Here's an organization that is trying to get the laws changed so we can open carry in the bush.
http://www.wildernessprotection.ca/
HA
Printable View
Here's an organization that is trying to get the laws changed so we can open carry in the bush.
http://www.wildernessprotection.ca/
HA
Anyone that spends a lot of time in the woods should be able to have a handgun. Trappers can apply but it is my understanding that the CFO in Ontario issues very very few. Depends on how the next election goes. Harper may have the will to enact this...
http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/2..._in_woods.html
Hey HA
No thanks, I'm against it, for a few reasons, first of all, I don't like handguns, if you need protection in the Ontario bush, carry a rifle or a shotgun. Truthfully there is very little you need to worry about in Ontario and Quebec. I've watched may times when bear baiters went to their barrels with only a stick or an axe.
Handguns end up in the wrong peoples hands and are used by gangbangers as some sort of status symbol and the more there are around, the more they get.
We have a huge issue right now in Ottawa with handguns and it would be worse if more people had them.
This is just my opinion, but IMHO, hunters don't need anything to do with handguns
Ig
By the way, they make a very short 30.30 rifle called a Trapper model and it is exactly for that, trappers
I always thought a trapper or bear guide could carry a pistol. Personally I never saw a need to though.
I also disagree with Iggy!! Canada has strict handgun laws pertaining to who can carry.
So just because you don't like them you think its good to impose upon those that do? I'm not much for city folk but you dont see me pushing for them to have to stay locked up in the cities! Come to think of it.....Quote:
Originally Posted by Iggy
Since when has Ottawa had a big handgun issue? Im in and around the city all the time and aside for the police I dont see any handguns. Dont see gangbangers running around waving guns in peoples faces. Besides how does people carrying handguns in the bush have anything to do with the ammount of guns in the city? Do you have any idea how many RPAL holders there are? Do you have any idea how easy it is to go to Detroit and pick up whatever you want?
If someone wants an illegal gun they will get them. Period.
I'm against semi auto rifles and shotguns no need for them either to dangerous for most people ban them.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iggy
Waite.....I'm going to make popcorn....this should get really interesting !!!!Quote:
Originally Posted by Iggy
The beer's on ice. I'm in!Quote:
Originally Posted by rick_iles
How does that saying go..."Guns dont kill people...people kill people" Shotgun, rifle, hangun....hell knives they can all kill you if you are a moron!!...its alot easier for a knife or a rifle to fall into the worng hands then most handguns as they are alot harder to acquire and posess. People that are authorized to own handguns do/should know how to properly store and carry one therefore I am all for it....a gun is a gun why should it matter the size of it heading into the bush.
Is this warren kinsella in disguise?Quote:
Originally Posted by Iggy
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gsgTR_o97p0
I would also like to suggest maybe a max of 3 guns. A 22 rim, 1 shotgun and 1 big game rifle. No reason to own more then 3 guns.
Their much to dangerous.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iggy
Agreed, the only people who should have hand guns are those in uniform. The reason being is that those individuals go through extensive testing and training, and are also monitored constantly by their peers. Whereas Joe Q Public has no effective monitoring, if you doubt the effect of this just take a walk through any crown land in WMU 87 on a long weekend. On one occasion I counted over 100 rounds going off and heard rounds zip past me, later I found empty 223 boxes. Those individuals showed an absolute lack of self discipline which would only be compounded with the addition of hand guns to the mix.Quote:
Originally Posted by Iggy
As a former resident of the UK I can say that we in Canada have the best hunting opportunities I have seen, the hunting in Europe is a pay-per-use system only for the rich. We as hunters must maintain a level of respect and defence against that type of system (ie anti hunters). As part of that, being able to compromise and quietly go about our business will help ensure the longevity of the sport.
Just my 2 cents.
This was mentioned in another thread already.
1. The website is slightly slick, but actually says very little.
2. There are no identifiable persons affiliated with this group, no directors, etc. There are no organizations that have even lent their public support to this organization.
3. Other than a vague promise that "once they raise $150K they will get the ball rolling", there is very little substance by way of strategy, planning or anything quantifiable except for an idea that wilderness carry is good, and they want it.
IMHO, this is a splitting of the pie with Firearms support in this country. If people wish to donate to push the wilderness carry agenda, they should be joining the NFA, and then speaking to the people there, and making it a priority.
Well I can assure you yes most handgun owners who are hunters or non members of uniform are not monitored...but practice the same amount of dicipline etc as those in uniform. Currently there is no point in owning a handgun unless you belong to a range and I know alot of men in blue that prob shouldnt be aloud to carry or fire a handgun. As for your reference to careless shooting it is not really relevant as you described events that took place from a rifle not a handgun. Why should any responsible handgun or any gun for that matter be penalized based on stereotypical conclusions of others. Just because you ahve a handgun does not mean you are a gangbanger. I own handguns which I frequently take to the range as there is no other place to use them legally in canada...i do not use one for home defense nor do I carry one for protection, but I have passed all my required courses I take all of the proper legal steps necessary to storing and owning them, so as a responsible handgun owner and hunter why wouldnt you be in support of expanding the laws as to where you can use what you are legally able to posess.............Also just my opinion, but if the law is going to allow me more then why would I want less!!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marker
Are those in uniform even required to have a PAL/POL?
No....unless they own other firearms other than their duty weapon.Quote:
Originally Posted by mox72
Rick's right.Quote:
Originally Posted by mox72
Neither LEO, nor CF are required to have POL / PAL / RPAL. The weapon is considered part of the issued equipment, and specific training for each is provided.
I find myself in the agreeable position of agreeing with all of you except iggy,which is not unusual as I dont think I have ever agreed with one single thing he has ever said.
I have always supported CC by properly trained individuals.There is no reason why a trapper,prospector, or any number of outdoor users should not have the use of handguns.I keep my avatar around the cabin to give me a heads up on bears.But I,am not to sure if he would stand to a bear or run for the hills.I would probably feel a lot more comfortable with a 40 cal Glock.
I have nothing against LEO'S and I am not trying to start a poop storm so please bear with me. When I took the RPAL course in the spring, both instructors are retired police officers and they told us that most LEO'S are only trained on their service firearms. They said that by the end of the RPAL course we would have more knowledge then most LEO'S about firearms in general (just by taking the required courses to be a firearm owner)
Very true,we went 20 years using .38 Smith and Wesson,s and our annual qualification was 6 practise shots at 10 yards and six for the qualifier.Quote:
Originally Posted by mattadam
If you wanted trained on a 12 qa shotgun you did another half day.
I know lots of officers who went to houses to secure estate guns myself included and we did not know how to safety the various guns.
The standard procedure was to call in the ETF and have them safety the firearms.
The only exceptions were the boys off the farm and hunters on the job who knew the long guns.But ask them to safety a WW2 Lugar and you might want to step out of the room.
Your instructors were correct !Quote:
Originally Posted by mattadam
They also won't tell you that a startling number of range accidents are attributed to LEOs. Usually in the drawing or holstering of a loaded weapon.Quote:
Originally Posted by mattadam
I have seen in the real world what a 40 cal will, and more importantly won't do. If I was that afraid of the bush that I felt I needed to carry a firearm for protection, it certainly wouldn't be a handgun !
Thankfully, or luckily, there haven't been many injuries. I can only think of one, and that was recently.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bluebulldog
A number of years ago I did an OPP firearms qualification course up in Aurora. There was this one female that had people jumping for cover. They had us shoot the .38 SW, the Mini Ruger 14 and then the shotgun, single handed. They snuck a magnum load in there but you didn't know which one was the mag load until you fired. This tiny female fired and that shot gun went all over the place ..LOL People were running for the hills and ducking/diving for cover!LOL She was just as bad with the .38. I think that thing pointed at every one of us at one point or the other.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bluebulldog
Last I heard she was working out of Burlington detachment.
I agree nobody should own any guns as they can kill. We should ban all guns completely.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marker
Jeebus murphy . A gun is a gun is a gun. One is no more dangerous than the other be it a short stubby one or a long skinny one. As far as I am concerned once you pass all the required courses and the background checks it should not matter what type of gun you own or use. To hear other gun owners say we should or should not be allowed to own and use specefic types is stomach turning to say the least. You are either trusted to own and use firearms or you are not.
