Concealed weapon or not: The bush and animal protection
- Thread starter Win 38-55
- Start date
- Location
- Steel Town
Pity you can't engage in an adult level of discussion without resorting to playground level insults. Your reading comprehension is also lacking, but that can be overcome (your job) or over looked (ours).
Earlier I said that I thought that most 'antique' revolver users (those that pack them in the bush or advocate same) have not thought things through. I'll elaborate ....
Currently the law provides for the discharge of 'antique' revolvers anywhere you can legally discharge a non-restricted firearm. Over the last few years, people have come to realize this and been buying up 'antique' revolvers at an increasing rate and ever increasing prices. Guns that would have gone begging not too many years back are now hot items.
The proliferation of interest in 'antique' revolvers is eventually going to attract attention and it is not beyond the realm of possibility that 'Big Brother' may decide that it's time to close the door on the current provision for 'antique' revolvers and "grandfather" them as are 12(6) prohibs and similar classes. This will not require an Order In Council by the government, the RCMP has the power (apparently) to arbitrarily make it happen, as they have regarding many other guns.
Therefore, it behooves anyone interested in owning an 'antique' to acquire one (or more) ASAP in order not to be left out in the cold as were many with the 12(6) exclusion.
This means that more 'antique' revolvers are going to be carried and fired in the bush. It doesn't take much imagination to foretell a couple of possibilities resulting from this increased activity.
Eventually, some individual is going to run afoul of the law (wrongfully, of course) and be dragged into court on his dime to exonerate himself. Win lose or draw, this is going to be a very expensive proposition and the way things are happening in the courts these days, there is a strong possibility that things will not go well for the shooter.
In the second scenario, it could happen that an 'antique' revolver is used for defence in a bear attack where things go sideways, resulting in death or injury. In the subsequent investigation and/or Coroner's inquest, a recommendation to disallow the carry of 'antiques' in the field could result and be acted on by CPFO's or the RCMP.
If it's a successful encounter where the bear loses, it will likely not come to light, but if it does, it could have the opposite effect of making a strong case for the carrying of sidearms in the bush.
No one is in a hurry to be the first test case. We live in an era of ever increasing anti-gun legislation and court decisions that go against the gun owner. I hope that none of what I've described above comes to be, but if you had told me 25 years ago that we'd be dealing with the current gun laws and the loss of so many guns based on calibre, barrel length, magazine capacity, colour and stock configuration, I would have laughed.
Earlier I said that I thought that most 'antique' revolver users (those that pack them in the bush or advocate same) have not thought things through. I'll elaborate ....
Currently the law provides for the discharge of 'antique' revolvers anywhere you can legally discharge a non-restricted firearm. Over the last few years, people have come to realize this and been buying up 'antique' revolvers at an increasing rate and ever increasing prices. Guns that would have gone begging not too many years back are now hot items.
The proliferation of interest in 'antique' revolvers is eventually going to attract attention and it is not beyond the realm of possibility that 'Big Brother' may decide that it's time to close the door on the current provision for 'antique' revolvers and "grandfather" them as are 12(6) prohibs and similar classes. This will not require an Order In Council by the government, the RCMP has the power (apparently) to arbitrarily make it happen, as they have regarding many other guns.
Therefore, it behooves anyone interested in owning an 'antique' to acquire one (or more) ASAP in order not to be left out in the cold as were many with the 12(6) exclusion.
This means that more 'antique' revolvers are going to be carried and fired in the bush. It doesn't take much imagination to foretell a couple of possibilities resulting from this increased activity.
Eventually, some individual is going to run afoul of the law (wrongfully, of course) and be dragged into court on his dime to exonerate himself. Win lose or draw, this is going to be a very expensive proposition and the way things are happening in the courts these days, there is a strong possibility that things will not go well for the shooter.
