IPSC STORM

Exactly. She made her bed now she can lie in it...............errr I mean die in it.

Well this just takes the cake. But it does open an interesting door. My daughter got a nice 9mm Glock G17 for Chirstmas this year. She was also a vicitim of a sexual assault at her school. I think I will start a new religion of Glockism. Where by all adherants must wear a blessed plastic framed pistol to protect themselves and other innocents! Naturally her Glock will remain holstered and concealed at all times!

Cornwall is in Ontario. And it was a receptionist who refused treatment. Even worse. What is being missed here is the fact that the Dr she wanted to see was her FAMILY doctor. He just happens to work in this French clinic a few hours a week. Thus is it perfectly logical for her to try and seek him out. This is just another example of French speaking Canadians thinking they have "extra" rights and powers.

Well I for one am willing to lead by making the gravy!

CPIC is very limited. Once an individual has "paid their due" and are no longer on parole. They are free to move about Canada on a whim. Meanwhile as I stated above I am not given this freedom. Do you realize that there are some 100,000 people in Canada who are prohibitted form owning firearms? Do you know that the government has absolutely no idea where they are? Now here is an idea. Keep track of those who are not to be trusted with firarms due to earlier actions. Then...............check their homes not mine! If you find a gun in their home...............they go go jail again. If you come to my house. You know for a certainty that I have guns so what are you looking for? What possible gain is their to the system? I should also point out that CPIC is directly connected to the CFC data bank and has been hacked some 308 times in the past few years. There is some conjecture that his is the reason behind the spate of robberies of collectors homes in the GTA. At one point last week I understand CPIC was hacked for a period of 8 hours ( but this is hearsay).

DB..............the problem is the urbanites indeed do want to take my guns. They do not see a positive use for them.........because they have no positive experience with them. Look, I have two kids age 12 and 15. Do I not want a safe world for them? Do I not want them to walk safely in the streets? ( mind you as mentioned above my daughter was not safe in her school). Of course I do! I also know a heck of a lot about firearms. I have been shooting since I was 18 ( I am now 39 and holding). I am a qualified instructor and chief range officer. I am not the problem. The folks at my club are not the problem. Look at the now famous boxing day shooting. The shooters had records a mile long and were still at large. That is the real problem. Wasting efforts and resources to chase after me is a terrible waste of time and money. I am certain that a comproimise can be reached in everyone of interest were to get together. However that is simply not the case. We have the likes of Wendy Cukier taking govement grants ( now that will stop of course) who is now driving at the UN to take guns away from civilians. The trick is to educate the common people. Which I guess is part of what I am attempting to do here. I work hard at this part of my hobby. I organize open houses at my club ( 430 visitors last year). I hosted a media day. I have been a guest host on a call in show on CBC. But still there are voices out that still carping the same lies and distortions... The problem is and always will be the Criminals. They are the ones that need to be controlled. The big problem however is controling them is not easy and it is not clean which is of course why the liberals decided to avoid it.

Well you simply cannot trash the existing program without something to replace it. You know nature abhors a vaccum. Eveyone agrees that we need some sort of gun control scheme. I would just prefer to call it criminal control instead of gun control. The CPC will generate a method that I hope ( and trust) will help decrease crime on our streets and serve as a deterent for crime. At the same time I trust that it will respect the rights of gun owners.

