Todd n Natalie
Observer
Hopefully this has an effect.
I have close encounters with bears wandering through my garden. Welcome to Canada. Buy a plaid shirt, grown a beard. HTFUThere is only one reason why I carry. Had a close encounter with a bear that decided to make it's way into my campsite one night. Came right up and sniffed/ scratched on my tent. Never seen my wife's eyes so wide in fear. A different time we were hiking with my Beagle and had a fox circle and then trail us pretty much all the way back to the trailhead. Neither time was there a Park Ranger, police officer, or Mountie anywhere near by. I have carried ever since.
//RANT ON//That's the thing though. Nobody that owns these guns wants gun violence either. As soon as a tragedy like the one in Nova Scotia occurs it shines a huge spot light on firearms and the likely hood of more firearm regulation increases.
That guy had no firearm license and obtained the firearms he had through illegal means. No firearm regulation or ban in Canada would have stopped this tragedy.
I am trying to respect the forum rules and not get into the politics and will refrain from delving into how these new laws won't do anything to stop gun violence.
I worked in forestry in northern BC for several years and have had several close encounters with bears. I packed a pistol grip 12 guage pump action. I never had to shoot a bear with it, but did use it to scare them off several times. It gets unnerving when working alone remotely in the forest and a bear just keeps following you around. I sure felt a lot safer having the gun should the need arise.
I believe most firearm owners, myself included, use their firearms as tools or for recreational target shooting. It's fun to head to the range with your buddies and get a little competitive to see who can ring the gong! They can also be fun to accessorize with new stocks, optics, barrels, etc, etc to make them more accurate. I am sure regardless of your stance on guns everyone on this forum can agree accessorizing things is fun.
There needs to be more discussion around the subject and the understanding will follow. The sensationalized stereotype of gun owners the media spews is far from the truth in my experience.
I'm an ex military person been deployed a few times and I'll let you see what its like from the other side. AUS has moved the #s req for a shooting incident to declare it a mass shooting, yet still suffers from attacks. Britain suffers from mass knife/machete/baseball bat/acid attacks, Norway had their central secure lock up areas broken into and pillaged by the local crime syndicates.Totally non political, I just wish Canada had more in common with these countries. Quite right, I have never fired a gun in 65 years. And I have never felt a gun would do anything but escalate a confrontation, human and animal.
mericas/gun-deaths-eliminated-america-learn-japan-australia-uk-norway-florida-shooting-latest-news-a8216301.html?fbclid=IwAR1Y_G169kDFDBFa-BXG1FeSgbwAHj5q3Pzg4hHHTbF9WCp-q5DQyY99ga4[/URL]
But I'm not trying to validate the new legislation, just stating what I believe.
Is it possible to sensationalize a mass shooting? Isn't that a bit like trying to satirize a Trump press briefing?We live beside a firearms behemoth that experiences firearms tragedies frequently that are sensationalized by many media organizations.
If they get banned too, then you’d have to turn them in or else be a criminal...Now to pick up a non-AR carbine before those get banned too.
oh no, not me, but when your government bans them, well ......don't think I have to let you tell me I cannot have one