Wasn't gonna chime in, but you read my mind. So what John said. I'm out.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hunter John
Pretty sure I saw your avatar out for a run today with his owner , the dog looks good but the owner ,,,, not so much. Lol.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gilroy
They do not require a licence to carry a gun while working. They can not have guns outside of work, if they dont have a licence.Quote:
Originally Posted by mox72
Hunting with a handgun limits your range, similar to using a bow, instead of a rifle. It adds a new dimension to the sport.
Restricting legal gun ownership has no effect on the illegal gun owners. Thats why gun violence didnt change, even though we had our guns registered. Only law biding citizens abide by the law.
So I see you're from the UK.How's the gun control there workin for ya?That's where we are headed here with attitudes like yours.Wise up.Quote:
Originally Posted by Marker
I agree.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hunter John
Its ludicrous that I cant legally carry a handgun because a criminal in Toronto also carries a handgun (illegally). Like how does that even make sense? His handgun most likely came from across the border anyways.
Oh the horror! 100 rounds!Quote:
Originally Posted by Marker
Rounds zipping by you is absolutely horrible, but 100 rounds is nothing for a range day. I also fail to see how adding handguns to the mix would make it more dangerous. My Ruger 10/22 can have a 110 round magazine. How is a revolver holding 8 rounds of .22lr any more dangerous then a semi auto rifle with 110 rounds off .22 in the magazine?
Well....I guess I am looking to get bashed here but.................... I don't want anyone in the bushes I hunt carrying handguns.... If you seen some of the guys/gangs that hunt in my area you will understand.
Hand guns for the trapper guys, yes....................general public with our current course requirements.....no thanks...just too many irresponsible guys out there and my fear has nothing to do with gang bangers...
Current course requirements for average joe dont include handguns. Hence the restricted course.Quote:
Originally Posted by fratri
Again ~ A gun is a gun is a gun. One is not more dangerous then the other.
There are tons of stuff you can't do with a long gun. While in the bush, our on your own property... just to name a few.Quote:
Originally Posted by Iggy
Carry chicken feed
Carry deer feed
Shovel snow
Split fire wood
Cut wood..
Pretty much anything that requires allot of movement... and a sling won't work... I tried shoveling snow with my rifle on a sling... it would not work.. we have a massive coyote problem here and every day in near the chickens our deer bait they are near me... the other night they were circling me... but well.. having an un encased shotgun at dark is illegal... (not on my property)... a 22 handgun would of made me feel a lot more comfy than my buck 110 knife did..
I had coyote prints in my foot prints on my second trip back in the bush that night.. (one for feed one for the salt)..
And again a shotgun would not of helped.. as I would not of been able to carry out with the 80lb bag of corn...
[QUOTE=Gilroy;854334]Very true,we went 20 years using .38 Smith and Wesson,s and our annual qualification was 6 practise shots at 10 yards and six for the qualifier.
Your just a puppy, we carried Colt Police Positive.:santa:
Disagree.. a rifle is probably more dangerous than a handgun... (range, velocity etc) AFAIK a 22lr from a rifle had allot more velocity than a 22 from a handgun... therefore I can deduct that a projectile fired from a longer barrel (to a point) has more impact energy than from a pistol...Quote:
Originally Posted by blasted_saber
Before the gun laws in UK police carried whistles and wooden sticks... now they carry bullet proof vests and guns... sounds like it helped allot...Quote:
Originally Posted by Marker
Next to go I heard are knives... aren't point sharp knives on the chopping block?
What's after that? Hammers? Ya... UK... they know what they are doing.....
Edit... it appears I'm wrong.. handguns are dangerous....
Warning explicit language.. click at own risk... not responsible for offended ears.
gun safety gone wrong:
http://youtu.be/IouUsPsUg4Y
First of all buddy, I stated that it was just my opinionQuote:
Originally Posted by oaknut
Second, we've had more shootings in this city this year (with hand guns) than ever before, we just had 2 last week. All gang related apparently, maybe try reading the paper while your in town.
Third, I think everyone on here is allowed their opinion, that's why HA threw it out, unlike you, I didn't say I was right, I just said it was my opinion.
AND I STAND BY IT.
They are already legal and very useful for hunting, so it would be banning something and taking away guns people already ownQuote:
Originally Posted by greatwhite
LOL now that's funnyQuote:
Originally Posted by crayfish
Truthfully I can't stand him
What do the illegal guns in the hands of gangbangers in any part of the country have to do with the rest of us?
Don't know of any trappers that carry a 'Trapper'. Trappers normally carry .22's - often takedown models that can be packed.Quote:
Originally Posted by Iggy
100 rounds... that's just to get the barrel warmed up.
I don't shoot near as much now - but when I was younger, 100 rounds wasn't really a lot - particularly if there were 2 or 3 guys shooting.
.22's - I wasn't to hard to go through a brick in an afternoon. Especially with the semi-auto.
I don't have much use for handguns because of the restrictions on them. But if you could open carry, I'd sure get one. I spend a lot of time in the bush, but frequently don't bother with a gun because my hands are full - cutting trails, bush work, stuff like that.
Lol "buddy"Quote:
Originally Posted by Iggy
Ok.
Forget the papers! Lets look at 2013 city of ottawa crime stats!
Homicides-9
Impaired-649
Arson-106
Dangerous operation of a motor vehicle-95
So by your "opinion" we should be sure to ban vehicles, liquor, beer, wine and even matches?
Didn't say I was right! Just questioned every opinion you set forth. [emoji57]
For protection on the trap line or those into exploration work the only practical firearm to carry is a handgun. And they're not much value tucked under a parka should you need to access it real quick.
However, I question the actual need of one for protection anywhere in Ontario including the far north where polar bears might be encountered. Their real value is in dispatching an animal caught up in a leg hold trap.
Funny your comment earlier sounded a lot like him....Quote:
Originally Posted by Iggy
check out the 2014 statsQuote:
Originally Posted by oaknut
Don't put words in my mouth, I didn't give an opinion on driving or lighting fires or impaired driving, however, if I did, guaranteed Goofcrest would be on the opposite side of every one of them.
Anyway, hunters already have a firearm, I don't see the need for us to carry a smaller less accurate one.
I see why a trapper or tree planter may want a firearm, but hunters don't need another one. IMHO
Everyone has their opinions. I respect that. But it's a slippery slope when we choose one over another.
HA
When is this going too start getting good?
Heres a cundumdrum
Police-no PAL
CBSA-Must have before applying.
So, Joe Blow bowhunts only, how many can he shoot at a charging bear before hes hamburger?Quote:
Originally Posted by Iggy
Any of you oldies use the 32 caliber model Tens? Withdrawn from Toronto Police service in the early seventies.
I don't need a handgun for MY defense, but it would be handy to have one on my hip while working on the tractor for such things as porcupines, rabid skunks and other critters that we have to dispose of around the farm....even groundhogs in the garden can be remedied with a handy little gun.....
good point, but if your scared maybe you shouldn't be out there, I know lots of bow hunters, that target bears, and have never heard of one being killed by the bear and most of their stands are within 20 to 30 yards of the baitQuote:
Originally Posted by pdhenderson
Kinda like handguns......a lot of us own handguns now !Quote:
Originally Posted by Iggy
you guys jump on this like flies on ****Quote:
Originally Posted by rick_iles
I never ever said ban handguns, and I wouldn't, but handguns are not used in Canada for hunting, they are used manly for law enforcement and target shooting, and I'm happy with that
It's not about "need", it's about being able to possess and use a legally obtained piece of personal property in a safe and responsible manner without having to justify it. That's the very essence of "freedom" and freedom is a core building block of our society that is quickly being eroded away by all the left leaning thinkers. "I don't like it so I won't do it" is one thing but "I don't like it so I don't want YOU to do it" is very worrysome...Quote:
Originally Posted by Iggy
Here,now. Don't go off all making sense and all that. You'll confuse the Liberals.LOLQuote:
Originally Posted by TPM
Maybe you should be yote hunting instead.Quote:
Originally Posted by topher
Good point... But I don't eat yoteQuote:
Originally Posted by pbonura
You eat
chicken feed
deer feed
snow
and wood.. :)
Quote:
Originally Posted by topher
What? Even for you, that makes no sense... Dint you have a wood pile to make fall over?Quote:
Originally Posted by greatwhite
Your reasoning is a bit strange. If long guns were restricted to those in uniform, would your logic still apply? I sure hope not. If crossbows and compounds were restricted to those in uniform, would it still apply? How about knives??? Pointy sticks???Quote:
Originally Posted by Marker
Awww man you can't bring up the wood pile that's hittin below the belt. Not fair. :)
Quote:
Originally Posted by topher
So if Iam not scared the bears stay away?.............................Guess bears like to eat the 6'3" 205 lbs man that soiled himself.....Quote:
Originally Posted by Iggy
I will not say Iam for or against. But I think the mandate should be allowed to be decided by the responsible people, not those who think they know whats good for us, yet the wood to them is trinity bellwoods or the grass in front of queens park.
