My Opinion on Carrying Handguns

[KevGuy]

This is my opinion. I’ve kept it to myself for years but today I’m gonna put it out there.

I do not want open or concealed carry in cities and or urban areas. Walking around town with your glock 22 or your S&W M&P 9mm is not required here in a Canada.

However, I would like to see open wilderness carry for handguns. Examples of this are backwoods camping, quad trips into the woods, hunting, etc. I’m sure you get my drift. I heard that people who run trap lines are now allowed to carry a handgun?

Like I said, my opinion.

[lyallpeder]

Originally Posted by KevGuy

This is my opinion. I’ve kept it to myself for years but today I’m gonna put it out there.

I do not want open or concealed carry in cities and or urban areas. Walking around town with your glock 22 or your S&W M&P 9mm is not required here in a Canada.

However, I would like to see open wilderness carry for handguns. Examples of this are backwoods camping, quad trips into the woods, hunting, etc. I’m sure you get my drift. I heard that people who run trap lines are now allowed to carry a handgun?

Like I said, my opinion.

Your free to have your opinion.

I think some city folks have a higher risk walking down the street or to the local Safeway than some fly fishermen have hiking down a trail. Why should only the fly fishermen get to protect themselves?

My opinion.

[tri777]

100% Pro- concealed carry for this one.

[lyallpeder]

Originally Posted by lyallpeder

you’re (I mean) free to have your opinion.

I think some city folks have a higher risk walking down the street or to the local Safeway than some fly fishermen have hiking down a trail. Why should only the fly fishermen get to protect themselves?

My opinion.

.

[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.

[6.5 shooter]

Originally Posted by lyallpeder

Your free to have your opinion.

I think some city folks have a higher risk walking down the street or to the local Safeway than some fly fishermen have hiking down a trail. Why should only the fly fishermen get to protect themselves?

My opinion.

My thought as well.
Bear spray at a bear minimum should be allowed to be carried...everywhere.

[Dewey Cox]

We can't be trusted with pistols.
We're such children.

[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.

[58thecat]

Originally Posted by tri777

100% Pro- concealed carry for this one.

Yup....just like a folder etc....don't have to advertise to the world.

[58thecat]

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.

You choose not too I would like to have all options made available and ready to use from a handgun, shotty, bear spray and a hand grenade.....not in that order....

[obsessed1]

Originally Posted by tri777

100% Pro- concealed carry for this one.

Yup

[WhiteTailAB]

And yet when you walk around town you're passing people who carry every day. The difference is they don't own that gun legally.

[Slash8]

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.

Aaaaaand that pretty much sums it up for me to.

[Pathfinder76]

I want it my way. No one else matters.

Sounds about right now days.

[cody j]

Let’s separate and we can all carry in the bush, or go gopher hunting or target shooting in the back 40 with handguns

[260 Rem]

I’ve read the Clairvoyant / Clintonside / Sasquatch threads ... I don’t want anybody carrying

[Positrac]

Bahahaha! This thread should be in the fishing section...

[Dewey Cox]

The argument against it is if everyone is packing, road rage incidents will all end in shootings.
Well, it is perfectly legal to have a shotgun under the seat of your truck, yet no one is being shot.
I really think that if it was allowed, very few people would carry on a regular basis. Probably everyone who is gung ho for it would carry to start, but after a few months of not having any reason to shoot anyone, they'd stop.

[ghostguy6]

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.

100% agree. There should at least be an option for those that wish too carry to defend the lives of themselves and their family. I think this would actually reduce crime in the long run. I imagine most violent crimes would not be commited if there was the possibility anyone could pull a concealed firearm at any time in the legal defense of others. Our criminals have nothing to fear the way it is now.

[260 Rem]

Early in WW 2, the US Army started arming non-combat troops and officers with M1 Carbines in the place of handguns because they found without a lot of training, pistols were generally ineffective defensive tools. The M1 is sufficiently light/accurate and packs a punch. Given that many of these small/ handy types of firearms are manufactured with barrels long enough to be non-restricted ... they can be legally be “carried” almost any public place in Canada. While waiting for the law to change, why not pack a M1 carbine / Mares Leg / etc?

[jef612]

Originally Posted by 260 Rem

I’ve read the Clairvoyant / Clintonside / Sasquatch threads ... I don’t want anybody carrying

That's awesome. Made me laugh this afternoon

[Mulehahn]

I have no objection to concealed carry but I personally wouldn't. If so e one goes through the training have at 'er. But will never happen. That being said I think we should be able to discharge a restricted firearm anywhere I can discharge a non restricted. Be fun to go camling and pack a .22 pistol to take a couple of grouse for the pot.

