Liberals want Handgun Ban

[Jarnhamar]

I like chris rocks idea.
Make bullets cost $5000. If someone gets shot you KNOW they deserved it.
No stray bullets either.

 

[Michael Dorosh]

I like chris rocks idea.
Make bullets cost $5000. If someone gets shot you KNOW they deserved it.
No stray bullets either.

One more expensive thing for criminals to steal, that is all that that would mean...

 

[TCBF]

"Make bullets cost $5000."

- Never mind 10 mm Auto, have you priced .455 Colt lately?

Tom

 

[Laps]

Wow....  Amazing how things get after you started a thread on such a topic. 

In my first post on the subject, I tried to keep it to fact as much as possible, whitout putting too much emotions into it.  My point was mostly: I am a soldier, I shoot less than 50 rounds a year at work due to: budget cuts, lack of time, lack of training, etc...  I bought firearms of my own, not to build an armoury at my place, but so I can continue my training where the military left me.

Now, they propose to take my "training aid" away from me.  The same governement that caused the military to make weapon handling difficult due to constraints want to take away my pistols.  Pistols I purchased because I felt unprepared for military duties...

All of you guys (and girls) that replied in this thread, pointing out that this was a non-sense need to do more than keep these words on that forum.  As I previously mentionned, I am preparing a letter that I will send to my MP (actually, MPs: both where I enrolled and where I am currently serving), asking them to really consider the pros and cons of such a proposal, irregardless of the elections' outcome.  I might be a military member, supposed to support whoever is the government, but I am also a Canadian citizen, a tax payer that will be voting in the new year.  I ask you to also consider doing the same.  Spread the word around if you are even remotly opposed to such a proposition, because you know what?  If this becomes real and handguns are indeed banned, then it will be way too late to try to change things!

My $0.02 (and cry for support...)

 

[TCBF]

www.canadiangunnutz.com

Laps, it IS funny how the Tac Hel community always seems to provide us with new shooters.

;D

Try the above link for all info, as well as the CSSF  www.cdnshootingsports.org

and the NFA  www.nfa.ca

Lots of letter writing going on, the most prolific and effective writer probably being a guy named Bruce N. Mills in Ontario.  He encourages people to use his points, and ends every sitrep on the Canadian Firearms Digest,

teapot.usask.ca/cdn-firearms/Faq/cfd-faq1

with the guilt inspiring question "Have you written a letter today?"

I wrote TWO letters today (for once) - how about you guys?

Tom

 

[Gunnerlove]

Sigh, I am very disappointed by this announcement. I was in fact hoping that they would ban cars to prevent the accidents caused by stolen vehicles.

I live on the west coast and until the RCMP gets their collective sh*t together and stops the "Angels" from bringing in guns and coke in by the container load , we are going to continue to have these problems.

Oh right just a club, I forgot.

 

[FastEddy]

And when three perps invade your home, take your 357 out of your hands, find it conveniently loaded, and then empty it into you, what exactly will you do then besides bleed a little bit before breathing your last?   Or God forbid your kids (or their friends) decide to play with daddy's gun...

Safe storage reasons are in place for a reason.   Get an alarm system and a gun safe.

Well Micheal, maybe you should stick to things you are more familiar with. I have three fire arms strategically placed and built in around my residence. All with a hidden quick release access. There are no children residing at my residence and any visiting guests with their children could not possibly locate these weapons let alone release them.

As for three Perps disarming me, that is a possibility, but only after I seriously wounded one or more. And by the way, do you think they have invaded/burglarized my home to Chat and have a cup of tea. As for being a victim of my own weapon or theirs. that is a distinct possibility, but I'd rather go down fighting as it probally going to happen anyway if they are discovered. (dead victims/witnesses tell no tales).

I've found that dealing with this Scum that passiveness & pleading only encourages more rage and escalation of violence in the attackers, whereas armed resistance produces escape from injury and flight.

Yes I have a good alarm system, but my damn cat decides to play king of the jungle in the wee hours and occasionally trips a motion detector, much to the disdain of my neighbors.

Yes people can safely protect them selves, if they take the time and effort to do so. But they can't if the Government takes away what few tools they have. If the only solution is to turn your home into a armed camp, I don't know, but I feel much safer.

One sure way of reducing armed violent crimes, that any person found guilty of a crime using a dangerous weapon or in possession of such a weapon, would receive a  mandatory sentence of 40 years without chance of parole and such sentence could not be appealed. Sounds harsh so is shooting and killing a 19yr old student working partime at a 7/11. Or just attemping to.

 

[larry Strong]

How many of the "legally" owned handguns in Canada were;

a.  Stolen
b.  Used in a crime 

 

[TCBF]

We don't know Larry, because they don't keep the stats. 

Does it matter?