As the saying goes
" Better too have it and not need it, then need it and not have it"
If I was in a position where I felt it "may" be needed, I would like to think that this democracy of ours would allow us to at least feel protected.
This is about handguns, not full automatic assault rifles.
Ok I was going to stay silent, but can't any more. I have been shooting handguns for almost 40 years, for both enjoyment and competition. I also carried a handgun on my duty belt for years before retirement. I have spent lots of time on a range and have known a lot of handgun shooters. I hope some of my retired brothers and sisters don't take offence but.....I would much rather stand beside a civilian handgun shooter than most sworn ones. I have had an officer hit my target on a range on a regular basis. This wouldn't be bad if they were not 5 positions over from me. I have never seen a civilian shooter do this. I have seen range instructors shoot across the range striking a wall with an unintentional discharge. Never seen a civilian do that. there should be nothing wrong with open carry while in the bush. Personally, I think the gang bangers and thugs who carry may think different if they issued CCW's in Canada to anyone who wanted to go thru a course. I live and worked a border town across from Detroit, so we were one of the largest ports of entry for illegal firearms making their way down the 401 to TO. Comparing a hunter with a criminal who carries a gun, and shoots another criminal IS CRIMINAL. We are not criminals, so don't compare me having a handgun in the bush to shoot a grouse to a drug dealer shooting another over turf.
And with that Kids,,,,,,,,,,,,,,I think the topic is over!!Quote:
Originally Posted by Crash2000
I hate to break this one to you but many of those "highly trained" individuals are not as highly trained as you may think. Some qualify when they have to and that is it (I have been there and seen it).Quote:
Originally Posted by Marker
This thread is a laugh riot give that we're all arguing over something that's simply not going to happen.
Reality is that it is far more likely handguns will be banned in Canada within 25 years than that we will see open or concealed carry. For good or for ill what happens in major cities drives how the law is made, because that's where most of the people actually live -- that's what makes big cities big, lest we forget. Gripe all ya want, but the broad public opinion in this country on handguns is clear. None of these arguments is worth a fart in the wind.
The best comments here were made early. Let's go back....
Yup, and as I pointed out in that other thread, raising money for lawyers does squat because the only path to allowing wilderness carry is legislative change. There is no basis on which to challenge the law in court. And legislative change is about as likely as?Quote:
Originally Posted by Bluebulldog
Focus on the problems at hand, such as the classification system.
That's how I feel about it. A handgun would be a great convenience to a trapper, for the purpose of dispatching animals, but anyone whose knees knock together at the prospect of encountering a bear ought to stop calling himself an outdoorsman.Quote:
Originally Posted by rick_iles
Would be fun stalking a rabbit with a .22 handgun.
Then you my friend have not been shown how to carry with a sling properly.Quote:
Originally Posted by topher
Why does it have to be about protection? I want a .22 revolver for small game. I know guys who want to hunt deer with .44 mag handguns. Whats wrong with that?
Quote:
Originally Posted by sawbill
You were a cop????Quote:
Originally Posted by Crash2000
And just where did anyone call someone who wanted to carry a handgun to hunt, a criminal.
Man you guys are delusional.
Nothing wrong with that, and there are places you can go where you can do just that, but not in Canada and it never will beQuote:
Originally Posted by blasted_saber
Several cops on here disagreed with you. Also as indicated Cops are not as trained as you believed. They are require to pass an exam every 6 months. Some also fail and have to retake it because they cannot hit the target. Also you would be surprised at the number of Cops who do not even know how to handle firearms safely. I suggest you do some research.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iggy
Thank you for standing up for civilian shooters.Quote:
Originally Posted by Crash2000
The damage that was done over the years at our club, was done by police, shot out lights, holes in the ceiling , wall, chips into the concrete floor , the target turning mechanism damaged, all done by the police till they finally quit due to embarrassment.
Police are trained to shoot at center of mass, a dedicated civilian shooter will and can hit a button on a shirt front target, they are not spray and pray shooters, they practice constantly because they want too , not because it is forced upon them by their superiors.
Most police officers do not fire a handgun at any other time than when they are told to do so in order to "qualify".
When I was shooting competitively, I would shoot over 15,000 rounds yearly, and my classification was "Master Class", have shot against some of the best .
If the opportunity ever came around, I would definitely want to carry a handgun to hunt with , and definitely would not go around shooting at everything nilly willy as some here suggest would happen.
We did have that privilege years ago to be able to hunt with a handgun , it would be nice to be able to do it again , and myself I would again definitely not do anything stupid to jeopardize that privilege if ever it was granted to us by a change in our laws but I doubt that it will happen as there are too many negative people even right here on this forum , most of whom are hunters and as such should stick up for each other.
I'm not sure if I'm reading this wrong Bill C42 This is about wilderness protection, doesn't not give you any right to hunt with
If theres nothing wrong with why are you so against it?Quote:
Originally Posted by Iggy
Nothing wrong with wanting to hunt with a handgun, I want to be able to fly a jet someday, but I'm not allowed, so my dreams go unanswered.Quote:
Originally Posted by blasted_saber
I just don't agree with handgun hunting in Canada.
Like I said, there are places you can go to do it legally.
Let me put it another way.
I don't/won't shoot things that I don't/ won't eat.
That's my choice, my decision.
I'm not out there rallying for the cancellation of coyote and wolf hunting,
but I personally don't want to have anything to do with it.
Big deal
Because you coyote hunt, does that make me an enemy of hunting, no
I just don't want anything to do with it.
Is that allowed, or do all hunters have to have the same opinion.
I respect most cop opinion but from everything I've heard, I wouldn't classify Gilcrest as a cop, or ex cop, I've heard all the stories, from other cops, some on hereQuote:
Originally Posted by greatwhite
Well I was not going to make any more posts on this thread as I was a bit out of my league in my earlier post, but I have learned from those who know more than me.Quote:
Originally Posted by Crash2000
Thank you for your comments. And thank you for your service.
help me understand what is so wrong with me sitting in my treestand with my 44 mag revolver with 4 power scope waiting for a whitetail deer to come by .you can do it with a bow crossbow o shotgun and in most places in Ontario you may us a high power rifle very high power if you wish even a 375 or 410 .for the real big guys you could even us a 50 cal .how am I any more of a danger then any of the others .with my revolver .give me one good reason please .DutchQuote:
Originally Posted by Iggy
There is no good reason Dutch just irrational liberal fear.
They are all tools. None are more dangerous than the other when used properly.
HA
Why not a grenade launcher, M16, flamethrower or tank? They are all tools and no more dangerous than anything else if used properly.
There obviously has to be limits on these things ... its not a liberal fear thing ... its simply that the majority rules.
If you think most cops on the force have ,ore knowledge of firearms then the average owner you will be sadly mistake. I know one of the trainers for Ottawa. Most Police barely pass.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iggy
I suggest we ban any and all guns capable of firing a second shot. In fact maybe all guns should be banned a bow an arrow is suitable isn't it?
Quote:
Originally Posted by KawarthaGoose
What makes a handgun any more dangerous then a rifle?Quote:
Originally Posted by KawarthaGoose
Not that many 60 year olds can run that 6k as fast as I can,wanna go a jog.lolQuote:
Originally Posted by Hunter John
Next thing your going to say is that the registry prevented deaths.
