- Location
- The Police State: Ontario
Is CCW permitted in Canada?
- Thread starter BDD
- Start date
Brutus
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
Including your own naivety friend.
Certainly CCW/full auto and such are possible in many states. But some municipalites/counties/states are almost as strict as Canadian federal gun laws. NYC, New Jersey, Connecticut, Massachucetts, and California come to mind on the stricter side, with Vermont, Arizona, Alaska, Nevada and Utah on the other end of the scale. With a whole lot of the USA somewhere in the middle ground.
The USA is a union of 50 different entities, all with thier own swing on state rights, regardless of what the constitution says.
Educate yourself, google is your friend.
Edit: Besides this truth, making sweeping genralizations makes me lol comparing Canada and the USA. Uncle Sam frowns most furiously on Short Barrel Shotguns and since 1934 has classed them as Class III firearms much like full autos. The same 8.5, 12.5 and 14 inch barrels on a full stock Grizzly or an 870 that easily passes for a non-restricted wilderness protection shotgun by any PAL holder in this country.
Another shining example of who considers what a 'bad gun' versus an 'okay gun!'
Last edited:
I mention how I'm surprised suppressors are openly sold/marketed in the US and I'm a "troll". I haven't left. 
"Supressors" weren't designed originally with the intention of quieting down gun fire so we wouldn't have to wear ear protection. Or reduce the dB in an urban gun range. (I could be wrong) I was surprised (as would most) to discover that "silencers" are now being openly sold. Legally. Even the companies selling suppressors usually have disclaimers on their websites reminding people it's legal to own. Which tells me there are many Americans who don't know suppressors are legal still. The "surprise" comes form the fact that the only place most of us have seen supressors used is in spy films, films with assassins, special ops soldiers...etc. Now to learn civilians can actually buy/own them in the US...? I think it IS a HUGE "WOW". Not just for me but I think a lot of Americans too. Perhaps it's because I'm new to firearms.
And I don't think I'm Anti-American...just because I think their CCW permits seem to be too common and handed out to people who clearly shouldn't have them. Or that I think there are a lot of "Rambo types" with guns/CCW permits...doesn't make me Anti-American. Feel free to disagree. I'm sure there are tons of respectable and responsible American gun owners. Who aren't looking for an excuse to draw, who do not have firearms related stickers plastered on their vehicles...
Any how back to the topic "CCW in Canada". Though my questions have been answered and confirmed.
"Supressors" weren't designed originally with the intention of quieting down gun fire so we wouldn't have to wear ear protection. Or reduce the dB in an urban gun range. (I could be wrong) I was surprised (as would most) to discover that "silencers" are now being openly sold. Legally. Even the companies selling suppressors usually have disclaimers on their websites reminding people it's legal to own. Which tells me there are many Americans who don't know suppressors are legal still. The "surprise" comes form the fact that the only place most of us have seen supressors used is in spy films, films with assassins, special ops soldiers...etc. Now to learn civilians can actually buy/own them in the US...? I think it IS a HUGE "WOW". Not just for me but I think a lot of Americans too. Perhaps it's because I'm new to firearms.
And I don't think I'm Anti-American...just because I think their CCW permits seem to be too common and handed out to people who clearly shouldn't have them. Or that I think there are a lot of "Rambo types" with guns/CCW permits...doesn't make me Anti-American. Feel free to disagree.
I'm sure there are tons of respectable and responsible American gun owners. Who aren't looking for an excuse to draw, who do not have firearms related stickers plastered on their vehicles...Any how back to the topic "CCW in Canada".
Though my questions have been answered and confirmed.
- Location
- The Police State: Ontario
Wrong. It is legally possible for anyone to carry a pistol in Canada, but, like freedom in the Soviet Union, that possibility exists only on paper.
If you are a Supreme Court Judge, high level politician, or relative/friend of similar highly placed government employees, you can get a carry permit.
For nearly everyone else, it will however be completely out of the question. Discretion to give said permission is in the hands of elitists.
Note of interest: Pierre Trudeau, who hated guns in the hands of the common, honest citizen, and who stated he intended to outlaw civilian gun ownership, very frequently carried a pistol himself.
- Location
- The Police State: Ontario
AND, obviously, a troll.
bearkilr
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Nowhere, ......just past the middle
I mention how I'm surprised suppressors are openly sold/marketed in the US and I'm a "troll". I haven't left.
"Supressors" weren't designed originally with the intention of quieting down gun fire so we wouldn't have to wear ear protection. Or reduce the dB in an urban gun range. (I could be wrong) I was surprised (as would most) to discover that "silencers" are now being openly sold. Legally. Even the companies selling suppressors usually have disclaimers on their websites reminding people it's legal to own. Which tells me there are many Americans who don't know suppressors are legal still. The "surprise" comes form the fact that the only place most of us have seen supressors used is in spy films, films with assassins, special ops soldiers...etc. Now to learn civilians can actually buy/own them in the US...? I think it IS a HUGE "WOW". Not just for me but I think a lot of Americans too. Perhaps it's because I'm new to firearms.
