Province is completely against handgun hunting.

[Pudelpointer]

Originally Posted by PoppaW

This power qualification would be hard to do. We don't want to say under 45 is a no go as a lot of old antiques are 44 and 41 etc. Most 45 colt antiques are not sought after up here as they need licensing.
As it applies to Restricted modern guns, Some of the same problems apply. I hate to make rules but we have the bigger than 23 caliber for rifles. I figure for big game 10mm and up works if done right. We would have to get rid of the ATT. YES! And if done right the law would read 'restricted' and not say hand gun or pistol so we could use AR's also. Thats a gopher popper.

I have forwarded this thread to Santa. Tis the season.

I like how you are thinking Poppa! We have energy limits for Bison, calibre limits for big game, and used to have cartridge limits; straight walled cases under a certain length - but I don't think this has been much of an issue in the last 30 years or so. In fact I believe the original reason for the length rule was to address low powered handgun cartridges such as 32-20, 25-20, etc. that made the calibre minimum, but were not well suited to big game hunting.

You could create a list of acceptable cartridges, but I don't think it would be workable. Easier to say ">.40 (10mm), X ft/lbs of energy at the muzzle Bullet weight x Velocity = minimum energy requirement.

[Albertacoyotecaller]

I agree with Randy, we need to stick together.

We need to have a united voice. I too don't care what you use to hunt with, you are a fellow hunter in my books. We are the enemy out there!!!!

As well as individuals, we need to have the F&W clubs out there writing letters of support for stuff like this to move.

Greg

[rwm1273]

I like the idea of handgun hunting for small game like chickens, but not big game. It is not that I don't think that big game can't be taken with a pistol, or that there aren't good shots out there with a pistol. The problem I see hunting big game is that the average joe may not be consistent enough with a pistol, may take longer than optimum shots when they see that big buck, and then there are the idiots. With small game like chickens, you can often get pretty close, and the animal is easily killed with a .22. I would like to be able to carry a .22 pistol on my hip for chickens, while I have my big rifle on my shoulder for big game.

[elkhunter11]

The problem I see hunting big game is that the average joe may not be consistent enough with a pistol, may take longer than optimum shots when they see that big buck, and then there are the idiots.

The very same things apply to many people that hunt with rifles.

[huntinstuff]

Originally Posted by elkhunter11

The very same things apply to many people that hunt with rifles.

Or drive cars, or have children, or obtain credit cards etc etc

People need to be self thinkers. The nanny state, riddled with regulations and limitations, is for society's idiots, not me.

[Scar270]

Originally Posted by huntinstuff

Or drive cars, or have children, or obtain credit cards etc etc

People need to be self thinkers. The nanny state, riddled with regulations and limitations, is for society's idiots, not me.

Halleluja

[tony d]

Well letter writing I will have to be, i wish everyone could just get united for once and hel;p us all out!! we can sort out the details later

[nanuk-O-dah-Nort]

Originally Posted by 762Russian

My own concern for it would be the people behind the trigger. Goal of the hunter is to take down an animal as quickly and clean as possible, and handguns, while deadly, can't produce the velocity of a long gun. Less velocity is less accuracy, and less stopping power coming out of the end of the barrel. What the heck does this mean??? Are you saying a 45/70 factory load is less accurate and has less stopping power than a 30-30?

Myself I would not want to see it used on large game because while you might be a crack shot and able to take the arse off a flea at 50 paces, the next guy down the line might be able to hit serving tray at 20, if it's a good day and he doesn't have the sun in his eyes. Rifles are stable, have better performance at uncertain ranges, and hit harder. I would suggest that anyone who takes the time and money to purchase handguns, jumps through all the hoops, is probably going to be a more effective hunter than the Yokel who buys his first rifle, a 300 Eargasplitzen Loudenboumer Magnum, and starts "Hunting" at 500 yds!

That said, I would like to see it allowed for small game. A .22LR revolver at hand when out Gophering would be great for popping the dumb buggers that stand up ten feet away. A .22LR hitting a grouse out of a rifle or a pistol won't have any demonstrable difference on such a small target. Game is game. they all deserve the respect of a clean humane kill.

