🚀 go-pugleaf

You can build a private range at your cabin and have it certified.  The stats
on people using guns for self defense are appalling,  they have a better
chance of hurting you or someone you love just as much as they do the
intruder, that is from the US where you can sleep with the loaded gun under
your pillow.

I would not support making the long arms not available for hunting, don't
believe that happened in britain either.  Firing of guns even on private
property needs to be controlled as bullets do not respect property lines.  As
for the stops with a restricted firearms, I understood in the course that you
could make normal short stops but not extended.  You can get very liberal ATTs
that allow a broad range of transport time etc within your province.  You can
make extended stops but you must control the firearms (i.e. can't leave them
in the vehicle while you sleep in the motel).  I was primarily talking about
the requirements for keeping them locked during transport, I don't have a
problem with it.  If the guy who got convicted of manslaughter just recently
had done so he wouldn't have "accidentally" had the gun go off because it
would have been unloaded and locked, the kids would have been gone before he
got the gun ready to shoot.

Sensei Brent

Craig Tataryn wrote:

> Well, I am fine with the existing non-restricted storage laws, I believe
> them to be more than adequate. If someone broke into my house and they gave
> me a minute to go grab my gun, I still wouldn't have enough time to unlock
> them and load them :)  It's the transportation law that I would have a
> problem with.  For instance, with restricted firearms such as pistols, you
> literally cannot stop at McDonalds for a burger after hitting the shooting
> range.  As well, you wouldn't be able to bring it out to your cottage for
> target practice either.  I take my guns out to Kenora to a friends cabin to
> shoot skeet (and we make multiple stops going there and coming back), if
> long arms became restricted the only shooting you would be doing is at the
> range.
>
> Craig.
>
> Sensei Brent wrote:
> > Craig Tataryn wrote:
> >
> >> I would feel a whole lot better about the gun registry if they put a
> >> statement in the act that said:
> >>
> >> "All non-restricted firearms registered will remain as
> >> non-restrticted".  I believe other countries such as UK/Austrailia
> >> imposed similar laws as the one we are implementing.  Once their law
> >> abiding citizens registered their non-restricted firearms (shotguns,
> >> hunting rifles) they said "Oh, by the way we are now classifying
> >> guns those as restricted/phrohibited"
> >>
> >> Correct me if I am wrong, as I may not have all the details correct.
> >>
> >> Craig.
> >
> > When all are registered the only difference between restricted and
> > unrestricted is the transfer, storage and transportation
> > requirements. Does it really matter. I don't see any problem
> > requiring the more stringent storage/ transportation  requirements
> > for long arms.  In effect all firearms are to some degree restricted
> > as you must have a license and register them.
> >
> >
> > Prohibited is another matter, but they will not prohibit long-arms
> > because of the large rural base, particularly in northern Canada,
> > that legitimately needs them.  The list has to remain open  to some
> > degree to classify new or modified weapons.
> >
> > And by the way I am a shooter who fully supports the gun laws.
> >
> > Sensei Brent