Quote:
Originally Posted by 220swifty
After participating in the thread that was running until it got locked last night, it is pretty clear there is a division between members on CCW in Canada. I know where I stand, but understand the division too.
That had me thinking today, how does this forum view handguns as a defensive tool, in places other than the urban public. Let's say, for example, a bill was introduced tomorrow that allowed handgun owners to essentially use them as they would a non-restricted, and store them as they see fit at home. It would also make it legal to use a firearm on your own property for defense of life and livelyhood.
Discuss, without getting this one locked too.
|
My main concern with the ideas expressed above are that I have no confidence that individuals who do not have a firm understanding of their rights with respect to self defense as they stand now... (as evidenced in the text above)... cannot be trusted to act appropriately if given even further latitude.
Besides.. it takes more than target practice to make someone an effective shooter of men.
Most folks can't do it without considerable conditioning... no matter how sure they are in advance...when the time comes they disappoint themselves.
I do not object to open carry where and when appropriate if an individual is suitable trained and that training remains ongoing.
I do not object to any licensed person carrying a sidearm in the back country or on their property for protection of life or for pest control.
I do not feel that an ATT should be required to go to any range in Canada or for that matter if someone wishes to visit a country friend and shoot tin cans in his field.