Man, I should get a little .22lr semi for pointing. Even my 9mm is starting to get expensive to run.
Sigh, plinking.
I don't think it is. The pistols might be banned by name though. And yeah, the laws are designed to restrict based on length and such, so concealibility is bad. Though I can easily tuck my sub 2000 under my jacket or in a bag, unfold it and go to town in less then 30 seconds. Laws here make no sense.
Russian Nagant 1895 revolvers. A matched set from the Izhevsk arsenal that were a wedding gift for me and my wife--they're not on the banned list and the barrel length is 114mm, 9mm longer than the legal minimum. If I get into any of the Canadian universities I applied for all the guns go into storage, of course, but if I were to stay there for a long time (I interviewed for a job in Yellowknife as a backup to not getting into grad school) I'd probably want to bring them up someday instead of leaving them sitting in a safe deposit box for all eternity. I imagine you definitely have to be a permanent resident for that, and possibly obtain dual citizenship first. Still, I just thought of it when we started talking so I decided to ask.
Oh those, yeah legal but restricted like all handguns. Requires a seperate license, if you move up and apply, let me know, I'll vouch for you as a refernce.
Aaron wrote:Oh those, yeah legal but restricted like all handguns. Requires a seperate license, if you move up and apply, let me know, I'll vouch for you as a refernce.
MARSTAR usually has that in stock iirc.
Thanks! That's pretty sweet, then, I'd hate to give those things up and they're beautiful to shoot, even if the trigger pull is a total bitch.
I figured a job (engineer at one of the diamond mines in the territories-- 2 wks on/2 off) up there would suck but, pay off my student debt in short order, buy the liveaboard yacht I've always wanted and save up the money for paying for grad school if I can't get a scholarship/TA position so that it pays for itself (my current effort). That and other things like the enormous expense that adopting will be for us. So it might suck for a decade but if you manage the money right you can put enough way to actually do things with your life. Otherwise I'm waiting on hearing back from McMaster and the UNB for nuclear engineering masters' programmes.
Aaron wrote:Live aboard yacht might not be feasible if your in the far north.
Heh, I don't plan to stay there in the long term. though amusingly the MacKenzie actually is navigable to the Great Slave lake and heavily used for barge traffic, but you'd have to haul it out in winter and insulation would be a nightmare, so, no. I meant to save up money for one for when I can finally quit the job.
Yeah, I'd love to navigate the MacKenzie sometime in summer to the Great Slave Lake, just because I love the idea of taking a giant (say, 70 - 75 feet) classical wooden two-masted schooner on inland navigation trips up major rivers--the Yangtze, Ganga, Nile, Amazon, etc--but also for the naturalist experience of the arctic in summer, but it'd be no place for an honest yacht when the ice comes back.
Hey Aaron, as someone way more informed and familiar with the whole issue than I am, how do you feel about the handgun registry? It's been around since the 20s or 30s but why are people less against it than the long-gun registry?
On the same topic, Danielle Smith, leader of the Wildrose Alliance, which hopes to beat my PCs in the election on the 23rd, is in favour of CCWs in Alberta.
I dunno man, it's got longevity on its side, I personally think it's bs and a lot of handgun shooters I talk to agree but the ATT and associated restrictions seem to be a bigger issue.
Honestly I can't come up with a reason to be against CCW anymore, especially with mandatory courses.
I don't see why it would be bad to issue CPLs (concealed pistol licenses--the more technically correct term) in Canada, as long as you guys maintain the no-brainer Common Law Duty to Retreat. It somehow worked for people armed with firearms since they were invented until 2005, after all, and even though I live in a stand-your-ground state, why would I refuse to try and avoid having to shoot someone by fleeing as best as I can before opening up? It may be legal here, but it's also immoral. The only exception to it should be if you encounter someone actively committing a violent felony on someone else--for example, if you find a rapist in a park raping someone and they advance on you, it's a no brainer you should be able to shoot them, since the person they were assaulting might be unable to run themselves. But that's a really rare and unlikely case.
That guy who shot his busing contractor got ruledbecause he pulled his gun out
But obviously he did so because he knew if his son was in danger he might not be able to close in on time to protect him
It's pretty funny these insane 'kill whoever' laws exist but don't actually work in situations they should
starku wrote:Situations like that don't even work in the us
That guy who shot his busing contractor got ruledbecause he pulled his gun out
But obviously he did so because he knew if his son was in danger he might not be able to close in on time to protect him
It's pretty funny these insane 'kill whoever' laws exist but don't actually work in situations they should
That situation didn't work because he was black. Racism in the US and gun laws in the US are actually separate issues, even if they produce deadly results in combination.
