Hikers shot and robbed in California

I think that carrying while backpacking, in most cases, is silly. That pound could go towards something that is more likely to save your life.

However, there are places where, if you are someone who regularly carries, that it would not be silly to continue carrying. The places Jennifer describes are a good example. Some of the areas in Northern California that are more accessible by old roads, not deep in wilderness areas, can be a little sketchy with all the pot farming out there. Not dangerous enough to not go there but enough that it makes sense to extend your carry into these places.
There are some really lightweight pocket pistols that could be effective as a short range last option weapon.
One of my backpacking/camping buddies is an LEO and he carries a ruger LCP in his pant pocket.

You know that at one time carrying a pistol was a womanly thing to do? A pistol is a force equalizer against large men with more brute strength.

…

…

Kat – I hear ya; I appreciate you saying that. I heard this tragedy and, after being sad, the first thing I thought of is "How can we AVOID this?" I truly was not trying to derail/insert political agenda; but yeah I dropped the "g" word and it's almost impossible to do that these days the way it magnetizes divisiveness (deservedly or not).
From my heart, as a husband, as someone who's seen some traumatic things, I don't want this to happen to myself or anyone else. Hopefully we can all find solutions and procedures we can implement in our personal lives to mitigate this form of tragedy.
Peace to all!! – I mean that

…

there are a ton of aholes who are willing to harm others, so i carry ahole repellent (bear spray).

Odds are pretty good you will never have a problem in the woods. But if you do you could end up dead, statistics be damned.

Justin, I ran into an old grow that must have been a couple hundred plants close to the trail in Cache Creek, makes me wonder if I should carry my LCP though I haven't yet.

I've hiked in Cash Creek at least 15 times, it's only an hour drive for me. That's scary to think about. What trail did you see the old grow near?

There are some off trail routes I've wanted to do there but I've been apprehensive about it for that exact reason.

In the Baton (sp) Flat area. It's about 2 miles in from the redbud trailhead. The grow was about 100 yards south east of the impacted site immediately before crossing the creek. Lots of trash including many of the little plastic seedling containers. I would guess there are several sites along the creek at any given time.

That sounds really foolish on the part of the growers. During the summer Cache Creek is a popular place for rafting. It would be very easy for someone to stop there to camp or walk around and run into the grow. Maybe that's why it's and "old" grow. It's amazing how close these people will grow to civilization or trials.

…

I know that, but I always figured remote little creeks and springs tucked away in canyons, not a major waterway that people float down.

…

Makes you wonder what kind of chemicals are in the water in these areas that get heavy grower use.

it was tucked away towards the bluffs. I only found it while trying to find a nice quite spot to dig a little hole. It is close to the trail and creek but not obviously visible, no reason for anyone to be where it was. I think the same people who make Mendicino Forest off limts would operate here. They move between numerous grows in the back country so they don't have to be huge, and if they are found they don't lose the whole crop. Most people will not be going into Cache Creek till fall at this point so it's a low risk proposition for the bad guys.

i wouldn't worry too much about the chemicals. That water goes through some huge cattle operations just north of there, I've watched herds standing in that water as it flows gently south. None of our scouts have been sick there but you can't be too careful with that water.

I had to drink untreated water from Cache Creek when my steripen ran out of batteries and I had no pot to boil. Glad I didn't get sick.

"When you run, you will be caught,"

Depends on who's doing the running.

And who's doing the chasing. ;0)

Just remember that violent crime is down across board everywhere and what is really happening is more awareness of violent crime.

Rape murder assault all down from their peaks.

So this particular case sucks but 20 years ago unless you lived in California it wouldn't have been common knowledge.

So relax and don't change your behaviour. The wilderness is still more likely to kill you on your hike then a stranger.

"Depends on who's doing the running.

And who's doing the chasing. ;0)"

My money is on Tom.

Perspecive. Statistically, I'd wager that the most dangerous part of any backpacking trip remains the drive to and from the trailhead. Cars are far more likely to kill you than bad guys or exotic diseases. After that…falls, lightening, a fight with your hiking partner, choking…robbery is low down on the list. But more likely than terrorism! and we go to wars and suspend all manner of civil rights to fight that grave, grave threat!

you don't have to outrun the bear or the bad guys, you just have to outrun your hiking partner. Hence, always hike with a slower runner.

…

You obviously feel the need to carry a gun. There's really no need to broadcast it or try to convince others. Even people that don't like you carrying can't be bothered if they don't know you're carrying.

Not even thinking about firearms here Roger, but I like your post. I have had a number of people telling me statistics of getting killed by lightening versus by a mountain lion…so I should not be worried at all; if I do then I must be paranoid. I think being realistic and then deciding what risks one is willing to take, along with what kind of protection -be it snake bite kits, warm clothes, a knife etc. has nothing to do with paranoia.
Some people tell me I should not worry at all when out checking my cameras around mountain lions, others tell me it is foolish not to carry a gun. I do not carry the latter, I have a healthy dose of fear, I take what precautions I deem reasonable and I am out there all the time.
Statistics can be helpful but are irrelevant to the individual.

Yes, risk will also be adjusted based on the number of hours you spend on an activity. Traditional risk management will also look at the severity of the risk as well as the probability. Getting shot is pretty severe, but so is a femur fracture. Most of us aren't carrying a traction splint kit (too heavy!); I would argue that, personal opinions aside, the added weight of certain protective measures is often sufficient to tip the balance against packing them.

Certainly there are some places, at least in California, where the risk calculus changes. Just as one adjusts their first aid kit, clothes, and sleep systems, one might wish to make security adjustments as well.