Now THIS ( sorry for yelling) is helpful!! These are legitimate questions and I will cover them one by one. Thanks for being helpful For the purpose of discussion I will assume you want a handgun and I will assume you are in Ontario as that is where I live and know the process intimately. 1) pay from $100 to $150 to take the CFC Non restricted course which would allow you to buy non restricted firearms ( rifles and shotguns) This is a one day 8 hour course which covers the action types of various non restricted firarm. Safe gun handling, history, The firearms act in terms of storage and transport. Funny but you never actually fire a gun. 2) pay another $100 to $150 to take the CFRC Restricted course. Again this is a one day course covering restricted firarms (all handguns and some carbines and rifles like the AR15) Once more you never fire a shot in this course. 3) Fill out your application for a restricted lisence. This will cost you $80. You will need to have two references vouch for you that have known you for more than 2 years. Also you need to list any spouses you have co-habitated over the past 5 or 10 years and provide contact data for them. You also need to provide a passport quality photograph. The photo must be signed again by someone who will attest to it being a photo of you. 4) Sit back and wait. The law says that the minimum is 28 days. That is a flat out joke. Most are taking between 3 and 6 months to process. Then your PAL will arrive in the mail. 5) Shopping for a firearm. Once you have decided on one and paid for it the tranfer process begins. The seller phones the CFC in Miramichi. Since it is a restricted firearm they send it to the CFO in Orillia Ontario ( each province has their own office). They are supposed to do another background check on you but in reality they just take a few days to process it. 6) You are then issued a TAN (transfer authorization number) this is supposed to be proof that the gun is registered to you ( but is actually breaking their own law). Once you have a TAN you can apply for an ATT ( Authorization To Transport. 7) The ATT alows you to take your firearm home with you. It is limited to one day ( if direct) or several days ( if the gun is being mailed). 8) Once you have your gun safely at home you still cannot take it to the range. You need a long term ATT 9) To get a long term ATT in Ontario you need to take the CSSA ( Canadian Shooting Sports Association) handgun course ( I happen tobe qualified to teach this course). This course is 8 hours long and is almost a repeat of the CFRC course. However in this one you are actually taught to shoot a gun. There is also an accuracy test. 10) Once you have passed the CSSA test your club which you joined which cost you from $50 to $500 a year to join ( mine is $160) will apply on your hehalf for a long term ATT. The ATT will arrive from 4 to 8 weeks later. 11) one you have your Long term ATT you can take your handgun from your home to any qualified range in Ontario. You must put a lock on the trigger and then lock the firearm in a case. You must take a direct route to and from the gun club ( I knew of a guy busted for going to a Timmies drive through on his way home). You also need to keep the registration certificate with the firearm. Now.....how did it work before? We had an Firearms aquisition system. FAC. To get an FAC you paid $5 for every 5 years. The first time in you took a test at the local police deptartment and had an interview with the local Firearms officer. The application process took about a month to get. For non restricteds that was it. When you wanted to buy a firearm ( rifle) you showed your FAC and if it was valid you got your firearm and went hom. For handguns you applied for a tranfer which went though your local CFO. Then you needed to take it to the police station where they would ensure that it was in fact the firearm you had registered. That would mean an ATT from the store to the police station and then one from there home. I had many many handguns mailed to my local police station. They would call me when they arrived and I would pick them up. BTW the lady who ran that department now takes her two kids to my clubs junior program. You still had a long term ATT system back then as well but they were only good for one year. The new ones are for Three years. See above...........Criminals had their FACs taken away. Just like PALs are supposed to be taken now. Funny again the CFC does not keep track of how many PALs they have taken away. The funny (sad) thing about the current system is the lack of background checks. They were suspended about 2 years ago. That was about the only part of the system that could actually have done some good. I have never met anyone who has ever had any of their references called and I know thousands of gun owners. You can also deregister your car. This is the process you use when you take your car to the wreckers. Theoretically you could do that with your brand new car as soon as you got it home. Then you could sell it to anyone you want. You just could not drive it on public roads. Just think of race cars ( CASCAR) etc. There is a reason they are transported on trailer from homes to the race track beyond saving tires. They are not allowed because they are not registered and lisenced nor do they have to be. They cannot drive on the roads because they are not lisenced. Registering owners does have some merrit but that is equaled by a registry of criminals and I think that registering criminals is both morally and logically a more sound idea. What is the differnce between checking to see if someone is lawful and checking to see if someone is a criminal? They are flipsides of the same coin. The only advantage of a Permit system ( which I am not dead set against) is that you can ensure training. I have some problems with forcing people to take a course but it does have some good points. However this program could easily be run by volunteers ( like myself) and could be designed by people who actualy know something about firearms. This would reduce the cost to take payers as well as make a superior course. Like the CSSA course I teach you can actually get people out shooting to see how they handle themselves. The PAL system we have I like to compare to pilots ground school. No solo flight but they hand you the keys to a plane anyway. Not very bright if you ask me. Again self managment by interested parties within constraints of law make more sense. I really do appreciate that fact. The problem is people who have no idea at all about the firearm issue keep spouting off that it is a good idea. They do not know the history. They do not know the current process. They do not know the technical pit falls. Just try reading some of the post here or letters to the editor by anti folks. The errors of a factual nature is downright scary. It is not a place to start. It is a place to end. It does not add to the investigation at all becuase the regisrty is a dead end. Not to mention it is so messed up as to be useless in court. You say you think that.........but you do not say why! What do you hope to gain by it? What process do you think will occur? Some cities and states require registraion of firarms (mainly handguns) similarly to Canada. It is interesting to note that these are also the places with the highest gun crime rates. Those area with fewer laws limiting guns and more limiting Criminals have lower crime rates. Now next time watch what they do with the info? Every time they find the owner he just has to say that it was stolen last week. The trail is a dead end. LOL!! No not directly. It is not a crme to have your gun stolen. What they have done is make it a crime not to store your guns properly. How do they determine if they were stored properly? Well since their are zero laws to define what safe storage is. They simply say...if your guns were stolen then they were not stored properly. Nice trick eh? The result is the same. Owners are arrested and loose their rights due to the illegal actions of others. Great! Damn but you are thoughtful!! That could be fixed by a registry of stolen guns. While you are at it. Can you also make sure that any DVD player or Plasma TV that is found can also be returned? Shall we spend billions more on such a system? I surely hope not. No malice noted what so ever. It is obvious that you do not know the system and seem genuinely interested in the situation. I wish that there were more people of similar intent. Cheers ( and if you live in Ontario you are cordially invited out to the range. The ammo is on me!)

