> Wrong.  In almost all cases you'd have to undergo a background check.  A
> few days ago I was in 2 hardware stores and saw no guns.

A few days ago I was in a hardware store and saw no guns and no pesticides.
Annecdotal evidence is useless for making inferences about a large
population. Bad use of statistics. Also using the phrase 'in almost all
cases' without referencing this 'judgement' or giving it any quantitative
criterion is 'misleading' to say the least. A 'background check' has nothing
to do with having a licence to carry a hand gun. A licence and a permit are
different. The only permits granted to citizens of Canada is for Mounties
and security guards. Some prospectors and foresters can carry a hand gun but
they cannot carry these hand guns any where on their bodies whilst not in
the field. They require a licence and a permit to buy and own the gun.
Anyway what does the person that buys a second hand gun do? Does he submit
to a 'background check' by the seller?

There is one use of personal hand guns in Canada...target shooting at a gun
range. But the hassles of carrying the hand gun makes it impractical to own
one and use it....at least this is what I am told.

>You can purchase
> a handgun, but to carry one concealed in most areas you will need a permit
> to carry a concealed weapon.  Each state varies on the difficulty of
> obtaining a CCW.  In Los Angeles no CCWs are granted.

This is strictly forbidden in Canada unless you are a Mounty or a security
guard. There are no permits in Canada for private citizens to carry hand
guns except for natural resource professionals. I did not say that a permit
was not required in the US. Again misleading statements such as 'in most
areas' which means either that you are unsure, or that you do not know
exactly.

> > Handguns cannot be used to hunt animals here, so their only use is for
> > self
> > defense. Some people working in natural resources use handguns; however
> > most
> > people use 'pepper spray' and special rifles in the case where an animal
> > may
> > attack such as bears, or cougars.
> >
> > I have never heard of an animal or a child being killed with a handgun
> > in
> > Canada. I suspect that the rate of homicide or animal deaths due to
> > handguns
> > is neglible.
>
> Most children deaths due to firearms, from what I have read, are due to
> accidents.  Popular news stories aside, the idea of the gun blazing youths
> are more myth than fact.

Again another decoy opinion. In comparison with Canada, the rate in the US
is stellar. In fact the US has the highest homicide rate in the world, and
the greatest difference between the rich and the poor. There are 1.5 million
men in prison today in the US. That represents almost 3 to 5% of the adult
male population. How many of these men own hand guns?


>
> Anyhow this is getting very far afield of enviro-ethics.  The point of the
> original post that spawned this was to show that inumeracy was a problem,
> not the fields of statistics and applied math.  One has to use critical
> thinking when it comes to things like statistics, a failure to do so will
> result in accepting alot of junk.
>
>
> Steve
>
>
>
> =====
> "In a nutshell, he [Steve] is 100% unadulterated evil. I do not believe in
a 'Satan', but this man is as close to 'the real McCoy' as they come."
> --Jamey Lee West
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail
> http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/