Carrying hiking

Hiking someplace is an elective. If it's so bad to hike there that you need a long gun, HIKE SOMEWHERE ELSE!

Long guns under no circumstances carry better than a handgun. You may thinks it's faster to unsling a long gun but if it's that easy to unsling it's more than likely not very secure either. A long gun across you back is slow slow to bring into action. The only place to carry a long gun out of the way is........you guessed it, across your back.

Over all it's a horrid idea in 99% of the U.S. Alaska MIGHT be the exception. If you still choose to go forward with this HORRID idea, only hike in areas allowing hunting, carry a hunting licence and a gun/ammo generally used for hunting what ever quarry might be in season. Almost all states have at least one animal in season throughout the year. Coyote is a good example in most states and it wouldn't hurt to invest in a $6 predator call to help plead your case when a game officer gives you the evil eye.

Did I mention that it's a HORRID idea?

LK
 
Last edited:
Hiking uphill and down all day with a carbine would be crappy. I go hiking to enjoy myself. If I'm day hooffing it, I'll take the pistol on the belt anyday.
If I were in serious bear country, I would probably be hunting, not hiking, and I'd be toting the long rifle. Again--crappy to be going uphill and down all day with an asymmetric weight to deal with, but it's the price of entry

Thanks for the holster tip, Hiker 1.
 
Long guns under no circumstances carry better than a handgun. You may thinks it's faster to unsling a long gun but if it's that easy to unsling it's more than likely not very secure either. A long gun across you back is slow slow to bring into action. The only place to carry a long gun out of the way is........you guessed it, across your back.
Click to expand...

+1

Over all it's a horrid idea in 99% of the U.S. Alaska MIGHT be the exception. If you still choose to go forward with this HORRID idea, only hike in areas allowing hunting, carry a hunting licence and a gun/ammo generally used for hunting what ever quarry might be in season. Almost all states have at least one animal in season throughout the year. Coyote is a good example in most states and it wouldn't hurt to invest in a $6 predator call to help plead your case when a game officer gives you the evil eye.
Click to expand...

Its not uncommon to see people in Alaska/some Canadian territories carrying long guns strictly for defense. I even knew a guy who lived in Alaska for 2 years and only had one gun for one reason: a .30-06 for when he went to cut his Christmas tree every year.

It mainly just comes down to weight, convenience, and practicality for me. Im not going to need or use a long gun.

BUT. . . Hiking is different than bushwacking, exploring, etc. I consider hiking traveling on known/marked trails, with a destination in mind, generally for several (8-50) miles. If I am just out exploring/scouting an area, and I probably won't go more than 3 miles away from my truck, I will occasionally sling a shotgun. The same applies if I am traveling an out-of-service/extremely seldom used trail. And I feel it every time.

Our desert and mountain pot gardens protected by armed guards do exist out here. And I have more than once encountered an individual in the backwoods I believed might have been affiliated with something similar. Though in the event that I did actually stumble across one, I am sure I would be spending more energy running than shooting. They also generally don't exist anywhere close commonly traveled trails or roads.
 
"Trail ninjas."


Perfect name! Judging from the OP's other post about zombies that was quickly closed, I'd guess this is what we're talking about.:rolleyes:
 
I don't think you've read all the posts in this thread Neal, otherwise you'd know that there is at least one person who responded in this thread that hikes with a longarm, and I wouldn't characterize him as a trail ninja.
 
First of all, I'm not proposing that anyone hike with anything - I just posed a question.

If you are allowed to OC in your state and in the park where you are hiking [sic] does anyone ever just carry a carbine or rifle on a sling when they're hiking. [sic]
I just think for myself it would be easier to carry a carbine slung than carry a pistol in a holster.
Click to expand...

As far as how difficult it is to haul a longarm versus a pistol, I've been on long marches with an M16 and not counting the FCL - it's not that bad to haul. I've also been on shorter marches with a .45

I also stated that there are different types of hiking - if you are passing a person on the trail every 2 minutes is that a situation where someone would pack a carbine? I wouldn't. Most other people wouldn't.