Quote:
Originally Posted by KawarthaGoose
Well iggy if am not a ex cop what do you think I worked at for 36 years.Quote:
Originally Posted by Iggy
I have actually taken you off the "ignore list" to have a good laught at your comments.Your past history on this forum and over at the hunting lodge is well know to many.I know your own hunting website did not work out for you and you were the subject of a mutiny, so please Captain Blyth dont come on here and strong arm your opinion on everybody.
No I certainly dont think the registry did anything other than waste money.
My point is that it doesnt matter whether one is more dangerous than the other ... all that matters is what the perception is out there.
Given that even hunters don't think handguns are appropriate for hunting it seems unlikely that the broader public is going to think they are appropriate.
I'll start the tally of hunters that disagree with this statement.Quote:
Originally Posted by KawarthaGoose
#1
Since many hunters on this site have said they do not vote, what difference does their opinion make.
#2Quote:
Originally Posted by mox72
BTW... though I agree with Welsh's statement about the reality I still think that it is reasonable to carry a handgun in the woods for those that spend a lot of time there. I don't personally want to enjoy the challenge of hunting with one but I am supportive of anyone that has the will to do so.
It politics and perception same as people thinking this is actually anything such thing as an assault rifle. They read the first two lines in a media story and think they are informed.
I think we should just have a handgun for when we travel to the "city"
I work there a lot and I always ask my "boss" kevlar required before I go?
In the bush I don't think we need this, just a rifle or axe is good enough.
But hey to each their own
This isn't the states......
Just saying
#3...Maybe we even get a special handgun season. TC Contender in .444 would be on my wish list - and I can fire .410 ammo in it as well.Quote:
Originally Posted by mox72
#4. Give me a revolver in .22lr please
Iggy, Gilroy actually is a cop.
Can't believe I'm actually in agreement with you.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gilroy
#5
Pistol, please.
Quote:
Originally Posted by blasted_saber
#6.
And Iggy.....just stop, before you further embarrass yourself.
Sorry, hit send too fast - change the above to Given that even SOME hunters don't think handguns are appropriate for huntingQuote:
Originally Posted by KawarthaGoose
#7. A nice, accurate .22 semi-auto please.
You couldn't keep up lol . I will give ya a wave next time I see you.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gilroy
Why should hunters have semi auto's or pumps or even double barrel?s? I think you should give those up or your a hypocrite.
Curious we have had a handgun registry for almost 50 years do you think it helped stop criminals from getting handguns?
I will guarantee that majority of handgun owners are more versed in the use of handguns then a cop.
Quote:
Originally Posted by KawarthaGoose
#8 And I will also bring my bearcat .22 and a contender would be perfect ,perhaps in a 7*30 waters.
http://www.oodmag.com/community/imag...39wk9Y0H//2Q==
None of that is relevant though - all that matters is the perception of the public to handguns - facts are irrellevant - it certainly doesn't matter whether handgun owners are more versed than cops. Correct that - if you can convince the general public of that then you've got a winner.Quote:
Originally Posted by greatwhite
A good portion of the public don't think you should be allowed a semi auto in fact I would say just as many who are against handguns. Many people don't think anyone should own a powerful gun like SKS or anything more powerful. Including most of the Liberal party and the NDP party.
So it is 100% relevant are you prepared to hand over your firearms tomorrow?
Hunters/Gun owners should stand together if we don't it will be the fault of those who didn't stand when we lose other privileges.
Quote:
Originally Posted by KawarthaGoose
[QUOTE=greatwhite;854781]A good portion of the public don't think you should be allowed a semi auto in fact I would say just as many who are against handguns. Many people don't think anyone should own a powerful gun like SKS or anything more powerful. Including most of the Liberal party and the NDP party.
So it is 100% relevant are you prepared to hand over your firearms tomorrow?
Hunters/Gun owners should stand together if we don't it will be the fault of those who didn't stand when we lose other privileges.[/QUOTE]
Exactly.
However you have specifically said you do not stand with others. I support ALL gun owners. YOU pick and choose.
[QUOTE=KawarthaGoose;854797]Quote:
Originally Posted by greatwhite
[/QUOTE]Quote:
Originally Posted by greatwhite
IMHO I disagree. Some HG owners just collect. Few go to the range on occasion and shoot. Cops are gaurunteed to handle their service gun twice a day. You said majority versed in the use of. I would agree that the average HG owner probably has more knowledge of HG's overall but in use of I doubt it. If you consider that the number of reported accidents to the number of cops the percentage is very low.
I hunt with cops and they don't pretend to know anything about guns other than their service issue and the ones that they hunt with. I trust their muzzle integrity more than a once a year deer hunter. I do know that some out there are cocky and have false comfort around guns too.
About them failing tests ya I have heard it happens. Bad apples in every bunch. It's a provincial standard. If you miss one shot you fail and redo till you pass. I would appreciate to know that they are failing and getting the training they need as opposed to being pushed through or the test made easier.
I think we should have a practical for Hunter Safety like they do in some states. Standard target and distance. I can't believe that the practical here is classroom unless you get some of the better opportunities out there where they take you on the range.
I don't think that the bush carry is a bad idea but if it ever does come true (more open I mean ) I hope there is more than a written and dry test.
The simplest thing as far as HG for hunting is exactly as it is,now. Upgrade to an RPAL,follow all HG storage guidelines,carry only in the woods,but,under no circumstances,allow "open carry" anywhere other than there. It would be no different than any other rifle or shotgun. We can't walk down the street without them encased,either,so,WTH is the difference? Honestly,liberal philosophy is so warped,it defies all logic and common sense. There's one burning question that someone asked that none of the liberals have been answering and that is "What does HG possession for hunters have to do with the criminals use of illegal firearms?" Apples and oranges,anyone?
Oh,BTW,I just got back from the Beer Store,so,carry on.
If you actually check the stats as reported to the CFO. Range incidents reported, are higher with LEOs, as pointed out earlier, this is due to them holstering, or unholstering a loaded weapon. Unlike civillians, LEOs are not required to undergo a black badge certification before being allowed holster privileges on ranges.
Some HG owners just collect, yes. But the vast majority of them ( at least in this province) actively participate in shooting sports. Handling a service pistol twice a day? Meaning drawing from lock up, and placing in holster? That's not really handling now is it?
You want to have a practical for HS and PAL? Ok, so you now want it to cost even more for a new hunter to get involved? At what benefit? The current exam in class has shown that it works. So instead of a new guy coming out and paying $300 for both, he's now upwards of $500 - $600? Nice job buggering new hunters out there...
Concealed carry would be much better, so those furry beasts don't know you're packing.
Quote:
Originally Posted by fishermccann
You go into a store and speak to a salesman (politician) and he has three faulty electric kettles for sale (platforms), you dont like any of them,because they are faulty.
Do you leave the store without buying,or pay for and get a faulty electric kettle?
Only if I could still plug it in and throw it in a full bathtub with said salesman.....Quote:
Originally Posted by Gilroy
"I think we should have a practical for Hunter Safety like they do in some states. Standard target and distance. I can't believe that the practical here is classroom unless you get some of the better opportunities out there where they take you on the range"
I remember all the old timers at a neighbours hunt camp taking the CFSC and challenging the exam.All these guys had the old FAC,s with no exam.They all failed the exam for various reasons save and except the camp owner who was given a pass after much argument.
No, you buy the kettle from the salesman who's dad sold kettles. duh.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gilroy
Quote:
Originally Posted by mox72
Not me I was the guy who walked out of the store the last time without buying (provincial)
Now between salesman Steve,Thomas or Justin at this stage I,am probably still walking out the store.
go get your mental illness taken care of, then I'll respondQuote:
Originally Posted by Gilroy
Nice back track on you being a LIEberal though.
She looks good on you
he was a quasi cop, then got booted, now it's just pretendQuote:
Originally Posted by greatwhite
what a stupid analogy. (sorry)Quote:
Originally Posted by Gilroy
let's make it a little more realistic: all three kettles are not the same, and are faulty in different ways. plus you have to take a kettle to use for the next four years whether you like it our not.
go vote. even spoiling your ballot (telling the store their kettles are ) says a lot more than sitting on your and complaining. democracy's a lot different than capitalism.