[Dubious]

Pro open and concealed carry you should also be allowed auto opening knifes and drinking/smoking in public.

[Red Bullets]

I hope I am long dead before everyone is wearing sidearms in Canada. If I wore a sidearm in public I'd be outta bullets pretty quick with the encounters of all the idjuts that need ventilation holes installed.

[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.

[CaberTosser]

Originally Posted by 260 Rem

Early in WW 2, the US Army started arming non-combat troops and officers with M1 Carbines in the place of handguns because they found without a lot of training, pistols were generally ineffective defensive tools. The M1 is sufficiently light/accurate and packs a punch. Given that many of these small/ handy types of firearms are manufactured with barrels long enough to be non-restricted ... they can be legally be “carried” almost any public place in Canada. While waiting for the law to change, why not pack a M1 carbine / Mares Leg / etc?

A military/ war setting has vastly different parameters than in peacetime as your attackers are generally shooting at you with significantly different hardware from further range than encountered in a Toronto drive-by shooting or Vancouver armed robbery/ Starbucks drive-through execution.

[Red Bullets]

Originally Posted by CaberTosser

A military/ war setting has vastly different parameters than in peacetime as your attackers are generally shooting at you with significantly different hardware from further range than encountered in a Toronto drive-by shooting or Vancouver armed robbery/ Starbucks drive-through execution.

Definitely different motives from wartime to criminal defense but I am wondering how a holstered sidearm is going to protect a person in a drive by or drive through shooting. Probably no time to react. Sort of like having your bear spray holstered while walking through the blue berry patch a grizzly is sitting in.

[CaberTosser]

Originally Posted by Red Bullets

Definitely different motives from wartime to criminal defense but I am wondering how a holstered sidearm is going to protect a person in a drive by or drive through shooting. Probably no time to react. Sort of like having your bear spray holstered while walking through the blue berry patch a grizzly is sitting in.

One has to keep in mind that a victim of a drive-by is more often than not going to be a criminal themselves. I could care less if those cretins defend themselves from rival gangs or not, my only concern being any innocents caught in the crossfire. When I referenced a drive-thru shooting that was recalling the Hells Angel murdered recently in the lower mainland of BC while sitting in his Dodge Viper in a Starbucks drive-thru (also no tears shed there).

Compared to the worries the average Canadian gangster has where people are intent on murdering them rather than robbing them, I think the average Canadian has far different self-defence concerns. Meth heads in rural B&E settings being one instance, urban robbers and rapists, etc. Aggressive looking gangsters are not going to be approached by your typical scumbag looking for an easy target of opportunity. I guess I was a little off-tangent in referencing the most recent shooting examples that came to mind when those are not the type one wants to use when advocating for self-defence.

[260 Rem]

Originally Posted by CaberTosser

A military/ war setting has vastly different parameters than in peacetime as your attackers are generally shooting at you with significantly different hardware from further range than encountered in a Toronto drive-by shooting or Vancouver armed robbery/ Starbucks drive-through execution.

The M1 Carbine was initially issued to “cooks”, truck drivers etc so they could defend themselves at very short range...in the event they were overrun. Initially, they were armed with colt 1911’s but (generally) couldn’t shoot effectively at very short range ... which the handy little M1 overcame. Officers were issued the M1 because it was taking too much time to get them proficient with the pistol. Must have been pretty effective.
Highly unlikely any pistol would be an effective defense or a deterrent against the scenarios mentioned.
Seems to me that most of those feeling the need to carry a firearm for self defense (two or four legged) would be best served by carrying a Carbine....completely legal ... no need for legislation.

[Tactical Lever]

Big city, or even little town, or even work camps are probably more dangerous than being outside, at least most of the time. People kill people in far higher numbers than animals do.

Everyone has the right to self defense, but yet carrying the most effective option is illegal. I'm pro carry. You might not feel the need to carry, but knowing it's legal is a strong demotivational tool for predatory behaviour. And the first time you "feel the need" might be the last time you get the chance.

I also believe in going armed in the bush, or at least having the option. Doing outdoors work will likely find the rifle far out of my reach when it's needed. Carrying a long gun, is unwieldy, and can be a little more hazardous depending on your activity. One that really stands out is how restrictive a gun boot can be on an ATV.