Scary NRA Militia types?!!

pixelfrog · Post by **pixelfrog** » Aug 05 2002 10:44 am

Hi All,

I was on a beautiful hike this past saturday morning on the Bluffs Springs Trail in the Sups. The Temperature cooperated, the sun was behind clouds, there was a nice breeze and of course anyone who's been out there knows the scenery is increadible.

The only weird thing about the hike was on the way back to the trailhead at the end of my hike probably within a half mile of the peralta trailhead, I ran into these two guys that were all suited up for war games or something. Camo, Knives strapped to gear suspenders, a pistol at the older man's side who had so much facial hair, you could barely see his face.

As I passed them with my hiking poles out the older guy said to me all suprised, "Ski Poles?!!!" I quickly explained they helped the old knees on the way down after I noticed he had a gun at his side. I pretty much smiled and nodded then continued on my way.

Now I'm all for everyone's right to bear arms and all, but seeing this kind of freaked me out. I know it's legal to carry handguns in Arizona and that's fine, but I was thinking there isn't a very large reason to carry a gun out there, especially if you are with another full grown adult male.

I have no idea what their reason would be for bringing those types of weopons out there, and the whole incident was a bit disturbing. I was glad that I encountered these yahoo's close to the trailhead. Anyone else run into any of these gun toting militia type weirdo's?

Paul

azhiker96 · Post by **azhiker96** » Aug 16 2002 10:14 am

Wiz, you've touched on the greatest ill I see in today's society. We need drastic reform of our legal system. There's too many people who want to be victims and want 6 figure compensation for anything that happens to them. The only trauma center in Las Vegas shut down a few weeks ago due to a lack of doctors. The docs quit working there because they were tired of paying $160K/yr in malpractice insurance premiums. Ob docs are getting harder to find due to the high premium for malpractice insurance for that branch of care.
Lawyers won't fix it because they make a killing off personal injury lawsuits charging 30% plus expenses. It's like playing the state lotteries except the odds are much better and the payoffs sometimes are higher.
On a lighter note, some of the ridiculous lawsuits people talk about do serve a good purpose. My daughter works with a girl whose apartment was broken into a few months ago in Mesa. A few things were taken but there was also blood in the apartment and on her lab. She checked the dog but he didn't have any cuts on him. The police checked out the scene but said unless the guy showed at the hospital, they would probably not be able to find him. The next day the burglar showed up at the police station to file charges against her for the dog bite. After a few weeks of worry a judge finally got to hand down his decision. Dog was justified, crook ordered to pay restitution and spend time in the pokey. As a side note, he lived in the same apartment complex. He got evicted. Stories like this rarely make the news though.

montezumawell · Post by **montezumawell** » Aug 16 2002 10:38 am

Just checking in on Good Ol' HAZ and see this topic has over 120 posts and a whopping thousand and something views. Does this set a new record for a HAZ topic on the forum? What kind of nerve did this topic touch? Apparently, a VERY sensitive nerve!!!!

J&S in Gold Beach.

olesma · Post by **olesma** » Aug 16 2002 1:33 pm

AZhiker96,

You have hit on the very thing I have been avoiding ranting about. Its a serious problem, and one that isn't solved easily. I personally think it boils down to the diffusion of personal responsibility. The court system and the leaders of the nation (political and economic - and some religious) have continued to put out the word that there are some things that just aren't our fault - tobacco being a very good example of the genre. Smoking is a choice, and most (if not all) smokers know that it is an unhealthy one. Sure the big companies can shoulder some blame for their marketing strategies - but....anyway - old history.

What is the fix? England has a system (from what I understand - although I could be completely off base here) that might seem to help - but only creates different problems. There, if you loose a lawsuit, then you have to pay the legal costs of the defendant as well. Pretty harsh in some regards. The average joe cannot afford the armies of legal support that a big corporation can - and in some cases that type of suit is warranted (e.g.: Firestone and Ford). The risk is sometimes just to great to persue legal recourse. The result is fewer lawsuits than what we have here, but then the little guy gets the shaft.

