|
|
08-26-2019, 08:02 AM
|
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 2,443
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by elkhunter11
. I agree on the poor training and capabilities of our police forces in general, but twisting stats to support an opinion/agenda, to the extent that you are doing, only gains support from people that are too clueless to realize how badly the stats are being twisted.
|
I disagree that these stats are twisted to support an opinion/agenda.
They have certainly been selected to support my opinion, but I have no agenda, or power to implement one.
I only ask that people critically examine all the facts, (and statistics) before forming opinions (or voting).
Good Luck, YMMV.
|
08-26-2019, 08:18 AM
|
|
|
|
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Calgary
Posts: 19,418
|
|
Qwert
Those posts sure proved the Mark Twain quote you provided correct, the one comparing police shootings (generally just a single suspect) to mass shootings was total horse dung. That was obviously done to create an imbalance by intentionally cherry picking which numbers to compare. A truer comparison would be the total number of criminal shootings/ murders versus officer-involved shootings resulting in death. If you want to compare them honestly, post numbers where police shot two or more suspects to compare to the mass shootings, otherwise it’s blatantly obvious the bias being pushed. If you want to dig into greater detail, dig up officer involved shootings where the suspect had already shot someone. Also look up how many officers get shot (not necessarily killed, but at least shot at) , just for your own information.
There are hour upon hour of police shootings to watch on YouTube from body camera footage, the vast majority are entirely justifiable. I say this having not seen a bad one but I’m sure they must exist. (ie: I acknowledge my own bias but am honest enough with facts to allow for counterpoints, even providing ones against my own perspective)
When quoting sources such as the Washington Post keep in mind their known and intentionally cultivated left wing bias (it’s owned by Jeff Bezos).
Citizens flee shootings, police are dispatched to head towards them. They like to survive their shifts. A huge factor in the growth of police involved shootings is the meth and fentanyl problem, when criminals are extremely aggressive and completely devoid of reason they are very dangerous. Some are using vehicles as weapons but they’ll use whatever is available without hesitation. In the absence of these drugs, police-involved shootings would drop drastically.
__________________
"The trouble with people idiot-proofing things, is the resulting evolution of the idiot." Me
Last edited by CaberTosser; 08-26-2019 at 08:24 AM.
|
08-26-2019, 03:03 PM
|
|
|
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Fox Creek
Posts: 3,315
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by gunluvr
Until there is an infallible litmus test for mental stability/instability I don't think people need to be carrying handguns in public. Too many things can go wrong. I'm not completely sure most LEOs should be packing either, when it seems like almost every day in the US, some cop guns down some unarmed (usually black) person.
There are just way too many guns in the US. And not enough gun control. Canada is just about right, IMO. The problem here is criminals, not guns.
Wilderness carry? Maybe... Sure. Why not.
|
Until there is an infallible litmus test designed by the all knowing government, I don't think anyone should pilot a 4500 lb. machine 65 mph down the highway. Or practice medicine, law, or run for office...
It'll work out great.
__________________
Profanity and name calling are poor substitutes for education and logic.
Survivor of the dread covid
Pureblood!
|
08-26-2019, 03:14 PM
|
|
|
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Camrose
Posts: 45,099
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by qwert
I disagree that these stats are twisted to support an opinion/agenda.
They have certainly been selected to support my opinion, but I have no agenda, or power to implement one.
I only ask that people critically examine all the facts, (and statistics) before forming opinions (or voting).
Good Luck, YMMV.
|
As an example of how stats can be twisted, the person supporting CCW would use the fact that it isn't allowed in Canada to argue that there have been zero instances of stray bullets from a legal CCW holder injuring anyone, or causing damage. The anti CCW person would argue that there hasn't been a single case of a CCW holder preventing or stopping a crime. Both arguments are true, but both are also meaningless.
__________________
Only accurate guns are interesting.
|
08-26-2019, 10:51 PM
|
|
|
|
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: central Alberta
Posts: 12,628
|
|
This is meant as a satirical post just for fun....To heck with sidearms...maybe we should allow open carry of Winchesters.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IE9kPKZ5eOQ
__________________
___________________________________________
This country was started by voyagers whose young lives were swept away by the currents of the rivers for ten cents a day... just for the vanity of the European's beaver hats. ~ Red Bullets
___________________________________________
It is when you walk alone in nature that you discover your strengths and weaknesses. ~ Red Bullets
|
08-29-2019, 11:47 AM
|
|
|
|
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 1,597
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dick284
My opinion is that everyone has an opinion.
And.
Opinions are like butt holes.
Everyone has one.
And some stink worse than others.
I choose to really keep my opinions fairly close to myself, as I really don’t want to bless the masses with my odour, and in doing so certainly do not wish to catch much of a wiff of others stench either.
|
The opinions/butt holes analogy has been done before. It's full of holes. Pun intended.