Here is a good radio show interview from today. http://www.cknw.com/station/audiovault_members.cfm you have to register ( sorry) but it is easy. Go to Feb 22nd at 10:07 am The rep from the Chiefs of Police speaker is an embarasment...............spouting the very disinformation that I spoke about above. Naturally he was cut to pieces. Even he does not know how many guns used in crimes are registered!! LOL! Too funny really

Damn...........I have a bit of a problem with SANTA and the tooth fairy. But I am pretty sure the P99 that I was just cleaning for my son is real. You failed to explain how the registry would help. So you find that 100% of handguns used in crimes were stolen ( the actual number is closer to 13% but this is for test purposes so we will set it at 100% for aguement). What has the registry acomplished? Nothing nadda................ Are you closer to finding the criminal who commited the crime with the gun? No.........otherwise you would have put them in jail for the theft itself. What the old government did instead was to criminalize the victim who was robbed! Back to your favorite car/gun analogy and learning from TV. Did you ever note that on TV cop shows when they rob a bank and they find the get away car they generally hit a dead end when they find................shock of shocks that the theives used a stolen car? The cops then say that they hit a dead end..... It is exactly the same with a gun. A registered stolen gun is a dead end. Unless.............unless you want to go after the person who was robbed that is. So continue the car/gun analogy. You own a Honda Accord that is blue...... A blue Honda Accord is stolen and used in a bank robbery. In the course of the get away they hit a young 17 year old girl on the side of the street who later dies. What would happen if cars were treated like guns??? Well......... 1) the person who owned the car invovled would be charged with unsafe storage. It would not matter if the car had been locked in their garage. It would not matter if it has been hotwired. The very fact that it was stolen would be enough to prove unsafe storage ( there are zero guide lines to safe storage) 2) The police would then show up at your door and confiscate your Blue Accord as it has now been deemed to be commonly used in criminal activity. Silly as it sounds this is exactly how the gun law works and is why it must be replaced with laws that actually target criminal activity. My personal concept is to add 5 or 10 years for the simple possesson of an illegal firaerm. ie If you have been deemed to be incapable of the responsibility of owning a firarm and are found with one. You go to jail. No ifs. No ands. No buts. I forgot to add in my earlier post about why the registry is a bad idea the simple concept that it cannot work. It cannot work for what the Feds say it would be used for. Why you ask?? Well becuse you cannot tell one gun from another that is why. Even when they try they mess it up..... My P08 luger has 7 errors in its registration. That is right they messed up on everything!! I have tried and tried to get them to fix it. The worst part of it is I am liable for their mess up. As a result when the requirement came for me to register my other guns. I registered them all as Unknown make, unknown model, unkown serial number, unkown action, unkown barrel length, unknow caliber etc. Their solution? Well in their wisdom they sent me nice little stickers to place on the firearm with the caveat that I must put the sticker on the reciever of the firearm. They then warn me not to expose said sticker to solvents or oils. Guess what we clean firerms with??? Yes inded you guessed it...........first you use solvents to clean out the carbon build up. Then you coat it with oil so it does not rust. What does this prove? It proves the people who wrote the law do not have a clue when it comes to the technical aspects surrounding firearms. As scary a thought as you can get. If you like ( and I have time) I can recount story after silly story of how the CFC has totally messed this system up.. Peoplel blame gun owners for messing with the system. I will be the first to admit it......... However........nothing I mean nothing we could do can even come close. You can try a google on some of the classics. Mauser rifle serial number series AR15 lowers. Walther G22 stocks. Beretta Storm Magazines. Benelli M1 super magum shotguns.

