Handgun Hunting Support

[Foxer]

Well Gatehouse, those are some pretty good answers. (i'm shocked. No, really. )

I think we can build on some of those as well and add even more answers to 'em that make sense.

Sig comes up with some interesting points on the 'why' of it. Like this:

Fourth - since it will be applicable for small game as well as big game, fishermen would be able to carry it in areas where they do not feel safe and don’t want to carry non restricted.

That really helps answer the 'why' beyond 'because i want to'. We here know that 'because i want to' is valid. However, not everyone will agree.

There are times when handguns just make more sense than a rifle. Often, a rifle IS the better choice and it's safe to say when it is, most people will choose a rifle. But - lets look at some of the times It's BETTER to have a pistol: (Some have been mentioned)

1 - for rough terrain hunting. Already, several rifle manufactuers make rifles that are as light as possible to appeal to this market, where every ounce of gear makes a difference. A 3.5 lb pistol will ALWAYS be easier to pack and carry than even the lightest rifle.

2 - COMBINED OUTDOOR ACTIVITIES - sig hit a good one, what if you're going into an area to hunt AND fish? Or hike and hunt? You can't carry a rod ANd a rifle, etc. A handgun would allow you to do both.

3 - hunting in 'dangerous game' areas. If you're hunting deer in griz country, there's a good argument for having a firearm that you don't have to put down. Shoot the deer with the pistol, then put it in it's holster while you gut it. If a bear shows up, you've got the gun handy.

4 - different game animals. A rifle is usually only good for one class of game - a 300 win mag isn't a good grouse gun, and a 22lr isn't effective on deer. Being able to carry a pistol means you can have an effective grouse gun with you when you're hunting deer - OR conversely have a good deer gun with you while you're hunting grouse with a shotgun. With wildlife management over the last few years, there are lots of places where you may run into that - if you're hunting deer/bear/moose you may encounter grouse/rabbits/turkey/yotes . (this is probably a big one for most hunters.)

 

[joe-nwt]

Well this is the big one - the belief is that it's HARDER to BE ethical with a bow, so to speak. You need to be a very accurate judge of distance. It's much harder to hit with a bow than with a rifle. etc etc. So - even if a person is TRYING to be ethical the chances are much better they will screw it up and wound the animal by accident or incompetence without meaning to. If a guy thinks a deer is at 75 yards with a rifle, but it's actually at 150, no big deal. The animal's still going down. But with a bow... could be a wounded animal.

+ 10 characters......

 

[Foxer]

Well this is the big one - the belief is that it's HARDER to BE ethical with a bow, so to speak. You need to be a very accurate judge of distance. It's much harder to hit with a bow than with a rifle. etc etc. So - even if a person is TRYING to be ethical the chances are much better they will screw it up and wound the animal by accident or incompetence without meaning to. If a guy thinks a deer is at 75 yards with a rifle, but it's actually at 150, no big deal. The animal's still going down. But with a bow... could be a wounded animal.

+ 10 characters......

Believe me - that argument is STILL kicking around and was pretty popular for a while

Like i said, handgun hunting has a lot of the same challenges as bow hunting did.

 

[joe-nwt]

Believe me - that argument is STILL kicking around and was pretty popular for a while

Like i said, handgun hunting has a lot of the same challenges as bow hunting did.

So putting forth the same arguments as bowhunters should be in our best interests, no?

 

[Levi Garrett]

I think we can build on some of those as well and add even more answers to 'em that make sense.

Well my eye sights going, but still hear well enough, so I would be great to have those extra shots in the mag .

 

[Foxer]

So putting forth the same arguments as bowhunters should be in our best interests, no?

Some of them, sure. Some of them are the same. But there are big differences too. Obviously, a bow is safer close to population centers. It's less noisy. People who don't have a gun license can use one. Etc etc. some of those don't apply.

I think bowhunting became accepted partly because it was seen that there were times and places where a bow was actually a BETTER choice than a rifle. The same general 'argument' could be made of handguns - we just need to express it in terms people can understand.