.
So would it surprise you that "suppressors" aka "silencers" aka "sound moderators" are very common for hunting use in one of the most restrictive firearms countries in the world, namely the UK? How about the fact they can use night vision and thermal imaging for hunting fox?
Do some more research and report back, you sound like an uninformed idiot.
I mention how I'm surprised suppressors are openly sold/marketed in the US and I'm a "troll". I haven't left.
"Supressors" weren't designed originally with the intention of quieting down gun fire so we wouldn't have to wear ear protection. Or reduce the dB in an urban gun range. (I could be wrong) I was surprised (as would most) to discover that "silencers" are now being openly sold. Legally. Even the companies selling suppressors usually have disclaimers on their websites reminding people it's legal to own. Which tells me there are many Americans who don't know suppressors are legal still. The "surprise" comes form the fact that the only place most of us have seen supressors used is in spy films, films with assassins, special ops soldiers...etc. Now to learn civilians can actually buy/own them in the US...? I think it IS a HUGE "WOW". Not just for me but I think a lot of Americans too. Perhaps it's because I'm new to firearms.
This is why you are being called a troll though. Because you are exhibiting the same "shock" that anti gun zealots do.
At this point you are uninformed, and that's why some are suggesting doing a little research. The U.S. is simply following Europe's lead in legalizing suppressors. You automatically associate suppressors with spy films, as do most people. That Hollywood has created this image has been our downfall as firearms owners. We are not fighting the fear of guns, we are fighting what people see in movies.
Parts of Europe have been using suppressors for years for exactly what they were designed for.... noise control. But forget the spy stuff. Their image of noise control allows them to use firearms in close proximity to populated areas without noise complaints. As Bearklr stated.
And I don't think I'm Anti-American...just because I think their CCW permits seem to be too common and handed out to people who clearly shouldn't have them. Or that I think there are a lot of "Rambo types" with guns/CCW permits...doesn't make me Anti-American. Feel free to disagree.
Any how back to the topic "CCW in Canada".
AGAIN, you are relating what you are writing to what you see in film or the odd flamboyant news article.
Someone may take the time to chime in with some proper stats, but I'll give you a few off the top of my head. And the other guys, don't flame me if I'm not accurate, I'm not quoting ver batum, just trying to make a point.
There is something like 2.5 million defensive uses of personal firearms in the state per (day? week? Forget) and in 98% of those defensive uses NO shots are fired !! Rambo itching to draw on someone????? Not.
There are stats to show that people who take on the responsibiliy of carry a concealed firearm are less likely to commit a crime than ANY other citizen (in the decimal points , like 0.01% or something)
There are many many instances where armed citizens have used their personal carry firearm to save the life of a police officer. A recent news article was posted here a few weeks ago.
All this to say BDD...... get reading as was suggested and turn the action adventure flicks off for a little while.
When you read the right info you will see why you are being called a troll.
have you ever actually been to the US? or did you only take what you wrote from watching YouTube? Hey, you could find some You Tubes of some real morons who also happen to be Canadian. Give me a break on that. CCW is not as easy as you think - must pay for a course, take the time for course, must pass a written test about laws, must pass a range test, must submit fingerprints, must pay a fee to state, must have a clean record. Now I will add that few states, where I am being one, allow anyone who can legally own to carry concealed. But everyone I know who carries has committed the time and money to maintain their permit, because they are responsible.
Others here have already answered your statements about suppressors - I tried hunting when young in Canada, never took off for me, but I do know enough to understand why hunters would like to use suppressors. Nothing to do with responsible CCW. Me thinks that too many video games and movies have given you wrong ideas.
I'll tell you what - I did not relocate from Canada to US for guns as you wrote. I relocated for a better job, lower taxes was a close second because that improved our quality of life. Gun freedoms and allowing personal responsibility for decisions has been a nice bonus. I served Canada for 14 years, and after leaving service I resented that a bunch of libtards had decided that I could no longer be trusted with a firearm unless I submitted to a bunch of libtard crap.
One more point since I see you are from Toronto. I lived near Toronto, know that city pretty well. I have walked areas in your great friggin liberal city where I would not take my wife and son because gangs carry knives and guns. Geeshh, guess what - criminals do not obey the laws!! At least down here we feel safe in our home because I am allowed to choose how to protect my family. Out on the streets I, like my American friends, exercise the privilege of carry if and when we deem it may be prudent. You do not see guns everywhere, CCW holders are not out looking for an excuse as you imply. In fact, the penalties for misuse of a firearm are most often more severe here then in Canada - just look at sentencing statistics.