Criminals most certanily should not own firearms. I would much prefer them to be locked away in jails. I had the unfortunate experience of having to watch my 15 year old daughter go though court just last week to convict a 17 year old who sexually assaulted her in school. ( the court date was Feb 15th). In the end he was convicted on two charges of sexual assault, one court of simple assault and one of breach of probation..... His sentence?? Six months!! Which they then said was equal to 3 months pre trial custody and since he had been in jail for 89 days prior to the trial. THEY LET HIM GO THE VERY NEXT DAY!! Meanwhile I would be looking at 5 years for not having a bit of paper? Sorry but that just does not wash with me. ( BTW.............the saving grace of my daughters case is he had to submit a DNA sample to the sexual offender registry. Now THAT is a registry I can get behind) Exotic animals are not a vaild counter point either. This can be proven by a simple virtual experiment. Say I load one of my handguns or "DEADLY MILITARY ASSAULT RIFLES" ( don't run away this is a virtual experiment LOL ) I leave it sitting on my kitchen table. Now you take a vemonous snake......or a nice "tame" tiger and do the same thing. Now............you enter the room. Which item is most dangerous to you? Is there a possiblitiy that the gun will train itself on you and shoot you of its own accord? Nope. It is an inanimate object. It cannot do anything unless an outside force acts upon it. Can the snake or the tiger decide to attack you and in fact DO SO. Moving upon its own will? Are you in fact in danger by the very fact that you are in the same room? Most certainly YES! So no the analogy does not work at all. The funny thing is the fiearm is in fact better compared to the CAR. The problem being that as you point out the vast majority of people do not know a blessed thing about them thus they make incorrect assumptions. They do in fact not know the existing law. They do not know the history of gun control in Canada or the world for that matter. Thus they make extremely erroneous assumptions. This leads us to the mess that we have now. I do not have a blanket dismissal for people who disagree with me. Rather for people who are factually incorrect. I know it is a fine line but there it is. I do not base my arguments ( ok most of them) on emotion but on hard facts. You say that I do not have a "right" to bear arms. Well once again..........I hate to shock you but you are in fact technically in error. True this right is not "enshrined" in the constitution however the constitution is only a building block in the history of our rights. The "right" for Canadian citizens to bear arms can be traced through the BNA act all the way back to the Magna Carta. Since this right has never been extinguished it must still exist. Of course it would be much easier if it were actually in the constition. But its lack does not take away from the fact that I still have this right ( I used to know a great site on this topic I will try to find it and post it later) Now ...........why am I personally opposed to registration? Well taking away from the pure fact that it is technically impossible for it to be of any use to prevent criminal activity ( other than paper offences against the registry itself) there are two main reasons. One I will admit is based purely on emotion. I have never hurt anyone so why should I be singles out. I am not a threat to anyone who is not a threat to me. Second is a sense of history both international and Canadian. In every instance in world history the registraion of firarms has directly lead to their confiscation. There is not a single instance when this did not occur. It did not take a rocket scientist to figure out what Canada had planned when C68 was revealed. Sure the Liberals said that they had no plans to confiscate. BINGO............We have plans for confiscation. BTW as per C68 I have 12 of my firearms slated for confiscation even without the latest Liberal plans that were defeated in the eleciton. Beyond that as I live in Ontario I still have to deal with an out of control AG who is bound and bent to take my property. ( I have a meeitng with my MPP on Friday to discuss this fact). Now to turn the table on you DB. Please explain a plausible process that you think will allow a registry to achieve any rationals good other than confiscation. Cheers

