my Last post was too serious. To make up for it here is some gun porn. Para ordnance super hawg 1911 double stack with a Burris Fast fire3 sight.
Who carrys a firearm with them while camping?
- Thread starter Autism Family Travels
- Start date
my Last post was too serious. To make up for it here is some gun porn. Para ordnance super hawg 1911 double stack with a Burris Fast fire3 sight.
Traveler III
There is something deeply wrong with the moral fabric of any society that would try to do that to someone for defending themselves or another person from violent crime. I agree with your sentiment, but the fact that a person should face prison for exercising their fundamental, inherent right to defend themselves and others from unjust attack is a sign of how profoundly deranged many in our society have become, on both sides of the 49th parallel.
You are absolutely right about situational awareness and conflict avoidance. The same goes for wildlife as well - keeping food well sealed, never taking food into your tent, understanding wildlife behaviors and habits all go a long way toward avoiding the necessity to put the 00 deterrent to use, and I am thankful I haven't had any bad encounters with wildlife, but given the places I like to explore and camp, it would be quite foolish not to be prepared for the possibility that all those precautions and knowledge fail to be sufficient.
I'm not afraid of going in the woods, but rather I have a healthy respect for nature's capacity to utterly destroy me, and I go prepared.
Enthusiast III
Actually, I would like to clarify some comments. First off. It' wasn't a bait thread. my comments regarding AR and the like stemed from what happend in NS this past year. I think I was really upset that it happened so close to home. The pellet gun comment is for sport shooters. You get the same feel and you can become just as proficent using a pellet version of whatever your shooting with the realistic blow back versions etc. So why not. If someone breaks into your home and steals your guns at least they won't be used to limb many people as what happened in NS this past year. I get that most gun owners are responsable citizens. But guess what some aren't and why give them the tools to do harm to others? I don't have any fear. I don't sleep with a gun under my pillow or anywhere near me. I walk around everywhere without carrying. Why, because the world is not as scary as some make it out to be. My comments came from sheer pissed off'ness of what that person did in nova scotia. This happend after I made the original post. Which still is a very interesting converstaion. I would love to be able to carry a firearm into the back country to keep my family safe. The only way I can do that In newfoundland is to become a trapper. Other than that, we are not allowed. Our firearms rules are too strict and Americas are to lax. there needs to be an in between. I have not visited this post for ages, until I saw the bear spray / pepper spray comment, I thought was funny. But in all seriousness. I came off wrong and I appologise to anyone I may have hurt with my comments about your guns. Was not my intention.
Some people can drive pretty good, other can’t drive a worth a shit. So because of that we’re gonna ban all cars. Some people are pretty smart with good education. Others are uneducated blooming idiots who think they can say what people should and should not be allowed to own. Don’t worry, because of you we will ban books, pencils, and higher education.
Traveler III
So you don't live in fear, and yet you want to take away hundreds of thousands of guns that have never been used in crimes away from people who are more law abiding than the police (proven statistical fact) because you are afraid of some nut job going on a killing spree... and yet somehow disarming people and making them helpless in the face of such a madman is going to make them safer?
You rail on the US, and yet apparently you don't realize that "according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, almost every major study on defensive gun use has found that Americans use their firearms defensively between 500,000 and 3 million times each year. There’s good reason to believe that most defensive gun uses are never reported to law enforcement, much less picked up by local or national media outlets." (Defensive Gun Uses in the U.S.). By contrast there are only 38,390 deaths by firearm, of which 24,432 were by suicide (which really shouldn't be counted as "violence", but for the sake of transparency, I include it anyway) and 13,958 were homicides(also from CDC). So you explain to me how people are safer when you prevent 500,000 to 3 million people from defending themselves, when the measures you speak of are proven to do NOTHING to prevent those 38 thousand odd crimes (if you want to consider suicide a crime).
Maybe your ire would be better directed at the incompetent bunglers in the RCMP who somehow allowed this lunatic to amass police uniforms, vehicles and equipment, and to keep firearms illegally despite being warned repeatedly that he was dangerous and would do something very bad. Maybe you should fault their utterly incompetent response to the situation that allowed it to become far worse than it should ever have been allowed to get. Perhaps you should get pissed off at the flagrant cover up the RCMP has been allowed to conduct in order to bury all evidence of their own incompetence, or perhaps even malevolence, given that the killer was a paid police informant at some point.
Your argument is utter nonsense. Respecting the property rights of Canadians and not enacting collective punishment against millions of innocent law abiding gun owners is not "giving them" meaning criminals and lunatics the tools to do harm. News flash: criminals and lunatics (who are already prohibited from owning guns in this country, and the US, btw) don't care about gun laws and will find ways to do evil regardless of any laws, or did you not realize that all the guns used in that shooting were illegally owned and everything he did was already illegal?