Anyway, enjoy your oh so safe and secure life in gun free Toronto.
Last edited:
Hi,
This is my first real post to this forum, and I am sorry to read something like the post from BDD. I will respond to these points as an American who recently moved to Canada. When I lived in the States I was a CCW permit holder. Poster BDD is uninformed about a number of issues which I hope I can clarify with factual information.
Most of the gun violence in the US is not due to CCW holders. Most gun violence is done by people who are not CCW holders, and who have obtained their firearms illegally. In fact, if you read in the newspaper about a shooting where the perps and victim's names have been released and look those names up on the state's Department of Prison website (assuming it has an offender search), you find that many times these people (both the victim and the perp) have done time for felony convictions. Felons are not allowed to own or possess firearms. Nevertheless, somehow they find and obtain firearms.
Statistics have shown that people who are CCW holders are some of the most law abiding citizens in the society. In the state where I lived, the number of firearm infractions by CCW holders was in the 0.01 - 0.03 percent range. Almost none of those were assault or murder charges. Recently one of the states (maybe Ohio -- I can't recall) legalized being able to bring a firearm into a drinking establishment. The anti-gun people wailed about how there would be drunken shoot-outs and blood running in the streets. Guess what happened -- a big fat nothing. In the first year of that law being in effect there were no incidents regarding firearms being used at a bar. The same thing happened when CCW was first legalized in the US. The anti-gun folks where shouting about how there would be shoot outs at intersections and blood running in the streets. Guess what? Nothing happened. The vast majority of CCW holders are very responsible people, especially when comes to firearms. To get a CCW in most states, there is mandatory training, passing a written and live fire test, as well as background check which includes a search of mental health background. The CCW training in the US stress the legal ramifications of using deadly force -- when is it justified and when is not. Even in justified shootings, there is a legal tangle that can ruin lives, so no one who is a responsible CCW holder is eager to deploy their weapon. The general attitude I have encountered among CCW folks is "situational awareness is vital and stay far away from trouble as possible".
With regard to CCW being promoted: Many if not most law enforcement officers (LEO's) support the arming of private citizens. Most LEO's know that they will not be able to respond in time to prevent an assault or murder, and their job is mostly post facto investigation, and hopefully making an arrest. Several of the instructors with whom I have taken classes are active duty LEO's or retired LEO's. You talk like training is a bad thing. If one is going to wield a firearm for self-defense or sport, training and competence is absolutely essential. You are responsible for any round you fire, therefore you need to be able to put rounds where you intend them to go.
Again, you are talking about fantasy images of CCW holders. I can't say this enough, but in my experience, most of the CCW people I met in the States were prudent and generally responsible individuals who took particular responsibility for their own safety.
***
I don't see this much talked about much on gun boards but I think here is something to consider: I don't think a nation's gun laws are what keeps violence down. I think it is the social net provided by the country. The reason why the US has such as problem with violence (not just gun violence) is not inadequate gun laws, but an inadequate social safety net. Desperate people are driven to desperate ends. Many times these desperate ends involve criminal behavior. The greater the desperation, the greater the chance of violent criminal behavior. Something to ponder.
For what it is worth to BDD: I am happy to be in Canada. I'm not going to go "wild west"; I respect and abide by the laws of this sovereign nation. See, there you go -- yet another (former) CCW abiding by the law, no matter where or what that law is.
This is my first real post to this forum, and I am sorry to read something like the post from BDD. I will respond to these points as an American who recently moved to Canada. When I lived in the States I was a CCW permit holder. Poster BDD is uninformed about a number of issues which I hope I can clarify with factual information.
Most of the gun violence in the US is not due to CCW holders. Most gun violence is done by people who are not CCW holders, and who have obtained their firearms illegally. In fact, if you read in the newspaper about a shooting where the perps and victim's names have been released and look those names up on the state's Department of Prison website (assuming it has an offender search), you find that many times these people (both the victim and the perp) have done time for felony convictions. Felons are not allowed to own or possess firearms. Nevertheless, somehow they find and obtain firearms.