Sorry but once again you are just dead wrong. You base your ideas once again on the lies and common mistaken perceptions of those who either do not know the facts OR do not want you to know the facts. ANYONE that is even a person with the most disgusting driving record in the world can buy a car. There is no legal way in Canada to prevent it. So in fact any shmuck can in fact own a car. NO WAY you say? Well hate to burst your bubble but that is the fact. The question comes about when said individual wants to DRIVE it on PUBLIC streets. BINGO then you need to have valid registration and a tag. Otherwise you are free to have as many cars as you like and drive them in what ever manor you wish. As long as you stay on private property. To parallel with firearms................. My guns are either in my home ( private property) locked up in tranisit or at my gun club ( again private property), So the true equal would be that when handguns are used for defensive purposes as a concealed weapoin ( CCW) they would need to be registered and a permit issued to the owner. Yep, I could live wth that. But the ANTI crowd would have fits. So again, the car/gun analogy just does not work. Of course if you do not register your car you get a ticket. IF you do not register your gun you go to jail and have a criminal record. Once again. Apples and Pineapples. Ok.........I thought I had. My bad Please be so kind as to list any and all issues and I will address them point by point. That would be far more efficient and everyone can stay on track. Deal?? BTW...I am not angry at all. Frustrated that people spout off incorrect data with out any real idea as to the truth? Yes indeed. Frustrated that these same people want to take away my rights? Yeppers. But angry? No not yet. I do admit that I often use CAPITALS to stress a salient point. Is that the problem?

Not to mention a fine is a far far cry from 5 years in jail.......... The car/gun analogy just does not hold water at all. Wilber..........registration just does not work. It cannot work. If you like I can give you the technical reasons. But rest assured. The RFC said it woudl cost BILLIONS of dollars to try it the way they did. I am certain that when the AG accounting comes out we will once again be proven right. There is simply no way to do it on the cheap. There is no way that the data in it can be used for anything but confiscation and then only from those who obey the laws. The police in fact do NOT use the system for the purpose it was intended. The much flaunted 5000 uses per day is an outright distortion. The real question is HOW MANY TIMES IS IT USED TO SOLVE A CRIME> The 5000 figure came about this way. You are pulled over for speeding.... They put you in CPIC. CPIC is tied to CFC. BINGO a "use" of the system. Did it really do anything? Did it tell the cop that there was NO gun in the car? Of course not. Did the officer take off his vest to approach the car because he KNEW that there was no gun? Of course not. So what did we find? Well if it comes back as the driver is a gun owner. We now know that he is a law abiding gun owner. WOW! What great intel that must be!! LOL! The anwwer that the CFC (Canadian Firearms Centre) gives to that question??? "We do not track this data". What? You do not track to see if your program actually does what you said it was designed to do? Only in a goverment department can you get away with that sort of reply! DB...........which of my posts was offensive? All I have done is point out that FACTs that the "anti" crowd have been flaunting and how they are flawed. If you do not have a simple grasp of a submect (Like them) then how on earth can you expect to debate it? That is just plain stupid and I stand by that. If you do not want to own guns........more power to you. I am not here to force anyone to own guns. I just wish that those who are on the other side had the same respect for the individual. Sadly that is plainly not true.