Thinking on a bit more before I post, I actually can see handguns being used on bigger game, with certain rules; they would have to be demonstrably powerful enough, with the right bullet and charge, and the hunter needs to be aware that they are hunting in the same fashion as a bowhunter; getting as close as absolutely possible before taking the shot, and knowing when NOT to take the shot as well.I believe a handgun hunter would use her/his discretion when choosing an appropriate caliber/cartridge. Just like we would be unlikely to encounter a Moose hunter with a 38spl RIFLE!

Self defeating attitudes will change Nothing

[nanuk-O-dah-Nort]

Originally Posted by rwm1273

I like the idea of handgun hunting for small game like chickens, but not big game. It is not that I don't think that big game can't be taken with a pistol, or that there aren't good shots out there with a pistol. The problem I see hunting big game is that the average joe may not be consistent enough with a pistol, may take longer than optimum shots when they see that big buck, and then there are the idiots. With small game like chickens, you can often get pretty close, and the animal is easily killed with a .22. I would like to be able to carry a .22 pistol on my hip for chickens, while I have my big rifle on my shoulder for big game.

again.. self defeating

I would expect that handgun hunters would be better than the average deer hunter who, due to reading online forums and hunting mags that 600yd shots on deer are ethical and the norm for all hunters.

You can't legislate against stupidity.
Whether it is stupidity with a handgun or a rifle.

[rwm1273]

Ok, so if they permit handgun hunting, do people want it to be the same as the current hunting seasons, or treat them like the primitive weapon season, or open a specific season just for pistols? Will anyone with a RPAL be permitted to hunt with a pistol? Should there be extra licenses needed?

I am happy with a .22 on my hip for chickens. My big rifle for big game. I am not a bad pistol shot, and own many pistols in various calibers, but I know myself that I would be hard pressed to have a good kill shot past 20 or maybe 30M, unless I go out and get myself another pistol.

[Pudelpointer]

Originally Posted by rwm1273

Ok, so if they permit handgun hunting, do people want it to be the same as the current hunting seasons, or treat them like the primitive weapon season, or open a specific season just for pistols? Will anyone with a RPAL be permitted to hunt with a pistol? Should there be extra licenses needed?

I am happy with a .22 on my hip for chickens. My big rifle for big game. I am not a bad pistol shot, and own many pistols in various calibers, but I know myself that I would be hard pressed to have a good kill shot past 20 or maybe 30M, unless I go out and get myself another pistol.

See, you already know your limitation with the amount you have practiced and with the equipment you have.

Different equipment and skills will vary a pistols effective range from between 25 yards to 300 plus.

[rwm1273]

Originally Posted by Pudelpointer

See, you already know your limitation with the amount you have practiced and with the equipment you have.

Different equipment and skills will vary a pistols effective range from between 25 yards to 300 plus.

Perhaps, but I still would prefer to shoot big game with a rifle. I feel it is more accurate, and therefore more likely to kill cleanly. Unless you are very close to the animal, the possibility of missing is substantially higher the shorter the length of barrel.

Perhaps if you wanted to hunt with a pistol, you need to have a special permit. I understand that in some other countries you need to have a marksmanship test before you are permitted to get a gun. Perhaps some specialized testing is needed to hunt with a pistol. May be a way to quiet the anti gun groups, because the license would not be issued to just anyone who can legally have a RPAL.

[hillbillyreefer]

Originally Posted by rwm1273

Perhaps, but I still would prefer to shoot big game with a rifle. I feel it is more accurate, and therefore more likely to kill cleanly. Unless you are very close to the animal, the possibility of missing is substantially higher the shorter the length of barrel.

Perhaps if you wanted to hunt with a pistol, you need to have a special permit. I understand that in some other countries you need to have a marksmanship test before you are permitted to get a gun. Perhaps some specialized testing is needed to hunt with a pistol. May be a way to quiet the anti gun groups, because the license would not be issued to just anyone who can legally have a RPAL.

There is no reason to appease the antis, by definition they are against all we do. Screw 'em!

We need solidarity. If you don't want to use a handgun to hunt, don't, but do not impinge on my ability to do so.

