Go Back   Alberta Outdoorsmen Forum > Main Category > Guns & Ammo Discussion

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #271  
Old 11-22-2011, 02:33 PM
Lonnie Lonnie is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 1,709
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Scar270 View Post
Why not? Explosives used to be readily available at every hardware store. Dynamite used to be a common farm item.

I know people with the land to safely use bazooka's if they chose to do so. Strangely enough I don't think most large scale artillery is restricted. I'm reasonably certain you can own all the cannons you want. Hopefully someone can provide more details on that, I'm sure there are a couple cannon owners on here.

It all goes back to the fact, if your too dangerous to be trusted with a firearm, you are too dangerous to be allowed among the public unsupervised.

Edit: I'd love to have a panzer, unfortunately I don't think I'll ever have the money.
it is mind boggling on why the law abiding citizen cann't buy dynamite any more and they can show how to make a claymore mine on TV its a good thing that they used the proper chemical terms and not laymen terms or I'm sure the kids wuold be trying to copy it. (the show was NCIS) very easy to make. as for cannons don't own one but I'm pretty sure there is no restrictions on them as alot of my relatives have and use them.
Reply With Quote
  #272  
Old 11-22-2011, 04:53 PM
hillbillyreefer's Avatar
hillbillyreefer hillbillyreefer is offline
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 4,672
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lonnie View Post
full auto IMO are the most useless thing ever invented but they should not be prohibited. as they are no more dangerous than any other gun. maybe put them on the restricted list.and remove most if not all handguns from the restricted list and just keep them on a registered list. or better yet just scrap the handgun regestrey along with the long gun regestery.
Now your talking!!
__________________
Upset a Lefty, Fly a Drone!

"I find it interesting that some folk will pay to use a range, use a golf course, use a garage bay but think landowners should have to give permission for free. Do these same people think hookers should be treated like landowners?" pitw
Reply With Quote
  #273  
Old 11-22-2011, 06:41 PM
Lonnie Lonnie is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 1,709
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Okotokian View Post
So no limit on any sort of weapon at all? Interesting. So there is no point up the ladder at which you would ever say "Ok, people shouldn't be able to own THAT"... explosives? Bazookas? Anti-tank or anti-aircraft missles? chemical or biological weapons... Does the "I'm a law-abiding guy" principle hold right up the chain?
as for holding up the chain it should as most house holds do have enough chemicals that are poorly stored with absolutely no thought to safety that make them an extremely dangerous as an explosive or chemical weapon if some thing happens they call it an accident. if you caused it to happen with intention your a nut. because there is no reason that a person wuold need or want an explosive. as for a chemical that cuold be used as a weapon works great at getting rid of mice, bedbugs, and most other pests when in gas form one must be careful not to gas themself. this is found in a lot of liniments and in off the shelf meds to treat foot fungus. so whats the difference you can make it. but it was a lot easyer just to buy it and safer than making it.
Reply With Quote
  #274  
Old 11-22-2011, 07:44 PM
rugatika rugatika is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 17,790
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Okotokian View Post
Totally missses the point. It seems to be gospel here that any criminal of any ilk can easily get any weapon they want. But the simple fact of the matter is that the majority of criminals do not use prohibited weapons in crimes. Few criminals in Canada pack full auto uzi's. Would anyone like to dispute THAT fact.

Now if you accept the above, then my claim is that a partial reason for that is that they are rather hard to come by (not impossible, but hard). My contention is that if, say, an uzi was non-restricted and 50% of the membership of this board owned a couple, they would be incredibly easy for any criminal to obtain. They would be as common as .22's. They would be coming out the back of WSS like water. I'm sort of agog how some here think they wouldn't be used more by criminals if there were a few hundred thousand of them in the country.
Oko, hardly any criminals use full auto where they are available. (arizona, nevada I think to name a couple). They really are impractical weapons for general crime use. Why are you more scared of a criminal with an uzi than say a 30/06?? Frankly, if a criminal was out to get me, I'd say give him an uzi shooting 9mm instead of a freaking 30/06 high power rifle.

