Yes, you can store them at your home. But if you fire at someone breaking into your house you’ll wish you hadn’t. Better to slice them up with a chainsaw.
I feel like if you shoot anyone you should at least have to stand in front of a judge to explain yourself even if it is to say "I was being shot at, so I shot back."
Totally agree. But they hammer that point home during firearms license training... there is NEVER an acceptable circumstance to shoot a human being. A few have done it and was acquitted by a jury, but that’s the exception.
What Nett said, doesn't matter what the situation is doesn't matter if they are murdering and raping your family don't use your guns. And some aren't even aloud 25caliber 32 caliber, and some others. And if you do have them, they have to be in a safe, and the RCMP can come check to see if you are complying at any time. I don't think i have ever heard of them doing that but they can.
There was a huge stink a few years ago in Sask. Alberta when they had huge floods... the RCMP took that opportunity to go through people's houses and find insecure firearms, seize them, and fine people for them. They had a valid point, but holy fuck was the timing so incredibly wrong. https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/rc...iver-gun-seizures-during-2013-flood-1.2954483
I've always been taught that every bullet that comes out of your gun in a defensive use comes with two things: jail time and a lawyer. Even if you were completely legally justified in using it, you're still facing at least a night or two behind bars and some expensive legal fees. And that's something you have to be ok with. It's something I am ok with, because if it comes to a situation where I need to use my CCW to defend myself, then being alive and paying an attorney sure as hell beats being dead. Now the reality is, if someone is using deadly force or someone is causing you a reasonable fear of grave bodily harm or death, then the cops are just going to confiscate your gun as evidence and let you go after some questioning. For example, at least in the US, if someone says "I'm going to shoot you" and is just standing there with their thumb up their ass and you shoot them, you're going to jail for a long long time. But if someone points a gun at you and says "I'm going to shoot you" and you shoot them back, you're in the clear.... this is obviously very broad and there are exceptions and qualifications, like the Duty to Retreat and Castle Doctrine (as well as the infamous "stand your ground" laws), but in general the laws follow morality. The phrase "in fear for my life" is, in general terms, the litmus test though. If a bad guy causes you to fear for your life, you can defend your life with force up to and including deadly force. Just curious.... how do y'all Canadians feel about your gun laws? I know the debate is really hotly contested down here, is it the same up there? What do you do for home security, or is that not really as much of a concern? @wexton, what's the logic behind the .25 and .32 being outlawed? I mean, aside from them being essentially outdated and pointless wildcat rounds.
Never heard of that, personally. But I'm OK with our laws... except for the attempt at the long gun registry. I appreciate the effort to at least do SOMETHING to regulate guns, and really it seems to be doing not a bad job overall. The vast majority of gun crimes are by illegal guns, and one of the biggest issues with gun deaths is due to cops/owners who are depressed. I think we have a long way to go, but overall I'm not complaining.
Holy praise the cops..... The guy does a good job of breaking down security footage of the Dayton murder. I had no clue there were that many responding officers, or that they made swiss cheese out of him that fast before he could enter the bar (I thought he had, from what I'd read until now). Wish the media would focus on stuff like this. That asshole was covered in body armor and still looks like he got hit by a linebacker from the hail of freedom seeds. And no, video is not gory in any way.
We have some common sense laws that I really wish the US would adopt. On top of what Nett mentioned: - We have an active registry for mental competency. If you suffer a psychotic break and are hospitalized, you’re required to give up your guns. - if you’re going through a divorce (and I will stand corrected on this) I believe you have to surrender the firearms in the home. - no conceal carry unless you’re a law officer. We also have incredibly stupid laws and restrictions: - Almost no legal argument for self defence with guns. - The issue Nett mentioned about seizing guns is worse than he said. When High River flooded and faced a mandatory city evacuation, the RCMP went door to door, forced entry and seized any guns they could find. There were multiple reports of gun safes being opened. All it does is ensure the next time they evacuate, the citizens will be armed. - The attempted Long Gun Registry was a fucking debacle.
Luckily it didn't cost us anything... Oh... wait... https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/scrapping-the-long-gun-registry-some-relevant-numbers-1.861912
I think it has to do something with really small caliber that can do more damage then a .22 which i don't think they were ever outlaw. So easy to conceal. I like most of them except the restricted shit, i should be able to hunt with an ar if i want, i should be able to carry a pistol in the bush if i want.
- but wouldn’t that encourage people from not seeking help if they had to give up their guns? At various points I went through therapy and was diagnosed with several different things for what ultimately was just a traumatic brain injury. But if I had to give up my guns, I can say for certainty I would never have even considered treatment. And I have a lot softer stance on it than most people down here. - not sure why a divorce would be a danger? Are they really worried about one party getting pissed and shooting the other or is it more of a split property thing? Do they get them back after the divorce? Regarding the evacuation stuff, whenever people have to evacuate for hurricanes or whatever it’s always advised they take their firearms with them. To keep themselves safe, so the guns aren’t damaged in the home, and so they aren’t stolen in the event of looters. Costal states are starting to pass what most consider common sense laws that formalizes what had been an informal, look-the-other-way deal where people are allowed to transport their firearms absent a concealed carry permit while evacuating a disaster area.
Almost all women who die from violence are killed by their partner, and abusive spouses are most likely to kill when the wife attempts to leave them. So, yeah. Get the guns the fuck out of the house while the relationship falls apart.
Thats really alarming. The gun control proponents in the US always say they want "common sense" gun control, but they really just want a gun grab. Thats exactly the way it turns out whenever its implemented. And for the laws and restrictions they do demand, they turn around and call them loopholes that they then demand be closed. Thats what the so-called "gun show loophole" actually is. On the first point, granted I dont know shit about Canadian local law enforcement, but how is that in any way reasonable in the rural parts of Canada, which is obviously the majority of it? If someone in Yukon or Northwest Territory needs the cops, what are they supposed to do?
There have been some hotly contested cases in recent years arguing that very point, Juice. - A group of young First Nations adults was drunk and acting up in rural Saskatchewan. They had gone to two farms and tried to steal ATVs, cars, and had broken windows and in general acted like assholes. They went to a third farm and tried the same thing. Farmer and his son were mending fences. The son confronted the carload of people. They swerved and tried to run him over. He threw his hammer at them, and his dad went to the barn and got a shotgun. Came out, fired two warning shots and somehow the third shot wound up killing one of the kids. Huge trial ensued. Farmer was ultimately acquitted, and it caused such outrage in the Native community that the Prime Minister of Canada stepped in and they changed the law. Now juries with native defendants must have native jury members. - On another farm, a man heard a ruckus in his garage at 2am. Grabbed his shotgun to investigate. Came outside to find his truck being stolen. All sides - the man and the Crown - agree that it was pitch black. No moon, no street lights, etc. The man says in the ambient starlight he sad the shape of the thief run at him. He shot and (I believe) killed. Now he’s being charged with murder and a hate crime, since the thief turned out to be native. Our laws are ridiculous when it comes to defending yourself and your property.
Those are textbook cases where guns are needed for self-protection. A farmer's equipment is his livelihood. It sounds like a terrible cocktail of dramatic overreaction based on racial tension and fear of gun crime. Thats absolutely tragic.
Two impressive things in that video: - the bicycle cop who appears first and immediately runs straight towards the shooter at 2:13 while civilians are running the other away - the list of responding and shooting officers; almost all of these guys with just over 3 years on the police force Agree, 'nerds. Shout out to the police here.