How do you Feel About Handgun Restrictions?

[elkhunter11]

Though if that were the case they would be used more by criminals than handguns.... but they aren't.

The vast majority of our firearms laws came about as a result of the two shooting sprees in Quebec. Why do you suppose that the shooters in those incidents chose rifles instead of handguns?

[SkytopBrewster]

Originally Posted by elkhunter11

The vast majority of our firearms laws came about as a result of the two shooting sprees in Quebec. Why do you suppose that the shooters in those incidents chose rifles instead of handguns?

does it really make any difference what type of gun Lapine used? He was a nutjob with a gun, maybe if anyone was allowed to carry someone could have shot him down when he walked through the door with a rifle.

[elkhunter11]

does it really make any difference what type of gun Lapine used?

That is exactly my point,a firearm is a firearm, and if misused, it can kill, yet some people want to treat each type of firearm differently as far as the law is concerned.

Lepine used a rifle that is still unrestricted, so the new laws have done very little to prevent an incident like this from happening again.

[Okotokian]

Originally Posted by pseelk

Not true they use hand guns cause they are easier to conceal not cause they are more powerful.

Not my point. My point is handguns are much more desirable to, and much more commonly used by, criminals. Hence much more likely to be used on you and I... hence much more "dangerous".

[Rugerlover]

Originally Posted by Okotokian

Not my point. My point is handguns are much more desirable to, and much more commonly used by, criminals. Hence much more likely to be used on you and I... hence much more "dangerous".

Here we go with ideologies. Canadians must learn to keep their views to themselves. It's stuff like this that the Governments hear that cost us all.

[Boberama]

Originally Posted by Rugerlover

Here we go with ideologies. Canadians must learn to keep their views to themselves. It's stuff like this that the Governments hear that cost us all.

I bet most Canadians want tough handgun restrictions. So I guess the restrictions show democracy is working, in a way.

Although with the end of the registry anyone will be able to buy a shotgun and take a hacksaw to it.

[Rugerlover]

Originally Posted by Boberama

Although with the end of the registry anyone will be able to buy a shotgun and take a hacksaw to it.

What?

[Okotokian]

Originally Posted by Rugerlover

Here we go with ideologies. Canadians must learn to keep their views to themselves. It's stuff like this that the Governments hear that cost us all.

Canadians must learn to keep their views to themselves? LOL Time to move to Syria my friend.

NO ideology at all RL, I simply stated that handguns are the preferred weapon of criminals and are responsible for more murders than non-restricted weapons. A fact is not an ideology.

And remember, my original comment was only a reply to someone who said other non-restricted weapons were more dangerous than handguns. I'm not calling for any draconion tightening of gun laws.

[catnthehat]

Originally Posted by Boberama

I bet most Canadians want tough handgun restrictions. So I guess the restrictions show democracy is working, in a way.

Although with the end of the registry anyone will be able to buy a shotgun and take a hacksaw to it.

I don't know where you got your info about hand guns from, and as far as sawing off a barrel of a shotgun, nothing is stopping acriminal from doing that now.

Cat

[Rugerlover]

Originally Posted by Okotokian

Canadians must learn to keep their views to themselves? LOL Time to move to Syria my friend.

NO ideology at all RL, I simply stated that handguns are the preferred weapon of criminals and are responsible for more murders than non-restricted weapons. A fact is not an ideology.

And remember, my original comment was only a reply to someone who said other non-restricted weapons were more dangerous than handguns. I'm not calling for any draconion tightening of gun laws.

I hear ya.
lol

[Rugerlover]

Originally Posted by catnthehat

I don't know where you got your info about hand guns from, and as far as sawing off a barrel of a shotgun, nothing is stopping acriminal from doing that now.

Cat

That guy scared me. Sawing off a shotgun is going from unrestricted to prohibited category.

[uglyelk]

I’m all for getting rid of the restricted registry and the classification system for firearms.

They all go bang... if you can past the test then buy one if you wish.

It’s already illegal to kill or injure people just for schist and giggles....How many laws do we need on the books to deal with the same damn issue?

It works like this folks, shoot someone go to jail.

All the rest of this BS is just window dressing to grab votes. Those left leaning hoplophobs hiding under their beds vote too. Stop lining up for your government issued tin foil hat; those hats can’t stop violence from visiting you.

Removing access or restricting access to specific inanimate objects will not stop someone intent on inflicting harm from doing so. Think about it!

Someone can tear a tree branch off one of your trees ring the door bell and when you open the door drive the pointy end of it into your guts.

You might be walking through a department store and some fruit loop decides to open your melon with a cast iron pan, clean up in aisle six!

A friend may drop by for a coffee, without warning ram your head through the glass window and then open up your neck and belly with the glass shards.

A perfect stranger may one day decide to pound your head into the sidewalk.

What should we do? Should we restrict the use of shrubbery, glass, and sidewalks?

