How do you Feel About Handgun Restrictions?

[elkhunter11]

I wasn't aware that handguns were banned?

Some handguns are prohibited, and most are restricted. The point is that if public safety and saving lives is worth prohibiting or placing very strict restrictions on handguns, why not save a lot more lives by banning other non essential items like alcohol or tobacco? Or do you just want to pick and choose the items that you have no use for, and ignore the other items that kill many times more Canadians every year than guns do. If that is the case, then your motive isn't really public safety after all,now is it?

Originally Posted by Hun-Ter

I absolutely agree.
I lived in the US (NC) for over a decade, open carry state, no license required. I use to carry my Glock to the woods mostly in the snake infested areas, chambered a snake/rat shot, I was also a participant in IDPA shooting competition and used 1000-2000 rounds of pistol ammo/week on the range.
I could carry my loaded rifle on the passenger seat, not that I did, but it was legal.
If I got pulled over by cops I told them that I was armed, pointed to my belt or the back seat. They noted, politely asked me to stay in the car while they run a check on me.
Once on the way from our hunting place to a diner one of my friend was pulled over for not wearing the seat belt. The cop saw his rifle laying against the pass. seat, he asked him if it was loaded, he said of course, there is one in the chamber too. So the cop asked him:" Do you mind if I unload it until we finish our business?" He removed the mag and the round from the chamber, but left them on the seat. That was it.
You are obliged to take a day long course if you apply for CCL, which is issued by the Sheriff (in NC). Another friend of mine carried his pistol in the center console, during a DUI checkpoint the cops were checked vehicles for open bottles and discovered his pistol. Since he did not have a CCL, he got a $50 ticket. If he would keep it in the seat or in a holster on his belt there would be no fine.
I have seen people to walk into banks while carry handguns openly. It was interesting that many banks let you in with guns meanwhile some grocery stores won't allow you to do it.
You can't carry it in school property (including the parking lot), places where drinks being sold, or where you need to purchase a ticket to get in - like movie theaters..
You can't buy guns legally in the US if you have been convicted in any gun or drug related crime or you have a documented mental health issue. Note: air and black powder rifles or handguns are not considered guns in the US, you can buy them off of the shelf.
NICS check is the first thing to do when a person want to buy a gun in a store. It takes few minutes - even at the first time, than in most states you walk out from the store with your gun.
In those states where the Castle Law was reinstated the crime rate dropped significantly.
Take a look at NY city or LA, where the gun control is on the highest liberal level. The crime rate is also high because it's hard to get guns in the legal way, meanwhile most criminals carry, they have easy access to full auto guns too.
In my opinion firearms are nothing more than tools to get a game, sporting goods for target shooting, weapons for self defense or accessory in a criminal act. Everyone has a brain to choose his/her own purpose, act responsibly and pay the price if not.
The thing is, as long as criminals have access to guns to commit crimes, a bear or cougar can eat you while you are hiking, it would be nice to be able to defend your life or property legally.
At least as long as an RCMP or F&W officer won't fit in your holster, eh?

Very good post! I can see your point and I have nothing against handguns myself. I was an auxiliary RCMP once upon a time and had no gun except the shotgun in the car

I appreciate all views, its just that some of the good ol boys need to go back to playing their banjo's instead of ramming someone for their opinion.

Time to go see pucks shooting....Go Flames

[fear 666]

Originally Posted by BBBB

I don't think that people that are allowed to carry firearms are all 100% good guys.

With recalssification more screeing could be done (whether it needs it is based on opinion) which means people would go throught background checks for everything more then they already do. Which means peeople who can legally buy a handgun in my opinion is a good guy. I have never seen a crazy person who has a 99-100% clean LIFE/criminal record. So yeah pretty much all restricted gun owners are good safe people.

And you saying there is bad drivers of course there is, but that is whole different example. I know people who can't drive for their life, yet the have a license. getting restricted license isn't as easy as getting a drivers license.

[Redfrog]

"Time to go see pucks shooting....Go Flames"

That explains it.

[catnthehat]

Originally Posted by BBBB

Very good post! I can see your point and I have nothing against handguns myself. I was an auxiliary RCMP once upon a time and had no gun except the shotgun in the car

I appreciate all views, its just that some of the good ol boys need to go back to playing their banjo's instead of ramming someone for their opinion.

