Crossing the Canada/US border with guns

[240Gordy]

Travel almost daily in bear country, millions of Canadians do, very few with guns. Leave them at home please
_________________
Tencentlife said,
"So, now that you know what you're doing, go to town."
2010 GOLF TRENDLINE 2.5
1985 GL now with more! a 2.1L
H&R SPORT(RED) Springs FRONT , SLAM SPECIALTIES RE6 AIRBAGS REAR

[photogdave]

I love and respect all my American friends regardless of their beliefs.
Please believe me when I say my opinion comes from a purely objective viewpoint.
I believe our two cultures simply have a fundamental difference of opinion regarding the need for guns as self-defense.
In our culture we are raised to believe we can defend ourselves without guns. I have lived in small towns where more than half the population owns rifles for hunting. I don't believe any of these people would think they need to bring their weapons on a hike or camping trip for self-defense.
I have traveled the world and been personally threatened with guns and other forms of violence on more than one occasion. I've never carried a gun or needed anything but the brain I was born with to get out of these situations. I truly believe that if I had produced a gun in any one of these scenarios there is a good chance I would have been wounded or killed.
I've encountered black bears and cougars on the trails (and some in bars ) in Alaska and BC and lived to tell the tale.
I don't propose to talk anyone out of their belief that a gun is a requirement for self-protection but maybe just to recognize there are other successful and less dangerous solutions. Just because you don't carry doesn't mean you don't take protection of yourself and your loved ones seriously.
_________________
89 Syncro GL Westfalia 2.1 WBX/WBXaustSS

My Westy Movies:
photogdave On Vimeo
photogdave On YouTube

Stop dead photo links! Post your photos to The Samba Gallery!

[Abscate]

It's a perfectly simple piece of constitutional right here, with an established precedent that localities can regulate as appropriate ( that's why Harry Callahan can't concealed carry in Manhattan). It get gets badly messed with as political statements like proposing to arm every kindergarten teacher in case there is a gun nut, or trying to write a gun law that fits both Central Park and the Bridger Range.

People have rationale for arming themselves or not and like all decisions, rationale is supported by a range of factors, only one or two of which are arguable,
_________________
🇺🇸 🇺🇸 🇺🇸 🇺🇸 🇺🇸 🇺🇸 🇺🇸 🍊 🍊 🍊

[Wildthings]

I had an old acquaintance who may have more time hiking in Alaska and the Yukon than anyone living. In his later years he carried a flare gun for defense against bears. His idea was to shoot the flare into the ground in front of him to scare the bear off.

Around 40 years ago, he was attacked by a grizzly and as a result has refused to go into the woods with a dog ever since. I have known others who have been attacked because their dogs attracted grizzlies as well. Best to leave your dog at home if you don't want to be attacked by a bear.

[greebly]

The "wild-life" in Detroit is far more dangerous than the wild-life in Windsor.

[Gauche1968]

[IdahoDoug]

I appreciate everybody's viewpoint on guns, their value as protection against animals, their value as protection agains humans, their value as a deterrent, their value as protection for yourself, and for your family. It's good stuff and it is a worthy discussion and I give you all respect.

The difference in our viewpoints takes on a completely different tone when you choose to force your view on me through laws taking away the right to carry protection. That in turn forces me to make different choices in my life. Where I travel. When I travel. What I travel with. Where I sleep. Who I take with me. What might happen to me if the worst happens.

So I appreciate your views. But understand it is the APPLICATION of your views over mine that is unfair. It is unfair because you are making the decision that the potential for me to misuse my gun in a way that affects you trumps even the most responsible use and possession of it. Canadian leadership feels that some vague and abstract thing that may happen in some faraway part of your country outweighs the potential that I may find myself in a remote and beautiful part of your country with a direct and very real need for protection for myself or my family. It's group-think at its finest.

So you cut out the responsible gun owners in a broad brush way that is the fashion of short sighted leadership everywhere and turn anti-gun sentiment into a belief system, rather than work hard to produce a system that trusts its people and seeks to include a broad range of individual use of rights. You had those rights once. Your system says in capital letters "we don't trust any of our citizens". Or more accurately, "we don't trust SOME of our citizens, therefore we will enact laws as if we trust NONE of them." Poor leadership at its finest.

Doug
_________________
1987 2WD Wolfsburg Vanagon Weekender "Mango", two fully locked 80 Series LandCruisers. 2017 Subaru Outback boxer. 1990 Audi 90 Quattro 20V with rear locking differential, 1990 burgundy parts Vanagon. 1984 Porsche 944, 1993 Toyota LandCruiser, 2002 BMW 325iX, 1982 Toyota Sunrader

[Mike Robinson]

[Paulbeard]

[Sodo]

A lot of Americas obsession with guns was caused by deft marketing. Read the book "GLOCK" by Paul Barrett. Good read.

Guns are also a very effective political tool to drive a wedge between any legislation that may affect "the investment sectors". Huge marketing dollars are available to maintain the existing profitable investment sectors. Huge marketing dollars have a definite effect on society, change the way people think. Fear, inc.

I personally think guns should be used to blast sh*t. Or to just marvel at their construction, and feel the excitement of the explosion. Thats just me. Talk of pointing them at people, or inventing danger that necessitates a gun for protection from and I'm not interested. If I was walking around Alaska I'd have one, and it would be nice if there was nobody telling me I couldn't.