Possibly we could require all individuals using cooking wares to be government licensed. We could start pots and pan registry, this could be useful in ensuring cooking utensils don’t end up in the hands of criminals. Possibly merchants could keep their pans locked up and we could get an escort out of the store when we purchase one, just like they do at some of the Crappy Tires stores that I no longer shop at.

No amount of government testing and training or legislation can stop someone from going off the deep end.

The mental health of your fellow citizens is not a static state. Someone who is stable one day may not be in the future. Sound mental health can not be legislated. We cannot create a utopian state with government guaranteed safety. There are no guarantees in life. Life is fraught with risk; get out from under the bed.

The restriction of side arms was the thin edge of the wedge it eventually led to the long gun registry. The registration of side arms was as effective in preventing crime as the registration of long arms.

Time to role back the clock!

[Boberama]

Originally Posted by Rugerlover

That guy scares me. Sawing off a shotgun is going from unrestricted to prohibited category.

I was talking about criminals.

It's gonna be just as easy to make a sawed-off shotgun as it is to obtain an unregistered handgun and the police won't be able to demand where the shotgun they bought is.

[uglyelk]

A thought on wilderness carry:

Why is our life less valuable than a geologist a trapper or someone working in the patch? If a bear eats us we are just as dead. Why are these people worth protecting and the rest of us are not?

If your hiking, fishing , hunting etc., in bear country you should have the same rights as other Canadians.

[catnthehat]

Originally Posted by Rugerlover

That guy scared me. Sawing off a shotgun is going from unrestricted to prohibited category.

The funny thing about it is a guy could simply get a Remington or similar pump gun and buy a 12.5" barrel for it!!

Cat

[uglyelk]

Or buy a judge.

[Okotokian]

Originally Posted by uglyelk

I’m all for getting rid of the restricted registry and the classification system for firearms.

They all go bang... if you can past the test then buy one if you wish.

yeah, can live with amalgamating non-restricted and restricted classifications...

Though I would say we still need a "Prohibited" category. Go ahead and call me a PETA-loving pinko pacifist commie-sympathizing freedom-hater (heck, a couple here already do LOL), but I'm not ready to have anyone with a PAL filling the basement with .50cal machine guns, uzi's, explosive and armour-piercing ordinance, etc.

[uglyelk]

or just buy a prohib.

[elkhunter11]

The funny thimng about it is a guy could simply get a Remington or similar pump gun and buy a 12.5" barrel for it!!

And a mini 14 is non restricted, while firearms that fire the same cartridge, and use the same type of operating mechanism are restricted weapons. These are the kinds of nonsense that results when the people that are making the laws are clueless about the objects that they are making the laws for.

[Boberama]

Originally Posted by Okotokian

yeah, can live with amalgamating non-restricted and restricted classifications...

Though I would say we still need a "Prohibited" category. Go ahead and call me a PETA-loving pinko pacifist commie-sympathizing freedom-hater (heck, a couple here already do LOL), but I'm not ready to have anyone with a PAL filling the basement with .50cal machine guns, uzi's, explosive and armour-piercing ordinance, etc.

You can already buy a non-restricted 50 cal semiautomatic M2HB from Marstar.

Cough up $10000 and it's yours.

[Okotokian]

Originally Posted by Boberama

You can already buy a non-restricted 50 cal semiautomatic M2HB from Marstar.

Cough up $10000 and it's yours.

a semi-automatic is not a "machinegun".

[Boberama]

Originally Posted by Okotokian

a semi-automatic is not a "machinegun".

I think I know that.

Seems to me a 50 caliber semi-automatic with a disintegrating link belt which is unregistered and fires as fast and as much as you can make it go would be pretty dangerous in the hands of a crazy man.

But they prohibit a Benelli M3.

[elkhunter11]

a semi-automatic is not a "machinegun".

And a semi-automatic isn't an assault rifle, even though the media keeps referring to them as such.

[Boberama]

Originally Posted by elkhunter11

And a semi-automatic isn't an assault rifle, even though the media keeps referring to them as such.

I never even said a semiautomatic was a machinegun.

I said they sell a semi-automatic M2HB.

Rate of Fire: This firearm cannot fire in full-auto mode!
Origin: U.S. mfg. new semi-auto receiver and fully restored original WWII
Availability: In stock and ready to ship
Classification: Non-Restricted (req. std. PAL/FAC only)

[sullijr]

I have been around guns of all sorts my whole life,as the son of a military armourer,bisley shot,and a range officer in the military myself.Some of the worst offenders at the ranges I have been a range officer at are the police forces who refuse to follow the posted range orders,eg all firearms are to be unloaded except on the fireing line when the range has been opened to shoot.The local firearm owners who pile their stuff on the fireing line strap on a holster put a loaded clip in the gun and walk around talking to all their buddies.This might not seem a problem to a lot of people on this forum but it shows a lack of respect to all the other users on the range.Before I would agree to the carrying of handguns the training and background checks are really going to have to improve,the are too many "wannabe rambos"out there

[Okotokian]

Originally Posted by Boberama

I never even said a semiautomatic was a machinegun.