Your special license scenario can also be turned around and used against rifle and shotgun shooters. Drop it, just because a freedom is regained doesn't mean the government needs to be a bigger pain in the ***** to return for granting those freedoms.

[Scar270]

Exactly. I dont think handgun hunters need any further restrictions then rifle hunters. We all should be choosing our firearms and shots based on our own abilities. You cant legislate against those who take unethical shots. Just go ask a local butcher how many rifle killed deer come in with bullet holes in poor locations.

Also at least in rifles, often the small caliber guys do a much better job because they can shoot their guns better. The guy who can place a 243 bullet in the heart at 100 yards every time is going to do better then the guy who shoots em in the hind end with a 460 weatherby. Let people choose what tools they want.

If we were ever to want to have some sort of punishment for poor choices, it should be like africa, where wounded game uses your tag up. Give people more incentive to make their shots count, and use guns that will do the job.

[Grizzly Adams]

Originally Posted by philthygeezer

I think petitioning for a test case would be best. Make it for rimfire single shots and single action revolvers with a barrel length of over six inches and must be worn outside coat on holster or cross draw sling. Transport to and from WMU must be as per other restricteds, and an ATT must be granted for each hunting trip.

Rimfire prevents any rhetoric about dirty Harry or the wild west from the gun control idiots. No yakking about powerful concealed handguns on twitter.

What do you think?

We seem to have this same discussion, same time, every year and I've seen you get quite heated about it. Federal Criminal Code laws override Provincial and that's where the change would have to come from. Bummer to be out with your 1200. rig, cause the Province says you may and some RCMP seizes it and throws you in the clink. I'd be happy just to be able to pack a handgun to discourage bears.

Quote should actually have been Duffy's.

Grizz

[densa44]

I have a colt navy reproduction in cap and ball. Can I hunt with that until the law changes?

Is it an antique? It packs a wallop too.

[Redfrog]

Isn't it strange that the hunter who is the problem or concern is always the other guy. The average Joe? I'd be responsible but there are all these whack adoodles out there just waiting for it to be legal to hunt with a handgun. If only they were responsible like me.
Yep even the ones who have been hunting all their lives. I only know one other person who as conscientious as me and my mom doesn't hunt.

People need to realize they are the other guy.

[Scar270]

Originally Posted by Grizzly Adams

We seem to have this same discussion, same time, every year and I've seen you get quite heated about it. Federal Criminal Code laws override Provincial and that's where the change would have to come from. Bummer to be out with your 1200. rig, cause the Province says you may and some RCMP seizes it and throws you in the clink. I'd be happy just to be able to pack a handgun to discourage bears.

Quote should actually have been Duffy's.

Grizz

The point is to get provincial law changed so we can lobby the federal law. Right now if you lobby the feds they say your province won't allow it anyway.

Get the provincial rules out of the way, and fighting the federal ones becomes easier. That is the point of this entire exercise.

[Scar270]

Originally Posted by densa44

I have a colt navy reproduction in cap and ball. Can I hunt with that until the law changes?

Is it an antique? It packs a wallop too.

If it's a reproduction, then no, it's a restricted firearm.

Definition of antiques:

Handguns:

* manufactured before 1898 that can discharge only rim-fire cartridges, other than 22 Calibre Short, 22 Calibre Long or 22 Calibre Long Rifle cartridges;
* manufactured before 1898 that can discharge centre-fire cartridges, other than a handgun designed or adapted to discharge 32 Short Colt, 32 Long Colt, 32 Smith and Wesson, 32 Smith and Wesson Long, 32-20 Winchester, 38 Smith and Wesson; 38 Short Colt, 38 Long Colt, 38-40 Winchester, 44-40 Winchester, or 45 Colt cartridges

[gitrdun]

So, I'll say what I gotta say knowing full well that this'll start a chit show, but I couldn't careless. Let me start by saying that I have a lot of guns, rifles, shotguns, enough to overfill my safe to over abundance, so that some are hung on the wall with trigger locks of course. I have an RPAL and own a pistol. I fully am in support on the LGR's abolishiment and support Randy's plight....to a point. Now for the hardcore facts:

There is no way that I'll ever support handgun hunting. Be it that you may want to even pack a .22LR pistol for chickens or what have you. I've been witness to so many idiots that pack long guns that I couldn't possibly imagine more of these morons packing a side arm to boot. I've heard your plight that "we" should stand united. SORRY, but some of the idiots that I've seen out in the woods, plains, or prairies, in spite of the fact that "they" had a hunting license or a PAL, I still so not stand "united" with them. Simply because of the fact that we on this forum have a common interest, doesnt' mean that I will stand "united" with you. You have a lot more to do to earn "that" privilege as far as I'm concerned. And "yes" I'm a tree hugger, I love trees, makes for a great place to live.

[Scar270]

So you are for punishing everyone over the behavior of a few? How enightened. How about reporting the yahoos instead of turning a blind eye, and leaving those of us who are responsible to hunt as we see fit? Or is that authoritarian enough for you?

[gitrdun]

How's about the fact that I do not punish others, but instead learning that I'm not willing to give you my support as I feel that your stand is not within my standards and that I'm entitled to my own believes and opinions? huh?

And how many yahoos have you reported? I can recall several from which one I have been rewarded for with cash. So tell me about how many you've reported and I'll exchange facts with you. I've reported many, "report a poacher" is on speed dial on my phone.

[gitrdun]

Hey Scar270...I do not support handgun hunting, now nor never. If if came to a vote, mine would be a huge "no way" whether it hurts huntinstuff's feelings or not (whom I have a great deal of respect for BTW) . There, now you know where I stand....flame away.

[Scar270]

You are punishing me if you wont let me hunt with a handgun because you feel someone may abuse the right. You may not agree with handgun hunting, but when you tell me I can't simply because you disagree with me, that is anti freedom. How would you like it if someone made the exact same argument and substitued rifles where you have handguns?

I dont ever intend to hunt with a crossbow, yet I support their use, and their use in bow season, and I am a bow hunter.

Oh and I have both report a poacher and the local wardens cell in my phone.

[duffy4]

Originally Posted by gitrdun

Hey Scar270...I do not support handgun hunting, now nor never. If if came to a vote, mine would be a huge "no way" whether it hurts huntinstuff's feelings or not (whom I have a great deal of respect for BTW) . There, now you know where I stand....flame away.

Funny some family are here for Christmas and we were just discussing the definition of a "troll" and here I see one.

[gitrdun]

Originally Posted by Scar270

You are punishing me if you wont let me hunt with a handgun because you feel someone may abuse the right. You may not agree with handgun hunting, but when you tell me I can't simply because you disagree with me, that is anti freedom. How would you like it if someone made the exact same argument and substitued rifles where you have handguns?

I dont ever intend to hunt with a crossbow, yet I support their use, and their use in bow season, and I am a bow hunter.

Oh and I have both report a poacher and the local wardens cell in my phone.

No, I'm not punishing you.
Yes, many will abuse the right.
Yes, I disagree with you
I'm am all for freedom, not anarchy.

And remember that I have mentioned that I hold an RPAL and own a handgun. So on many levels, we're on the same page. Let me ask you...why is it that you feel that handgun hunting is so important to you.? Is the 7lb, 24" barreled, scoped rifle slung across your shoulder not sufficient enough to do the intended job? Does the .357 Magnum Revolver on your hip make you feel like Billy the Kid? Do you not feel that having elected a Conservative majority government whom have promised to abolish the LGR good enough for you at a time when they are still going through the parlimentary process to abolish it good enough. Do you not realize that if you wish to build on something that you build it up stone by stone. Like yourself, I want to gain a lot more rights to transport my handgun, but you're going about it the wrong way. First you get people to come on your side with honey, not force. What you're asking for is way too much for most politicians to comprehend all at once. And besides, you're still gonna have to deal with the likes of ME who believe that your need to hunt with handguns is nothing more than a bully pressure to obtain a lesser thing. I've been hunting this land for 40 years (ages me), and I've seen the exponential growth of the idiotic moron, careless hunters, and new immigrants who've now got a free for all. Guys who should even be let out with a rubber band gun, never mind a hand gun. So. NO, I will never concede to hand gun hunting, in spite of the fact that I am a proud hand gun owner. As a matter of fact, if it were a political issue, I will even say that I'll stand against it. There would simply be too many hoops to jump through to make a specific handgun owner legal and responsible to go afield when you have to separate that same person from all the gangbangers out there. No way, not on my watch.

