Printable View
Here in Pa. you can carry a pistol openly in a holster without any permit - but once you conceal it under your shirt or jacket or get into a car you need a permit to carry - which is easy to get as long as you don't have a police record - now Texas is going the same route - very few people actually carry a weapon like that because it is a lot better that no one knows that you are armed - http://www.foxnews.com/us/2015/04/18...hts-activists/
This is a concept that most Canadians can't get their heads wrapped around. Please understand I mean no offense,Joe,but,honestly,is American society so violent that citizens need to carry firearms 24/7 to be safe from other armed thugs ?
It isn't bad all over but there are certain places that are like war zones - and unfortunately some of this trash spills out into the better areas - so a lot of people feel safer if they have a gun with them - its too bad that it is this way - you have a gun handy but hope that you never have to use it - I guess there is nothing worse than being in a situation where your life is in danger and you have no means to defend yourself -Quote:
Originally Posted by trimmer21
It has happened here in good and peacefull Ontario in the last couple of days, been on the news , and it is just going to get worse [the shootings] .Quote:
Originally Posted by trimmer21
This is no longer small town Ontario or Canada for that matter .
If you're referring to the shoot out in the Jane-Finch corridor in Toronto the day before last,I don't expect much more from those brain dead idiots. That is really an abberation specific to that area,though. So far,in our large cities,the Police are doing a stellar job of intel gathering and knowing who and where the mutts congregate and live. When the stupids start their nonsense,Police can almost drive right into their driveways. Thankfully,I doubt we have any areas where it's necessary for ordinary citizens to venture out armed. Normal people don't frequent after-hours booze cans and associate with gang bangers. Sending that idiot Husbands to the big bucket for thirty years sends a pretty powerful message to rest of the dummies.Quote:
Originally Posted by jaycee
To be honset, there are a lot of places up here where you shouldn't walk without a gun. Be it in any of the big cities or the smaller ones like Thunder Bay.
attitudes are changing quickly up here Jo. It is just as violent here as there, the only difference is you have a larger population. I should look up the crime rate per capita for Thunder Bay. Just might be higher than most US cities.
Here's is what you could be up against - http://video.foxnews.com/v/417837529...#sp=show-clips
If you are walking down the street with a pistol openly holstered couldn't that make you more of a target for the kids? I mean they see you carrying, sneak up on you like the infamous sucker punch videos and take your weapon, now there is another firearm in the wrong hands. But if its concealed no one is the wiser in turn making you maybe less of a target.....Just an opinion.
In a short answer "NO "Quote:
Originally Posted by CDNSportsman
Ronald Kenneth Noble who is the Secretary General of Interpol, has said many times that in the fight against terrorists and gang violence that an armed Population is a good option.
Noble was born and Raised in New Jersey. One of the more Anti-gun states there is.
If I was in desperate need of a pistol and could just watch people walking around with them on there hips, i would pick the weakest one wait around a corner give you a surprise lick to the face with a bat and off i go with a pistol....so i don't think there is a short answer.Quote:
Originally Posted by jaycee
I'm as pro gun as it gets and feel many people should in fact be allowed to conceal carry in certain situations but wouldn't want to live where i felt I needed to. I would conceal carry a pistol while training my dog in case I needed to stop a coyote attack. My dog and I have been followed out to the car by coyotes before. Don't need to carry it openly and scare the hikers, just have it handy when needed. I used to bowhunt for bear and would have carried one then also if I could.
It's a no brainer - better to carry it concealed so you have the surprise factor in your favor - I don't know when I saw a person actually carrying a weapon in the open - makes no sense to do that unless you have another gun concealed - if you watched the video of the gang attacking that guy I think a lot of people would have defended themselves and shot a couple of the gang members - when your attacked like that you don't know if they are going to beat you until your brain dead - so you have to pull your weapon and starting shooting -
No waving the gun screaming back off...just starting thigh high and pressed against the flesh.Quote:
Originally Posted by JoePa
I doubt that would happen, people if they are armed do not put themselves carelessly in a position where someone would be able to surprise them at a corner, they are very aware of their surroundings, this is one of the main items taught at firearms courses for the issuance of carrying permits.Quote:
Originally Posted by CDNSportsman
Be aware of your surroundings.