Time to go see pucks shooting....Go Flames

Sooo, I guess running shots on deer with hand guns would not be "on"?
Cat

[huntinstuff]

You should be able to buy a handgun, shoot the handgun on your private property, hunt with it, and carry it for your protection

Registration is only good for confiscation, so get rid of that too

Other than that, I really have no opinion

[280Hunter]

Is there any kind of permit you can get for carrying a handgun in the bush? For when your hunting in areas with high bear populations.

Originally Posted by Redfrog

"Time to go see pucks shooting....Go Flames"

That explains it.

I like the Oil as well, lived in Edtn for 17 yrs

[hillbillyreefer]

Originally Posted by BBBB

Again, I don't think it would be the legal gun owners, I just believe that more guns out in the world (availabilty) wouldn't be a good thing. I personally dont think I would want to be a cop in the US because of that....

The more CCW holders in a state the lower the crime rate. Your logic is totally flawed, do a bit of research and check back with us.

[hillbillyreefer]

Originally Posted by BBBB

Yep, been to the US many times

Seen anyone shot...hmmm, no

Seen anyone waving a gun.....YES NY robbery

Yes I have seen a car wreck

Cars are essential, handguns are not

The duck thing, well, that might be the reason u shouldnt own a handgun

You saw an armed robbery in NYC? They have amongst the most restrictive gun laws in he US. Handguns are not allowed, unless you are one of Bloombergs bum buddies.

You got anything concrete or just the rantings of an uninformed middle schooler?

[hillbillyreefer]

Originally Posted by elkhunter11

Both alcohol and tobacco kill more people than guns in Canada. Since neither are essential, should we ban them?

Want to hear a good one? In 2010 there were 166 deaths in Canada due to falling out of bed. In 2010 there were 167 deaths in Canada due to firearms. I'm thinking that if we waste about $20 billion on a bed registry and force special conditions on bed heights etc., in 2025 the death rate from falling out of beds will still be about the same. But if the bed inspectors had the power of warrant less searches we could bring the death rate down to about 165/year.

[hillbillyreefer]

Originally Posted by huntinstuff

You should be able to buy a handgun, shoot the handgun on your private property, hunt with it, and carry it for your protection

Registration is only good for confiscation, so get rid of that too

Other than that, I really have no opinion

And the above comment is from a real cop, who does real cop stuff everyday.

huntinstuff for PM.

[kronk]

Originally Posted by graham1

SSSHHHHHHHHHHHH!!! Don't give them any ideas.
But, the gov't gets to much tax money on booze and tobacco. Likely won't have to worry.

Problem solved... 150% tax on restricted fire arms. A $300 administration fee, and a $500 application fee for an open carry permit (both of which will be taxed the 150% of course.) Can't forget the monthly renewal fee of $100 (plus $300 administration fee, and 150% tax on both.) A $5 per round fee for restricted fire arms.

Which means that for you to carry for a year, and to use one bullet in self defence in the bush on a $500 fire arm with $2 bullets, it will only cost you $7007. The government will make $6505.

You gotta pay into their pension plans to get anything... and with how much smokes, and booze are taxed, this formula looks pretty accurate.

[adaras]

Originally Posted by pickrel pat

If a criminal wants a handgun, HE WILL GET A HANDGUN! If Joe average wants a handgun for defence in the bush and plinking, HE WILL NOT GET A HANDGUN! that being said, is it really neccesary for all the red tape? Its very easy for a criminal to obtain a handgun. the red tape only hinders the decent folk.

x100

[silver]

Originally Posted by BBBB

Ah yes, the freedom to bear arms, wake up guys!
The more available handguns are, the chances of them being in the wrong hands increases. Yes criminals can get whatever they want, but lets not make things easier. Easier access to handguns means that criminals will have a better selection.
Have a look at the issues in the US because of this so called right.
As I stated, its not the average sportsman that ruins things, but easier access and less regulation IMO would be ludicrous.

Watch a few COPS re-runs and see the low life gang bangers that are all packing like the old West. Better yet........ask a few law enforcement officers what their thoughts are??

