Canada sure does not want you to transport a gun (Anchorage: fit in, insurance)

[starlite9]

Originally Posted by Dakster

My experience at the border hasn't resulted in a full car take apart (thankfully). It has resulted in a lengthy interview at times - I'll call it what it is, an interrogation. But when in Canada, other than being able to pay with different currency and having to do some conversions, it feels like USA North to me. I haven't been to every province, but I have been to Far Eastern and Far Western Canada on my many driving trips.

I've always had a good experiance crossing the boarder, but I am aware that is a fine line when you get the wrong person at the gate. So I try to make the simplest crossing, and not having firearms is a good start.

Next time I go North, I plan to hit some of Central Canada. Just so I can say I did...

The Trans Canadian Highway is a great way to cross Canada!

As far as Guns go, times, they are a changing. People going bonkers and shooting up a bunch of people in a public place does not help. It seems to mobilize people that until that happened really didn't care to get involved. Now they are. Not that ANYTHING that is being done/proposed would have stopped most of those incidents here and anything that would, should violate the 2nd Amendment - until someone figures out a way to get that repealed. Then the difference in gun carry laws between Canada and the US will be about the same again.

Yes the loons are out there that kill people with guns, they also run over people with cars and burn down buildings with people in them. But the founding fathers were much more worried about keeping the people armed for the ability of National and Personal Defense. Had these places where the loons were shooting kids had armed teachers (legal carry permits), that may have never been such a big deal instead of protecting the children with their bodies. And the events where guns were used to stop such events, is rarely shown in the biased media. But this killing we see on the news isn't that new, people have been doing is since the "Rock" was invented as a tool, and then mounted on an "Assault Stick", making it a military grade weapon for the times, then upgraded to a spear shaft, arrow and so forth... Just the fact that we have "Instant News" is what is new, the kooks have always been with us.

[richelles]

Originally Posted by starlite9

Yes the loons are out there that kill people with guns, they also run over people with cars and burn down buildings with people in them. But the founding fathers were much more worried about keeping the people armed for the ability of National and Personal Defense. Had these places where the loons were shooting kids had armed teachers (legal carry permits), that may have never been such a big deal instead of protecting the children with their bodies. And the events where guns were used to stop such events, is rarely shown in the biased media. But this killing we see on the news isn't that new, people have been doing is since the "Rock" was invented as a tool, and then mounted on an "Assault Stick", making it a military grade weapon for the times, then upgraded to a spear shaft, arrow and so forth... Just the fact that we have "Instant News" is what is new, the kooks have always been with us.

It is a true statement that ‘people’ have killed other people since humanity has kept some sort of records. But perusing history since the advent of the ‘written record’ doesn’t seem to show a persuasive argument for the random killings such as we see today, using the school and movie killings as examples, In fact the use of guns to kill considerable numbers of ’people’ by a small number of people seems to have become a possibility only in recent times. One only has to go back to times in the 1800s when the US Army was the driving force in killing crowds of people during the Indian Wars to find guns killing randomly. It was true that the Native American population had groups that believed they were protecting the rights of their people by killing the new comers who were, in their minds, usurping their lands, food sources, and their very right to live in their chosen manner.

Random killings have happened throughout human history but it is only since the invention of the repeating ability of guns that mass killings became a norm of sorts. Today it is the ability of a small portion of the population to obtain weapons of mass destruction and use them in such a manner to become really newsworthy. A single shot weapon is little different than the rock, spear, or knife when it comes to the killing of numbers of people.The claims that the founding fathers wanted the population, as a whole, to have guns when repeating guns didn’t exist is a fantasy that is put forth by a certain portion of the population. Had those founding fathers known of the capabilities the gun would acquire is it a certainty they have reached the same decision?Look at today’s news in Europe for what happens when repeating guns are turned on a large group of people. Is that what those founding fathers imagined when they were asserting a right to something we call the Second Amendment Right? Is it possible they might have seen things differently had they understood the ramifications to come from their decision?
Perhaps the fact there are so few incidents of people with guns stopping others with guns from committing acts of violence accounts for the "biased media" not reporting a higher number of such incidents. Why not tell the truth when defending something? They aren't very many cases where such events have occurred. So is the media really biased of just telling the truth the way it is.

[Dakster]

Planning to take the trans-Canada Highway - thanks for reassuring me that is the way to go.

While I certainly can agree that guns have stopped other people with guns doing bad things. Most of the time the people that stop them are highly trained individuals. I don't remember that many cases where a person that doesn't use a weapon for work purposes at one point in their life and decided to go the movies armed taking out a bad guy that was shooting the place up. They are usually either current/retired military or police or they have extensive civilian gun training of some kind.. Why - because when the SHTF, you are scared too. Fight/Flight takes hold and only those than have been under fight/flight often enough can tone down the adrenaline enough to think and Fight. It is tough to train for that, until you experience it, you just don't know how you are going to react.