I said they sell a semi-automatic M2HB.

Sorry. When you said "They ALREADY sell..." you appeared to be contradicting my point about .50 cal machine guns appropriately being prohibited. I simply pointed out that you were not talking about what I was talking about. That is now clear in spades.

[uglyelk]

Originally Posted by Okotokian

yeah, can live with amalgamating non-restricted and restricted classifications...

Though I would say we still need a "Prohibited" category. Go ahead and call me a PETA-loving pinko pacifist commie-sympathizing freedom-hater (heck, a couple here already do LOL), but I'm not ready to have anyone with a PAL filling the basement with .50cal machine guns, uzi's, explosive and armour-piercing ordinance, etc.

Oki no need for name calling if we disagree.

I do disagree but better men than I gave their lives so we would have the freedom to speak in this country. I respect your freedom to come to the wrong conclusions and express them on this public forum.

We can go through life living like an ostrich if we choose. The law will keep you safe? Banishment will keep you safe? We all have the right bury our faces in the sand and wave our butts about in the breeze. We can even believe that no one will sodomize our unprotected arse because it's not legal to do so with our permission! But then again Oki like it or not people do break the law.

Believing that the prohibited class of weapons will keep you safe makes about sense as believing someone can not be raped because it’s against the law.

Laws can not and do not stop wrongful acts; they only provide a platform for punishment after the fact!

Some of us Canadians presently have prohibited class on our PAL so who knows what may be in a basement near you Oki. Then again some folks just break the law, might be an unregistered howitzer pointed at your house!

I don’t believe there is a limit on how much gun powder may be stored for reloading purposes in the home. I suspect the neighbour’s capacity for storing diesel fuel and fertilizer together in front of your house is probably limited by the size of his slip tank and box on his truck. Surprising you’ve managed to live so long with all this evil potential swirling about.

Your post very much reminds me of the first gun amnesty offered in this country back in the early seventies. A biker, a yank vet, I knew turned in an M60 and few boxes of belted ammo and a few other goodies. The RCMP were shocked and asked lots of questions, the dude just pointed to the poster (no questions asked). He eventually told them I’m just happy to get rid of this stuff.

I talked to him about it later and he told me....I’ve got one more...just thought they wouldn’t come looking for it if they thought I’d turned everything in.

Hard to say what’s out there Oki! Heck anyone with half a clue could turn an sks into a machine gun with a shim on the sear. It’s not rocket science.

Bottom line is anyone willing to do evil and commit crime will. All these rules do is restrict the honest folks.

The government invested ten’s of thousands of dollars teaching many of us to operate FN’s and SMG’s etc. What’s the harm if we take one to the range. (other than the dent the wallet takes when you depress the trigger)

Having the firearms and not being permitted to shoot them is BS.

[Rugerlover]

Originally Posted by uglyelk

A thought on wilderness carry:

Why is our life less valuable than a geologist a trapper or someone working in the patch? If a bear eats us we are just as dead. Why are these people worth protecting and the rest of us are not?

If your hiking, fishing , hunting etc., in bear country you should have the same rights as other Canadians.

Fish and Game law here in Ontario says if you have no tag for the bear you can't harvest it. If you were hunting for deer during the gun season and so happened to get rushed by a bear, you have a sort of valid reason for shooting the bear. Aside from Moose/Elk/Deer/Bear hunting season you can't carry firearms and ammo that are capable of taking down a black bear with you in the bush.

You're done for either way..
lol

[Scar270]

Well said Uglyelk. There are already machine guns living in basements quite legally in this country. Anyone ever heard of a convenience store held up with a Ma Deuce?

Generally speaking if you can afford a machine gun, and afford to feed it, you aren't going around robbing quickie marts for your spending cash.

Those who want to live outside the law, will, and will have whatever toys money can buy. I'd rather legalize it and allow those who do live within the laws the same abilities as those who do not.

[Rugerlover]

Originally Posted by Okotokian

yeah, can live with amalgamating non-restricted and restricted classifications...

Though I would say we still need a "Prohibited" category. Go ahead and call me a PETA-loving pinko pacifist commie-sympathizing freedom-hater (heck, a couple here already do LOL), but I'm not ready to have anyone with a PAL filling the basement with .50cal machine guns, uzi's, explosive and armour-piercing ordinance, etc.

So are you against hunting animals? are you a gun owner for sport then?
I'm trying to figure you out here my friend.
why should you even have a say about a responsible gun owner not owning an "uzi"?
Why should we treat an "uzi" differently than a rifle, shotgun or handgun?
you're starting to sound like the coalition for gun control.
if you feel that way maybe you should join?
if you feel threatened with "uzis" and the like maybe you should just speak for yourself and limit your choices to what you currently have. Doesn't mean I have or someone else have to follow because you feel that way.
Explosives are for military purposes.