We already have provinces where it's not illegal to hunt with a handgun. You just won't get an ATT for it.
Job one is to deal with the feds. Once that hurdle is crossed, THEN we can start doing work with the provinces.
Handgun Hunting Support
- Thread starter SIGP2101
- Start date
We already have provinces where it's not illegal to hunt with a handgun. You just won't get an ATT for it.
Job one is to deal with the feds. Once that hurdle is crossed, THEN we can start doing work with the provinces.
Johnn Peterson
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Chemainus B.C.
The 'Plan', in the rough, here it is.Camp Cook said:I didn't think you where giving me a bad time...
I was thinking that you may have misread that I was using a scope in my example.
I also prefer iron sights on handguns and carry with the scope off. I bought scopes for my SRH's because they come with scope rings and due to the amount of reloading/load developement I do with these guns the scopes have helped me with the accuracy testing.
Looking forward to your plan...
To facilitate positive change for our interests, first we should guage more accurately, what the public sentiment really is. Then as part of a course of action, gauge how effectively 'we' are able to change the misconceptions the public has. With that in mind, I propose that 'we', on an individual basis, do a sampling within other groups we are involved with. In my case, I'm regularly involved as a bike rider in a group of joggers & bike riders that would represnt a good cross section of the 'public'. Saturday morning following our exercise, we all get together for coffee so for me, this would be an opportune time to do the 'sampling'. At this point what I would suggest for some level of consistency for those of us that are interested in doing the sampling, is to come up with say five basic questions. Then to guage the resopnse. Next, do what we can to affect change to 'their' misconceptions and overall understanding, sentiments and attitude, and then guage how effective we feel we've been. OK Guys & Gals, now,
Step # 1
- What do you think of the sampling concept and do you feel it would serve a worthwhile purpose or am I pi**ing into the wind? Questions & comments?
Step # 2
- If there is a favourable response to step # 1, what five questions?
Step # 3
- Dependant upon how successful 'we feel' our efforts have been, what have we learned? What course of action or tact is required to address our cause at the next level?
The current incarnation of the conservative party is less than 5 years old and is running the country. I continue to plead/browbeat people I know to sign up I don't know how to get around them, if everyone would do it there would actually be a powerful gun lobby as windy suckier has been claiming all along. It seems too many of us are concerned more about a stupid hockey game than about our rights and our places in society. Fuhkin' retards.Foxer said:
I was driving the kids to the pool tonight and daydreaming about the day we could handgun hunt. And a question popped into my head that made me think.
How would we ask the regs to be modified for handgun hunting with regards to transportation? Or do we?
With a long gun we can just have it sitting on the seat beside us unloaded to and from our hunting site and the same when we move from one hunting area to another. We can load when we get to our hunting site and simply unload to move. Now if we were moving from one area to another with a handgun would we be expected to unload, trigger lock and case it? If we were driving a trail (not road) where we could stop, exit the vehicle and shoot, could we just have it sitting on the seat beside us? Holstered? How do you think this should be approached?
How would we ask the regs to be modified for handgun hunting with regards to transportation? Or do we?
With a long gun we can just have it sitting on the seat beside us unloaded to and from our hunting site and the same when we move from one hunting area to another. We can load when we get to our hunting site and simply unload to move. Now if we were moving from one area to another with a handgun would we be expected to unload, trigger lock and case it? If we were driving a trail (not road) where we could stop, exit the vehicle and shoot, could we just have it sitting on the seat beside us? Holstered? How do you think this should be approached?
Apples and oranges my friend. people are used to voting 'conservative' since canada was founded. The fact this is a new party doesn't change that.
Gun owners are NOT used to belonging to or even needing a 'gun rights advocacy group'. That's new.
True. It will take time. But we've already come a huge distance. Remember, a lot of people are set in their ways and many even hold the gun orgs responsible for our current situation, unfair as that is.
It takes a while for people to see the 'big picture'.
That's not accurate. They just don't understand yet. They may not understand what these orgs can do, they may not understand the need to join them. They may use other methods to fight for our rights. And in many areas, the gun laws have not really touched people much, and they may not realize how close to disaster we are.
Be patient, take your time, don't give up but don't get mad. This will be a process of decades, not weeks.
Certanly not at first, unless they're re-writing the law.
Doing so would force the matter before parliment for debate as it would require a change to existing law. That is not something we would want to happen at this time. Down the road, yes, but there's no advantage in the slightest to creating any kind of public discussion in the commons at the moment.
I'm afraid for at least the first while you'd drive with your pistol cased, and a rifle beside you in case you saw game. Then when you got out, you'd load up and move on.
