Handgun Hunting

I just recently I received some communication that though various organizations there was some effort taking place to reintroduce handgun hunting in Ontario. Considering the relative power and expected range that shots would take place, the concept compares favorably with bow hunting. I also was reminded that handgun hunting was legal in Ontario right up until 1968, so there has been some precident set for this. This very much interested me as I do own handguns and the possibility of expanding on their use to hunting seems positive. After reading that the proposals included strict control with open and holstered carry, and only to individuals who first meet all the criteria for restricted, I was completely sold on the idea. Not sure how other hunters feel about this but would be curious to see what support there may be out there.

I like the idea and why not .

TD

As long as it is done responsibly I don't see why not? I would expect minimum calibre and energy requirements for certain game.

I would support it but I have my doubts that it will be a reality last time I checked the Liberals weren't handgun friendly and I doubt the current government would have the balls to make it a option.

While I don't own a handgun and don't plan on owning one even if hunting with them becomes an option, anything which increases hunting opportunities for hunters, I am 100% behind. I wish you guys the best of luck with this and if there is a petition needed to be signed please let me know.

Dyth

I would love this, I just don't know how they would setup permits, maybe if they had an ATT to each hunting land you have permission for. I like the idea but I doubt it would happen.

You have got to be kidding! Hunting with a handgun. If hunting with a rifle, shotgun, compound or crossbow has become too boring maybe you should consider another sport. Handguns were made for protection and target shooting, not hunting. I'm not sure where you got your information but I don't recall handguns being used for hunting in 1968 or any other year in Ontario.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by beardchaser

You have got to be kidding! Hunting with a handgun. If hunting with a rifle, shotgun, compound or crossbow has become too boring maybe you should consider another sport. Handguns were made for protection and target shooting, not hunting. I'm not sure where you got your information but I don't recall handguns being used for hunting in 1968 or any other year in Ontario.

---

handguns have been used to hunt many species of game both here before 68 and south of the border , you should do a little research about handgun hunting , some of us would also like to be able to use ours for our trapping trade without being penalized by needless paperwork , regulations and costs that go with the current atc system

Honestly I don't ever recall anyone hunting in the 60's with a handgun in Ontario, or even talking about it. Yes, they do it in the states. I've witnessed it in Pennsylvania. Nothing weirder than a hunter with a 44 mag strapped to his hip. Sorry, but I feel a need for a certain amount of traditionalism. Now, for trappers, I agree. You guys should have been allowed to carry them years ago.

I'd love to be able to hunt with a t/c contender in one of the many rifle calibers as well

As one of those who used to legally hunt with a handgun here in Ontario I would love to see it come back into" legality".
We needed to be closely checked by the local police as well as the OPP. This was before CPIC and computer records so it took a few months. The result was a permit to carry that was good anywhere in Canada. Sort of a "We trust you to be good" recomendation from our government. If you did not have a squeeky clean record, you did not get one. It helped if you were a member of a target club or a personal friend of a cop for references.
My permit was valid up into the seventies.....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by beardchaser

You have got to be kidding! Hunting with a handgun. If hunting with a rifle, shotgun, compound or crossbow has become too boring maybe you should consider another sport. Handguns were made for protection and target shooting, not hunting. I'm not sure where you got your information but I don't recall handguns being used for hunting in 1968 or any other year in Ontario.

---

Made for "protection and target shooting"??? any more or less so than rifles? Pretty strange statement.

I think federal laws regarding handgun transportation and use need to be changed before Ontario can look at allowing them for hunting.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by beardchaser

Honestly I don't ever recall anyone hunting in the 60's with a handgun in Ontario, or even talking about it. Yes, they do it in the states. I've witnessed it in Pennsylvania. Nothing weirder than a hunter with a 44 mag strapped to his hip. Sorry, but I feel a need for a certain amount of traditionalism. Now, for trappers, I agree. You guys should have been allowed to carry them years ago.

---

As trappers we always were able to carry them but it was simpler years ago . Now we have to take a course and requalify by testing every 4 years . And the red tape .. Don't even ask . LOL Might be nice to pluck a bird or rabbit with a little handgun while deer hunting with the rifle ,no ? Plus it really really ticks the Co's and boys in blue off if your allowed to pack even though it is in the bush only . LOL

TD

TD

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by werner.reiche

I think federal laws regarding handgun transportation and use need to be changed before Ontario can look at allowing them for hunting.

---

Correct, I think. Ontario might be able to formally recognize handgun hunting in the FWCA but the Firearms Act would need to be changed also.

I have no problem with handgun hunting and it makes a lot of sense to allow trappers to carry handguns to dispatch animals, similarly big game hunters, but I don't see this happening. There's simply not enough pressure for it, and too much likely backlash from the other side. A political no-go.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hawtree Hunter

I just recently I received some communication that though various organizations there was some effort taking place to reintroduce handgun hunting in Ontario. Considering the relative power and expected range that shots would take place, the concept compares favorably with bow hunting. I also was reminded that handgun hunting was legal in Ontario right up until 1968, so there has been some precident set for this. This very much interested me as I do own handguns and the possibility of expanding on their use to hunting seems positive. After reading that the proposals included strict control with open and holstered carry, and only to individuals who first meet all the criteria for restricted, I was completely sold on the idea. Not sure how other hunters feel about this but would be curious to see what support there may be out there.

---

Can you elaborate on your source of communication? I would have thought this would have been news worthy by the NFA, OFAH or CSSA and there is nothing on their sites. You mention reading these things, can you post a link or a copy of the communication. There are a lot of us that would like to support the group leading this, but can't if we don't know who they are.

thanks

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by beardchaser

You have got to be kidding! Hunting with a handgun. If hunting with a rifle, shotgun, compound or crossbow has become too boring maybe you should consider another sport. Handguns were made for protection and target shooting, not hunting. I'm not sure where you got your information but I don't recall handguns being used for hunting in 1968 or any other year in Ontario.

---

beardchaser, while rifle, shotgun, compound bows and crossbows are all tools to be used in hunting, why couldn't you use handguns for hunting as well as long as they have the required energy to bring down game humanely? Also all of those tools you listed require two hands to use. What if a person wishing to hunt only has one hand (an CF solider who lost a hand in Afganistan for instance)? Is it right they are denied the chance to hunt because you think handguns are only for protection and target shooting?

Also many things we use today were made for different roles. For example, Teflon was originally used in The Manhattan Project. Today it is used for cookware.

