HANDGUNS!!!!.......YIKES!!!!....in canada

Colpy

Hall of Fame Member
Nov 5, 2005
21,887
848
113
70
Saint John, N.B.
Sorry i was told it meant, and i know you know this," SELF LOADING RIFLE"

:lol:

What the Brits call an "SLR" is a FN FAL made by Fabrique Nationale in Belgium........it was the standard issue 7.62 NATO rifle for both Great Britain and Canada (Here known as the C1) until the Brits adopted the Enfield and the Canadians adopted the C7 (M16 basically) both in 5.56mm

I own an FN FAL. I bought it years ago, before they were prohibited for civilian ownership. Now I'm not even allowed to take it to the range. Dumbass laws.

BTW, "long gun" refers to rifles and shotguns in Canadian parlance.
 

quandary121

Time Out
Apr 20, 2008
2,950
8
38
lincolnshire
uk.youtube.com
What the Brits call an "SLR" is a FN FAL made by Fabrique Nationale in Belgium........it was the standard issue 7.62 NATO rifle for both Great Britain and Canada (Here known as the C1) until the Brits adopted the Enfield and the Canadians adopted the C7 (M16 basically) both in 5.56mm

I own an FN FAL. I bought it years ago, before they were prohibited for civilian ownership. Now I'm not even allowed to take it to the range. Dumbass laws.

BTW, "long gun" refers to rifles and shotguns in Canadian parlance.

Thanks colpy your knowledge of guns is astounding.im not sure that it was a FN FAL does this have a 5 bullet magazine, as the one i shot did have...???
 

Nuggler

kind and gentle
Feb 27, 2006
11,596
141
63
Backwater, Ontario.
Understandable. :)
And I might mention that an SLR to me, means Single Lens Reflex. lol (That's a camera type).


Good one, LG :lol:......T'was what I was thinking also. Unless it was a 007 type with a gun in the camera sort of deal, eh. One nevah noes bout these here Brits........crafty devils.......:lol:
(no offence, Quandry)

...............................time for a lunch break......................
 

quandary121

Time Out
Apr 20, 2008
2,950
8
38
lincolnshire
uk.youtube.com
Good one, LG :lol:......T'was what I was thinking also. Unless it was a 007 type with a gun in the camera sort of deal, eh. One nevah noes bout these here Brits........crafty devils.......:lol:
(no offence, Quandry)

...............................time for a lunch break......................


 

givpeaceachance

Electoral Member
Mar 12, 2008
196
3
18
Colpy said :
"In a free country, there is absolutely no requirement for me to explain the reasons that I would own any legal device.......unfortunately, this nation is slowly pulling away from the concept of liberty."

Unfortunately, some people feel that Liberty means that they can do whatever they want and screw everything and what everybody else thinks or wants.

Until we are fully capable of understanding that with Liberty there must come maturity, responsibility and respect for life and those around them, which we have scarcely ever seen, especially from people who always like to point out that they are 'Free to do what they want', i don't think that Canada should go there. What with the USA being only one example of the prototype of this sort of Freedom, we see that the only freedom to be had is by the one holding the gun.

What i see going on that may be more subtle is that Canada seems to be desperately trying to be like the US. That only makes me think that our Prime Minister - as strong and as independent as he wants us to believe he is, is really just a pussy for Bush to play with.

Here's another way to look at it. Take the heinous murder that happened in Manitoba just recently. You know the crazy guy that decided to come to Canada because there he would be free to do whatever he wanted and then basically carved up a human being right on a greyhound bus while everybody was running and in shock. Sounds bad enough hey? Well imagine if every man on that bus had a gun and decided that they wanted to be a hero, but didn't have the actual skills to qualify as one, there very well could have been a possibility that not one but everybody on that bus would've been dead - including the perpetrator. After all, the only statement that this crazy has made since everything happened is "Just kill me!"