 

[Foxer]

Well my eye sights going, but still hear well enough, so I would be great to have those extra shots in the mag

Ok - you're officially OFF the list of people who are allowed to speak about this to the general public

 

[MiG25]

i have the montana regulations in front of me and here is what they say about legal requirements for handguns:

Traditional Handguns: A traditional handgun:
-is not capable of being shoulder mounted;
-has a barrel length of less than 10 1/2 inches;
-chambers only a straight wall cartridge, not originally developed for rifles.

not the best regulations i think, it disallows "modern" hunting handguns (which i find hideous anyways and have no desire to own, but to each his own). it also begs the question as to whether the 44-40 and 38-40 are allowed since they are not straight walled and were originally developed for rifles.

i think that rimfire handguns (or any handgun really) should be allowed for any game that is legal now to hunt with a rimfire.

for big game i am not a fan of arbitrary energy requirements or whatever (witness bc's requirement for bison that the traditionally loaded 45-70 does not qualify for). but there may be no other way, it would suck to see people trying to bag a deer with a 380 ACP.

one danger though if handgun hunting was allowed, is that handguns not suitable for hunting would fall into the anti's "it isn't used for hunting" song and dance. although this is probably the least of our worries in todays political climate.

as others have pointed out, a nutbar with a rifle scares me much more than a nutbar with a pistol.

 

[tootall]

From Handgun Hunter magazine, an article about HG hunting for the disabled.

http://www.handgunhunt.com/feature/s29/index.html

 

[Salty]

Foxer is on to the biggest question that those who don't 'believe' will ask. And that is why. I mean c'mon, why do you people want to hunt with hand guns? We need to build on answers to this question.

One that springs to mind is to honour a lost Canadian tradition. I mean we have cheap collector plates on old cars, laws that prohibit the destruction of heritage buildings, government effort to save old and dieing first nations' languages etc. In this day and age I suggest that the average Canadian citizen can understand the rationality of somewhat special laws/rules to protect tradition.

It should be told that there an honest and law abiding group of traditionalist Canadian outdoorsmen and women who want to preserve a part of our heritage. Where the skillfull ( tested, licenced) legal Canadian hand gun owner should be able to hunt as our forpeople did with a six shooter. It is an extremely low impact method of hunting to the enviroment designed for serious hikers, quieter than other forms of hunting and with projectiles that carry fractions of the distance that others do.

Next?

 

[joe-nwt]

quieter than other forms of hunting

This should be expanded to include the fact it would be less stressful on other wildlife and people in the area.

with projectiles that carry fractions of the distance that others do.

This should be expanded to accent the fact that the whole harvesting process would be closer in the the hunter and inheirently(sp?) safer.

Those that pass the testing part of the licencing should by virtue be more safe with a handgun that those who have a handgun for purely recreational target shooting.

I guess I'm having a hard time getting past "why not?". What are the dangers of me taking my handgun into the bush? Not a valid point for furthering the cause I know.

 

[joe-nwt]

What about recoil? Can we play that one? No matter what handgun I've ever shot, the recoil is never as bad as a rifle. Even hanguns that shoot rifle cartridges. At least it's a different kind of recoil. Some , perhaps women or the handicapped, may be able to benifit from this.

Certainly anyone without the use of both arms is discriminated against by rules that say you must use a rifle.

 

[Win94]

One that springs to mind is to honour a lost Canadian tradition.

....I am not sure about this. Wasn't handgun hunting sporterized and done more frequently during modern times?? My grandfather passed at 90 a couple years ago and any pics of him and my great grandfather would include a long arm when gathering food. Hunting back then was for survival and not sport thus i would think a rifle would be chosen over a handgun??

I can't picture people harvesting game for the sole purpose of survival leaving the rifle hangin over the mantle of the log home and heading out with a handgun. That doesn't jive with me and its not how my grandparents and great grandparents rolled.

 

[Salty]

Fair enough Win94.

But there were many settlers who didn't go too far from anywhere without a hog's back strapped to their leg

My father's side family (swedish) had hand guns around the homestead for cowboying, trapping, whatever...

My mom's side (germanic) didn't have them around the homestead as far as I know. But gramps did have some .22 pistols come to think of it

So its not an across the board Canadian tradition but it is pretty much in the circles I grew up around

 

[Win94]

You can try and come up with concrete solid reasons to get this lawfully allowed but there is nothing more than one could say when lobbying the govt other than because we want to or because its fun. There is no traditional reasons to allow it. What you are doing is hoping to make a sport legal and that is fine if thats something you would be interested in.