Dyth

It was done in all provinces.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by beardchaser

Honestly I don't ever recall anyone hunting in the 60's with a handgun in Ontario, or even talking about it. Yes, they do it in the states. I've witnessed it in Pennsylvania. Nothing weirder than a hunter with a 44 mag strapped to his hip. Sorry, but I feel a need for a certain amount of traditionalism. Now, for trappers, I agree. You guys should have been allowed to carry them years ago.

---

Anyone who says handguns are simply made for protection or target shooting are narrow minded or brainwashed. Alot of non-hunting/shooting people I talk to say 'Im ok with hunting and rifles but handguns are pointless'. If you were allowed to hunt with them, they wouldnt be.....

If hammers were banned is their only use a paperweight?

You can repurpose anything with laws right?

Lots of people used to carry handguns before the ban. If it was legal I would get into it big time. I would have a .22 for grouse and a big game suitable one also. I can't see any party even considering it though. The antigun people have done a great job demonizing the handgun and have won that war. We need to pick our battles to use up our limited capital. Not sure this is a good use of it unfortunately.

I would support this, and it would encourage me to go and get my restricted license. Unfortunately, I don't see it happening anytime soon - look how long it took to get rid of the longun registry. There is just no taste in Canada, or perhaps the world, to encourage private ownership of firearms.

Sorry. I didn't know expressing an opinion would offend so many. If using a hand gun cranks your handle, go ahead. I will stay narrow minded I guess.

First, I cannot believe that this is going to come, here and now...
Second, there's the question who will use them how (ethical hunting and understanding their limitations; what a long barreled handgun with scope is capable of, cannot be done with one that was designed to put holes in perfectly lit paper at rather short distance).
I might not fancy them as primary hunting tool, but as scondary. If you bow hunting bear and you have to track them all they allow you is a can of bear spray. Not as comforting as a .454 casull if you ask me.
I'm positively surprised that they are still allowed to dispatch trapped game (which makes absolutely sense).

I can see this being a bone of contention from the anti gun crowd.

It would require an overhaul of the existing firearms act, and while the CPC Party did deliver on its promise to scrap the LGR, I can't see them taking a run at it again, particularly when they are trying to secure ridings in urban areas.

This may not be a bad thing however. If the coalition for gun control and Wendy Cukier are pushing for more bans / controls, an item like this may very well be given up as a sacrificial lamb......despite it not really being an issue for many.

having said that, I am not against using handguns for hunting, particularly for trappers to be able to carry. I simply look at our climate right now and realize the uphill battle that would represent.

I thought that it wasn't even the FWCA or any provincial law that prohibits the use of handguns but rather federal firearms laws...am I wrong?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fishy Wishy

I thought that it wasn't even the FWCA or any provincial law that prohibits the use of handguns but rather federal firearms laws...am I wrong?

---

Nothing noted in the FWCA about handguns.

It probably is the fact that the firearms act prohibits transporting a handgun except to and from ones residence to an approved range.

Pretty well eliminates the possibility of taking it out in the field.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bluebulldog

Nothing noted in the FWCA about handguns.

It probably is the fact that the firearms act prohibits transporting a handgun except to and from ones residence to an approved range.

Pretty well eliminates the possibility of taking it out in the field.

---

That's what I'm saying.

Ridiculous to be legal and usable at a range but not in the field.

Just need a min. caliber requirement, if doubled up with long gun during a hunt, it cannot be concealed, and must be visible if hunting handgun hunting only.

You didn't offend me Beardchaser, it's just that you were wrong.
Back when it was legal to hunt with handguns we found that it was wiser to keep your gun concealed, unless you were in the deep bush, that way the uninformed would not get all upset when they spotted a handgun.
We were able to use handguns because the federal government had no problems with us doing so, provided we had the proper paperwork. It was ok to take them camping, to the gravel pit, farm or up to your boat or cottage, all under the same carrying permit. It wasn't until the first Trudeau that law abiding people carrying guns even became an issue.

" It wasn't until the first Trudeau that law abiding people carrying guns even became an issue. "

Could the FLQ crisis been a factor in any change back then?

Not sure but my Dad carried for the bank up until 1971 maybe until 1973 I'd have to ask for sure, but isn't that after most of the FLQ crisis?. That is when he was no longer required. Although he never actually like carrying it he said mostly because they told him no gun no job. He was a very good shot apparently but I would have only been 2 or 3 at the time.

A handgun could easily be purchased up until the early 1990's and still be used at a gravel pit.

Does anyone remember when handgun hunting stopped in Ontario? I know in NB you could no longer hunt with them in the late 1980's but could in the 1970's

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gilroy

" It wasn't until the first Trudeau that law abiding people carrying guns even became an issue. "

Could the FLQ crisis been a factor in any change back then?

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fishy Wishy

I thought that it wasn't even the FWCA or any provincial law that prohibits the use of handguns but rather federal firearms laws...am I wrong?

---

Correct. There is no law provincially, that outlaws hunting with handguns.

You can hunt with a 44 mag handgun or rifle, providing where you are allows for such caliber.

What makes it illegal is the federal firearms law.

You can still illegally hunt now with some antique handguns in Ontario.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by patvetzal

As one of those who used to legally hunt with a handgun here in Ontario I would love to see it come back into" legality".
We needed to be closely checked by the local police as well as the OPP. This was before CPIC and computer records so it took a few months. The result was a permit to carry that was good anywhere in Canada. Sort of a "We trust you to be good" recomendation from our government. If you did not have a squeeky clean record, you did not get one. It helped if you were a member of a target club or a personal friend of a cop for references.
My permit was valid up into the seventies.....

---

That was then! I think it would be a problem now. We went through the registry because general public thought it would be safer. It took a beating, and so did the legal owners not criminals. A lot of bad publicity around hand guns in our N.A. media so I don't think it will happen. As well on this forum the debating of ethical hunting on what calibre to use, which one nobody should use, bows, crossbows etc. Wounding of animals, not the tools fault the user (us ). I'm not against handguns, but I would be against all the people jumping at the opportunity who wouldn't put the effort into the practise, and being safe and considerate to others and the animals being hunted. We have that now. Just imagine the people who have that fantasy brought on by the movies of carrying a handgun around even if it was only in the bush. There used to be this thing called respect. More bad things than good would happen. Just my 2cents.

Brent according to the regs you cannot hunt with a handgun.

since all Handgun (excluding pellet and BB pistols) are restricted or prohibited they are illegal. I guess if the Feds were to make them unrestricted then they would be legal.