Don't try to reason with him, he voted LIEberal, read his posts, it's very obvious, now he is trying to hide itQuote:
Originally Posted by phaedrus_dh
best two posts from this thread right here:
Quote:
Originally Posted by trimmer21
Quote:
Originally Posted by last5oh_302
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iggy
Be very careful about what you say as you might be into defamation of character territory.Your first warning.
For the record joined in 1976 retired in 2008, reason for retirement CANCER,unable to continue due to complications.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iggy
Warning number 2, how would you possibly know what I voted or if I voted.
...and you're sure of that how exactly? Mr. New Guy.Quote:
Originally Posted by Iggy
Try taking the conversation back on point,and making some salient arguments of fact.
Pardon the off-topic digression, but it did, and it does. Controls on handguns in Canada function to drive up black market costs. This is what makes smuggling guns profitable. More importantly, increasing the cost of a black market gun prices guns out of the market for the petty crook. Consequently, handguns are rarely used in robberies here, compared to the US where handguns are readily and cheaply available on the black (and grey) market. This is all well documented. You can compare costs, and you can compare the rate of firearms use in armed robberies, which are a bottom-feeder's crime: risky, with low payoff.Quote:
Originally Posted by greatwhite
So why is handgun crime the only category of crime that has increased in Canada since the 1970s, you ask? Easy: drugs. The drug trade is profitable enough that participants can afford black market guns; since they are essential tools, drug prices will rise to cover their cost anyway. (Robberies, on the other hand, can't become more lucrative.) If we legalized drugs tomorrow, handgun crime would plummet.
Similar effects can be argued for the gun registry in the US. "What registry?" you scoff ... the machine gun registry, in place since 1934. But this kind of logic does not apply to a long gun registry in Canada, so proponents of the LGR can't use this argument, but that's a whole nother discussion.
We now return to your scheduled programming.
Sorry, Gilroy, but you can't defame a person identified only by a screen name.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gilroy
Thats OK the tone of my sentence might make the moderators take notice that this guy is up to his old tricks, he,s already upset a few and will eventually sulk off back to where he came from.Quote:
Originally Posted by welsh
OMG he,s now posting more stuff on the hunting lodge.
Iggy
"There is no place in Canada for hunters with handguns, I hope they keep it that way, as a matter of fact I'm sure they will. There are places in the USA where you can hunt with a handgun, may I suggest if it is such a strong urge, you go there.
You are allowed your opinion, I'm allowed mine, and if you don't want to hear an opposing view, don't ask the question"
.... you can insult a person identified only by a screen name, which would violate the rules of the board....
IMHO I disagree. Some HG owners just collect. Few go to the range on occasion and shoot. Cops are gaurunteed to handle their service gun twice a day.[/QUOTE]
Handle it? Oh.. you mean putting their booster on and then putting the gun in the holster and end of removing gun? Ya.... that's gun knowledge alright.... I know a few collectors... they "handle" their guns very regular....
Loading drills... cleaning... admiring....
Actually I didn't give my opinion on the subject as my opinion doesn't matter...
[QUOTE=greatwhite;854808]However you have specifically said you do not stand with others. I support ALL gun owners. YOU pick and choose.
# 9 , I would like to have my old 44 Mag . back it was very accurate with my hand loads , as for a .22 I already have one , S&W MDLE 41 with two barrels , 5 1/2 inch heavy bull barrel w/ extended sight, and 7 inch barrel with compensator and additional weights.
You are aware that the Police lose more guns every year then private owners right. Don't believe me look it up.
IMHO I disagree. Some HG owners just collect. Few go to the range on occasion and shoot. Cops are gaurunteed to handle their service gun twice a day. You said majority versed in the use of. I would agree that the average HG owner probably has more knowledge of HG's overall but in use of I doubt it. If you consider that the number of reported accidents to the number of cops the percentage is very low.
I hunt with cops and they don't pretend to know anything about guns other than their service issue and the ones that they hunt with. I trust their muzzle integrity more than a once a year deer hunter. I do know that some out there are cocky and have false comfort around guns too.
About them failing tests ya I have heard it happens. Bad apples in every bunch. It's a provincial standard. If you miss one shot you fail and redo till you pass. I would appreciate to know that they are failing and getting the training they need as opposed to being pushed through or the test made easier.
I think we should have a practical for Hunter Safety like they do in some states. Standard target and distance. I can't believe that the practical here is classroom unless you get some of the better opportunities out there where they take you on the range.
I don't think that the bush carry is a bad idea but if it ever does come true (more open I mean ) I hope there is more than a written and dry test.[/QUOTE]
Bluebulldog I can't find those stats but would be interested. Not being condescending just curious. I tried to search range accidents but came up mostly south of the border. I would say that by the time the average cop leaves the academy they would fire more than a black badge certification. I dont think a cop in an average career would shoot as much as an active Ipsc shooter does in one year. There are accidents in Ppc and Ipsc too just like hunting. Scary to me to think that the first time someone EVER shoots a gun I could be in a tree stand a kilometer away. Having someone stand over your shoulder testing you could create nerves for some that could recreate the idea of seeing your first aninimal and pointing at it with a high powered rifle. I love to introduce people to all disciplines of shooting and hunting. I love the reaction of surprise when someone fires a handgun, shotgun, or high power rifle for the first time. I think firearm ownership is a privilege and no I don't want to make it cost prohibitive but just a safe as possible. We all read stories here of accidents and if a test would prevent one than all the money spent is worth it.
Topher if you look closely at my post I acknowledged that most HG owners have more "knowledge" than cops. I had said that in the "use" of firearms I would give cops an edge. They point guns at people not paper and the consequences of missing are a lot greater. I do acknowledge that a decent Ipsc shooter would probably do better .
About the bush gun. I took a Kel Tech SU16 in the bush with me frequently for coyotes and to go to bait stations. I was once told by a cop that you can't take an AR except to a range. It looked big and scary like an AR but he didn't know the difference. I know they have a lot to learn.
Sorry. No disrespect to anyone, but i see a lot of comments here that are really left wing. Isn't that the liberal view of of the issue. Ban them all. I don't think I have to worry about someone taking it. I generally don't have to worry about like minded individuals carrying. Are not most crimes committed with illegal guns. Me owning a side arm. I can guarantee you it is not going to get in the wrong hands, misplaced or misused. Why should I be penalized? How should I say it. "I want one". But current laws are too strict to make it worth while.
[/QUOTE]Quote:
Originally Posted by greatwhite
I tried. Do you have a source? I didn't know that. Including break and enters and range thefts?
#10!!!!!!
Actually there is a course available and it is called The Wilderness Handgun Safety course but only open to trappers ,bear baiters and geologists to partake in and yes you must qualify shooting on a range as part of the test and every 4 years is requalifying time .Having the certificate and getting the pass to carry by your local constabulary also has many restrictions . One thing is though you can't pack on the street nor can you practice or hunt as in Hunt in the bush nor can you be on your wheeler or sled with it loaded I can't recall who mentioned it earlier but it was stated you can't carry a long gun on the street unless it is encased . That is only true if its before or after legal shooting times as far as law .
TD
#11 and my uncle is#12 my dad is 13
As far as the letter of the law. Before anyone risked their firearms licence and more importantly their personal liberty on that bet, I'd go check the case law ... and if I found no case law, I still wouldn't go walking down a city street with an uncased rifle. You'd stand a good chance of finding yourself fighting a long and expensive case against a Crown attorney trying to set a precedent.Quote:
Originally Posted by 400bigbear
No most are just lost but it's OK because it's the Police. But you know gun owners are bad people.
This is 1 Police force. We can probably multiply this by at least 1000 or just multiply by the number of forces.
There use to be a complete report but I cannot seem to find the link anymore.
http://www.thestar.com/news/crime/20...for_years.html
I tried. Do you have a source? I didn't know that. Including break and enters and range thefts?[/QUOTE]
Wilderness Handgun Safety Courses
The Canadian Firearms Institute is facilitating Wilderness Handgun Safety Courses.