[260 Rem]

Like it or not, there is a line between "reasonable" and "unreasonable" and the application of common sense. Unfortunately, when we mix these ideas with human behavior, things get a bit complicated. I generally would not support the use of handguns for taking big game, simply, because for the most part, they do not have sufficient power for an "ethical" kill. Argue all you want about how powerfull and accurate your tool is, and sure enough, somebody will make the case that they should be permitted to use "throwning stars" or poison darts. I share the dream of being able to carry a handgun under certain circumstances and in certain areas.
For small game like gophers and grouse where the bullet weight/game ratio is 1:100, maybe we can rationnalize ethical kills?
IMO what ever projectile is used, it should be powerfull enough to pass completely through the animal from side to side.

[rwm1273]

Originally Posted by Scar270

You are punishing me if you wont let me hunt with a handgun because you feel someone may abuse the right. You may not agree with handgun hunting, but when you tell me I can't simply because you disagree with me, that is anti freedom. How would you like it if someone made the exact same argument and substitued rifles where you have handguns?

I dont ever intend to hunt with a crossbow, yet I support their use, and their use in bow season, and I am a bow hunter.

Oh and I have both report a poacher and the local wardens cell in my phone.

I agree with gitrdun to a point. I do not think that a total ban on hand gun hunting is warranted, but I too agree that there are some idiots out there that will kill others, and possibly themselves. I do not want to be in bush with some of these idiots with a rifle, yet alone a pistol.

For my safety, I would like to see some kind of testing and licensing before you can hunt with a pistol. It is not to take away from the other guy, but to protect me and my son. We have too many idiots who make a "good sound shot" and see nothing wrong with that. Now imagine they are walking with a pistol in hand waving it around, all hyped up on adrenaline with buck fever.

I have a friend who is a crack shot at the range. Put him in front of a deer, and he couldn't hit it if it was 20 feet away. There are lots of people who just can't focus when they have a deer in their sights. Now give them a pistol that is possibly just marginal to make a clean kill. I think this is just bad news.

Redfrog, yes I may be "the other guy", but I know my limitations, and that makes all the difference.

[gitrdun]

Originally Posted by duffy4

Funny some family are here for Christmas and we were just discussing the definition of a "troll" and here I see one.

While YOU're on the topic of trolling, this discussion is about handgun hunting. Did you miss something duffus4?

[gitrdun]

Originally Posted by rwm1273

I agree with gitrdun to a point. I do not think that a total ban on hand gun hunting is warranted, but I too agree that there are some idiots out there that will kill others, and possibly themselves. I do not want to be in bush with some of these idiots with a rifle, yet alone a pistol.

For my safety, I would like to see some kind of testing and licensing before you can hunt with a pistol. It is not to take away from the other guy, but to protect me and my son. We have too many idiots who make a "good sound shot" and see nothing wrong with that. Now imagine they are walking with a pistol in hand waving it around, all hyped up on adrenaline with buck fever.

I have a friend who is a crack shot at the range. Put him in front of a deer, and he couldn't hit it if it was 20 feet away. There are lots of people who just can't focus when they have a deer in their sights. Now give them a pistol that is possibly just marginal to make a clean kill. I think this is just bad news.

Redfrog, yes I may be "the other guy", but I know my limitations, and that makes all the difference.

Thanks for your partial support rmw. But, most already bitvch and complain about how we are over governed. So throw hand gun profiecency into the pot. Yet more to do for already overworked and understaffed F&G officers, or whomever would bare the responsibility. I can't believe the mayhem that it would cause, excuses for the gangbangers or the gun toting idiots out there. I've been scoped once this year and once last year by clowns that were allowed to carry long guns and were deemed "responsible" enough by the mere fact that they hold a PAL. The implications of those out there with handguns scare the crap outta me. As I said, not on my watch.