Firearms include rifles, shotguns, air or pellet guns, bows and crossbows. You may use semi-automatic or repeating firearms for hunting in Ontario, but not handguns that are restricted or prohibited
firearms or fully automatic firearms. Air and pellet pistols with a muzzle velocity less than 152 metres (500 feet) per second may be used for hunting in Ontario (see restrictions on page 24).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by brent

Correct. There is no law provincially, that outlaws hunting with handguns.

You can hunt with a 44 mag handgun or rifle, providing where you are allows for such caliber.

What makes it illegal is the federal firearms law.

You can still illegally hunt now with some antique handguns in Ontario.

---

You have got to be kidding! Hunting with a handgun. If hunting with a rifle, shotgun, compound or crossbow has become too boring maybe you should consider another sport. Handguns were made for protection and target shooting, not hunting.

I am not sure if this is an anti hand gun or anti hunting rant.

Handgun hunting back in the late 50's and early 60's was a privilege granted by Kelso Roberts who was the Attorney General appointed by then Premier Leslie Frost.
Kelso Roberts was also an avid handgun shooter with the Toronto club, he granted the privilege of hunting with a handgun ; provided you had a valid carrying permit and a valid hunting license. Those were the only stipulations , I had been checked back then by a few Game Wardens as they were usually called and there was never any problems , the usual comment was " carry on ".
After his tenure as Attorney General , he become the Minister of Natural Resources and died about the mid 60's.
When a new Gov. was elected our "privilege " was gone which was a real sad situation, as I do not recall anyone ever running into trouble with the handguns while hunting as back then we all respected this privilege granted to us .
As far as a change back to handgun hunting , I for one would sure appreciate it but I am not holding my breath because in the eyes of the unknowing public , we hand gunners are demonized, we are the bad ones , we are put in the same class as the ones that have shoot outs on Yonge street in downtown Toronto.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gilroy

" It wasn't until the first Trudeau that law abiding people carrying guns even became an issue. "

Could the FLQ crisis been a factor in any change back then?

---

Funny you mention that Gilroy . It actually became a real issue when the 14 women were slaughtered in Quebec by a MAD MAN . Thats when the hammer really came down and the battle started . ALL FIREARMS owners in Canada should never ever forget KIM Campbell . Remember her ? And what PARTY did she belong too ?

I've battled for many years the restrictive ,biased gun laws in Canada but I'm just a pup compared to a few on here and many others I know . Nobody supported the lads in those days and forward ,,, and I think as others have said .... the battle is huge and uphill .

As firearms owners we should never give ground . You can't afford too when your going uphill on a steep incline .

I'm not more danger to anybody whether I have a knife strapped to my belt, a handgun , or a rifle in my hand, or an axe . That is the point . Its just a tool we use to harvest or help in our harvest and nothing to fear .

Gilroy I lived at the time the FLQ crisis went on and the Wars Measures Act was enacted in Quebec because of the murders of top officials in our country Canada . I was just a kid but I was old enough to know . People yell about Trudeau although most were not even born ,,, but that half bald , ugly Liberal showed,,,, muchos balls . Harper got rid of the long gun registry . He's a Conservative but it was his balls that has us climbing the hill .

TD

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jaycee

Handgun hunting back in the late 50's and early 60's was a privilege granted by Kelso Roberts who was the Attorney General appointed by then Premier Leslie Frost.
Kelso Roberts was also an avid handgun shooter with the Toronto club, he granted the privilege of hunting with a handgun ; provided you had a valid carrying permit and a valid hunting license. Those were the only stipulations , I had been checked back then by a few Game Wardens as they were usually called and there was never any problems , the usual comment was " carry on ".
After his tenure as Attorney General , he become the Minister of Natural Resources and died about the mid 60's.
When a new Gov. was elected our "privilege " was gone which was a real sad situation, as I do not recall anyone ever running into trouble with the handguns while hunting as back then we all respected this privilege granted to us .
As far as a change back to handgun hunting , I for one would sure appreciate it but I am not holding my breath because in the eyes of the unknowing public , we hand gunners are demonized, we are the bad ones , we are put in the same class as the ones that have shoot outs on Yonge street in downtown Toronto.

---

Well said sir . In all honesty I don't think were going back to those days any time soon either but I do have HOPE .

TD

So.. what would you hunt with a handgun? I really have no use for a handgun, Except for target I have an air pistol which works perfectly for grouse and bunnies. So imagine a 9MM for a grouse? There would not be much left of a grouse. So if a 3030 is not big enough for deer, as a lot of hunters feel only a 300 win mag will take a deer, even a 22 has more power and is a lot more accurate....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Blackwolf

So.. what would you hunt with a handgun? I really have no use for a handgun, Except for target I have an air pistol which works perfectly for grouse and bunnies. So imagine a 9MM for a grouse? There would not be much left of a grouse. So if a 3030 is not big enough for deer, as a lot of hunters feel only a 300 win mag will take a deer, even a 22 has more power and is a lot more accurate....

---

if I had my wish...
a lot of things many think is adequate to hunt with, I would rather not like seeing used on game. childhood memory tells me that a pellet gun is one of them!
however, it is not about my personal preference. it is about creating opportunities. regulations are a limitation - nobody says you have to use them (better don't get me started on the rules around controlled hunts)
I don't believe there will be handgun hunting any time soon, but I hate the idea that our very own folks are the number one limiting factor. as said earlier, as backup for a bow hunter tracking a bear in the undergrowth or for the trapper it's the first choice. and I'm sure there are many more applications, let alone the enthusiasts who will use them as primary tool (again, wouldn't be necessarily my personal choice)

Actually a good old 1911 was a lot better for partridge than a 22. Unless you hit the spine with a 22 the bird normally flew off, but a big old 180gr slug at 700fps anywhere in the body would anchor the bird with hardly any meat wastage, even on a breast shot.The 38 special police load was also good for grouse, but it was hard to stop a porky with them. A body hit with a 357 and the porky would just curl up and quit. I found a slide the other day that was taken in the early seventies of my wife holding a raccoon and my old 38auto, forerunner of the 38super. It worked on coons and one rabid groundhog that was wandering around our lawn one afternoon. Back then we also used it to kill snapping turtles. Hand loads only as 38 auto ammo was pretty hard to find and 38super ammo was too powerful for the gun.
Originally, handguns weren't mentioned in the hunting regs. Then there was a note that handguns and fully automatic arms were not allowed across the border. Finally this was changed to handguns not being allowed for hunting.
i remember being camped in a field for the deer hunt when the FLQ situation was starting and Trudeau involved the War Measures Act. This piece of legislation made the six of us all liable to instant arrest, similar to the Homeland Security Act they have down south .....