In the second scenario, it could happen that an 'antique' revolver is used for defence in a bear attack where things go sideways, resulting in death or injury. In the subsequent investigation and/or Coroner's inquest, a recommendation to disallow the carry of 'antiques' in the field could result and be acted on by CPFO's or the RCMP.
If it's a successful encounter where the bear loses, it will likely not come to light, but if it does, it could have the opposite effect of making a strong case for the carrying of sidearms in the bush.
No one is in a hurry to be the first test case. We live in an era of ever increasing anti-gun legislation and court decisions that go against the gun owner. I hope that none of what I've described above comes to be, but if you had told me 25 years ago that we'd be dealing with the current gun laws and the loss of so many guns based on calibre, barrel length, magazine capacity, colour and stock configuration, I would have laughed.
Sharps '63,
The truth is I agree with you on a couple points.
The increased activity isn't a good thing or is it? Perhaps it'll bring attention to the fact that we need legal wilderness carry of handguns. Maybe, just maybe one of these people will take notice of these ridiculous laws and take the fight where it needs to go.
I also agree that many antiques are a poor choice for protection from anything, never-mind bears... But some guys are scared of the bush, some are making a sales pitch and others just feel more manly with a gun, any gun. Meh, in the end I don't care what others do and I would like to continue using my antique firearms where I choose.
My issue with your posts is you contradict yourself constantly... Get your storey straight and somebody might agree with you. Until then you just look like a rambling, grumpy old man that's afraid of the future.
The truth is I agree with you on a couple points.
The increased activity isn't a good thing or is it? Perhaps it'll bring attention to the fact that we need legal wilderness carry of handguns. Maybe, just maybe one of these people will take notice of these ridiculous laws and take the fight where it needs to go.
I also agree that many antiques are a poor choice for protection from anything, never-mind bears... But some guys are scared of the bush, some are making a sales pitch and others just feel more manly with a gun, any gun. Meh, in the end I don't care what others do and I would like to continue using my antique firearms where I choose.
My issue with your posts is you contradict yourself constantly... Get your storey straight and somebody might agree with you. Until then you just look like a rambling, grumpy old man that's afraid of the future.
This and a few other subjects are difficult to discuss on an open forum.
It is the responsibility of those who buy and use antiques in public
areas to be discreet, but not hide in the bushes, the police Could be
for a different kind of complaint. LOL
It is the responsibility of those who buy and use antiques in public
areas to be discreet, but not hide in the bushes, the police Could be
for a different kind of complaint. LOL
What a pant load! When your life is on the line, slip into some sort of transcendental Zen type state!Its fight or flight with us humans (these maharishi types must be elevated beings
) When its "on", it's better to have a gun...makes the "fightin' part" easier. If the gun doesn't outright kill the bear, I'm willing to bet it'll make the "flight part" easier too!
"icy coolness" I call B.S.
I've been in that "zone" before.... everything slows down like the matrix and it's actually impressive what can be done in that time and space...... if you don't close your eyes!
Not BS at all but If you've never been in a life/death situation and experienced it for yourself I could see where some people would have doubts.
Lot's of soldiers don't engage during a battle even though they are armed and "it's on" as you say.
My experience is some people freeze up and some people are able to perform when the SHTF.
Anyone who disagrees with this phenomenon is saying that they have never been in such a crisis situation. Once you have experienced, it becomes a challenge to be able to enter this mind set at will.
I took part in a mental preparedness seminar at SFU as part of a marathon clinic. It focused on being in the 'zone' to achieve athletic excellence. The instructor likened it to a Zen-like 'out-of-body' experience and asked if anyone had ever been there. I had.
During an IPSC National Championship I won a difficult multi-magazine stage. I was acutely aware of everything going on around me, but it was as if it was happening in slow motion and I was watching myself perform. He asked if I was 'psyched up' or 'psyched down' because if I ever wanted to repeat that, I'd have to be in that head space. I was in the latter, totally prepared mentally and physically for the task.