Gun Deaths - International Comparisons
Gun deaths per 100,000 population (for the year indicated):

Homicide Suicide Other (inc Accident)

USA (2001) 3.98 5.92 0.36
Italy (1997) 0.81 1.1 0.07
Switzerland (1998) 0.50 5.8 0.10
Canada (2002) 0.4 2.0 0.04
Finland (2003) 0.35 4.45 0.10
Australia (2001) 0.24 1.34 0.10
France (2001) 0.21 3.4 0.49
England/Wales (2002) 0.15 0.2 0.03
Scotland (2002) 0.06 0.2 0.02
Japan (2002) 0.02 0.04 0

I am not sure where your data comes from, but it does look at least ten years out of date. The info I have says Japan and Switzerland have a similar suicide rate, about double that of Canada. In Switzerland, an able bodied male (female too maybe) is required to keep an assault rifle in his house as part of his military duties, in Japan a person can grow old and die and not see a legally owned firearm in the hands of a private citizen. It would appear that firearm ownership has little to do suicide. By the way, the gun control people will tell you since the gun registry was implemented, that gun suicides had fallen and they are right. What they wont tell you is that overall suicide rate continues to rise. This is called a half truth. The US is made up of about 3000 different jurisdictions with each able to set their own laws. This goes from Vermont with almost no specific firearm laws and a murder rate of 4/100,000 to the District of Columbia with one of the most restrictive gun laws in the country and a murder rate of 150/100,000 . I would suggest you read a book called The Samurai, Mountie and the Cowboy written by a man named Kopel. He started out believing in gun control, researched gun laws in different countries around the world, and changed his view point. There is alot of data out there, it can be twisted to support most any view point, the trick is to make sure the right questions are being asked.

[colt45]

Originally Posted by huntinstuff

You should be able to buy a handgun, shoot the handgun on your private property, hunt with it, and carry it for your protection

Registration is only good for confiscation, so get rid of that too

I agree i have a few hand guns, ready to go hunting if that ever happens,
and yes all registration ever did was lead to confiscation,
they allow handgun hunting in the states, and have no problems,
i also have antique hand guns which are leagal to carry and shoot where ever you can use a regular rifle,
lets just get rid of all the registration crap,
Criminals never pay attention to the laws anyway.

Originally Posted by hillbillyreefer

You saw an armed robbery in NYC? They have amongst the most restrictive gun laws in he US. Handguns are not allowed, unless you are one of Bloombergs bum buddies.

You got anything concrete or just the rantings of an uninformed middle schooler?

How do you Feel About Handgun Restrictions?
I think that this was the title for this thread.....

Just because you don't like my opinion.......again, my opinion, you need to start throwing insults and innuendos around.
There have been some good facts that I have learned some new information. I didn't reply back with a statistical barrage because that's not what the post asked.

So, time for you to go back and mingle with your cousins ...geez

and yes, I did witness an armed robbery in NYC and I do know what huntnstuff does, mr deceased friend used to work with him!

[SkytopBrewster]

We shoud just ban misinformed Liberal gun haters and arm our law abiding citizens would make this a safer place. They think that everyone is going to be running wild in the streets shooting and killing like its fu**ing Iraq if LAW ABIDING citizens get ahold of handguns, its all BS, anyone that thinks handguns should be banned can get lost, go live in England or Australia.

[SkytopBrewster]

Originally Posted by BBBB

I think that handguns and their use should be kept as is. We have enough problems with crooks and whackos having access to rifles and such.
Handguns are too easy to conceal and our law enforcement agencies would be under increased threat pulling over any vehicles.

Again, its not the sportsman that would ruin things........

thats right because as soon as you LEGALLY aquire a handgun you turn into a crazed killer that would shoot down every police officer that tried to pull you over and murder everyone that aggrevated you, it would be mass chaos!!! if LAW ABIDING citizens were allowed to carry handguns or use for hunting

[Big Daddy Badger]

I don't disagree with the idea of folks being allowed to carry handguns in the bush or shoot them on their property etc.
Unfortunately the reality of it is that there would be more thefts of those guns if they were treated more casually and there would be more accidents.

Forget the criminals... they are a constant and... predictable.

It's the honest folks that are just careless, arrogant, bad tempered or over confident.
Some very good people just can't be trusted to take reasonable precautions or play safe once left to their own devices.

I'd support many of the ideas put forth here if there was a process of renewal that also included refresher training to confirm that people remained safe and competent over time after their initial licensing.

Too many guys write an exam... get a license then walk out with the attitude that they can dump everything they just "learned" and do their own thing.

It's no different than what happens when some people get a drivers license.
Safe usage is dependent upon continued diligence and respect for whatever tool you are using and the maintenance or development of the skills required to use those tools.

I'd support periodic re-examination of drivers to.
I'd bet that would result in less accidents and that quite a few people out there would fail a re-test... even if they have been licensed for years.

[858king]

This isn't Tennessee and we're not the United States, and they aren't us. If you want their laws and way of life, move there. If you feel comfortable knowing your tweaking methamphetamine neighbour has his personal gun rights protected, by all means then party on. Because in the grand ol' Opry, your criminal neighbours rights are as protected as yours, and the rule of the gun wins in a dispute.