Actually if you look at my avatar I'm wearing mine, originally I was sceptical as well. I practiced on targets and shot some pigions with it. The purpose was to shoot grouse off the saddle and so far I've shot 4. What is little known is that wearing your holster down low gets stuck on the cantle (back of the saddle) and after a little while hurts like hell.Actually the accuracy with a handgun even an air pistol is very low, and takes a lot of practice. People barely practice with their rifles how are you going to get them to practice with a handgun??

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 400bigbear

Funny you mention that Gilroy . It actually became a real issue when the 14 women were slaughtered in Quebec by a MAD MAN . Thats when the hammer really came down and the battle started . ALL FIREARMS owners in Canada should never ever forget KIM Campbell . Remember her ? And what PARTY did she belong too ?

I've battled for many years the restrictive ,biased gun laws in Canada but I'm just a pup compared to a few on here and many others I know . Nobody supported the lads in those days and forward ,,, and I think as others have said .... the battle is huge and uphill .

As firearms owners we should never give ground . You can't afford too when your going uphill on a steep incline .

I'm not more danger to anybody whether I have a knife strapped to my belt, a handgun , or a rifle in my hand, or an axe . That is the point . Its just a tool we use to harvest or help in our harvest and nothing to fear .

Gilroy I lived at the time the FLQ crisis went on and the Wars Measures Act was enacted in Quebec because of the murders of top officials in our country Canada . I was just a kid but I was old enough to know . People yell about Trudeau although most were not even born ,,, but that half bald , ugly Liberal showed,,,, muchos balls . Harper got rid of the long gun registry . He's a Conservative but it was his balls that has us climbing the hill .

TD

---

Then again, when you recall, the knee jerk reaction after the Ecole Polytechnique massacre was to ban the Ruger Mini 14, as it was the offending implement.

Not sure when it happened, but it is now readily available.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Blackwolf

So.. what would you hunt with a handgun? I really have no use for a handgun, Except for target I have an air pistol which works perfectly for grouse and bunnies. So imagine a 9MM for a grouse? There would not be much left of a grouse. So if a 3030 is not big enough for deer, as a lot of hunters feel only a 300 win mag will take a deer, even a 22 has more power and is a lot more accurate....

---

One moose and three deer with my 44 mag. and one jack rabbit, numerous grouse with my 1911 and a special smooth bore barrel and home brewed shot shell loads, groundhogs with my .22 cal. target pistol and a few cotton tailed rabbits.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Blackwolf

Actually if you look at my avatar I'm wearing mine, originally I was sceptical as well. I practiced on targets and shot some pigions with it. The purpose was to shoot grouse off the saddle and so far I've shot 4. What is little known is that wearing your holster down low gets stuck on the cantle (back of the saddle) and after a little while hurts like hell.Actually the accuracy with a handgun even an air pistol is very low, and takes a lot of practice. People barely practice with their rifles how are you going to get them to practice with a handgun??

---

What about your vertical bow?
Long range shooting?
Traditional archery?
Archery in general?

Handguns are as accurate as you can make them, they are short barreled rifles, they have predictable trajectories and points of impact. The problem lies with the user and their ability to hold steady with the shot. The same problem lies with all the methods listed above, we can also add wing shooting to that, you need to know where the shotgun will put the pellets hit, follow through, proper lead and all of that jazz to hit.

Stop knocking something because it may not be your fancy.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Blackwolf

Actually if you look at my avatar I'm wearing mine, originally I was sceptical as well. I practiced on targets and shot some pigions with it. The purpose was to shoot grouse off the saddle and so far I've shot 4. What is little known is that wearing your holster down low gets stuck on the cantle (back of the saddle) and after a little while hurts like hell.Actually the accuracy with a handgun even an air pistol is very low, and takes a lot of practice. People barely practice with their rifles how are you going to get them to practice with a handgun??

---

Ok. So completely confused on this one. You're saying that pic is over 25 years old? And you hunted with the pistol back when it was legal to do so?

Otherwise friend, unless you and trigger there are actually sitting on an approved range, or are South of the US Canada border, you're admitting to a no-no which you can be severely prosecuted for.

It was different back in 1989 you could still shoot at agravel pit. This changed early in 1990.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bluebulldog

Ok. So completely confused on this one. You're saying that pic is over 25 years old? And you hunted with the pistol back when it was legal to do so?

Otherwise friend, unless you and trigger there are actually sitting on an approved range, or are South of the US Canada border, you're admitting to a no-no which you can be severely prosecuted for.

---

I'm not against the idea of handguns I just have no use for them. The problem I see is people not practicing with them, and anyone who shoots them knows it takes a lot more practice to be as proficient than a rifle. Still how many people actually put a box of shells through their rifle before they hunt with it? I'm not knocking something that is already banned in our country, I just would not support the reintroduction of handguns into hunting for that reason and that I do not think the ballistics support big game hunting. In my opinion.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Blackwolf

I'm not against the idea of handguns I just have no use for them. The problem I see is people not practicing with them, and anyone who shoots them knows it takes a lot more practice to be as proficient than a rifle. Still how many people actually put a box of shells through their rifle before they hunt with it? I'm not knocking something that is already banned in our country, I just would not support the reintroduction of handguns into hunting for that reason and that I do not think the ballistics support big game hunting. In my opinion.

---

I'll side with you on this Blackwolf. For the few that would be proficient and conscientious shooting a handgun at game, there would be hundred's, if not thousands, of others who wouldn't be. Sort of like many who call themselves bow hunters? I've seen and heard of way to many wounded animals that got away due to the shooter not being competent enough to make a good shot with a bow. It happens all too often with long guns, let alone what would happen if handguns were thrown into the mix.

Its not going to happen. Dont get your hopes up

Afraid I have to agree with Bushmoose about the number of shooters who just don't take the time to learn to shoot their weapons. You have to remember however that it is normal for a hand gunner to fire between 50 and 250 rounds PER WEEK.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bluebulldog

Ok. So completely confused on this one. You're saying that pic is over 25 years old? And you hunted with the pistol back when it was legal to do so?

Otherwise friend, unless you and trigger there are actually sitting on an approved range, or are South of the US Canada border, you're admitting to a no-no which you can be severely prosecuted for.

---

Actually I'm using and wearing a Smith and Wesson

http://www.airgundepot.com/5866.html

The picture was taken last fall, and the Horses name is Sugartyme Lady, not Trigger. Although I've been in negotiations with Bob Redford to purchase Trigger's Great-Great grandson.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Blackwolf

Actually I'm using and wearing a Smith and Wesson

http://www.airgundepot.com/5866.html

The picture was taken last fall, and the Horses name is Sugartyme Lady, not Trigger. Although I've been in negotiations with Bob Redford to purchase Trigger's Great-Great grandson.