IMHO, Because of gun control, what we haven't seen are a lot of nutcases getting a "good guys/gals" gun and killing a bunch of people. As an example, there is a reason no guns are allowed in jail - not even the jailors/corrections officers have them. And they are trained n gun retention and use. Why? Because one gun could take the whole facility hostage. And even highly trained individuals can get guns taken from them.

If a SWAT Team was on school grounds when someone hell bent on killing a lot of people and knows/expects they will die during the event, gets a teachers gun (which should supposedly be the only 'good' gun in the classroom). There isn't a lot they can do to prevent anyone from getting killed (other than the "bad guy"). Now would they prevent more loss of life then if they were not there yes. Just illustrating that everyone being armed isn't always the answer. It takes fractions of a second to pull the trigger...

These scenarios and others in history are the reason that any active duty Police Officer or honorably retired Police Officer can carry nationwide with limited exceptions. (Law Enforcement Officers Safety Act)

Gun Control is a delicate balance. I am not for the removal of all guns in the US either. Just making a case for why some gun control is needed.

[AlaskaErik]

Good info on ways to get firearms to America, but what about ammo? Can you take ammo with you through Canada? If not, I'll be popping off a lot of rounds before I leave Alaska!

[GnomadAK]

And don't forget to get a receipt at the US border before you cross into Canada or you will run into trouble coming back into the US. I neglected this step and it was actually easier getting the rifles through Canada than back into the US.

And no, you can't ship firearms to yourself in another state via UPS or FedEx. You can spout the regulations until you are blue in the face but you cannot make the company do it. What we were told is that "we don't know if that is actually YOUR firearm you are attempting to ship" and that's the end of the discussion.

[stiffnecked]

Originally Posted by AlaskaErik

Good info on ways to get firearms to America, but what about ammo? Can you take ammo with you through Canada? If not, I'll be popping off a lot of rounds before I leave Alaska!

You can take up to 5000 rounds of small arms ammo.

bsf5044: Importing a Firearm or Weapon Into Canada

[tablemtn]

One of the advantages of obtaining a Canadian PAL is that you can purchase firearms (but especially ammunition) at Canadian gun/outdoor stores. Firearms are often pricier (though not in every case), but ammunition has had some pretty wild pricing spreads over the past few years in many cartridges, as I'm sure many of us know. At times, certain cartridges have been noticeably cheaper in Canada than in the US, due to the sales distribution systems for ammo.

It's something to consider if you live anywhere near the border, since it crops up from time to time.

As for the political aspects of all this, the Canadian mindset is that the US has a way higher murder rate than Canada (which is true), and it's best to keep Canada's rate low, and one of the ways to do that is to closely regulate the importation of firearms. You can see the logic, even though it can be inconvenient. There is a sense of "put your own house in order before you complain about ours."

[Dakster]

Originally Posted by GnomadAK

And don't forget to get a receipt at the US border before you cross into Canada or you will run into trouble coming back into the US. I neglected this step and it was actually easier getting the rifles through Canada than back into the US.

And no, you can't ship firearms to yourself in another state via UPS or FedEx. You can spout the regulations until you are blue in the face but you cannot make the company do it. What we were told is that "we don't know if that is actually YOUR firearm you are attempting to ship" and that's the end of the discussion.

True they can always refuse to ship it, but when the web page says they will ship it, why wouldn't they?

Tomorrow I'll be close to a packing/shipping store and I'll ask them about shipping my own guns to myself and see what they say. They use Fedex, UPS, and USPS --- so they have all the options available to them.

[stiffnecked]

Originally Posted by tablemtn

One of the advantages of obtaining a Canadian PAL is that you can purchase firearms (but especially ammunition) at Canadian gun/outdoor stores. Firearms are often pricier (though not in every case), but ammunition has had some pretty wild pricing spreads over the past few years in many cartridges, as I'm sure many of us know. At times, certain cartridges have been noticeably cheaper in Canada than in the US, due to the sales distribution systems for ammo.

It's something to consider if you live anywhere near the border, since it crops up from time to time.

As for the political aspects of all this, the Canadian mindset is that the US has a way higher murder rate than Canada (which is true), and it's best to keep Canada's rate low, and one of the ways to do that is to closely regulate the importation of firearms. You can see the logic, even though it can be inconvenient. There is a sense of "put your own house in order before you complain about ours."

And Canadian's don't live by the motto of "Live Free or Die" so I'm okay with Canadian's not being able to defend themselves. Geez, it's a country that still bows down to a queen in a far off land.....

[JoDan]

This discussion has answered my question about entering Canada with a gun. It has become apparent to me to leave my gun(s) home. I will, however, be bringing my bear spray canister. :-)