It is a known fact, and should be known especially by people who own guns, that in many cases, the weapon being used as self defense ends up being used against the victim. Why? Because many, who are full of piss and vinegar and otherwise, usually lack the intelligence/judgement and the gumption to use the gun on a human being and underestimate their opponent. You can't beat crazy with fear. And in the majority of cases, anyone who is out to seriously hurt somebody is usually far outside the proper mental parameters of society. Shooting animals is very different than shooting a human being. And if you think that it's something that you could do, then you shouldn't own a gun.

"Those who live by the sword, die by it" It's an old quote but it is still quite relevant.

However, Colpy, that you should be free to own a gun, sure! if we could trust everybody in this country to respect life and be responsible. But they don't do psychological assessments on people to see if they are even mentally capable to own one because that would be infringing on their freedoms. So in the name of Liberty we sell guns to people who want to kill and end the Liberty of others.

How ignorant and hypocritical of us to be shouting out our right to freedom knowing that that which that we are fighting for is something that has been used and has no other purpose but to end and destroy Liberty itself.

With that, until we stop hearing the pubestent-like arguments that it's 'my right' and 'it's a free country' or 'i can do what i want', i think its safe to say that we, as a collective society, obviously don't know what Freedom is or what it really means.

Guns are not the answer to our problems.

But what i do know is this : if we as a society decide to choose guns as the answer then you can be ASSURED that the very Liberty that you say gives you the right, will the first casualty. Guaranteed!

Africa anyone?
 

Lester

Council Member
Sep 28, 2007
1,062
12
38
64
Ardrossan, Alberta
I heard there was a town in Texas or somewhere down there where everybody had a gun and wore it openly- I also heard that they go out of thier way to be polite to one another:) - I don't have a problem with responsible citizens owning handguns but I do have a problem with not so responsible citizens owning one - The problem is how do you level the playing field between criminals who have handguns and ordinary folks who aren't allowed to carry them?
 

scratch

Senate Member
May 20, 2008
5,658
22
38
I heard there was a town in Texas or somewhere down there where everybody had a gun and wore it openly- I also heard that they go out of thier way to be polite to one another:) - I don't have a problem with responsible citizens owning handguns but I do have a problem with not so responsible citizens owning one - The problem is how do you level the playing field between criminals who have handguns and ordinary folks who aren't allowed to carry them?


......the criminal will always have the upper hand....sad..
 

BigLou

Electoral Member
Aug 13, 2008
149
1
18
Vancouver, B.C.
Handguns in Canada...wouldn't that be a dream world. Oh, but then again, look at the crime rate in the U.S.A., and look at the crime rate in countries that dont allow firearms except for hunting rifles.
 

missile

House Member
Dec 1, 2004
4,846
17
38
Saint John N.B.
There's only one reason to own and carry a handgun..to be able to kill another human being. Ok! Just some sour grapes on my part:-( Couldn't even get a permit to buy a brace of 1861 Navy Colts:angry3:
 

#juan

Hall of Fame Member
Aug 30, 2005
18,326
119
63
Handguns are for the most part useless. Police and various guards use them, but for a private citizen to protect house and home I would suggest that a 12 ga. shotgun is far superior to any handgun.
 

talloola

Hall of Fame Member
Nov 14, 2006
19,576
113
63
Vancouver Island
Handguns are for the most part useless. Police and various guards use them, but for a private citizen to protect house and home I would suggest that a 12 ga. shotgun is far superior to any handgun.

I agree with you, but I'm always the one who has to clean up, yuk.;-)
 

talloola

Hall of Fame Member
Nov 14, 2006
19,576
113
63
Vancouver Island
What on earth 'good' would happen if people in Canada were allowed to carry handguns,
just seems like something for 'others' to make a lot of money. Why would we purposly
make the crime rate rise, and get more violant, why would we want children to have a
chance to kill themselves or others when they pick up that 'carelessly' left, handgun.
Why would anyone want to encourage 'that', hand guns are fine for the hobbyist, or collectors,
or competitions, and whatever else, but please, not for the 'person' on the street.
 