For wilderness worker’s, who are usually working in the bush by themselves, safety has become a major concern. They are exposed to ever increasingly dangerous and threatening encounters with bears, wolves and other predators.
The Ontario Wilderness Handgun Safety Course is recognized as firearms training standard for the issuance of an “Authorization to Carry” for wilderness occupations in the Province of Ontario.
The permit is available for Trappers, Geologists, Prospectors, Bear Baiters, Forestry workers and Wilderness pilots for self defence and dispatching trapped animals.
Andy Chartrand a certified Firearms, Hunting, Trapping and Boat Safety Courses Instructor is spear heading the effort. Andy has just recently been certified as a CFI instructor and will be delivering CFI Range Officers courses and CFI Gun Club Safety courses.
If you have any questions or would like further info on the wilderness handgun course please contact Andy [email protected] or myself Jim - [email protected]
In my village it isn't illegal and I have walked down the road with my gun slung over my back and a cop has even seen me.
Quote:
Originally Posted by welsh
KawarthaGoose
Up until 1971 / 1972 Even Bank Managers carried side arms. My Dad use to carry a 38 special for the bank even when he was off duty. Up until 1990 it was much easier to purchase a handgun and back then you were still allowed to go target shoot in a sand pit. The handgun registry has existed since 1971 but still has never stopped criminals, I don't know but I think criminal still don't register their handguns if I am wrong you can correct me.
"Village" and "city street" are two different scenatios entirely. Try it on Yonge. :)
Been there done that too! But I fear with the increasing number of eager rookies in the area those days are numbered. Not the rookies fault, its just what they know. I live right in town and shoot my bows in what little backyard I have. No issues either. Lots of onlookers though.Quote:
Originally Posted by greatwhite
Quote:
Originally Posted by welsh
I'll refer to the criminal code possession for dangerous purpose Sect 88(1).
I saw six guns lost since 1998 at Peel Regional Police in your article. 1900 sworn members and 16 years obviously never an acceptable number but not as bad as I thought it would be. Didn't like the source either. Not a big fan of the Star.
We as legit gun owners I think take the cake when it comes to lost or stolen. Numbers don't lie there while I do believe that vast majority of crime guns in Canada are smuggled from south.
Take poor Calvin an advocate for all of us. 53 guns in one fluke break and enter. It would take Peel Police a while to get up to those numbers.
http://m.thestar.com/#/article/news/crime/2010/03/17/men_charged_in_theft_of_53_guns_including_uzi_from _apartment.html
Says here Calvin had lost 30 not 53 and that Toronto police seize 2400 guns a year. Probably a lot of that is amnesty.
This Stat say 328 for all police agencies across Canada. Doesn't say time frame but if you try the NFA website it speculates since 2008. Bit short of the 1000 multiple. Not even a 1000 since 2008 really.
http://www.canada.com/mobile/iphone/story.html?id=0cf469f3-9f66-49ea-ab41-1d158cb338df
Had to find recent stats with numbers.of guns stolen. According to rcmp stats looks to be average 3000 with roughly half recovered. So depending on what the time frame is of the above Stat cops account for at most ten percent.
This one says 918 stolen in Ontario in 2012 with 94% long guns.
http://www.ottawapolice.ca/en/annual-report/Guns-and-Gangs.asp
[/QUOTE]Quote:
Originally Posted by greatwhite
16 pages. Looky me go! My first viral post!!!!
Hahahahahahahahahaha
HA
The hand gun registry has been around since 1934.Quote:
Originally Posted by greatwhite
LOL Welsh . It is funny you mention Yonge and it happens regular because Yonge is an extension of #11 highway but heah I know where you mean the GTA . Well there actually was a gunshop on Yonge St although I'm not sure it still is and a friend of mine bought a rifle and we walked just down the street to my parked truck and jumped in it and headed for home . Nothing encased .:D True story .:D I actually get a chuckle when some of my friends from the south or even some not get all panicky and encase and trigger lock when we get into the vehicle . Daylight hours there is no need for using a case nor is it law to lock it . North of Novar you can even walk down the road with it loaded .Quote:
Originally Posted by welsh
TD
Actually, it became easier to purchase handguns when they brought out the first FACs. Before then, you needed a "permit to purchase" if you were buying from a store. This could take a while to get as you were investigated by both your local police and RCMP before you got your first one. In my case they came to my house to speak to my wife, talked to both my neighbours and my boss. Modern privacy laws that have since come into effect would prohibit this.Quote:
Originally Posted by greatwhite
If you were buying privately, or inheriting, then you just took the gun to the station to register it......
When the FACs came out, they didn't differentiate between long guns and handguns. If you were cleared to buy one, then you could buy both, a mistake on the part of the liberals which allowed many to buy handguns as the FAC was much easier to get than the old Permit to Purchase.
My wife was a bank teller at 19. Back then they also did cash payroll deliveries which demanded that she carry an old Webley around Scarborough and North York. I had to wait until I was 21 to join a gun club.
Our carrying permits were issued after that club was confident that we could safely handle a handgun under all conditions. This also meant hitting the target....
I currently do not own handguns but probably will by next year for target shooting, I have no interest in hunting with one right now. That being said I absolutely stand behind those who would choose to do so responsibly, any hunter who would disagree with this is being counterproductive to the rest of us and should be ashamed. The day may come when they try to ban/turn down a type of hunting you do (or would like to do), at that point I am sure you would like the rest of the hunting community to stand behind you. I am quite disappointed with some of the comments in this thread.
Awe c'mon dont use logic in an internet argument.
I know it was a thread that was discussed on here about 2 years ago. CFO in ON had seven reported range incidents, 4 or 5 were LEOs. I'll see if I can't find it somewhere.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mdiddi
No argument about the fact that by the time a cop leaves the academy, but there is serious skill fade in most police forces.
These days, the cops would sooner go to a "Golf Tournament " than to a "Shooting Match" , and most of them do not know anything about any other firearms other than the ones "that are issued to them" , or the ones they used at the police college in Aylmer .Quote:
Originally Posted by Bluebulldog
Exactly.Quote:
Originally Posted by topher
I don't think those who are voicing their opinions against handguns have any clue about ballistics and have been relying on movies and/or anti-gun propaganda to get their "facts". They're saying the bush will be more dangerous if handguns are allowed, yet the long guns hunters currently use will throw bullets much faster and farther.
That means handguns are technically safer than rifles...
Then you have action type. Full auto is not allowed in Canada which means the fastest action would be semi auto.
That means the handguns would shoot just as fast as your semi auto rifle or shotgun.
Then there are those who say that it'll result in more gang bangers having handguns. We already have very strict laws for restricted firearms and that has done nothing to reduce the number of firearms related crimes. Why? The huge majority of handguns that gangs use are brought in from the US.
That means gangs will be able to get their hands on handguns even if Canadians were prohibited from owning handguns. Do you really think firearms laws will do anything to stop crooks from obtaining firearms? If so, I suggest coming back to reality.
Originally Posted by Mdiddi http://www.oodmag.com/community/imag...post-right.png
Bluebulldog I can't find those stats but would be interested. Not being condescending just curious. I tried to search range accidents but came up mostly south of the border. I would say that by the time the average cop leaves the academy they would fire more than a black badge certification. I dont think a cop in an average career would shoot as much as an active Ipsc shooter does in one year. There are accidents in Ppc and Ipsc too just like hunting
I suppose a simple requirement for a RPAL could be asked of any new recruits.No cost to the public except the rookie trying to get on the job.As they have to take the shotgun training at Aylmer they may as well get the restricted and non restricted training.
Once your on the job the big problem is scheduling especially for the big services.Annual leave,court cases,and a whole host of other issues makes it even difficult to schedule for the annual re qualification.Just ask any supervisor.
We did have a pretty decent target shooting gun club in Toronto Police years ago and they competed a lot in the States,dont know if they are still running.
Years ago, I pushed to have the CFSC mandatory for applicants, similar to first aid and CPR certificate requirements....brass at the time didn't think it was necessary !!!! Go figure !
Firearms safety course for those who are issued firearms, no, not necessary.Quote:
Originally Posted by rick_iles
Sounds so stupid.