In time we presumably would want a 'between hunting areas' exemption similar to what exists for black powder. But because that's a federal law, we'd only want to mess with it AFTER we got hunting fully established. We'll get murdered if this becomes a public debate.
Yes,I meant later rather than sooner just thinking ahead is all.
So a hunting ATT, which would allow you to go elsewhere other than a reasonably direct route to the range would require you to have the appropriate hunting licence? What do you think of making a hunting ATT an ammendment to a range ATT? Or should it be stand alone? I personally like the idea of a potential handgun hunter having to belong to a range. And actually, a range is where they should practice.
So a hunting ATT, which would allow you to go elsewhere other than a reasonably direct route to the range would require you to have the appropriate hunting licence? What do you think of making a hunting ATT an ammendment to a range ATT? Or should it be stand alone? I personally like the idea of a potential handgun hunter having to belong to a range. And actually, a range is where they should practice.
I dunno actually. To be honest, i'm still kind of on the 'get rid of att's to and from the range' program in the first place.
The NFA had some interesting ideas along these lines in their 'practical firearms' plan.
I think i'd need to think about it a little more.
- Location
- The Conservative part of Ontario
Here in the wonderful 
province of Ontario, we have to belong to a gun club in order to aquire an att. In fact, although there is no legislative basis for the rule, the CFO will not issue you a permit to own a handgun without a range/club membership. The club applies on your behalf.
Under a system like that, where an individual has to pass the judgement of his/her peers to own a handgun, and gets range safety, shooting training with same, WHY the hell can't we hunt with them?
Answer, pure Liberal
province of Ontario, we have to belong to a gun club in order to aquire an att. In fact, although there is no legislative basis for the rule, the CFO will not issue you a permit to own a handgun without a range/club membership. The club applies on your behalf.Under a system like that, where an individual has to pass the judgement of his/her peers to own a handgun, and gets range safety, shooting training with same, WHY the hell can't we hunt with them?
Answer, pure Liberal
Last edited:
In 76 full auto owners were locked into an exclusive group that I cannot join, so that aint new.Foxer said:
Yeah we've come a huge distance alright, apologising and compromising and whimpering all the way.
Ask any gun owner the name of the American in charge of the NHL, then ask who runs the NFA, it's very accurate. Nero fiddled whilst Rome burned.
why should we be patient? I want it now, in decades I will be too old or dead. Why should I need approval from some wankers in Ottawa to hunt a deer in Alberta the way I want to? Oh right it's the law, i say again if gun owners can get their stupid lazy asses off the couch and kick in a few bucks each those laws will change pronto. Look how this government has flipped on Income trusts and global warming, they wanna keep their jobs. A million of us as paid up members who vote will get our way every time.
savagefan I totally agree with you...
The answer to the ATT problem is extremely simple.
I have an ATT to transport from my home to remote wilderness areas which is good for the life of my ATC 2 years.
If ATT's remain then there is already in place an ATT to cover this kind of transport.
As soon as I drive off of a paved road in an uninhabited area I am legally allowed to put my handgun in my holster (unloaded if I am in a vehicle).
There are many times that I am jumping in and out of my vehicle. I carry a semi-auto 10mm for ease of loading when I am doing this and revolvers for when I hike further into the bush.
The answer to the ATT problem is extremely simple.
I have an ATT to transport from my home to remote wilderness areas which is good for the life of my ATC 2 years.
If ATT's remain then there is already in place an ATT to cover this kind of transport.
As soon as I drive off of a paved road in an uninhabited area I am legally allowed to put my handgun in my holster (unloaded if I am in a vehicle).
There are many times that I am jumping in and out of my vehicle. I carry a semi-auto 10mm for ease of loading when I am doing this and revolvers for when I hike further into the bush.
Oh for gods sake - that's a teeny tiny percent of gun owners whether you like to think of it like that or not. You're asking me why ALL gun owners aren't getting off their butts - the nfa and cssa DO have hundreds of thousands of members between them, it's not like NOBODY joined.
Quite the opposite. We've had the 'angry old man' syndrome.
You're not going to like to hear it - but it's exactly what you're doing right now. Acting like a 5 year old who's been told he can't have what he wants. "WHYYYY NOOOOTTT WAAAAAHHH I WANT IT RIGHT NOWWWWW AAAAAAHHHH".
We're where we are because people felt more at home #####ing and moaning and coming up with bull#### about the past than they did actually getting things done. There is a process. You're like a guy who buys a gun, goes into the woods and is pissed off he doesn't shoot a deer day one. It takes TIME. You have to play the GAME. There is no other way.