---

Ah, seen. Read your post, and missed the one little word "air" right before pistol.

Carry on there Will Rogers....;)

Hunting with a handgun makes perfect sense. I would love to pot squirrels and grouse with my .22. Those folks on this board who oppose hunting with a handgun are simply narrow-minded. "It's not right for me, so it's not right for you" sort of thing. Thanks for the advice, mommy. If a "hunter" is unethical enough to go afield with the improper caliber or the improper skill level to reasonably ensure clean harvesting with a handgun, that same person is as likely to commit the same failings with a long gun or archery tackle.

Using a handgun safely and ethically is NO different than that of a long gun. I have taken holster certification/safety training for the purpose of participating in IDPA competitions (had fun, but wasn't my thing). That doesn't make me an expert in anything, but it does reflect the fact that I am not completely ignorant about the dynamics of using a handgun where safety/speed/accuracy are a trinity. Like in hunting.

I would love to sit in my tree stand and shoot deer with the 357 or 44 mag Dutch

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by smallgamer

Those folks on this board who oppose hunting with a handgun are simply narrow-minded....Thanks for the advice,mommy

---

This board is used to express ideas, not that we are all yes men. I stated clearly why I would not support reintroducing handguns to hunting, and if any province were to allow it Alberta would be the first. Yet because I state my ideas and because they are not the same as yours, you berat and call us names. In actual fact that is bullying. As far as what constitutes Ethical???? Thats a topic for another thread.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by smallgamer

Hunting with a handgun makes perfect sense. I would love to pot squirrels and grouse with my .22. Those folks on this board who oppose hunting with a handgun are simply narrow-minded. "It's not right for me, so it's not right for you" sort of thing. Thanks for the advice, mommy. If a "hunter" is unethical enough to go afield with the improper caliber or the improper skill level to reasonably ensure clean harvesting with a handgun, that same person is as likely to commit the same failings with a long gun or archery tackle.

Using a handgun safely and ethically is NO different than that of a long gun. I have taken holster certification/safety training for the purpose of participating in IDPA competitions (had fun, but wasn't my thing). That doesn't make me an expert in anything, but it does reflect the fact that I am not completely ignorant about the dynamics of using a handgun where safety/speed/accuracy are a trinity. Like in hunting.

---

I don't think the majority of hunters here are against the idea. It's the idea of giving another tool (handgun) which takes a lot of practise to get good with to masses of hunter that would take it up like a fad. Just like a debate on the faster crossbows that are being made. People think they can shoot farther (not many, especially without the effort in practise) and better. Those guys who miss or wound game say they won't use them anymore and only use a gun. Is it the bows fault? Or the newest ultra mag cartridges with shorter actions. Like that makes a better shot or hunter! If the general hunting public we're given another opportunity, do you think they would put the effort in that an enthusiast would? Not! Only can see more negatives than positives.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by smallgamer

If a "hunter" is unethical enough to go afield with the improper caliber or the improper skill level to reasonably ensure clean harvesting with a handgun, that same person is as likely to commit the same failings with a long gun or archery tackle.

---

Uhhmmm, I'm pretty sure that's what I said in my earlier post? Thanks for backing up my point of view. :thumbup:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Blackwolf

This board is used to express ideas, not that we are all yes men. I stated clearly why I would not support reintroducing handguns to hunting, and if any province were to allow it Alberta would be the first. Yet because I state my ideas and because they are not the same as yours, you berat and call us names. In actual fact that is bullying. As far as what constitutes Ethical???? Thats a topic for another thread.

---

My apologies for causing you to feel that I am berating you. My intention is to point out that deeming a handgun as an inappropriate tool for harvesting game demonstrates the same narrow-mindedness as is displayed by those firearm users who feel that way about bow-hunting, bow-hunters who feel that way about cross-bows, etc.. If using the term "narrow-minded" falls under your definition of name-calling or bullying it is your prerogative to feel that I have done so, however that is not my intent. "Thanks for the advice, mommy" is meant to infer that as a responsible and competent individual I reserve the right to decide what is best for me, without desiring to be subject to the paternalism that is so often directed at those within the firearm community by fellow citizens, our government, and worst - our fellow firearm enthusiasts.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by robster

I don't think the majority of hunters here are against the idea. It's the idea of giving another tool (handgun) which takes a lot of practise to get good with to masses of hunter that would take it up like a fad. Just like a debate on the faster crossbows that are being made. People think they can shoot farther (not many, especially without the effort in practise) and better. Those guys who miss or wound game say they won't use them anymore and only use a gun. Is it the bows fault? Or the newest ultra mag cartridges with shorter actions. Like that makes a better shot or hunter! If the general hunting public we're given another opportunity, do you think they would put the effort in that an enthusiast would? Not! Only can see more negatives than positives.

---

I understand what you are saying, however I believe that the majority of potential handgun hunters (and the general hunting public) would indeed adapt to the limitations imposed by the capabilities of their chosen firearm, as ethical bow-hunters have done. Will there be those who don't? Yes. But I don't see more negatives than positives because I believe there are far more skilled and ethical folks afield than not.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bushmoose

Uhhmmm, I'm pretty sure that's what I said in my earlier post? Thanks for backing up my point of view. :thumbup:

---

Yes, but you also said "For the few that would be proficient and conscientious shooting a handgun at game, there would be hundred's, if not thousands, of others who wouldn't be" which I strongly disagree with and I think is a poor description of the type of people who populate our hunting community. I stated that in the case of any "hunter" in the sense of a person who I described in your quote, it matters not what tool they take afield they are liable to be inadequately prepared to take their chosen game. There will always be a few unprepared, opposed to the hundreds if not thousands who are, IMHO.

I bet that a lot of old timer moose hunters could tell you about handgun hunting in Ontario?

While I used to carry one while moose hunting I never had a chance to shoot at a moose with one. Killed dozens of grouse and a few snowshoes during the hunts though.
When we were getting dressed each morning the harness went on under our jackets and thus we would have a gun with us all day long, while going out to collect firewood, water or just for a quick walk to check on a spot for sign. This was before the days of the ATV in an area where seeing another hunter was rare.
I've only had one occasion when I was close enough to use a handgun on a moose in all my years of hunting them. Since I happened to have a rifle as well, that's what I used.