But I reject the suggestion that if you feel that you need a firearm to go hiking then you should hike in some other area - the same could be said for going to the Bank, the grocery store, or any activity. The logic that you seem to be proposing is if any situation might require a longarm - then you shouldn't be in that situation. So I reject that logic. A longarm is more useful than a handgun in many situations so if you're hiking and you're going to take a firearm, why not a rifle or a carbine?

I'm not going to only hike in areas where there is one ranger every 500 meters.

If someone can hike in beautiful country that just happens to have bear, wolves and or cougar and they can take a long a carbine, and the extra weight of a longarm doesn't bother them - then it might make sense in some situations
 
Well first off, if indeed you have packed an M16 and a .45 (how old are you anyhow?) than you would know that carrying a sidearm is way easier than carrying a 6-8lbs long gun. So considering that you
think for myself it would be easier to carry a carbine slung than carry a pistol in a holster.
Click to expand...
I'm in high doubt that you have done either. And your thought that you shouldn't have to hike in a safer place because you can carry a gun is ludacris. Carrying a gun does not give you the ability to throw common sense out the window.

You wear a seat belt not so you can drive 100mph thru a residential neighborhood, you wear a seat belt in case things go wrong when even when you do the right thing at the right time in the right place.

Go back to your video game.

LK
 
Depends on where I hike.

In Sam Houston National Forrest? Well I pack a .357 with top loads, good knife, compass, water, first aid kit, etc....

Around the local park? Glock 26/27 or J .38.

Deaf
 
Countzero,

I am not saying that there are not situations or areas where carrying a long gun would be a bad idea. Just don't overdo it. Don't look for a reason to take one if there is not one present. People who dress in full BDUs, sling an AR, and then populate normal family-friendly hiking trails and routes only make gun owners look like idiots and extremists. These are the people I would call trail ninjas. These kinds of negative interactions can have long lasting effects on people, something responsible gun owners really don't need in today's world.

As for how quickly the weapon could be brought to a ready position, at 10 yards I can draw and make a COM shot in about 2-3 seconds give or take. While I am much more natural with handgun than rifles, I know un-slinging and firing a rifle would take me 2x that amount of time.

I would not be caught dead in the Alaskan wilderness without a rifle. But generally in the lower 48, it is just not unnecessary, and for me personally, not nearly as comfortable.

If you do not have a pistol that is a good fit for hiking I would recommend getting one. Something .45, .357 or larger, in as small and lightweight of a package as you can handle. I am a revolver man all the way. I also didn't wanna spend $800. So I ended up narrowing my choice down to a Charter Arms Bulldog in .44spl, or a Ruger SP101 in .357. After handling both guns, I decided the extra weight was a fair trade for the superior durability and quality of the Ruger, as well as ammo cost and availability being much better.
 
People who dress in full BDUs, sling an AR, and then populate normal family-friendly hiking trails and routes only make gun owners look like idiots and extremists. These are the people I would call trail ninjas.

These threads are better off when we stay away from hyperbole. C0untZer0 was asking about laws regarding carrying a long gun while hiking not what thigh-holster and tactical sling he needs.

I've never seen a trail ninja in my life and I've logged many a mile.
 
my dad hikes many long trails. he is retired and has never owned a gun(unless you count the one in the attic from vietnam - sorry, don't know the story).

I wanted to buy him a firearm. I mean, we're talking pacific crest trail, appalachian trail, etc, etc here. I didn't want his a$@ getting eaten by a bear or some scorned woman panther that was having a bad week.

Besides the 'more difficult than other states' issue of where I grew up, I am pretty sure that the laws aren't in the hiker's favor. Correct me if I am wrong, and I know some laws have eased up lately which I am all for too.
 
These threads are better off when we stay away from hyperbole. C0untZer0 was asking about laws regarding carrying a long gun while hiking not what thigh-holster and tactical sling he needs.