Tom

 

[FastEddy]

"Agreed.Sadly in Canada you can't shoot someone whos breaking into your house with the intention of stealing from you, raping you or murdering you."

- Well, don't let me discourage you from not saving your own life.   I guess the gene pool really is self chlorinating.

This is my letter to the EJ:

letters@thejournal.canwest.com  
Subject (no subject)

          Show additional options

Dear Sir,

This is "Hillbilly Logic": Peggy-Sue is asking Elly-May why
she has a black eye and a fat lip - again.   Elly-May says
that her boyfriend, Billy-Joe-Jim-Bob, beats her daily.
Peggy sue asks her why she doesn't leave him and get a new
boyfriend. Elly-May says "Well, any new boyfriend I get
might beat me too."
Thats Hillbilly Logic - that's Liberal voters.

And my letter to the ESun:


mailbag@edmsun.com  
Subject Ltr to the Editor

          Show additional options

Sir,

Edmonton Police Association President Peter Ratcliff stated
"Every handgun that killed a person started out legally
somewhere."
Okay, and every prostitute started out as a virgin. And
every cop charged under the police act started out as a good
cop. We could go on. What exactly is his point?

Tom

Tom, sometime your Old Man from the Mountain off the cuff remarks, leaves me scratching my head. But the above two letters, I don't think anybody could have said it better.

Keep em coming and have a nice day.

 

[larry Strong]

Well I don't know if it really matter's in the big scheme of things. But I was interested to see what the figures where as they are the crux of PM's reasoning. You would think someone would have the numbers

 

[Mike Bobbitt]

FastEddy,

Sounds like quite a setup you have there! I ask this not to stir the pot, but out of genuine interest... With that level of protection in your home, what do you do when you venture out to significantly more dangerous venues? (I.E. Out walking around town at night.) Do you limit your activities based on a fear of being victimized or bring the arsenal along for some fresh air? Or just accept the increased risk?

If you've accepted that your house is a dangerous place (in the event of a home invasion) it would follow that the outside world (where no "invasion" is required) would be much more risky.

 

[Dirt Digger]

Actually the 18 inch maglite beside the bed is much more comforting,.....cause then I get to turn it around, turn it on and watch the intruder bleed profusely.

Ahh yes, D-cell justice.  ;D

 

[Michael Dorosh]

FastEddy,

Sounds like quite a setup you have there! I ask this not to stir the pot, but out of genuine interest... With that level of protection in your home, what do you do when you venture out to significantly more dangerous venues? (I.E. Out walking around town at night.) Do you limit your activities based on a fear of being victimized or bring the arsenal along for some fresh air? Or just accept the increased risk?

If you've accepted that your house is a dangerous place (in the event of a home invasion) it would follow that the outside world (where no "invasion" is required) would be much more risky.

How many people in Canada have actually been killed in a home-invasion of their own home by a total stranger?  Murder-suicide by an ex, a drunken fight, a whacko roommate, sure - but how many thugs have broken into somebody's home just to kill them?  I'm not going to live my life in fear of the next Charles Manson.  Defending one's property sounds all noble and all, but killing someone who broke in to look for a few bucks is murder as far as the law is concerned.  Not that I have much sympathy for housebreakers and thieves, but the guy who plugs him will have to live with it the rest of his life.  And, more importantly  maybe, his family.

 

[Eland]

I'm going to wade in with my two cents here (well, maybe 1.5 cents before GST/PST). Gun bans of the type proposed by the Liberals do not work. Look at the experience of other countries/jursidictions:

Great Britain: Private ownership of handguns banned; ownership of long guns severely proscribed. Result: Crime, particularly violent crime, has increased 50% since the ban took place.

Australia: Most types of long guns (other than bolt-action rifles and single-shot or double-barreled shotguns) prohibited. Handguns similarly prohibited. Result: Massive increase in violent and gun-related crime.

New Zealand: Introduced gun registration system in 1983. Abandoned due to severe cost overruns and overall ineffectiveness in meeting its goals. General gun laws are similar to those found in Australia and other Commonwealth countries.

New York State (USA): In New York City, handgun bans have been in place for several decades now. Result: No appreciable decrease in gun-related crime, particularly those committed with handguns.

Washington, DC (USA): Same experience as New York City.

There is no question that the proposed Liberal gun ban is just cheap electioneering designed to capture votes in the 905 and 416 area codes (aka the GTA), and thereby exploit Tory weakness in this area. The Liberals know that thanks to their ill-starred gun registry, Western Canada is a write-off. So is Quebec, for other reasons. That leaves Ontario, BC and Atlantic Canada as the remaining provinces where the Liberal party has good prospects.

In short, besides pandering to a bunch of scared people in the GTA who can't think the issue through critically, all the Liberals are really doing is shoring up the redoubt.