I don't think people get that gun rules have as much to do with law breakers as they do with law keepers and the non-shooting public in general.

[elkhunter11]

I don't think people get that gun rules have as much to do with law breakers as they do with law keepers and the non-shooting public in general.

Most gun regulations are actually dreamed up by the people that don't own guns, or that hate guns.

[Rod1960]

Originally Posted by elkhunter11

Most gun regulations are actually dreamed up by the people that don't own guns, or that hate guns.

And can't get their head around the fact that a gun is nothing more than an inanimate object. Guns don't scare me.......however, some people do.

[hillbillyreefer]

Originally Posted by 858king

This isn't Tennessee and we're not the United States, and they aren't us. If you want their laws and way of life, move there. If you feel comfortable knowing your tweaking methamphetamine neighbour has his personal gun rights protected, by all means then party on. Because in the grand ol' Opry, your criminal neighbours rights are as protected as yours, and the rule of the gun wins in a dispute.

I don't think people get that gun rules have as much to do with law breakers as they do with law keepers and the non-shooting public in general.

There is no one on here that wants your tweaker neighbor to have an RPAL and a carry license. Get a grip.

[hillbillyreefer]

Originally Posted by pesky672

I don't disagree with the idea of folks being allowed to carry handguns in the bush or shoot them on their property etc.
Unfortunately the reality of it is that there would be more thefts of those guns if they were treated more casually and there would be more accidents.

Forget the criminals... they are a constant and... predictable.

It's the honest folks that are just careless, arrogant, bad tempered or over confident.
Some very good people just can't be trusted to take reasonable precautions or play safe once left to their own devices.

I'd support many of the ideas put forth here if there was a process of renewal that also included refresher training to confirm that people remained safe and competent over time after their initial licensing.

Too many guys write an exam... get a license then walk out with the attitude that they can dump everything they just "learned" and do their own thing.

It's no different than what happens when some people get a drivers license.
Safe usage is dependent upon continued diligence and respect for whatever tool
you are using and the maintenance or development of the skills required to use those tools.

I'd support periodic re-examination of drivers to.
I'd bet that would result in less accidents and that quite a few people out there would fail a re-test... even if they have been licensed for years.

If that is what it takes to get the initial door opened, I would support that.

[Classic_Cool]

I sometimes ponder these sorts of rules that target people who by their nature don't follow rules.

Take all the extra airport security since 9/11. Used to be able to carry utility knives onboard, now we can't, and maybe that's fine. Then you couldn't bring water onboard or any liquid or gel. Then they started x-raying you to make sure that bulge in your underwear is actually you

And maybe those new procedures have had some moderate effect, if only to make the would-be terrorists go back to the drawing board and pray to Allah for a new plan.

Thing is though, humans are a creative bunch. If I was that keen on taking down a plane I'd find a way even if it meant knawing the end of my toothbrush into a shank or rubbing two sticks together to set the whole thing on fire.

Back to the gun restrictions, I'm personally not in favor of people walking around in public with guns under their jackets. Maybe a 22 in a woman's purse but in general even a good man can make a mistake in the heat of the moment and do something they'd regret. But I don't see the problem with transporting your handgun in a car to the range or wherever and certainly not with carrying one in the woods. Afterall there are more dangerous things out there than one guy with a pistol. It wasn't illegal to be a bear last time I checked

[elkhunter11]

And can't get their head around the fact that a gun is nothing more than an inanimate object. Guns don't scare me.......however, some people do.

Ignorance about firearms, on the part of the lawmakers, is the reason that most of the nonsense regulations get put into law.

[gopher]

Originally Posted by elkhunter11

Ignorance about firearms, on the part of the lawmakers, is the reason that most of the nonsense regulations get put into law.

Wildlife Act? Just joking

[Rod1960]

Originally Posted by Classic_Cool

Back to the gun restrictions, I'm personally not in favor of people walking around in public with guns under their jackets. Maybe a 22 in a woman's purse but in general even a good man can make a mistake in the heat of the moment and do something they'd regret. But I don't see the problem with transporting your handgun in a car to the range or wherever and certainly not with carrying one in the woods. Afterall there are more dangerous things out there than one guy with a pistol. It wasn't illegal to be a bear last time I checked

So, just so we're clear, you're okay with a women carrying a pistol but not a man?

[Redfrog]

Originally Posted by Rod1960

So, just so we're clear, you're okay with a women carrying a pistol but not a man?

Well c'mon a man is little heavy to carry, that's why she needs a pistol.