Yes indeed more words of wizdom from the anti side. So much for debate. Just fling some insults......hope they stick then carry on spouting lies. Sorry but it just does not work that way. I can imagine that you are a little nervous. YOU SHOULD BE. You have to contend with people that actually KNOW the law and KNOW the firearms issue. You should indeed be running for the hills. Your arguments are now MUD. Cheers

Na I will leave it to left wing nuts like you to MELLOW out............. Once again you do not have a logical argument so you resort to personal attacks. That tactic speaks volumes for your position or rather lack of position. I note that you did not address the FACT that your entire post was so much BS! Yes indeed you sure add to the facts of this debate. Lies Lies Lies and insults. Face it your argument does not hold water at all...............but anyone with a brain would know that. Hollas............ Taking Television as a source of data is not a very good idea. Not even PBS etc. What you really want is a Registry of CRIMINALS. Guy walks into a gun shop. Says......Hey I would like that .357 revolver. Ok says the clerk. Let me check the data base of criminals. Type type...................... PING.. Good you are not on the list of people who are prohibitted from owning firearms. That will be $800 please End of story. Meanwhile with the data base of criminals you can track where they live. Have a rape in the area? Click click......click and you have a list of possible suspects. Now THAT would help solve crimes that are a risk to people. But then the resident anti gun nuts would cry FOUL and say that the Criminals have "rights". Of course they do not allow gun owners to have rights. makes you wonder doesnt it. Take the FACT that police do not need a warrant to enter the home of a gun owner but they do need one for a drug dealer. How backwards can you get!

Hollus........ Please explain the theory behind the above. How does the registry get you closer to the murderer? Remember the registry of handguns has been around since 1934 and has NEVER in its entire history been used to solve a crime. Here is an idea....... REGISTER CRIMINALS!! Do you realize that as a gun owner if I do not tell the police I have moved within 30 days.............I GET CHARGED!! Meanwhile a convicted rapist........is free to move about the country with abandon!! That is just not right!

I sure am glad this was your last post on the subject because it is JUST TOO STUPID!! Handguns or any firearm DO NOTJUST GO OFF!! Computers are used to ROB MORE MONEY than any firarm ever has....... Oh and the registration of rifles STARTED IN 1998!! If you do not know EVEN THAT little tidbit of information on the subject at hand...........then you lack the very basic knowlege to talk about this subject. As such any debate with you is USLESS as you do not have a CLUE!! You say Guns have ONE purpose..............then go on to list THREE possibilities!! LOL!! Yep your logic is sure on the ball!! LOL!! Damn but you ANTI gun nuts are a JOKE!!

Anger??? LOL I have spent most of my time trying not to LAUGH at your stupid ideas. You really do not have a sigle clue as regards the firearms issue. Again...........that is fine as long as you do not try and effect me or my family and friends. The REAL danger is people like you who want to spread their disinformation and flawed ideas. But thanks for your reply. A personal attack likes yours above is a sure sign that I am indeed correct in my assumptions of you and your knowledge of the issue at hand. YOU HAVE NO CLUE!! That is now also painfully obvious to anyone that reads this thread. So...............thanks for that! ( BTW. The final count was 70 shooters firing some 7550 rounds of handgun ammo over two days. The only casualty was a steel taget that broke its hinge............OH THE HUMANITY!!)