It's a safe bet that ALL butt holes stink. Opinions, not necessarily so.
One can get by without an opinion. One would be in dire straits without the other.
One's butt hole can be wiped clean. One's opinions usually linger.
Opinions, like ideas, are meant to be shared. One should keep his butt hole to himself.
Good things can come from opinions. Nothing good ever came out of a butt hole.
One can change his opinion. You're stuck with your butt hole.
If you listen to someone's opinion, you might learn something. All you'll get from a fart is stink.
__________________
Some days you're a bullet; some days you're a gopher.
|
09-06-2019, 01:26 PM
|
|
|
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 1,032
|
|
Canada absolutely needs to rewrite the regulation about wilderness carry. And not for all restricted arms, they could even narrow it to a revolver with magnum rounds, i.e. 44mag, 454 casull and require a separate permit.
__________________
feeding the occasional troll.
|
09-06-2019, 07:11 PM
|
|
|
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Peace..................Country
Posts: 229
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by gunluvr
The opinions/butt holes analogy has been done before. It's full of holes. Pun intended.
It's a safe bet that ALL butt holes stink. Opinions, not necessarily so.
One can get by without an opinion. One would be in dire straits without the other.
One's butt hole can be wiped clean. One's opinions usually linger.
Opinions, like ideas, are meant to be shared. One should keep his butt hole to himself.
Good things can come from opinions. Nothing good ever came out of a butt hole.
One can change his opinion. You're stuck with your butt hole.
If you listen to someone's opinion, you might learn something. All you'll get from a fart is stink.
|
LOL, thanks for that.
|
09-06-2019, 08:29 PM
|
|
|
Join Date: Oct 2017
Posts: 735
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by cody c
Canada absolutely needs to rewrite the regulation about wilderness carry. And not for all restricted arms, they could even narrow it to a revolver with magnum rounds, i.e. 44mag, 454 casull and require a separate permit.
|
Rather than get into what I am not for, this I can really get behind. I would also like to see it for smaller calibers as I do not see any increased risk with target shooting using a handgun and wailing away with an SKS.
Matt
|
09-22-2019, 09:42 AM
|
|
|
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Yellowknife, NT
Posts: 19
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by whiskeywillow
Absolutely should-be a backcountry/outdoorsmen carry permit for those who are licensed & wish to do so.. remote fishermen, hikers, mountaineers, canoe & kayaker's, pasture riders tending stock, packers working with horse & mule strings, even to hunters as an emergency piece at their side... individuals of those sorts anyway, and for reasons far beyond just wildlife defence too.
One example: pasture riders.. doctoring cattle for example... a rifle tied to your horse and a rope dallied onto cows or a bull yankin on the end of that rope is recipe for trouble. Tangling, a broken gun, hurt rider or horse (or both!) is just'about guaranteed. A sixgun though on that persons belt is already out of the way and always present should he/she need it. They may not need it for the animal tied on getting doctored, but for the odd one found that's beyond help while rifles are non-logistical and amiss
Another: packers.. once again with loads, leads & ties all over and 3-4 or 15 head of stock in tow, if things go south and one falls lame in the middle of nowhere, a bullet is quicker more humane dispatch than your leatherman is.. and I know I'd personally prefer using a bullet to a knife if I ever had to put down my own horse for some reason or other in the middle of nowhere. Sidearm adds virtually nil for weight to you, your horse or any animal in your string and is always at hand out of the way for emergency's.
More..? How 'bout a case like those canoer's near Yellowknife just last month who had their camp & canoe smashed up by a bear, then remained tormented by that bear until their SOS call finally arrived just-barely short of too late!? (good thing they had THAT at least, and had someone respond. I know and have met many who take nothing, as well am aware of numerous SOS calls that did get left on def ears leaving individuals on their own anyhow until the ones in distress could be moved someplace with easier access!!) ... I've personally been on fly-in canoe trips myself where space was limited and any long gun would have been completely non-logistical to bring. But a sidearm surely would have been handy enough, would have served well in those Yellowknife canoer's case too.
And for the record, any sidearm that a person takes the time to become proficient with is damn sure plenty for close-quarter defence on anything including bears. Somebody arguing otherwise has NOT done their due dilligence on the subject... 357's, 41's, 44's even the lowly 40s&w has reportedly served successful in wildlife defence cases outside of canada & within canada as well, by those who do rightly have permitting to bring theirs.
Canada very-well SHOULD have an "outdoorsmans" version of carry permit written into the firearms act, then made available to any restricted-licence holder with proper qualification in hand. It truly is ridiculous that (currently) no such thing exists. And in mine & many's opinions, such a permit would be the simplest most rightful amendment of great significance to the outdoorsman that any Federal government could make to the Firearms act as we know it. It really should be done.
|
I actually live in Yellowknife and I agree that it should be allowed to carry for purposes of camping, hiking, and these other pursuits. While I was in high school here two kids from the catholic high school here were out at one of the provincial campgrounds and the young man was killed by a black bear in front of his gf, she was also injured but got away.