It is a dilema for sure, and one that does not appear to have an easy solution. How do you re-boot the ethics and integrity of a whole nation/culture? That is the only fix I see as working long term.

snow22_5150 · Post by **snow22_5150** » Aug 16 2002 1:54 pm

Hey and what about the guy sueing a few of the fast food chains because he ate there food and now has a weight/health problem. HA! BS is what I say! Or I could mention another very touch subject, the millions for reparations march. More BS!

Wiz · Post by **Wiz** » Aug 16 2002 2:10 pm

This thread has certainly mutated into something different than it started!

I love this site!

Wiz · Post by **Wiz** » Aug 16 2002 2:13 pm

P.S. to Azhiker96: That burglar must have been doing more than just stealing a few things to get a Lab mad enough to chew on him. Labs are the biggest sweethearts in the world.

azhiker96 · Post by **azhiker96** » Aug 16 2002 4:35 pm

Olesma, I actually like that suggestion from England only with a limitation. I'd limit it to what a party had paid for their own counsel. Here's an example. Suppose I sue General Motors for whatever reason. I hire an attorney and pump $20K into the legal system. General Motors assigns a half dozen of their staff lawyers to defend them and spend $500K. If I lose then I reimburse them actual costs up to the limit of what I spent to sue them, the $20K. If they lose (aside from any judgement), they reimburse me for my actual costs of $20K. Anyway, I guess I should really look for a political action board for this ranting and raving. I need to get outside and get some fresh air this weekend, perhaps head up to the rim. Thanks for the good discussion to all!

MaryPhyl · Post by **MaryPhyl** » Aug 16 2002 9:22 pm

If you have a real grievience you should be able to sue. You should get however much you can prove you are out for example how much you would have earned had you not been injured by that drunk driver and of course medical bills and a new car to replace the one the drunk squished.

The problem seems to lie in the pain and suffering awards. My husband has suggested that these awards should go to the state--not as much incentive to sue in the first place if the lawyer does not get a slice of that.

Abe · Post by **Abe** » Aug 18 2002 8:34 am

WOW! Awesome! When I read the first three pages of this thread I thought I would stay out it. I figured it would have burned it self out. However, I do get into these kinds of conversations at work which is pretty much made up of hard-core conservatives and patriots. Many consider me the liberal of the outfit and tolerate me because of my 23 years in the military. Most have not served. Notwithstanding, I will add my two cents quickly. I believe in individual responsibility. I am a liberal when it comes to individual choices which do not hurt anyone else and a conservative when an individual has his pursuit of life and happiness destroyed by idiots. An example would be should a person suck down large quanity of beer at home while watching football that is O.K. But, should this person enter a vehicle and drives to the local mart to restock his brews during the break in the game and in the process wipes out a family on a Sunday drive, the drunk should be charged with murder and throwed into prison for life. A short example. And in closing if those who wish to pack a firearm hiking or smoke dope and it is an individual choice, fine, on the other hand if their choice disrupts another individual's life then they should take responsibility for their actions and simply pay the price.
My 2 cents

Wiz · Post by **Wiz** » Aug 18 2002 10:34 am

Abe,
I agree 100% with every word you just said. Are we related or something?

snow22_5150 · Post by **snow22_5150** » Aug 18 2002 3:17 pm

Abe, Completely agree!!!!

Unregistered · Post by **Unregistered** » Aug 18 2002 4:27 pm

Abe wrote:WOW! Awesome! When I read the first three pages of this thread I thought I would stay out it. I figured it would have burned it self out.

Nah. I'm sure this will be an ever-morphing entity for a long while...

I agree with what you say Abe. I find that most of the people who are against any type of firearm toting are the one's most afraid of them. I'll take anyone who is willing out to Usery range for a couple hours. It's fun (and a little humbling). PM me if interested.

AZHiker · Post by **AZHiker** » Aug 18 2002 8:28 pm

Abe, I agreed with your comments but came to a screeching halt when you included dope as "not hurting others".

Nope, I do not agee. When one purchases drugs, even for personal consumption, one sets into motion a sequence of events which hurts a lot of people with ruined lives and destroys our children at an alarming rate.

The user patronizes and thereby supports the drug industry, and the misery it creates, both on a personal level, and also in graft, corruption, and gang wars with the resulting loss of llife. Lastly, it hurts us as taxpayers for the increased cost of social services needed to pick up the pieces.

Sorry, there is no such thing as taking drugs and not hurting anybody.

ck_1 · Post by **ck_1** » Aug 18 2002 9:00 pm

AZHiker wrote:Sorry, there is no such thing as taking drugs and not hurting anybody.

Got to agree with this statement.

Unregistered · Post by **Unregistered** » Aug 19 2002 7:24 am

AZHiker wrote:When one purchases drugs, even for personal consumption, one sets into motion a sequence of events which hurts a lot of people with ruined lives and destroys our children at an alarming rate.

Hmmm. Very true. I would say that the majority of the populace do not take this into consideration. I missed that one myself on my last reply.

snow22_5150 · Post by **snow22_5150** » Aug 19 2002 8:46 am

I missed that one myself on my last reply.

I missed it too! Didn't think about that at all.

mtoomeyaz · Post by **mtoomeyaz** » Aug 19 2002 11:51 am

Sorry, Gotta go along with Abe here. Its not dope that causes the injury to society. Its our lack of liberty to use it freely. Take the alcohol example and nobody replies, but insert the word dope and it becomes a hot topic. Alcohol takes a terrible toll on our society, but there was some agreement in this thread that it is ok to use. One can make the same arguement for drugs. Much of the death and destruction associated with drugs is due to its illegality. If you could go down to 7-11 and buy dope, you get rid of smuggling. You also get rid of smugglers and cops dying in the "war on drugs", and gang wars (over drugs at least), and people getting caught in crossfire, and addicts robbing and stealing to pay for inflated prices (due to the illegality) and people selling the stuff to kids because they are unregulated. And we could tax the crap out of it too!!! What you don't get rid of is people who will use it irresponsibly (just like alcohol) or people who are addictive personalities (just like alcoholics) So it brings us back to the question of liberties and personal responsibility. Free to carry a gun? Free to drink? Free to take drugs? Something to ponder anyway.

joebartels · Post by **joebartels** » Aug 19 2002 4:54 pm

Well... come on... isn't anybody gonna disagree with mike t

or is legalizing drugs the cure all?

And does this have anything to do with Scarry NRA Militia types? Was pixelfrog afraid the two men where gonna sale him drugs?
(ummm, that last part was a joke you know)

Unregistered · Post by **Unregistered** » Aug 19 2002 5:42 pm

Joe...dude...

You really need to change that avatar pic.

I crack up every time I see it now... no offense...

ck_1 · Post by **ck_1** » Aug 19 2002 9:26 pm

Hey Joe...I'll speak up...Mike T...gotta disagree. I hear that same arguement for the legalization of pot from my 16 year old students. Regardless of the source, it just doesn't seem to hold water.

Though I don't have any statistics, I'd be willing to wager that most of the death and destruction associated with the "war on drugs" stems from drugs other than pot. Now the rangers in Organ Pipe might argue this a bit, though I think that's more an issue of border control than drug smuggling.

Just because something isn't as bad as something else doesn't mean it is ok.
Just because pot isn't anymore dangerous than alcohol doesn't mean it should be legalized.

The expense related to it's legalization would be staggering...as soon as it is made legal, it has to be monitored, regulated, approved, standards would have to be set, the govt would need to determine if it falls under FDA or USDA. The average supplier wouldn't be able to jump through all the govt. hoops, and thus, the small time dealer would still deal, only it would again be illegal. Only this time not because the product was illegal, but rather because it was dealt without the appropriate permits.

Kids (and adults) would still kill braincells by the tons and lessen their lifetime intellectual capacity.

Scary NRA Militia types?!!

To pack or not to pack, iron that is...

Scary NRA Militia types?!!

Does this topic set a new record?