A friend who is an ex police chief said he shoots way more as a hunter than they ever did when he was a police officer, he wants mandatory training and mandatory shooting for all LEOs
Well we have the mandatory training and the mandatory shooting the question raised is it enought. Most posters tend to think its not and I tend to agree,however the logistics,cost,to get it done are pretty bad.You got to remember its not that long ago we got shot of our pee shooters.Quote:
Originally Posted by Fox
They should have to go and do it themselves, spend the $200 for an RPAL and go do some live fire ATT course.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gilroy
I do think that our RPAL and PAL courses do not teach enough, mentoring is required to know how to shoot properly. You may be able to be safe but knowledge of firearms and their use does not really come from these courses.
It's precisely for those reasons that all gun ranges have to do their own safety courses. My club also has a 90 day probation, where you have to shoot a minimum X times in each discipline under the supervision of an instructor.Quote:
Originally Posted by Fox
We just had dad within arms reachQuote:
Originally Posted by Bluebulldog
LOL, so did I when I learned, but there is a growing trend for people to get involved with firearms who have never handled one before, they then show up at the range and actually pose a fairly real danger to others, and themselves. Most clubs recognize this, and are conducting themselves accordingly.Quote:
Originally Posted by Fox
When I first joined Galt in 1997, as long as you had your FAC you were given a key to the club.
As an active Patrol LEO, in my old agency, just to transition to a semi handgun was a 3 day classroom, 600 round minimum outside course of fire. All types of FTF, stoppages, retention, strong hand/weak hand, etc. were thoroughly taught.
At the end of the course you had to qualify on the standard COF.
We also had to run the night fire full Patrol course complete with active light bars, deafening federal siren, yelp, phaser, hi lo, going full blast with muted street lighting.
I was shocked at the lack of skills of a very few active LEOs. Most did well.
I instructed defensive firearm training and qualification at the Academy one year and got a much different picture of new recruits and sidearms. Don't believe I'd ever do it again in a fast paced Academy setting.
I believe that was Hallams. it was 1960 - I was 18, 1st paycheque burning a hole in my pocket ($60). Walked past Hallams. They had an original flintlock Kentucky Long Rifle in the window. I had to go in to look at it. It was $300. Might as well have been 3 million! I sighed and went to walk out.Quote:
Originally Posted by 400bigbear
A salesman saw me and let me handle the Kentucky anyway. When I told him I couldn't possibly afford it he asked how much I could afford. $60. He brought out an old (but in near mint condition) Belgian percussion smoothbore Trade Musket. The gun, a pound of powder, a box of old Eley percussion caps, a bag of shot for $60!
I walked up Yonge St. openly carrying my treasures to meet my sister who was giving me a ride home.
Any of you guys remember Halman and Hickey on Dawes Road.Bought my Rem 870 Wingmaster from those guys.Quote:
Originally Posted by GoldenLakePete
I bought a coupe of handguns from them in the mid 70's. B525Quote:
Originally Posted by Gilroy
Spent a whole lot of money at Holman & Hickey! Also West End & Weston Gun Shop on Dundas West, GUNCO when it was in Toronto (and Ottawa), Griffin's Guns and Antiques in Lakefield, Ellwood Epps when it was in Clinton, Smith's Gun Shop in Hazeldean... Good thing I had an understanding wife!Quote:
Originally Posted by Gilroy
I took the bus across town (0.10C) when I was a youngster and arrived at KMart. Bought myself a brand new shiny single shot Cooey, two boxes of shells and a gun case. Paid at the cash. Put the gun in the case and proceeded to the bus stop. Got on the bus for the ride home. Bus driver said to me. You get a new gun son? Me all proud said Yes sir!
Try that today.
HA
Mention of bus brings back some memories . I travelled through much of the province via greyhound with two guns in my case going hunting . A few stubbed their toe on it sitting in the aisle ;):thumbup:. It doesn't seem that long ago either and we even smoked and sipped on a mickey of southern or rye :D . LOL It really doesn't seem that long ago either but guess it was . LOL
TD
Well we do still provide a Big Mac,fries and coffee in the overnight lock up before your arrival in court the next morning.LOLQuote:
Originally Posted by huntaway
when I was a teen I traveled back and forth in the late 1980's to NB and NS I i use to carry my guns right on the Princes of Arcadia Ferry boat between Saint John NB and Digby NS. I would bring my shot gun and rifle in a case. Others on board use to ask to see what guns I used including the Captain.
I doubt if I could carry them on board anymore.
No Jim me lad not unless you like Big Macs,french fries and coffee.Quote:
Originally Posted by greatwhite
WTF hunh
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gilroy
post 177Quote:
Originally Posted by greatwhite
There was nothing illegal about it back then, in fact that is what they recommended rather then my put it on the luggage van and someone possibly steal it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gilroy
Toronto police don't provide that any more.. you get an orange juice, and a hot pocket thing... also your no longer held the local station any more over night... now they deliver you to a station depending on location... 51 (parliament), 23(the one in rexdale). 43..Quote:
Originally Posted by Gilroy
I know Newmarket gave you an egg mcmuffin and a coffee for breakfast.
IN Ontario they had a charge in collage we called it the drunk tank charge I believed it 53.53.
In NB if they picked you up walking and falling drunk they just picked you up for the night and free breakfast in the morning. No Charge. ;)
Free in NS to but no breakfast.
Quote:
Originally Posted by topher
I've told this one before on this site but 1986, walked down to Week's Hardware at the corner of Mill and Dundas in Waterdown on my lunch break. 16 yrs old with my brand new FAC in my pocket. Bought a lakefield .22 semi and a box of .22 long rifle. Back to scholl and into the locker it went but not before a couple of teachers had to see it first. It rode home on the bus with me at the end of the day.Quote:
Originally Posted by huntaway
Today?...........
The 1st week of November was always mid-term exams. Somehow i always managed to do certain ones early. Those were the classes taught by the teachers that understood deer season was almost sacred.
I know I was just pulling your leg.Quote:
Originally Posted by greatwhite
From
http://www.oodmag.com/community/show...-bear-defense/
I figured I'd reply to and link both threads to keep everything easy to find. The quotes are all from the above thread, but obviously relate to this discussion.
The NFA has lots on their plate already, plus this is not a new issue. People have been complaining and grumbling about ATC-3 inconsistencies and issues for years. Another firearms owner set up his own Wilderness handgun carry information campaign and website a couple of years ago, to bring awareness to the issue and try to get support, without much traction.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bluebulldog
Yet, I have never read anything regarding ATC-3 and wilderness protection/carry out of the NFA offices. I don't know that it is even on their radar.
Someone has decided to take on this specific issue, outside of their regular employment, and is gaining momentum with support. At this point, it doesn't look like they need the NFA for what they are planning.
They have objectives; a bit vague, but I doubt they will lay out their strategy on the website.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bluebulldog
Quote:
OUR MISSION
Quote:
http://www.wildernessprotection.ca/about-us/
To ensure that all outdoor enthusiasts across Canada are offered equal opportunity as citizens to protect their own and other human life during the occurrence of a dangerous animal encounter.
OUR OBJECTIVES
To collaborate with outdoor enthusiasts and organizations across Canada in order to create a unified, powerful and effective movement.
To advocate for the equal right for all Restricted Possession & Acquisition License holders to carry a legal registered holstered handgun on rural and Crown land where a dangerous animal encounter is possible.
To educate about prevention and avoidance strategies that pertain to dangerous animal encounters and the best way to survive an attack via all means possible including a handgun.
To lobby politicians and public officials encouraging them to care about and defend our goals. To remind them that our intrinsic rights in this regard are granted and clarified in the Canadian Charter of Rights & Freedoms sections 7, 12 & 15.
To take action in a legal manner that works effectively towards policy or legislative change in order to reclaim our right to carry a legal registered handgun on rural and Crown land for wilderness protection of human life.
The last I read, they were putting together the BoD, but I haven't seen an update on that. As for the NFA, or other like group, endorsement, I think that was covered previously. Even adding a 'stamp of approval' from a professional organization could taint the fact that this is an issue being raised by Joe Blow Canuck.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bluebulldog
Can't find it on the website, but Joe Blow Canuck is Steve Boissoin in AB, working in modular home designs and sales.