Untill about 2000, 4/5'ths of gun owners were apathetic because none of the rules really impacted what they did, and the rest were screaming like children instead of knuckling down and doing what needed to be done. The NFA was divided by in fighting, the cssa wasn't a national org yet (and is still expanding along those lines) and gun owners for the most part got up and went hunting same as they had for the last 100 years or so.
So - you want it all now, but you don't want to pay the price which is hard work and patience. Can't help you bud - people EARN their rights, and they must defend them always. it's the price of freedom. We dropped the ball. Now we've got to build it all up from scratch, and that ain't going to happen overnight.
Well say whatever makes you sleep at night, but that don't make it true.
There's no doubt that properly funding our orgs would go a very long way to helping, but even then the laws would NOT change overnight. And it will take time to get recruitment up there - hell we still have lots of guys out there badmouthing the groups and saying it's all hopeless and screaming about how useless the CSSA and NFA is.... our own people work against us as often as not, and you wonder why we haven't got 100 percent buy in?
To top it off - our advocacy groups are just ONE of the things we MUST pursue. We need to have VALUE to political parties who support us. We must get new shooters into the sport, and expose others to the sport to show them it's fun, not 'scary'.
We got lots on our plate. We're coming along nicely - we've made huge leaps and bounds in the last 7 years - it's truly amazing. But it will take decades to be where we truly want to be.
So get off your lazy ass - quit yer damn whining - and organize a membership drive in your area today! There's much to be done.
Now comes the hard question...
Which group or does it matter?
I can present this to everyone in my club which is now about 1800 people but who do I promote?
I feel that we need to have one pro-firearms orginization in Canada not 3-4 splintered groups.
Until this can happen how/who do I/we promote...
Camp Cook said:
Well a few years ago (and maybe currently) one of the concerns with regards with ATTs was that anybody, gun owner, drug dealer, you name it, could be roaming around downtown Toronto with a handgun in the trunk and "be on the way to the range". Competitive shooters have been granted leeway to some extent after demonstrating that they in fact travel alot for competition. Wilderness ATTs are few and generally not available to someone who may be found "roaming around downtown. My point is not whether this is right or wrong, so don't go there.
Now, some may argue, anyone can have a handgun and be "going hunting" as long as they have the proper licence. A licence can be purchased anywhere. I'm sure this will be a concern of the anti's and law enforcement. How do we address this concern?
Well - there's an old trick in sales. Don't ask 'em "Would you like to buy a car", ask 'em "would you like that car in red or black"?
Perhaps the best thing to do would be to assemble some information on both of the orgs, and present them both boldly and ask people to make a choice. In many respects they are very different.
This is largely my take on it - but in my personal opinion, observing the situations I'm aware of regarding both groups, they fill two very necessary yet different roles.
The NFA is undoubtely the greatest source of legal information out there. They have helped countless individuals, they have been effective in court, they pick their battles carefully, and i doubt anyone on earth knows more about canadian gun law than they do. Further - they have been very effective talking to provincial and federal politicians and making good headway there.
BUT - they suck as a rule at publicity, they are less agressive in promoting getting people into the sport, and putting dave tomlinson on tv is, in my opinion, one of the fastest ways to put people to sleep known to man.
The CSSA in contrast is smaller, and tho they've done some excellent work in the courts, they can't hold a candle to the nfa yet. BUT - They are without a doubt the best promoters of our sport to the non-shooting communities, they are the more aggressive and assertive of the two orgs, they work very well with regulatory bodies (note the work they did on the reloading file - holy crap, that could have been ugly without their input) and they have had better direct communication with the shooting community - allowing for some very powerful grass roots actions. (tho the nfa is definately getting better).
There are other differences, but basically both fill a desperately needed roll in our fight - and both are experts in their own specialties, with enough overlap to make it effective working together.
Both orgs in the last year and change have really started to work together well. I personally think that the CSSA wanted that to happen in the best interests of the shooting community, and the NFA people stood up and joined in. So kudo's to both. But there is NO doubt that many times they have acted more like one big org when a threat or situation required a maximum response.
In my perfect world, the NFA and CSSA would offer a JOINT membership to those who want it - a small discount for joining BOTH orgs at one time to encourage everyone to support both. I don't know it has to be a choice.
But in any case, I think the important thing is to get people involved. Put it before them and let them choose. The MOST important thing is to participate. Get in there and help the people who are fighting for us do their jobs and do them well.
In the end -it's more important to impress upon people the need to support one or the other (and local orgs such as the bcwf) than it is to get them to join a specific group or the other. It's all about getting people into the fight, and getting them used to contributing in some fashion, be it time donated or money or whatever.
Give it 20 years, and gun owners will be buying lifetime memberships for their kids the day they're born as a matter of course. In the meantime, we have to educate them on the need to participate. The world is run by those who show up. We just need them to show up.
