Open carry is the key here, not consealed. It is simply a right, I won't intend on getting a pistol since my long arm is enough for me, but any advance in gun rights is a win on all fronts. The only thing that might be a barrier here is the fact that they will fear some hunters will use their pistol to take some game. I think there should be at least some thought put into that as a solution for this reasoning. Basically we need to make our gun rights based on safety and utmost responsible ownership and use.
Hunter killed by bear, WRITE a letter to change Wilderness ATC 'rules'..
- Thread starter Jay
- Start date
Done Jay. I wrote a new letter and borrowed some of yours:
Dear Honourable Sir,
We have all heard the news concerning the fate of Mr. Rick Ross. As a fellow hunter I understand how our pass-time can be a dangerous one. We are also well aware of how random and uncommon these attacks are. I am though saddened that as a law abiding citizen we cannot exercise more rights to defend ourselves against incidents such as this, even considering how infrequent they are.
Assuming what happened is likely a waste of time, until investigators can enlighten us to the circumstances surrounding this occurrence. No matter the outcome of the investigation I am sure we can all agree that he was unable to effectively defend himself against the attack. If he had been in possession of a smaller firearm on his belt, could this have saved his life? Well it definitely wouldn't have hindered his chances.
My first question to you is: Why is it that as a law abiding citizen in Canada we cannot enjoy our time in the outdoors, much better prepared for a life threatening event?
I am not advocating for concealed or open carry in a heavily populated public environment. This is wilderness, deep and vastly empty. I live in Northern British Columbia and have experienced many encounters with wildlife. Most of them were very positive but some were extremely tense situations. During regular treks in the outdoors my family and I use all the prescribed methods of deterrent; make lots of noise, stay close together, carry a deterrent (bear spray). I have taken the industries 'Bear Awareness' course many times. But, when I hunt I am as silent as can be therefore enhancing the chance of surprising a dangerous animal. Unfortunately, being loud scares everything away, including that which we are hunting. We know this is a more dangerous way to enter the wilderness. But we love it! We need to do this to hunt! I have luckily never needed to defend myself from an attack, but I would never want to experience a dangerous situation without the ability to effectively defend myself or my family or anyone else for that matter. I hope every time I prepare to enjoy the wilderness that I never need to use force to defend me or anyone else. That does not mean I do not prepare to be able to. Just as I wear a seat-belt, use my personal protective equipment while working and a helmet playing hockey. Our freedom in this fine country has advocated that we exist in a safe society. Sometimes though our laws are confusing and serve very little purpose.
My second question is: Why are handguns not allowed to be packed when we are in the wilderness?
My third question is: Who's rights I am I impinging upon by wanting to carry a side arm in the wilderness?
My fourth question: If a carried side arm prevents one unnecessary death then shouldn't it be considered?
I am also officially requesting a review into the laws that prevent us from being able to effectively defend ourselves.
Please consider my request seriously. Currently Chief Firearms Officers are denying Wilderness Carry Permits based upon the fact that the area is not ‘truly wilderness’. I would submit to you that their interpretation is abusive and must stop. Anywhere you can lawfully hunt should be considered wilderness and should be recognized as a potential place to face a threat from a life threatening situation.
Respectfully.
Thank-you,
Karl Johnson
Enjoying our vast wilderness responsibly.
Dear Honourable Sir,
We have all heard the news concerning the fate of Mr. Rick Ross. As a fellow hunter I understand how our pass-time can be a dangerous one. We are also well aware of how random and uncommon these attacks are. I am though saddened that as a law abiding citizen we cannot exercise more rights to defend ourselves against incidents such as this, even considering how infrequent they are.
Assuming what happened is likely a waste of time, until investigators can enlighten us to the circumstances surrounding this occurrence. No matter the outcome of the investigation I am sure we can all agree that he was unable to effectively defend himself against the attack. If he had been in possession of a smaller firearm on his belt, could this have saved his life? Well it definitely wouldn't have hindered his chances.
My first question to you is: Why is it that as a law abiding citizen in Canada we cannot enjoy our time in the outdoors, much better prepared for a life threatening event?
I am not advocating for concealed or open carry in a heavily populated public environment. This is wilderness, deep and vastly empty. I live in Northern British Columbia and have experienced many encounters with wildlife. Most of them were very positive but some were extremely tense situations. During regular treks in the outdoors my family and I use all the prescribed methods of deterrent; make lots of noise, stay close together, carry a deterrent (bear spray). I have taken the industries 'Bear Awareness' course many times. But, when I hunt I am as silent as can be therefore enhancing the chance of surprising a dangerous animal. Unfortunately, being loud scares everything away, including that which we are hunting. We know this is a more dangerous way to enter the wilderness. But we love it! We need to do this to hunt! I have luckily never needed to defend myself from an attack, but I would never want to experience a dangerous situation without the ability to effectively defend myself or my family or anyone else for that matter. I hope every time I prepare to enjoy the wilderness that I never need to use force to defend me or anyone else. That does not mean I do not prepare to be able to. Just as I wear a seat-belt, use my personal protective equipment while working and a helmet playing hockey. Our freedom in this fine country has advocated that we exist in a safe society. Sometimes though our laws are confusing and serve very little purpose.
My second question is: Why are handguns not allowed to be packed when we are in the wilderness?
My third question is: Who's rights I am I impinging upon by wanting to carry a side arm in the wilderness?
My fourth question: If a carried side arm prevents one unnecessary death then shouldn't it be considered?
I am also officially requesting a review into the laws that prevent us from being able to effectively defend ourselves.