It would make more sense to disband the RCMP at this point than to ban lawfully owned firearms, a massive number of which are types which have literally never been used in any crime in the history of Canada, given that organization's obvious corruption and gross incompetence at the upper levels.
I really wonder why it is that people like you never stop to consider how events like this could have been different if the victims had the mindset and the tools to actually defend themselves instead of waiting for the police to collect their corpses after the fact.
Enthusiast III
that was excatly my point in my last post. i was WRONG.
Thats true about the food too. one night im my camp we say eyes in the bushes and upon investigation it turned out to be deer running through to the next camp where peoplke food and dog food was left out. Durring all this also we never felt like we needed our firearms but it felt good know we did have it, if it were a bear then that would be different.
Traveler III
Well hallelujah for that. It seemed like you were still trying to justify yourself. I apologize if I misunderstood.
My post nevertheless has some important facts for anyone following the thread, so I'll leave it there.
Incidentally, if you want any suggestions on what firearms to carry in the bush, I'd be glad help out. I forgot to mention that it's perfectly legal in Canada to take non-restricted firearms into crown land for recreation and defense against wildlife, provided you're a license holder, of course. You don't need special permission or to be a trapper or anything like that.
Enthusiast III
As far as all the information I read, In newfoundland you need to be a licensed trapper to carry into the bush outside of hunting seasons. I will look again.
You are trying to tell people, that based on the actions of others, you should not get to own something. Then you try to clarify it, yet all you succeeded in doing was doubling down on your original statement. You are the kind of person who vilifies the gun not the person behind it. Come to my house I’ll place my ar15 on the table and we’ll argue if I should be able to own it or not. Until it gets up on its own and shoots somebody, I will never agree with a word you have to say. Crimes like you’re talking about are committed by a percent of a percent of the population. And yet you wanna use that incident as justification to restrict my rights?
its all good...just consider it a "teachable moment"
you see the american mindset for the most part....we are willing to compromise on quite a few things, but our safety and self protection isn't one of them
as far as your air gun posts go, they are interesting. i looked up the one link you had and they do make some pretty cool air powered guns. i could certainly see the fun in shooting them, but probably not as a replacement for regular guns when it comes to self defense, but they have definitely come a long way from my daisy BB rifle from the 70s
Enthusiast III
yeah, i saw that. pretty impressive.
as far as guns go, i think nitrocellulose is getting to be a bit antiquated, like a steam engine vs gasoline.
a bullet is just a piece of material traveling thru the air and transferring kinetic energy to an object. a .45 bullet is roughly 180 gr. travelling in the 800fps range and delivering X amount of energy when it impacts a target. if a air blast can move that same piece of lead at that speed, then its just as deadly no matter what propels it.
Enthusiast III
It was, I was watching the video, and thinking....Yeah, he's going to shoot the bear and it's going to run for a mile before it bleeds out. Bear's are thick boned and skinned. They are difficult to take down even with a good firearm. But nope. It ran like 20 ft and was done. Impressive.
Mrprez
Rank IV
Enthusiast III
FWIW, Meriwether Lewis carried a .46 caliber air gun. Read more about it here. The Airgun of Meriwether Lewis
Member III
Good on you for attempting to clarify and diffuse.
You pretty clearly state that your position on guns is driven by emotion. Think about that before you promote the notion that some else "doesn't need" any particular type of weapon.
This is much like the fuel costs and overlanding thread, just because one group of people have allowed themselves to become subjects and be stripped of their rights, doesn't mean any other group should.
Thanks for being honest whether we agree or not.
Para double stacks fit my paws like a glove. Daily carry tool. Always tucked in a Milt Sparks IWB holster.
It's an individual preference. Personally, I don't leave home without one. Only recommendation is if your primary concern is bear, research type and caliber before making your selection.
Contributor III
No One knows what is better for you than you....in the world, weapons are not the problem it's the lack of resect or value for other people..it seems that the only person that is important is the individual speaking their mind...not so...everyone one has an opinion and every opinion has value...we might not agree and that is perfectly fine...your life is just as important as mine or anyone else...when human life is relegated to that of cattle then we see atrocities that should never happen....this seems to be an ever increasing trend in all societies...
If faced with a life threatening situation do you reach for the weapon or the unicorn....I'm going with the unicorn because in my world there aren't any life threatening situations. Joe said so.... Rainbow sprinkles, anyone?!
If faced with a life threatening situation do you reach for the weapon or the unicorn....I'm going with the unicorn because in my world there aren't any life threatening situations. Joe said so.... Rainbow sprinkles, anyone?!
Member III