Colpy

Hall of Fame Member
Nov 5, 2005
21,887
848
113
70
Saint John, N.B.
What on earth 'good' would happen if people in Canada were allowed to carry handguns,
just seems like something for 'others' to make a lot of money. Why would we purposly
make the crime rate rise, and get more violant, why would we want children to have a
chance to kill themselves or others when they pick up that 'carelessly' left, handgun.
Why would anyone want to encourage 'that', hand guns are fine for the hobbyist, or collectors,
or competitions, and whatever else, but please, not for the 'person' on the street.

In 1989, the state of Florida brought in the first "right to carry" law. That law meant that any citizen with no criminal record that took a minimal fiearms use course HAD to be issued a license to carry the weapon concealed. The police chief of Miami, among others was horrified, as tens of thousands of Florida citizens took up licenses and began carrying loaded concealed handguns.

then the bottom fell out of the violent crime rate. Murders dropped radically, as did robbery, rape etc. The police chief in Miami went from a rabid opponent of the law to one of its biggest supporters.

The law was so successful that now 36 states have right-to-carry laws......and now millions of US citizens carry handguns ascasually as we carry wallets......and the violent crime rate has DROPPED radically from what it was.............

Violent criminals seek out the helpless to victimize......when they don't know who is packin' heat.....it becomes much harder to find a victim, thus less violent crime.

It is just so damn simple.
 

Dexter Sinister

Unspecified Specialist
Oct 1, 2004
10,168
539
113
Regina, SK
It is just so damn simple.
Don't think so. If you Google for "right to carry" and "violent crime" the first thing that comes up is "Our reanalysis of Lott and Mustard's data provides no basis for drawing confident conclusions about the impact of right-to-carry laws on violent crime. We document that their results are highly sensitive to small changes in their model and sample. Without Florida in the sample, there is no detectable impact of right-to-carry laws on the rate of murder and rape, the two crimes that by the calculations of Lou and Mustard account for 80 percent of the social benefit of right-to-carry laws. A more general model based on year-to-year differences yields no evidence of significant impact for any type of violent crime. As a result, inference based on the Lou and Mustard model is inappropriate, and their results cannot be used responsibly to formulate public policy." (bolding mine)


You're a responsible gun owner Colpy, but I wouldn't expect most people to be. Too many people can't even drive or vote responsibly. I do not have a high regard for the judgment and self-control of most of my fellow humans, I don't want them armed.
 

Scott Free

House Member
May 9, 2007
3,893
46
48
BC
Don't think so. If you Google for "right to carry" and "violent crime" the first thing that comes up is "Our reanalysis of Lott and Mustard's data provides no basis for drawing confident conclusions about the impact of right-to-carry laws on violent crime. We document that their results are highly sensitive to small changes in their model and sample. Without Florida in the sample, there is no detectable impact of right-to-carry laws on the rate of murder and rape, the two crimes that by the calculations of Lou and Mustard account for 80 percent of the social benefit of right-to-carry laws. A more general model based on year-to-year differences yields no evidence of significant impact for any type of violent crime. As a result, inference based on the Lou and Mustard model is inappropriate, and their results cannot be used responsibly to formulate public policy." (bolding mine)


You're a responsible gun owner Colpy, but I wouldn't expect most people to be. Too many people can't even drive or vote responsibly. I do not have a high regard for the judgment and self-control of most of my fellow humans, I don't want them armed.

Don't you think that the people who go through the rigorous demands for legally owning a gun in Canada are going to (most probably) be responsible gun owners?

Just the process of getting the proper tickets, locks, lockers, etc... makes it unlikely the owner is going to have a need for immediate gratification (the criminal mindset).

My concern stems from a man I know that saved his wife, daughter and grand daughters from being raped on a camping trip. He was a WWII veteran and kept a hand gun in his camper. Some scoundrels showed interest in the women and made their intentions well known. The veteran was able to dissuade them from their original plans and put the run on them. This is a clear cut first hand experience of mine that demonstrates (to me) that responsible gun ownership does prevent crime.

I think it's dangerous to use statistics from another country and assume they are relevant to Canada. We have much different laws, requirements for gun ownership and culture here which I suspect help curb the danger of just anyone owning a gun - which I agree with you is a disconcerting prospect.
 
Last edited:

Dexter Sinister

Unspecified Specialist
Oct 1, 2004
10,168
539
113
Regina, SK
... This is a clear cut first hand experience of mine that demonstrates (to me) that responsible gun ownership does prevent crime.
In that particular case, it apparently did, though there may have been other ways to deal with that situation that would also have worked, but you can't--or at least shouldn't--generalize an anecdote into a basis for public policy. In particular, there's the issue of who defines what "responsible" gun ownership means in a legal sense, and precisely what it means. What do you think might have happened if those scoundrels had also qualified as responsible gun owners and had been armed at the time of this event? It worked out as it did only because the veteran was the only one who happened to be armed.
 

Colpy

Hall of Fame Member
Nov 5, 2005
21,887
848
113
70
Saint John, N.B.
Don't think so. If you Google for "right to carry" and "violent crime" the first thing that comes up is "Our reanalysis of Lott and Mustard's data provides no basis for drawing confident conclusions about the impact of right-to-carry laws on violent crime. We document that their results are highly sensitive to small changes in their model and sample. Without Florida in the sample, there is no detectable impact of right-to-carry laws on the rate of murder and rape, the two crimes that by the calculations of Lou and Mustard account for 80 percent of the social benefit of right-to-carry laws. A more general model based on year-to-year differences yields no evidence of significant impact for any type of violent crime. As a result, inference based on the Lou and Mustard model is inappropriate, and their results cannot be used responsibly to formulate public policy." (bolding mine)


You're a responsible gun owner Colpy, but I wouldn't expect most people to be. Too many people can't even drive or vote responsibly. I do not have a high regard for the judgment and self-control of most of my fellow humans, I don't want them armed.

Okay, Dexter.....I didn't come up with the same results, but as a hypothetical situation, let's say they are correct. Once again, I'm not convinced, but I'm willing to play a worst case logic game.......

So, let us accept for the moment that the following is true....."(there is) no detectable impact of right-to-carry laws on the rate of murder and rape, ......... A more general model based on year-to-year differences yields no evidence of significant impact for any type of violent crime."

Fine. So millions of folks carrying guns does not decrease violent crime.....neither does it increase violent crime. Therefore the choice is simply between allowing people the choice to defend themselves and the freedom of the right to bear arms........or denying them that right, removing their choice, for no discernable reason.

In a free society, that should be a very obvious choice.

Remember, this is simply for the sake of argument.....I do not necessarily accept the opening premise........
 

lone wolf

Grossly Underrated
Nov 25, 2006
32,493
210
63
In the bush near Sudbury
The parts that worry me most about handguns are the badge-heavy rookie cops who carry them - and I'm twenty minutes away from the closest one of them if it happens to hit the fan here.
 

Nuggler

kind and gentle
Feb 27, 2006
11,596
141
63
Backwater, Ontario.
The parts that worry me most about handguns are the badge-heavy rookie cops who carry them - and I'm twenty minutes away from the closest one of them if it happens to hit the fan here.

git yerself a .12 ga. riot gun. I think they take 10 in the mag, and one up the spout, but I might be erring on the 10. Saw off the stock to a pistol grip, so's you ken swing er fast. Stock up on SSG. Buy a Rambo knife, and a bandana. Learn to say, "duh".........all you need to know.

You safe.

At least at close range.

Or unless you shoot yerself in the foot.

8O..........Nugg the killer:cool:
 

lone wolf

Grossly Underrated
Nov 25, 2006
32,493
210
63
In the bush near Sudbury
git yerself a .12 ga. riot gun. I think they take 10 in the mag, and one up the spout, but I might be erring on the 10. Saw off the stock to a pistol grip, so's you ken swing er fast. Stock up on SSG. Buy a Rambo knife, and a bandana. Learn to say, "duh".........all you need to know.

You safe.

At least at close range.

Or unless you shoot yerself in the foot.

8O..........Nugg the killer:cool:

8O You bin here?!?! Thass the room broom.... Just ... it'd be nice if the cops got here fast. Bucky left me a great space to dispose of bodies ... but blood and pellets is hell to dig and scrub out of century old tongue-and-groove - and I'd really hate to paint it....