Outside:
I’m not anti-gun, nor am I a city-dwelling ideologue. I’ve lived in Montana for nearly 20 years, and I own guns. The only time I carry one into the woods, however, is to hunt. To kill game. That’s what they’re built to do.
I’ve been an outdoor writer and editor for nearly as long, covering everything from skiing and climbing to hunting and fishing. I own a backcountry guide service and operate exclusively in grizzly country, including some of the most bear-dense parts of Yellowstone. I’ve had dozens of grizzly encounters, run-ins with polar bears on Arctic ski expeditions, and more than a few awkward conversations with disturbed individuals over the years—all sans sidearm and no worse for wear. Some of these experiences were scary, but I’ve never pulled the trigger on my bear spray (much less a pistol), and every one of those encounters made me a better outdoorsman.
Honestly, every time I read one of these pieces my eyes just glaze over when I have to wade through their ridiculous creds. Why can’t anyone simply say what they think? Why do they have to trot out their creds? You know, that’s “appealing to authority,” or in other words, it’s formally called the genetic fallacy. But this guy still isn’t finished.
I’ve also worked as an armed courier, transporting millions of dollars in an armored Freightliner—a job that required defensive-firearms training and certification with law enforcement and former military contractors. Guns were part of my wardrobe, and I’m comfortable with almost any firearm you could put in my hand. It’s guns in other peoples’ hands that make me nervous.
I’m not going to cite statistics about rifles and pistols or their effectiveness in wilderness-self-defense scenarios (the outcomes are generally piss-poor).
I don’t know anything about this guy and I’ve never met him, but one thing we learn from his writing is that he’s either a liar or a very sloppy and careless man. But you knew that already. His allegations disagree with what we learned from the fantastic research work performed by Dean Weingarten concerning bear attacks. So whatever else you think of what he says, just remember he’s lying or is just too stupid to know the real facts.
We are not in danger on our favorite hiking trails and in our national forests. In fact, these places are ridiculously safe
So if someone listens to him, he disarms himself and loved ones in the face of potential danger.
There are three practical reasons why carrying a gun in the backcountry is silly.
First, any responsible owner knows that the highest priority is the security of their weapon at all times. On the trail, that becomes a real issue, since there’s no way to safely store your weapon. Want to go for a quick swim? Sorry, you can’t leave your sidearm unattended. Need to head into town for a resupply? Public transportation is off-limits, and most businesses don’t allow firearms. Want to grab a cold beer at the local watering hole after a particularly humid stretch of trail? Bummer, because in most states guns aren’t allowed in bars.
Second, hikers and backpackers are notorious gram counters. Are you seriously going to agonize for months over how to save a few grams on your stove, tent, and shoes, and then pack two pounds of loaded pistol on your hip? You may as well carry an external frame pack and a canvas-wall tent.
Finally, and most importantly, carrying a gun changes the way we interact with and feel about others. For thru-hikers, the social element is an enormously rewarding part of the experience. They meet people from around the world, adopt kooky trail names, share information (including who might be sketchy or carrying a weapon), and coexist for a brief time in a remarkable place, doing a remarkable thing. Bring a firearm into that dynamic, and it won’t be the same. Others don’t know you—they don’t know your training, demeanor, judgment, or intelligence. All they know is that you have a weapon and, with it, the power to hurt them. And that’s all that truly matters. Guns intimidate.
So basically this all boils down to three things with him. First, beer. Second, weight. Third, intimidation. So if you like beer on the trail, or if you’re concerned about a couple of pounds that could save your life, or if you like to gather with folks who call each other by kooky names, then perhaps he has a point. Or maybe not. I didn’t have any problems with a couple of additional pounds, I never had beer on the trail, and I’ve just never worried about intimidation when I carry. That’s not the point.
If you’re not experienced in the bush but very concerned about how people feel about you – in other words you’re a unique and special snowflake – this might be the guide for you. On the other hand, he might get you killed too. My bet is that for whatever reason he has been blessed in the bush, and he is conflating his lack of means of and need for self defense with something totally out of his control.
He isn’t in control over the disposition of wildlife or two-legged threats in his life. On the other hand, he is indeed in control over his own decisions, and he has chosen the option less safe. That’s his prerogative, just as it is mine to call him an idiot.