Actually a full auto rifle is probably one of the more useless weapons in crime, unless you are maybe planning on having a full on, all out shootout with an entire police department or something. IF there was any sort of criminal need for full auto's up here, trust me, they'd be here. Pot and drugs seem to flow pretty freely across the border, no reason why full auto's shouldn't if there was any kind of demand for them.

Probably the best use I can think of for a full auto rifle would be shooting up some pumpkins or something. Frankly there is no way I'd ever be able to afford to feed a full auto to bother getting much use out of one. You've been going to too many of those Calgary wine tastings.

PS: Good use of the word agog. Nice touch.
Reply With Quote
  #275  
Old 11-22-2011, 09:56 PM
1100winger 1100winger is offline
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Edmonton
Posts: 297
Default it does affect me

Quote:
Originally Posted by Scar270 View Post
Ok, just because you think they are reasonable, since they obviously don't effect you, doesn't mean they are. I'm tired of people being so willing to restrict other peoples freedoms because it doesn't effect them. We got a body armor ban because most people don't own it or care to. I don't have any or care to either, but I'm ****ed as hell that our government decided to ban it.

You are so selfish about your hunting season you are wanting to restrict someone elses enjoyment. I'm the guy that has been asking for handgun hunting with AFGA forever, I am not asking for a special season, I'd be quite happy to be out there hunting beside rifle hunters with my handgun. While on the topic, I have never seen rifle seasons being shrunk, they have added other seasons, but rifle seasons have never been shortened since I started hunting. In fact in the CWD zones the Season was lengthened by 20 days, more if you consider they have added Sunday hunting in that time too.

By the sort of logic you seem to use, I should lobby to ban semi auto's for bird hunting, after all I use a sxs or o/u and find two shots quite adequate for my uses, I don't have any need for a semi, or even a pump with the extra shots, so if they restricted them and you could only use them at the range should I support that, since it doesn't adversely effect me?

You better take a serious look at what your saying, and contemplate how long you would be hunting and shooting at all if everyone took the same sort of view you do. Remember all the whining about how we are deregistering high power SNIPER RIFLES, in case you missed it, that is your bolt action deer rifle.
I am handgun owner and love to shoot them - shot IPSC for years, poorly but still enjoyed it. Selfish - no we were asked for an opinion. You got it.
Re the handgun hunting - that is not a freedom; nor can we say it is my right to do so. I would be willing to accept it as long as the hunter would be able to pass a proficiency test; seems to be a reasonable idea. The notion that a hunter can hit what he is aiming at, recognizing that shooting a handgun accurately is a difficult thing to do. Much more so than my bolt gun. Sorry to have crawled so far down your craw - my comments were towards who gets to hunt during peak times - especially elk - its not a long gun hunter.
Reply With Quote
  #276  
Old 11-22-2011, 10:15 PM
Camp Cook Camp Cook is offline
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: BC
Posts: 217
Default

I have to ask other than purchasing a bow license do bow hunters need special training to hunt with a bow or do they just hunt with a bow?

Why should it be different for a handgun?
Reply With Quote
  #277  
Old 11-23-2011, 12:03 AM
Scar270 Scar270 is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 468
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 1100winger View Post
I am handgun owner and love to shoot them - shot IPSC for years, poorly but still enjoyed it. Selfish - no we were asked for an opinion. You got it.
Re the handgun hunting - that is not a freedom; nor can we say it is my right to do so. I would be willing to accept it as long as the hunter would be able to pass a proficiency test; seems to be a reasonable idea. The notion that a hunter can hit what he is aiming at, recognizing that shooting a handgun accurately is a difficult thing to do. Much more so than my bolt gun. Sorry to have crawled so far down your craw - my comments were towards who gets to hunt during peak times - especially elk - its not a long gun hunter.
If you want to get into proficiency tests, that is a slippery slope. I'd put myself with a handgun up against a lot of rifle hunters, if you are going to base it on that, they better be tested too then.

You are free to have an opinion, but expect to be called upon to back it up.

Excellent point Camp Cook. I've shot competitive archery and competitive handgun, and I know which one took more practice and which one I'm better at. If I had to live off my game, I'd take the handgun every time.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 07:53 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.5
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.