I've never seen a trail ninja in my life and I've logged many a mile.
Click to expand...

AZ has apparently had an outbreak of them. The two I encountered a few months ago were the only ones I have seen, but I have heard stories from a few people, and have found myself trying to explain to some of the groups I hike with why idiots are allowed to have guns and why we should not have stricter laws. Maybe they are just having fun, maybe they have been playing too many video games. This is especially tough when you pass a barrel or saguaro cactus that has been shot 80 times.

But I do agree with you. I didn't mean to imply that Countzero was any of the above. I just wanted to boost the chance that anyone who views this thread on the forums or through a simple google search take those things into consideration.
 
I packed my .45 AMT Backup in a small waist pack on a 12 mile hike on the Chattooga river trail a couple of weeks ago. Bought the strap-on pack at Walmart that came with two water bottles (replaced one with a filter bottle). Gun and some food fit perfectly in the waist pack. Not the best rig for drawing from concealment quickly, but it worked well for hiking.
 
Hiking and/or backpacking with a holstered weapon is a PITA, even more so with a slung long gun. I am excluding hunting here because of the differences in distance traveled and packs carried, as well as necessary equipment and purpose. True backpacking requires a chest holster if anything, to allow rapid access. Myself, I usually have a handgun in the top flap of my backpack. Always situated the same. I can reach up and snag it out fairly easily. Things other than small daypacks really interfere with any waist holster. Pocket carry works but is slower due to the constraints of the pack and weight considerations. A full size Glock rides essentially unnoticed up top.

As for trail Ninjas, I have seen them myself, as well as the evidence of their presence. Pinheads. Very rare in these parts though thankfully.
 
Since the original question started with "does anyone......" it would appear that the answer is predominantly - no. (at least the public answer)

Other- we had a guy all dressed in camo try to hold two 50-ish female hikers at knifepoint on a relatively remote trail about 2 years ago. They fought back with their hiking staffs and got away. The area was sealed off by deputies, a suspect was identified as he tried to exit the area thru a roadblock and the perp has been tried and put away.

Bringing a knife to a stick fight ain't too hot an idea.

How much better it would have been if one of the ladies had been carrying and just dispatched him then and there.

About 2 years earlier and 30 miles south a nutcase held a male and female he'd captured on a trail for a few hours. The female got away and went for help.

Stuff happens. But this sort of stuff doesn't seem to me to be rifle problems.
 
I'm not much of a park hiker, but around the Natl Forest, where I do hunt, it's not uncommon for me to carry my .45-70 or my 12 gauge shotgun, depending on what I'm doing. They are more comfortable for me than the handgun on my hip tends to be. They are easier to hit with as well.
 
How much better it would have been if one of the ladies had been carrying and just dispatched him then and there.
Click to expand...

For them this case turned the best it possibly could. They got away, the guy got arrested and is in jail. They don't have to live with the fact they killed someone and no legal or civil problems are coming there way. People who think killin is better worry the hell outta me. Not as easy as it sounds (hope I never have to find out) and your problems may only be beginning when you pull the trigger. Getting out of a situation without having to pull a trigger is ALWAYS the best option.

LK
 
AZ has apparently had an outbreak of them

I suspect these guys aren't really hikers per se, but rather yahoos walking around looking for something to shoot, but agreed - those folks do not give off a good impression of gun owners in general.
 
For them this case turned the best it possibly could. They got away, the guy got arrested and is in jail. They don't have to live with the fact they killed someone and no legal or civil problems are coming there way. People who think killin is better worry the hell outta me. Not as easy as it sounds (hope I never have to find out) and your problems may only be beginning when you pull the trigger. Getting out of a situation without having to pull a trigger is ALWAYS the best option.
Click to expand...

For them certainly.

For society, I disagree. Brady & co will claim that no one needs a gun because a hiking stick is completely adequate for self defense in all cases.

And the taxpayers are feeding and housing a wacko indefinitely.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top