Just got home from Vermont where i met a young mother of two, 5 ft. 2 in. 115 lbs. Recently,while alone at home a person started banging on her door and would not leave. She called 911 and returned to the door with a loaded .45 and told him to leave before she blew his brains out. Funny thing, he left, imagine that!!!. Cops arrived promptly and told her they got him and another suspect in the near vicinity and she could forget about him. That little girl has more cahonies than a lot of men. Her reply to the cop was, "thank you officer but i want to see and identify him". The officer obliged her and let her see the two suspects. She was lead to the car where she promptly said "thats the f..cker right there". The officer could not help but chuckle and thanked her. It is legal to carry in Vermont and obviously the young lady knew how to use a hand gun. Would the out come have been any different without the .45 ? We will never know, but wouldn't it be nice if we and our wives and loved ones could defend ourselves in a similar fashion if need be,without being charged,drug through the legal system and quite likely be convicted. Thousands of dollars later,a record,possibly jail time just to defend yourself ,loved ones and property. While the poor bad guy, if caught gets a lesser sentence if anything. Just a thought ,would there be fewer violent home invasions? Less property theft? etc. etc. etc. if we were even just allowed to brandish a gun or shoot a shot off in the air without having to face assinine repercussions!!!! I PERSONALLY KNOW MY RESPONSE. What does everyone else think?
Assuming that we can't defend ourselves in that manner is a mistake because there's ample case law in Canada where crooks have been shot and killed or killed by guard dogs with no repercussions besides an initial investigation. The only thing is that if you shoot and kill someone,you damned well better be right.
I hear ya trimmer. But there are also lots of cases where people should get a medal and a hand shake but instead get charged for the stupidest reasons just because a gun was involved. Believe me , if I coul get my gun out of safe storage to defend myself against someone with a gun or knife that I fully believed had intent to injure or kill me , I would have no qualms doing him in.
Right now the "Jane-Finch" crowd can be assured that they will encounter NO opposition from the law abiding public. Would they change their tactics if they knew that there was an open season on them as soon as they produced a gun? Might be a cop on her way home from work or a serious target shooter who could handle their gun..This is what it was like back in the 60-70's...
Which is fine... since they don't target the law abiding public.Quote:
Originally Posted by Pat32rf
Not that I feel any desire to get into this debate, but do want to provide some thought, on at least 1 wee aspect.
Armed cops are ambushed and killed all the time. Why might an armed civilian be any better at preventing, or avoiding it. It's logically inconsistent to think Johnny Q would be any more capable (likely less given most/many cops have something called street sense and situational awareness, likely not found in the average person) at not becoming statistics.
Most cops walk around in these target bags call uniforms then stand out like neon signs.Quote:
Originally Posted by JBen
The guy that walks in to the store and shoves a gun in the clerks face may not have payed any mind to the elderly lady looking at produce....till she lets the air out his head with her .22 mag revolver.
Cops dress to be seen. A conceal carry person is like that snake you just grab not knowing it's got fangs.
Now you're bite and are going to DIE.
Was referring to some comments re open carry. Maybe just me but a glock on someone's hip stands out just as much any missed target...sorry cop
Yes advertiving is bad...Quote:
Originally Posted by JBen
That's what I'm thinking.
I think ultimately while there are similarities between us and the US. There are different dynamics in play as well. WHo knows what 15 years will bring, but often things that are occurring in the US with respect to various trends, social things follow here. Will things ever get as bad here, as there? No I don't think so. While we definitely have similarities here and there (Im trying to avoid specifics ;) ), we are very different as well. With respect to literacy/education, people feeling disenfranchised and disadvantaged ( social nets) and more.
Shall issue and all that.
Im staying out of :)
They don't target the law abiding community??? Tell that to all the victims, many of them elderly, of the recent rash of home invasions that seem to be occurring more often. While it may not be of epidemic proportions currently, one is too many. Brain dead, stoned punks barging in to a home, tying people up, robbing and occasionally killing them , deserve one thing and one thing only in my opinion. A face full of buckshot. End of story!!!Quote:
Originally Posted by Oddmott
Pat specified the Jane-Finch crowd. Erringly claiming that area's violence is against innocents. It's not.
I absolutely agree. Any community that insists on keeping silent about crime when they know who the badasses are and steadfastly refuse to co-operate with law enforcement are enablers and as such can never be seen as "innocents."Quote:
Originally Posted by Oddmott
As for home invasions,not all,but,almost every one has some prior involvement with crime at some level. It's usually always a common denominator. They can't be regarded as "innocents",either.
Random homes are not picked, they know who lives there ,and what they want. How they know what is in the house is the question, prior interaction would be # 1 on the list.:shades: Everyone I know uses a bank , not a bunch of shoeboxes filled with cash under the bed.:cool: ......But it might not be the grandparents ( who may know nothing), who are home, when they arrive, that the intruders are after, but the grandkids living in the basement who were not home ,when the bad guys showed up.