As radio talk-show Charles Adler correctly points out, the Liberals are trying to bait the Tories into a response. They hope that response will paint the Tories as 'scary, pro-gun rednecks'. Wisely, the Tories haven't risen to take the bait.

I think something else is happening here, too. I think the Liberals have deliberately thrown a controversial policy out there in the public forum in an effort to keep voters' focus on the Liberal party, for better or worse.

 

[Infanteer]

Well thank goodness someone has the common sense to tell the Liberals how stupid their plan is.  Ralph Klein for Prime Minister!

http://www.cbc.ca/story/canadavotes2006/national/2005/12/10/hanguns-alberta051210.html

Alberta will reject proposed handgun ban: Klein
Last Updated Sat, 10 Dec 2005 10:36:31 EST
CBC News
Alberta Premier Ralph Klein said his government will opt out of any plan to ban handguns.

On Thursday, Liberal Leader Paul Martin announced he would immediately introduce a handgun ban, offering narrowly defined exemptions for target shooters and allowing collectors time to sell or dispose of their weapons.

Collectors will have to sell or surrender their weapons over five years or become certified as target shooters. Martin said provinces could also opt out of the proposal.

Klein said Martin is engaged in political grandstanding and that Alberta would not participate in the plan. Banning handguns won't reduce gun crime, he added.

"To me the solution is for courts to get really, really tough on people who use handguns illegally," Klein told reporters on Friday. "That's the solution. It's not to ban them... I can ban anything. I can ban tape recorders by law. It's not going to stop you from using them,"

Klein said criminals will always find a way to get guns, whether or not those weapons are legal.

He said Alberta feels the same way about a ban as it does about the federal gun registry â “ that it will only hit law-abiding citizens, not criminals

He said Edmonton has had more than 30 murders this year and existing legislation to control weapons hasn't stopped the problem.

"Many of them have involved handguns. I'm sure that those handguns weren't registered and I'm sure that even with a ban, the bad guys will find a way to get their hands on a handgun."

 

[Slim]

Anyone  moving to alberta?

 

[Kat Stevens]

God bless ya, Ralphie.  Don't EVER leave us

 

[FastEddy]

FastEddy,

Sounds like quite a setup you have there! I ask this not to stir the pot, but out of genuine interest... With that level of protection in your home, what do you do when you venture out to significantly more dangerous venues? (I.E. Out walking around town at night.) Do you limit your activities based on a fear of being victimized or bring the arsenal along for some fresh air? Or just accept the increased risk?

If you've accepted that your house is a dangerous place (in the event of a home invasion) it would follow that the outside world (where no "invasion" is required) would be much more risky.

Not at all Mike, First of all, I do not consider my residence a dangerous place due to the possibility of a Home Invasion. From the point of view of a Criminal, most certainly, but that is by design and intent.

As for my normal public activities, they are conducted much like anyone else going about their lives. However, with one advantage, I can see sh?t coming a block away, due to thirty years on the streets. And like then, I am always prepared for it.  Unlike the general public, I am prepared to act on it.

With regard to Home Invasion vs Crime on the Street, bear this in mind, "Home invasions/burglaries are conducted in Stelath, Seclusion, Usually in Darkness, No Witnesses,  Without public assistance and Surprise. Street crimes are usually carried out in Lit Areas, Possible Public Assistance, Possible Witnesses and with Some Warning or Indication. So tell me in your opinion, which scenario are you most vulnerable.

I am also licensed to carry a (38.cal Snub Nosed Detective's Special) I've always preferred revolvers to pistols.

With regard to all the critics of Firearms and/or those that possess or carry them, If I were you, I'd be more concerned and worried about my Love ones and Children being killed by a Drunken Neighbor in his car than being shot by his Firearms.

 

[1feral1]

I am also licensed to carry a (38.cal Snub Nosed Detective's Special) I've always preferred revolvers to pistols.

I did not know the CF had 2in bbl models (even on the CF 2004 weapons catalogue posters), but just old Colt 4" .38 spl Police Positives, thats what they had (SIU etc) back in 91 anyways.

I know, I had two pointed at my face on 21 Apr 91, before I was rudly handcuffed and made a prisinor in my own home. That was in Regina, 15 Wg MPs, and another story all together. Thats because of an uneducated 15 Wg MOC 421, who thought one could not LEGALLY possess T series Inglis 9mms, CA AK's and FN C1A1 rifles. From that day on, my whole prospective on police changed forever.

Even today, after all these years that wound is still close to the surface,and my respect for the Regina Police (competance wise anyways) is on a level of 2/10.

BTW, it took me 6 wks to get all my property back, some of it damaged, but at least teh MPs appologised for being led astray by the city police.

nuff said,

Wes