The laywer handling this, and the firm holding the funds in trust, is Gerry Chipeur at Miller Thomson, LLP
http://www.millerthomson.com/en/our-...rald-d-chipeur
I've read indirectly that Ed Burlew supports this initiative (other forum post by his also-lawyer wife), but you are right that there does not yet appear to be a list of supporting organizations. Wilderness Rod & Tackle in Red Deer, Alberta, is the company that has donated the three rifle/scope packages so far.
That's true, and it may be due the fact that this whole thing kicked off at the end of October of this year; the website is three weeks old - set up with the initial donations after the retainer, and the facebook group is only two months old.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bluebulldog
Nothing wrong with being wary though.
The pie is already split, and it doesn't look like anybody is eating this piece. The NFA is not a panacea for firearms issues, they have their strengths and are playing to them right now. The NFA also seems to be on the outs with the some key politicians, and their message might be muted because of that.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bluebulldog
Hopefully the updates are forthcoming soon for the Canadian Wilderness Protection Initiative, so that people can have that transparency and reassurance that is currently lacking.
Quote:
Originally Posted by welsh
Honestly, I don't know what their strategy is. Other than it has now entered phase two, with an introduction-type letter campaign. I don't like that the letter campaign includes a ringing endorsement of C-42, but amendments at committee are still an option, as are regulations of the Act. If C-42 actually ascends, then there are always options for further amendments to the Firearms Act in a later Parliamentary session.
First Letter Campaign
http://www.wildernessprotection.ca/be-heard/
The lawyer's accolades seem to suggest that he is professional, so I don't think he would take this on if he thought it was a damp squib:
Like I wrote above, it is good to be wary, but I think it would be a good thing if this got initiative got some legs.Quote:
http://www.millerthomson.com/en/our-...rald-d-chipeur
- Bachelor of Laws (1984) and Master of Laws (1990) from University of Alberta Law School
- Past Chair and Co-chair for a number of Canadian Bar Association committees, including the national Constitutional and Human Rights Law Section and the Canada for Tomorrow Committee of the Alberta Branch of the Canadian Bar Association
- Member, Federal Judicial Advisory Committee for Alberta, 2006-2008
- Served as an adjunct professor at Canadian University College, 1993-1997
- Appointed Queen’s Counsel, 2006
- Awarded Queen Elizabeth II Diamond Jubilee Medal in 2012 for public service to Canada
- The Canadian Legal Lexpert® Directory, Litigation - Public, 2014
I have not donated yet, but will after my second January pay.
Mooboy.
Very good post.
It wil be interesting to see if it develops.
As you pointed out though, the objectives are a bit vague, and not listing persons associated is a huge put off. Particularly since they could very well have listed what you did on their website to their benefit. The whole initiative seems a bit haphazard, and without definite outcomes and set timelines ( I am a project manager), like I said, I'm not inclined to contribute funds.
As stated though, I think if this was identified as a hot-button issue with NFA membership ( and there are a lot of us), it would definitely be a ball that they could carry in the game further than someone just starting out. I regard the NFA as basically an NRA in its infancy...
Gilroy- Was it Holman, or Hickeys son who was the gunsmith on Straughan above the old OPP Lakeshore garage? Real nice guy but kinda noisy in the garage when he was firings own into the water tank...
The gun vault where all the seized, turned in guns were kept was also on the same floor. Never seen so many old Cooeys and SMLEs in one spot. Even had a sled mount water cooled Browning in there one day....
Dont know about that one Pat.
John Holman is still a practicing gunsmith. He works the gun counter at SAIL in Oshawa now.Quote:
Originally Posted by Pat32rf
Here you go guys, we should learn from them
http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=B5ELyG9V1SY
I don’t think that long guns should be allowed, everyone should hunt and target practice with a pistol as there range is a lot shorter.This would be safer especially the in the shotgun and muzzle loader hunting areas. I would love to be able to hunt with a pistol, rimfire for small game, and centerfire for big game.
I do a lot of IDPA action shooting and belong to a couple of gun clubs. Muzzle control is different with a pistol but once you know the principles like long guns it’s easy. All guns are dangerous if they are not used properly, remember the Four Rules of Gun Safety always apply:
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 till your sights are on the target
4.Identify your target, and what is behind it
A like button or thought you would get .:thumbup: YeS SIR, I and us old grunts got your dry humour too ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by Found
TD
Would it surprise you to know that the NRA was formed from the Dominion of Canada Rifle Association after the turn of the 20th century?Quote:
Originally Posted by Bluebulldog
this is 2006 in Idahio.i felt real safe.
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v2...n/PA080028.jpg
Of course you would you ol silver hair on the right . Look at your pic Greenhorn . The cat is protecting you and not many will go hand to hand against cat claws . LOL Your not a help in this discussion not that I am either . LOLQuote:
Originally Posted by Greenhorn
TD
One of the two families lived over top of the shop on Dawes rd.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tactical870
About 3am Mrs H heard noises down there so she grabbed a 12 bore and came downstairs to interrupt a breakin just as they were leaving. She didn't want to kill anyone so she fired one shot into the wall above the door, missing the clock that hung there by about 4". She claimed that she did this on purpose to save the clock and the two large display windows.....It was a brick wall so they didn't repair the pellet holes in the plaster....just left them as a message and a tribute to Mom....
No need to be upset about some negative comments ; just ignore them ! --- Who cares what his OPINION is ? --- I wouldn't even try to explain matters to him . --- Us law-abiding citizens are being curbed . The crooks wouldn't be affected at all . I've been a handgun-owner and user since 1959 . During the early 60s it was still legal to hunt with a handgun (in Ontario) provided the individual possessed the necessary licences . --- Every spring I prowled the bush with a 44 mag. on my hip and a camera hanging on my chest . Generally I had the bush all to myself because not too many other guys were after bear (I was). --- Some of my best hunting-related memories stem from this time . --- During the moose-season I carried my 22 Ruger Single Six Convertible (loaded with CB-caps) as well as my big-game-rifle . I harvested many grouse with the handgun without scaring every moose in the area . --- After our BELOVED LAW-MAKERS closed this loop-hole I lost the desire to own handguns and sold them . --- In 1990 I fell in love with another handgun again (a 357 mag.) and consequently purchased it . --- I'm still using this gun at our club-range ; however , it may be for sale again (along with loading-dies etc.) because of the lack of hunting-opportunities . --- Yeah , I'm GETTING OLD ; the Remington 700 (7 mm/mag.) will have to go as well . My 12 gauge and the rim-fire will remain . --- ~ 60 years of hand-loading , hunting and (competitive) shooting have become 2nd nature to me . But . . . . . . . . . !
After perusing some of the previous posts , where people were talking about walking down Yonge St. WHILE CARRYING AN UNENCASED PEA-SHOOTER and no-one even paying attention , I remember a STUPID stunt I'd pulled ~1960 . I'd just purchased a new Ruger Super Blackhawk 44 mag. at Holman&Hickey on Dawes Rd. --- I had traded a P38 and payed on top . --- Sooo , on my way home I decided to to pick up some money (from my account --- lol) at the Bank I normally dealt with . --- I didn't want to leave the gun in the car ; alas , I entered the Bank with the en-boxed 44 . --- Most of the tellers there knew me . So , when one of them smilingly suggested that I might have purchased a gift for my wife (referring to the box under my arm ) I said : No this is for myself . --- I opened the box and pulled out the handgun and handed it across the counter (for them to inspect) . Every-one was laughing and joking ; there was no paranoia . --- If any-one tried this nowadays there'd be a swat-team showing up in no time . In 1959 I acquired a Marlin 336 (30/30) at Hallams and a 98 Mauser (8mm) at Hercules and walked up Yonge St. without attracting any undue attention . --- Nowadays , every-body seems to be paranoid about guns . 30 or 40 years ago I used to ride into the bush (on a motorcycle) with my gun tied to the bike ; no-one ever complained . --- During the warm season I still like to use my bike when going to the range ; however , my handgun has to be trigger-locked , encased in a locked steel-box and chained to the bike . --- If I want to transport my rifle or shotgun I have to use my SUV . --- According to some cops I'd be violating the law if I carried them on my bike .