And we actually do have a provision here because of our history of mineral exploration and mining, for people with a prospectors license(only costs $75, and takes a course) to be able to legally carry a sidearm for that purpose.
I worked on the diamond drills on and off for a while and have done surveying up at Hope Bay on the arctic coast and Barren Ground grizzlies are everywhere. Last summer we had a Sow with two cubs walk right onto our 16x16 drill shack at around 3 am with our drill running full bore as I was putting samples in a box. Just at the Ekati Diamond Mine alone I was told by the Enviro Dept that there was over 130 bears within a 40km or so radius of the camp. Been stalked by wolves while doing the helicopter moves for the drill up there too, although bear banger's worked on them good.
|
09-23-2019, 07:41 PM
|
|
|
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Parkland County, AB
Posts: 4,253
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by 270person
100% agree with you but why anyone would carry a handgun in the bush vs any other far more effective and less of a pain in the arse weapon I.e. shotgun, is beyond me.
Handguns are basically useless. My 357 mag shoots a 158 bullet at 1400 fps. Big whup. I'd pack beer spray before I took it out as an animal deterrent.
|
Exactly.. A Handgun is more than likely to aggravate an already bad situation than end it. Think of trying to stall a V-8 engine by grabbing a fan blade, then look at your puny handgun.
Being Bear Aware and Bear Spray have proven to be the odds- on best ways to go.. and even then they aren't 100% effective on a determined critter. Try and remember this.
__________________
When applied by competent people with the right intent, common sense goes a long way.
|
09-23-2019, 08:49 PM
|
|
|
|
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Central Alberta
Posts: 21,399
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by CaberTosser
I’d be fine with it provided there was a stringent qualification process with lots of training and live fire range tests. We surely all know people that we’d not want carrying and we probably all know people that we’d be fine with having CCW.
At the very least it should be fine to defend ones home with any type of firearm.
|
My opinion as well.
Grizz
__________________
"Indeed, no human being has yet lived under conditions which, considering the prevailing climates of the past, can be regarded as normal."
John E. Pfeiffer The Emergence of Man
written in 1969
|
09-24-2019, 01:54 PM
|
|
|
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Fox Creek
Posts: 3,315
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Salavee
Exactly.. A Handgun is more than likely to aggravate an already bad situation than end it. Think of trying to stall a V-8 engine by grabbing a fan blade, then look at your puny handgun.
Being Bear Aware and Bear Spray have proven to be the odds- on best ways to go.. and even then they aren't 100% effective on a determined critter. Try and remember this.
|
Defense against bear statistics.
https://www.ammoland.com/2018/02/def...#axzz60TGcEBT7
10mm vs. Cape Buffalo (1 of 3 for this guy I believe):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sZBVnquaLXM
Another Cape Buffalo finished off by a 10 mm. Go to about the 12 minute mark if you don't want to see the whole hunt.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EcTiIfBbJ_c
This guy's done a little handgun hunting. As far as many are concerned, he is the authority on what works on big game.
https://www.africahunting.com/attach...ith4-jpg.3802/
__________________
Profanity and name calling are poor substitutes for education and logic.
Survivor of the dread covid
Pureblood!
|
09-24-2019, 07:14 PM
|
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 1,604
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tactical Lever
|
^^^ True , but it is very hard to educate a "brain washed" anti-handgun person.
|
09-26-2019, 01:54 PM
|
|
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: On the border in Lloydminster
Posts: 8,362
|
|
Having a gun in a bear situation won't help if you are inept in using it
From Japan didn't know they had black bears or guns.
https://www.khq.com/digital_hub/watc...23093ad8f.html
Run away........run away
|
09-26-2019, 08:15 PM
|
Banned
|
|
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: Edmonton, Berta
Posts: 221
|
|
IMHO, a handgun will be a good tool in the tool belt in the "Just in Case if all my other tools fail me" situation.
Nothing wrong with carrying handguns during hunts, hikes, camping/ anything outdoor.
Regarding training. If it were ever pass as a law (Never going to happen). It is should written as " It is your responsibility to shoot your gun well and properly, and any projectile that comes your gun will be your responsibility and all consequences will be on you."
Of course, this kind of law will never pass since our current government barely trust with us firearms. In fact, coming after us gun owners for their communists/progressive agendas.
And to spice matters with that, the government does not even trust us with the ability to defend ourselves and property without being rammed up the butt by judges, lawyers, politicians and their enforcers if we do defend ourselves and property.
But meh. Keep on taking up the butt my fellow Canadians.
|
Thread Tools |
|
Display Modes |
Linear Mode
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 04:58 AM.
|