Of course you do not see anything wrong with it.........You hate guns and the people that use them. Registration can only be used as a lead in to CONFISCATION. So it plays right down your alley. Registration can achieve NO OTHER PURPOSE. This is not conjecture it is a simple fact. Registration has NEVER in the history of Canada been used to solve a single crime. NOT ONE. It has however time and time again lead to CONFISCATION of property from people who were stupid enough or trusting enough to follow the orders of the government. FINE!! You are welcome to think like that. It is trying to put these twisted thoughts in motion where I have a problem. How about BANNING people who commit CRIME! What do you really know about the dreaded AMERICAN (shudder) gun lobby? Nothing more that the tripe spouted by the likes of Michael Moore I would gatther. The NRA that you elude to is not active in Canada. Here we have our own groups that became active AFTER you and YOUR ilk decided to try and strip away our rights. Well bucko......... I am here to tell you that me and THOUSANDS of Canadians like me will not sit idle by and let you and your ill advised friends ruin our country. YES OUR COUNTRY. We have as much say as to what happens here as you do. However we do not run around telling other people how to run their lives!! As to the profit motive..............damn are you REALLY that much of a leftwing nut? I mean REALLY!! Reading your posts I knew you were somewhat spun in the head but that concept just makes me wonder if you could possibly be more than a little off your rocker. People who promote the legitimate use of firearms for FUN, SPORT and Defense do so for more than profit. ( albeit there is that nagging problem of having to provide for ones family)- But then again your type have always counted on the Government to do that for them.

I'm pretty sure you can obtain them with a restricted weapons permit but I'm not 100% sure, the .32cal that is. If you had them before Feb 14 1995 you are grandfathered to own them ( like me). You can buy and sell them amongst other grandfathered owners. The downside is the police do not need a warrant to search your home any more.( those rights are reserved for real criminals). If you bought your first one between Feb 14 1995 and Dec 31 1998 you would be in LIMBO as the Feds true to form screwed the pooch with regard to how the law functioned. That is why thousands of owners are now in court to clear it up. Incidently the judged decided AGAINST a class action suit to settle the matter. So instead on one clean and relatively inexpensive case we now will be clogging the court system with THOUSANDS of cases. The two crowns I have spoken to about this are royally pissed that this is happening. One who speciallized in DRUG CASES has ZERO background in firearm issues. I was having to give him an overview of the Law so he could try to argue HIS CASE! Lucky.............this portion of the law is slated to be killed off by the CPC when their new law comes into play and it will not be too soon!