Wish they would allow open carry here!
If you are thinking of home invasion protection, you are far better off with a 12 gauge and 00 buck shot.
People with little to no experience with pistols would be hard pressed to hit a 10X10 inch piece of paper stapled to a wall 20 feet away. Make it a moving target, and forget it.
On the street, you would be better off with a blade in most situations as these are typically close combat.
Anyone truly concerned about these scenarios should take some self defense training and learn what is effective and when. Pistols are never first choice, if you mentally can't comprehend that shooting someone is the last choice, then you are not mentally fit to carry a hand gun via open carry or carry and conceal.
I wish the would allow open carry for working and hunting in the bush.
A lot of home invasions I have heard of have been RANDOM. No prior involvement, contact in any way shape or form. Just gutless scumbags entering homes unlawfully , tying and beating up and occasionally killing people. Random or not, imo they still deserve the face full of buckshot.Quote:
Originally Posted by fishermccann
OK, I should have said "Jane Finch TYPES". Any time you have a victim who is GARANTTEED to be defenceless, you are going to have a thug who will take advantage. When the victim can bite back its a different deal.
I feel lucky to have been born and raised back when we had " carrying permits" for handguns. This meant that our government trusted some of us ( after checking ) to be armed, open, concealed , didn't matter. Any drunk could buy a long gun, but you had to have a squeaky clean record to carry a handgun.
I say I was lucky because I enjoyed shooting, was able to do so frequently and could choose between a rifle or handgun for the job at hand. This meant that the three times our tent, cottage, vehicle was under siege I could show I was armed and the threat left. It also meant that I had a weapon handy when the porcupines started chewing on our camper, when we had a rabid ground hog on our front lawn and other critters (4 legged) destroying our home.
If you are able to shoot when and where you choose (plinking in the country), then it is no problem for most people to become good enough to hit a grapefruit at ten feet, basketball at twenty. This covers 95% of your needs for defence. With the proper gun it becomes ten and twenty yards.....for hunting needs. With more practice you can soon hit that basketball at fifty and one hundred yards using a 4-6" barrel.
I just get upset when the government says that people cannot be trusted to behave so we fence them in so they have no choice. They then decide that certain guns are evil and have no legitimate purpose so need to be prohibited.
Agree with you on all of this. Unfortunately we are preached to over and over that we should leave protection to the authorities and shouldn't protect ourselves. To that I say bullsh..t.Quote:
Originally Posted by Pat32rf
I like where you are going, in most cases a pump shotgun that racks is all that you need, no need for even ammo, everyone knows that sound. That being said, if you need something for home defense you are better off with bird shot, 00 Buck can go through a lot of stuff before it stops, that wall behind the bad guy may hold your kids and 00 Buck will go right through it. #7.5 shot within the length of a room will stop anyone as fast as buckshot or a slug. Lots of people in the states claim their AR15 is for protection, a FMJ 223 round can exit your house and go into your neighbours, not well contained.Quote:
Originally Posted by B Wilson
Not 100% sure bird shot would complete the task. Lethal wound channels need to be created.Quote:
Originally Posted by Fox
You hit someone at 15 feet with a 1 1/8oz load of #7.5 you essentially have a slug.Quote:
Originally Posted by B Wilson
I have a reloading book with a heavily detailed section on home protection reloading. The larger the shot the better the chance of going through more. Even going to #4 lead vs # 7.5 would increase your range and again at across the room it would knock anyone trying to kill you or your family down, it would probably do more damage than 00 Buck if the 00 Buck shot opens up.
I am still going with the sound of the pump being enough.
My MD spent his internship in Belfast during "the troubles",so when he tells me that with #7 shot at 15 yds. ,no doctor is going to put the bad guy back together before he bleeds out,I'm going to believe him. Give me a good ol' 12ga. any day over anything restricted or prohibited. BANG,down,dead....pure and simple. After that it's "Yes,your honor, while he was coming at me he said he would kill all of us. That's when I fired." "No problem,son,you have a good day. Case dismissed."Quote:
Originally Posted by Fox
That is why you probably will never have to shoot it, hearing and seeing that pump 12ga makes people think of what it can do.Quote:
Originally Posted by trimmer21
In Canada a restricted vs a non-restricted for home security leads to other issues, discharging a restricted not at a legal range draws other charges.
You know you would have to be in front of a judge but it is better to be judged by 12 than to be carried by 6.