But by sheer numbers there are many many people who shouldn't. Opposing all controls has an inevitable outcome of gun saturation, where the percentage of resposible gun owners become the minority. Then you need a gun just for protection from the other owners. This could be evidenced but the ratio of "personal protection guns" that are produced. Its what, 3:1? 4:1? We are there IMHO.

All the while the gun industry dumps guns out into society by the truckload. And people want them, buy them, respond to the marketing, vote for more. It can't end well. JMHO....
_________________


'90 Westy EJ25, NEW oil rings (!) 2Peloquins, 3knobs, SyncroShop pressure-oiled pinion-bearing & GT mainshaft, filtered, cooled gearbox.
'87 Tintop w 47k 53k, '12 SmallCar EJ25, cooled filtered original gearbox
....KTMs, GasGas, SPOT mtb

[Zeitgeist 13]

This thread is about an American attempting to cross into Canada, so American "rights" are pretty moot, since Canadians are under no obligation to honor whatever it is we believe to be our gawd-given "right". When voluntarily entering another country, you honor their laws--period. Don't like, then don't go--period.

[JudoJeff]

So-o-o hiding the guns under the marijuana bales, covered by the bear and cougar hides isn't a good idea when entering Canada?
_________________
________________________________________
1989 Vanagon GL Westfalia Camper, Burned up on 7/31/16.
1987 Vanagon GL Westfalia Camper, Bostig & Rebuilt, sold
1986 Vanagon GL Westfalia Camper, Bostig Sold May 10, 2021
1999 Ford GTRV Westfalia camper (30% bigger Westy layout)

[Merian]

bear spray is the best for most people; any side arm is the worst

and no, my knowledge on this is not particularly limited
_________________
....

[Vanagon Nut]

As far as protecting yourself against a bear or cougar, say in BC..... (one factor in deciding to carry a firearm into Canada, I guess)

If a cougar is tracking you, and wants you, you won't know till it happens.

With a black/brown bear, (and most certainly a grizzly), bear spray may help but is no guarantee. It may only serve to further anger your foe.

Do you think a few bullets, of which maybe only one hits the target, will stop a bear, or worse a moose, when its charging?

Neil.
_________________
1981 Westy DIY 15º ABA
(VW Gas I4)

1988 Westy DIY 50º ABA

VE7TBN

[theadventureneverends]

[Wildthings]

[theadventureneverends]

I would guess their computer system let's them know if the driver has a CCP before the vehicle even gets to the booth. My wife and I have ccps and have not been asked at the border yet. Last time we went was exactly a year ago.

We have never tried to bring a firearm of any sort into Canada. Although we did drive about 1000 miles in NW Canada to catch a ferry in Prince Rupert had we had time to explore some of the gorgeous very remote country we would have appreciated being able to be armed. Once we got to Alaska I bought several and skipped Canada on the return trip.

[crukab]

[theadventureneverends]

Aloha Wildthing

Are you able to edit your post a little? The way you quoted my post looks like I wrote about doubting stopping a charging bear with bullets and my name is Neil, which it is not.


[Moderator note: quoted posts on page 4 fixed.]

[IdahoDoug]

I often find it conversationally awkward when an anti/non gunner speaks with authority that a gun is not effective protection. I believe a speaker can speak for THEMSELVES with a gun and that being ineffective. But I believe when a speaker says that Doug, or Ted, or Sally with a firearm is ineffective, they are way over reaching. Again, it is when people force their belief system upon others that I think the leadership has gone astray and in a micro way, that is also how discussions of this topic similarly become ineffective.

If you accept YOUR position that a firearm is definitely NOT effective, then you wanting to take that choice away seems perfectly logical and rational. I understand that, folks.

If, however, you accept my position that a firearm is definitely effective, then you wanting to take that choice away from me seems heavy handed. It is this latter position that gunners like me have, and may explain to some of you why it is problematic when you espouse taking that choice away.

By way of further, imagine if I told you that you cannot own a powerful sports car that can go 150mph because I worry that you are not capable, trained or have the temperament to do so in a world with 80mph speed limits. Instantly we are no longer talking about a car, but I am insulting you, your skills, your judgement, and a whole raft of things that you probably hold dear to your value system. Do you see the difference?

A sidearm in the hands of a well trained individual is a benefit to society. If I am standing in the checkout line next to a lady who happens to be your wife when a robber comes in, all is well. I'm not going to draw and fire. Its well right up to the moment he eyes the lady standing behind me in line and says "we need a hostage, you're coming with me." The moment the timing is right, he just changed the situation and I'm going to prevent some random lady who later turns out to be your wife from being taken.

There are thousands of scenarios where this proves to be true. As I have in literally every single firearm discussion, I urge folks to read "More Guns, Less Crime" by John Lott for an effective overview of the statistical reality of the situation.
_________________
1987 2WD Wolfsburg Vanagon Weekender "Mango", two fully locked 80 Series LandCruisers. 2017 Subaru Outback boxer. 1990 Audi 90 Quattro 20V with rear locking differential, 1990 burgundy parts Vanagon. 1984 Porsche 944, 1993 Toyota LandCruiser, 2002 BMW 325iX, 1982 Toyota Sunrader