 

[Teapot]

A man I knew from Nova Scotia hunted to help his mother and father feed their family. I asked him what he hunted with and he said anything he could borrow or had ammunition for. The list included .22, .32, .380, .38 for the pistol calibers and various other rifle calibers. He hunted deer and any other animal that was made of food with pistols at the tender age of ten. This was during the depression.

 

[Salty]

You can try and come up with concrete solid reasons to get this lawfully allowed but there is nothing more than one could say when lobbying the govt other than because we want to or because its fun. There is no traditional reasons to allow it. What you are doing is hoping to make a sport legal and that is fine if thats something you would be interested in.

Ol budddy, I have to disagree.

Now don't take this the wrong way and i don't know for sure but I'm pretty sure I'm longer in the tooth than you at 47. I started hunting as a boy in the 1960s. My dad had a 44 mag revolver for prospecting/guiding and a .22 revolver for grouse.

I got to spend some time in places that most people didn't get to see. I'm talking very remote northern BC, the Skeena and the Chilcotin. I met old hermits, trappers, cowboys that lived off the land. Period. Every one hand a side arm or two.

I remember and old guiding lodge/cattle business that had old Colts laying around like half read newspapers. No one batted an eye. I remember homestead familys that we'd visit and a bit of gun bsing was always in order and a few proud revolvers trought out for a look.

This is a part of our heritage you are just too young likely to have seen it.

 

[Win94]

A man I knew from Nova Scotia hunted to help his mother and father feed their family. I asked him what he hunted with and he said anything he could borrow or had ammunition for. The list included .22, .32, .380, .38 for the pistol calibers and various other rifle calibers. He hunted deer and any other animal that was made of food with pistols at the tender age of ten. This was during the depression.

...............i wouldn't doubt it but it makes it far from being the "Canadian way" because of a few that did it.

............We are barely allowed to keep the long arms we have at the moment and i would much rather concentrate on that issue myself.

................Now if we were all native and lobbied the govt on handgun hunting, maybe we would have a better chance.

 

[Win94]

This is a part of our heritage you are just too young likely to have seen it.

...............Well i am 34 and when we lived up in the territories my father potted grouse with his Ruger Mark II .22lr quite frequently. Doesn't make it a tradition to me. The amount of game and food harvested in this country by a handgun both now and back in the day wouldn't amount to a pimple on a mooses ass compared to long guns being used to harvest in the last 100 years.

 

[Win/64]

Okay Foxer, i will play...

Actually- ALL handguns have the power to kill effectivley- It's just how they are applied. A .22LR is a great grouse pistol, and a 9MM would do fine on close range coyotes etc...

We just have to set minimum acceptable power levels for larger game, which is not hard ot do.




Without a doubt it's much harder to hit wiht a handgun, and I'd suggest that the peopel who are only into it for the "cool" factor are not going to do well, and will probably abandon the handgns and return to a rifle becuase of lack of sucess. Thankfully, the "cool" guys will be at a minimum, since most hunters are in it to put soem meat in the freezer, as efficiently as possible. So they choose a rifle...




I am sure it *is* easier to *sweep* someone wiht a handgun - In a close range situation, where there are a number of peopel around. When hunting wiht a handgun, most of the time it sits in the holster. Also, there are few peopel around, so when you do draw it, it's not like you are waving it around and there are people everywhre. it's you and your buddy.

You will no more "sweep" someone at longer ranges wiht a handgn thean you woudl a rifle.




No need to reply- You answered it already. Handgun huntig and bow hunting are very similar. Your range is slightly extended by a scoped revolver, and it is extended more wiht a bolt action or a TC Encore, but all of that ehtical wounding discussion was made long ago wiht bow hunters. If they can do it ethically, so cana guy wiht a .44 Magnum.





Same reason anyone wants to hunt with anything, really. It interests me, It challenges me.

We dont' ask this question of people that use:

Lever guns wiht open sights

Single shot rifles

Muzzle loaders

Archery Gear

etc..

Why do we not ask these people that question? We already know why they choose this gear, instead of a scoped bolt aciton. The challenege, it interests them, they like it.

Same as handguns.

Gatehouse; Had a few pop's tonight? Or is your spelling really that bad? Hope it's the first. Because it's really hard to take anything you say seriously.