But that was a well rehearsed scenario. But as I found out when charged by that bear, it's possible to get there with total focus on the 'now' of the situation.
I took part in a mental preparedness seminar at SFU as part of a marathon clinic. It focused on being in the 'zone' to achieve athletic excellence. The instructor likened it to a Zen-like 'out-of-body' experience and asked if anyone had ever been there. I had.
During an IPSC National Championship I won a difficult multi-magazine stage. I was acutely aware of everything going on around me, but it was as if it was happening in slow motion and I was watching myself perform. He asked if I was 'psyched up' or 'psyched down' because if I ever wanted to repeat that, I'd have to be in that head space. I was in the latter, totally prepared mentally and physically for the task.
But that was a well rehearsed scenario. But as I found out when charged by that bear, it's possible to get there with total focus on the 'now' of the situation.
you do realize how many insults you have thrown out there at all of us through this thread right? I've been enjoying how many ways you can insult us, and somehow think your smart enough that its going over our heads.
To read you saying the above quote is nothing short of comical. Seldom does the saying "the pot calling the kettle black" seem more fitting.
I have partaken in LSD experimentally several dozen times (it was a comprehensive experiment, self regulated, but comprehensive all the same
) when I was much younger, so I know exactly how chemically altering brain chemistry can result. So I've been in this "zone" you're referring to as well.One cannot approach anywhere near the "matrix" type reality on the naturally occurring hormones/chemicals that reside in our bodies...sorry just facts.
Some of us who regularly sample a healthy dose of adrenaline (jump out of airplane types) learn to better control the negative affects of the "rush" and can enjoy the experience. I would suggest even these individuals would not enter a time warp if a mauling bear were in full rage on top of them. Where's the proof of my assertions you ask? When was the last time you heard of an unarmed human being Chuck Norris{ing} (yea, it's a verb now!) the sh1t out of a bear and coming out of the fray with nary a scratch?
BTW; another little known fact, Chuck Norris has never found a use for a stud finder. He just points to himself and beeps!
IBTL...It's getting even deeper in here! Sharps '63 is superior to us mortals, so much so I'm sure he can speak Braille as well as Latin!
BTW, Chuck Norris can kill two stones with one bird!
OP; I wanted to thank you for the interesting thread.
Last edited:
I have partaken in LSD experimentally several dozen times (it was a comprehensive experiment, self regulated, but comprehensive all the same
One cannot approach anywhere near the "matrix" type reality on the naturally occurring hormones/chemicals that reside in our bodies...sorry just facts.
Some of us who regularly sample a healthy dose of adrenaline (jump out of airplane types) learn to better control the negative affects of the "rush" and can enjoy the experience. I would suggest even these individuals would not enter a time warp if a mauling bear were in full rage on top of them. Where's the proof of my assertions you ask? When was the last time you heard of an unarmed human being Chuck Norris{ing} (yea, it's a verb now!) the sh1t out of a bear and coming out of the fray with nary a scratch?
BTW; another little known fact, Chuck Norris has never found a use for a stud finder. He just points to himself and beeps!
Were getting a bit off topic, but what do you base the above "fact" on? I'm no scientist and I can only relate to some of this stuff through my own personal experiences which I don't think were "acid flash backs"?
The matix is a sci-fi movie and when I said "matrix" was more referring to the change in time and space that can occur during extreme situations.
Not so much the ability to dodge bullets or leap over buildings etc....
That said there is a lot we still don't know about our body chemistry and the power of are mostly untapped brain.
I watched DMT - The Spirit Molecule last night on netflix. Quite interesting although I prefer Joe Rogan calling UFC over him talking about science.
Wrestling and beating down an angry bear without a scratch...... you are correct. I can't think of a time I heard or witnessed that.
Probably not very realistic unless you were somehow operating on a different level or in a different dimension. But if that was the case you'd probably just talk it out with the bear telepathically.
Last edited:
