For clarity:

I believe that the right to bear arms and all of our (americans) other rights and liberties are vital to our success as a society and political power.

That having been said I also believe that discussion of that opinion on an international forum that has decidedly attempted to remain non-political is out of place. My initial post was made in an attempt to clarify the question. As I see it, all the grumbling about restrictions placed on us in the name of security are correct and the situation is quite a lot worse than most realize as you said. OTOH, if someone comes here and wants to know what could be carried as helpful survival tools in the face of these or more severe restrictions then we owe it to them to focus on those items that would be helpful and allowable so that they can have their questions answered even if they don't agree with our having liberties. There are many Britons who believe that carrying a gun is not the right thing for a citizen but If one showed up here wanting answers for day-to-day survival in urban London they would need an answer that doesn't include a Glock.

It is interesting to see where a seemingly simple question will lead us.

I've been pointing this problem out to family and friends for years. Their more affectionate endearments for me include paranoid, anti-social, etc. After all, nobody likes to admit that THEIR government just might not be so benevolent. <img src="images/graemlins/frown.gif" alt="" />

I honestly believe that this problem is with us to stay and most people will just accept it. With that thought in mind I must now go and give your name to my new Big Brother <img src="images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" />

What's the quote by Jefferson about tyranny and good men doing nothing?

Ed

I cary a q-tip travel pack with the following
leatherman squirt p-4
leatherman mircra
victorinox mini champ light 2
photon 2
10 strike any wheres
3 bandaids
duct tape
5 bucks
saftey oins
tweezers
whistle
candle
needle and thread
pepto bismo chewables
tylenol

That's cool man... I'm not really trying to make you feel like I'm coming down on you. I just feel very strongly about this. I've said it before and I'm sure I'll say it again, Tom Ridge and the "Department of Homeland Security" scares me more than any terrorist that has ever lived. This is not to say that I don't think that our government doesn't have good intentions... I think even Karl Marx had good intentions in the beginning.

As far as what I was originally trying to say. Atty_guy said he had a "fundamental question." I was merely trying to point out that his question may have been even more fundamental than even he realized. Is it a problem when someone doesn't carry all the tools they want because its a security hassle? I think so!

As far as what you must carry for survival, I have always said that its your knowledge and your mental state that will prepare you more than any tool ever can. Still, I don't want to have to look for flint to start a fire and chip a spear point when something happens. I'd rather afford myself a few advantages, and I get pretty upset when people tell me I can't do that. Its feels a little like someone is punishing me when I haven't even commited a crime.

Everybody stays quiet about it because its done in the name of "security." I think people that know this is BS need to speak up more, or it may never stop. And even though this is an international site, I imagine this is going to eventually be a problem for everyone here... if it isn't already.

I think I see your point about some international members needing a source of information that doesn't include a Glock. However, I think your concern just might be misplaced.

On this entire thread I found 2 replies in which a member actually said they carry a firearm on a regular basis. I didn't see any Glocks mentioned. I think that your hypothetical Londoner would have gleaned plenty of useful information and still not have had to worry about circumventing the gun laws of the U.K.

The thread may have digressed a bit politically but certainly no more than many others. (Long live the French army knife!)

Ed

There are two laws pertinent to the question of what the law permits in DC, along with some understanding of a term of art. DC law generally allows pocket knives with blades under three inches. Federal law is ambiguous.

One may not bring a "dangerous" or "deadly weapon" onto federal property unless one is a law enforcement officer in the performance of his (or her) duties. The federal law states that a "dangerous" or "deadly weapon", per se, does not include a knife with a blade length under two and a half inches. The law is ambiguous with respect to, say, pocket knives with three inch blades. (Per se dangerous or deadly weapons include firearms and switchblades.) If it is not clear that an item is per se dangerous or deadly, a court or prosecutor will look to intent. If one is carrying a pocket knife for benign, non-offensive uses, it is not a dangerous or deadly weapon. If, OTOH, one carries a pocket knife for self defense, it may well be found to be a dangerous or deadly weapon and the carrier may be violating the law.

So, what does the law permit one to carry in DC? Probably a pocket knife with a blade under three inches. The last time I visited the White House (post-9/11) the Secret Service had a sign posted by the East Wing stating that visitors could not bring into the building pocket knives with blades longer than three inches.

Disclaimer: This is not legal advice and I am not acting as anyone's attorney.

miniMe:

A couple of interesting thrings regarding the Capitol. First, it was a widely spread rumor, pre-9/11, that if you were a staffer or a congressman and you could get your firearm onto Capitol grounds, you were safe and the Capitol Police would not confiscate it.

Second, you may recall a shooting incident at the Capitol a few years back. A mentally ill man was able to blast his way through security and shoot a number of people, including staffers and police officers. Again, there was a rumor that staffers in various offices on the hallway that the shooter went down had locked out a number of victims who, unable to reach safety, were shot. If there were any heroes, besides the fallen peace officers, the list would have to include Senator Bill Frist who saved lives that day, including the shooter's.

Didn't see any indication that this thread originated in the U.K.. Being one of the "packing" members, I have to point out that Doug's first item on the list of what he carries on his person when he leaves the house to travel in the local area is a Glock 22 with a 15 shot clip. My pistol is my starting point for preparedness. I would not leave the house with my family without being prepared to defend them if necessary. I've had many people ask me why with my degrees don't I pursue a more lucrative career. I'd rather be the captain of my own boat so to speak, and chart my own course. Maybe I work in some seedy areas where I feel better with a gun, but I'd rather work there than have to go through security checks and body cavity searches to make a buck every day. My spirit would die a little each time. Regards, Keys

It's a matter of personal choice after careful consideration of the risks and benefits. For me, without question, firearms are a part of my preparation for disasters or emergencies. They aren't appropriate for every situation, but when they are needed, there are no substitutes.

Excellent choice!

I'm also fond of .357 Sig, if you want something more modern.