I grew up hearing all the "old timer" stories. My Grandfather was a founding member of the Toronto Sportsman Association. He used to chum with Greg Clark, who chumed with Hemingway. The only stories I've heard where those using a twelve gauge with 00 buck shot. I have pictures of Moose and Deer hanging in camp circa 1920's. Handguns were not used and were not considered to not be a sportsman's choice of firearm.

To use a handgun as a back-up to scare off nasties is one thing as a main firearm??? I did look up ballistics on a 44 Mag and a 357 Mag. Neither even comes close to the standard 1000ft/lbs for a deer, let alone the 1500 ft/lbs for moose. http://www.hornady.com/store/357-Mag-140-gr-XTP/

So what would be ethical about using something undersized to humanly kill an animal?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Blackwolf

I grew up hearing all the "old timer" stories. My Grandfather was a founding member of the Toronto Sportsman Association. He used to chum with Greg Clark, who chumed with Hemingway. The only stories I've heard where those using a twelve gauge with 00 buck shot. I have pictures of Moose and Deer hanging in camp circa 1920's. Handguns were not used and were not considered to not be a sportsman's choice of firearm.

To use a handgun as a back-up to scare off nasties is one thing as a main firearm??? I did look up ballistics on a 44 Mag and a 357 Mag. Neither even comes close to the standard 1000ft/lbs for a deer, let alone the 1500 ft/lbs for moose. http://www.hornady.com/store/357-Mag-140-gr-XTP/

So what would be ethical about using something undersized to humanly kill an animal?

---

A .44magnum properly loaded will easily kill a deer at appropriate ranges. Common sense trumps Hornadys chart.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by blasted_saber

A .44magnum properly loaded will easily kill a deer at appropriate ranges. Common sense trumps Hornadys chart.

---

I could probably use a .22 to kill a deer and a .17 HMR should kill a deer, but I don't....Why would you use something that there is a question whether or not it would do the job?

Quote:

---

To use a handgun as a back-up to scare off nasties is one thing as a main firearm??? I did look up ballistics on a 44 Mag and a 357 Mag. Neither even comes close to the standard 1000ft/lbs for a deer, let alone the 1500 ft/lbs for moose.

---

Try telling that to all the "handgun hunters " that have done it , plus bear and elk.
Boy oh boy , you live in a different world than most of us do , your views on hunting , firearms and most other subjects sure differ from the majority, or is it that you just like to argue to cause controversy amongst us .

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by blasted_saber

A .44magnum properly loaded will easily kill a deer at appropriate ranges. Common sense trumps Hornadys chart.

---

According to BW , it can't be done , and now thinking about it I wonder what killed the moose I shot at [55 to 60 yards ] before meters,. There must have been some one else in the forest and shot at that moose at the very same instant that my .44 mag. went off. That moose just dropped dead within a few feet , but according to BW , it could not have been me that killed it.:confused:
The same must be said about the deer I have killed or thought I did, I sure would like to know , who killed those animals for me ?because again according to our authority and Hornady , It wasn't me.:rolleyes:
Man oh man am I ever confused .:confused:

I have never shot any animal with a handgun with the exception of my air pistol on grouse/pigeons. However I was trained in their use. So for the most part I have to rely on ballistic charts to tell me what is adequate and what is not. Can you take a moose with a handgun??? Why would you?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Blackwolf

I have never shot any animal with a handgun with the exception of my air pistol on grouse/pigeons. However I was trained in their use. So for the most part I have to rely on ballistic charts to tell me what is adequate and what is not. Can you take a moose with a handgun??? Why would you?

---

This post is a prime example of what's wrong in our sport. Just because it isn't your thing doesn't make it the wrong choice.

Quote:

---

Can you take a moose with a handgun??? Why would you?

---

Because at the time, we could, I wanted to and I did .
I shot handguns competitively for many years went through usually 5000 rounds per year in .22 cal. alone also .45 and .38 cal. in competitions , I was good at it with a wall full of Trophies and Awards .
The shots that I took at my game animals were taken with positive kills in mind , never took shots that I knew I couldn't make .

I would support handgun hunting if it were made legal. I remember on my very 1st deer hunt in 1959 one of the guys in the camp had a gorgeous Luger "Artillery" pistol with a long barrel and a detachable stock.

Re: handgun power - a lot of the modern magnum handgun cartridges have velocities/energy levels that equal or surpass some of the "old time" loads. Cartridges such as the .38-40, .44-40. .38-55, .40-60 etc. were considered to be entirely adequate for deer and were widely used (and still are by some).

What caliber would be best for hunting wild boar in Ontario?
I can see the point of carrying a handgun as a back up while cougar hunting near Turkey Point. Easy shot while the hounds have the cat treed.
Seriously, it would be great if we could carry handguns, .22 for small game, larger calibers for larger game. It would add a whole new dimension, i suspect effective ranges would be similar to archery. I can also see the benefit of walking to or from a bear bait with a back up weapon at times.
Maybe a full open season is too much to expect right away. Perhaps a .22 revolver for small game/ trappers. A handgun spring bear hunt? Allowing houndsmen to carry handguns?

Hunting with handguns is illegal in Canada, if it was made legal then so be it and I'd support it. However, that being said, I will not be one of those who fight for the re-introduction of handguns to hunting in Canada.

I love to hunt with a handgun and have done so since a small child. When hog hunting in the thick black swamps of the South there isn't much more convenient and adequate to kill poisonous snakes and hogs than a handgun.

People hunt with .36 cal muzzle loader rifles and handguns back home during "Primitive Weapon Season." Surely a modern handgun in .357, 44 mag, etc. is more than adequate for most game. Bigger cals. are available and adequate for Brownies, etc.

The only general requirement in the States is to open carry in plain view for the Game Warden's benefit.

All kinds of people hunt deer with handguns quite successfully. If you can take moose with archery gear of course the handgun is effective and useful. If we could hunt with them I would own them. Right now I can't see "any" government risking any political capital expanding handgun use and ownership in Canada.

There is about as much of a chance of that ever being allowed again in Canada as there would be not having to pay income tax.

Isn't it interesting how long a thread that deals with at topic not a single contributor believes in it becoming reality anytime soon (i.e. never) can go on and on?

This forum given enough time could discuss all the world's problems.:moose:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Waftrudnir

Isn't it interesting how long a thread that deals with at topic not a single contributor believes in it becoming reality anytime soon (i.e. never) can go on and on?

---

Would hunt with one if it was legal... Hand gun week for whitetail?... Oh ya!