Statistics have shown that people who are CCW holders are some of the most law abiding citizens in the society. In the state where I lived, the number of firearm infractions by CCW holders was in the 0.01 - 0.03 percent range. Almost none of those were assault or murder charges. Recently one of the states (maybe Ohio -- I can't recall) legalized being able to bring a firearm into a drinking establishment. The anti-gun people wailed about how there would be drunken shoot-outs and blood running in the streets. Guess what happened -- a big fat nothing. In the first year of that law being in effect there were no incidents regarding firearms being used at a bar. The same thing happened when CCW was first legalized in the US. The anti-gun folks where shouting about how there would be shoot outs at intersections and blood running in the streets. Guess what? Nothing happened. The vast majority of CCW holders are very responsible people, especially when comes to firearms. To get a CCW in most states, there is mandatory training, passing a written and live fire test, as well as background check which includes a search of mental health background. The CCW training in the US stress the legal ramifications of using deadly force -- when is it justified and when is not. Even in justified shootings, there is a legal tangle that can ruin lives, so no one who is a responsible CCW holder is eager to deploy their weapon. The general attitude I have encountered among CCW folks is "situational awareness is vital and stay far away from trouble as possible".
With regard to CCW being promoted: Many if not most law enforcement officers (LEO's) support the arming of private citizens. Most LEO's know that they will not be able to respond in time to prevent an assault or murder, and their job is mostly post facto investigation, and hopefully making an arrest. Several of the instructors with whom I have taken classes are active duty LEO's or retired LEO's. You talk like training is a bad thing. If one is going to wield a firearm for self-defense or sport, training and competence is absolutely essential. You are responsible for any round you fire, therefore you need to be able to put rounds where you intend them to go.
Again, you are talking about fantasy images of CCW holders. I can't say this enough, but in my experience, most of the CCW people I met in the States were prudent and generally responsible individuals who took particular responsibility for their own safety.
***
I don't see this much talked about much on gun boards but I think here is something to consider: I don't think a nation's gun laws are what keeps violence down. I think it is the social net provided by the country. The reason why the US has such as problem with violence (not just gun violence) is not inadequate gun laws, but an inadequate social safety net. Desperate people are driven to desperate ends. Many times these desperate ends involve criminal behavior. The greater the desperation, the greater the chance of violent criminal behavior. Something to ponder.
For what it is worth to BDD: I am happy to be in Canada. I'm not going to go "wild west"; I respect and abide by the laws of this sovereign nation. See, there you go -- yet another (former) CCW abiding by the law, no matter where or what that law is.
Quality, Sir! Welcome to Canada!
Yup. Many ranges in the UK and Ireland, particularly those near built-up areas, actually recommend shooters to have moderators on their long arms - NOT BP or dedicated target guns of any kind of course. Many recreational and professional shooters who shoot at night - targetting foxes, mainly - are actually compelled to have a moderator when shooting in certain locations to avoid spooking cattle or other humans.
Being deef anyhow, it's a never-mind as far as I'm concerned, and my kind of shooting - milisurp and old-fashioned - does not lend itself to the use of these devices.
tac
Yup. Pal Dave got three last sunday night, even tho' it was raining. Shooting a .223 Tikka with 2-gen nightsights and SAKS mod. Lamping in the IR, illuminating them and dropped them foxies where they stood.
tac in East Anglia
BDD, Sir - like it or don't, but you are building up into the position of Troll of the Year here.
Many if us here, me included, have friends and relatives in the lower 48, and again, many of us enjoy the shooting fun times that we share down there, so bad-mouthing those folks unlucky enough not to be Canadians is not a popular move on this generally CANADIAN forum.
If you feel so strongly about the way that our Southerly brethren do things, you would be well-advised to go post your many concerns on a site that has a far larger American readership, say, sigforum.com - and see where that gets you.
Obviously, being a long-distance visitor here myself, forced to live for personal reasons in a country on the western edge of Europe, I have nothing but my own opinion about your posts, and that opinion, necessarily, carries no weight here. However, I am the president of a small but thriving association of classic rifle shooters, and can tell you - entirely without prejudice - that you'd be well on the way to figuratively walking out of the door of OUR forum with your teeth in a bag for making half the comments that you have so far inflicted on this far more long-suffering bunch of fellow shooters.
That's it from me.
Apologies to the rest of you.
tac
vcrai.com
Many if us here, me included, have friends and relatives in the lower 48, and again, many of us enjoy the shooting fun times that we share down there, so bad-mouthing those folks unlucky enough not to be Canadians is not a popular move on this generally CANADIAN forum.
If you feel so strongly about the way that our Southerly brethren do things, you would be well-advised to go post your many concerns on a site that has a far larger American readership, say, sigforum.com - and see where that gets you.
Obviously, being a long-distance visitor here myself, forced to live for personal reasons in a country on the western edge of Europe, I have nothing but my own opinion about your posts, and that opinion, necessarily, carries no weight here. However, I am the president of a small but thriving association of classic rifle shooters, and can tell you - entirely without prejudice - that you'd be well on the way to figuratively walking out of the door of OUR forum with your teeth in a bag for making half the comments that you have so far inflicted on this far more long-suffering bunch of fellow shooters.
That's it from me.
Apologies to the rest of you.
tac
vcrai.com