Please consider my request seriously. Currently Chief Firearms Officers are denying Wilderness Carry Permits based upon the fact that the area is not ‘truly wilderness’. I would submit to you that their interpretation is abusive and must stop. Anywhere you can lawfully hunt should be considered wilderness and should be recognized as a potential place to face a threat from a life threatening situation.
Respectfully.
Thank-you,
Karl Johnson
Enjoying our vast wilderness responsibly.
I have, a number of times. I've only ever had one incident (involving a brief bluff from a juvenile black bear) that got my hackles up a bit. The most memorable "what if" moment came when I was watching a Grizzly sow and juvenile cub amble and browse around Lake Annette in the summer of 1995, on the way out from a trip up Paradise Valley. That same pair attacked a tent nearer Lake Louise that night, with unpleasant results.
Since then, I've been more prepared for things I'm not at all afraid of. Since then I've also become more than passing acquainted with firearms.
When hunting, I'm carrying a rifle, or shotgun in the case of birds. I'm also carrying pepper spray. I would happily trade that pepper spray for a revolver if it were legal.
Brutus
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
It's only in the last thirty years of liberal and red tory federal leadership that social engineering has taken it's toll on society.
In the halls of history there are many examples of traditional firearms. Just because you do not wish to choose a handgun for the possible life saving scenario, does not mean the rest of us have to stay silent on this matter.
I'm sure there are archery hunters who look with a certain level of disapproval upon you non-traditional choice of hunting tool also. That does not make them any more right either.
Mall Ninja huh? This Mall Ninja does not own one single 9mm anything. Black powder handguns and single shot match grade level rimfires are hardly the first choice of Mall Ninjas!
The personal option of an adequate handgun to preserve human life is just another tool in the survival box, nothing more and nothing less.
Last edited:
You always have an opinion as to how others should hunt, where they should hunt, what they should carry. You come across as maybe just a troll. I've read many of your posts since you joined and must say your liberal elitest attitude is tiresome. Thats more polite than I would be if we were speaking in person.
Geez, some people sure get up in "arms", pun intended. Everyone is entitled to their own opinion; if some disagree, that's fine. I've hunted grizzly/cougar territory and encountered them for over 35 years and didn't need any sidearm......experience speaks louder than words.
People have a right to ask the government for extra gun privileges, however I personally don't see a need for a sidearm to be utilized while hunting. Most were against the LGR, I included, however some now want a registered gun to pack........make up your mind.
I'd have to agree with your logic somewhat, not on all topics of course.
And even if I don't agree with you 100% , I don't see the need to launch an attack calling you a Liberal elitist.
My thoughts on the whole deal? Make cap and ball pistols eligible for open carry. If a Ruger Old Army or Italian Remington isn't enough for you to stay out of trouble...
Depending on the date of manufacture they are already.
Oh; I've an original Remmy, but I'd not want to load it 'for bear'
Antiques are mostly treated gently. Not max loading...IMO anyhow
I think first and foremost my most sincere condolences to the family of Mr. Cross, I'm sure all here would rather that this death not have happened and that the approach of this thread be from a more gun rights point of view. I also do not believe anyone here is trying to gain ground on their point of view as some have implied by using this tragic death to dance on. Having said that I believe this is a more common sense issue. When I go out in the wilderness I take my GPS with me, I also take my magnetic compass with me too, its called backup cause things happen, I also take a small first aid kit, why cause things happen, I take a lighter and matches, why, cause things happen, my gun only holds 4 cartridges, do I carry extras, you bet, cause things happen, and if I used more than 2 to take a animal I would not be happy with myself, yet I'm prepared cause things happen. Why then if I had the opportunity and the legal right to do so would I not carry a side arm as well, it only makes perfect sense to me, it's my life and I have the right to protect it to the fullest. Those who say that or imply that it would make us to much like Americans, I say show me some evidence of how or when some American out hunting or just enjoying the great out doors went berserk with his or her side arm and did the unthinkable, I'm more than 100% sure that having that extra insurance on has saved many lives over the years.
Goodness sakes. If the guy had a long gun and couldn't deploy it, good luck with a hand gun. I don't know a sheep hunter among us that would carry an extra 4lbs just to have an extra bang stick, and I am willing to bet the victim here would say the same.
I am for wilderness ATCs, but using this tragedy is equally as ghoulish as the opposition using other deaths for their purpose. This situation doesn't fit the mold.
I am for wilderness ATCs, but using this tragedy is equally as ghoulish as the opposition using other deaths for their purpose. This situation doesn't fit the mold.
The key point to me is a handgun is strapped to your body, you don't set it down or sling it on your back. You may not get it into a fight if you are ambushed but it certainly should be an option if one chooses to hump the extra weight. If you prefer not to that's your choice, I like to make my own choice rather than some paper pusher at the CFO
- Location
- East of Home, West of the Rest
So in other words....
Open carry of a rifle is ok, respectable.
But open carry of a pistol, while openly carrying the same rifle is the sign of weakness, insecurity and fear?
This may not be ideal situation, I agree.... but the fact is it should be the hunters choice....
And THAT is where you would be WRONG! http://www.dailyheraldtribune.com/2013/01/16/get-your-tickets-now
The gentleman in the link SAVED HIS OWN LIFE by illegally carrying a pistol just in case of such a situation.
If I was EVER to be in a life & death situation with a bear, the last place I would want my LEGALLY owned 44 Magnum revolver IS IN MY GOD DAMN SAFE AT HOME!!! It should be on my hip while I am out hunting!!!
Regards
Jay