The way I understand this is you would still need to be a member of a range and have the ATT with the ability to hunt being somehow just an additional endorsement allowing you to hunt. Seems simple enough and a great opportunity, but agree that with the current anti gun Liberals it would be a stretch.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by grizzlygreig

Would hunt with one if it was legal... Hand gun week for whitetail?... Oh ya!

---

I think you'd be stuck with general firearms season.

I heard this through a friend, and believe part of the CSSA. Mostly just letter writing at the moment, but I think that whatever organization anyone here belongs to, if they feel the same way they should make their voices heard but also writing letters to their clubs as well as MPP's and MP's.

Looks like there is a lot of support among the shooting and hunting community for the reintroduction of handgun hunting. Not going to mention any names just yet, but the person I know who is pushing this is a well respected hunter and shooter with close ties to the military and law enforcement community. Just have to comment on the ethical part, as well as the part on the accuracy of handguns and shooter practice. The ethical part would be covered by minimum calibers just like rifles - with that it would be no different than bow hunting. You are limited by range, so as a hunter you need to define your limits so you know when to shoot or not. as far as accuracy goes, would I shoot at a rabbit or grouse with my 9mm Sig - probably not but also would probably never want to hunt with it. With a 6 inch or 8 inch barrel on a .357 or .44 magnum revolver though I would suggest that a white tail deer would be in easy range out to about 50 yards. I have a Ruger .22 autoloading pistol with a 6 inch bull barrel with which I could easily hit a rabbit or grouse with out to probably 25 yards - and if I had younger eyes, even further. So I think returning to handgun hunting is plausible with the only roadblock being political.

Dare to dream. No one ever thought they would ever get rid of the long gun registry either. I think a long thread with most people liking the idea is the first step down a long road to right a wrong.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pat32rf

Afraid I have to agree with Bushmoose about the number of shooters who just don't take the time to learn to shoot their FIREARMS. You have to remember however that it is normal for a hand gunner to fire between 50 and 250 rounds PER WEEK.

---

Fixed it for you!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Blackwolf

This board is used to express ideas, not that we are all yes men. I stated clearly why I would not support reintroducing handguns to hunting, and if any province were to allow it Alberta would be the first. Yet because I state my ideas and because they are not the same as yours, you berat and call us names. In actual fact that is bullying. As far as what constitutes Ethical???? Thats a topic for another thread.

---

The whole argument about what firearm is suitable is just wrong. There are those here that would say that rifles or shotguns should not be allowed for deer, it should be bows only. I see all the posts referring to the yahoos out in the bush once a year shooting at anything with their rifles,,,,.

And then I see the comments that bow hunting should be banned because they don't practice enough and too many wounded and lost deer as a result. Of course there are those that would only hunt with a traditional bow, compound and crossbows should be banned, they are nothing more than a rifle with a different projectile.

Then there are those that use the muzzle loaders, for them that is the only way to hunt, but I'd have to say, drop a pre measured charge down the barrel, push a bullet/ sabot down the barrel and stick a primer on the nipple, what's the difference between that and a bolt action rifle?

But many will say, use a high power rifle, go for a quick and painless kill, drop the game right on the spot, no lost game,,,,,

This doesn't seem to be much different from the boaters arguing about power or sail! We are pretty much all interested in being out in the bush, having a good time with friends, why do we need to argue over the methods of taking game? If it is legal, and if it does the job, and if it is ethical, why should any one of use decide for the others how they hunt?

If we can't stick together, it is very possible that they may attack your form of hunting next. Stand by me and I'll stand by you as well, and together we can protect our heritage.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Blackwolf

I have never shot any animal with a handgun with the exception of my air pistol on grouse/pigeons. However I was trained in their use. So for the most part I have to rely on ballistic charts to tell me what is adequate and what is not. Can you take a moose with a handgun??? Why would you?

---

Just one, no make that 2 words. Thompson Contender.

As hunters and firearms owners, we should always support each other in our chosen pursuits. Regardless of whether I bow hunt or not, I do not dismiss bowhunters or their objectives, since they are a hunter, and at the end, we aren't so different.

The same argument goes for firearms. At the end, those of us who own and shoot firearms really shouldn't pick apart anyone who wants to use their guns in sport, regardless whether we see the appeal or not.

There are enough anti- hunters / firearms groups out there without us being divided amongst ourselves.

Having said that, this is a discussion forum, where differing viewpoints should be discussed, that is what makes it interesting. Even if it is 9 pages worth.

I do not see it coming to pass where handguns are permitted for hunting in Canada, as the traction the anti gun establishment has gained since it was legal is great. If it were to somehow be allowed, great. The one main reason why I haven't got my RPAL is I see no good reason to own something I cant just take out and shoot whenever / wherever I like. I'm sure if handgun hunting were allowed, you'd see a lot more folks getting their RPAL.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PaulR

Just one, no make that 2 words. Thompson Contender.

---

That should work for moose... http://www.vincelewis.net/60magnum.html

In places where handgun hunting is legal and prominant, Is there many accidental shootings? i feel like handgun hunting would cause alot of this.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BuckWisperer

In places where handgun hunting is legal and prominant, Is there many accidental shootings? i feel like handgun hunting would cause alot of this.

---

I wouldn't guess that it is any higher than where long guns only apply.

The rules for safe shooting always apply, regardless of the size of the barrel.

yeah... i took my restricted liscense not too long ago and it amazed me how easily/how often people loose muzzle control with a handgun.. just made me think of some yahoo's out with handguns would be real bad news

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BuckWisperer

yeah... i took my restricted liscense not too long ago and it amazed me how easily/how often people loose muzzle control with a handgun.. just made me think of some yahoo's out with handguns would be real bad news

---

... it amazed me how easily/how often people loose muzzle control with a rifle.. just made me think of some yahoo's out with rifles would be real bad news...

That makes just as much sense.

I think we should play it safe and go back to using pointy sticks.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BuckWisperer

yeah... i took my restricted liscense not too long ago and it amazed me how easily/how often people loose muzzle control with a handgun.. just made me think of some yahoo's out with handguns would be real bad news

---

Really? This was at an approved range with an instructor present?

If it was at BGC I'm surprised. You're either at the firing line with your pistol pointed downrange, its sitting on the bench pointed downrange, or its in its case. Not a whole lot of opportunity to swing them around. If any of the students did, they would have been sorted out in short order. The same can be said for most ranges I've been to.