My computer was not built with the express purpose of expelling a piece of lead or metal at unbelieveable speeds into someone's body. Your gun was built with this express purpose. Or was the very first gun invented for a purpose other than killing -- if it was, by all means tell us. "It's a decorative accessory" (Like my earrings, 'cause earrings don't kill people, people do ) I'm glad you had fun at the shooting club. I'm also glad to hear that hunting with a handgun is illegal. My dad hunted moose evey year as we were growing up. Us kids (or our friends) never touched those rifles. It's not 1970 anymore though. My sister had a foster kid a couple of years ago... we found a handgun (don't know what kind, it was a big, silver thing) in her backpack. We called the police, they came and took it away. The kid had NO consequences whatsoever. Wonder where she got it? One of her "friends" perhaps? Perhaps one of her friends father bought it for her as a gift LOL. "Here you go honey, but don't use it unless you really need to!". Couple weeks goes by..... "Hey, honey where's your gun?" "Oh Dad, I dunno, my friend Cindy was here the other day, and now my gun is gone, I just wanted to show it to her!" Putting guns in the hands of children. I shake my head. If you want your kid to learn to shoot why not put them in army, air or sea cadets? That way they get to learn the "tool" not the "cool". PLUS the rifle (they use rifles in the army -- go figure) would stay at the armoury, not in the home. Margrace: Lovely to see you here! WRONG on all fronts. Actually your computer does come from its roots as a killing machine. The first computers were designed BY THE MILITARY to make it easier to KILL PEOPLE! In reality their purpose is to store and transmit information. What information is dependant upon the intentions of the user. It can be life saving information for a hospital or the twisted images of a child molester. Likewise a firearm is designed as you point out to shoot a bullet at high speed. Again the end result is dependant on the user. The bullet can kill an attacker, it can kill an innoncent, it can kill prey for the supper table, or as in my case this weekend it can punch holes in paper targets and knock over steel plates. You decry my handing guns to my children after ensuring that they have passed the required courses for firearm lisencing. Both my 12 year old son and 15 year old daughter have been around firearms since they were born. Both can safely clear every single firearm I own not to mention their own collections. There is absolutely NO risk that they or anyone around them would be harmed should a fiream. Meanwhile you recount a story of the risks involved when kids with little or no knowledge regarding firearms encounter one. Both my children are involved in my clubs Junior Rifle program as well. They join a distinguished group of kids in our area. As a matter of fact one graduate of our program is currently away to University on a FULL SCHOLARSHIP for shooting! She is also on the Deans Honour list. Many of our kids have represented our province in the Canada Winter and Summer Games. Two of them (girls) have been to Olympic trials! As to hunting with handguns and your obivous dislike of it. It is interesting to note that you do not put forth any REASON why. This is understandable of course because there is in fact no logical reason not to hunt with a handgun. Of course moose hunting with a handgun would be very rare indeed due to the power required and the subsequent recoil. Howver I suggest that while hunting moose it would be very convienient to have a nice .22 revolver or pistol to harvest the grouse that inhabit the same woods as the moose. Using a High powered 7mm magnum on a grouse is overkill and does not leave much meat. ( unless you manage a head shot) With regard to keeping guns in the armoury.........that is really a stupid idea to be truthful on multiple levels. One is of course security. It is very hard to defend ones home and family with a firarm that is across town now isnt it! With regard to the discussion about .32 caliber handguns above....... Sorry but again........WRON WRONG WRONG! .32s are not banned from collectors. True the Liberals were trying to do so but they have lost evey battle. Many thousands of Canadian gun owners are "grandfathered" to keep them as per the OIC that made them illegal. Of couse we now hope that the new government will use the same OIC to can that ever so stupid law. I am currently helping out several owners caught in a CFC inspired limbo by the LIEberal OICs. As a matter of fact I was in court last week on such a case. Now if any of you are in SW ontario I would be more than please to take you out to the range so you can try one of these fine firearms. Just send me a PM and we can set it up.

Sadly you are very very correct. Many police do not even know what the name of the firearm they are carrying is! The local police near me just recieved their new Glock G22s. Guess what? They have only fired them ONCE!! That is right! ONCE!! Sure they are great people. They do a not so nice job at times but PLEASE! I bought my 15 year old daughter a 9mm Glock 17 for Christmas and she now has 10 times the trigger time than the police in town! Many police to not really have an interest in firearms. That is fine. BUT! If you are going to carry a gun all day long and you are legally able to SHOOT PEOPLE with it. Damn it but LEARN how to use it! My local range takes a litteral BEATING every time the police rent our range. ( but at least they pay well and cover damages)

Well glad I found this place. Dreas.......... I just came home from a HANDGUN shooting competition. Today we had about 40 competitors ( 40 more tomorrow) and we fired over 6000 rounds of ammo. Guess what?? NOBODY DIED!! So your "theory" that guns are only good for killing is just crap. As to hunting with handguns? Well you really should learn about a subject before you post about it. The TRUTH of the matter is that in many areas handgun hunting is very popular. The only reason we do not hunt with handguns in Canada is because the goverment made it illegal No other reason. There are MANY MANY handguns that are designed specifically FOR hunting. So only the police NEED guns? Hmmmm Well well.........do you NEED your computer? I would imagine not. And since we know that child molesters are now using computers to commit crimes it is LOGICAL (by your twisted logic) that YOU should turn YOURS in.