I might consider paranoia. You might consider me to be naive and unprepared. C'est la vie.

My point is, it makes no sense to me to be so worried about such astronomically unlikely events. Doing so would make me wonder about all the events "in between", let's say motorcycle riding and getting ambushed and killed in a rock quarry. What sort of steps do I take to prepare or protect myself from THOSE events? None, probably. So why the rock quarry?

Or, let's say I take these precautions at the rock quarry but I smoke cigarettes. Is that logical? If I'm prepared for such incredibly rare events, why would I do something so commonly, undeniably fatal?

It makes me wonder about much more likely events and precautions which I, and I'm sure you, ignore. My car for example. It's FAR, far, far more likely that installing a roll cage and 5-point racing harness will someday save my life than will being "prudently cautious" at the shooting range. Such precautions aren't all that expensive either. No more than a nice rifle and scope, certainly no more than two. Why do we ignore such things and place such emphasis on things of such undeniable, astronomically lower probability?

It all comes down to our own interests. It really does. I don't have a roll cage and harness but I do carry a gun. Why? I want to carry a gun and I don't want a roll cage. That's all. I'd like to BELIEVE there's more to it, but there isn't. I will likely live the rest of my life without ever needing my gun, "prudent caution" or otherwise. When I die, it will likely be disease that kills me and if not, almost certainly in a motor vehicle accident but I will die still "convinced" that carrying my gun all those years was "prudent caution".

How does any of this relate to the OP? Simply this. It's lots of "fun" to analyze and conjecture about these events, just don't forget that we do it because we want to and, in all likelihood, none of it will ever matter a whit to any of us or anyone we know. We will mostly, by a large margin, die the same deaths as those around us who have no interest in terminal ballistics, no interest in firearms, do not carry one and wouldn't know "prudent caution" if it slapped them in the face.
__________________
Still happily answering to the call-sign Peetza.
---
The problem, as you so eloquently put it, is choice.
-The Architect
-----
He is no fool who gives what he can not keep to gain what he can not lose.
-Jim Eliott, paraphrasing Philip Henry.
Brian Pfleuger is offline  
 
Page generated in 0.05347 seconds with 7 queries