Attachment 24070

hahaha

it was at the wolfs den, in a portable, with a great instructor, no shooting, all you ahd to do really was load/unload a handgun with dummie ammo, and know the same crao you gotta know to pass the PAL exam.. i went with my brother in law, he got his pal/restricted same weekend and had never shot so much as a pellet gun his whole life, he sent in the paper work, got his restricted liscense in the mail, went straight to the den and bought a 1911... had the paperwork to bring it home, and we unloaded a few clips in the backyard (shhh) first time he ever fired a gun lol...

you cant deny though, that its MUCH easier to loose control with a handgun,, thats just handguns 101 and such common knowledge for anyone who's ever held one. cant believe that point is being argued..

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BuckWisperer

you cant deny though, that its MUCH easier to loose control with a handgun,, thats just handguns 101 and such common knowledge for anyone who's ever held one. cant believe that point is being argued..

---

Yes I can deny it.

Despite not having my civilian RPAL I have handled more than my share in the CF.

Muzzle control is muzzle control, period. If you're the kind of person who talks with his hands, put the darn thing down....

Given the structure of most ranges, which if you intend to shoot pistol, you will be on to shoot said pistol, the opportunities to display poor muzzle control do not exist.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bluebulldog

Yes I can deny it.

Despite not having my civilian RPAL I have handled more than my share in the CF.

Muzzle control is muzzle control, period. If you're the kind of person who talks with his hands, put the darn thing down....

Given the structure of most ranges, which if you intend to shoot pistol, you will be on to shoot said pistol, the opportunities to display poor muzzle control do not exist.

---

thats just silly to deny it, and silly to refrence the gun range. what f***** forest has the same structure as a range! unless your huting at a shooting range your point is foolish

Really?

The environments I have handled pistols in were not always ranges. Muzzle control is the same regardless of which type you are handling. I've seen idiots with long guns, I've seen idiots with pistols.

The folks who shoot cowboy, IPSC, and 3 Gun at my club have probably the best control of any individual I've seen.

I'm not sure what ******* forest you are referring to, but since you're speaking in a position of hypothesis only, you have no substance to your argument.

You have made an assertion that it's easier to lose control of a handgun over a long gun. Apparently it's handgun 101 according to you. Yet your extensive experience with handgun is taking your RPAL course "not too long ago".

You have gone from asking if it would result in a higher accidental shooting rate, because you "feel" that it would, to vehemently arguing that it will, and being insulting to someone who argues a counter point.

California allows handgun hunting, correct?

California Hunting Accidents for the year 2010, data in years after that isn't available.

https://nrm.dfg.ca.gov/FileHandler.a...54368&inline=1

10 accidents total. All long gun.

2009. 15 accidents total. All long gun.

https://nrm.dfg.ca.gov/FileHandler.a...54369&inline=1

I had to go all the way back to 2007 to find one (1) incident involving a pistol while turkey hunting.

You're up.

The main issue when presenting your case before the government is the issue of ballistics and common amount of energy required to kill game. I know there are handguns chambered to use a .308 and has energy at 50 yards of 1500-1800 ft/lbs of energy. Fine. So how are you going to persuade the government and overcome these obstacles?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by werner.reiche

... it amazed me how easily/how often people loose muzzle control with a rifle.. just made me think of some yahoo's out with rifles would be real bad news...

That makes just as much sense.

I think we should play it safe and go back to using pointy sticks.

---

Yep, agree with you WR.

I have had 100s of automobiles pointed at me today..... no grille control or poor grille control, my gawd....so horrific.....sarcasm off.....

Its not really a case of weither any handguns are suitable for killing game. Experience has proved that they are capable. They are also capable of shooting casual targets such as wood blocks and tin cans and providing many hours of entertainment.
The big point is our government trusting us, even after strict checks and balances that show we are safe, rational, educated, sober people with no violent tendancies.
They used to trust us, up until the seventies.....I've been told that some city police forces don't even trust their uniformed officers to take their firearms home when off duty.

A handgun residing in a proper holster is safer than any long gun that is being carried by hand.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BuckWisperer

In places where handgun hunting is legal and prominant, Is there many accidental shootings? i feel like handgun hunting would cause alot of this.

---

Sure thing, if we allow hunting with handguns, there will be more deaths in the field. We need to ban all firearms for hunting, only bow hunting should be allowed. Nobody other that the police or military should be allowed to own firearms, need to take them all away,,,,,, Rightttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttt.
No hand gun or any other firearm has ever shot anyone. Can't say the same for the careless person holding it. Refer to the 4 rules by Jeff Cooper.

1. All guns are always loaded.
2. Never let the muzzle cover anything you are not willing to destroy.
3. Keep your finger off the trigger until your sights are on the target.
4. Be sure of your target and what is beyond it. —Jeff Cooper

Follow those rules and everyone is safe. Violate those rules,,,,,,,
If you can't obey those rules, perhaps you shouldn't be hunting period, and that includes bows as well.

First you need to find out why handguns were banned from hunting. Next you need to dispute the reasons with scientific evidence. Then you need to petition (25 signatures each petition) Then be prepared to fight the fight...

Hand guns are not banned for hunting. They are legal for hunting. I don't know of any Provincial legislation such as the FWCA that says we cannot use a handgun to hunt. In fact we can use a pellet pistol for hunting. The Federal Government won't let us carry them. If the federal Gov't let us carry them....they would be legal to hunt with.

The regulations specifically state " You may use semi-automatic or repeating firearms for hunting in Ontario, but not handguns that are restricted or prohibited firearms or fully automatic firearms." There is nothing stating that you may not use a prescribed antique pistol. In fact it is very clear that the pistol can not be restricted or prohibited but have fun explaining that to a CO in the woods. Also you would be restricted to small game only as the summary of firearms restrictions for hunting in ontario specifically refers to Rifles, shotguns, bows and muzzle loaders for big game and turkey

If the Feds would give us back our permits, it would not take long for the MNR to make the changes to the printed regs....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pat32rf

If the Feds would give us back our permits, it would not take long for the MNR to make the changes to the printed regs....

---

So how are you going to get the Feds to give you back your permits?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Blackwolf

The main issue when presenting your case before the government is the issue of ballistics and common amount of energy required to kill game. I know there are handguns chambered to use a .308 and has energy at 50 yards of 1500-1800 ft/lbs of energy. Fine. So how are you going to persuade the government and overcome these obstacles?

---

You do not need to present this, the OP was not about big game, this was about hunting with a handgun period. They do not have a restriction on small game unless there is a big game season open in Ontario. Why would a 22LR be able to be used for hunting rabbits?

The government should not be part of the "what can be used for hunting?" discussion.

They could change the regs. All I'm saying as they read now there is nothing saying that you cannot use an antique pistol for small game